Time for a zero refugee policy? - *Read OP for mod warnings and threadbans - updated 11/5/24*

I gave the reason English is the main language used in Ireland. For centuries the use of Irish was banned. It had to be used by everyone for everything. Ireland has been an independent country for less than a century. It also highlights how Britian viewed and treated other cultures. As I said, Britain have never open and accepting of other cultures. Hence the reason they tried to colonise so many places and force them to live by British rule and tried to eridacte their own culture.

I know it will disappoint you, and it disappoints me, but this thread isn't about me. So who I am, where I'm from, what I do and anything else about me is off topic unfortunately.

No, if you accept that they are in a position to know then that would make their evidence first hand experience, not anecdotal evidence which would be second hand or hearsay in my opinion.

but maybe it should start being asked. If their views are against the laws and values of the land, why do they want to come to start a new life here. We need to start getting real about the calibre of people we're allowing into the country at will.

No. That's anecdotal evidence. You have no idea what anyone on here does.

There is a degree of confusion over what can and can't be discussed on this thread. Is it just 'refugees' as per the OP and related warnings on page 1 and page 725.

Does this extend to the asylum seeker issue and policies relating to both?

If both these issues of refugees and asylum seekers can be discussed, does such discussion relate to 'immigration'.

@Beasty please clarify, so that people can stay within what's deemed suitable.

You said ; “All you have proved with your anecdotal evidence is that you do not ask them.”

So you don’t accept they are genuinely in a position to know then - or in this case both the posters - that’s fine it was unclear from what you said there in quotes.

You're criticising others for using anecdotes yet your counterpoint is equally anecdotal i.e. you imply (in post 21770) that you have inside info on what applicants are asked.

To make things worse, you then state that asylum seekers are asked about their attitudes but then you also say (21753) that this does not mean that such info impacts decisions. So your own point, by your own admission, is actually moot. This is a completely childish and purposely confusing method of posting that undermines any shred of credibility in your arguments.

The interview is described online (links below). It only covers international protection matters. There is nothing to suggest that attitudes towards Irish society are investigated - the contrary is in fact the case.

If an interviewer goes off on an unapproved tangent and starts asking questions that do not pertain to the formal process, then any information garnered cannot be used to make a decision.

https://ipo.gov.ie/en/ipo/pages/assesment
http://www.ipo.gov.ie/en/IPO/InfoBookletNew.pdf/Files/InfoBookletNew.pdf

There's zero chance of that happening.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/arid-41394742.html

As Ireland becomes more of a melting pot, we need to foster a sense of cohesion while allowing new citizens to preserve their cultural heritage. Actually, the term melting pot arguably brings difficulties because it suggests developing a monoculture, so maybe we should be aiming for a tossed salad with a nice dressing to cover us all.

It doesn't seem like the people advocating for increased migration want these people to integrate at all.

Humans do not generally integrate if there is enough people similar to themselves. Example..driving through Letterkenny this evening, I passed an all-weather soccer pitch, probably an 8 or 9 aside match taking place. All participants were non-Irish (visual presumption). All fine but it perfectly exemplifies if you have enough of your own you will have segregation. Immigration is all about numbers, you cannot have a big number arrive and not expect them to create their own community.

Yes an interviewer interested in just ticking boxes, will do just that. An interested more rounded interviewer will take the time to know the person a little better. There are some people who are very good with interview techniques.

You have no proof of what you are saying, yet you criticise others for the referring to their own personal experiences.

As I said, if an interviewer goes rogue then the information they acquire in doing so cannot be used as part of the application. In fact, the interviewer may land themselves in trouble, as they are trained in a certain process and cannot just ask whatever they want. The formal process is laid out online and clearly states there are limits to the questions asked, and that only international protection matters are discussed.

Stop using anecdotal info yourself if you want to criticise others for the same, and stop with the cryptic nonsense of "I know something but I can't say it".

The UK is one of the most ethnically diverse countries in the world. Compare it to any African or Asian country which are all mono-ethnic and monocultural. Your viewpoint is so wrong that I don't even want to lower myself to argue with someone on your level.

I can only hope that you are young enough to educate yourself a bit more about the wider world.