Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How will you vote in the Citizenship referendum?

Options
1…1213151718…25

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    It would be nice if some of the"NO' ppl would put their own people first.


  • Options
    #423
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    And it would be nice if some of the YES people were able to cogently argue their point, unfortunately this seems not to be the case. I don't put 'my own people' first because I'm not a racist.


  • Options
    #424
    Hobbes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    It would be nice if some of the"NO' ppl would put their own people first.

    Thats a pretty rasict comment.
    Then they should claim asylum in the first EU country they enter, which isnt Ireland.

    And if they get approved in that other country then they are allowed come here freely thanks to the EU. How do you plan to stop that?


  • Options
    #425
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    And if they get approved in that other country then they are allowed come here freely thanks to the EU. How do you plan to stop that?

    If they are approved as legal migrants then I accept their right to come here at least then they cant claim asylum and get free houses.
    Thats a pretty rasict comment.

    No its a patriotic one. I believe Irish interests come first.


  • Options
    #426
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    If they are approved as legal migrants then I accept their right to come here at least then they cant claim asylum and get free houses.

    Talk about going in circles now, please show where you are getting this 'free houses' thing from. Have you any proof whatsoever to back up this statement.

    Also, as you yourself are a member of a minority feared and hated by many people, including, no doubt, a lot of people who are supporting the yes vote in this referendum, I find it doubly depressing that you seem unable to think about this like a rational person.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    bobbyjoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 798 ✭✭✭bobbyjoe


    So is it safe to say the 58% of female asylum seekers over 16 arriving here are pregnant isn't strictly true?

    That 1,255 of them are people re applying. By re applying I presume that they have
    been here for a considerable time more that nine months.
    I rang the refugee council thay say its not unusual for asylum seekers to be in the country for a while before thay claim asylum.

    Also once a fact has been established to be untrue such as them getting free houses, ferraris, pedicures and champagne can we drop it otherwise the debate goes around in circles.


  • Options
    #428
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users Posts: 5,333 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    If they are approved as legal migrants then I accept their right to come here at least then they cant claim asylum and get free houses.
    I know you'll ignore this, but what the hell.
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?


  • Options
    #429
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Also, as you yourself are a member of a minority feared and hated by many people, including, no doubt, a lot of people who are supporting the yes vote in this referendum, I find it doubly depressing that you seem unable to think about this like a rational person.

    I find that comparison very puzzling.

    That analysis is base don the idea that there is a parallel between wanting stronger controls on immigration on the one hand and homophobia on the other. I strongly disagree with that. Being gay does not cause me to place extra costs on the Irish taxpayer. I do not get a free house. And remember, as I have said umpteen times, my opposition to an overly liberal immigration policy is NOT based on hatred of other races, and as such there is no parallel with hatred of gay people.

    I do not believe that Irish people are racist. They just want to stop the free for all that exists at the moment whererby our citizenship law is attracting pregnant women from the four corners of the world, at considerable expense to our Health-Service. It is supposed to be our Health-Service, not some kind of international babies-for-citizenship service.


  • Options
    #430
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users Posts: 5,333 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    I do not get a free house.
    Neither do they, what's your point?


  • Options
    #431
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    We need Jeremy Paxman in here - just answer the question:
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars.
    Or is it just right wing propaganda that you insist on attempting to pass off as fact?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Frank they don't have to pay for their houses like the rest of us.


  • Options
    #433
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users Posts: 5,333 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    Frank they don't have to pay for their houses like the rest of us.
    They do not get free houses, they get put into temporary accomodation like in what was Mosney in Meath.
    What do you suggest we do with people that are looking for asylum? Leave them on the side of the street?


  • Options
    #434
    Hobbes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    It is supposed to be our Health-Service, not some kind of international babies-for-citizenship service.

    You do know that anyone who is in Ireland who is pregnant is entitled to totally free medical help to ensure the baby is born safely REGARDLESS if they plan to stay or not.
    Frank they don't have to pay for their houses like the rest of us.

    Can you point to proof of this please? I don't mean pointing to the places where they are kept (eg. Mosney) as that does not count as free housing. Free housing would imply that they have been accepted as an Irish citizen.


  • Options
    #435
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Arcade, you really are struggling against reality here
    1. Free housing
    Whilst your claim is being processed you will be given a place to live outside Dublin in a full-board centre (i.e. three meals a day and accommodation). You are not entitled to rent supplement and are obliged to stay at the full-board centre until a decision is made on your asylum application. If your circumstances change, e.g. you or your spouse becomes ill you should talk to the Reception and Integration Agency (RIA) about the possibility of being transfered to self catering accomodation.
    http://www.ris.ie/whataremyrights/asylumseeker.asp
    On side issue, ordinary local authority tenants have the right to buy their houses after just 12 months at a discounted rate. Not quite 'free' but cheaper.

    Mods, if AG2004 brings up this Free House for Asylum Seekers nonsense again, without evidence, I think a ban is in order...

    2. First point of entry

    It is commonly noted and you will find the statistics on the ORAC website, that the majority of Asylum Seekers present their claim at the office of the ORAC, not the Airport. Therefore it is next to impossible to apply the terms of the Dublin Convention, as at this point travel documents have not be retained or presented. The UK is extremely unlikely to co-operate with the argument that 'there is no way to get from Nigeria without passing through the UK' They are most likely to politely say 'get to fúck, your responsibilty mate'...

    Equally Arcade I used fly regularly from Prague to Dublin. Before expansion this was a non-EU direct to Ireland flight. I'm sure there are many other direct flights to Dublin from non-EU countries. This really is a nonsensical argument. Either drop it, or prove how the Dublin Convention could be applied to such people.


  • Options
    #436
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    I have previously pointed out that “having no direct flights to Ireland” merely proves that someone got a connection in another country. This, of course, does not necessarily need to be an EU country. This was ignored as I am sure yours will be too.

    MrP


  • Options
    #437
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Being gay does not cause me to place extra costs on the Irish taxpayer.

    Actually were I a raving homophobe I could build a case that you do...

    [IRONY]
    HIV 'scroungers' get Disability A of about €157 a week.
    HIV/AIDS housing associations such as the AIDS Fund Housing Project give away FREE HOUSES!!! Plus Free Medical card - all your medication, hospital visits and all medical procedures will be free.

    The Gay Men's Health Project is discriminatory against Straight men!! Why should we pay for these Gay Men to have special provision at tax payers expense. What a waste of money when the health service is so in crisis. I hear these Men also turn up at the last moment and have dangerous infectious diseases!!

    I could go on until I frighten myself... so I'll end the irony. Cruel one isn't it.

    [/IRONY]


  • Options
    #438
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Oh goodie, someone sane mentioned the Dublin convention so I can ask the question:

    Haven't we all (except Denmark) been following the Dublin II Regulations since September 2003 instead of the older Dublin Convention (which binds governments rather than asylum seekers in any case) due to inconsistencies between the old convention and the Schengen accords?

    (the answer is "yes" unless you can say exactly why we aren't)


  • Options
    #439
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    put their own people first

    They do. They are called humans.


  • Options
    #440
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    http://dgei.mir.es/en/general/english_343_2003.pdf

    You mean this set of regulations?

    And the point you are leading to is?


  • Options
    #441
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    No its a patriotic one. I believe Irish interests come first.

    Arcade, can I ask you about this one? Are you really making the point for positive action. So that an employer would HAVE to employ an Irish citizen over an EU citizen if a suitable Irish citizen applied for a job?

    Because that is what I think you are saying??


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    Redleslie2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭Redleslie2


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    It would be nice if some of the"NO' ppl would put their own people first.
    Yeah we should just revert to the 16th century and have everyone look after their clan within its historical boundaries. Basic map of clans.
    Originally posted by MadsL
    Actually were I a raving homophobe I could build a case that you do...

    [IRONY]
    HIV 'scroungers' get Disability A of about €157 a week.
    HIV/AIDS housing associations such as the AIDS Fund Housing Project give away FREE HOUSES!!! Plus Free Medical card - all your medication, hospital visits and all medical procedures will be free.

    The Gay Men's Health Project is discriminatory against Straight men!! Why should we pay for these Gay Men to have special provision at tax payers expense. What a waste of money when the health service is so in crisis. I hear these Men also turn up at the last moment and have dangerous infectious diseases!!

    I could go on until I frighten myself... so I'll end the irony. Cruel one isn't it.

    [/IRONY]
    Don't forget that gays aren't likely to provide Ireland with future generations, so very unpatriotic of them.


  • Options
    #443
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Redleslie, that is a silly comparison. I am opposed to Citizenshio-tourismn by whoever is engaged in it. I don't understand why gay people are being dragged into this.

    The system as is stands is unsustainable. Presently , we are constitutionally obliged to give Irish citizenship to any woman who turns up in Ireland and gives birth. This is stupid. Why should we have to give citizenship to unlimited numbers of people. I seen no basis for this.


  • Options
    #444
    bobbyjoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 798 ✭✭✭bobbyjoe


    quote:
    Do you honestly believe that they get free houses and cars?


    Arcadegame could you answer this question so I can decide whether its worth continuing to debate with you?


  • Options
    #445
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by MadsL
    http://dgei.mir.es/en/general/english_343_2003.pdf

    You mean this set of regulations?
    Yup, nice finding.
    And the point you are leading to is?
    I have to have a point? Dagnabbit.

    OK, here it is.

    Firstly, arcadegame has been rabbiting on about a convention (while getting the year wrong[1], which leads me to believe he's never seen it, just like the actual preliminary ruling in Chen) that is no longer in force in any EU country apart from Denmark and dealings with Denmark.

    Secondly, he's been basing arguments on the idea that asylum seekers in Ireland can't possibly be legitimate because they're asking in Ireland, despite the fact that these regulations never said that and neither did the 1990/97 Dublin Convention as it's merely a prodecure for governments to shunt asylum seekers back to the country of entry if that can be ascertained and despite the fact that there's a specific exception made for asylum-seekers who have been resident in any EU country, legally or otherwise for more than six months (they apply in that country regardless of where they entered). Obviously should a ruling be made under the Regulation that another country should deal with this particular individual, they will be transferred to that State (as that's what the regulation and preceding convention was all about) but they can apply wherever the hell they like unless someone can tell me where it says they can't. Article 3 section 1 of the regulation kindly linked by MadsL would be worth a read before anyone starts spouting rubbish though.

    Thirdly I object to this idea rolling around that they can't be real asylum seekers because they come from country X. They're asylum-seekers regardless of where they come from, all that matters if whether their reasons for asking for asylum are justified or not. In Ireland an asylum-seeker is legally defined as "a person who seeks to be recognised as a refugee under the terms of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees as defined in Section 2 of the Refugee Act, 1996, as amended". Whether they actually are recognised as a refugee under the relevant Act is immaterial to whether they are "asylum-seekers" or not - they're "asylum-seekers" as soon as they ask. Their reasons may be found to be suspect but they were still asylum-seekers. It's a legal term precisely defined, it'd be nice if anyone misusing the term looked it up.

    My main point is that I don't want to hear anything more about the Dublin Convention unless we're suddenly talking about Denmark. That'd be good.



    [1]It's 1990, ratified in 1997. No idea where you pulled 1981 from multiple times arcadegame but please stop as it's just making you look like you never read it. or worse, that you're working from information out of date for some substantial number of years now. I assume you're also posting as "Julius Caesar" over on politics.ie as he's the only other guy on the interwebulator who's working from the same Dublin Convention as you. If you're not him, stop relying on his posts. edit: and just checking the name over on politics.ie I see gubugirl has also pointed this out. Good.


  • Options
    #446
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Sceptre The Dublin Convention applies to most of the EU. Oh and MadsL yes I do believe they get free houses.


  • Options
    #447
    Frank Grimes
    Registered Users Posts: 5,333 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    Oh and MadsL yes I do believe they get free houses.
    Thanks for the belated answer.
    Why do you believe they get free houses? Do you have any proof of this you would like to share with us?


  • Options
    #448
    sceptre
    Registered Users Posts: 19,608 ✭✭✭✭sceptre


    Originally posted by arcadegame2004
    Sceptre The Dublin Convention applies to most of the EU.
    The Dublin Convention continues to apply only between Denmark and the other EU states. In other words, not only does it not apply to most of the EU, it applies only to Denmark and we only use it when we're trying to send an asylum seeker to Denmark (which doesn't happen often) or to receive one from Denmark (which doesn't happen a lot either). If you'd read the link MadsL provided you'd know that because it explicitly states it. While it remains in force, it applies only to Denmark. We don't live in Denmark.

    More to the point, you've failed to provide any text from either the Dublin Convention or the regulation that replaced it to show that either requires an asylum-seeker to apply in the country of first entry. I've made reference to an article (not an Irish Sun article, an article of an EU Regulation currently in force) that says they don't. What have you provided except for unmitigated shite?

    Now I've pointed this out twice you either get to provide a link to actual text or to pipe down before everyone starts laughing at you. Your call.


    edited for typos


  • Options
    #449
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    I don't understand why gay people are being dragged into this.

    Because YOU said....
    Being gay does not cause me to place extra costs on the Irish taxpayer. I do not get a free house.

    And I pointed out that in fact there are taxpayer funded projects aimed specifically at your minority group.

    My real point is that like the abuse that was being levelled at gays a few years back (remember the GAY PLAGUE stories - what am I thinking you were a mere child in the 80s)

    Minorities will always get the blame for societies ills. You (and I) form part of a minority that may be blamed for effects whose causes really lie elsewhere.

    Refugees, asylum seekers, gays, teenage mothers, junkies, homeless, bums, addicts - anyone we can blame for our problems. It is easier than facing the truth.


  • Options
    #450
    arcadegame2004
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    We are not under any obligation to turn Irish people into a minority in their own country just to please a rabble of loony-lefties whose policies in this direction have led to the rise of the Far-Right in Austria, France, Belgium and the Netherlands.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    We are not under any obligation to turn Irish people into a minority in their own country just to please a rabble of loony-lefties whose policies in this direction have led to the rise of the Far-Right in Austria, France, Belgium and the Netherlands.

    Hmm...let me see.

    I present rational argument and debate, backed up with statistics. I'm a looney-lefty.

    You, who consistantly refuse to post anything that backs up your 'opinions' and constantly wave the 'free houses, cars etc' flag without a scrap of evidence, feel that I am the one contributing to the Far-Right.

    You are truly a mup.....misguided individual...

    Do you live under a bridge?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement