Asylum Seekers Getting Apartments in Ballinamore - mod warning in OP (18/10)

SafeSurfer

alastair wrote: »

I’ve supported the assertion. There’s precisely zilch evidence to support the notion that these people are here. It’s that evidence of absence that supports the claim.

Well what evidence do we have that they are not here? We have evidence that they were here and no evidence that they have left. It is equally reasonable to assume that some are still here.

SafeSurfer

alastair wrote: »

If they don’t show up to pursue an asylum claim, they’re not actually asylum seekers, are they? Stands to reason.

Yet in all objective records and evidence they are listed as asylum seekers.

alastair

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Well what evidence do we have that they are not here? We have evidence that they were here and no evidence that they have left. It is equally reasonable to assume that some are still here.

It’s not, if there’s no evidence they remain. The evidence that they have left is that they were issued with an order to leave, have left all accommodation and welfare support systems, and they’re not showing up anywhere in the State.

alastair

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Yet in all objective records and evidence they are listed as asylum seekers.

They’re not though. To retain their status as asylum seekers they have to adhere to the assessment process.

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

A notion unsupported by any evidence whatsoever.

So your claim which you have refused to back up over several threads with nothing

And here you are saying this can't happen and that can't happen because you say so .

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

They’re not though. To retain their status as asylum seekers they have to adhere to the assessment process.

Which they can walk away from at any time ,they can also walk away from dp at any time and go anywhere they choose in the country

SafeSurfer

alastair wrote: »

It’s not, if there’s no evidence they remain. The evidence that they have left is that they were issued with an order to leave, have left all accommodation and welfare support systems, and they’re not showing up anywhere in the State.

Lack of interaction with the state by a group seeking to avoid state detection is hardly compelling evidence for absence.

SafeSurfer

alastair wrote: »

They’re not though. To retain their status as asylum seekers they have to adhere to the assessment process.

So once they fail to turn up for interview they cease to be asylum seekers and 6 months later if they present for interview they become asylum seekers again?
So in theory they could seek asylum, work in the black economy for years and if detected, enter the asylum process again.

Calhoun

1641 wrote: »

Propose any system you like and it will carry just as many objections or more. Purpose built accomodation? Uproar! Supports through directly provided public services? Costs and inefficiency! Quick processing? People not checked properly!

I am not saying that there are not issues here or that improvements can not be made. But fundamentally it is not the issue. It is the convenient excuse.

True enough but I suppose the current system lends itself to be seen as unjust to bothsides of the coin so its easier to build opposition against it. When you have violent opposition being used as a method to express your disapproval of the system because its the only mechanism then the current process has failed.

I don't condone whats happening at all but when you have a government minister basically saying they are intentionally putting them inplace without any consultation then the power of words is removed and you see a shift to more action.

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

So your claim which you have refused to back up over several threads with nothing

And here you are saying this can't happen and that can't happen because you say so .

I’m saying there’s no evidence of it happening whatsoever.

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

Which they can walk away from at any time ,they can also walk away from dp at any time and go anywhere they choose in the country

Sure. And then they get served with a deportation order.

alastair

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Lack of interaction with the state by a group seeking to avoid state detection is hardly compelling evidence for absence.

Not a single arrest? Unlike pretty much every other category of illegal immigrant seeking to avoid State detection. Seems rather unlikely.

alastair

SafeSurfer wrote: »

So once they fail to turn up for interview they cease to be asylum seekers and 6 months later if they present for interview they become asylum seekers again?
So in theory they could seek asylum, work in the black economy for years and if detected, enter the asylum process again.

Nope. Asylum seeking is a one-time only affair. If they register and don’t adhere to the process, that’s their singular opportunity lost.

SafeSurfer

alastair wrote: »

Nope. Asylum seeking is a one-time only affair. If they register and don’t adhere to the process, that’s their singular opportunity lost.

Unless they apply under a new identity of course.

alastair

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Unless they apply under a new identity of course.

Given that they’re fingerprinted - nope.

weldoninhio

alastair wrote: »

Sure. And then they get served with a deportation order.

Can you serve an order on someone if you don't know where they are??

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

Nope. Asylum seeking is a one-time only affair. If they register and don’t adhere to the process, that’s their singular opportunity lost.

Explain the case of the Brazilian chap who came here with his parents who eventually went home to Brazil ,he then went back to so national service ,then got married had kids then returned here asking to continue his asylum case his mother apparently made when he was 15.

Or explain why so many asylum seekers failed to turn up after making their initial application

alastair

weldoninhio wrote: »

Can you serve an order on someone if you don't know where they are??

Their identity is known - they are fingerprinted and their identity confirmed as part of the claim assessment process.

weldoninhio

alastair wrote: »

Nope. Asylum seeking is a one-time only affair. If they register and don’t adhere to the process, that’s their singular opportunity lost.

Wrong. The Irish Times propaganda piece "New to the Parish" had the story of a Brazilian guy who came over with his family when he was younger and claimed asylum, he got bored waiting, so moved back to Brazil for a few years, met a girl and got married, came back to Ireland in the hope that he could recommence his previous claim (laughable). He's still here and very hopeful of getting leave to remain. It's a shambles of a situation. We have no waiter shortage here, he should be back in Brazil right now. These are the people clogging up our country and blocking actual refugees.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/i-ve-been-made-to-feel-like-i-don-t-belong-in-ireland-1.4029874?fbclid=IwAR3JqIuoHxKcC5qUH7wwNoEAbWHWumyQc2_Y7rgMN-cOc28HGseoL6YmSdk

weldoninhio

alastair wrote: »

Their identity is known - they are fingerprinted and their identity confirmed as part of the claim assessment process.

I didn't ask if they were known. I asked how do the Gardai serve deportation papers to someone when they have no clue where they are??

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

Their identity is known - they are fingerprinted and their identity confirmed as part of the claim assessment process.

Which means what exactly .

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

Explain the case of the Brazilian chap who came here with his parents who eventually went home to Brazil ,he then went back to so national service ,then got married had kids then returned here asking to continue his asylum case his mother apparently made when he was 15.

Or explain why so many asylum seekers failed to turn up after making their initial application

Don’t know anything about this Brazilian fellah, but a parent’s claim for asylum is separate from their child - who wouldn’t have made their own claim, if they were entitled to make a claim as an adult. So the singular asylum claim would have been made as an adult.

alastair

weldoninhio wrote: »

Wrong. The Irish Times propaganda piece "New to the Parish" had the story of a Brazilian guy who came over with his family when he was younger and claimed asylum, he got bored waiting, so moved back to Brazil for a few years, met a girl and got married, came back to Ireland in the hope that he could recommence his previous claim (laughable). He's still here and very hopeful of getting leave to remain. It's a shambles of a situation. We have no waiter shortage here, he should be back in Brazil right now. These are the people clogging up our country and blocking actual refugees.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/i-ve-been-made-to-feel-like-i-don-t-belong-in-ireland-1.4029874?fbclid=IwAR3JqIuoHxKcC5qUH7wwNoEAbWHWumyQc2_Y7rgMN-cOc28HGseoL6YmSdk

He wouldn’t have made a claim as a child, so I’m not wrong.

Edit - read the article - in this case he did make the claim as a child, so its that singular claim which was voided. He’s awaiting a decision on his wife’s application - which will Determine if he’s deported or not. If her claim is successful, he’d qualify for family reunification.

alastair

weldoninhio wrote: »

I didn't ask if they were known. I asked how do the Gardai serve deportation papers to someone when they have no clue where they are??

Nobody in direct provision is not known. So your question isn’t relevant.

jmayo

I wonder do some people get paid by the post on here ?

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

Nobody in direct provision is not known.

There location might not be known or alias

alastair

jmayo wrote: »

I wonder do some people get paid by the post on here ?

You’ve a higher post rate than I do. 😂

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

There location might not be known or alias

Their location is obviously known. Their ’alias‘ is a product of your imagination.

Gatling

alastair wrote: »

Their location is obviously known. .

Obviously not no .



How would the guards know their location if they walk out of dp exactly

alastair

Gatling wrote: »

Obviously not no .



How would the guards know their location if they walk out of dp exactly

Just to be clear then - you reckon you can evade a court order by leaving your house? 😂