To: The Social Security Commissioner
My name is Charles Wright and I live on First Street. I would like to present before you the following story:
‘Many years ago, I married a widow out of love who had a 18-year-old daughter. After the wedding, my father came to visit a number of times, and suddenly he fell in love with my step-daughter. My father eventually married her without my authorization.
As a result, my step-daughter legally became my step-mother and my father my son-in-law. My father’s wife (also my step-daughter) and my step-mother, gave birth to a son who is my grandchild because I am the husband of my step-daughter’s wife. This boy is also my brother, as the son of my father.
All at once, my wife became a grandmother, because she is the mother of my father’s wife. Therefore, it appears that I am also my wife’s grandchild. A short time after these events, my wife gave birth to a son, who became my father’s brother-in-law, the step-son of my father’s wife, and my uncle. My son is also my step-mother’s brother, and through my step-mother, my wife has become a grandmother and I have become my own grandfather.
In light of the above mentioned, I would like to know the following: Does my son, who is also my uncle, my father’s son-in-law, and my step-mother’s brother fulfill the requirements for receiving childcare benefits?
The word “refugee” is a legal term, one defined by several international treaties. These documents brought the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) into existence, and sustain the relevance of the United Nations agency responsible for refugees to this day.
The contents of these treaties, however, sit oddly with how the UNHCR has comprehensively sought to hoodwink the European public about the predominant status of the demographic influx into their continent this year.
None of these documents — the 1951 Refugee Convention; the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, or the EU’s own Dublin Regulations — grants the right of refugee status to those traversing several safe countries, and illegally crossing multiple borders, to shop for the best welfare state.
Even a legitimate refugee from Syria now living, for example, in Turkey or Lebanon, loses his refugee status by paying a people-smuggler to travel to Europe. According to international law, that refugee then becomes an “asylum seeker.” Only when his asylum claim has been investigated and judged to be valid by a requisite domestic agency, is he once again a “refugee.”
So far, the world’s media has dutifully followed the false narrative established by the UNHCR. Those concerned by an unchecked and unlimited flood of Muslims into Europe — concerns grimly validated by Friday’s jihadist atrocities in Paris — have mostly been accused of heartlessness towards alleged refugees.
Iran’s hardliners are pressing their attack on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which has not yet been approved by Iran. Iran’s opponents of the JCPOA have succeeded in halting any steps toward implementation of Tehran’s responsibilities under the July14 settlement reached in Vienna by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — the US, the UK, France, China and Russia, plus Germany (the so-called P5+1). But who appointed them?
While some reports indicated that Iran was beginning to take off the production line some of the uranium-enrichment centrifuges in the Natanz and Fordow facilities, contradictory reports suggested that any such action was halted due to pressure from Iran’s hardliners, and that dismantling the centrifuges had not been authorized by Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and was therefore premature. Another report suggested that only a small number of outdated centrifuges had been decommissioned.
However, a stern letter of warning was dispatched to President Hassan Rouhani from 20 key members of Iran’s Majlis [Islamic Consultative Assembly], many of whom have close ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), informing him to cease any dismantling activity.
This weekend the Prime Minister was reported to have said he would lead the Leave campaign if he does not get what he wants from the renegotiation. At a time when we see yet again how the government cannot hit its sensible target for controlled migration thanks to the EU ,the case becomes ever stronger for us to take back control over the things that matter to the British people.
Leaving the EU will make us freer, more democratic and better off. The UK will save its large financial contribution or EU tax which it currently pays. The UK will be able to decide for itself how much to award in benefits to whom. We will be able to settle who we invite in and to whom we grant citizenship.