Deluge Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 And thank God for that. Of course, America hating psychopaths like robomarx and the rest of that cult are losing their shit, but nobody really cares what they think. 1 Quote
robosmith Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 7 hours ago, Deluge said: And thank God for that. Of course, America hating psychopaths like robomarx and the rest of that cult are losing their shit, but nobody really cares what they think. Too bad for your fantasies there are NOT VOTES in Congress to remove your anti-Trump judges, and I LOVE that about America. LMAO It's you anti-Constitutional SCUM who violate the law giving immigrants the right to apply for ASYLUM. 🤮 Quote
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 9 minutes ago, robosmith said: It's you anti-Constitutional SCUM who violate the law giving immigrants the right to apply for ASYLUM. Sure... anyone can claim asylum, but there is no right that all claims are to be taken seriously and at their word and then must be allowed into the country while we spend years processing them. Nor is there any right that all must be granted asylum just because they ask for it. Quote
eyeball Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 5 minutes ago, User said: Nor is there any right that all must be granted asylum just because they ask for it. There's no guarantees but they do however have the right to ask for it Read Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 14 Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: There's no guarantees but they do however have the right to ask for it Read Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 14 Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Gee... what did I already say? "Sure... anyone can claim asylum" Also, the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" is not binding law. 1 Quote
Legato Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 4 minutes ago, eyeball said: There's no guarantees but they do however have the right to ask for it Read Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 14 Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Which like much from the UN has no clout. Aspirational, Not Binding: The UDHR was adopted by the UN General Assembly as a resolution, not a treaty, meaning it doesn't create legally enforceable obligations for member states. Therefore they can ask but it is not legally binding. 1 Quote
eyeball Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 1 minute ago, User said: Gee... what did I already say? "Sure... anyone can claim asylum" You also said, wrongly, there is no right that all claims are to be taken seriously I'm pretty sure the part of Article 14 that mentions the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution... This guarantees there will still be a serious claims process that must be followed. 5 minutes ago, Legato said: Which like much from the UN has no clout Unless you've signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 Just now, eyeball said: You also said, wrongly, there is no right that all claims are to be taken seriously I'm pretty sure the part of Article 14 that mentions the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution... This guarantees there will still be a serious claims process that must be followed. There isn't. Just because you show up and say you want asylum, doesn't mean anything. It has to be valid. Yet again, there is nothing binding from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Do you just not bother to read or care about these facts? Quote
robosmith Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 10 minutes ago, Legato said: Which like much from the UN has no clout. Aspirational, Not Binding: The UDHR was adopted by the UN General Assembly as a resolution, not a treaty, meaning it doesn't create legally enforceable obligations for member states. Therefore they can ask but it is not legally binding. Wrong. Britannica Quote The document’s nonbinding status was initially perceived as one of its major weaknesses. Authoritarian states, which usually sought to protect themselves against what they considered interference in their internal affairs, approved of this feature of the declaration, and even some democratic countries initially worried about the potentially intrusive nature of the obligations that a legally binding document would impose. Some observers have argued, however, that its nonbinding status is one of the UDHR’s major advantages. Its inherent flexibility has offered ample room for new strategies to promote human rights and has allowed it to serve as a springboard for the development of numerous legislative initiatives in international human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, both of which were adopted in 1966. In addition, the UDHR has been reaffirmed in numerous resolutions passed by organs and agencies of the UN, and many countries have incorporated it into their national constitutions. These developments have led many analysts to conclude that, despite its nonbinding status, its provisions have achieved a juridical status akin to that of norms of customary international law. Quote
eyeball Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 17 minutes ago, Legato said: Therefore they can ask but it is not legally binding. Sure, America seems happier in the company of non signatory nations these days. Czechoslovakia. Poland. Saudi Arabia. Soviet Union. Byelorussian SSR. Ukrainian SSR. South Africa. Yugoslavia. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 11 minutes ago, User said: Yet again, there is nothing binding from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights No, there's just the desire for human decency. You can still be as indecent as you like. 1 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 10 minutes ago, eyeball said: No, there's just the desire for human decency. You can still be as indecent as you like. Well, this is a different discussion now, not what you were ignorantly claiming before. There is nothing decent about opening up a nation's borders to the entire world to simply claim asylum. Quote
Legato Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 33 minutes ago, eyeball said: You also said, wrongly, there is no right that all claims are to be taken seriously I'm pretty sure the part of Article 14 that mentions the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution... This guarantees there will still be a serious claims process that must be followed. Unless you've signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Still not legally binding. 26 minutes ago, robosmith said: Wrong. Britannica Which means squat, consideration does not mean legal 1 Quote
Legato Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 22 minutes ago, eyeball said: Sure, America seems happier in the company of non signatory nations these days. Czechoslovakia. Poland. Saudi Arabia. Soviet Union. Byelorussian SSR. Ukrainian SSR. South Africa. Yugoslavia. and? 1 Quote
robosmith Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 16 minutes ago, Legato said: Still not legally binding. Which means squat, consideration does not mean legal It has the same force as International Law. It is telling that YOU BELIEVE International Law is "squat." Fortunately you have NO POWER. Quote
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 2 minutes ago, robosmith said: It has the same force as International Law. It is telling that YOU BELIEVE International Law is "squat." Fortunately you have NO POWER. Um... no. The "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" is not binding law. Quote
Legato Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 6 minutes ago, robosmith said: It has the same force as International Law. It is telling that YOU BELIEVE International Law is "squat." Fortunately you have NO POWER. Which part of "not" did you "not" understand 1 Quote
Deluge Posted March 29 Author Report Posted March 29 1 hour ago, robosmith said: Too bad for your fantasies there are NOT VOTES in Congress to remove your anti-Trump judges, and I LOVE that about America. LMAO It's you anti-Constitutional SCUM who violate the law giving immigrants the right to apply for ASYLUM. 🤮 IN MEXICO. 1 Quote
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 5 minutes ago, Deluge said: IN MEXICO. No shit. You can apply all you like, doesn't mean you get a free pass to come in and then abscond from your hearing like these open borders leftists support. 1 Quote
Legato Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 1 hour ago, eyeball said: No, there's just the desire for human decency. You can still be as indecent as you like. 1 1 Quote
herbie Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 Git ridda dem Judges that rule by law instedda whut they're told! Yeehaww! Go git 'em boys! 1 Quote
Deluge Posted March 29 Author Report Posted March 29 (edited) 30 minutes ago, User said: No shit. You can apply all you like, doesn't mean you get a free pass to come in and then abscond from your hearing like these open borders leftists support. True story. Of course, robomarx hates that shit. He doesn't give a f*ck about immigration law. He just wants illegal aliens roaming free, dropping anchor babbies, and browning a town near you. Edited March 29 by Deluge 1 Quote
robosmith Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 1 hour ago, Legato said: Which part of "not" did you "not" understand Which part of "juridical status akin to that of norms of customary international law." do you not understand? Quote
User Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 34 minutes ago, robosmith said: Which part of "juridical status akin to that of norms of customary international law." do you not understand? What about it? Quote
Legato Posted March 29 Report Posted March 29 53 minutes ago, robosmith said: Which part of "juridical status akin to that of norms of customary international law." do you not understand? "akin to norms" does not mean legal. That much is overstand. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.