Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Asylum Seekers Face Glasgow Exodus
Glasgow Boards/Forums > GG Discussions > Glasgow News Blog
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26
petunia
I was an immigrant to Toronto many many years ago and never had the help that the "NEW CANADIANS"
get now, I had to sink or swim, fortunately I swam by my own determination.

How many miles have you walked in a homeless person's shoes Angel??

I lived not too far from Scarborough which is a place I never had a wish to live (it is certainly the place where a huge number of immigrants lived) including a lot of Scots when they first came to Canada in the early year 50's before they moved on. Scarborough is a place I never lived in but I did go to college there for a while I also worked there for a while (Bernardo days) to me it was not a place I wanted to live as the population was/is very diverse.

I believe legal immigrants have a right to try and make a better life for themselves but it is the illegal ones that bothers me, the ones that come in with the sob stories and the ones some of the churches bring in and we end up having to pay for. As you say Alex instead of spreading immigrants out they all stay like in ghetto's and don't what to do better for themselves and want everything they can get from the government in handouts and have more and more kids.

I'm sure if I still lived in Springburn area I might think like you do but you'll always get the people who hasn't "walked a mile in your shoes" to throw stones.
angel
I walked more than a mile with my two young children and thank God my husband . I can say that it is a traumatic experience , wondering if you will have a roof over your head that night . for your children and yourselves . So I say to Hell with nationality we are all "Jock Tamsons Bairns .
*Jennifer*
QUOTE (angel @ 30th May 2015, 10:00pm) *
I do not think that Detroit or any other city in the U.S.A. can be compared to what is supposed to be going on in Glasgow , or for that matter any other European city when it comes to legal immigrants or otherwise .

Glasgow Scotland . has been full of bigotry forever , whether it be racial , political ,or religious, " They are still in the dark ages " However you are definitely entitled to your opinion but if it differs , just don't post it , that is so much easier .

The black American " so called ' has been in America for nearly 400 hundred years or more and has done so much to make it the country that it is , and to compare him with an illegal immigrant in Glasgow is ludricous I say give those people a chance , WHY ARE YOU SO AFRAID. This is my opinion , which I have had the audacity to post .

Angel, if I may, some pertinent clarifications that I would like to make to you regarding your inaccurate and somewhat rude reply to my post on these forums.

1. I compared Detroit now to Glasgow in 20 years time.
2. My post was about illegal asylum seekers not legal immigrants.
3. Your comment about bigotry is sensationalized havering.
4. Your comment about historical immigration to the US is irrelevant.
5. The people did get a chance and now they have been told to leave.
Betsy2009
QUOTE (angel @ 31st May 2015, 06:59pm) *
I walked more than a mile with my two young children and thank God my husband . I can say that it is a traumatic experience , wondering if you will have a roof over your head that night . for your children and yourselves . So I say to Hell with nationality we are all "Jock Tamsons Bairns .

Angel, I was saddend to hear a little of the difficulties you have experienced and wondered if you'd like to tell us more. If it's too personal/painful, then don't, but I'm sure it would be interesting if you wanted to.
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (flam @ 31st May 2015, 11:03am) *
sister paper of the Glasgow Herald that the SNP adore , and where buying in their droves


I see no problem with this.
Betsy2009
In case anyone is actually interested;

"Asylum seekers and refugees do not get large handouts from the state"

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/policy_re...asylum_-_page_1
petunia
Sorry you had a hard time when you came to Canada Angel but I also had to fend for myself with no help from anyone except an old boss of mine who gave me a job but I neither got nor asked for any government handouts (if there was such a thing) which they get now and Betsy it even states on your refugee council site that they get 5 pound a day and housed (maybe not in the most desirable places) but then the people who lived there before the refugees arrived probably don't think so either. All immigrants have a story to tell about moving to their new country it is not all roses trying to establish a life in a strange land some never and went back home.
I feel very sorry for refugees through no fault of their own are without a country but if the governments of this world don't have the answer I sure don't but bringing them to live in ghettos in other countries isn't the answer either (in my opinion)
Alex Saville
The Refugee Council.
To use that old Tory phrase, they are being economical with the truth'!
"Asylum seekers and refugees do not get large hand-outs from the State"

What amounts to a large hand-out?
Asylum seekers and refugees get free housing. Add free medical care, free legal aid (10 years ago I consulted a lawyer. Being a working person, I got no legal aid. I paid the lawyer 100 an hour, or part of an hour, 50 for a letter. I drew the line at her receptionist answering the phone to me and the lawyer tried to charge me 25 for a two minute call! I dumped the lawyer and wouldn't pay the 25.) and a whole host of other 'Freebies' that amount to a substantial financial package.
How about education? Another hidden cost to the taxpayer.
So the allegation that asylum seekers and refugees do not get large hand-out's from the State is a lie.

Asylum seekers get State Benefits:_
A married couple or civil partnerships 75.52
Lone parent over 18 43.94
Single person over 18 36.95
16 to 18 year old 39.80
Under 16 52.90
They don't pay rent or Council Tax.
Add the above to what other 'Freebies' they get, they've got a good deal!
Add to that the cost of Taxpayer grants to organisations that support them, and the cost gets higher and higher.
Positive Action on Housing (For ethnics, asylum seekers and refugees) has high priced offices in West George St.
On their website in April was an advert for a a job with the West of Scotland Regional Equality Council.
18.5 hours a week which paid 20,000 p/a.
Lots of noses in the asylum seeker/ refugee trough!

Bunch of Taxpayer funded chancers there!
Alex
angel
QUOTE (Betsy2009 @ 1st Jun 2015, 10:47am) *
Angel, I was saddend to hear a little of the difficulties you have experienced and wondered if you'd like to tell us more. If it's too personal/painful, then don't, but I'm sure it would be interesting if you wanted to.

Thanks for your interest Betsy but , I believe that I did write about that experience a few years ago on this board on a different thread , anyway I have to say that never at any time have I been looking for pity nor do I possess a " poor me attitude ", actually I have been thrown for a loop on occasions in my life, but it doesn't take me too long to rally ,

However , Betsy I will say that, my husband did notice a one room for rent sign , that night , he enquired about it , and that was when we met our Guardian Angel , An old Hungarian gentleman who let us into his home and we ended up staying with him for about 6weeks . with the use of 3 of his rooms , he was a treasure and he was so very sad when we moved to an apartment at the other end of Toronto and the story goes on .

Most of the problems in our immigration saga was a case of " the best laid plans of mice and men " but I did learn that when plan A falls through you had better have plan B .

I am of course Betsy , sympathetic towards most immigrants legal or otherwise , who do need direction from caring people, No matter the colour of their skin .

ps .. just for the hell of it ! we did not know which direction to walk when we got to Toronto . It was the scariest place we had ever encountered . we arrived 5am in a mid November morning very few people on the streets and huge Skyscrapers , and they are still building them yes.gif
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 1st Jun 2015, 03:46pm) *
How about education? Another hidden cost to the taxpayer.

It's a legal entitlement, and it's not a "hidden cost" to the taxpayer. It's publicly available information.

What in any case is wrong with educating children? Is it better to somehow keep them ignorant and unemployable, so that you can then complain they're unemployed and on benefits?
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (*Jennifer* @ 1st Jun 2015, 10:28am) *
2. My post was about illegal asylum seekers not legal immigrants.

There is no such thing in law as an illegal asylum seeker. It is not illegal to seek asylum in the UK, therefore, there cannot be illegal asylum seekers.
Alex Saville
Education is indeed a hidden benefit to those who haven't paid in to the system.
The organisations who champion asylum seekers and refugees should fund education, and everything else, themselves instead of sitting in expensive offices in West George St & Cadogan St, Glasgow, drawing large salaries.

Asylum seekers whose claims are rejected are indeed 'Illegal', the UK Government says so:-
"People who require leave to remain in the UK but do not have it are 'Persons subject to Immigration Control' within the meaning of 'Section 105 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999'
They are not eligible for Social Security Benefits.
Since they are in the UK without legal status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."
That applies to all Illegals whether failed asylum seekers or not.

As for those yet to be processed, that should be done from abroad.
If they have moved to another country any application should be rejected on the grounds they already have safe haven.
Legal Aid should not be available to them. Let the charities pay for legal help.
The Legal Aid lawyers will soon lose interest when that source of money dries up. No charitable thought's from them, only a loss of a Revenue Stream.
Alex
angel
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 1st Jun 2015, 02:13pm) *
There is no such thing in law as an illegal asylum seeker. It is not illegal to seek asylum in the UK, therefore, there cannot be illegal asylum seekers.

First generation immigrants to a new country do not always integrate very well , they just want to work and survive and look after their families . They keep with their own nationalites whether they come from Scotland or Timbuktu but through education which is extremely important to them , their first and second generation's integrate perfectly in their parents country of choice and those children become very proud of there ethnic origins but also wonderful citizens to be proud off in their new country

Now , is this not what immigration is all about . EH
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 1st Jun 2015, 04:52pm) *
Education is indeed a hidden benefit to those who haven't paid in to the system.


You said it was a hidden cost. It's not. It's not a hidden benefit either. It's the law, and that's public, that all children under the age of sixteen are to be in full time education.

Education is what makes people employable. Can you explain why you're against making children employable?

QUOTE
Asylum seekers whose claims are rejected are indeed 'Illegal'

No they are not. That is junk. If you applied for free dental treatment, and were rejected because you did not qualify, that would not make you an illegal dental patient. Only a failed applicant.

If you can point to any case at all of someone being declared in a court of law an "illegal asylum seeker" that would be extraordinarily helpful to your case.

You won't be able to do that.
Alex Saville
Mr MacPhee

Note the UK Governments words:-
"People who require leave to remain in the UK but do not have it are 'Persons subject to Immigration Control' within the meaning of 'Section 105 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999'
They are not eligible for Social Security Benefits.
Since they are in the UK without legal status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."
Those words make it perfectly clear that "SINCE THEY ARE IN THE UK WITHOUT LEGAL STATUS' if they remain they are illegal'.
Which part of:-
"People who require leave to remain in the UK but do not have it are 'Persons subject to Immigration Control' within the meaning of 'Section 105 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999' do you not understand?
That's the LAW!
Without the Law there is only Anarchy.
Are you advocating Anarchy?
If so, it's not fashionable nowadays!

Alex
john.mcn
Are we to call criminals failed law abiding citizens now wink.gif

We have an immigration system, some people try to circumvent that by trying the 'asylum line', when they arrive here and get caught they go through the processes, appeals and whatnot at our expense and when it's found that they dont have a case for staying here(as many are) they should be removed. Now as i've said all along that the ones who think the UK should have open borders and any poor wee economic migrant who thinks they can just waltz in and have everything handed to them on a pate should dig deep into their own pockets and fund all expenses, hidden or otherwise.
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 1st Jun 2015, 06:00pm) *
Note the UK Governments words:-

Show me where is says there is such a thing as an illegal asylum seeker.

That's all you have to do. No circumlocutions, no personal interpretations, just a documented status of "illegal asylum seeker".

For the avoidance of doubt, a failed asylum seeker is not an illegal asylum seeker.

You can, if you are able, point to a single instance of any person charged with being an illegal asylum seeker, or any statute or law which says that there are any circumstances in which seeking asylum is either illegal or an offence.

That's all you have to do.
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (john.mcn @ 1st Jun 2015, 10:34pm) *
Are we to call criminals failed law abiding citizens now

Show me anywhere, any case, where seeking asylum has been a criminal offence.

Just the one case will do.
Betsy2009
It's not so easy to 'send them back to where they came from'.

"Every year, tens of thousands of would-be immigrants to the UK are taken to detention centres while the authorities seek to deport them. What happens to them once they get there and become isolated from the outside world?"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27332370

What do you do when their home country won't allow them in because they don't have a legal passport?
ktv
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 1st Jun 2015, 11:21pm) *
Show me where is says there is such a thing as an illegal asylum seeker.

That's all you have to do. No circumlocutions, no personal interpretations, just a documented status of "illegal asylum seeker".

For the avoidance of doubt, a failed asylum seeker is not an illegal asylum seeker.

You can, if you are able, point to a single instance of any person charged with being an illegal asylum seeker, or any statute or law which says that there are any circumstances in which seeking asylum is either illegal or an offence.

That's all you have to do.


international law clearly states.....

QUOTE
There is no such thing as a bogus asylum seeker or an illegal asylum seeker. As an asylum seeker, a person has entered into a legal process of refugee status determination. Everybody has a right to seek asylum in another country. People who don't qualify for protection as refugees will not receive refugee status and may be deported, but just because someone doesn't receive refugee status doesn't mean they are a bogus asylum seeker.

UNHCR

a past Secretary-General of the United Nations said...

QUOTE
Let us remember that a bogus asylum-seeker is not equivalent to a criminal; and that an unsuccessful asylum application is not equivalent to a bogus one - Kofi Annan
bilbo.s
Och, Kofi Annan ! Is he no a bloody foreigner ?

Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (ktv @ 2nd Jun 2015, 09:38am) *
international law clearly states.....

UNHCR

a past Secretary-General of the United Nations said...


At last, someone gets it.
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Betsy2009 @ 2nd Jun 2015, 08:58am) *
What do you do when their home country won't allow them in because they don't have a legal passport?

Quite so. People who are fleeing persecution and grave harm from often-corrupt governments are hardly likely to apply to those same government agencies for permission to seek safety.
ktv
QUOTE (bilbo.s @ 2nd Jun 2015, 09:42am) *
Och, Kofi Annan ! Is he no a bloody foreigner ?


haha depends on what country your from
ktv
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 2nd Jun 2015, 09:43am) *
At last, someone gets it.


some people deliberately don't get it because it would hurt their agenda to accept reality now n then wink.gif
Dykejumper
Odd case in the Sunday Mail, a woman here on Holiday!! decided to claim asylum, if she was at risk in her home country would they really have let her leave.
Alex Saville
For those who have difficulty in understanding the Law and terms within the Law.
An asylum seeker is one who seeks asylum. Now that's clear enough, I'd say.
A person who has applied for asylum and been refused is no longer an asylum seeker.
That's clear too!
If a person applies for refugee status and is refused, they are not permitted to stay.
That's clear too!
The Law says:-
"Illegal Immigrants are people who have entered the UK illegally or who have stayed here longer than they were allowed.
Since they are in the UK without permission or Legal Status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."
Failed asylum seekers & refugees no longer have the right to be here.
Those who waffle and wave straws in the wind and talk of others 'Agenda' clearly do not have the ability to understand how Law is created.
We elect people to Parliament, they propose 'Bills', if those 'Bills' are voted for and passed by a majority, that becomes the Law.
Clear enough, again!

The Law in this case is 'Section 115 of the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999'.
This Law is enforced by the Police and the Immigration Authorities. Any dispute can and will be settled in the Courts.
No Agenda there, just the Law in action.
Clear enough again.

The cry "Show me where it says there is such a thing as an Illegal asylum seeker" indicates that the person who emits that cry cant make the distinction between an asylum seeker and one whose application has failed.
At the point of failure the Law, the Immigration Authorities and in some cases the Courts, says that person should leave the UK.
If they don't leave that means they are in the UK unlawfully.
Simple if you have any intelligence, difficult to grasp if you don't!

Some people deliberately 'Don't get it' because they prefer stirring the pot instead of intelligence and reasoned debate.
They ignore the Facts and the Law because it doesn't suit their Pot Stirring Agenda.

Finally, some of you should do your own research instead of expecting others to do it for you.
Of course, if you can't grasp the fact that we have Laws in this country, and what they mean, you're highly unlikely to have the abilty to do any research. Much simpler to bluster, with support from the not too bright (Not you, Betsy, I have respect for your views!)

Alex
Alex Saville
Betsy

"What do you do when their home country won't allow them in because they don't have a legal passport?"
The question here is 'How did they manage to get to the UK without one'?
They didn't travel through any borders legally therefore they should be removed to the last country they passed through.
Anyone who has watched the TV programme about the UKBA will know that one of the first things these 'No paperwork' people do is either hide or destroy their documents.
This is a loophole that needs to be closed.
How can some of these people arrive at UK airports without documents?
They wouldn't get on the plane without them since the Carrier would be fined.
Stricter checks are required at points of entry to stop this abuse.

Alex
ktv
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 12:01pm) *
For those who have difficulty in understanding the Law and terms within the Law.
An asylum seeker is one who seeks asylum. Now that's clear enough, I'd say.
A person who has applied for asylum and been refused is no longer an asylum seeker.
That's clear too!
If a person applies for refugee status and is refused, they are not permitted to stay.
That's clear too!
The Law says:-
"Illegal Immigrants are people who have entered the UK illegally or who have stayed here longer than they were allowed.
Since they are in the UK without permission or Legal Status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."
Failed asylum seekers & refugees no longer have the right to be here.
Those who waffle and wave straws in the wind and talk of others 'Agenda' clearly do not have the ability to understand how Law is created.
We elect people to Parliament, they propose 'Bills', if those 'Bills' are voted for and passed by a majority, that becomes the Law.
Clear enough, again!

The Law in this case is 'Section 115 of the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999'.
This Law is enforced by the Police and the Immigration Authorities. Any dispute can and will be settled in the Courts.
No Agenda there, just the Law in action.
Clear enough again.

The cry "Show me where it says there is such a thing as an Illegal asylum seeker" indicates that the person who emits that cry cant make the distinction between an asylum seeker and one whose application has failed.
At the point of failure the Law, the Immigration Authorities and in some cases the Courts, says that person should leave the UK.
If they don't leave that means they are in the UK unlawfully.
Simple if you have any intelligence, difficult to grasp if you don't!

Some people deliberately 'Don't get it' because they prefer stirring the pot instead of intelligence and reasoned debate.
They ignore the Facts and the Law because it doesn't suit their Pot Stirring Agenda.

Finally, some of you should do your own research instead of expecting others to do it for you.
Of course, if you can't grasp the fact that we have Laws in this country, and what they mean, you're highly unlikely to have the abilty to do any research. Much simpler to bluster, with support from the not too bright (Not you, Betsy, I have respect for your views!)

Alex


so after all that waffle youl be admitting now that the fact is that in uk/eu/international law (implied or otherwise) there is no such thing as an "illegal asylum seeker"?
Alex Saville
"Of course, if you can't grasp the fact that we have Laws in this country, and what they mean, you're highly unlikely to have the abilty to do any research. Much simpler to bluster, with support from the not too bright."


Alex
ktv
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 12:50pm) *
"Of course, if you can't grasp the fact that we have Laws in this country, and what they mean, you're highly unlikely to have the abilty to do any research. Much simpler to bluster, with support from the not too bright."

Alex

yes we do have laws....real laws not made up laws to suit your agenda yet you don't seem to have the intelligence to realise "illegal asylum seekers" are not mentioned or part of any law.

your OWN "research" disproved your own argument.

QUOTE
A person who has applied for asylum and been refused is no longer an asylum seeker.

so they don't exist but your still saying theyre illegal wacko.gif

what next?...illegal unicorns?
john.mcn
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 1st Jun 2015, 10:24pm) *
Show me anywhere, any case, where seeking asylum has been a criminal offence.

Just the one case will do.

I never said it wasn't. You seem to ignore that many are economic migrants who only claim asylum when caught, their intentions are to work and live in the UK without all that troublesome paperwork like applying for immigration through proper channels, that means they either enter illegally or over stay their visas, again illegal.
Claiming asylum when caught does not mean they did not commit those crimes it only means the law accepts it happens when people are fleeing their home country. When their applications and appeals have been rejected it means that they have no right to remain here and their crimes stand, hence they are criminals who should be removed as soon as possible. if their home country refuses them entry then they should be locked away in some hole until they do.
What on earth is there a point to immigration or asylum rules/laws if people ignore them and get to stay anyway.
When you hear those (i admit rare) stories about violent criminals being deported to the UK when they left as babies yet the UK cant deport illegals, terrorist suspects or other criminals simply because they might get harsh treatment then common sense has certainly left the party.

BTW Alex i'm not against genuine asylum or in fact immigration, but we do need controls on the latter and those who are not granted asylum should be forcibly removed from these borders.
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 12:01pm) *
The cry "Show me where it says there is such a thing as an Illegal asylum seeker" indicates that the person who emits that cry cant make the distinction between an asylum seeker and one whose application has failed.

I did suggest you cite the appropriate law or statute, without resorting to circumlocution and personal interpretation.

I also remarked you would not be able to do that.

So far, all you've come up with is personal interpretation and circumlocution.

You've not come up with any statute or law that says being an asylum seeker is illegal, or an offence.

Just as you can't come up with any legislation that says applying for jobseeker's allowance is an offence. Or applying for council tax relief is an offence. Or applying for disability benefit is illegal.

Because none of them is illegal to do, and being refused any benefit does not make the applicant an 'illegal benefit applicant'.

If you have legal authority on your side, you should be able to cite it, by referring to statute or Act of Parliament.

If you haven't, you won't.

QUOTE
Much simpler to bluster, with support from the not too bright

Though you may have recourse to ad hominem argument instead, if that's easier for you.
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (john.mcn @ 2nd Jun 2015, 01:07pm) *
I never said it wasn't. You seem to ignore that many are economic migrants who only claim asylum when caught

The issue is quite plain, and is clearly an instance of the Principle of Bivalence. There is, or is not, a status of 'illegal asylum seeker'.

It is either legal to seek asylum, or it is illegal to seek asylum.

If it is illegal to seek asylum, or illegal to be a person who seeks or has sought asylum, then there must be legislation which determines this, and makes provision for it to be illegal either to seek asylum, or to be a seeker of asylum.

It really is that straightforward.

It is possible to enter a country illegally : but that is not the issue here. The distinction is between a refugee, and an asylum seeker. An asylum seeker is one who, by definition, has entered the national asylum system.

If you maintain it is illegal to enter the national asylum system, you have to show this. To be an "illegal asylum seeker" means either it is illegal to apply for asylum, or it is illegal to have made an application that is refused. It's what the words mean.
Alex Saville
"yes we do have laws....real laws not made up laws to suit your agenda"
The real Law is the 'Immigration & Asylum Act 1999', I didn't make that Law, Parliament did!
Duh!!


"so they don't exist but your still saying theyre illegal"
I didn't say they are illegal, the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 says they are!
Tut, Tut!

"A person who has applied for asylum and been refused is no longer an asylum seeker."
Exactly! Now you're getting it!!

"what next?...illegal unicorns?"
I suggest you seek Medical help for your delusion's.

Alex


Alex Saville
This is what the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 says, not what I said:-
"Illegal Immigrants are people who have entered the UK illegally or who have stayed here longer than they were allowed.
Since they are in the UK without permission or Legal Status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."

This is what I said because it is logical and truthful:-
"Failed asylum seekers & refugees no longer have the right to be here."
I said that because if they have been refused permission to stay, they are told, by the Immigration Authorities, amongst others to leave.
Which part of that do you not understand?
Or do you think the Law doesn't apply to failed asylum seekers but applies to everyone else?
Try that argument in Court!

"It is either legal to seek asylum, or it is illegal to seek asylum."
It is not illegal to seek asylum, IT IS ILLEGAL IF YOU STAY AFTER HAVING BEEN REFUSED!
Why don't you get that?
It's because you get your rocks off stirring the pot like the other on here.

Alex



Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 02:19pm) *
This is what the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 says, not what I said:-
"Illegal Immigrants are people who have entered the UK illegally or who have stayed here longer than they were allowed.
Since they are in the UK without permission or Legal Status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."

Nowhere does it say it is illegal to be an asylum seeker at any time, either before, during, or after an adjudication.

QUOTE
"It is either legal to seek asylum, or it is illegal to seek asylum."
It is not illegal to seek asylum, IT IS ILLEGAL IF YOU STAY AFTER HAVING BEEN REFUSED!

This would mean, if true, that it is illegal to appeal against a refusal of asylum.

QUOTE
It's because you get your rocks off stirring the pot like the other on here.

One sees that your ad hominems are doing sterling work as substitutes for argument.
Alex Saville
When you have something sensible to say, I'll respond, until then, I'll ignore you. I'm not holding my breath either!

Alex
ktv
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 02:12pm) *
"yes we do have laws....real laws not made up laws to suit your agenda"
The real Law is the 'Immigration & Asylum Act 1999', I didn't make that Law, Parliament did!
Duh!!


"so they don't exist but your still saying theyre illegal"
I didn't say they are illegal, the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 says they are!
Tut, Tut!


the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 does not mention "illegal asylum seekers".

no UK legislation whatsoever mentions "illegal asylum seekers"

you made it up and are now too embarrassed to admit it.
ktv
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 02:19pm) *
This is what the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 says, not what I said:-
"Illegal Immigrants are people who have entered the UK illegally or who have stayed here longer than they were allowed.
Since they are in the UK without permission or Legal Status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."

This is what I said because it is logical and truthful:-
"Failed asylum seekers & refugees no longer have the right to be here."
I said that because if they have been refused permission to stay, they are told, by the Immigration Authorities, amongst others to leave.
Which part of that do you not understand?
Or do you think the Law doesn't apply to failed asylum seekers but applies to everyone else?
Try that argument in Court!

Alex


now your changing your tune as the penny drops.......
D O H
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (ktv @ 2nd Jun 2015, 03:54pm) *
the Immigration & Asylum Act 1999 does not mention "illegal asylum seekers".

no UK legislation whatsoever mentions "illegal asylum seekers"


You have 60 seconds to re-arrange the following words into a well-known phrase or saying :


Dunk. Slam.


Scotsman
Illegal or bogus or failed or whatever.... whats the difference??

Its just playing about with words and the fact is that they have been given a fair crack of the whip and they have been told to leave and they have not. That just damages it for the real ones who are not illegal of bogus or failed. If we want to help the ones who really need it then we also have to remove the ones who have been found not to be worthy of the term asylum seeker. I dont see any problem at all with that.
john.mcn
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 2nd Jun 2015, 12:39pm) *
The issue is quite plain, and is clearly an instance of the Principle of Bivalence. There is, or is not, a status of 'illegal asylum seeker'.

It is either legal to seek asylum, or it is illegal to seek asylum.

Who has said it is illegal to seek asylum, what many have a problem with is the ones who are economic migrants abusing the asylum system to try to remain here. I have no problems with genuine asylum seekers, i do have a problem with people circumventing immigration laws by stowing away here or lying about and overstaying their visas.

QUOTE
If it is illegal to seek asylum, or illegal to be a person who seeks or has sought asylum, then there must be legislation which determines this, and makes provision for it to be illegal either to seek asylum, or to be a seeker of asylum.

It really is that straightforward.

It is possible to enter a country illegally : but that is not the issue here. The distinction is between a refugee, and an asylum seeker. An asylum seeker is one who, by definition, has entered the national asylum system.

If you maintain it is illegal to enter the national asylum system, you have to show this. To be an "illegal asylum seeker" means either it is illegal to apply for asylum, or it is illegal to have made an application that is refused. It's what the words mean.

It is no more illegal to claim asylum than it is to claim innocence at trial, so why is it that when the latter is proven false a punishment often follows but with the former the person who is found not to have a case for remaining in the UK is not forcibly removed straight away. Is it not the case when sentence is passed they should be led away for punishment?

You seem to be getting caught up on the phrase 'illegal asylum seeker', one person said it not everyone. People who come here to live and work are economic migrants, some jump through hoops to go the legal way and some dont,. The latter kind are illegal, often working in the black market and remain so until they are caught, it's then they cry 'ASYLUM' and they go through the system as asylum seekers. When their case is investigated, refused, appealed and refused again they are no longer 'officially' asylum seekers and revert to their previous position of illegal economic migrant. They have no right to remain here and should be taken away and placed on either a plane to their home country or the place they left to enter the UK.
ktv
QUOTE (Scotsman @ 2nd Jun 2015, 05:05pm) *
Illegal or bogus or failed or whatever.... whats the difference??

Your quite right.

The only difference is that someone is claiming there's laws stating things when there clearly isn't.

So it's just a case of me showing fabricators don't know what they're talking about... Nothing else.

My job is done ✔
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (john.mcn @ 2nd Jun 2015, 05:33pm) *
Who has said it is illegal to seek asylum

Jennifer, post #753, 2nd June 2015, was :-

"My post was about illegal asylum seekers not legal immigrants."

QUOTE
You seem to be getting caught up on the phrase 'illegal asylum seeker'

Several people are discussing the same term. Including you.
Alex Saville
For the benefit, and once again, of the not too bright.
It says IN THE IMMIGRATION & ASYLUM ACT 1999,
"Illegal Immigrants are people who have entered the UK illegally or who have stayed here longer than they were allowed.
Since they are in the UK without permission or Legal Status they are liable to be removed by the Immigration Authorities."
Note the words in the Act;-
"Since they are in the UK without permission OR LEGAL STATUS!"
if you're not LEGAL then you're ILLEGAL!
It say so IN THE ACT!

How anyone with half a brain can argue that is not the case is beyond me!
I don't make anything up.
It's all there in the Act.

Alex
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 06:30pm) *
How anyone with half a brain can argue that is not the case is beyond me!
I don't make anything up.
It's all there in the Act.

There is no reference in the Act to illegal asylum seekers.

If there were, you'd have pointed it out by now.
Alex Saville
You and you're pal are clutching at straws!
Both stirring the pot since you're both talking rubbish!

Alex
Alex MacPhee
QUOTE (Alex Saville @ 2nd Jun 2015, 06:35pm) *
You and you're pal are clutching at straws!
Both stirring the pot since you're both talking rubbish!

If there is any reference you can find to "illegal asylum seekers" in any legislation you can point to, you'll have shown this to be true.

So, now we wait. Again.
john.mcn
QUOTE (Alex MacPhee @ 2nd Jun 2015, 05:29pm) *
Jennifer, post #753, 2nd June 2015, was :-

"My post was about illegal asylum seekers not legal immigrants."

Several people are discussing the same term. Including you.

I know Jennifer posted it, but yourself and KTV have then questioned either myself or the other Alex about it when we didn't say it, that is the only reason 'we' are discussing it.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.