Sinn Fein end Direct Provision

Pronto63

Gynoid wrote: »

That is a disgrace for sure . Perhaps a good investment would be to spend a good bit of money recruiting a significant number of qualified people (eg legal, civil service, reassign from overloaded depts) to process applications, prioritise approved people and escort out failed applicants. Surely every application does not have to go to court and if presently it does, then remedy that loophole with legislation. A fair assessment, professionally done. Quickly. It should really be a top priority.

ALERT
ALERT

Boards is talking sense!!

piplip87

Imagine the heads on those who spout far right nonsense while supporting SF when this happens.

SchrodingersCat

Kivaro wrote: »

The mental gymnastics of the poster you keep responding to is why I have him on the ignore list for some time.

Kivaro wrote: »

I have the poster who made the anti-immigration comment on ignore

Kivaro wrote: »

There's a reason why he is on the ignore list, which is highly recommended for those who do not want to read about obviously false assertions.

You make a statement, someone questions it, so you put them on ignore? This is not a mature debate.

Its the equivalent of a child sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting “la la la la". :rolleyes:

Wibbs

Kivaro wrote: »

Even when Leo Varadkar highlighted the bogus asylum seekers from Georgia and Albania as the "big driver" behind our country's problems in housing asylum seekers, the remarks were branded by the usual crowd as "gas lighting and dangerous".

Indeed and they're both White countries. Leo thinking he was avoiding the racism charge by not mentioning the equally high numbers from Black countries.

Though there is a colour bias on the Right On side too. I mean we have over a 100,000 Poles, about the same number of British, near enough the same again from Latvia, Lithuania and Romania combined, over 10,000 each from Germany, Spain and France, but funny how they very rarely get a mention from the Right On, vested interests and the usual NGO types. Must not be exotic enough to be truly Multicultural(tm), too pale of face for the posters and holier than thou crawthumping.

It seems for some for "diversity" to "improve" a country has to be down to skin colour, the darker the better. And of course none of these yahoos would ever consider a non White nation and culture to be in dire need of such "diversity". It seems this need only goes one way. I wonder why that is? I actually do.

Gatling

Amazing immigrants get burned out in Belfast by republicans cross into here and the republicans welcome them with open arms .


They Can't seem to agree on whether they hate foreigners or love them

Kermit.de.frog

Gatling wrote: »

Amazing immigrants get burned out in Belfast by republicans cross into here and the republicans welcome them with open arms .


They Can't seem to agree on whether they hate foreigners or love them

As I was saying earlier I know a handful of people you could describe as ra heads to varying degrees but none of them would be particularly welcoming to foreigners. Don't get me wrong, they wouldn't be out and out racists either but still...

That's just my experience.

I think SF might be out of touch with their base.

DelaneyIn

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It's just another of their fantasy promises. In a housing crisis, where are they going to put asylum seekers?

Send them home after their initial claim and one appeal is rejected?

Eric Cartman

tipptom wrote: »

FFS,and this was thanked by a mod.

You should be fu*king ashamed of yourselves and Boards should be ashamed letting this HATE FILLED RACISM stay up.

what race are people from georgia ?

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Indeed and they're both White countries. Leo thinking he was avoiding the racism charge by not mentioning the equally high numbers from Black countries.

Though there is a colour bias on the Right On side too. I mean we have over a 100,000 Poles, about the same number of British, near enough the same again from Latvia, Lithuania and Romania combined, over 10,000 each from Germany, Spain and France, but funny how they very rarely get a mention from the Right On, vested interests and the usual NGO types. Must not be exotic enough to be truly Multicultural(tm), too pale of face for the posters and holier than thou crawthumping.

It seems for some for "diversity" to "improve" a country has to be down to skin colour, the darker the better. And of course none of these yahoos would ever consider a non White nation and culture to be in dire need of such "diversity". It seems this need only goes one way. I wonder why that is? I actually do.

This us a thread about direct provision & asylum seekers.
None of the countries you listed come here as asylum seekers?
They are entitled to live here.
What's your point? Do you think there should only be Irish people living in Ireland?

enricoh

If Sinn Fein cant end direct provision maybe Bohemians can. No mention of where they are going to put the 10,000 in the system at the minute oddly enough!
Are they going to build accommodation for them in dalymount park? Rte forgot to ask them for costed solutions!!

https://www.newstalk.com/news/bohemian-amnesty-direct-provision-966219

The club has partnered with Amnesty for a campaign to bring an end to the Direct Provision system in Ireland – ahead of the 20th anniversary of its establishment.

Boggles

I thought everyone wanted to see an end to direct provision?

Eric Cartman

Boggles wrote: »

I thought everyone wanted to see an end to direct provision?

They do, it just depends on whether you want to see the economic migrants live in a free house in rooskey or back from the nation they really came from or syria that they pretended to come from.

Boggles

Eric Cartman wrote: »

They do, it just depends on whether you want to see the economic migrants live in a free house in rooskey or back from the nation they really came from or syria that they pretended to come from.

Sure let them work while their here let them pay towards their upkeep.

Bit shameful that it had to got to the Surpreme Court to allow them to in the first place.

Eric Cartman

Boggles wrote: »

Sure let them work while their here let them pay towards their upkeep.

Bit shameful that it had to got to the Surpreme Court to allow them to in the first place.

are you happy with them decreasing the pay and demand of local workers ?

Boggles

Eric Cartman wrote: »

are you happy with them decreasing the pay and demand of local workers ?

Was just listening to 2 business people on the radio today saying they can't get workers and they pay well above the average.

8 vacancies in all they said.

Gatling

Boggles wrote: »

Bit shameful that it had to got to the Surpreme Court to allow them to in the first place.

Shame taxpayers were forced to fund bogus asylum seekers jolly trip to the supreme court

Boggles

Gatling wrote: »

Shame taxpayers were forced to fund bogus asylum seekers jolly trip to the supreme court

Jesus, you are a bitter individual. :pac:

Anyway back in realty.

The ban was challenged by a member of the Rohingya minority from Myanmar who spent eight years in direct provision before getting refugee status.

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

This us a thread about direct provision & asylum seekers.
None of the countries you listed come here as asylum seekers?
They are entitled to live here.
What's your point? Do you think there should only be Irish people living in Ireland?

You really seem to have difficulty with reading comprehension, or more likely, read what you want to read in your head and your reality follows suit. And of course not address any points raised that don't agree with this reality.

I merely pointed out that the fans of multiculturalism seem to only feel the need to see a "diversity" based on colour, diversity made up of pale faced people from different nations and cultures don't quite rev up their ardour nearly so much. And as part of pointing that out I noted the large numbers of non Irish origin people, the vast majority of whom are pale of face living here that barely get mentioned, or for that matter are too visible in the NGO/vested interests marketing. I wondered why. Can you answer that one? Or are we going to see more examples of your personal reality, rather than the points raised?

Oh and BTW Georgians, Albanians and Ukrainians, all very high on the "nope, ye can't come in" are White. And again oddly missing from the usual crews Asylum seekers, Yay!! rhetoric. Sure oul Leo got some stick from pointing out the high number of chancers in the first two groups, but imagine the pearl clutching and attacks of the vapours if he'd added Black Africans into that speech. :eek:

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

I merely pointed out that the fans of multiculturalism seem to only feel the need to see a "diversity" based on colour, diversity made up of pale faced people from different nations and cultures don't quite rev up their ardour nearly so much. And as part of pointing that out I noted the large numbers of non Irish origin people, the vast majority of whom are pale of face living here that barely get mentioned, or for that matter are too visible in the NGO/vested interests marketing. I wondered why. Can you answer that one?

In your head people who have no issue with multi culturalism, don't include white people.
Entirely in your own head.
You just made that up.
What would you suggest NGOs etc say about people who live here legally & are not in need of assistance from them?

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

In your head people who have no issue with multi culturalism, don't include white people.

I said the fans and active supporters of multiculturalism, not those who express no great issue either way. And they very rarely include White people.

What would you suggest NGOs etc say about people who live here legally & are not in need of assistance from them?

Don't hear too much about the Georgians, Albanians and Ukrainians who try to get here and get refused claiming it's "racism".

Entirely in your own head.
You just made that up.

Medice cura te ipsum.

Gatling

Boggles wrote: »

Jesus, you are a bitter individual

No not one bit bitter,

That multimillion bill for bogus asylum seekers legal teams could be better spent on the likes of better support for children with special needs in schools around the country .

Beasty

tipptom wrote: »

FFS,and this was thanked by a mod.

You should be ashamed of yourselves and Boards should be ashamed of themselves leaving this HATE FILLED RACISM up.

Report anything you have a problem with and leave the modding to the mods

tipptom

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope. 'Fraid not. Unless you can point to even one example where I came within an asses roar oof either of those statements, you're a barefaced liar. And since you most certainly can't, you most certainly are.

You thanked a post that said "let them out into the general community where they will be free to commit crime".

Also thanked "send them the F*ck back home".

Wibbs

tipptom wrote: »

You thanked a post that said "let them out into the general community where they will be free to commit crime".

Also thanked "send them the F*ck back home".

With those "asylum seekers" who are chancers? Which may I remind you those in our government departments refuse in the majority of cases from a particular few countries. Yes deport them in short order back to their place of origin. Oh and BTW most of them are White, so... I must be one of those self hating White people.

Herrerofatime

Wibbs wrote:

Nope. 'Fraid not. Unless you can point to even one example where I came within an asses roar oof either of those statements, you're a barefaced liar. And since you most certainly can't, you most certainly are

tipptom wrote: »

You thanked a post that said "let them out into the general community where they will be free to commit crime".

Also thanked "send them the F*ck back home".

Actually, I was referring to Wibbs' defense of the burning down of buildings being used for asylum in Roosky a little over a year ago, which basically fits the text book definition of terrorism. Might explain why Wibbs has appeared to have since deleted the post you quoted.

tipptom

Wibbs wrote: »

With those "asylum seekers" who are chancers? Which may I remind you those in our government departments refuse in the majority of cases from a particular few countries. Yes deport them in short order back to their place of origin. Oh and BTW most of them are White, so... I must be one of those self hating White people.

Theres hate there alright.

So all asylum seekers are going to commit crimes in our community's?

You think that is acceptable to say.

"Send them to f*ck back home",you think that is acceptable rhetoric to say about asylum seekers?

Wibbs

Herrerofatime wrote: »

Actually, I was referring to Wibbs' defense of the burning down of buildings being used for asylum in Roosky a little over a year ago, which basically fits the text book definition of terrorism.

Please quote any such post that even came close to that. Indeed you will find a few that directly stated the very opposite. Again and I have zero problem with saying this out straight, you Sir are a barefaced liar. Shows just how tenuous your position and how pie in the sky your "arguments" are if you have to resort to same.

Oh and I didn't delete the post. Not once have I deleted any post of mine.

Wibbs

tipptom wrote: »

Theres hate there alright.

OK so I hate White people now? Mmmkay. I've no issue with Syrians and Eritreans being granted asylum and indeed would want them out of DP and into the wider community as quickly as is possible. And yet they're extremely rarely blue eyed blondes. My "racism" seems to be a tad confusing...

So all asylum seekers are going to commit crimes in our community's?

You think that is acceptable to say.

If those on the coalface consider these applicants not worthy of entering this country, then that's good enough for me.

"Send them to f*ck back home",you think that is acceptable rhetoric to say about asylum seekers?

It's not how I would have personally worded it, but I would agree with the general sentiment yes. And as I've pointed out the majority are White. Like I say, confusing "racism".

Herrerofatime

Wibbs wrote: »

Please quote any such post that even came close to that.

One example from you: boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=109417500&postcount=248

Wibbs: "If the government were to drop into a small rural Muslim town with few employment options or infrastructure a large number of predominantly young male Jews without any consultation or choice in the matter for the local population, yep I could well understand locals getting extremely pissed off and some taking it to extremes. Because I live in a place called the Real World™. And in said real world "multiculturalism" almost never works and has never worked, save for in what the modern world would consider hard core "right wing" cultures of the past. "

Indeed you will find a few that directly stated the very opposite.

Now, point out where you condemned these attacks.

I would add the caveat that if you don'rt you're a liar, but I'm not a moderator so would be risking getting in trouble for that.

tipptom

Wibbs wrote: »

OK so I hate White people now? Mmmkay. I've no issue with Syrians and Eritreans being granted asylum and indeed would want them out of DP and into the wider community as quickly as is possible. And yet they're extremely rarely blue eyed blondes. My "racism" seems to be a tad confusing...

If those on the coalface consider these applicants not worthy of entering this country, then that's good enough for me.

It's not how I would have personally worded it, but I would agree with the general sentiment yes.

Can you answer the question and stop weaselling about white people,black people etc.

You think its acceptable to say that "if asylum seekers are lose in our communities they will commit crime"?

You obviously think this incendiary rhetoric is okay alongside "send them the f*ck back home.