52 - They WERE fleeing war when they left Syria. They weren't when they chose to move on from Hungary, Servia or Romania. No that decision might not be purely economic (I don't think of said it is) but if they are moving for a better quality of life then they are defined as economic migrants.
The Dublin agreement does not say they are altering there status if they go to somewhere else.
The forcing was in Syria, if for example they chose to go to a poorer country because they had a relative there are they still an economic migrant?
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 4 minutes ago
52 - They WERE fleeing war when they left Syria. They weren't when they chose to move on from Hungary, Servia or Romania. No that decision might not be purely economic (I don't think of said it is) but if they are moving for a better quality of life then they are defined as economic migrants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United Nations disagree.....
It's this idea they have to flee to the first place they come to and if they don't they are the equivalent of, say a Polish plumber going to Germany to earn more money it's bizarre.
And what difference does the nomenclature make RDD?
52 - Mad isn't it.
And I agree, what does it matter how we refer to them?
Can I change to in this late on?
RDD, do you acknowledge your definition of refugee differs in some cases to that of the UNHCR?
Its clear to me that's what is the case, not sure why so many posts written about it.
Far be it from me to say that no one will hang on to your every word on the issue of refugee's, but so let us know when someone does.
I'll take heed of the definition from the UNHCR.
Red - their definition of a refugees is exactly the amazing e as mine. A person fleeing war or persecution. Neither of which these people faces in Romania, Hungary or Serbia. And therefore could have settled there.
“At sea, a frightening number of refugees and migrants are dying each year"
UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi
Interesting that he refers to both refugees and migrants yet they don't provide a definition for migrants.
How can they be exactly the same as yours?
Refugees are anyone setting off fleeing conflict
Migrants are those that set off on economic reasons.
It's the reason they depart from their homes in the first place..
Do you think only Syrians cross the meditteranean? You've got to be daft if you do think that.
So no, the UNHCR does not share the same definitions as you.
You're deluded if you think they do, Nancy boy.
Red - read their definition and read the one I posted. It's the same.
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
And who has said only Syrians cross the med?
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
---------
So you can show me where the UNHCR use this type of example ?
Equating yourself with the UNHCR ffs!
Red - the UNHCR definition of a refugee is the same as the one I posted.
And where have I said they used this example?
And how am I 'equating myself with them' exactly. Ypu brought them up.
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
---------
So the UNHCR, do they use this criteria above to define who is a refugee?
No. They define a refugee as a person fleeing war.
They do not specify if they should or should not seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in.
The Dublin agreement does state though that refugees should be returned to the first safe territory they arrive in for asylum consideration.
Bottom line if the people are leaving a safe country purely to improve their quality of life, they fir the definition of an economic migrant.
I have no idea why this label upsets you, Kung Fu and 52 so much. What is wrong with economic migrants?
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 55 minutes ago
Red - read their definition and read the one I posted. It's the same.
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
And who has said only Syrians cross the med?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet the family I posted an article about, crossed multiple "safe" countries into Germany and we're still recognised as refugees by the German Government and the UN.
So if your definition is the same it would mean you agree that the Syrian family in the article are refugees. Do you recognise that?
No. They define a refugee as a person fleeing war
------
Ok. That about sums it up.
Of course any addendums to this description that you may cite are the words of a Nancy boy only.
Kung Fu -I have already said I accept Germany have encouraged people to travel through Europe to seek refuge in Germany.
Do you accept Germany, if they chose to could return these people to thr first safe country they had travelled through?
Red - I haven't added anything. That is the definition I have used throughout the thread.
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 8 minutes ago
Kung Fu -I have already said I accept Germany have encouraged people to travel through Europe to seek refuge in Germany.
Do you accept Germany, if they chose to could return these people to thr first safe country they had travelled through?
Red - I haven't added anything. That is the definition I have used throughout the thread.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you accept Germany have given refugee to a family that have travelled through multiple "safe" countries.
Which means the status of refugee, doesn't change if you cross through a safe country.
Well done for finally admitting that 👍🏼
Debate over.
Red - I haven't added anything. That is the definition I have used throughout the thread.
-------
No matter where they end up in the short term, the fact that they were fleeing war makes them a refugee. No question about it.
No, it means they were refugees.
Those Syrians in Germany yer to be given refugee status, If they travel to Britain or France next week, what is their status?
RDD. I have explained the difference the label makes.
People and government don't like to be seen hard on refugees.
People and government are happy to deny entry to economic migrants as the label sanitises that action.
If you believe the label is unimportant, does that mean you are happy for economic migrants to be given entry.
52 - Which governments are identifying refugees as economic migrants in order to refuse entry ?
And what status do you give tose in germany yet to be given refugees status that then decide to move to Britain after 2 or 3 months?
I'm happy for economic migrants to come here and work hard as long as they have no criminal record or extremist views.
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 4 minutes ago
52 - Which governments are identifying refugees as economic migrants in order to refuse entry ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MU52 did not say governments are identifying refugees as economic migrants did he?
You just made that up.
And actually a refugee ceases to be a refugee once they voluntarily leave a safe country they could have applied for asylum in to go to another country UNLESS that country accepts their refugee status.
E.G. If a Kurdish refugee flees Turkey because of persecution into Greece and is able to claim asylum there then they cease to be a refugee if they then decide to travel on to say France without the express permission of French immigration.
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 46 minutes ago
No, it means they were refugees.
Those Syrians in Germany yer to be given refugee status, If they travel to Britain or France next week, what is their status?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Refugees.
Our government for a start. All those at Calais for example. Also the USA. Mexicans and Europeans.
You would allow more in than me then.
I think you would find that not having extremist views was a condition of entry, nobody would have extremist views, or at least until they got here.
Anyone who spends three months in Germany and then decides to come here, is not a refugee imo.
Those who come straight here are imo. And in the opinion of many others.
By the way dictionaries are not the word of God. They are written by men and women occasionally they differ, new words added words edited and amended as usage changes.
Sign in if you want to comment
EU Special
Page 27 of 32
28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32
posted on 22/6/16
52 - They WERE fleeing war when they left Syria. They weren't when they chose to move on from Hungary, Servia or Romania. No that decision might not be purely economic (I don't think of said it is) but if they are moving for a better quality of life then they are defined as economic migrants.
posted on 22/6/16
The Dublin agreement does not say they are altering there status if they go to somewhere else.
The forcing was in Syria, if for example they chose to go to a poorer country because they had a relative there are they still an economic migrant?
posted on 22/6/16
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 4 minutes ago
52 - They WERE fleeing war when they left Syria. They weren't when they chose to move on from Hungary, Servia or Romania. No that decision might not be purely economic (I don't think of said it is) but if they are moving for a better quality of life then they are defined as economic migrants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The United Nations disagree.....
posted on 22/6/16
It's this idea they have to flee to the first place they come to and if they don't they are the equivalent of, say a Polish plumber going to Germany to earn more money it's bizarre.
And what difference does the nomenclature make RDD?
posted on 22/6/16
52 - Mad isn't it.
And I agree, what does it matter how we refer to them?
posted on 22/6/16
Can I change to in this late on?
posted on 23/6/16
RDD, do you acknowledge your definition of refugee differs in some cases to that of the UNHCR?
Its clear to me that's what is the case, not sure why so many posts written about it.
Far be it from me to say that no one will hang on to your every word on the issue of refugee's, but so let us know when someone does.
I'll take heed of the definition from the UNHCR.
posted on 23/6/16
Red - their definition of a refugees is exactly the amazing e as mine. A person fleeing war or persecution. Neither of which these people faces in Romania, Hungary or Serbia. And therefore could have settled there.
“At sea, a frightening number of refugees and migrants are dying each year"
UN High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi
Interesting that he refers to both refugees and migrants yet they don't provide a definition for migrants.
posted on 23/6/16
How can they be exactly the same as yours?
Refugees are anyone setting off fleeing conflict
Migrants are those that set off on economic reasons.
It's the reason they depart from their homes in the first place..
Do you think only Syrians cross the meditteranean? You've got to be daft if you do think that.
So no, the UNHCR does not share the same definitions as you.
You're deluded if you think they do, Nancy boy.
posted on 23/6/16
Red - read their definition and read the one I posted. It's the same.
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
And who has said only Syrians cross the med?
posted on 23/6/16
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
---------
So you can show me where the UNHCR use this type of example ?
Equating yourself with the UNHCR ffs!
posted on 23/6/16
Red - the UNHCR definition of a refugee is the same as the one I posted.
And where have I said they used this example?
And how am I 'equating myself with them' exactly. Ypu brought them up.
posted on 23/6/16
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
---------
So the UNHCR, do they use this criteria above to define who is a refugee?
posted on 23/6/16
No. They define a refugee as a person fleeing war.
They do not specify if they should or should not seek asylum in the first safe country they arrive in.
The Dublin agreement does state though that refugees should be returned to the first safe territory they arrive in for asylum consideration.
Bottom line if the people are leaving a safe country purely to improve their quality of life, they fir the definition of an economic migrant.
I have no idea why this label upsets you, Kung Fu and 52 so much. What is wrong with economic migrants?
posted on 23/6/16
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 55 minutes ago
Red - read their definition and read the one I posted. It's the same.
Flee Syria - refugee
Enter the safe Romania - as a refugee
Decide to leave safe Romania - as economic migrant
And who has said only Syrians cross the med?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet the family I posted an article about, crossed multiple "safe" countries into Germany and we're still recognised as refugees by the German Government and the UN.
So if your definition is the same it would mean you agree that the Syrian family in the article are refugees. Do you recognise that?
posted on 23/6/16
No. They define a refugee as a person fleeing war
------
Ok. That about sums it up.
Of course any addendums to this description that you may cite are the words of a Nancy boy only.
posted on 23/6/16
Kung Fu -I have already said I accept Germany have encouraged people to travel through Europe to seek refuge in Germany.
Do you accept Germany, if they chose to could return these people to thr first safe country they had travelled through?
Red - I haven't added anything. That is the definition I have used throughout the thread.
posted on 23/6/16
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 8 minutes ago
Kung Fu -I have already said I accept Germany have encouraged people to travel through Europe to seek refuge in Germany.
Do you accept Germany, if they chose to could return these people to thr first safe country they had travelled through?
Red - I haven't added anything. That is the definition I have used throughout the thread.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you accept Germany have given refugee to a family that have travelled through multiple "safe" countries.
Which means the status of refugee, doesn't change if you cross through a safe country.
Well done for finally admitting that 👍🏼
Debate over.
posted on 23/6/16
Red - I haven't added anything. That is the definition I have used throughout the thread.
-------
No matter where they end up in the short term, the fact that they were fleeing war makes them a refugee. No question about it.
posted on 23/6/16
No, it means they were refugees.
Those Syrians in Germany yer to be given refugee status, If they travel to Britain or France next week, what is their status?
posted on 23/6/16
RDD. I have explained the difference the label makes.
People and government don't like to be seen hard on refugees.
People and government are happy to deny entry to economic migrants as the label sanitises that action.
If you believe the label is unimportant, does that mean you are happy for economic migrants to be given entry.
posted on 23/6/16
52 - Which governments are identifying refugees as economic migrants in order to refuse entry ?
And what status do you give tose in germany yet to be given refugees status that then decide to move to Britain after 2 or 3 months?
I'm happy for economic migrants to come here and work hard as long as they have no criminal record or extremist views.
posted on 23/6/16
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 4 minutes ago
52 - Which governments are identifying refugees as economic migrants in order to refuse entry ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MU52 did not say governments are identifying refugees as economic migrants did he?
You just made that up.
And actually a refugee ceases to be a refugee once they voluntarily leave a safe country they could have applied for asylum in to go to another country UNLESS that country accepts their refugee status.
E.G. If a Kurdish refugee flees Turkey because of persecution into Greece and is able to claim asylum there then they cease to be a refugee if they then decide to travel on to say France without the express permission of French immigration.
posted on 23/6/16
comment by Reddevilsdouble - give peace a chance (U12215)
posted 46 minutes ago
No, it means they were refugees.
Those Syrians in Germany yer to be given refugee status, If they travel to Britain or France next week, what is their status?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Refugees.
posted on 23/6/16
Our government for a start. All those at Calais for example. Also the USA. Mexicans and Europeans.
You would allow more in than me then.
I think you would find that not having extremist views was a condition of entry, nobody would have extremist views, or at least until they got here.
Anyone who spends three months in Germany and then decides to come here, is not a refugee imo.
Those who come straight here are imo. And in the opinion of many others.
By the way dictionaries are not the word of God. They are written by men and women occasionally they differ, new words added words edited and amended as usage changes.
Page 27 of 32
28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32