American Woman seeks asylum in Ireland.

Meh

DublinWriter wrote:

The one given to asylum seekers.

I am aware of no such grant, can you provide me with a link to a page describing the criteria, eligibility, etc?

DublinWriter

Meh wrote:

I am aware of no such grant, can you provide me with a link to a page describing the criteria, eligibility, etc?

I'm currently working on an article about this and I'm trying to bust some of the urban myths.

Apparently I believe that those who have their asylum application accepted are eligable for a grant based on 'special circumstances'. A friend of mine in Drogheda has a small auto-business selling older cars that he reconditions himself. I'm dropping out to him this weekend to photocopy some of the cheques he's received this week. He told me that they are made out from the Department of Social and Family Affairs are have the endorsement "Payable to Motor Trade only" at the bottom.

I've heard the a similar thing regarding hair dressing costs from my sister-in-law who runs a small hairdressers down in Wexford, but I'd like to get the copies of the car-cheques first before I check that out.

DublinWriter

Meh wrote:

I am aware of no such grant, can you provide me with a link to a page describing the criteria, eligibility, etc?

...opps, sorry, forgot to include the link in the earlier post.

It's...http://www.welfare.ie/schemes/families/swa.html
and...http://www.welfare.ie/foi/swa.html

As I said earlier, it's only on successful asylum application that you'd be entitled to the SWA.

A Dub in Glasgo

DublinWriter wrote:

The one given to asylum seekers.

You mean people who are actually successfull in proving that they are persecuted and should be granted asylum. They are not asylum seekers then.

Edit: I have just seen that you have clarified it. Interesting to see what the Headline will say

Zombrex

DublinWriter wrote:

As I said earlier, it's only on successful asylum application that you'd be entitled to the SWA.

The SWA is given to anyone in Ireland who is in immediate need of financal assistence but doesn't qualify for something like the dole (eg would be a late term pregnent woman with no income) or disability allowance.

No one on SWA gets "car grants", all you get is rent allowance (as i have already said the myth about asylum seekers getting cars is a complete lie).

Asylum seekers used to get SWA as they were not able to work, but seemingly this was too good for them (:rolleyes:) so new applicants no longer get it, they are forced to live in hostles and centres where the state puts them, forced to eat the food they are given and are not given any form of income bar the 19 euros.

Zombrex

DublinWriter wrote:

As I said earlier, it's only on successful asylum application that you'd be entitled to the SWA.

Successful asylum applicants are able to work and as such would have very little need for SWA bar specially cases just like you find amoung the rest of Irish citizens. To imply that people granted refugee status jump straight onto SWA is completely false and miss-leading, and shows a lack of understanding of what SWA actually is.

Zombrex

DublinWriter wrote:

He told me that they are made out from the Department of Social and Family Affairs are have the endorsement "Payable to Motor Trade only" at the bottom.

You cannot get "car grants" on SWA. You would be lucky to get rent allowance. I would love to see where this ridiculous myth that the State gives people free cars, or grants for cars, started from.

Meh

DublinWriter wrote:

...opps, sorry, forgot to include the link in the earlier post.

It's...http://www.welfare.ie/schemes/families/swa.html
and...http://www.welfare.ie/foi/swa.html

As I said earlier, it's only on successful asylum application that you'd be entitled to the SWA.

So your "car grant for asylum seekers" isn't a car grant, and it isn't available to asylum seekers. That's zero out of two, good going there.

case_sensitive

Given the hostile (hear hear) response to xenophobic rants, I doubt we'll hear the line about 'blacks coming into my area and lowering the tone/house prices', but I've heard it from taxi drivers, my cousin's wife (!) , and any number of otherwise reasonable people too.
I lived just off Dorset St for months, an area that used to be a big no-no, but I find that now it's 'ethnically-flooded' it's not only safer, but a better place to live. Loads of food shops open all hours (don't get me started on the price supermarkets *were* charging for basmati rice before all this), internet cafés on every corner, and braiding shops for girls who want it (try getting Peter Mark to do that 5 years ago). I think the quality of these areas has increased with the influx of migrant populations *when they're allowed to work*, and not allowing people with skills to contribute to their communities and the country is not only wasteful, but a great shame.
*end liberal rant*.
Plus, on a personal note, I'm loving the new strain of mixed-race girls running around town :->

Meh wrote:

Funny you should say that, I do live in a "heavily ethnically-flooded area" (just off Parnell Street in Dublin).

If you have any hard evidence of official lying about asylum-seeker benefits (other than "friend of a friend" and "some guy on Stormfront said") then I'd be interested to hear it.

Popperised

Anti-racism is not a belief or even a practice-it is an attitude inclined in those who wish to impose ,just impose onto others ,to silence opposition, to bully, ridicule and smear opponents ,to stifle discussion (sometime violently) on public issues which affect the people, it has little concern with truth, it swaggers with classist contempt for the socially vulnerable - it exists because it enjoys the tacit backing of the powers-that-be who have a vested interest in low-skilled flooding of work and housing markets -in that, and other sense it has much more in common with its true predecessor Fascism .

bonkey

And there was me thinking anti-racism was wrong because it was the opposition of good ol' racism, which is a healthy activity which should be supported rather than opposed.

Live and learn.

jc

Popperised

Popperised wrote:

Anti-racism is not a belief or even a practice-it is an attitude inclined in those who wish to impose ,just impose onto others ,to silence opposition, to bully, ridicule and smear opponents ,to stifle discussion (sometime violently) on public issues which affect the people, it has little concern with truth, it swaggers with classist contempt for the socially vulnerable - it exists because it enjoys the tacit backing of the powers-that-be who have a vested interest in low-skilled flooding of work and housing markets -in that, and other sense it has much more in common with its true predecessor Fascism .

Pardon my vulgarity,but here was me thinking we all sit on the same crapper,breath the same air and basically come to the same end once we die.
Would you advocate that we shouldn't be ?

Anyway,implimenting our guideline policy on dual accounts,the offenders in this thread are being banned on this board.

Zombrex

bonkey wrote:

And there was me thinking anti-racism was wrong because it was the opposition of good ol' racism, which is a healthy activity which should be supported rather than opposed.

Live and learn.

jc

ROFL ... good post man

Popperised Anti-Racism is opposition to racisim. Hence the "anti" bit.

Hobbes

Actually there is no word "anti-racism" the opposite is called "acceptance".

sovtek

Hobbes wrote:

Actually there is no word "anti-racism" the opposite is called "acceptance".

I prefer "respect"
Personally I think "tolerance" sounds very condescending.

stackeye

Hobbes wrote:

Actually there is no word "anti-racism" the opposite is called "acceptance".

Not being a racist is acceptance or tolerance or having "repect", being an anti-racist is being intolerant to people who are intolerant.

But I have noticed a stand of anti-racist that destroys every argument on immigration by tagging everyone a RACIST, even though discussing immigration is not racist and it needs to be discussed or else the likes of far-right parties start making an appearance

stackeye

And back to the topic, the american women seeking asylum from GWB, i think she should be deported to North Korea or Iran, then she will fully understand what oppresssion feels like, she makes a mockery of people who are truly in fear of there lives and are seeking asylum.

toiletduck

stackeye wrote:

And back to the topic, the american women seeking asylum from GWB, i think she should be deported to North Korea or Iran, then she will fully understand what oppresssion feels like, she makes a mockery of people who are truly in fear of there lives and are seeking asylum.

Hear hear!

Hobbes

stackeye wrote:

Not being a racist is acceptance or tolerance or having "repect", being an anti-racist is being intolerant to people who are intolerant.

Pika? o_O

So not being racist is being accepting and tolerant of others and also being accepting of racists? How does that work then?

But I have noticed a stand of anti-racist that destroys every argument on immigration by tagging everyone a RACIST,

No, discussion is generally normal. The person normally gets called racist when they say something outlandish and are totally unable to back up with any facts. Add to that they then continue the argument based not on thier *facts* they posted out but on people who might argue with them.

Fictional example.
Person 1: Sure all those foriengers come here get free BMW's.
Person 2: What are you taking? Can you back that up with facts?
Person 1: You clearly have no clue seeing as you have to resort to calling me a junkie
Person 2: Can you back it up with facts?
Person 1: I'm not talking to you for being rude. Oh yea and they get free champagne too!

Add to that they do crazy things like interchange the words "immigration" and "Asylum" like they mean the same thing.