Secondly, asylum seekers have every right to seek asylum from persecution, torture and threats of death. As one of the richest and most powerful countries in the world it is our responsibility to accomodate those running from persecution. Just remember, we sent away many jews before the outbreak of the second world war back to the death camps; we should be ashamed of this. Are you happy for people to be sent back to countries such as Zimbabwe where many would certainly be murdered upon their return? The 1951 UN Convention on refugees was signed by 95 states, including Britain in the aftermath of the Second World War. The true horror of the millions of Jews and others who were massacred having failed to secure refuge abroad had come to light and the signatories of the Convention, including the UK, vowed to protect refugees so that such a tragedy would never happen again.

However, horrific violations of human rights continue to take place on a daily basis in scores of countries around the world. If people are threatened, imprisoned, tortured or their life is placed in danger, it is their right to go to another country and seek protection under this Convention. It may be their only hope.

Count yourself lucky that you live in a country where you can express your views, where campaigning for democracy will not see you locked up and tortured, or even murdered, to act without fear of retribution or death.
References :
http://www.asylumaid.org.uk

We have learned something. We have learned to be cautious in granting political asylum to all who have migrated here legally or illegally.

What enrages me and concerns me is the disrespect of men and women in uniform. We (the silent majority who support men in women in uniform) respect the views of others even if we are not in agreement. However, how can you respect those who show no respect for people in uniform? To respect that view… spitting on a person who is trying to give back to their country is an oximoron. They want respect but refuse to show any themselves???

For their own safety, ayslum seekers should be held in detention, out of direct public contact until their case has been heard. Asylum seekers shouldn’t be given any right of the host nation until a descision about their case has been reached.
References :
If an asylum seeker is fleeing their country for their own safety, doesn’t the host nation have an obligation to provide that safety until a descision about their case has been reached. And… should the host nations keep the asylum seeker segragated and out of direct public contact until a descision is made.

My point is… until their case is heard, they have no rights, no privlages, nothing.

And you think all asylum seekers are parasites, whileyu are the one murdering and robbing from people in their own countries abroad, you moron.

And you are not aware that the wars you create and take part in are not responsible for people needing to seek a safe place elsewhere, you really are army material.

Dumb, in uniform, with a gun and killing innocent people aboad, and then you complain of them coming here.

Are you totally without a brain. When yu leave the army, join the BNP, you will feel right at home there, with all the other mindless yobs.
References :

Anyway – no, I don’t agree with you. Asylum seekers are eligible for no more benefits than an unemployed briton. Employers are free to hire the person who most suits their requirements, whether they were born here or not. Immigrants with jobs contribute to the economy by way of taxation. The vast majority of Britain’s benefit recipients are chronically-unemployable british, who’ve never contributed a bean in their lives.

People "can’t get a job" because they’re not as good as the other applicants. An immigrant doesn’t "steal" a job – the employer gives it to them over the other guy. To use the word "steal" would imply that the job would belong to any given applicant by default, which is not the case.

So no, I don’t agree with you, because you’re flat-out wrong.
References :