Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6659 posts, RR: 22 Posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1471 times:
The 1 thing I dont understand about these so-called 'asylum seekers' is why they aren't kept in the 1st safe country they come to. If they are really fleeing persection etc then they wont mind what safe country they get.But,the fact that they are leaving France for England shows that there are economical reasons behind their 'asylum seeking'.
What do you think?
Treg From Estonia, joined Oct 2001, 537 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1464 times:
Sad, but true - I think majority of those so-called "asylum seekers" are actually economic immigrants. Take for example Romanians (I have some Romanian friends and therefore I know little more about incidents with this nation). I have been in Romania by myself and I have some great friends there and therefore I am absolutely sure, that the only reason, why thousands of them are leaving, is economical. Still - they are among top-10 in Europe for asylum seekers. You can find them also at Songate. And also - if someones life is really in danger in their homeland, they wouldn't travel to the other end of the world in order to find a new home. I don't think that their life would be in danger in France and I truely can not understand, why French goverment doesn't apply some tougher rules. If some of those "tunnel-tourists" would be denied the refugee status, maybe others will think twice before puting their and others life in danger.
Sonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (12 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1455 times:
Right, I know they are economic immigrants.
In Lithuania, many people emgrates to GB, USA, Scandinavia or other countries. It is even so that one tour company said, that approximately one third of all Lithuanian people, who goes to USA, leaves there and do not flies back to Lithuania.