[Newsbot]

Title: Asylum seekers continue to cross Canada-U.S. border despite shutdown | CTV News
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: Freakinoldguy
Date: 2020-06-26 10:06:10
Canadian

[Freakinoldguy]

Well it would appear that things are starting to heat up again. Apparently being a refugee in a first world country that's being overrun by Covid 19 isn't such a great prospect anymore especially when there's free health care just a 9 iron shot away.

[BartSimpson]

Why would anyone expect illegal border jumpers to care that the legal port of entry is closed when they had no intention of using it anyway?

[DrCaleb]

Asylum is not illegal.

[Freakinoldguy]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Asylum is not illegal.

Asylum may not be illegal but, then again our gov't using a loophole they refuse to close to allow this practice to continue isn't exactly ethical, is it?

And if our gov't can stop the practice of illegal border jumping to seek asylum at will like they did here the question becomes. Why are they once again allowing the "irregular" asylum seekers to cross into Canada?

$1:

TORONTO — After years of asylum-seekers crossing the Canada-U.S. border illegally to file refugee claims, Canada is turning them around and sending them back to the United States, which says it plans to send them swiftly back to their countries of origin.

Canada said last week it will no longer accept irregular migrants trying to cross the shared border with the United States and will instead return them to U.S. authorities, as a temporary measure amid the coronavirus outbreak.

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/u- ... me-nations


Hypocrisy at it's finest.

[Mowich]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Asylum is not illegal.

They are crossing from the US - a democratic country so stating they are asylum seekers is not applicable and really a sign that you have little understanding of what real asylum seekers face. Illegal borders jumpers are an anathema to legal refugee claimants.

[herbie]

I dunno. Do you think US citizens escaping pandemic, idiots who think face masks are an affront to God, absurd medical costs, a President that's outright evil and armed patrols of racist militias should NOT be grounds for asylum?
Or is it the usual bitch that the border jumpers are brown people again?

[Freakinoldguy]

herbie herbie:

I dunno. Do you think US citizens escaping pandemic, idiots who think face masks are an affront to God, absurd medical costs, a President that's outright evil and armed patrols of racist militias should NOT be grounds for asylum?
Or is it the usual bitch that the border jumpers are brown people again?

Then, what was their excuse before the pandemic?

And, given your criteria we should be allowing every US citizens no matter race, creed, colour or financial status asylum even if they "irregularly" cross into Canada at places like Roxham Road?

[DrCaleb]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Asylum is not illegal.

Asylum may not be illegal but, then again our gov't using a loophole they refuse to close to allow this practice to continue isn't exactly ethical, is it?

If you are in danger of being sent back to a country that will torture and kill you, is it really unethical to try to stop that from happening?

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018 ... h-sentence

[DrCaleb]

Mowich Mowich:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Asylum is not illegal.

Illegal borders jumpers are an anathema to legal refugee claimants.

When you have to leave your home in a hurry, because the death squads are coming for you and your family, you don't have time ot grab your ID. Crossing borders without ID is illegal, so there is a treaty in place to make crossing a border illegally nullified by claiming asylum.

$1:

In the aftermath of World War I (1914-1918), millions of people fled their homelands in search of refuge. Governments responded by drawing up a set of international agreements to provide travel documents for these people who were, effectively, the first refugees of the 20th century. Their numbers increased dramatically during and after World War II(1939-1945), as millions more were forcibly displaced, deported and/or resettled.

.

$1:

States are responsible for protecting the fundamental human rights of their citizens. When they are unable or unwilling to do so – often for political reasons or based on discrimination – individuals may suffer such serious violations of their human rights that they have to leave their homes, their families and their communities to find sanctuary in another country. Since, by definition, refugees are not protected by their own governments, the international community steps in to ensure they are safe and protected.

$1:

Refugees are forced to flee because of a threat of persecution and because they lack the protection of their own country. A migrant, in comparison, may leave his or her country for many reasons that are not related to persecution, such as for the purposes of employment, family reunification or study. A migrant continues to enjoy the protection of his or her own government, even when abroad.

$1:

The 1951 Convention contains a number of rights and also highlights the obligations of refugees towards their host country. The cornerstone of the 1951 Convention is the principle of non-refoulement contained in Article 33. According to this principle, a refugee should not be returned to a country where he or she faces serious threats to his or her life or freedom. This protection may not be claimed by refugees who are reasonably regarded as a danger to the security of the country, or having been convicted of a particularly serious crime, are considered a danger to the community.

Other rights contained in the 1951 Convention include:

The right not to be punished for illegal entry into the territory of a contracting State (Article31);

https://www.unhcr.org/about-us/backgrou ... tocol.html

So, since the United States is returning people to places where they are likely to be persecuted by their governments, perhaps it is not me who doesn't know what they are talking about when you call a person fleeing persecution in their own country a "border jumper". I mean, it's been around since 1951, how do you know nothing about the UN Convention on Refugees? Have you never heard of the Komagata Maru or the Motorschiff St. Louis?

Also, what is a "border jumper" anyway, besides a grey area term devised to sound ominous by the right wing?