Perhaps the UK would prefer to do its own background check on the man before just letting anyone in.
But once some person is in a safe place where there is no threat for him then immigration laws apply instead of asylum laws.
So why do I want to differentiate between immigration and asylum? (and generally all Western countries do so)
Asylum is something you grant based on moral principles, immigration is something that we grant only voluntarily.
And here I want my country to choose new immigrants based on what skills we need, what skills the migrant brings to the table and of course we also have to take into consideration if we are capable of absorbing them into society.
Meaning: Do they have a chance to integrate and lead a successful life here or not. This is very important because in Europe we already have no go zones where police cannot enter and the inhabitants basically implement some kind of Sharia law.
I will never accept living under some kind of alternative law without a fight. This does not mean that I am against Muslims, but I want to preserve the culture that we have here and more importantly the freedoms and the social order.
But at the same time, I would like to understand why you are so vehemently opposed to him being legally allowed to pick wherever he prefers. If I'm born in France I can legally move and work in the UK, what in your mind is the rationale for not extending the same privileges to someone who's been given refugee status in France? Honest question.