It's valid, Javid

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
^woody^ said:
Anyway ... my OP was more about the fact that our Home Secretary, responsible for looking after the UK, can't even question motives of people illegally trying to get in the country (after travelling through several safe countries) without the libtards instantly denouncing him and saying how these illegal immigrants should be just let in regardless and allowed to launch their illegal entry efforts unquestioned.

That must surely make us all feel safe if (God forbid) any of these libtards eve got into power. FFS.
Click to expand...

The irony. You're as sensitive as the liberals you criticise.

https://news.sky.com/story/sajid-ja...y-leadership-backfires-spectacularly-11597150

SJ was just posturing and as usual you have fallen for it. Crazy RW and LW are so easy to get worked up.
 
Sponsored Links
SammyInnit said:
It's pretty obvious you were presuming they were refugees and it would be very dishonest for you to say otherwise now.
Click to expand...

The word "refugees" does not appear in my press cutting.

However, a dislike of foreigners coming to this country is evident in it.

As I said, no change.
 
JohnD said:
The word "refugees" does not appear in my press cutting
Click to expand...

It didn't need to. It was clear what you were implying, anyone who questions the legitimacy of an asylum claim (if one was even made, clearly not in these cases) must be guilty of wrong think or xenophobia.
 
Silly sammy is incapable of comprehending my press cutting.
 
There does appear to be some confusion as to the right to claim asylum in a country of your choosing. You can claim asylum wherever you like and the country can return you the under the safe third country and first country of asylum concept

https://www.unhcr.org/56f3ec5a9.pdf
 
motorbiking said:
There does appear to be some confusion as to the right to claim asylum in a country of your choosing. You can claim asylum wherever you like and the country can return you the under the safe third country and first country of asylum concept

https://www.unhcr.org/56f3ec5a9.pdf
Click to expand...

Maybe someone can trudge thousands of miles across many countries to claim the pot of gold in a particular country.

But the issue is, and the one Javid has highlighted, is that if you are genuine, why are you trying to sneak into the UK illegally instead of via the proper process?

Or why not claim your asylum in the EU and then spend your money on a £29 RyanAir flight instead of a £5000 place on an inflatable duck with 10 others.

I wonder if the UK returns Asylum seekers to the safe third counry under the above concept, or do the libtards insist they are kept here?
 
devilish54321 said:
Only if certain conditions can be met, which have already been mentioned:
"Application of the concept requires an individual assessment of whether the refugee will be readmitted to that country and granted a right of legal stay and be accorded standards of treatment"
If the applicant has not previously submitted any application in that 'first' country then that country has no obligation to accept the return of the applicant, whether during the attempted return process or ever. Therefore the condition is not met. So it requires cooperation of that 'first' country.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but it quite clearly says - they are the "safe third country" - to be applied in cases where a person could, in a previous state, have applied for international protection, but has not done so, or where protection was sought but status was not determined.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top