This referendum lark

Hobbes

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Well with only 5% being deported last year it is clear that it must help many get the right to stay here. The Dublin Convention alone makes over 90% of our asylum seekers bogus. Look at the map.

How about posting proof. I have a rock here that protects me against polar bears. There are no polar bears near me so it must be working.

And the Chen ruling may mean that anyone giveing birth in Ireland gets EU residency rights.

Again as I already mentioned. Assume for the moment the Yes voters win. Chen will still be allowed stay here. The laws supercede the constitution (that is how they plan to word it).

I can only assume you have not bothered to actually download and read what the changes are.

I suspect the pregger Nigerian women or those who were pregnant and gave birth here to claim citizenship for their babies will now get their lawyers to cite the "family unity" aspect of the Chen ruling to demand the right to bring over the fathers of their kids.

Suspect. So no actual proof? Anyway if you vote yes then they can still do this. But you keep going on about blacks and Nigerians. You do know that the majority of immigrants is in fact from Eastern block countries.

I mention this in respect of the free houses the so-called 'asylum' seekers get. [/B]

Again post proof to this seeing as this is your new excuse for today.

MadsL

I mention this in respect of the free houses the so-called 'asylum' seekers get.

Proof. Links. Articles. Anything except this constant unsubstantiated accusations you trot out everytime you are challenged.

Mods - how much longer are you going to tolerate this behaviour?

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Hundred thousand welcomes (Cead mile failte)? No. What's going on now is more like 2 hundred thousand welcomes when you consider the price of a house on average in this state, or 700 hundred thousand considering the average price of a house in Dublin. I mention this in respect of the free houses the so-called 'asylum' seekers get.

Back to the free houses? You implied in your post earlier that all foreigners get free houses and cars.
So voting Yes will reduce the houses prices too?

bonkey

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
And the Chen ruling may mean that anyone giveing birth in Ireland gets EU residency rights.

Oh FFS. The Chen ruling may equally also mean that anyone non-Irish giving birth in Ireland will be spray-painted in flourescent yellow paint, paraded up and down O'Connell Street with sirens blazing and all of that, whilst the citizens of the state are obliged to throw soggy banana sandwiches at them.

The provisional Chen ruling implies neither of these things. If the ruling is changed, it may mean either of these things, or any of a countless myriad of others.

What is the relevance?

I could just as well argue that the referendum is pointless as the EU may change its rules in some other way we can't predict, forcing us to accept all migrants as citizens regardless, so the only way "to be sure" is to actually withdraw from the EU.

Had Chen chosen to live in the South we could not have deported her. Also, her husband got EU residency rights.

And again, despite it being pointed out innumerable times, you seek to mislead people by omitting to mention that this is only the case becayse they have access to enough funds to be guaranteeably self-sufficient..

You're fully aware that this is the case, and you are deliberately trying to misrepresent that fact to imply that any asylum seeker would be treated the same way as the Chens.

Whats with the spin? Are you that short on telling points that you constantly need to misrepresent situations to add to your argument?

I suspect the pregger Nigerian women or those who were pregnant and gave birth here to claim citizenship for their babies will now get their lawyers to cite the "family unity" aspect of the Chen ruling to demand the right to bring over the fathers of their kids.

Oh dear lord...we're not back to that, are we?

So now, we have a non-final ruling, which contains two words which - if taken in comiplete isolation from the context they were put int - could give grounds for a further case on EU law, which - were it to happen - could ultimately lead to a situation where our government would be obliged to change a law.

And this string of if, buts and maybes is a critical reason why not only should be vote no, but we need to vote no now....before we find out if even the first link in this chain (the wording of the Chen ruling) remains in place.

Brilliant.

I'm still saying your logic supports the soggy-banana-sandwich-throwing requirements as well, so we should really be seeking to leave the EU, not just change our laws. Its the only way to be sure, arcade.

I mention this in respect of the free houses the so-called 'asylum' seekers get.

I think anyone reading these threads both knows what you are talking in respect of, as well as the myriad of points reubtting this continued policy of using half-truths and misinformation: Points which you continue to ignore, preferring instead to take the head-in-sand (No offence, Sand) approach of just parrotting the same claims, as if you still believed they were solid arguments.

jc

MadsL

bonkey, please close or merge this thread. Let's not spread the madness over three threads..my head is spinning keeping up.

Victor

Originally posted by Frank Grimes
So voting Yes will reduce the houses prices too?

Official: "Voting Yes will cause housing bubble to crash."

Yeah and lock it please.

arcadegame2004

Originally posted by Hobbes
Assume for the moment the Yes voters win. Chen will still be allowed stay here. The laws supercede the constitution (that is how they plan to word it).

No you are interpreting this wrong. Allow me to explain.

The Chen ruling was that EU Citizens parents have EU-residency rights.

Catherine Chen was only an EU citizen because our Constitution made her an Irish citizen.

Therefore, by removing automatic Irish citizenship from future babies of asylum-seekers, we prevent them getting EU citizenship.

And therefore by voting "Yes" we prevent future Chen cases and prevent future asylum-seekers using their babies to get EU-residency.

Hobbes

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
No you are interpreting this wrong. Allow me to explain.

No I am not. Any law passed to allow Asylum seekers to stay here over rides the constitution. Go and read the actual wording.

As for your link, thanks.

http://www.justice.ie/802569B20047F907/vWeb/wpMJDE5WZMEU

Now... go and actually read it. Here are some details.

Total applied for Asylum based on having Child to a non-Irish person (and were accepted)
2001: 5924
2002: 6549
2003: 982 (The process was stopped March 2003)

in 2003 there were 8,655 applications but only 982 were approved (That number is made up of previous years attempts).

"The trend in asylum applications in 2003 was downwards with a 32% reduction in the number of applications in 2003 ... Since January 2003, the month of the decision of the Supreme Court in the cases of L & O, there has been a steady decrease in the number of asylum applications received. "

Also..
1 out of every 5 children now born in Dublin has a non-EU national mother.

Applies to everyone, not Asylum seekers. This would be 25% but voting Yes will not change this figure dramatically.

So the actual figures are a lot lower then you make them out to be.

Victor

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
And therefore by voting "Yes" we prevent future Chen cases and prevent future asylum-seekers using their babies to get EU-residency.

But the Chens weren't / aren't asylum-seekers. Isn't that a big hole in your argument?

arcadegame2004

Originally posted by Hobbes
No I am not. Any law passed to allow Asylum seekers to stay here over rides the constitution. Go and read the actual wording.

As for your link, thanks.

http://www.justice.ie/802569B20047F907/vWeb/wpMJDE5WZMEU

Now... go and actually read it. Here are some details.

Total applied for Asylum based on having Child to a non-Irish person (and were accepted)
2001: 5924
2002: 6549
2003: 982 (The process was stopped March 2003)

in 2003 there were 8,655 applications but only 982 were approved (That number is made up of previous years attempts).

"The trend in asylum applications in 2003 was downwards with a 32% reduction in the number of applications in 2003 ... Since January 2003, the month of the decision of the Supreme Court in the cases of L & O, there has been a steady decrease in the number of asylum applications received. "

Also..
1 out of every 5 children now born in Dublin has a non-EU national mother.

Applies to everyone, not Asylum seekers. This would be 25% but voting Yes will not change this figure dramatically.

So the actual figures are a lot lower then you make them out to be.

Hobbes, the reason for the decline in asylum-numbers until recently was the Supreme Court ruling that the asylum-seeker parents of Irish-born children could be deported. However that ruling has been overturned by the Chen-ruling that the non-national parents of EU/Irish citizens CANT be deported.

Hence the incentive to come here before January 2003 has returned. We need to vote "Yes" to stop the babies of asylum-seekers getting Irish citizenship and thereby giving their parents EU residency.

Also, may I add that besides asylum-seekers who claim asylum in Ireland, there are a significant number of Chen-style people who claimed asylum in another EU state, and who fly to Ireland, especially from the UK, to get citizenship for their babies here and consequently EU-residency. Jim Cusacks article refers to a large groups coming here from the UK to give birth then returning. I also find this carry on an unacceptable consequence of our stupid citizenship-laws which places an unacceptable burden on our hospitals.

TwoShedsJackson

What's placing an unacceptable burden on our hospitals is the fact that this Government has ignored all it's pre-election pledges on health and has continued to close wards and cut funding, preferring instead to splurge on a new and oh so nessecary Government jet, or waste millions on tribunals.

Hobbes

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
However that ruling has been overturned by the Chen-ruling that the non-national parents of EU/Irish citizens CANT be deported.

Either your a troll or you are incapable of reading what people are saying.

1. Chen was not an Asylum seeker.
2. Even if Chen was and the Yes vote passed then further Chens would still have the same chance to stay here.

I could refute the rest but everyone has already. Your inability to read what people are posting and your ability to avoid posting any proof is just astounding.

bonkey

Originally posted by Hobbes
Either your a troll or

You know the rules Hobbes. Take it easy....

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
. However that ruling has been overturned by the Chen-ruling that the non-national parents of EU/Irish citizens CANT be deported.

arcade...either drop the bullsh1t and the lies, or get off this forum. I've had enough of this crap.

And you know what...I'm not even breaking the rules by calling you a liar, because I can link to posts which show that you are already aware that this is not the case and have argued as much.

You have alternately acknowledged that it is not yet binding, and that it does not apply to people who are not financially independant of the state, so you know damn ****ing well that what you're saying above is untrue.

Ergo, you are lying. You've been spouting this bullsh1t for too long now, and quite frankly, I'm getting fed up of it.

If you want to continue discussing fantasy, then take it to the appropriate forum. If you wish to discuss politics then give this utter ****e a break.

Just how ****ing stupid do you honestly think people are that they're not going to notice the number of times you've already been pulled up for spouting this crap?

No more.

jc

TwoShedsJackson

And of course arcade is captain of the yes side in the upcoming Debate - ironic if he gets banned from Politics due to a complete inability to debate :rolleyes:

MadsL

Bonkey please close all but one of these threads. With the up coming debate lets get this mess sorted out.

Hobbes

Originally posted by TwoShedsJackson
And of course arcade is captain of the yes side in the upcoming Debate - ironic if he gets banned from Politics due to a complete inability to debate :rolleyes:

Actually BEAT is the team captain for the Yes side (I'm the no side) and the forums used are the Debating forums.

TwoShedsJackson

I know it's a different forum Hobbes, but him being banned in here for an inability to present a rational argument will scarcely reflect well on his abilities to debate. I thought he was captain too, shame, still hopefully he will be on the team to provide some much-needed laughs.

bonkey

Originally posted by MadsL
Bonkey please close all but one of these threads. With the up coming debate lets get this mess sorted out.

Given that I'm heavily involved in the discussions, that wouldn't be the most impartial thing for me to do.

Nor am I the best person to make the decision in terms of if it shoudl be done, and if so, which thread should be left.

I'll leave that decision for one of the other mods to make. They've already seen the "Report This Post" you sent with the same sentiment (thanks), so I'm sure they'll come to a decision soonish.

jc

MadsL

Seems reasonable to close the non-poll one as it is parallel to this one...