If you are looking for asylum you are required to ask for it in the first country you enter. How many countries do you have to go through from Bangladesh to the USA. If you think for one moment this is not an organized invasion of the US you are not paying attention. More than 600 Bangladeshi nationals caught trying to cross into U.S. from Mexico https://foxsanantonio.com/news/loca...ls-caught-trying-to-cross-into-us-from-mexico
"There is no such thing as an ‘illegal’ or ‘bogus’ asylum seeker.Under international law, anyone has the right to apply for asylum in any country that has signed the 1951 Convention and to remain there until the authorities have assessed their claim. There is nothing in international law to say that refugees must claim asylum in the first country they reach. A European regulation allows a country such as the UK to return an adult asylum seeker to the first European country they reached. This means that countries on the edge of Europe have responsibility for a lot more asylum seekers than others. Some of the countries through which people travel to get to Europe are not safe places and many have not signed the Refugee Convention, meaning that people who remain there will not get international protection and be able to rebuild their lives." https://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy_research/the_truth_about_asylum/facts_about_asylum_-_page_4 The 1951 Refugee Convention http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html---
The 1951 Refugee Convention http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49da0e466.html--- This document is not found by my computer. Here we go again with the UN a bunch of not elected dictators telling the world what to do wake up. You would fight a dictator but allow an non elected group to make laws for you
Asylum means giving temporary refuge for a person escaping persecution from a government. OK now these people who left Bangladeshi half way around the world passing by countries with the same religious beliefs and traveling through countries who would grant Asylum to come to the US. Funny that these so called poor people can afford to travel half way around the world to find a new temporary refuge is amazing. Like I said if you don’t think some one with lots of money is not causing this think again
True. The U.S. normally respects and acknowledges International law and in many ways we will follow said laws but in no way can International Law prevent the U.S (or any other nation) from making and enforcing separate laws regarding our own territory.
We are obligated by international treaties which we have signed. In this case, although we refrained from the 1951 Refugee Protocol we did sign on to the 1967 advancement of said Protocol.
Martin's first sentence was: "If you are looking for asylum you are required to ask for it in the first country you enter." Does that not assume an international law to which we ascribe? It was that remark I was challenging. Who made this requirement? Under what circumstances must we follow it? Or not?
Sorry about that link for the 1951 Refugee Convention not working. I went back to the original page and lo and behold, it had a different link attached: http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/1951-refugee-convention.html
1. They are not “required” to ask but under the “safe third country” clause, they have been offered sanctuary by a country which harbors no malice. Once the offer of asylum has been made by a hospitable country, the migrants no longer meet the requirements to ask for asylum in the U.S. 2. Any law, International or not, which conflicts with U.S. rule of law and is applicable on U.S. soil is superseded by U.S. law. Note of interest: Foreign embassies within the territories and borders of the U.SA. are not considered to be U.S. soil and therefore subject to all laws of their own state be it International Law or private. Now, the recent debacle in Tijuana may be the monkey wrench solution in which some of the migrants may ask for asylum in the U.S. and it might be granted but only if they meet all of the rest of the criteria as stated in our own (not International) laws. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158
The MSM have now got their show. Teargas against invaders is now chemical weapons against children.In the WW1 it was Germans bayoneted babies. Iraq through babies out of incubators on the cold floor. It is the same lies over and over again. They want those good people that cannot see the lies falling for the emotional trap.
Just looking for a better life is not equal to calling for asylum Ami Horowitz: The Truth Behind the Caravan
They have finally exposed themselves these immigrants calling for asylem are now telling the US give us 50,000 dollars and we will go home. So I guess Honduras is not bad if you have money. This is just extortion and nothing more.