097. Questions to answer about the EU's migrant deal with Turkey

Questions to answer about the EU's migrant deal with Turkey


By Lorne Cook (Associated Press) | Updated March 16, 2016 - 7:02am


BRUSSELS — It's being hailed as a breakthrough, but the European Union's tentative deal with Ankara to send back thousands of migrants is fraught with legal complexities.

EU lawyers say the final agreement can, and will, comply with international and European law. Rights groups want to know how.


The UN refugee agency has doubts about Turkey's asylum standards. It insists that Ankara should "ensure that all people seeking international protection can have a fair and efficient determination of their claims by a competent authority within a reasonable time."


Here are just some of the questions legal experts are still grappling with before EU leaders gather again in Brussels on Thursday to endorse the agreement.





The draft deal says all "new irregular migrants" crossing from Turkey into Greece would be sent back. That rules out people already in Greece. The first challenge is to establish whether a migrant came from Turkey. If that person does not want to apply for asylum, or the application is judged "inadmissible", the person could be sent back on EU-funded transport. The international principle of "non-refoulement" — not to chase away people who have a right to protection — suggests that those plucked from boats in Greek waters could not just be sent back. EU experts and the UNHCR say any mass deportation would be illegal, meaning applications must be examined on a case-to-case basis.


Good Afternoon. When we speak of HUman Rights are we not all speaking then with one voice? Or do the “rights” of one citizen of this planet change with the mood? Do not all citizens have the right to not have imposed on themselves a lesser or greater right than does their brother or sister global citizen of this planet?


When we begin separating one HUman being’s right to survival from that of another HUman being’s right of survival that is where the Charter of Rights falls flat upon its face.


One then will forever become tied-up in legal battles which continually drain the pocketbooks of the citizens of the nations in question while empty mouths survive which cannot feed empty stomachs and the ache of uncertainty in each quarter both governments as well the immigrants fail to gain absolution of any format from the unforgiving banker whose debt is forced upon them all. In one way or another, everybody pays whilst the lawyers remain rich and wealthy on the banker’s so-called superior policy yet upholding an archaic countenance before the nations.


Yes, we would agree that mass deportation would be in your terms “illegal” simply because mass deportation back into a situation which was so intolerable that the migrants had to leave in the first place and seek out lands where at least survival could be had, would be both immoral as well as unethical. These are all HUman beings no different than that of yourselves and in the meanwhile must be accepted and cared for as you would your own extended family.


Mercy and compassion for another living HUman being is the “key” here. Thank you.


Next please.





If someone has applied for asylum, their application must run its course, probably over several months. In the event the request is rejected, applicants should have the right to appeal. The issue for legal experts is whether a person could be sent to Turkey while an appeal is pending. Rights groups think not.

If by court injunction the layovers to the court proceedings remain for a reoccurring simulation of what you call “time,” the applicants in question especially upon appeal would need to then find themselves a viable source of income which could not be provided at short notice due to extenuating circumstances.


Now, most who apply for asylum are in the immediate need, and court docket is not going to fulfill that immediate need due to the situation having created too much backlog already.


Therefore, knowing that Turkey cannot fulfill the desire of the court in either accepting nor re-accepting a citizen of the global community within its house for lack of provisional means to survival (due to the present draconian banking system) for the one in question, then the criteria alone now changes that issue of legality into a issue of morals and ethics.


One cannot pit the survival of another HUman being against a sheet of paper in a docket. Sending the applicant into a situation as bad or worse while waiting for a ruling on application or appeal is neither courteous, moral, nor ethical, and by that standard alone does the court need to rule.





For every irregular migrant sent back to Turkey, the EU agrees to take one Syrian refugee from the country. Turkey hosts some 2.7 million Syrians, only 10 percent of whom are sheltered in camps. Resettlement is the act of accepting refugees from outside the EU rather than sharing those who've already arrived. The UNHCR supervises resettlement and despite reservations about the plan would oversee the process in Turkey, with European officials monitoring.


As we have already stated, the issue here is who is best able to house and feed so many displaced HUman beings simultaneously and not piecemeal because families must never be divided? Why not instead of shifting around the pieces of a puzzle which do not fit in the schematic the world bank has created, deal with the situation instead by dealing with the core problem. Who displaced these HUman beings in the first place?


The world bank did with it wars and famine programs to the negative. The world bank works on a policy of quantitative easing so demand that the world bank provide all necessary goods and services for the upholding of the HUmanities due to the unspeakable damage done in the name of “progress” and “corporate” backbenching resulting in HUman sacrifices on the world scene in both cases.


If the EU and wishes to engage itself in the bankers trust then let the EU meet the bankers on their own terms and acquire the necessary funding in such a way as to ensure the “benchbiting” does in no wise hit the public purse of the nations, the governments of the nations, nor the citizenry of the nations. Then unfasten the nozzle around your noses and begin to breathe that warm breeze and fresh air of the land which will no longer be sanctioned away from the citizens of the global community, a land globally which the banker allows no food to grow and parches other lands such as Africa with HAARP and weather modulations. This keeps the migrants flooding into Europe for a garden they cannot even grow in their own homeland either.





The main aim is to bring the deal into line with European law and the Geneva Convention on refugees, the key international text on people's right to protection. But Turkey applies the convention only to European citizens because it has not ratified protocols extending the accord to other countries. EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has said it could "easily be that both in Greece and in Turkey some pieces of legislation would have to be brought through parliaments." This could take some time.


This is another main crux of the problem. The problem lies not so much in what morally, ethically, and is physically achievable within the Original Talent and Purchase Order System of good and healthy paradisaical economics, but the problem lies in initiating the solution when the nations are all under draconian sanctions which the world bank and IMF inflict on the nations as to tourniquet off the flow of HUmanitarian aid at will. The world bank keep HUmans as chess pieces to be rerouted through courts which bankrupt the nations and the Peoples and of this are sanctions upheld in such manner also.


Paperwork is strangling and putting extra cost when the simplicity of the solution is to stop all banking practices which keep the commissions going around in circles while people suffer and physically die waiting. The world banking practice is sadistic and their system follows suit.


Why would you want to be a part of it?



The EU regards Turkey as vital to resolving a migrant conundrum that has raised troubling questions about solidarity and refugee burden-sharing; issues that are undermining the future of the entire European project. Even a string of extremist attacks in Turkey, including the weekend suicide car-bombing in Ankara which killed at least 37 people, is unlikely to have any impact on these EU-Turkey talks. Greece and Germany consider Turkey to be a safe destination for migrants, and they are not alone. Other nations remain to be convinced because significant numbers of Turkish citizens are granted asylum in Europe each year, and no EU-wide readmission agreement with Turkey exists yet. If Turkey is officially deemed a safe country, potential asylum seekers in Greece could told to apply in Turkey.


Passing the buck to Turkey is not going to gain any of you credibility except among European nations which just want “migrants gone.” Why do you not, since so many of you work and enjoy world banking privileges on the EU council emulate then your world bank heroes and write off all expenses, current and otherwise, including for each and every European nation as your first step.


Your second step then is what to do with all the migrants. Help them return to their own homes through quantitative easing in order to make their journey as comfortable as possible, and to ensure there is plenty of food, clothing and shelter and clean drinking water, write off more on your calculated expense sheet toward environmental correction and rehabilitation of those who create wars, which all stem again from the world bank, and then place the ORIGINAL TALENT AND PURCHASE ORDER SYSTEM IN PLACE KEEPING EACH MIGRANT BUSY REBUILDING PARADISE WITHIN THEIR OWN NATIONAL BODIES AS WELL. We shall place the blueprint in all its detail again at the bottom of this page.


As you relearn the Original Talent and Purchase Order System you learn to keep economics simplified and you eliminate court hours completely. You will find all other criteria and plaguing issues will then fall well and solidly into place.


The European Union shall no longer exist except in the nations’ minds as one of the world glossary bank tax collectors. No wonder Great Britain does not want to join. What an embarrassment to belong to such an organization which trips constantly over its own feet in order to serve the master of infinity on the wrong side of the curtain - those who traversed through the accidental rip in the fabric of space created unfortunately by our own Federation of Unified and Free Planetary Worlds bringing with them the matrix of sanctions, embargoes, taxes, hatred, greed, and the corporate capitalist system with its many facets which run back to itself leaving the nations dry and forever thirsty, and all at the whim of the world bank jewry (jewry being an action word, a verb, and not a noun nor a race).




EU officials are wary that the agreement might further destabilize the fragile Middle East. Lebanon and Jordan are home to more than 2 million Syrian refugees, and people in those countries could try to flee to Turkey if they believe it could boost their chances of finding homes in Europe. It's worth noting that Jordan's King Abdullah II arrives in Brussels for a two-day visit on the eve of the EU-Turkey talks.


Yes, indeed, if the European Union puts the cart before the horse, so to speak, then it is like sending the guests an invitation to a dinner for that same evening before the chef and his or her staff have even begun to prepare the agenda and set the table to ensure all are presented with a proper regimen.


How then could the question of such a poorly-thought out deal such as the European Union in its “project” with migrants even be considered when there is no provision for the migrants at all which one could call substantial or categorically usable without the squalor of poverty ever biting at their heels?


This is not a deal, neither is it a program which we would advise anyone to follow for how is a program to work when the correct and workable system is not even in place as the groundwork?


This is a backroom deal which will afford the cost of HUman kindness to be milked by the world bank until all efforts to actually create a situation which could be considered livable for another HUman being in effect be a deal which no HUman being could endure.


What you intend then upon building is a house for the migrants upon quicksand with no real nor lasting foundation.


What deal is this that the European Union would even consider other migrants wishing to engage themselves as part of the latest banker’s schematic?


Migrants are People, dear Ones, and if the European Union thinks for one moment that this is a practical and wonderful idea for the migrants, then we may all settle the question by asking ourselves:


Would we want to live in such camps? If the vote is affirmative then the European Union heads and their accomplices must immediately pack their bags and change places with the migrants.


After all, it is better to observe the health of your brother or sister in your own home than your brother or sister live with your boot-shoes on their necks?


Should we leave these Islands of the beautiful land of the Philippines we fear the United States will attack CHINA and the ASEAN NATIONS WILL GET CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE and we have family here, too, and friends, and we shall need protect them ALL.


”Our New Website for the Federation of Unified and Free Planetary Worlds will appear at the top of each Memorandum and Round Table Conference. Thank you.


- Uthrania Seila Sentana-Ries Cortez, a representative of the Federation of United and Free Planetary Worlds




Thank you, and salu.


- Uthrania Seila Sentana-Ries Cortez, a representative of the Federation of Unified and Free Planetary Worlds