Asylum seekers

[azureline**]

Law and Policy

Refoulement/Physical Protection 
Saudi Arabia is not party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or to the 1967 Protocol, nor the 1965 Casablanca Protocol concerning Palestinian refugees.  The 1992 Basic Law provides that “the state will grant political asylum, if so required by the public interest.” However, the Kingdom has no legislation implementing this provision and the Government allows only those with residence permits to apply for asylum.  The Government bars those who entered illegally or overstayed on pilgrimage visas from ever receiving asylum.

[ufo_investigations]

---

@azureline** wrote:

Law and Policy

Refoulement/Physical Protection 
Saudi Arabia is not party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or to the 1967 Protocol, nor the 1965 Casablanca Protocol concerning Palestinian refugees.  The 1992 Basic Law provides that “the state will grant political asylum, if so required by the public interest.” However, the Kingdom has no legislation implementing this provision and the Government allows only those with residence permits to apply for asylum.  The Government bars those who entered illegally or overstayed on pilgrimage visas from ever receiving asylum.

---

If muslim countries don't want their own muslim neighbours why should western countries take them?

Are we suckers?

[boris1gary]

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

Law and Policy

Refoulement/Physical Protection 
Saudi Arabia is not party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or to the 1967 Protocol, nor the 1965 Casablanca Protocol concerning Palestinian refugees.  The 1992 Basic Law provides that “the state will grant political asylum, if so required by the public interest.” However, the Kingdom has no legislation implementing this provision and the Government allows only those with residence permits to apply for asylum.  The Government bars those who entered illegally or overstayed on pilgrimage visas from ever receiving asylum.

---

If muslim countries don't want their own muslim neighbours why should western countries take them?

Are we suckers?

---

So do you only have a problem with asylum seekers who are Muslim? 

[ufo_investigations]

---

@boris1gary wrote:

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

Law and Policy

Refoulement/Physical Protection 
Saudi Arabia is not party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or to the 1967 Protocol, nor the 1965 Casablanca Protocol concerning Palestinian refugees.  The 1992 Basic Law provides that “the state will grant political asylum, if so required by the public interest.” However, the Kingdom has no legislation implementing this provision and the Government allows only those with residence permits to apply for asylum.  The Government bars those who entered illegally or overstayed on pilgrimage visas from ever receiving asylum.

---

If muslim countries don't want their own muslim neighbours why should western countries take them?

Are we suckers?

---

So do you only have a problem with asylum seekers who are Muslim? 

---

Asylum seekers are mostly muslim, usually fleeing alleged persecution.

Why should any country take asylum seekers if their own muslim neighbours wont take them, are we in the west suckers?

Saudi Arabia is oil rich they can afford it. Dubai is rich too why wont they take them? Qatar is oil rich too. Most of the countries around there are filthy rich they can take them.

[azureline**]

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@boris1gary wrote:

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

Law and Policy

Refoulement/Physical Protection 
Saudi Arabia is not party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or to the 1967 Protocol, nor the 1965 Casablanca Protocol concerning Palestinian refugees.  The 1992 Basic Law provides that “the state will grant political asylum, if so required by the public interest.” However, the Kingdom has no legislation implementing this provision and the Government allows only those with residence permits to apply for asylum.  The Government bars those who entered illegally or overstayed on pilgrimage visas from ever receiving asylum.

---

If muslim countries don't want their own muslim neighbours why should western countries take them?

Are we suckers?

---

So do you only have a problem with asylum seekers who are Muslim? 

---

Asylum seekers are mostly muslim, usually fleeing alleged persecution.

Why should any country take asylum seekers if their own muslim neighbours wont take them, are we in the west suckers?

Saudi Arabia is oil rich they can afford it. Dubai is rich too why wont they take them? Qatar is oil rich too. Most of the countries around there are filthy rich they can take them.

---

Do you have any factual evidence for that statement? I am not sure it is correct

[iapetus_rocks]

It is unarguable that some asylum seekers are not really seeking asylum, but are only seeking better economic opportunities. This is well known, though it may be politically inexpedient for politicians to say so.

It needs must be considered how much of what politicians say and do is directed towards their chances of re-election, rather than towards the interests of the people they were elected to serve.

[ufo_investigations]

---

@azureline** wrote:

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@boris1gary wrote:

---

@ufo_investigations wrote:

---

@azureline** wrote:

Law and Policy

Refoulement/Physical Protection 
Saudi Arabia is not party to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or to the 1967 Protocol, nor the 1965 Casablanca Protocol concerning Palestinian refugees.  The 1992 Basic Law provides that “the state will grant political asylum, if so required by the public interest.” However, the Kingdom has no legislation implementing this provision and the Government allows only those with residence permits to apply for asylum.  The Government bars those who entered illegally or overstayed on pilgrimage visas from ever receiving asylum.

---

If muslim countries don't want their own muslim neighbours why should western countries take them?

Are we suckers?

---

So do you only have a problem with asylum seekers who are Muslim? 

---

Asylum seekers are mostly muslim, usually fleeing alleged persecution.

Why should any country take asylum seekers if their own muslim neighbours wont take them, are we in the west suckers?

Saudi Arabia is oil rich they can afford it. Dubai is rich too why wont they take them? Qatar is oil rich too. Most of the countries around there are filthy rich they can take them.

---

Do you have any factual evidence for that statement? I am not sure it is correct

---

Saudi Arabia
GDP $927.762 billion
Per capita $31,309


Qatar
GDP $214.575 billion
Per capita $96,903


Dubai
GDP $107.100 billion
Per capita $64,000


Iran
GDP $974.406 billion
Per capita $12,478

These countries can well and truly afford it!

AND they already have islamic sharia laws in place which is exactly what they want.

[debra9275]

How do you know that all Muslims want to live under sharia law? Maybe they don't

Have you ever noticed that we live in a multi cultural society here in Australia? It's been that way for a long time, since the second world war

[ufo_investigations]

---

@debra9275 wrote:
How do you know that all Muslims want to live under sharia law? Maybe they don't

Have you ever noticed that we live in a multi cultural society here in Australia? It's been that way for a long time, since the second world war

---

Have you been hiding under a rock? Can't you see that every country muslims have migrated to they have demanded sharia law, islamic sharia compliant foods (halal), sharia finance, sharia punishments, etc...

They do not like western democracy and freedoms.

[debra9275]

Nonsense