Immigration, Refugees, Asylum, Illegal aliens and everything in between

[tvstrip]

I think this topic deserves its own thread. It's not just those crossing from Mexico to the US; you have Canada's Roxham road, the UK/France's Chunnel refugees, Germany's huge refugee intake- it affects every non-third world country in some way. Worthy of discussion, me thinks.

On that note:
Ex-Russian military bomber engineer seeks asylum at U.S. border, offers military secrets
https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-ex...border-offers-military-secrets-220728915.html

Kind of a reverse Snowden. It's just odd that the media would report on this, if it were legit. If I were the US, I'd want him in witness protection and keep it hush-hush.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

I think the United States should talk to him see what this guy can do for us.

As far as people immigrating to America, or any country for that matte, if it's not done legally, with due process, they should be deported immediately. Any of those deported should file for admittance, and proceed to go about entering legally. Those here illegally with known ties to gangs and cartels, should be sent back, via catapult. We have way to much corruption, on both sides of the boarder crossings. Agents from our side, should be dealt with as harshly as possible. We can't do much about their side, but I think it's more then obvious, the mexican police, and military are responsible for allowing dangerous persons to cross over, as well as stealing military grade weaponry for the cartels. This notion that all of these guns are getting purchased legally in America, then being sent to mexico, is ridicules. It's pretty unlikely that someone, or a group of people are buying AK47's and M16's from gun shops, and converting them to full auto. It happens, but on a far smaller scale then gun grabbers want to believe, and if they are from here, and going South, they were stolen from military armories, and I just can't count that as a reasonable reason to place blame on our gun laws. I also think a great deal come from the South, up into mexico, and I don't know how to monitor that.

There are a great many of people who want to enter this country, that would be good law abiding members of society, and I would hope want to become a citizen, and if they do it properly, should be allowed, unfortunately they have a lot of fear, and justifiably so with all of the violent and evil cartels and gangs terrorizing them. The big problem is, the politicians in mexico, are corrupt. and unwilling to help with this problem, or say they will, and lie to us. Look at some of the crap their president has pulled. He has no control over these groups, and obviously stays alive by leaving them alone, or taking a payday, otherwise the cartels would have killed him already. But one of the things that bothers me the most is, who are THEY letting into their country, that is then crossing into ours? How many islamic extremists could have crossed? Or people that are carrying viruses, that would decimate Americans, because our bodies aren't adjusted. Many countries you would go to, require vaccines before you enter, because they have illnesses, we don't.

 

[tvstrip]

With Roxham Rd., Trudeau is importing an American political problem
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/othe...ing-an-american-political-problem/ar-AA17HOEI

People who have come from various parts of South America, travelled up through Mexico and crossed into the United States are treated to a series of bus rides that increasingly sees them land in Ottawa, Toronto and Niagara Falls. Texas, where many of these migrants land, sends them on buses to New York City while NYC meets people at the bus station with tickets to Plattsburgh, N.Y., just south of Quebec, with instructions to Roxham Rd.

Now, once they make it into Canada, they are being shipped from Quebec to Ontario courtesy of the Trudeau government.

Why deal with a problem when you can just shuffle it on to someone else?

They aren’t fleeing persecution stateside; in fact, they are often people who have been given a bus ticket north to Canada by the U.S. government.

Remember that Martha's Vinyard stunt, and also how NYC is saying they can't handle any more refugees?
The US (and by that I mean the US Government) is now shipping those people to the Canadian border where they are literally given directions where to enter illegally and claim refugee protection.

And even worse, Canada is playing their own game of "Hot potato" and shipping the refugees off to other provinces.

 

[Mr. Daystar]

Seems to me, the best way to handle this, is to have the Canadian and U.S. military start at the Northern boarder of mexico, and start pushing South. As we move through, we process the mexican people. Those that are law abiding, we give a job, and those that aren't, we put in prison, or execute. When we get to the narrowest part of mexico, we build a wall, and secure it with a joint military force, and keep it locked down. We can rename it............Camexrica, make it a joint property and split the tax revenue.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

I say return to sender but if you choose to be a sucker who offers sanctuary rolling the red carpet out offering additional goodies then be careful of what you ask for.

 

[tvstrip]

I say return to sender but if you choose to be a sucker who offers sanctuary rolling the red carpet out offering additional goodies then be careful of what you ask for.

Bang on. The people trying to look good for the press and act all benevolent and welcoming to everyone, aren't the ones who have to deal with the shitstorm of refugees, both good and bad ones.

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...-feb-15-17-2022/irb-inventory-wait-times.html
Last year, there were almost 100,000 refugee claims in the backlog, with a wait time of almost 2 years. And that 300% jump came because of justin running his mouth and rolling out the red carpet to everyone who didn't like trump.

Refugee/Asylum claims aren't like a traffic court, or small claims court case you can finish in an hour. The case you need to prove is that you're life is at stake (or face persecution) if you get sent back. The stakes don't get any higher, so they need get their shit together and gather evidence, schedule/prep/have a hearing and be ready to file your appeal. All that takes shitloads of time, and multiply that by every single claimant. So to invite them when you can't even handle ones you have is pure madness.

 

[tvstrip]

Immigrant group threatens to sue over change to asylum policy
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/othe...-sue-over-change-to-asylum-policy/ar-AA17JyzJ

If adopted, the new rule would prohibit migrants from seeking asylum in the United States if they did not initially attempt to apply for it from the country they were coming from. Migrants would not be eligible for the program if they cross an international border without applying first.

In other words, there would be no more "immigrant caravans", because as soon as you set foot outside of your country, (unless you're Mexican) you're ineligible to apply for asylum in the US. It would get rid of those encampments at the US-MEX border, since basically none of those people would be able to apply for asylum. So either they go home, or they sneak in. The Dems being the one to (try to) implement it shows how they have no better solution to the problem than the GOP.

It's a jacked-up version of the Safe Third Country agreement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada–United_States_Safe_Third_Country_Agreement). And we know how that turned out...

 

[tvstrip]

Sorry for the copypasta, but I thought this was a perfect story for this thread.

So they plan on rejecting all ref claimants who aren't children or really sick.
Off the top, I can think of 2 problems:

1) How are you going to accept the children of a family but send back the parents?
2) What are "medically unfit"? Are they saying that if you're sick enough, you'll get status? And how sick do you have to be?

 

[Orban89]

More than 100 migrants – including a pregnant woman and 24 minors – rescued from Mediterranean​

 

[tvstrip]

More than 100 migrants – including a pregnant woman and 24 minors – rescued from Mediterranean​

Curious that they make no mention of their refugee claims, or if they'll even get to make one.

 

[Orban89]

BBC row deepens over suspension of former football star and TV host Gary Lineker​

 

[Orban89]

1,300 migrants rescued by Italian coastguard from Mediterranean Sea​

 

[tvstrip]

@Orban89

You seem to have an interest in the refugee crisis in Europe. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the issue.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

@Orban89

You seem to have an interest in the refugee crisis in Europe. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the issue.

Gotta narrow that question down a bit if you want a fella to answer it, Counselor.

 

[tvstrip]

Gotta narrow that question down a bit if you want a fella to answer it, Counselor.

Literally any thoughts he might have. The news clips are interesting, but literally without a word of commentary, it's hard to get what their position is.

As a starting point though, regarding that news about the UK turning back illegals floating across the channel. The exceptions are non-sensical. If they're saying they won't turn back children, how is that a viable solution? If trump said that all those kids in cages can stay in the US but their parents get kicked out - how would that have been gone over? The UK is literally doing that here.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

Literally any thoughts he might have. The news clips are interesting, but literally without a word of commentary, it's hard to get what their position is.

As a starting point though, regarding that news about the UK turning back illegals floating across the channel. The exceptions are non-sensical. If they're saying they won't turn back children, how is that a viable solution? If trump said that all those kids in cages can stay in the US but their parents get kicked out - how would that have been gone over? The UK is literally doing that here.

I agree with you about it being non-sensical to break up families along with the other exceptions too. The alternative would be to send them all back. Why have an immigration policy where you are assured to be taking on 100% debt?

 

[tvstrip]

On the other hand, I know it's controversial, but I have an issue with the refugees who are coming across the channel.

One question I would ask them is:
You safely made it all the way to Europe. Likely France, Spain, Germany or the Netherlands. All First world nations, and all signatories to the UN Refugee Convention. Why the fuck are you are not claiming refugee status/asylum there? If you are a true refugee, you aren't going to be picking and choosing your favourite country from a menu - you should be seeking protection the first place where you aren't being hunted like a wild animal.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

That is called Asylum Shopping. Some of the more entitled immigrants may have higher standards on who they intend to mooch off of.

 

[tvstrip]

That is called Asylum Shopping. Some of the more entitled immigrants may have higher standards on who they intend to mooch off of.

Exactly. The worst forms of Asylum shopping are cases where people are granted refugee protection (usually generous places like Germany), and then they apply to another country, and hide the fact they were already granted protection in the first country. I have no sympathy for system abusers like that & they should be sent back to their home country.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

Look, every country has the right to determine their own immigration policy based upon what is beneficial for their own country. If you do not have sovereignty are you really a country at all?