Why not embrace eCultural diversity?
•
by Releasethe Krakken
For everyone's info that is spewing hatred towards the current influx of refugees.
People your countries are all signatories to the 1951 UNHCR convention
The 1951 Refugee Convention is the key legal document that forms the basis of our work. Ratified by 145 State parties, it defines the term ‘refugee’ and outlines the rights of the displaced, as well as the legal obligations of States to protect them.
The core principle is non-refoulement, which asserts that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. This is now considered a rule of customary international law.
Why this statement . I just see a lot of comments about the current influx of refugees into Europe. You do not have a choice in allowing them or not! This is the reason for it.
What has this got to do with eIreland. I see culturally intolerant and racist comments such as this from several people in eireland
Need I remind people of the history of South Africa. People died in our country for their language rights. So no Chance Harrison and especially Winston Hope Smith I will continue to communicate in the lingua franca English. YOU WILL NOT TELL ME IN WHAT LANGUAGE I COMMUNICATE.
I do use grammarly so if it does not pick up bad grammar. I am certain you are still able to understand what I am saying.
Why was the refugee convention introduced. It was introduced after the Holocaust where 13 Million jews was killed.
But in a country like eIreland why are you so PEDANTIC!
You can not only learn plenty of the Irish culture but by allowing people to speak broken english and communicate with us in whatever english they can muster we can learn of their cultures as well:
Here are 3 music pieces (none are english)
and this
CHANCE AND HARLIQUIN YOUR such hateful people and that is why I urge you to leave eIreland permanently. Take your hatred somewhere else. Please brother and sister.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
Chance Hairyson OUT OUT OUT!
Use more Afrikans. I can only imagine it's a great language to curse in. Even simple words sound harsh.
Awesome.
LOL You're* I'm not hateful towards anyone but you. Stop playing the victim. You're the aggressor in all of this. The fact you made this articles makes me think you're even crazier than once thought. You can dish it out but you can't take it. As far as refugees are concerned I can show you videos to the contrary, I won't though because I h ave better things to do with my time. That being said refugees can suck a d. There;'s hundreds of other countries they can go to besides the USA. The US can't take everyone and we'd be stupid to do so. If young males 18-30 can't fight for their own country, they don't belong here. Islam is not a religion of peace. Never has been. Never will be.
The only religion in eRepublik is Dioism.
yes as I can remember its the official religion 🙂
https://www.erepublik.com/en/article/some-swahili-for-chance-hairy-son-2632144/1/20
I'm not meaning to fan the flames or to paper to support one side or the other. However I will make this statement:
I am concerned that there are many innocents that are being harmed by "extremest groups". I would like to see them receive protection from the civilized nations of this world. At the same time I believe it is imperative that all people be protected from the terrorism that is becoming rampant everywhere. i.e. Trucks running down people in public places for no other reason than to yell "Allahu Akbar!".
That said, please read this:
"A. Rationales of exclusion clauses
3. The exclusion clauses enumerated in Article 1F of the 1951 Convention operate to disqualify persons from the benefits of refugee status by reason of serious transgressions committed, in principle, prior to seeking asylum. The idea of an individual “not deserving” protection as a refugee is related to the intrinsic links between ideas of humanity, equity, and the concept of refuge. The primary purposes of these exclusion clauses are to deprive the perpetrators of heinous acts and serious common crimes, of such protection, and to safeguard the receiving country from criminals who present a danger to that country’s security."
http://www.unhcr.org/en-us/excom/standcom/3ae68cf68/note-exclusion-clauses.html
Please read the whole article. It does not allow for a country to just say no to refugees, but neither does it say that that country must take any ans all refugees.
Let's get our shit straight before we start flinging poo or we all are merely acting like those monkeys.
it refers to war criminals which have been found guilty of war crimes etc . that is not really what trump and others are proposing.
From introduction of the above:
“The provisions of this Convention shall not apply to any person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that:
(a) he has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes;
(b) he has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
(c) he has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”
The "etc" you mention include things other than war crimes.
From "Rationales of exclusion clauses", paragraph 3:
"The primary purposes of these exclusion clauses are to deprive the perpetrators of heinous acts and seriousThe primary purposes of these exclusion clauses are to deprive the perpetrators of heinous acts and serious common crimes, of such protection, and to safeguard the receiving country from criminals who present a danger to that country’s security. If the protection provided by refugee law were permitted to afford protection to perpetrators of grave offences, the practice of international protection would be in direct conflict with national and international law, and would contradict the humanitarian and peaceful nature of the concept of asylum. common crimes, of such protection, and to safeguard the receiving country from criminals who present a danger to that country’s security. If the protection provided by refugee law were permitted to afford protection to perpetrators of grave offences, the practice of international protection would be in direct conflict with national and international law, and would contradict the humanitarian and peaceful nature of the concept of asylum."
So to do background checks to see if someone seeking asylum is guilty of "heinous acts and serious common crimes".
I'm not wanting to fight but don't just tell one side of the story.
Sorry, my copy / paste didn't read so well. Refer to the link.
The central point I'm trying to make:
" If the protection provided by refugee law were permitted to afford protection to perpetrators of grave offences, the practice of international protection would be in direct conflict with national and international law, and would contradict the humanitarian and peaceful nature of the concept of asylum."
yes certainly but I think what they mean is you check the criminal record of a refugee in his home country. the problem comes in such places like zimbabwe where people are convicted for political reasons. how do you determine then whether this person is a problem. Syria I have doubts as well that there really have justice aint they the hand chopping of kind.
but the problem is more complex than that I can be a thief so you should not allow me if I face death in my country and has concluded my sentence. I doubt whether screening for criminals would really be helpful. That is not the profile of the common terrorist. Most of them aint common criminals. Perhaps
for example the son of that flower seller there should be zero reason not to allow him.
TUP suck
Most people in Ireland, like myself, support the humanitarian taking in of refugees. Be they Muslim or any other religion.
A lot of real life Irish here are the pond scum you get in every country latching on to nationalist populast (but funnily not supported by the population) racist bulls1@t that we read.
we have a massive intake of pakistani and bangladesh people and have never had any trouble with them. although they all are muslim.