Body & Soul3 mins ago
Why Is Javid Under Fire?
19 Answers
https:/
first sensible thing a politician has ever said on this subject.
first sensible thing a politician has ever said on this subject.
Answers
1 to 19 of 19
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's TROB pebble dashing their screens with African peace porridge at the thought of poor "refugees" not getting in so easily. They are economic migrants who have paid thousands to get here from, a safe country, end of. Congrats to Javid for having the orchestras to say what we are all thinking. Well done.
> Why Is Javid Under Fire?
I have no idea.
> He suggested those seeking asylum in the UK should have done so in France or elsewhere on the continent.
That seems sensible to me.
> While the UK would consider asylum applications from those seeking sanctuary in the UK, he suggested a tough line would be taken on economic migrants, so as to send a message to the people smugglers and criminal gangs which were exploiting them.
That's not going to work though, is it? They need a different sort of message.
People try to make the journey here because they are lied to by the people smugglers. The people smugglers tell lies to create a business opportunity for themselves. That's not going to stop until they are tracked down and put out of business. So if I have any issue with what Javid is saying it's that he is attacking the problem from the wrong end.
I have no idea.
> He suggested those seeking asylum in the UK should have done so in France or elsewhere on the continent.
That seems sensible to me.
> While the UK would consider asylum applications from those seeking sanctuary in the UK, he suggested a tough line would be taken on economic migrants, so as to send a message to the people smugglers and criminal gangs which were exploiting them.
That's not going to work though, is it? They need a different sort of message.
People try to make the journey here because they are lied to by the people smugglers. The people smugglers tell lies to create a business opportunity for themselves. That's not going to stop until they are tracked down and put out of business. So if I have any issue with what Javid is saying it's that he is attacking the problem from the wrong end.
"Ironically when the UK leaves the EU it will actually be harder to send refugees back as we will no longer be party to the Dublin arrangement."
Quite so. A couple of flaws, though:
1. Unsuccessful migrants who are repatriated are rarely, if ever, sent to the first safe country they arrived in (which is almost never the UK and rarely France) to apply for asylum there. This is what the Dublin Agreement suggests should happen. More than that they are not returned to France, the last safe country they are known to have resided in. So quite frankly the Dublin Agreement is not worth the paper it is written on and will not be missed by the UK as it rarely takes advantage of its provisions.
2. The Dublin Agreement does not trump or replace the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Article 31 of which says that refugees can be considered unlawfully at large if they fail to declare themselves to the authorities in the first safe country they arrive in. The UN Convention will still apply to the UK and the EU after Brexit.
Quite so. A couple of flaws, though:
1. Unsuccessful migrants who are repatriated are rarely, if ever, sent to the first safe country they arrived in (which is almost never the UK and rarely France) to apply for asylum there. This is what the Dublin Agreement suggests should happen. More than that they are not returned to France, the last safe country they are known to have resided in. So quite frankly the Dublin Agreement is not worth the paper it is written on and will not be missed by the UK as it rarely takes advantage of its provisions.
2. The Dublin Agreement does not trump or replace the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. Article 31 of which says that refugees can be considered unlawfully at large if they fail to declare themselves to the authorities in the first safe country they arrive in. The UN Convention will still apply to the UK and the EU after Brexit.
This is why it must be stamped out...it is an industry that will only get bigger if it isn't.
https:/
Long jail terms for both (yes if guilty) and then the Iranian sent home.
https:/
Long jail terms for both (yes if guilty) and then the Iranian sent home.
He's a self-serving opportunist, never missing a chance to promote his hopes to get into number 10. He didn't 'cut short his vacation', anymore than any other cabinet minister, he like all the rest, was called back by the PM.
The 'pertinent' question he asks, we have all been saying since Merkel allowed this immigration onslaught, its called the Dublin agreement.
He swore himself into his post in the British House of Parliament on the Koran though downplays his religion. These guys washed up in Dover are from Iran, so they will be Shia and will have little sympathy from a Sunni, so he tries to virtue-signal while carrying out his own agenda.
The 'pertinent' question he asks, we have all been saying since Merkel allowed this immigration onslaught, its called the Dublin agreement.
He swore himself into his post in the British House of Parliament on the Koran though downplays his religion. These guys washed up in Dover are from Iran, so they will be Shia and will have little sympathy from a Sunni, so he tries to virtue-signal while carrying out his own agenda.
//...and he swore his office oath on the Koran//
Is this the same thing as the oath of allegiance required of all MPs? I do see this on the protocol involved:
"A Table Clerk at the despatch box offers a choice of affirmation or oath cards to read. There is no set list of sacred texts which MPs may use when swearing in. All Members are asked before arriving at the House of Commons which text they would prefer to use and then every effort is made to ensure that it is provided.
Those books which may not be handled by non-believers are kept in slip-cases on the Table."
I did see Javid pick up his "sacred text" rather than having it handed to him by a kufar.
Personally I have high hopes for Javid: unlike Sadiq Khan he's not obviously a stealth jihadist, is he? But, even if he were, he couldn't advance the cause of Sharia-compliance in the ministry he's inherited from May and Rudd without formalising the de facto rules which deny visa entries to the UK by any critic of Islam, and restrict asylum applications only to Muslims.
Is this the same thing as the oath of allegiance required of all MPs? I do see this on the protocol involved:
"A Table Clerk at the despatch box offers a choice of affirmation or oath cards to read. There is no set list of sacred texts which MPs may use when swearing in. All Members are asked before arriving at the House of Commons which text they would prefer to use and then every effort is made to ensure that it is provided.
Those books which may not be handled by non-believers are kept in slip-cases on the Table."
I did see Javid pick up his "sacred text" rather than having it handed to him by a kufar.
Personally I have high hopes for Javid: unlike Sadiq Khan he's not obviously a stealth jihadist, is he? But, even if he were, he couldn't advance the cause of Sharia-compliance in the ministry he's inherited from May and Rudd without formalising the de facto rules which deny visa entries to the UK by any critic of Islam, and restrict asylum applications only to Muslims.
1 to 19 of 19
Latest Posts
Editor's Blog10 mins ago
Arts & Literature14 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles14 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles31 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles37 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.