Irelands Mediterranean Migrant Crisis Response

foggy_lad · 06-09-2015 10:59pm

How many Rwandan refugees were brought to Ireland?

What did the EU do for these people?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide#Death_toll

Out of a population of 7.3 million people–84% of whom were Hutu, 15% Tutsi and 1% Twa–the official figures published by the Rwandan government estimated the number of victims of the genocide to be 1,174,000 in 100 days (10,000 murdered every day, 400 every hour, 7 every minute). It is estimated that about 300,000 Tutsi survived the genocide. Thousands of widows, many of whom were subjected to rape, are now HIV-positive. There were about 400,000 orphans and nearly 85,000 of them were forced to become heads of families.

*upsetting pictures contained in link
https://www.google.ie/search?q=rwanda+genocide&biw=1366&bih=696&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMI45qgs7LjxwIV6ZnbCh0PWgy8

What was done to help those killed and maimed in Bosnia? Far too little and far too late!

*upsetting pictures
https://www.google.ie/search?q=rwanda+genocide&biw=1366&bih=696&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAWoVChMI45qgs7LjxwIV6ZnbCh0PWgy8#tbm=isch&q=bosnian+genocide

Why are Syrians so much more worthy of assistance than the Rwandans or Bosnians?

johnty56 · 06-09-2015 11:00pm

As I said earlier, the comments I made were an aside, and not strictly on topic.

As such I won't respond to either Nodin or Petrolcan again in answer to any more questions on these posts, as I feel I have explained them clearly enough.
to do so would be to go along with what I think is an attempt to derail the thread.

AlekSmart · 06-09-2015 11:02pm

ComfortKid wrote: »

Lads, I'm not a mod or trying to be one. I enjoy the debates on this thread and it's something that needs to be talked about. This off topic stuff which may be bordering on racism and the personal bickering will have the thread closed on us.

I feel it is quite a slippery slope we enter upon,if like ComfortKid suggests the pre-qualifying of posts has to begin.

There is something oddly unsettling about the current media frenzy to present ourselves as being entirely of one mind about this issue.

"We" are far from that,and if any semblance of democracy is to be preserved in order to eventually get the country out of the mess currently being perpetrated,at least some sense has to be spoken of.

Quite a good piece here in The Guardian,by the daughter of an immigrant to Germany....

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/06/germany-refugee-crisis-syrian

It is well worth reading to the end,which is perhaps the best example of a sting-in-the-tail on the issue.

Maybe my fears are as arbitrary as the resentments of rightwing Germans who demonstrate in front of refugee shelters in Dresden or Heidenau. But when I listen to the “good Germans”, I often ask myself: what is going to happen, when the new refugees demand more than a tent, a bottle of water and a slice of bread? How will German society deal with this next turning point? What if it turns out that not every refugee has the skills to equip them for the “made in Germany” brand? Will Willkommenskultur end, when it involves not just singing Hallelujah together, but helping people to become autonomous and articulate their own wishes? Will the liberal segment of German society that is drawing so much praise right now have the determination to fight their own government and abolish Dublin III and Schengen? Or will “Willkommen” be just a slogan on the doormat again?

Could that final underlined quote,perhaps unbeknownst to Doris Akrap,the journalist, offer a clue to the real reason/s behind some very odd decisions indeed ?

johnty56 · 06-09-2015 11:04pm

petrolcan wrote: »

Why do you single out Pakistanis as, and I quote, "people who have contributed nothing to our society, and who probably never will"?

Round my way, pretty much all of the corner shops are run by Pakistanis, most of whom start at 6am and finish at 11pm. They are a massive contributor to our society.

Sorry ... but having re read your post I feel that I have to reply to this.

I said 'people who have contributed nothing to our society' in reference to people who have not yet come here- if they are not here and never have been they could not have contributed anything to our society, could they?? As regards never will, that is something we will have to wait and see.

petrolcan · 06-09-2015 11:22pm

johnty56 wrote: »

Sorry ... but having re read your post I feel that I have to reply to this.

I said 'people who have contributed nothing to our society' in reference to people who have not yet come here- if they are not here and never have been they could not have contributed anything to our society, could they?? As regards never will, that is something we will have to wait and see.

This is what you said:

"Why should we share our childrens' legacy with people who have contributed nothing to our society, and who probably never will going by the experience of other Western countries. ( Name one single benefit that the millions of Pakistani (for example) immigrants to the UK brought)"

Now you may have meant that 'people who have contributed nothing to our society' were not here yet but you immediately followed up by querying "name one single benefit that the millions of Pakistani (for example) immigrants to the UK brought"

See how it might read?

johnty56 · 06-09-2015 11:26pm

petrolcan wrote: »

This is what you said:

"Why should we share our childrens' legacy with people who have contributed nothing to our society, and who probably never will going by the experience of other Western countries. ( Name one single benefit that the millions of Pakistani (for example) immigrants to the UK brought)"

Now you may have meant that 'people who have contributed nothing to our society' were not here yet but you immediately followed up by querying "name one single benefit that the millions of Pakistani (for example) immigrants to the UK brought"

See how it might read?

Try reading it from the start, and not reading it selectively so that you can imply a meaning that is different from what is there.

And that is the last I will say on it. Back on topic.

petrolcan · 06-09-2015 11:28pm

johnty56 wrote: »

Try reading it from the start, and not reading it selectively so that you can imply a meaning that is different from what is there.

And that is the last I will say on it. Back on topic.

Oh I read it all.

Twice, to be sure.

johnty56 · 06-09-2015 11:34pm

petrolcan wrote: »

Oh I read it all.

Twice, to be sure.

Then the problem is not with your vision, which could be remedied, but with your comprehension, which unfortunately cannot.:)

ComfortKid · 06-09-2015 11:36pm

Petrolcan and Nodin, Ye have added absolutely nothing to this thread, No opinions, no questions. Just nitpicking everyone elses posts.

Whats yer own views on the current crisis lads, How should we tackle it?

Gatling · 06-09-2015 11:38pm

Was there a suggestion somewhere today that based off Germany taking in 800,000 + refugees and we might have to take 40,000 or something ,
Anyone know more about it

ComfortKid · 06-09-2015 11:44pm

Gatling wrote:

Was there a suggestion somewhere today that based off Germany taking in 800,000 + refugees and we might have to take 40,000 or something , Anyone know more about it

Someone on here suggested it.

It can't work this way. We are in a completely different situation to Germany. Why would we "have" to take in a number based on what Germany does? What about our current laws on asylum, do they just go out the window because Angela says so.

Mongfinder General · 07-09-2015 12:01am

Gatling wrote: »

Was there a suggestion somewhere today that based off Germany taking in 800,000 + refugees and we might have to take 40,000 or something ,
Anyone know more about it

The Germans must know something the rest of us don't. There is no way they would sign up to accepting 800k migrants/refugees unless they know that this will get much worse. At which point it will be a case of well we took almost a million, the rest of you can fight amongst yourselves about who doesn't get what

Gatling · 07-09-2015 12:07am

Sky news ran a soundbite on Friday saying a new a permanent and mandatory rules on asylum would be discussed this week so it's very possible that set figures could be introduced but if set figure's on asylum seekers was introduced would our and other countries opt out be changed

Pat Mustard · 07-09-2015 12:37am

Mod:

The last ten posts have been deleted as completely off topic.

Either post on topic or don't post at all.

ComfortKid · 07-09-2015 12:41am

Gatling wrote:

Sky news ran a soundbite on Friday saying a new a permanent and mandatory rules on asylum would be discussed this week so it's very possible that set figures could be introduced but if set figure's on asylum seekers was introduced would our and other countries opt out be changed

Who is having this discussion? Will individual countries get to choose whats best for itself or will it be a case of "Do what you're told"?

Stheno · 07-09-2015 12:46am

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

Has any media outlet in this country took a poll of Irish people on this subject.
My guess they would be scared too, it might show up that a majority of Irish people are against open borders and taking unlimited refugees which would show up there left wing propaganda.

No.

We have already taken in about 100 Syrian refuges and settled them in Portlaoise and Tipperary

I can understand a phased introduction of a few hundred at a time, but wonder how we can do this and do nothing about the homeless here.

ComfortKid · 07-09-2015 12:49am

Stheno wrote:

We have already taken in about 100 Syrian refuges and settled them in Portlaoise and Tipperary

Any idea where these refugees came from? Direct from Syria or picked up in Europe? Are they housed already or in hotels or hostels?

Very little info from our government on how they are going about this. My guess is they haven't a clue themselves.

Stheno · 07-09-2015 12:51am

ComfortKid wrote: »

Any idea where these refugees came from? Direct from Syria or picked up in Europe? Are they housed already or in hotels or hostels?

Very little info from our government on how they are going about this. My guess is they haven't a clue themselves.

According to a Matt |||Cooper interview with one of them in Tipp, settled in the community

foggy_lad · 07-09-2015 1:04am

ComfortKid wrote: »

Who is having this discussion? Will individual countries get to choose whats best for itself or will it be a case of "Do what you're told"?

Most likely we will have a choice but our impotent politicians will do as they are told and we the people will get shafted yet again.

ComfortKid wrote: »

Any idea where these refugees came from? Direct from Syria or picked up in Europe? Are they housed already or in hotels or hostels?

Very little info from our government on how they are going about this. My guess is they haven't a clue themselves.

If they are "program" refugees they are already given asylum in the camps they are taken from. they are not required to be held in direct provision and will be given housing afaik this can be from council but most likely voluntary housing groups around the country so creating groups of migrants in social housing attached to private housing estates.

Stheno wrote: »

According to a Matt Cooper interview with one of them in Tipp, settled in the community

What type of accommodation though?

ComfortKid · 07-09-2015 1:18am

Stheno wrote:

According to a Matt |||Cooper interview with one of them in Tipp, settled in the community

Have you a link, or can you tell me when it was aired and I will try find it online.

jank · 07-09-2015 5:17am

I must agree with AlexSmart, the abandonment of EU law and policy has not been mentioned at all in the media or by our own legislators. Surely a massive failure on behalf of Europe yet again?

Galwayguy35 · 07-09-2015 6:10am

Joan Burton mentioned taking 5000 "with no upper limit" in an article yesterday.

The reasonable figure of 1800 wasn't long going out the window.

jank · 07-09-2015 8:04am

In OZ it seems there is some good populist ol-horse trading going on. The ALP are saying OZ should take in 10,000 Syrians. The Greens go one better and say it should be 20,000. The Socialists would let in a million but even though they are loud where I live they represent less then 0.1% of Australians, thankfully. I wonder will their budget submissions be amended?

Gatling · 07-09-2015 11:01am

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Joan Burton mentioned taking 5000 "with no upper limit" in an article yesterday.

The reasonable figure of 1800 wasn't long going out the window.

And the 5000+ we already have in direct provision costing 150+ million to house alone and a legal aid bill of 24 million if I'm correct for appeals due to asylum been denied and the multiple legal appeals .

Another 5000 and double or treble the figures with little chance of a return on the investment

foggy_lad · 07-09-2015 1:51pm

The minister for Moan Joan has rolled back as usual on what she stated before and now says the numbers would be around the 5000 figure BUT "over a number of years"

She is relying on the Program system where the people brought here are already "vetted" and granted asylum and are brought to the hazel hotel for orientation and then sent around the country to other accommodation run by the OPW.

Nobody can point out just where this mythical accommodation is that they are going to use and why it is not being used already to alleviate the home grown homeless crisis we have been experiencing for a number of years.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0907/726223-migrants-ireland/

Tánaiste Joan Burton has said that Ireland can accept, over a period of time, up to 5,000 refugees and there will not be a cut-off at that figure.

Some auld bishop is also calling on his flock to point out property that could be used for accommodating migrants but he falls short of offering the many many church owned properties or indeed the spare bedrooms in every priests house in the country!

Dontfadeaway · 07-09-2015 2:12pm

You can double or triple that number because once settled they will be getting their family over too.

ComfortKid · 07-09-2015 2:17pm

The Pope came out today and said every family in Europe should take in a migrant. Brilliant.

munchkin_utd · 07-09-2015 2:18pm

ComfortKid wrote: »

The Pope came out today and said every family in Europe should take in a migrant. Brilliant.

errrrr, no.

he said every parish should take one family.

VERY different than what you are claiming.

kupus · 07-09-2015 3:25pm

ComfortKid wrote: »

Any idea where these refugees came from? Direct from Syria or picked up in Europe? Are they housed already or in hotels or hostels?

Very little info from our government on how they are going about this. My guess is they haven't a clue themselves.

Give me ten minutes alone with each one, and after a five minute phone call and I can tell you exactly where they came from.

You think some ordinary civil servant down in tipp has a clue where they came from not a chance in hell.

That post comes across as giving myself a big head and that I'm belittling the civil servants, I don't mean to be like that it's just that's the reality of it.

AlekSmart · 07-09-2015 4:01pm

kupus wrote: »

Give me ten minutes alone with each one, and after a five minute phone call and I can tell you exactly where they came from.

You think some ordinary civil servant down in tipp has a clue where they came from not a chance in hell.

That post comes across as giving myself a big head and that I'm belittling the civil servants, I don't mean to be like that it's just that's the reality of it.

Whilst I can accept the thrust of your post Kupus,I feel you're being a little unfair on the Civil Servants and Gardai who staff the current setup.

Operating within the remit of the current Asylum and Refugee legislation,this section do a fantastic job.

I would suggest that,given the traditional lack of status,funding and appreciation,shown to our much maligned Asylum & Refugee Administration Staff,they perform at a level well above the norm in Irish Administrative circles.

Yet,over a protracted period,these ordinary Irish people,tasked at facing up to all manner of criminality,illigitimacy,obfuscation and any other methodology which could thwart legitimate process,have been regularly criticised,abused and subject to biased sneering coverage by an Irish Media of dubious proffessionalism.

What this cockamamey proposal entails is the ending of a cautious and sensible system and it's replacement with something vapourous and kinda nice.

If a State places any Value on it's own status and existence,then it must seek to protect it's own constituent parts,rather than embark upon some ill-considered and potentially damaging experiment at the behest of a rather odd collection of Outside forces ?

JONJO THE MISER · 07-09-2015 6:13pm

Saw a video on Six One showing hundreds running from police to fields when they arrived at a train station in Denmark, very few looked liked Syrians, mostly Africans.

Spanish Eyes · 07-09-2015 6:23pm

Cameron in the UK has proposed taking 20,000 from the refugee camps that house Syrian refugees. This to take place over 4.5 years.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/07/uk-will-accept-up-to-20000-syrian-refugees-david-cameron-confirms

Now I don't know about you, but that sounds eminently sensible to me. The refugees from the camps will be identified as "genuine", since it seems to be a big problem at the moment knowing who is fleeing from war and who is not.

And we are non Schengen, just like the UK, so it would make sense to do the same thing as they are.

We could take in our quota, but take them from the camps.

And that just might have an impact on the traffickers too. But maybe not as much as we think. Those using traffickers may not have been housed in refugee camps.

I wonder what others think?

foggy_lad · 07-09-2015 6:30pm

There are few real traffickers, mostly it is people buying up knackered old boats to make the crossing themselves and charging people for the crossing until they cant get any more on the boat then they set off including the ones that bought the boat who are probably now too wealthy to be called refugees.

JONJO THE MISER · 07-09-2015 6:32pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Now I don't know about you, but that sounds eminently sensible to me. The refugees from the camps will be identified as "genuine", since it seems to be a big problem at the moment knowing who is fleeing from war and who is not.

And we are non Schengen, just like the UK, so it would make sense to do the same thing as they are.

We could take in our quota, but take them from the camps.

And that just might have an impact on the traffickers too. But maybe not as much as we think. Those using traffickers may not have been housed in refugee camps.

I wonder what others think?

This is the proper thing to do, no problem taking Syrian refugees from camps and helping them out.
The problem is the millions of economic migrants that are invading Europe but the left seems so naive and think everyone coming is fleeing war.

my friend · 07-09-2015 6:35pm

Has the world gone mad?

Just turned off CNN , idiot editors cheerleading illegal activity by militant migrants.

Free money in Europe, roll on up.

seanin4711 · 07-09-2015 6:36pm

rubbing hands with glee only winners here!

seanin4711 · 07-09-2015 6:37pm

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

This is the proper thing to do, no problem taking Syrian refugees from camps and helping them out.
The problem is the millions of economic migrants that are invading Europe but the left seems so naive and think everyone coming is fleeing war.

100% correct.
opportunistic people waiting for this to happen to jump on that train literally!

Nodin · 07-09-2015 6:38pm

kupus wrote: »

Give me ten minutes alone with each one, and after a five minute phone call and I can tell you exactly where they came from.

You think some ordinary civil servant down in tipp has a clue where they came from not a chance in hell.

That post comes across as giving myself a big head and that I'm belittling the civil servants, I don't mean to be like that it's just that's the reality of it.

I don't think it beyond the realms of possibility that perhaps they will have staff on hand familiar with Syria, the Syrian accent and so on to aid in the process.

kupus · 07-09-2015 7:47pm

Alek and nodin... I'll deal with both of your posts as they were.

I've had a few dealings with Irish immigration service for different reasons. And also from a few friends experience in dealing with them. Most of us have foreign spouses.
And I find it probable that they wouldn't know a shii'te from a Buddhist.
Edit: (Ok maybe I'm being a bit harsh here but my point still stands)

When the case is straight forward, they are pefectly fine. No problems. Nice to deal with, pleasant and affable. But when they get a case that is not straight forward it goes to hell.
I wish it were otherwise. But in my experience it's not.

I can't give you facts, I can't give you links, I can only give you experience. It's up to you whether you believe it or not.

ComfortKid · 07-09-2015 7:51pm

Seems the pro migration crowd have quietened down alot the last few days.

Hopefully they took a few days to actually think about this situation, but more than likely, they were the usual crowd that get into hysterics until they find something else to be outraged about.

5,000 spread out over a few years seems ok to me as long as they are probably vetted. As said above, the British seem to be doing it in a very logical manner. Lets hope we follow suit.

ComfortKid · 07-09-2015 7:53pm

kupus wrote:

When the case is straight forward, they are pefectly fine. No problems. Nice to deal with, pleasant and affable. But when they get a case that is not straight forward it goes to hell. I wish it were otherwise. But in my experience it's not.

Can you explain in a bit more detail of your experience. What do you mean by "goes to hell" ?

If the case isn't straight forward as you said then obviously it's more complicated for them to deal with.

foggy_lad · 07-09-2015 8:06pm

ComfortKid wrote: »

Can you explain in a bit more detail of your experience. What do you mean by "goes to hell" ?

If the case isn't straight forward as you said then obviously it's more complicated for them to deal with.

Is someone has documentation to support their claims then it is straightforward but if someone claims to be from say Iraq and has no documentation then it is nigh on impossible to prove they are from Iraq as most civil records have been destroyed during the war so when the Immigration service here contacts the Iraqi services they have no records of the person so not straight forward.

Situations like this are not the fault of the immigration services here!

AlekSmart · 07-09-2015 9:04pm

kupus wrote: »

Alek and Nodin... I'll deal with both of your posts as they were.

I've had a few dealings with Irish immigration service for different reasons.
And also from a few friends experience in dealing with them. Most of us have foreign spouses.
And I find it probable that they wouldn't know a shii'te from a Buddhist.
Edit: (Ok maybe I'm being a bit harsh here but my point still stands)
When the case is straight forward, they are pefectly fine.
No problems.
Nice to deal with, pleasant and affable.
But when they get a case that is not straight forward it goes to hell.

I wish it were otherwise. But in my experience it's not.

I can't give you facts, I can't give you links, I can only give you experience. It's up to you whether you believe it or not.

Thank's Kupus,I've no issues with your opinions or experiences at all.

I would,however,be slow to ascribe any malice to these "hellish" experiences.

I'm unaware of any field of human interaction,from Car Repairs to Property Purchase,to Medicine,to Law where once the process becomes less "straightforward" it thus becomes more difficult...add in different Societal Structures,Religious Belief's,Political Aim's etc and you have significant ground for customers believeing that they are being dissed or given the run-around.

However,that's not usually the case.

As foggy lad points out,when it comes to foreign documentation issues there can be significant and frustrating delays and impositions...even in cases where the issuing countries are NOT embroiled in strife.

When it comes to dodgy paperwork and supporting stories,the Garda NBI have,over the years built up a very comprehensive global repository to inform them in their duties.

Neither is this a uniquely Irish experience,as many "Mainstream" EU states have administrative procedures capable of knocking the Irish into a cocked hat when it comes to paperwork.

It's not that long ago that the French Revenue authorities (Les Impot) were visiting our own Revenue/PAYE to glean the extent of our On-Line collection systems,some of which are remarkably more user friendly than their own.

The current proposals,if enacted without due regard for commonsense and security,will inevitably present Dept of Justice and GNBI front-line staff with serious problems going forward...along with loads more opportunities to denigrate,or otherwise do-down their efforts to make workable sense of Political whims.

Sadly Kupus,this current unstoppable desire to open our doors to all,will in all probability make life more difficult for those who ARE attempting to stick within the system's parameters.....It all smacks of yet another "Irish Answer to (not) an Irish Problem"

Galwayguy35 · 07-09-2015 9:45pm

Supposed to be a cabinet meeting on Wednesday to discuss this issue, this might give us more of an idea of the figures we are looking at taking in.

Cameron tells his people exactly the amount they are accepting, we get rubbish like "no upper limits" and later on then a figure of 5000 but no real clarity as to if this is the final figure.

Then to top it all Eamonn Ryan starts spouting that we should take in 40000.

foggy_lad · 07-09-2015 10:07pm

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Supposed to be a cabinet meeting on Wednesday to discuss this issue, this might give us more of an idea of the figures we are looking at taking in.

Cameron tells his people exactly the amount they are accepting, we get rubbish like "no upper limits" and later on then a figure of 5000 but no real clarity as to if this is the final figure.

Then to top it all Eamonn Ryan starts spouting that we should take in 40000.

Eamonn Ryan lol he's less credible than Bono

JONJO THE MISER · 07-09-2015 11:52pm

So the first poll conducted on this issue was on tonight's Claire Byrne show.
It was a demographically represented poll.
The question was should Ireland take 5,000 regufees.
The result:
54% Yes
37% No
9% Dont Know

That is hardly the vast majority that the media have been spouting all week.
So just over half want Ireland to take refugees, yet every t.v show and radio show has only callers that agree, very few if any from the opposing side.

KingBrian2 · 08-09-2015 12:16am

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

So the first poll conducted on this issue was on tonight's Claire Byrne show.
It was a demographically represented poll.
The question was should Ireland take 5,000 regufees.
The result:
54% Yes
37% No
9% Dont Know

That is hardly the vast majority that the media have been spouting all week.
So just over half want Ireland to take refugees, yet every t.v show and radio show has only callers that agree, very few if any from the opposing side.

Still a majority of the population favour taking in the refugees so the arguments by anti crowd is not gaining traction. Irish people want to do what they can to help these people in whatever way they can. If that means more should be allowed in then the most support this proposal.

Dick Turnip · 08-09-2015 2:42am

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

So the first poll conducted on this issue was on tonight's Claire Byrne show.
It was a demographically represented poll.
The question was should Ireland take 5,000 regufees.
The result:
54% Yes
37% No
9% Dont Know

That is hardly the vast majority that the media have been spouting all week.
So just over half want Ireland to take refugees, yet every t.v show and radio show has only callers that agree, very few if any from the opposing side.

Well that's not entirely true Jonjo. Taking what you wrote above as how the question was worded (I didn't see the show), just over half agree we should take 5000 refugees. Of the remainder, a sizeable portion may also feel we should take in refugees just not as many as 5000.

jank · 08-09-2015 4:49am

If that was a poll done by Red C then the figure would be lower the 54% given the systemic flaws of such a TV poll.

Peregrinus · 08-09-2015 6:10am

Dick Turnip wrote: »

Well that's not entirely true Jonjo. Taking what you wrote above as how the question was worded (I didn't see the show), just over half agree we should take 5000 refugees. Of the remainder, a sizeable portion may also feel we should take in refugees just not as many as 5000.

Or, they might have thought that we should take in more than 5,000 refugees.

This was a badly-worded question, it seems to me.

Irelands Mediterranean Migrant Crisis Response

Comments