Quote:
|
Quote:
"That said, a person cannot claim asylum unless they are on US soil." Again, I'm suggesting that the US not allowing them in isn't violating any International Law. No More, No Less |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Who is feeding them? The photos I see, sure don't seem to show most of them carrying a month's worth of food and water. That's a sincere question, I'm not saying George Soros is doing it. A lot of them seem to be carrying nothing. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
I don't believe they are true refugees - they are not fleeing a war torn country. Trump administrations problem is they can't "legally" mobilize active duty troops into law enforcement action (Posse Comitatus) UNLESS they can cite a danger to national security which is where this report I keep seeing referenced of 100 terrorists comes into play. That may allow his administration to place troops at the border in states (California) that will not mobilize their National Guard units.
|
Quote:
I have no need to change the laws or treaties. Would you like to change the laws or just ignore them? |
Quote:
|
im surprised no one here has stated that George Soros is funding them :hihi:
|
Quote:
Everyone of these countries has gone thru economic, political and civil turmoil in the last 50 years. It is not getting better. Nicaragua, Guatamala and El Salvador had long civil wars and various forms of ineffective governments. We, the US government, were tangled up in all of them. Honduras was the training base used by the US to train rebels that fought in all the other countries. The 1951 Geneva Convention is the main international instrument of refugee law. The Convention clearly spells out who a refugee is and the kind of legal protection, other assistance and social rights he or she should receive from the countries who have signed the document. The Convention also defines a refugee’s obligations to host governments and certain categories or people, such as war criminals, who do not qualify for refugee status. The Convention was limited to protecting mainly European refugees in the aftermath of World War II, but another document, the 1967 Protocol, expanded the scope of the Convention as the problem of displacement spread around the world. Article 1 of the Convention defines a refugee as a person who is outside his/her country of nationality or habitual residence; has a well-founded fear of persecution because of his/her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion; and is unable or unwilling to avail himself/herself of the protection of that country, or to return there, for fear of persecution. |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Is Mexico fulfilling its obligation by accepting the caravan's as refugees or returning them. Does the U.N. say that a country can refuse such refugees if its the first place they enter. That it can just ship them on to another country without that country's agreement to accept them? |
Quote:
jim Trump's response has everything to do do with politics, you have your head in the sand. when it comes to who you think is using it politically |
Quote:
Trump doesn't want to follow the law if he can get them to not make it to the border by physically blocking asylum seekers from setting foot on US soil — in other words, from triggering a legal right to claim asylum in the US — to begin with. |
Quote:
|
can't wait till the next caravan of 70,000
|
Quote:
in? weren’t you worrying about the debt? of course trumps response has to do with politics, asndies the liberal claim that we should let them in. how many is nancy pelosi going to let live next to her, so you suppose?? it’s very easy to support open borders when you are immune to the effects. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Open borders and refugees are different issues legally, though Trump is conflating them, quite successfully with his base as is demonstrated in this thread
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
why are these people waving the flag of the country they are fleeing, exactly?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
The Postmoderns would be free of any structured society. The Marxists and Progressives would somehow maintain a centralized world State. The Libertarians would not abandon social constructs but would embrace borderless societies and abandon statism. |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Do you like beer? Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com