Ireland's asylum hotel monthly bill tops €3.54m

_Kaiser_

So several lads who we know nothing about, who landed here by accident, have now gone missing not even a week later?

Yea, nothing wrong with that as a process at all!

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

Yes, I'm the one who is deluded...

OK then, pick any major city in western "multicultural" Europe, which areas are the most likely to be the most socially deprived and with the most social problems and crime? And what do they tend to have in common along ethnic lines? Who's more likely to be in gaol? A White person, a Black or Brown person or a Yellow person? Oh yes and before you say it's all because of racism, I mostly agree with you, but that doesn't change the facts.

Show me any western European country that has avoided the social problems of "multiculturalism", show me one where all this "diversity" works and mark me, works for the non local population. And no, exceptions prove the rule. Just because the mayor if I dunno Lyon is a Black man or woman, doesn't negate the fact that crappiest parts of the same city are mostly likely to be made up of the non local population.

Show me any city anywhere in the world that imprisons people on an equitable basis - be it class, wealth, religion, gender, race, ethnicity, etc? Your whole perspective is based on racism, whether you care to admit it or not. Multiculturalism brings precisely nothing new to this equation. Your alternative - supposed ethnic purity, is a fantasist’s fiction.

alastair

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

So several lads who we know nothing about, who landed here by accident, have now gone missing not even a week later?

Yea, nothing wrong with that as a process at all!

Ehh, you want to tag people or lock them up for a year and a half, not having committed any crime? That’s the process you’re advocating?

alastair

suicide_circus wrote: »

after the 39 dead in the lorry in the UK i'm not really surprised or annoyed by the medical staff arriving to meet them.

i do think the fact that they have the freedom of the country before their asylum claim has even begun to be assessed in earnest is utterly insane. they arrived here from a safe country. several safe countries. that puts an enormous question mark over their asylum request. An asylum seeker is an illegal immigrant, someone who broke through the country's sovereign borders, until they are granted asylum.

Extra-legal entry for the purposes of seeking asylum is, by international law, not a criminal act. Regardless of whether that claim is successful or not. So while they might be undocumented, they haven’t done anything illegal. And there’s no obligation on any asylum seeker to make a claim in a first safe country. Pretty much every successful asylum seeker in Ireland has passed through other safe countries. So no ‘enormous question mark’ there.

_Kaiser_

alastair wrote: »

Ehh, you want to tag people or lock them up for a year and a half, not having committed any crime? That’s the process you’re advocating?

They committed a crime by entering the country illegally in the back of a container from a safe country (France)

They were trying to make it to the UK (illegally)

My solution would have been to reject their "asylum" application (which they didn't make - our leaders presumed they would) on the spot, not turn it into a PR stunt and subsequently highlighting the inadequacies of our security forces when these guys (who we know nothing about) can just disappear only days later!

Beechwoodspark

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

So several lads who we know nothing about, who landed here by accident, have now gone missing not even a week later?

Yea, nothing wrong with that as a process at all!

It’s absolutely mental at this stage

Beechwoodspark

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

And no mention whatsoever on RTE who were all over the story when they arrived, no mention now as it doesn't suit their agenda.

Exactly. It’s yet another example of RTÉ burying “inconvenient” stories that go against their propaganda.

Beechwoodspark

jay0109 wrote: »

As if the whole sham that is the Asylum Industry needed to be called out even further! An absolute joke and an expensive one at that from all the stories in the media this week. The spectacle of the fleet of emergency medical response vehicles at Rosslare port...embarrassing stuff and even more so this morning.

+1. It’s sickening.

Beechwoodspark

suicide_circus wrote: »

should people who essentially broke in to the country, about whom authorities know nothing, with no visas etc be allowed walk around the country willy nilly?

There has to be security concerns over this.

Very much doubt the guards did any kind of in-depth assessment of these random men who *supposedly* are Kurds but -

who the hell actually knows the first thing about them???

alastair

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

They committed a crime by entering the country illegally in the back of a container from a safe country (France)

No they did not. Once they made an asylum claim, their entry is no longer a crime. That’s the law. If their claim is unsuccessful they will be issued with a deportation order, but they will not be prosecuted for illegal entry - no crime pertains. Equally it doesn’t matter that France is a safe country - they are perfectly entitled to make their claim here and not there.

_Kaiser_

alastair wrote: »

No they did not. Once they made an asylum claim, their entry is no longer a crime. That’s the law. If their claim is unsuccessful they will be issued with a deportation order, but they will not be prosecuted for illegal entry - no crime pertains.

And why did they not make their claim in France? Why try to get to the UK?

I'll give you a clue :it has nothing to do with preventing imminent risks to their safety (which is what the asylum process is intended for).

No one is buying it, and an increasing amount of people are fed up of being accused of being "racist" for asking these perfectly valid questions.

alastair

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And why did they not make their claim in France? Why try to get to the UK?

I'll give you a clue :it has nothing to do with preventing imminent risks to their safety (which is what the asylum process is intended for).

No one is buying it, and an increasing amount of people are fed up of being accused of being "racist" for asking these perfectly valid questions.

Their claim is assessed on it’s merits. What isn’t debatable is that they have committed a crime by making their claim here. They haven’t.

suicide_circus

alastair wrote: »

Pretty much every successful asylum seeker in Ireland has passed through other safe countries.

People are eligible to apply for asylum if they are in fear of persecution if they were to return home. Once you bypass other countries in order to make it to a county which may offer a better standard of living, social supports etc it is no longer merely a question of safety from persecution. It has now taken on an additional economic and materialistic element. If you refuse to see that, fair enough.

_Kaiser_

alastair wrote: »

Their claim is assessed on it’s merits. What isn’t debatable is that they have committed a crime by making their claim here. They haven’t.

As far as I'm aware, they didn't make a claim? I know it was expected they would, but did they?

And again. Why not in France? Did I miss the news about a war there?

Genuine asylum seekers don't pick and choose. They go to the closest and first place to offer them safety.

You can hide from it all you want, but that's the reality. This was another container load of welfare tourists at best, potentially dangerous at worst.

Neither have any rights here.

alastair

suicide_circus wrote: »

People are eligible to apply for asylum if they are in fear of persecution if they were to return home. Once you bypass other countries in order to make it a county which may offer a better standard of living, social supports etc it is no longer merely a question of safety from persecution. It has now taken on an additional economic and materialistic element. If you refuse to see that, fair enough.

Yeaah - nonsense. Refer to the actual laws regarding refugees and safe countries.

wellwhynot

Still nothing from RTE but they did post this

Beechwoodspark

wellwhynot wrote: »

Still nothing from RTE but they did post this

So he claimed asylum in Netherlands then LEFT and tried to get into England

What a joke.

alastair

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

As far as I'm aware, they didn't make a claim? I know it was expected they would, but did they?

And again. Why not in France? Did I miss the news about a war there?

Genuine asylum seekers don't pick and choose. They go to the closest and first place to offer them safety.

You can hide from it all you want, but that's the reality. This was another container load of welfare tourists at best, potentially dangerous at worst.

Neither have any rights here.

They did make a claim - it was reported in the media, and they were in direct provision - a facility only offered to those who have made a claim.

You seemed to have missed the news that there is no obligation on any asylum seeker to make a claim in a first safe country. But now you know, and need never embarrass yourself in that regard again. Every ‘genuine’ asylum seeker in this country came here via a safe country - every one of them.

suicide_circus

alastair wrote: »

Yeaah - nonsense. Refer to the actual laws regarding refugees and safe countries.

no YOURE talking nonsense. so there.

AlekSmart

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

So he claimed asylum in Netherlands then LEFT and tried to get into England

What a joke.

Now now...please remember every migrant MUST be considered a victim if the plan is to work...so no more of this joking please !

alastair

suicide_circus wrote: »

no YOURE talking nonsense. so there.

Fraid not. I can refer to the actual legislation - can you say the same?

suicide_circus

alastair wrote: »

Every ‘genuine’ asylum seeker in this country came here via a safe country - every one of them.

you said it.

alastair

suicide_circus wrote: »

you said it.

I did. Because the merit of an asylum claim has nothing to do with which safe countries they have passed through.

_Kaiser_

alastair wrote: »

They did make a claim - it was reported in the media, and they were in direct provision - a facility only offered to those who have made a claim.

You seemed to have missed the news that there is no obligation on any asylum seeker to make a claim in a first safe country. But now you know, and need never embarrass yourself in that regard again. Every ‘genuine’ asylum seeker in this country came here via a safe country - every one of them.

They made a claim because by all accounts they were encouraged to, and then absconded to (it's assumed) the UK which was their intended destination anyway.

You're the one embarrassing yourself here mate by arguing for and confusing chancers with genuine asylum seekers (who absolutely deserve assistance until they can return to their homelands).

If anything you should be calling these lads out as it only diminishes the support and tolerance those in genuine need will find in places like Ireland.

Gatling

suicide_circus wrote: »

you said it.

But .but ,but

alastair

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

They made a claim because by all accounts they were encouraged to, and then absconded to (it's assumed) the UK which was their intended destination anyway.

You're the one embarrassing yourself here mate by arguing for and confusing chancers with genuine asylum seekers (who absolutely deserve assistance until they can return to their homelands).

If anything you should be calling these lads out as it only diminishes the support and tolerance those in genuine need will find in places like Ireland.

Unlike you, I’m not so wedded to abandoning due process to actually evaluate asylum claims. I’m not the one embarrassing myself with inane posturing.

10000maniacs

Theres a liberal wet from the refugee council on the Marian Finucune show now suggesting we should increase our population by 3 million. His justification is that before the famine we had a similar population to England's.
And of course Marian cheering him on with this insanity.

Beechwoodspark

I heard that guy. It was a 10-15 minute propaganda broadcast with No dissenting views tolerated. It was quite scary to listen to. Only one point of view is allowed it seems.

ShamNNspace

10000maniacs wrote: »

Theres a liberal wet from the refugee council on the Marian Finucune show now suggesting we should increase our population by 3 million. His justification is that before the famine we had a similar population to England's.
And of course Marian cheering him on with this insanity.

Unbelievable.. Just listening to him there.. What sort of a parallel universe are these people living in??

_Kaiser_

alastair wrote: »

Unlike you, I’m not so wedded to abandoning due process to actually evaluate asylum claims. I’m not the one embarrassing myself with inane posturing.

You're not? Your entire position is tied to "the process" even though its clear as day that "the process" has being flagrantly abused by these lads and many more like them.

Personal insults (which are wasted on me by the way - it only shows you can't make a point without it) and deflection of every post put to you don't change that reality.