Pamela Enitan Izevbekhai

opo

T runner wrote: »

This is what you asked me.. which doesnt make sense. <snip>

<snip>

1. How would you go about eliminating FGM?
2. How would you approach the cultural issue as I expect you know that no government performs FGM?
3. How would you make sure FGM was eliminated and not just driven underground?

<snip>

Xiney

opo - keep the condescending tone out of your posts


this is me asking you nicely.

opo

[moderator's note: the quoted post has been deleted since it is not relevant to the thread]

For the life of me I cannot understand what is confusing about my initial question.

I asked how you would eliminate FGM - as you were particularily vitriolic about Stella Obasanjo's involvement in the a campaign to eradicate FGM in Nigeria.

I thought this was unfair as anyone who has done the most basis research on how to eliminate FGM; points to education as the way forward - not criminalisation.

I was and remain interested in what alternative you would propose.

T Xiney wrote: »

opo - keep the condescending tone out of your posts


this is me asking you nicely.

With respect, if there is one irritation that constantly arises in such discussions IMO, it is that of the debater on the side of angels being allowed to be arrogant, dismissive and insulting.

I am of the opinion that following accusations of using my own "private language", "poor grammer" and of posting "non-sensical" questions etc that I was entitled to post a slightly less than respectful response.

Xiney

That'll teach me for not reading all the posts in a thread (despite the fact that this one gives me a headache)

Best behaviour for everyone, then.

T runner

opo wrote: »

[moderator's note: the quoted post has been deleted since it is not relevant to the thread]

For the life of me I cannot understand what is confusing about my initial question.

It did not make sense logically or grammatically.

I asked how you would eliminate FGM - as you were particularily vitriolic about Stella Obasanjo's involvement in the a campaign to eradicate FGM in Nigeria.

First of all its a continental campaign not solely for Nigeria as you are implying. Inadequate as the Laws in Nigeria are it does not seem that the person figureheading a campaign against FGM should be from a country where they have never enforced their own Laws and where the Police treat it as "a domestic affair". Rape of women and young girls is endemic in Nigerias police force. Again why is a representative of such a country allowed spearhead a campaign against another gender based violence?
This is completely wrong. An appropriate figurehead should come from a country leading the fight against FGM and Nigeria is not that country.

It just makes Nigeria look like they care about eradicating FGM but amounts to no more than adding an extra line on the worthless CV of Nigerias "battle" against FGM. More posturing and box ticking on the part of Official Nigeria.

Education on the topic is absolutely necessary but it cant work on its own you need the stick as well. To improve Nigeria's current Laws I would allow someone in fear of FGM to get a barring order from people they may be in danger from. (similarly to domestic violence cases here). This would oblige the police to react to a call on this order and not to ignore it as they always do.
I would also propose that the police can request barring orders and arrest individuals who they suspect of FGM without a complaint due to the vulnerability of the victims and a possible inability or unwillingness to report it.
(Obviously wholesale reform of the police force is necessary in Nigeria.)
Most importanly, I would enforce any Laws created relating to FGM.

I thought this was unfair as anyone who has done the most basis research on how to eliminate FGM; points to education as the way forward - not criminalisation.

But Nigeria have criminalised FGM in many of their states. Are you saying that Nigeria realises that criminalisation was not the way and have turned to education. Is this the reason do you think that there has never been a prosecution against FGM in Nigeria?
Or is it more likely that they dont really do anything to stop FGM?

With respect, if there is one irritation that constantly arises in such discussions IMO, it is that of the debater on the side of angels being allowed to be arrogant, dismissive and insulting.

Im afraid, your post made absolutely no sense. No conspiracy.

A question for you: Why, in your opinion, has Nigeria never prosecuted one single case under state laws against FGM?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

opo

T runner wrote: »

opo wrote: »

[moderator's note: the quoted post has been deleted since it is not relevant to the thread]



It did not make sense logically or grammatically.



First of all its a continental campaign not solely for Nigeria as you are implying. Inadequate as the Laws in Nigeria are it does not seem that the person figureheading a campaign against FGM should be from a country where they have never enforced their own Laws and where the Police treat it as "a domestic affair". Rape of women and young girls is endemic in Nigerias police force. Again why is a representative of such a country allowed spearhead a campaign against another gender based violence?
This is completely wrong. An appropriate figurehead should come from a country leading the fight against FGM and Nigeria is not that country.

It just makes Nigeria look like they care about eradicating FGM but amounts to no more than adding an extra line on the worthless CV of Nigerias "battle" against FGM. More posturing and box ticking on the part of Official Nigeria.

Education on the topic is absolutely necessary but it cant work on its own you need the stick as well. To improve Nigeria's current Laws I would allow someone in fear of FGM to get a barring order from people they may be in danger from. (similarly to domestic violence cases here). This would oblige the police to react to a call on this order and not to ignore it as they always do.
I would also propose that the police can request barring orders and arrest individuals who they suspect of FGM without a complaint due to the vulnerability of the victims and a possible inability or unwillingness to report it.
(Obviously wholesale reform of the police force is necessary in Nigeria.)
Most importanly, I would enforce any Laws created relating to FGM.



But Nigeria have criminalised FGM in many of their states. Are you saying that Nigeria realises that criminalisation was not the way and have turned to education. Is this the reason do you think that there has never been a prosecution against FGM in Nigeria?
Or is it more likely that they dont really do anything to stop FGM?




Im afraid, your post made absolutely no sense. No conspiracy.

A question for you: Why, in your opinion, has Nigeria never prosecuted one single case under state laws against FGM?

Dear lord. Let me try condense this tirade:

I think (and correct me if I am wrong) your argument is that the Nigerian Police should enforce the law on FGM in Nigeria, with a couple of barring orders, but the Nigerian Police are corrupt and therefore they won’t because they are too busy raping women and children. You are saying there is no solution within Nigeria so outside intervention is necessary by some mysterious figurehead and that will solve the problem. Bob Geldolf maybe?

Re. your comments on my posts making no sense - have you considered that logic sense or grammer are not exactly your strong points and that may be causing you some difficulty in engaging in debate in a rational or focused manner?

darealtulip

to be really fair I agree with opo, you dont really react on a simple question and tell him he doesnt make sence, I really try to understand your point here but I dont. His question made sence to me, no problem.

Sometimes I just see a lot of critisism (which is fine) but no points.

I'll be back after reading your link and maybe it makes sence to me then, in that case I spoke to soon.

opo

darealtulip wrote: »

to be really fair I agree with opo, you dont really react on a simple question and tell him he doesnt make sence, I really try to understand your point here but I dont. His question made sence to me, no problem.

Sometimes I just see a lot of critisism (which is fine) but no points.

I'll be back after reading your link and maybe it makes sence to me then, in that case I spoke to soon.

Thanks for your comments.

The guts of the problems associated with FGM are quite well considered here:

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/jc.htm

And there is no easy solution nor is there neccessarily a desired solution within the communities that practice FGM.

Moving back the the case in point, I don't believe PI's version of events or that she resided in an inescapable environment or geographical location condusive to forced FGM.

I am also firmly of the belief that the solution to FGM is not extranational protection as a convention refugee in a foreign country for all and any that would claim such a scenario.

T runner

opo wrote: »

T runner wrote: »

Dear lord. Let me try condense this tirade:

I think (and correct me if I am wrong) your argument is that the Nigerian Police should enforce the law on FGM in Nigeria, with a couple of barring orders, but the Nigerian Police are corrupt and therefore they won’t because they are too busy raping women and children. You are saying there is no solution within Nigeria so outside intervention is necessary by some mysterious figurehead and that will solve the problem. Bob Geldolf maybe?
Re. your comments on my posts making no sense - have you considered that logic sense or grammer are not exactly your strong points and that may be causing you some difficulty in engaging in debate in a rational or focused manner?

Of course your ill mannered response allows you again to refrain from answering the awkward question on why Nigeria cant enforce its own FGM laws.
(Im sorry your ego seems not to have recovered from my not understanding your "eliminate the elimination of FGM.." question.)

Your post is once again deliberately condescending and insulting. I made a mistake replying to your last post as you implied your reason for asking had integrity: I will not be replying to you again.

Did you have a problem with Nelson Mandela campaigning against apartheid in his own country? Did you have a problem with Martin Luther King agitating for civil rights in his own country? If not, why do you object to Stella Obasanjo campaigning against female genital mutilation in her own country? Why do you insist that an "appropriate figurehead" should come from elsewhere?

Again, she is a figurehead for an African campaign not Nigerian.
I am not insisting an appropriate figurehead come from elsewhere as you are erroneously suggesting. Neither do I have "a problem" with Martin Luther King or Nelson Mandela. I am suggesting a figurehead should not come from Official Nigeria because Official Nigeria has done nothing to curb FGM.

Having the wife of the president of Nigeria (who has done nothing to stop FGM) is nothing more than a political stunt.

to be really fair I agree with opo, you dont really react on a simple question and tell him he doesnt make sence, I really try to understand your point here but I dont. His question made sence to me, no problem.

Sometimes I just see a lot of critisism (which is fine) but no points.

I'll be back after reading your link and maybe it makes sence to me then, in that case I spoke to soon.

Your free to agree with whomever you choose. The main point I am making is that Nigeria has never prosecuted anyone for FGM ever.

There are de facto no state protections against FGM in Nigeria. None of the posters who want to send her home can explain this.
The Irish Courts claim that protections against FGM in Nigeria are adequate. Why is the Irish asylum system stating something which is not in reality true?

If there is any of my points you dont understand feel free to ask.

opo

T runner wrote: »

opo wrote: »

Of course your ill mannered response allows you again to refrain from answering the awkward question on why Nigeria cant enforce its own FGM laws.
(Im sorry your ego seems not to have recovered from my not understanding your "eliminate the elimination of FGM.." question.)

Your post is once again deliberately condescending and insulting. I made a mistake replying to your last post as you implied your reason for asking had integrity: I will not be replying to you again.

I don't recall any "eliminate the elimination of FGM.." question."

Can you point to the post where I said that?

Have you considered the arguments posted in my link?

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/jc.htm

Do you see any suggestion of asylum as a solution in the link? or any of your bizzare solutions? Or are you simply beyond reason?

T runner wrote: »

If there is any of my points you dont understand feel free to ask.

I tried, but I don't believe you have the basic intellect required to answer. Inanely reposting your previous posts is not the key to explaining yourself in a coherent or rational manner.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hardly so difficult that there has Never been a prosecution against it.
I think a complete lack of will on the part of the police and courts system in Nigeria is more likely the case. Why bring in legislation if there is no possibility of ever enforcing it? Id the person consents to FGM you are breaking the Law. If a parent consents to it they are breaking the Law. If someone carried out the act they are breaking the Law. Do you mean to tell me that the Nigerian Police force has been unable to find one person from this group (Many millions of people) and make a case against them. Not one?

I see you now accept that state protections in Nigeria are inadequate, contrary to what the Irish courts repeatedly state.

In order for a prosecution to take place, you first need someone to report that a crime has taken place. Who is going to do that? The parents who asked to have it done, and are thus complicit? The infant child on whom it was performed? Is the girl, once she grows up, going to rat out her own parents and have them thrown in prison? No, she isn't.

How do you know the police cant charge and arrest someone?

There are a lot of Nigerian women's NGOs doing good work in trying to educate the population about FGM—which is ultimately the only long-term solution to the problem.
Your efforts to cast scorn on indigenous anti-FGM campaigners is greatly misplaced, I think.

As you know I am not casting scorn on NGO groups. I am doubting the credibility of the wife of a president who has done nothing to combat FGM on the ground, being the figurehead of such an African group. This appointments purpose is only by association to show the president of Nigeria and his government in a positive light with regard to its dealings on FGM which is a deception. If for example the leader of this group was a genuine activist from an NGO or a prominent person representing a country that has a good record in trying to reduce FGM then I would not doubt their credentials.

Xiney

opo wrote: »

are you simply beyond reason?

opo wrote: »

I don't believe you have the basic intellect required to answer.

I am giving you an infraction this time and if it happens again, you may be "asked" to take a break. Please note that due to the so recently issued on thread warning the above comments would usually justify a ban from me, but since I don't want to be accused of playing on the side of angels, you're getting a second chance.




If people want this thread to remain open, behave yourselves. Final warning, my lock button is itchy - it's already surpassed the scope of the Sligo forum and I won't let it sit around if it's being a problem.

opo

T runner wrote: »

Why bring in legislation if there is no possibility of ever enforcing it?

A theory: In the process of trying to eradicate FGM or any cultural issues as such, you may legislate against it. Those who become aware in the first instance that the practice is banned may reasonably ask as to why.

At this point, the education process comes into play as to reasons why the State would ban FGM thus raising awareness.

There is every reason to believe that thousands of FGM procedures would now not take place and indeed have not taken place because of this measure which would suggest it is an entirely beneficial exercise whether prosecutions occur or not.

As stated in my link, eradication of FGM may take a few generations – at least that’s what the experts say.

Opening gargantuan prisons and prosecuting often semi-literate people, in tribal cultures is really not the answer.

blackiebest

Hello all, From personal experience I feel it unfair to accuse Xiney of anything but fair Moderating.

I obviously follow this thread with interest and often lament being unable to articulate my opinions without sounding like I am a far left emotive soft touch or whatever. I read with interest a letter in the Champion yesterday from a person with whom I would agree however while reading I was thinking of the slaughtering he would get either here or in the politic's thread. I noted that beneath was a poll conducted which indicated that 67% of Sligo people surveyed wished for this family to be allowed to remain.

When arguing the detail and the law etc it seems to me that I should change my mind and be glad if Ireland forces the family out of our country. Really, without being sarcastic, the arguements put forward could convince anyone that we will be a better country if they are deported, but what about the family? Maybe that is why so many of us feel she should be allowed to stay, because letting them stay is not wrong, letting them stay would be good for us as a society.

I have read the most amazing assertions here and in the politic forum everything from cases like hers being the reason for the recession to thousands of Nigerians arriving on little boats to our shores, then on the lunchtime radio hear the chairman of BOI explain that his 'renumeration' in 2008 was 2.9 million euro! It amazes me that we, the people, can not see what is really wrong in this country but from my eyes it is certainly not Pamela or asylum seekers/refugees etc.

If 67% of the people of Sligo, or Ireland for that matter, feel that Pamela should be allowed to stay then are they all fools suckered by a fabricated story or are they just compassionate citizens who have a right to their opinion and to have their voices heard?

ParkRunner

blackiebest wrote: »

If 67% of the people of Sligo, or Ireland for that matter, feel that Pamela should be allowed to stay then are they all fools suckered by a fabricated story or are they just compassionate citizens who have a right to their opinion and to have their voices heard?

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/72505

http://www.socialistparty.net/pub/news/kunlevictory28-03-05.htm

They people of Sligo have had their voices heard as have supporters of other asylum seekers whose cases have gained national interest. In Sligo alone there must be many many other Nigerian asylum seekers who do not even get a mention in the Champion. I personally do not see why Pamela should be treated any different than these asylum seekers, who also have fears about returning to Nigeria. Is there any reason why Pamela and her two children should remain in Sligo and the other failed Nigerian asylum seekers there should be deported?

darealtulip

blackiebest wrote: »

Hello all, From personal experience I feel it unfair to accuse Xiney of anything but fair Moderating.

I obviously follow this thread with interest and often lament being unable to articulate my opinions without sounding like I am a far left emotive soft touch or whatever. I read with interest a letter in the Champion yesterday from a person with whom I would agree however while reading I was thinking of the slaughtering he would get either here or in the politic's thread. I noted that beneath was a poll conducted which indicated that 67% of Sligo people surveyed wished for this family to be allowed to remain.

When arguing the detail and the law etc it seems to me that I should change my mind and be glad if Ireland forces the family out of our country. Really, without being sarcastic, the arguements put forward could convince anyone that we will be a better country if they are deported, but what about the family? Maybe that is why so many of us feel she should be allowed to stay, because letting them stay is not wrong, letting them stay would be good for us as a society.

I have read the most amazing assertions here and in the politic forum everything from cases like hers being the reason for the recession to thousands of Nigerians arriving on little boats to our shores, then on the lunchtime radio hear the chairman of BOI explain that his 'renumeration' in 2008 was 2.9 million euro! It amazes me that we, the people, can not see what is really wrong in this country but from my eyes it is certainly not Pamela or asylum seekers/refugees etc.

If 67% of the people of Sligo, or Ireland for that matter, feel that Pamela should be allowed to stay then are they all fools suckered by a fabricated story or are they just compassionate citizens who have a right to their opinion and to have their voices heard?

who accused xiney of what? did I miss something? I think she does a great job as a moderator!

Again I understand your point of view but do you really want to get a poll to decied who stays and who doesnt? forget court and just put a poll in the papers?

I think this kind of thing should decision be without emotions (the court decision, not the rest of us!). It's not a popularity contest and it should be made by rules that are the same for every one.

elshambo

blackiebest wrote: »

Hello all, From personal experience I feel it unfair to accuse Xiney of anything but fair Moderating.

I obviously follow this thread with interest and often lament being unable to articulate my opinions without sounding like I am a far left emotive soft touch or whatever. I read with interest a letter in the Champion yesterday from a person with whom I would agree however while reading I was thinking of the slaughtering he would get either here or in the politic's thread. I noted that beneath was a poll conducted which indicated that 67% of Sligo people surveyed wished for this family to be allowed to remain.

When arguing the detail and the law etc it seems to me that I should change my mind and be glad if Ireland forces the family out of our country. Really, without being sarcastic, the arguements put forward could convince anyone that we will be a better country if they are deported, but what about the family? Maybe that is why so many of us feel she should be allowed to stay, because letting them stay is not wrong, letting them stay would be good for us as a society.

I have read the most amazing assertions here and in the politic forum everything from cases like hers being the reason for the recession to thousands of Nigerians arriving on little boats to our shores, then on the lunchtime radio hear the chairman of BOI explain that his 'renumeration' in 2008 was 2.9 million euro! It amazes me that we, the people, can not see what is really wrong in this country but from my eyes it is certainly not Pamela or asylum seekers/refugees etc.

If 67% of the people of Sligo, or Ireland for that matter, feel that Pamela should be allowed to stay then are they all fools suckered by a fabricated story or are they just compassionate citizens who have a right to their opinion and to have their voices heard?

As said previously dont know the case enough to have an opnion but i hate to see surveys used by one side or another in anything
as
HOW big a survey was it?
HOW was it carried out?
Straw Poll? Phone in? Asked in street?
Who are the people who took the survey?
What size was the sample of the population of Sligo people asked?

Lies, damed lies and statistics

According to surveys:
FF never win elections as nobody admits to voting for them
Nobody in Britian voted for Maggie Thacher
All muslims in the USA are terriosts etc etc.....

Your doing her case no good using emotive arguements and lines like

blackiebest wrote: »

If 67% of the people of Sligo, or Ireland for that matter, feel that Pamela should be allowed to stay then are they all fools suckered by a fabricated story or are they just compassionate citizens who have a right to their opinion and to have their voices heard?

Are you?

In fact from my readings of her supporters arguements i really am starting to belive that she is hiding something and her case is dodgy!?

first question, straight answer would be nice:
Why did she not stay in Britain with her visa?

T runner

elshambo wrote: »

first question, straight answer would be nice:
Why did she not stay in Britain with her visa?

Straight answer: that has absolutely nothing to do with her case for asylum.
Under UNHCR rules, the refugee appeals tribunal is supposed to ignore how the person got to the country because it has nothing to do with if they would be in danger if they returned to their own countr, absolutely nothing.

From EP: They people of Sligo have had their voices heard as have supporters of other asylum seekers whose cases have gained national interest. In Sligo alone there must be many many other Nigerian asylum seekers who do not even get a mention in the Champion. I personally do not see why Pamela should be treated any different than these asylum seekers, who also have fears about returning to Nigeria. Is there any reason why Pamela and her two children should remain in Sligo and the other failed Nigerian asylum seekers there should be deported?

The people of Sligo know her, believe her and feel she and her children deserve asylum in Ireland. Who are these other asylum seekers that you speak of?

rkeane

T runner wrote: »

Straight answer: that has absolutely nothing to do with her case for asylum.
Under UNHCR rules, the refugee appeals tribunal is supposed to ignore how the person got to the country because it has nothing to do with if they would be in danger if they returned to their own countr, absolutely nothing.



The people of Sligo know her, believe her and feel she and her children deserve asylum in Ireland. Who are these other asylum seekers that you speak of?

Care to do a national poll on should they stay? It would be a landslide against them....just like the citizenship referendum was in favour of the yes side. Even on boards your position is in a clear minority, I can't wait for the day Mrs Izevbekhai is deported.

elshambo

T runner wrote: »

Straight answer: that has absolutely nothing to do with her case for asylum.
Under UNHCR rules, the refugee appeals tribunal is supposed to ignore how the person got to the country because it has nothing to do with if they would be in danger if they returned to their own countr, absolutely nothing.

I fail to see where my question had anything to do with UNHCR rules or her case for asylum!

T runner wrote: »

The people of Sligo know her, believe her and feel she and her children deserve asylum in Ireland. Who are these other asylum seekers that you speak of?

More condecending guff!!!
Your doing the poor woman no favours with answers like that!
Do you speak for EVERY PERSON in SLIGO?

I swear its starting to look like the people who claim to be fighting for her are actually giving it the undercover undermining her bit!

rkeane wrote: »

[/B]

Care to do a national poll on should they stay? It would be a landslide against them....just like the citizenship referendum was in favour of the yes side. Even on boards your position is in a clear minority, I can't wait for the day Mrs Izevbekhai is deported.

Ive no tolerance for this kind of response either!

ParkRunner

T runner wrote: »

The people of Sligo know her, believe her and feel she and her children deserve asylum in Ireland. Who are these other asylum seekers that you speak of?

Well from info on the net Pamela is living in accommodation provided to asylum seekers <snip> I haven't seen anything on the news or in the papers really about why the rest of those in this accommodation centre should stay.

From a parliamentary question there were 228 asylum seekers in this accommodation centre in November 2008.
http://www.jcfj.ie/pqs/images/stories/dail_tables/2008-nov27-99.pdf
Do the people of Sligo know these people, believe them and feel that they deserve asylum?
I also wonder will the legal profession be willing to represent all these 228 asylum seekers pro bono through the High Court all the way to the European Court of Human Rights?

opo

T runner wrote: »

Straight answer: that has absolutely nothing to do with her case for asylum.
Under UNHCR rules, the refugee appeals tribunal is supposed to ignore how the person got to the country because it has nothing to do with if they would be in danger if they returned to their own countr, absolutely nothing.

Incorrect.

The route of travel is considered in terms of credibility of the applicant which is a bona fide reason to reject a claim.

darealtulip

I always thought that you had to apply at the first country you came in, which would be Holland in this case, accoording to her story.

I know this came up at the beginning, forgot the answer, read back in the morning though. Or if some one answers that saves me ddoing that;)

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

opo

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't think this is as black and white as some people might like to think, as this case implies:

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,GBR_CA_CIV,,LBN,4562d8cf2,3ae6b6ad0,0.html

Relevant section for consideration:

It is apparent that there is no current risk of the applicants being returned to any country where they are in any danger of persecution. They may face some inconvenience until their claim for asylum is properly considered, but I am wholly unable to conclude that there was any error of law in the refusal of Kennedy J to quash the decision of the Secretary of State not himself to consider the applicants’ applications for asylum and to direct the removal of the applicants to Austria.

seanybiker

rkeane wrote: »

[/B] I can't wait for the day Mrs Izevbekhai is deported.

me either. All these on here wanting her to stay because they know her are wrecking me bulb. Hopefully i
will get to laugh at them.

jimmmy

seanybiker wrote: »

me either. All these on here wanting her to stay because they know her are wrecking me bulb. Hopefully i
will get to laugh at them.

+1

T runner

elshambo wrote: »

In fact from my readings of her supporters arguements i really am starting to belive that she is hiding something and her case is dodgy!?
first question, straight answer would be nice:
Why did she not stay in Britain with her visa?

elshambo wrote: »

I fail to see where my question had anything to do with UNHCR rules or her case for asylum!

Well, you did claim it made her case "dodgy".
If the appeals tribunal concentrates on how the asylum seeker arrived in the country during their hearing the asylum seeker has a valid case for a judicial review because the tribunal member did not carry out the hearing correctly. (which is very common in Ireland and costly to our country).

rkeane wrote: »

[/B]

Care to do a national poll on should they stay? It would be a landslide against them....just like the citizenship referendum was in favour of the yes side. Even on boards your position is in a clear minority, I can't wait for the day Mrs Izevbekhai is deported.

This is the Sligo forum. According to the Sligo Champion a big majority of people want her to stay.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not true. In some tribes the women undergo FGM when they are pregnant and thus can give their consent.

Parents, who worry that unmutilated daughters will be seen as promiscuous or unmarriageable, believe that they are doing the right thing by their daughters, helping them become respectable women who will find good husbands. Those people who perform the act either make a living doing it or see themselves as carrying on a traditional practice.
Don't you see why the likelihood of someone outside this "closed circle" complaining to the police is small? And if the police don't receive complaints, they can't proceed with prosecutions.

Who said the police dont receive complaints?
Would a doctor in a hospital for example not complain when some child had bled to death after FGM?
The Nigerian Police force are one of the most corrupt and incompetent police forces in the whole of Africa.
They only investigate cases if they receive bribery and most of the population have absolutely no confidence in them.

Are you really trying to tell us that in 7-8 years in a country that may have had several million FGMs in that time that they have not being able to charge even one person? That is ridiculous frankly, you dont even believe it yourself.

I haven't said any such thing, and I don't know how you infer that from what I wrote.

You have acknowledged that there has been no prosecutions for FGM under Nigerian Law EVER. How is the NIgerian state protecting its citizens from FGM?

Stella Obasanjo was far from a mouthpiece for the Nigerian establishment. She first came to prominence as a human rights activist when her husband, Olusegun Obasanjo, was imprisoned in Nigeria for alleged treason in 1995. After he became the country's first elected civilian president after 16 years of military rule, she founded the Child Care Trust, a charity for children and young mothers that helps many poor and needy Nigerians. She received many international awards for her human rights work, and was an important figure in drawing international attention to the problem of FGM.

Wanting to get your husband out of prison doesnt make you a Human Rights activist, does it? Why were 90 million of Nigerias citizens living in abject poverty after her husbands rule? Why did she not influence her husband to do something about FGM sufferers or poor people while he was president? Why didnt she stop him ordering his police force to commit human rights abuses in Delta state? Why didnt she ask him to stop the Nigerian Police force from killing and raping their own citizens with impunity? Why was Nigeria rated one of the most corrupt nations on earth after his presidency? She had a chance to do something and like her husband she did nothing. She is a mouthpiece for Official Nigeria nothing more and her qualifications mean as little as the treaties that Nigeria has signed to protect its citizens from Rape and FGM. They mean absolutely nothing. In Nigeria as everywhere, you need to look past the posturing.

There was already a thread about this subject in the Politics forum, but for some reason all the active participants in that thread have moved over here.

I'm posting here because I am from Sligo. Why are you?
If you want a political debate the politics forum is the place for it. I believe Xiney is right to say that this thread should have relevance to Sligo matters.

I've asked you before how letting the Izevbekhai family stay would be "good" for Ireland, and you haven't been able to give a coherent answer. But assuming that it would be "good for us as a society" to let them stay, should we give a free pass to all the other asylum seekers who arrive on our shores, too? Should we even have a legal asylum process at all? Or should we all just stand at Dublin Airport with our Céad Mile Fáilte signs and have a big feel-good party to welcome them all to our generous country?

May I interject BlackieBest?
Allowing her to stay would show the world that Ireland will not accept empty promises from corrupt regimes in Nigeria to "protect" its citizens. It will send a message that creating laws to give the appearance of protecting its citizens from gender based torture will not suffice. They must carry out their Laws on the ground. This will force the Irish government (at least) to force Nigeria to do something about its problems. It will show integrity on our part and the ripple effect may help save countless women in Nigeria. The majority of Sligo people who support her should feel rightly proud should this happen.

More condecending guff!!!
Your doing the poor woman no favours with answers like that!
Do you speak for EVERY PERSON in SLIGO?

No, but the Sligo champion spoke for the vast majority according to its poll.