Asylum Seeker protest on Kinsale Road. Mod warning in OP.

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

Given that you claim to know the specifics of every asylum seeker's testimony in court over the years, I have to admit doubts about the veracity of your insights.

Seriously im all for debate but leave the ignorance and pettyness

alastair

tolerant from cork wrote: »

Again. Please point me to the post in which I said a lie.
And yes it is handy. Unauthorised people shouldn't be viewing reports about others.

You tried to defame a poster with false aspersions. That's dishonest.

And so far I'm just seeing unsupported accusations without any evidence. The other poster's claims are at least substantiated by concerns from experts in the field. I know which I place greater weight in.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Sorry. Who was granted asylum for that reason?

Read Walshb's post above....

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

Sorry. Who was granted asylum for that reason?

It has to be pointed out that walshb was referring to a Radio Phone-In contribution described here.....

Originally Posted by Daisy Dasi:
Another lady who rang Red Fm from the Kinsale Road (Cecilia was the name she used) told a very shocked Neil Prenderville she was fleeing an abusive husband.... Is there something wrong with this picture? The system (as in all systems) is open to abuse... as previously stated I would far prefer tax payers money to go directly to rescuing programme refugees from refugee camps from war zones...

Whether Red Fm were able to verify "Cecilia's" credentials is debatable,however until proven otherwise we must take the Lady was at face value.

alastair

AlekSmart wrote: »

It has to be pointed out that walshb was referring to a Radio Phone-In contribution described here.....



Whether Red Fm were able to verify "Cecilia's" credentials is debatable,however until proven otherwise we must take the Lady was at face value.

And why would someone granted asylum be still resident in a direct provision centre? Taken at face value, of course.

walshb

alastair wrote: »

Why did you post it up then?

Read it again. Closely. I never said anyone got given asylum because their husband was abusive. You asked a question. I answered it. End of.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Right so.

*it was a reference to an interview between Neil Prenderville, Red Fm and a resident of the Kinsale Road Ac Centre. Neil asked her her grounds for claiming asylum and she said she was fleeing an abusive husband....

alastair

reprise wrote: »

Is that your definition of a professionally researched report? Did you actually read it? I must have missed the bit that explained how it was compiled and where the information was obtained. You see anything there yourself?

You've some concerns about it's authoritativeness?

reprise wrote: »

The truth is there is a massive amount of money being spent on asylum seekers. In real life, this is as much loving as you get.

It must be a cold old world you experience.

reprise wrote: »

It would be a real bonus if there was a little gratitude in return or if it was going to more people that really needed it.

Ah, it's gratitude you crave?

reprise wrote: »

Oddly, you seem to have missed the last few months where there has been massive publicity on the issue of direct provision and asylum seekers.

You must have missed the bit about the **** hitting the fan.

tolerant from cork

alastair wrote: »

You tried to defame a poster with false aspersions. That's dishonest.

And so far I'm just seeing unsupported accusations without any evidence. The other poster's claims are at least substantiated by concerns from experts in the field. I know which I place greater weight in.

Yes I will givout to anyone and about anyone accusing someone with untrue stories. That is not being dishonest. I didn't accuse anyone. And again you are not an appointed body or organisation to see any evidence containing personal details. Therefore you won't see it as it would be against regulations.

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

*it was a reference to an interview between Neil Prenderville, Red Fm and a resident of the Kinsale Road Ac Centre. Neil asked her her grounds for claiming asylum and she said she was fleeing an abusive husband....

So - essentially no-one advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse, or any evidence of successful asylum application on that basis. Right so.

walshb

The applicant was asked why she was claiming asylum here. Her answer was fleeing an abusive husband. This is what has been posted. I take it that this is what the applicant actually said. You couldn't make it up.

alastair

tolerant from cork wrote: »

Yes I will givout to anyone and about anyone accusing someone with untrue stories.

You've nothing to prove the claims aren't true. We've seen that similar prior claims have been considered legitimate by the Integration Centre.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

That is not being dishonest.

But you weren't 'giving out' - you were falsely accusing them of something.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

I didn't accuse anyone.

Oh yes you did.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

And again you are not an appointed body or organisation to see any evidence containing personal details. Therefore you won't see it as it would be against regulations.

There's that, or the distinct probability that you were engaging in some fabricated hyperbole.

Daisy Dasi

tolerant from cork wrote: »

Yes I will givout to anyone and about anyone accusing someone with untrue stories. That is not being dishonest. I didn't accuse anyone. And again you are not an appointed body or organisation to see any evidence containing personal details. Therefore you won't see it as it would be against regulations.

fair enough... to be honest I don't think the majority of us here wish to see confidential information... I guess in your job you do access a lot of information which is highly confidential....

I know a middle eastern woman who received refugee status in Ireland and went on to marry an Irish citizen... she never divulged the fact that she is a refugee to her husband as she is ashamed of it. Both are highly educated people who hold highly esteemed jobs in Ireland and have PhDs etc but her husband has no idea of her original basis of coming to Ireland.... its due to this fact I applaud that the general public can only access certain areas of the centres.

Also, if there are 3 to a room I wouldn't like my room mate to be bringing back friends etc where my personal items are being kept...

alastair

walshb wrote: »

The applicant was asked why she was claiming asylum here. Her answer was fleeing an abusive husband. This is what has been posted. I take it that this is what the applicant actually said. You couldn't make it up.

Is this application approved? No.
Is anyone advocating for asylum on those grounds? No.

tolerant from cork

alastair wrote: »

And why would someone granted asylum be still resident in a direct provision centre? Taken at face value, of course.

Because it is very hard for them to find houses to rent. RIA gives them one month after they get their status to find a place. I now of cases that 3 months later they are still in the centre. And than that bad hated management turns a blind eye to it and let's them stay.

reprise

alastair wrote: »

You've some concerns about it's authoritativeness?

You ARE able to read between the lines:eek:

alastair wrote: »

It must be a cold old world you experience.

Not a fluffy wuffy wabbit one like yours and Elf pixie's huh?

alastair wrote: »

Ah, it's gratitude you crave?

Not really, I just stupidly think that if you are going to piss and moan about all that's being laid on for free, you might throw someone a bone so no-one can accuse you of being a totally selfish ungrateful ******.

alastair wrote: »

You must have missed the bit about the **** hitting the fan.

I didn't, because it isn't.

walshb

alastair wrote: »

Is this application approved? No.
Is anyone advocating for asylum on those grounds? No.

This is just it. Ireland has to deal with these kind of bogus and ridiculous claims, and there are people who would advocate her right to stay based on this.

"Is anyone advocating for asylum on those grounds? No"

How can you know that nobody is advocating asylum on these grounds?

tolerant from cork

alastair wrote: »

You've nothing to prove the claims aren't true. We've seen that similar prior claims have been considered legitimate by the Integration Centre.

They are still only claims and the person accused stays innocent until proven otherwise.

alastair

walshb wrote: »

This is just it. Ireland has to deal with these kind of bogus and ridiculous claims, and there are people who would advocate her right to stay based on this.

"Is anyone advocating for asylum on those grounds? No"

How can you know that nobody is advocating asylum on these grounds?

Because you can't point to anyone doing so. So why pretend otherwise? And we are obligated to treat all asylum applications equally - even the ones that fail.

Daisy Dasi

Refugee: “any person who owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear,  is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country” (United Nations Convention on Refugees, 1951)

quote="alastair;92300516"]So - essentially no-one advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse, or any evidence of successful asylum application on that basis. Right so.[/quote]

Domestic abuse as in any other country in the world can be sorted with a DIVORCE or local police intervention.... no need to run to the other side of the world... the next city would suffice


and no, I don't think it fits the criteria. ..

alastair

tolerant from cork wrote: »

They are still only claims and the person accused stays innocent until proven otherwise.

That's only in a court of law. Again - who was accused of a criminal act?

walshb

alastair wrote: »

Because you can't point to anyone doing so. So why pretend otherwise? And we are obligated to treat all asylum applications equally - even the ones that fail.

Nobody's pretending. I'd bet my house on it that the woman has plenty of backers.

PI had plenty, didn't she?

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

Refugee: “any person who owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear,  is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country” (United Nations Convention on Refugees, 1951)

quote="alastair;92300516"]So - essentially no-one advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse, or any evidence of successful asylum application on that basis. Right so.

Domestic abuse as in any other country in the world can be sorted with a DIVORCE or local police intervention.... no need to run to the other side of the world... the next city would suffice


and no, I don't think it fits the criteria. ..[/QUOTE]

Eh. I don't think you're quite grasping what I wrote.

Again: no-one is advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse.

Dunno how to be clearer.

Daisy Dasi

walshb wrote: »

Nobody's pretending. I'd bet my house on it that the woman has plenty of backers.

PI had plenty, didn't she?

I am sorry... why isn't she deported or more importantly... why wasn't she turned away at the airport.... are the immigration officials feeling ok seriously? People like this 'Cecelia' give the genuine AS a bad name...

alastair

walshb wrote: »

Nobody's pretending. I'd bet my house on it that the woman has plenty of backers.

PI had plenty, didn't she?

Aside from your vivid imagination - care to produce a third party advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse? Because if you can't - it's provably best not to accuse people of doing so. Straw man arguments and all that.

walshb

alastair wrote: »

Aside from your vivid imagination - care to produce a third party advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse? Because if you can't - it's provably best not to accuse people of doing so. Straw man arguments and all that.

Her new friends in the community? Not possible that they could advocate? Get your head out of the ground and face reality. There are legit asylum seekers and bogus ones. It's not ONLY the legit ones who are being supported and backed. Wake up.

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

I am sorry... why isn't she deported or more importantly...

She wouldn't be deported before the appeals/judicial review process runs it's course.

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

why wasn't she turned away at the airport....

Because, strangely enough, asylum applications aren't judged on the spot at the airport. Something to do with just application of the law.

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

are the immigration officials feeling ok seriously? People like this 'Cecelia' give the genuine AS a bad name...

What exactly did you want from these immigration officials?

AlekSmart

alastair wrote: »

So - essentially no-one advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse, or any evidence of successful asylum application on that basis. Right so.

Well,erm...although not (as yet) physical abuse related,this item has a few relevant issues worth noting....

http://www.evoke.ie/homepage3/jacqueline-conway-irish-mother-warns-women-not-to-marry-an-asylum-seeker/

Samson Adeoye, 25, first arrived in Ireland in 2009. He claimed asylum here saying that he had been forced to flee Nigeria after his entire family were murdered by a local tribe.

After a romance of just eight months, the happy couple decided to tie the knot.

At the time Jacqueline described her wedding day on September 17, 2010, as the happiest day of her life.

Following a two-year campaign by Jacqueline, Samson was allowed by the Government to return to his wife and child on December 27, 2012.

But just one month later Jacqueline reported her husband to gardaí for allegedly mistreating their daughter.

She said: ‘He completely changed when he returned to Ireland. He was always on the computer, he never wanted me to leave the house and he was abusive to our daughter.

At least the cruel,uncaring Irish State has'nt abandoned this gentleman to fate....

When contacted, Samson denied that he had done anything wrong. ‘None of my family is alive. They were all murdered. The marriage is over, she doesn’t want me in the house. He now lives in Carlow on on job- seeker’s allowance.

Ane we even get to read of an old favorite involved on the periphery...

Posted By : Reprise:- I don't recall anything as sustained since dear Pamela Izevbekhai and her groupies almost wiped out all goodwill for asylum seekers in 2011. God knows if a security guard had burst into her room unannounced - I bet she would still be here and very well rewarded by the State for any inconvenience.

Pamela Izevbekhai, Samson said: ‘I know Pamela from when we were in Sligo.She was at my wedding,she was the one that made the arrangements.
To be honest she is a very good woman, she saw that she can help this country and she did everything for my wedding to be in order.’

So Pamela Izvebekhai "made the arrangements" for what is now being described as a sham-wedding...:eek:

My marriage was nothing like I thought it would be. People warned me not to marry him but I didn’t listen. He has told me nothing but lies. He told me he used me for citizenship.’

An interesting addendum to the debate sure enough.....;)

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Aside from your vivid imagination - care to produce a third party advocating asylum on the basis of domestic abuse? Because if you can't - it's provably best not to accuse people of doing so. Straw man arguments and all that.

Well she has backers... namely Residents Against Racism and the Anti Deportation Ireland members who would protest on behalf of this lady if the State did try to remove her I bet... they have unrealistic requests of the State to completely abolish deportations...

A buddy of mine (Irish lady) was recently deported from India as her visa expired. Obviously the lady was a not a burden on India and with a population of over a billion and with 2 million orphans you think India has bigger fish to fry... just goes to show....

alastair

walshb wrote: »

Her new friends in the community? Not possible that they could advocate? Get your head out of the ground and face reality. There are legit asylum seekers and bogus ones. It's not ONLY the legit ones who are being supported and backed. Wake up.

Again - I'm not seeing anyone advocate for asylum for victims of domestic abuse. 'Put up, or shut up' seems appropriate here.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

She wouldn't be deported before the appeals/judicial review process runs it's course.


Because, strangely enough, asylum applications aren't judged on the spot at the airport. Something to do with just application of the law.


What exactly did you want from these immigration officials?

to ask her her basis in coming to the country and this basis should be basis she is expected to prove in court to claim asylum... if she is telling the people of Cork on live radio she came to the country fleeing an abusive husband and sees nothing wrong with that... then maybe, just maybe, she said this on entering the country and should have been turned away...

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Other report seems to see otherwise.



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/07/dublin-regulation-european-asylum-seekers

....the first country they enter, not the first safe country they come into, and - as explained in the link I gave - you may transit through countries without having been deemed to have entered there.

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

Well she has backers... namely Residents Against Racism and the Anti Deportation Ireland members who would protest on behalf of this lady if the State did try to remove her I bet... they have unrealistic requests of the State to completely abolish deportations...

No doubt you'll confirm the support of these groups for asylum on the basis of domestic abuse, with some statements to that effect from them?

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

A buddy of mine (Irish lady) was recently deported from India as her visa expired. Obviously the lady was a not a burden on India and with a population of over a billion and with 2 million orphans you think India has bigger fish to fry... just goes to show....

It shows what exactly? Was your friend seeking asylum in India?

tolerant from cork

alastair wrote: »

That's only in a court of law. Again - who was accused of a criminal act?

You produced nothing except that report from 2007.
Why are you asking everyone to produce a proof for every single word they say?
You ask for evidence that people are seeking asylum on the grounds of domestic violence. Can you show any evidence that they don't?
You are right here, it's not a court, it's a tread where nobody has to show you anything. If you are in doubt that they are telling the truth ... well that's your problem.

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

to ask her her basis in coming to the country and this basis should be basis she is expected to prove in court to claim asylum...

Asylum applicants don't have to prove anything at the airport - just confirm their asylum application and provide general information for the later interview to determine the merits of the application.

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

if she is telling the people of Cork on live radio she came to the country fleeing an abusive husband and sees nothing wrong with that... then maybe, just maybe, she said this on entering the country and turned away...

She wouldn't be turned away at the airport for an inappropriate asylum application - only for not meeting the requirements for seeking asylum in the state.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

No doubt you'll confirm the support of these groups for asylum on the basis of domestic abuse, with some statements to that effect from them?


It shows what exactly? Was your friend seeking asylum in India?

I doubt 'Cecelia' would have to tell RAR and the ADI lot her story to garner support all you gotta say is they want to deport me and they will support her...
Just showing deportation is an end process for immigration in every country in the world and should be taken seriously here if its taken seriously even in developing countries.... is my friend back in Ireland screaming "Racists racists!" about the Indian people... funny when Europeans are deported from America or Australia (even India!) the old racism card is never used...

alastair

tolerant from cork wrote: »

You produced nothing except that report from 2007.

Which supported some of the claims made by the poster you accused of feigning amnesia.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

YWhy are you asking everyone to produce a proof for every single word they say?

Just chiming in with the demands made by yourself of the previous poster.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

YYou ask for evidence that people are seeking asylum on the grounds of domestic violence.

No I didn't.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

YCan you show any evidence that they don't?

See above.

tolerant from cork wrote: »

YYou are right here, it's not a court, it's a tread where nobody has to show you anything. If you are in doubt that they are telling the truth ... well that's your problem.

I've no problem. It's you who feels the need to make false claims against posters.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Asylum applicants don't have to prove anything at the airport - just confirm their asylum application and provide general information for the later interview to determine the merits of the application.


She wouldn't be turned away at the airport for an inappropriate asylum application - only for not meeting the requirements for seeking asylum in the state.

I never said she had to prove anything... just give her basis for seeking asylum at the airport.. surely this basis HAS to match the basis she applies for in the court or else she is fraudently trying to enter the state by giving false info to immigration officials who have the power to allow her into the State or refuse the right to land...

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

I doubt 'Cecelia' would have to tell RAR and the ADI lot her story to garner support all you gotta say is they want to deport me and they will support her...
Just showing deportation is an end process for immigration in every country in the world and should be taken seriously here if its taken seriously even in developing countries.... is my friend back in Ireland screaming "Racists racists!" about the Indian people... funny when Europeans are deported from America or Australia (even India!) the old racism card is never used...

Scare quotes! And more supposition on your part. Still no meat on those bones though.

Asylum seekers and immigrants are distinct groups. Was your friend attempting to emigrate to India? Or is it the case that they're neither?

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

I never said she had to prove anything... just give her basis for seeking asylum at the airport.. surely this basis HAS to match the basis she applies for in the court or else she is fraudently trying to enter the state by giving false info to immigration officials who have the power to allow her into the State or refuse the right to land...

Who suggested the outline of her case changed at any point? The immigration officials only needed to determine that she was seeking political asylum, that such an application is forwarded to the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, or that she should be making that application in a different state. That's the extent of their responsibilities with regard to asylum seekers.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Scare quotes! And more supposition on your part. Still no meat on those bones though.

Asylum seekers and immigrants are distinct groups. Was your friend attempting to emigrate to India? Or is it the case that they're neither?

And I see no meat on any single post of yours just interrogation on everybody else's post without you making one single valid point of your own but this is only a discussion as Tolerant from Cork has said and I am happy to participate... she was touring India and simply out stayed her visa... I don't have details on how she was discovered, caught and deported... all I got was an email saying she was deported from India due to aforementioned reasons and is now back in Ireland...

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Asylum applicants don't have to prove anything at the airport - just confirm their asylum application and provide general information for the later interview to determine the merits of the application.


She wouldn't be turned away at the airport for an inappropriate asylum application - only for not meeting the requirements for seeking asylum in the state.

if her basis never changed then she shouldn't have been given the right to land in the first place as domestic abuse is not a requirement for seeking asylum....

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

And I see no meat on any single post of yours just interrogation on everybody else's post without you making one single valid point of your own but this is only a discussion as Tolerant from Cork has said and I am happy to participate... she was touring India and simply out stayed her visa... I don't have details on how she was discovered, caught and deported... all I got was an email saying she was deported from India due to aforementioned reasons and is now back in Ireland...

So, really it has no bearing on asylum applicants, or immigrants, or racism for that matter.

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

if her basis never changed then she shouldn't have been given the right to land in the first place as domestic abuse is not a requirement for seeking asylum....

Again - who suggested the basis of her claim was changed at any point? Immigration officials never make any judgements on the merits of an asylum application - they just pass the info on to those who do.

Daisy Dasi

alastair wrote: »

Again - who suggested the basis of her claim was changed at any point? Immigration officials never make any judgements on the merits of an asylum application - they just pass the info on to those who do.

Immigration officials have the authority to refuse entry.. in fact I believe more than 2000 people were turned away at ports last year...

Daisy Dasi

More than 2,200 people were deported from Ireland or turned back at the country’s sea and airports last year, new figures reveal.

Applications for asylum stood at 946 in 2013, just below the previous year’s tally, but well down on the peak of 11,600 recorded in 2002.

A total of 1,890 people were refused entry at sea and airports.

Some 210 failed asylum seekers and illegal migrants were also deported from the State in 2013, with Nigeria, China, Mauritius, Albania, and Pakistan representing the countries to which most were returned.
Irish Examiner January 7th 2014

Daisy Dasi

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

Immigration officials have the authority to refuse entry.. in fact I believe more than 2000 people were turned away at ports last year...

sorry 1890 were turned away...

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

Immigration officials have the autority to refuse entry.. in fact I believe more than 2000 people were turned away at ports last year...

Not on the merits of the asylum application however. If the applicant passes their requirements - which have nothing to do with the application.

alastair

Daisy Dasi wrote: »

sorry 1890 were turned away...

Because they didn't qualify as applicants, not because of the basis for their applications.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

....the first country they enter, not the first safe country they come into, and - as explained in the link I gave - you may transit through countries without having been deemed to have entered there.

How do you define 'transit' as in an airport transit lounge or simply moving over land hoping from one to the next. How does one 'Transit' over land to another country say from Italy, Spain or Greece.

Can one just say at the Spanish border, 'No, I do not want to claim asylum here, as I want to transit to Ireland' thereby you have not 'entered' Spain?

Therefore anyone who has entered Ireland from an another country they have already entered before should be deported to said country, right?

Anyway, straight from the horses mouth.

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/free_movement_of_persons_asylum_immigration/l33153_en.htm

Application in an international transit area of an airport
Where a third-country national applies for asylum in an international transit area of an airport of a Member State, that Member State shall be responsible for examining the application.

The above quote is relevant because one is usually checked before departure that they have a valid visa to enter a country. At least that is the way of it for Australia and NZ. My OH was not allowed board a flight to NZ because she forgot to get her e-visa thing online. They just would not give her the boarding pass. Another case, we were on the way to Fiji from Sydney but her residency visa sticker was on her old passport. She had to go home to get her old passport to prove she could return to Sydney, as they would not allow us to check in. So how do people just rock up in a countries airport with no visa with them? If one says that they have no visa but want to claim asylum then shouldn't they be doing so in that countries airport as descibed by the link above? This is actually a curiosity. Maybe Australia and NZ are much stricter in this regard?

Anyway, the only way I can see this so, is that someone who buys a one way ticket to Ireland via an airport transit lounge in Europe can therefore claim asylum. Anyone else should be deported. Am I correct?