The News & Topicality Thread

Where Fellowship and Camaraderie lives: that place where the CPS membership values fun and good fellowship as the cement of the community
User avatar
Wosbald
Door Greeter
Door Greeter
Posts: 1058
Joined: 15 Nov 2022, 10:50
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 59 times

The Right to Migrate / Fascism

Post by Wosbald »

+JMJ+

Source: Crux
Link: cruxnow DOT com/church-in-uk-and-ireland/2024/01/catholic-groups-join-opposition-to-uk-plan-to-deport-migrants-to-rwanda
Catholic groups join opposition to UK plan to deport migrants to Rwanda

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯

LEICESTER, United Kingdom — Catholic groups in Britain have joined over 250 organizations in a statement condemning a bill submitted by the government of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak to send some asylum seekers from the UK to the African nation of Rwanda.

The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill received its second reading in the House of Lords Monday. The government says the change is necessary to prevent dangerous boat crossings of the English Channel by migrants.

The government’s plan, originally floated under former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, would stop legal challenges against sending asylum seekers to the other country. The plan had been rejected by the UK Supreme Court, which late last year ruled Rwanda was unsafe for asylum seekers.

[…]

A statement signed by 265 civil society organizations, including several Catholic ones, called for the new bill — designed to not face the court — to be rejected.

The statement, which was coordinated by the NGO called Liberty, condemns the bill as undermining human rights protection and attacking the role of the judiciary and the rule of law.

It also accuses the proposed legislation of undermining the international system of refugee protection and international law — in particular, by stating that UK authorities should consider Rwanda a safe country regardless of “any interpretation of international law by the court or tribunal.”

“The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill is a constitutionally extraordinary and deeply harmful piece of legislation. It threatens the universality of human rights and is likely in breach of international law, striking a serious blow to the UK’s commitment to the rule of law. It was not a Government manifesto commitment — on the contrary, it will hinder the UK’s ability to ‘continue to grant asylum and support to refugees fleeing persecution’ … we call on Peers to reject the Bill,” the statement says.

The statement objects to the way the proposed legislation expands powers given to the government to ignore interim measures of the European Convention on Human Rights that prevent the transfer of refugees and prohibits UK courts from hearing appeals on the law.

“The Rwanda scheme is an attempt by the UK Government to shirk its obligations to consider asylum claims and support those granted protection as part of the international refugee protection system,” the statement says.

“Even more alarmingly, the Bill states that the Government and courts should treat Rwanda as a safe country, regardless of ‘any interpretation of international law by the court or tribunal.’ This extreme provision will damage the UK’s international reputation and ability to hold other states to account for human rights abuses,” it continues.

Sarah Teather, the Director of the Jesuit Refugee Service which signed the appeal, called the proposed legislation “cruel and risible.”

She also condemned the fact there has been much discussion about its implications for politicians’ careers.

“We urge policy-makers to remember that this isn’t about party politics pantomime. If enacted, the Rwanda scheme will destroy the lives of people who have already lost everything. It is these people — men, women, and children — who should be foremost in this discussion. For them, we continue to oppose this Bill and the Rwanda scheme as a whole,” she said in a statement.

Meanwhile, Lord David Alton — a leading Catholic member of the House of Lords — said It is the job of the UK Parliament is “to hear different views and to assess the arguments carefully.”

“Too often, we pass legislation in haste and repent at leisure. The treaty before us, the Bill that will come and that which we already considered in 2023 — the Illegal Migration Act [the legislation rejected by the UK Supreme Court] — are examples of that,” he said.

“Let us recall that eight out of 10 refugees — many millions — end up in neighboring countries, not in the United Kingdom, so there are plenty of other countries which need to join an international alliance and promote an international strategy,” Alton continued.

He said that at a minimum, the conservative government needs to say what has changed on the ground in Rwanda since the Supreme Court decision.

“What evidence do they have, for instance, in regard to political oppression or LGBT people? What examination have the government made of the reasons why Burundi has closed its borders with Rwanda, and of Rwanda’s links with the M23 militias in the eastern DRC — what analysis has been made of that?” Alton asked.

He also called for a government response to the 2023 Human Rights Watch report stating that commentators, journalists, opposition activists, and others “speaking out on current affairs and criticizing public policies in Rwanda continued to face abusive prosecutions, enforced disappearances, and have at times died under unexplained circumstances.”

The British Lord mentioned that he visited Rwanda in the aftermath of the genocide and saw terrible mass graves and admitted huge strides have been made to recover from the deaths of between half a million and 800,000 people, but he added, “it is deceptive to describe Rwanda as a safe country for refoulement.”

“It is passing strange that we have five alleged genocidaires living in the UK that we have not sent back to Rwanda, for fear that they would be at real risk of not receiving a fair trial if returned. The primary issue in those extradition proceedings was whether they were at real risk of a flagrant denial of justice if returned to Rwanda; they expressed fears that they would be tortured and executed,” Alton said.


Image
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2903
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 248 times
Been thanked: 410 times

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by Del »

User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2903
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 248 times
Been thanked: 410 times

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by Del »

Eventually, we will be forced to start an election thread. Blecch.

For now, this is topical. Democrats held a primary in South Carolina last week. A whopping 4% (130,000) of registered Democrats showed up (One-quarter of the turnout in 2008, when Hillary was the frontrunner and Obama was the new kid). Joe Biden scored 97% of their votes.

His opponent, Congressman Dean Phillips, has no name recognition. Democrat media have ignored him.

MSNBC finally invited him onto a panel for 10 minutes, where he boldly says the quiet parts out loud and clear. Worthy of listening to, as this Democrat speaks truth to a Democrat audience:

User avatar
ChildOfGod
Sunday School Teacher
Sunday School Teacher
Posts: 185
Joined: 14 Jun 2022, 16:19
Location: New Jersey (the beautiful part)
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 29 times
Contact:

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by ChildOfGod »

Del wrote: 05 Feb 2024, 08:36 Eventually, we will be forced to start an election thread. Blecch.
I would love, love, love to see anything besides another Trump/Biden smackdown.
Wishing you God's very best!
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2903
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 248 times
Been thanked: 410 times

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by Del »

ChildOfGod wrote: 05 Feb 2024, 11:41
Del wrote: 05 Feb 2024, 08:36 Eventually, we will be forced to start an election thread. Blecch.
I would love, love, love to see anything besides another Trump/Biden smackdown.
This will be one for the history books, for sure.
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2903
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 248 times
Been thanked: 410 times

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by Del »

If you haven't been paying close attention (and I don't blame anyone for not bothering), the Senate Democrats have passed a bill for "immigration reform" that gives $40 billion to Ukraine, $14 billion to Israel, $4 billion to Hamas, and still permits 5,000 people to enter illegally per day. That's 2 million per year, a slight reduction from the 2.7 million and 2.8 million the last two years. (Most likely, the rest will put their lives at risk -- crossing the river or indebting to the cartels to sneak across at unguarded stretches of border.)

House Republicans have said "No Deal."

Biden blames Trump and Republicans for his failure to secure the border.

Biden, After Denying Border Crisis For Years: ‘Only Reason Border Is Not Secure Is Donald Trump’



The worst part about a politician in cognitive decline: It's so difficult to lie confidently and effectively.
User avatar
ChildOfGod
Sunday School Teacher
Sunday School Teacher
Posts: 185
Joined: 14 Jun 2022, 16:19
Location: New Jersey (the beautiful part)
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 29 times
Contact:

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by ChildOfGod »

Del wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 13:10 ...and still permits 5,000 people to enter illegally per day.
Is that fact-checked-true? I don't know anything about the details - wondering if that's a stone cold fact in the bill or bull propagated by talk shows?
Wishing you God's very best!
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2903
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 248 times
Been thanked: 410 times

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by Del »

ChildOfGod wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 14:07
Del wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 13:10 ...and still permits 5,000 people to enter illegally per day.
Is that fact-checked-true? I don't know anything about the details - wondering if that's a stone cold fact in the bill or bull propagated by talk shows?
This figure has been quoted by numerous commenters, news reporters, and Republican politicians many, many times. It has not been refuted or rebutted by anyone on the left. So I trust it's pretty solid.

I have heard details about Biden's plans for the overflow, but I'm not quite so clear on that.

As I understand it, the bill hires more border officials to process the daily 5,000 rather more effectively, with a bit more screening for dangerous characters. I have the impression that the extras will accumulate in holding camps, awaiting their turn to be in the daily 5,000. In due time, the camps will fill up. At that point, Biden will be able to activate some emergency measure to.... take names and bus them to wherever, I guess.

There's no mention in the bill of securing the border or reducing the inflow of migrants. Just tracking them a little better, I guess.
==========================================
As long as we are being precise.... 5000 per day is 1.8 million. I rounded up to 2 million.
User avatar
Jocose
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2413
Joined: 09 Apr 2022, 12:10
Location: Ulaanbaatar
Has thanked: 309 times
Been thanked: 272 times

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by Jocose »

ChildOfGod wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 14:07
Del wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 13:10 ...and still permits 5,000 people to enter illegally per day.
Is that fact-checked-true? I don't know anything about the details - wondering if that's a stone cold fact in the bill or bull propagated by talk shows?
Are you serious?
The views expressed here are either mine or not my own, not sure.
The opinions expressed here may or may not be my own.
I post links to stuff.
Make your own choices.
User avatar
ChildOfGod
Sunday School Teacher
Sunday School Teacher
Posts: 185
Joined: 14 Jun 2022, 16:19
Location: New Jersey (the beautiful part)
Has thanked: 67 times
Been thanked: 29 times
Contact:

The News & Topicality Thread

Post by ChildOfGod »

Jocose wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 22:50
ChildOfGod wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 14:07
Del wrote: 06 Feb 2024, 13:10 ...and still permits 5,000 people to enter illegally per day.
Is that fact-checked-true? I don't know anything about the details - wondering if that's a stone cold fact in the bill or bull propagated by talk shows?
Are you serious?
I was quite serious. I didn't know any particular details of the actual bill. I'd seen and heard a lot of what seemed to be guesses and/or hearsay. Last night I saw the numbers for myself on a reliable news source, not a talk show posing as news.

It really strikes me as odd that Republicans were OK with that number (5K/day) and were going to sign this (let alone had worked on it themselves), but that seems to have been the case.
Wishing you God's very best!
Post Reply