How Ireland treats its Asylum Seekers exposed by the Guardian

iamstop

smash wrote: »

Free food, somewhere to live and a bit of cash.... They get enough!

Most of them down want handouts, they want opportunities to provide for themselves and their families. :rolleyes:

Nodin

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

What the fcuk is the Grauniad ????
If you are referring to The Guardian then you really should pay more attention when you are regularly reading it.

As they say on Boards.Fr...

*le sigh.....

walrusgumble

walrusgumble wrote: »

Why don't you do the same too! Where is your back up for this ? I'm am sure any member of the gnib would find that rather amusing.

You taken into account other family members who come after wards?

In that 90% Im taking into account asylum seekers, offspring and family members that may have joined them.

Biodegradable Bellend

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

What the fcuk is the Grauniad ????
If you are referring to The Guardian then you really should pay more attention when you are regularly reading it.

Shure everyone knows The Grauniad.

walrusgumble

Nodin wrote: »

Boombastic wrote: »

Shouldn't they be claiming asylum in the first country they land?

No. Dublin regulation.

Dublin regulations only deals with people who actually applied for asylum in another country, not dimly pass through another country! If you bothered to read and understand the rules you would not be making such an ill informed comment. Moreover those regulations are in bad need of reform since th problems in Greece and Italy. Moreover, in the case that the rules apply, a state must operate ite powers to return them within a short space of time. Failure to do so means that the person is their problem.

Asylum rules themslves will look at why by failed to apply in first safe country.


This issue was confirmed along time ago on this site. Why are mods allowing the repeat of such ignorance?

Madam_X

My name is URL wrote: »

Besides it's not like Chinasea to post stuff about how awful the Irish are. Living up to his own worst nightmare as usual.

Lol. Bet (s)he's Irish too - but of course an exception, not like all the horrid other Irish people.

Exactly, what tf is the Magdalene Laundries mentioned for? Are "we" supposed to be "ashamed" of that phenomenon which took place long before most of us were born?

lightspeed

Chinasea wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/asylum-seekers-ireland-magdalene-laundries



The above link is from The Guardian outlining the hideous way we manage the asylum seekers that end up on our shores. I find it shameful. In particular the paragraph I have extracted below.



Unable to access education, employment or frequently even to cook for themselves, asylum-seekers are accommodated and fed, and granted an adult weekly allowance of €19.10 (rates that have not changed in real terms since their introduction over a decade ago).

Do you feel as outraged about the homeless irish people who have not been given nearly the same accommodation and help?
The whole refugee situation is nonsense. The reason I say that is because they have not yet changed the environment in the countries their fleeing. The rapists and war barons and corrupt politicians are just replaced with more rapists, war barons and corrupt politicians. How can I not be outraged and annoyed when I see refugees come to the country despite the fact that we are bankrupt and live off of our citizens through generous housing, and benefits.

Boombastic

Fall in asylum seekers related to the recession 4 Jan 2012

Just 1,250 applications were received last year, barely a tenth of the peak recorded a decade ago.

Two-thirds of failed asylum seekers had used false identities 21 May 2012
Cross-checks carried out by gardai using British fingerprint records revealed that about 1,300 out of 2,000 failed asylum seekers investigated were known to Britain's Border Agency under a different name.


:pac:

Edit: we need a taxi driver to tell us how he brought different adults with the same kids to claim the social

Nodin

walrusgumble wrote: »

Dublin regulations only deals with people who actually applied for asylum in another country, ............ ignorance?

Still the charmer, I see.

walrusgumble

Ricky Whining Fig wrote: »

walrusgumble wrote: »

Why don't you do the same too! Where is your back up for this ? I'm am sure any member of the gnib would find that rather amusing.

You taken into account other family members who come after wards?

In that 90% Im taking into account asylum seekers, offspring and family members that may have joined them.

As I have said earlier, and iinviting others to look a the evidence that I have marked out, from stat websites, while it is not 90% of them, it would at least be 50 %. It would not be unreasonable for an ordinary Joe, depending on the African state (let us remember south Africa however,) to assume, even wrongly, that at some point, one of their family members cAme via the asylum process , in the last 15 year's, whether successful or not.

It is not a nice thing to say, but, there is accuracy in it, that not even the NGOs could possibly deny( I am not saying 90 %)

So, in line with the work permit stats and asylum stats,(which may not include the child in it, until recently as children are now processed individually,)( I don't think they have stats for each country on leave to remain ans sp) care to offer an attempt to backup your argument,

walrusgumble

Boombastic wrote: »

Fall in asylum seekers related to the recession 4 Jan 2012

Just 1,250 applications were received last year, barely a tenth of the peak recorded a decade ago.

Two-thirds of failed asylum seekers had used false identities 21 May 2012
Cross-checks carried out by gardai using British fingerprint records revealed that about 1,300 out of 2,000 failed asylum seekers investigated were known to Britain's Border Agency under a different name.


:pac:

Edit: we need a taxi driver to tell us how he brought different adults with the same kids to claim the social

Funny thing about the Irish taxi drivers, who complain about asylum seekers, is that they made a killing driving down from Belfast so that the immigrant avoided public transport and gnib checks. Maybe the southern taxi driver were jealous in not getting the fare.? Doubt they were too pushed what immigrant was doing down here so long as they got the fare. It is a great way to shut a taxi driver up when they start to rant. Rarely fails.

walrusgumble

Nodin wrote: »

walrusgumble wrote: »

Dublin regulations only deals with people who actually applied for asylum in another country, ............ ignorance?

Still the charmer, I see.

Stupidity should never be tolerated, especially on issue that have been argued and confirmed to be idiotic years ago by boards.ie.

Instead o taking issue what how the statement was said (100 % accurate by the way, ) deal with what was said. What, chief? I can't hear you. That is right, you have nothing to come back on.

Muckie

Speaking of Taxi drivers, think its quite a sight when ever i go into the City

Centre of Dublin at night and see the amount of Africans driving Taxi's.

Who would have thought a few years ago.

But then again, "have People Carrier and a GPS" what more do i need :pac:

Sir Pompous Righteousness

As far as I know, those who are granted asylum get free accommodation in nice ordinary houses and get everything paid for them, food, education, etc... If you lived in Balbriggan you'd know. Awfully disingenuous article.

walrusgumble

walrusgumble wrote: »

As I have said earlier, and iinviting others to look a the evidence that I have marked out, from stat websites, while it is not 90% of them, it would at least be 50 %. It would not be unreasonable for an ordinary Joe, depending on the African state (let us remember south Africa however,) to assume, even wrongly, that at some point, one of their family members cAme via the asylum process , in the last 15 year's, whether successful or not.

It is not a nice thing to say, but, there is accuracy in it, that not even the NGOs could possibly deny( I am not saying 90 %)

So, in line with the work permit stats and asylum stats,(which may not include the child in it, until recently as children are now processed individually,)( I don't think they have stats for each country on leave to remain ans sp) care to offer an attempt to backup your argument,

walrusgumble wrote: »

whether you like it or not, the stats from dept of justice for the past 15 years would make it on a balance of probabilities that their parents were part of that system.

You backed it up for me on the last page.

wp_rathead

Ricky Whining Fig wrote: »

wprathead wrote:

ffs
so what, black people automatically equal asylum seekers?
even though I know to expect it, still amazes me how these threads manage to bring out the knuckledraggers

Ignorance masked as political correctness.

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge"
-Stephen Hawking

humbert

Pherekydes wrote: »

But the mistake that many make is to equate this 80% figure with 80% of African immigrants.

As mentioned before, in this and other threads, asylum seekers form only a small percentage of total immigrants.

I'd genuinely like to see that stats too.

If you are talking about immigration from all countries then I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage of asylum seekers is negligibly small but I'd be a bit more surprised if the percentage of asylum seekers from Africa (and in particular excluding South Africa) of the total number of immigrants from Africa was small.

Nodin

walrusgumble wrote: »

Stupidity should never be tolerated, .

Yep, theres that charm again.

walrusgumble wrote: »

Instead o taking issue what how the statement was said (100 % accurate by the way, ) deal with what was said. What, chief? I can't hear you. That is right, you have nothing to come back on.

You don't have to claim asylum in the first country you land in. Its the country where you clear immigration. Thus I was perfectly correct in saying what I did.

wprathead

wprathead wrote: »

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge"
-Stephen Hawking

Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity

-Martin Luther King

Nothing is wrong with immigration and diversity is a good thing, to a point!
People like yourself and the pc brigade will not rest happy until they go to their graves where a white man in Dublin centre is a rare sight, or so your points would infer albeit discretely.

I don't know why people like you get so irate when someone even mentions diversity being a bad thing or even hinting at controlling it, they are immediately labeled racist.

Go over to Bradford and walk down the main street and see how you are treated, seemingly that is the way people like you would like all of the west to be.

golden lane

is it not time to publish the reasons that these people are claiming asylum.....asylum from what ??????

the taxpayer is paying for this....they deserve to know................

walrusgumble

Muckie wrote: »

Speaking of Taxi drivers, think its quite a sight when ever i go into the City

Centre of Dublin at night and see the amount of Africans driving Taxi's.

Who would have thought a few years ago.

But then again, "have People Carrier and a GPS" what more do i need :pac:

They are making an honest living just like you and me. What do you want them to do, go on social? I know there are issues with how they got that right to live here. But you might as well be piddling against the wind, you can't undue the past.

New taxi regulations about licences and renting them out (to bw abolished) and restrictions might end some of their careers so you can feel abit happier.alas they will then be claiming social.

Nodin

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

As far as I know, those who are granted asylum get free accommodation in nice ordinary houses .....

T'would seem you don't know very far.

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Nodin wrote: »

T'would seem you don't know very far.

And you do? Oh I'm sorry, you're a leftist, of course, you know everything, just like the Guardian.

walrusgumble

Ricky Whining Fig wrote: »

walrusgumble wrote: »

As I have said earlier, and iinviting others to look a the evidence that I have marked out, from stat websites, while it is not 90% of them, it would at least be 50 %. It would not be unreasonable for an ordinary Joe, depending on the African state (let us remember south Africa however,) to assume, even wrongly, that at some point, one of their family members cAme via the asylum process , in the last 15 year's, whether successful or not.

It is not a nice thing to say, but, there is accuracy in it, that not even the NGOs could possibly deny( I am not saying 90 %)

So, in line with the work permit stats and asylum stats,(which may not include the child in it, until recently as children are now processed individually,)( I don't think they have stats for each country on leave to remain ans sp) care to offer an attempt to backup your argument,

walrusgumble wrote: »

whether you like it or not, the stats from dept of justice for the past 15 years would make it on a balance of probabilities that their parents were part of that system.

You backed it up for me on the last page.

As in 90% ? Fair enough.

I know the other poster specifically said 90%, fair enough that was an exaggeration, and I'll informed one, but most posters would have got what he was getting at. but how far off the mark do you think he was? 50-60% more appropriate in your opinion?less?

Nodin

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

And you do?

They aren't put in "nice ordinary houses". Theres been a number of reports released on what they are housed in, if you care to take the time to research it.

Boombastic

Looking through the citzens info website I came across this


Citizens Information

You are not entitled to seek or enter employment, unless you sought asylum in the state on or prior to 26 July 1999. If you sought asylum prior to this date and are still awaiting a decision on your application and wish to enter employment, you should contact the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner.
You are not entitled to carry on any business, trade or profession.


:pac: 13+ years waiting for your claim to be processed:pac:


How slow are they at processing them?

walrusgumble

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

Nodin wrote: »

T'would seem you don't know very far.

And you do? Oh I'm sorry, you're a leftist, of course, you know everything, just like the Guardian.

Unlucky for you, I know what I am talking about on this matter. Nodin is correct on this one, you are not. If they leave direct provision , support by the state, during th asylum process they get absolutly NOTHING! Which is fair enough. Some maybe in relationships.some in the past might have worked on the black market and could afford accommodation of their own

It is only if they get legal status/ residency that they might be entitled to avail of some social welfare needs like rent allowance or social housing (despite leave to.remain status requiring them to be economically active)

As for the accommodation centres, inlight of the millions the owners get for accommodating these people, some of them have taken the piss. It is well documented on. Not much fun if Ireland landed in the dock in Europe over this.

On does hope they guardian have spent her as much time scrutinizing over the UK treatment as it has over Ireland

City Gent

Chinasea wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/asylum-seekers-ireland-magdalene-laundries

The above link is from The Guardian outlining the hideous way we manage the asylum seekers that end up on our shores. I find it shameful. In particular the paragraph I have extracted below.

Unable to access education, employment or frequently even to cook for themselves, asylum-seekers are accommodated and fed, and granted an adult weekly allowance of €19.10 (rates that have not changed in real terms since their introduction over a decade ago).

That will teach you to read the Guardian.

Skid

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

UK Guardian readers are considered very, very xenophobic so it would seem odd that this particular paper is attempting to make a case for asylum seekers.

That is nonsense.

Guardian readers are notorious Pinko Liberals.

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Nodin wrote: »

They aren't put in "nice ordinary houses". Theres been a number of reports released on what they are housed in, if you care to take the time to research it.

They do live in nice houses and apartments. Far better than any accommodation a typical student would have here to live in. They're also entitled to fairly generous welfare when they're granted asylum; I remember the government was granted some ridiculous "socialising allowance" back during the Boom for christ sake. I don't count reading the Guardian newspaper or any article written by Fintan O'Toole as "research" or any half-arsed cherry-picked "research" from some opinionated Starbucks Socialist. BTW, I'm talking about people who are granted asylum here, not asylum seekers.

the_syco

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/asylum-seekers-ireland-magdalene-laundries

The author of that article is a cúnt for comparing the asylum seekers and those who worked in the laundries.

Then asylum seekers get free food, free housing, and don't work. And they get free money. Those in the laundries got punished for living, worked all day every day, and never got paid for any of it.

walrusgumble

Boombastic wrote: »

Looking through the citzens info website I came across this


Citizens Information

You are not entitled to seek or enter employment, unless you sought asylum in the state on or prior to 26 July 1999. If you sought asylum prior to this date and are still awaiting a decision on your application and wish to enter employment, you should contact the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner.
You are not entitled to carry on any business, trade or profession.


:pac: 13+ years waiting for your claim to be processed:pac:


How slow are they at processing them?

To be fair, ORAC and RAT take about 6 months and less to process asylum cases.

The problem lies where the decision goes to th high court to challenge the validity of the decision. Some claims are legitimate others are a waste of court time. A case can b up to 2-3 years processing in the court, like other cases.

I it succeeds it goes back to rat. Even then after a decision you maybe have a valid case to go back to the high court, thus another 3 year's. Little can be done about that.

The major problem is if they fail in asylum ans apply for leave to remain an subsidiary protection. That can take 2-3 years and more to process.

Excluding high court, 5 years is not uncommon.add the high court, guarantee 5 years. Plenty of time to marry or get an Irish child ( other way to get residency) not bad if you have a homeless cAse, buys time. Brutal if you have a strong case, if not for asylum, but for leave to remain.

One solution, adopt the british approach, all applications considered in one. I might cut the accommodation bills too.

walrusgumble

the_syco wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/asylum-seekers-ireland-magdalene-laundries

The author of that article is a cúnt for comparing the asylum seekers and those who worked in the laundries.

Then asylum seekers get free food, free housing, and don't work. And they get free money. Those in the laundries got punished for living, worked all day every day, and never got paid for any of it.

I knew that there was a good reason for not reading the piece. Hey, the author lost credibility once those words were uttered.

Sir Pompous Righteousness

the_syco wrote: »

The author of that article is a cúnt for comparing the asylum seekers and those who worked in the laundries.

Then asylum seekers get free food, free housing, and don't work. And they get free money. Those in the laundries got punished for living, worked all day every day, and never got paid for any of it.

I have to agree. It's pretty insensitive trying to compare them to the Magdalen Laundries actually.

Madam_X

the_syco wrote: »

The author of that article is a cúnt for comparing the asylum seekers and those who worked in the laundries.

Then asylum seekers get free food, free housing, and don't work. And they get free money. Those in the laundries got punished for living, worked all day every day, and never got paid for any of it.

Absolutely. Not saying asylum-seekers get the life of luxury here or anything - obviously all those stories about big houses, free cars etc are a load of bollocks, but yeh, talk about cheapening the plight of the laundry victims. On top of what you've listed, they were abused and humiliated.
Getting boring the way the Magdalene laundries are constantly trotted out as a stick we should apparently be flagellating ourselves with...

Nodin

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

They do live in nice houses and apartments. Far better than any accommodation a typical student would have here to live in. They're also entitled to fairly generous welfare when they're granted asylum; I remember the government was granted some ridiculous "socialising allowance" back during the Boom for christ sake. I don't count reading the Guardian newspaper or any article written by Fintan O'Toole as "research" or any half-arsed cherry-picked "research" from some opinionated Starbucks Socialist. BTW, I'm talking about people who are granted asylum here, not asylum seekers.

.....they get different welfare than the rest of the population...?

Pottler

Toddle across to somwhere in the Middle east or Africa and announce you are seeking Asylum, see what sort of a spread they put on for you, then come back and rejoice in how wonderful it is here. This is like people in the UK whinging about their health service and their roads. Then they go overseas, and then come home all newly grateful. When we have them in plastic tents on the Curragh and feck sacks of cereal off the back of a truck at them as we drive past, then people might have somthing to whine about. The phrase "feckin swamped otherwise" springs to my mind.

petersburg2002

And what about how the UK treats its own asylum seekers?

vitani

Pottler wrote: »

Toddle across to somwhere in the Middle east or Africa and announce you are seeking Asylum, see what sort of a spread they put on for you, then come back and rejoice in how wonderful it is here. This is like people in the UK whinging about their health service and their roads. Then they go overseas, and then come home all newly grateful. When we have them in plastic tents on the Curragh and feck sacks of cereal off the back of a truck at them as we drive past, then people might have somthing to whine about. The phrase "feckin swamped otherwise" springs to my mind.

Alternatively, go to one of the countries that these asylum seekers have escaped from and try and build a life for yourself there. Then come back home and realise how good we actually have it, and how little difference it makes to your life if somebody from another country wants to come here and start afresh.

Not all asylum claims are genuine. I realise that. But if you've ever sat down and spoken to somebody who comes from a country where they've lived each day of their lives in fear, then maybe you'd be a little more gracious about giving them the opportunity to have a fresh start.

Pottler

vitani wrote: »

Alternatively, go to one of the countries that these asylum seekers have escaped from and try and build a life for yourself there. Then come back home and realise how good we actually have it, and how little difference it makes to your life if somebody from another country wants to come here and start afresh.

Not all asylum claims are genuine. I realise that. But if you've ever sat down and spoken to somebody who comes from a country where they've lived each day of their lives in fear, then maybe you'd be a little more gracious about giving them the opportunity to have a fresh start.

Come back in ten years when immigration issues have become integration issues and Ireland is no longer recognisable as Ireland. And for the PC crowd, I employ several immigrants and I doubt they would have a bad word, but I am also a realist and I know that they never integrate, they just dilute and eventually we end up as a mini UK. It's also not that far off. Unfortunatly. Also, BTW, there's a reason they are leaving the kips they come from in many cases, it's because they are kips. And people and cultural characteristics create kips. And kippism travvels.

parc

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Apart from that UK Guardian readers are considered very, very xenophobic so it would seem odd that this particular paper is attempting to make a case for asylum seekers.

LOL

Are you serious? I think you have your wires crossed here. The Guardian is the liberal paper in the UK

Nodin

Pottler wrote: »

Come back in ten years when immigration issues have become integration issues and Ireland is no longer recognisable as Ireland. And for the PC crowd, I employ several immigrants and I doubt they would have a bad word, but I am also a realist and I know that they never integrate, they just dilute and eventually we end up as a mini UK. It's also not that far off. Unfortunatly. Also, BTW, there's a reason they are leaving the kips they come from in many cases, it's because they are kips. And people and cultural characteristics create kips. And kippism travvels.

That's nice. Presumably thats what they said when the paddies and italians arrived in America.

Augmerson

Lads fs like, I don't see the problem with the asylum seekers. In fact we need more, but from specific countries. Get them in from Ghana, Senegal, the Ivory Coast in Africa. From Europe, anybody from Eastern Europe with two legs. Objective? Win the World Cup. ****ing serious!

Fuinseog

Chinasea wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/03/asylum-seekers-ireland-magdalene-laundries

The above link is from The Guardian outlining the hideous way we manage the asylum seekers that end up on our shores. I find it shameful. In particular the paragraph I have extracted below.

Unable to access education, employment or frequently even to cook for themselves, asylum-seekers are accommodated and fed, and granted an adult weekly allowance of €19.10 (rates that have not changed in real terms since their introduction over a decade ago).

sure publish your address and they can come live with you.asylum seekers come here for protection not to live in the lap of luxury.

bbam

Pottler wrote: »

Come back in ten years when immigration issues have become integration issues and Ireland is no longer recognisable as Ireland. And for the PC crowd, I employ several immigrants and I doubt they would have a bad word, but I am also a realist and I know that they never integrate, they just dilute and eventually we end up as a mini UK. It's also not that far off. Unfortunatly. Also, BTW, there's a reason they are leaving the kips they come from in many cases, it's because they are kips. And people and cultural characteristics create kips. And kippism travvels.

Wow.. Hitler really didn't kill himself after WW2, he became POTTLER

Augmerson

Pottler wrote: »

Come back in ten years when immigration issues have become integration issues and Ireland is no longer recognisable as Ireland. And for the PC crowd, I employ several immigrants and I doubt they would have a bad word, but I am also a realist and I know that they never integrate, they just dilute and eventually we end up as a mini UK. It's also not that far off. Unfortunatly. Also, BTW, there's a reason they are leaving the kips they come from in many cases, it's because they are kips. And people and cultural characteristics create kips. And kippism travvels.

Well Ireland was a bit of a kip for the years 1700 to about 1995 and we went to the UK, Canada, USA, New Zealand and Australia in our droves and we didn't make a kip out of those places. Granted, conditions were different, we weren't going to claim asylum but still.

Also I love the word Kippism and it should be in the Dictionary.

Fuinseog

Boombastic wrote: »

Shouldn't they be claiming asylum in the first country they land?

which is ireland and britain. they claim in both countries.

KINGVictor

Pottler wrote: »

Come back in ten years when immigration issues have become integration issues and Ireland is no longer recognisable as Ireland. And for the PC crowd, I employ several immigrants and I doubt they would have a bad word, but I am also a realist and I know that they never integrate, they just dilute and eventually we end up as a mini UK. It's also not that far off. Unfortunatly. Also, BTW, there's a reason they are leaving the kips they come from in many cases, it's because they are kips. And people and cultural characteristics create kips. And kippism travvels.

I am always suspicious when people use that line. Its just like when people are making racist remarks and then turnaround and say well I have black and Asian friends so I am not racist. Hello? its not verifiable and it is usually an attempt to obfuscate the discussion.

Anyway, thats not the daftest part of the post. What exactly do you mean by a mini Uk? And more relevantly, do you think that most people emmigrate because their countries are kips and unlivable? ....Interesting

Pottler

KINGVictor wrote: »

I am always suspicious when people use that line. Its just like when people are making racist remarks and then turnaround and say well I have black and Asian friends so I am not racist. Hello? its not verifiable and it is usually an attempt to obfuscate the discussion.

Anyway, thats not the daftest part of the post. What exactly do you mean by a mini Uk? And more relevantly, do you think that most people emmigrate because their countries are kips and unlivable? ....Interesting

So why do they come here? For the climate? I'm not getting into a big row, but this island is small, there's not that much work for the indigenous population as it is, I like it the way it is tbh, and feck anyone who disagrees with me tbh, like I care anyway, it's all just opinions and that's mine, warts and all. Oh and I get slated for employing "foreigners" btw, apparently I should be employing Irish only, so yeah, rascism is alive and well, only I'm a foreigner, that bit might not have registered with some. So, yes, I am also a bit hypocritical on this one, which kinda bothers me more than what others believe or think, but I reckon Ireland has a capacity to absorb, and it's close to that now. America is a kip to me, btw, as is the UK. Just saying like...

old hippy

latenia wrote: »

Another well informed individual

Yes, there does seem to be a lot of them on threads such as these