Izevbekhai and pleading the belly in Irish Law

caseyann

Nodin wrote: »

I'd rather you answered the question with regard to "....second generation"....if you'd be as good.

In order for someone to know any other country would mean they have been schooled here reared here and are connected with the country people and culture and ways.And feel Irish.

Nodin

caseyann wrote: »

In order for someone to know any other country would mean they have been schooled here reared here and are connected with the country people and culture and ways.And feel Irish.

...which - logically - the child of an immigrant, born here ("second generation"), would be. So why do you think they should be excluded from running from office?

caseyann

Nodin wrote: »

...which - logically - the child of an immigrant, born here ("second generation"), would be. So why do you think they should be excluded from running from office?

I said first generation should be not second except in cases such as Memnoch.

Nodin

caseyann wrote: »

I said first generation should be not second except in cases such as Memnoch.

This is what you stated....I've bolded the relevant section.

You can paint it as xenophobic all you like,its very well thought out,devalera is half Irish makes him Irish in my book.Even though i dont like the man.If you aren't born on Irish soil nor do you have Either parent of Irish nativity or second generation,you should not be allowed run for any kind of office.Same as the Irish or any other nationality shouldn't be allowed in their adopted countries.I stand by what i believe.

That seems to be you wanting to exclude the children of immigrants......

caseyann

Nodin wrote: »

This is what you stated....I've bolded the relevant section.



That seems to be you wanting to exclude the children of immigrants......

As you can see second generation actually refers to immigrants second generation who are schooled here.

K-9

caseyann wrote: »

As you can see second generation actually refers to immigrants second generation who are schooled here.

I read it as 2nd generation which is why I brought up JFK and his grandfather in particular.

Fair enough, you seem to have learned a bit from this thread. So, what would this test to stand as an election candidate entail?

Drinking pints of Guinness and buying Wolfe Tone albums?

caseyann

K-9 wrote: »

I read it as 2nd generation which is why I brought up JFK and his grandfather in particular.

Fair enough, you seem to have learned a bit from this thread. So, what would this test to stand as an election candidate entail?

Drinking pints of Guinness and buying Wolfe Tone albums?

Thats for citizenship,For candidate for elections they should be,like memnoch,Otherwise no.


Is that how you see Irish by all means if you wish it to be on the test:D

K-9

caseyann wrote: »

Thats for citizenship,For candidate for elections they should be,like memnoch,Otherwise no.


Is that how you see Irish by all means if you wish it to be on the test:D

Gone to school here, worked here, that type of thing?

caseyann

K-9 wrote: »

Gone to school here, worked here, that type of thing?

Yeah basically.

Zambia

Ok so have we decided at the end of all that if we are going to let PI run for office?

If you are made a citizen of a country there should be no doors closed to you. Otherwise you should just remain a Permanent resident. I would be in favour of a pretty tough citizenship test but once passed your in.

I dont believe in creating a second class of citizen.

Nodin

caseyann wrote: »

As you can see second generation actually refers to immigrants second generation who are schooled here.

"immigrants second generation", yes. The children of immigrants, born here in this country. Hence the problem re JFK etc.

caseyann wrote: »

Thats for citizenship,For candidate for elections they should be,like memnoch,Otherwise no..

So unless people match an arbitrary standard, defined by your personal thoughts about somebody you know little or nothing in fact about, they aren't eligible....

The Corinthian

Nodin wrote: »

So unless people match an arbitrary standard, defined by your personal thoughts about somebody you know little or nothing in fact about, they aren't eligible....

Maybe we could just flip a coin. Just as consistent, tbh.

Tordelback

mike kelly wrote: »

people can be irish by blood only. a 10th generation irish american is irish, but anyone born here to foreign parents is not irish

Mike, that makes absolutely no sense from an historical perspective. The first people came to Ireland from Britain (or far less likely France) sometime after 10,000BC, a handful of fishermen scattered along the coast and rivers. Were these people Irish? They weren't born here, and they had 'foreign parents', but maybe you'll allow them to lay claim since they got here first.

If you'll allow them, does that mean that only their blood descendants are allowed to be 'Irish'? All the 600 generations of farmers and miners and smiths and monks and Vikings and Anglo-Normans that followed them, none of those count unless they interbred with descendants of those few Mesolithic colonists? Rough on St. Patrick, but there you go.

Or maybe you mean 'blood descendants of people resident in Ireland at the formation of the Irish State?". That's be a good chunk of the Irish diapsora out of the net for a start.

Nodin

The Corinthian wrote: »

Maybe we could just flip a coin. Just as consistent, tbh.

I think divination of a sheeps liver would be better. Promote the agricultural sector and boost the Soothsaying industry at the same time.

The Corinthian

Tordelback wrote: »

Mike, that makes absolutely no sense from an historical perspective.

He's not going to make sense because he's unlikely to explain in any detail his reasoning.

To do so would likely betray some form of racialist theory behind who is Irish and who is not, based on some sort of pseudo-Celtic genetic pool, and glossing over the fact that migration to and from Ireland has been taking place, diluting down this supposed pool, for centuries if not millennia.

And putting forward a racialist theory would likely get him abuse or a ban here, or - better still - ridicule as people logically point out how much of a pseudo-science racialism is.

tbh

Tordelback wrote: »

Or maybe you mean 'blood descendants of people resident in Ireland at the formation of the Irish State?".

to hazard a guess, I would say:

acceptable: any white person born in an English speaking country
not acceptable: anyone else.

K-9

Tordelback wrote: »

Mike, that makes absolutely no sense from an historical perspective. The first people came to Ireland from Britain (or far less likely France) sometime after 10,000BC, a handful of fishermen scattered along the coast and rivers. Were these people Irish? They weren't born here, and they had 'foreign parents', but maybe you'll allow them to lay claim since they got here first.

If you'll allow them, does that mean that only their blood descendants are allowed to be 'Irish'? All the 600 generations of farmers and miners and smiths and monks and Vikings and Anglo-Normans that followed them, none of those count unless they interbred with descendants of those few Mesolithic colonists? Rough on St. Patrick, but there you go.

Or maybe you mean 'blood descendants of people resident in Ireland at the formation of the Irish State?". That's be a good chunk of the Irish diapsora out of the net for a start.

There is a theory out there that we all came from Africa anyway:
Early Humans May Have Crossed Sea to Leave Africa

Laminations

Sorry what does any of this have to do with this thread?

The Corinthian

Laminations wrote: »

Sorry what does any of this have to do with this thread?

In fairness nothing - I actually asked for the discussion that's been taking place for the last few pages to be split off into a new thread, as it really has nothing to do with what I originally began this thread for.

AlekSmart

Is it perhaps not time that we review our treatment of fraudulent asylum cases in general and the manner in which cases involving mothers are dealt with leniently in Ireland?

It`s been a while now,and a rather prolonged period of silence from the "Let them Stay" grouping.

While we await the next move would it not be opportune to revisit The Corinthian`s questions.. ?

mike kelly

Is she still around? When are we going to finally kick her out?

snubbleste

mike kelly wrote: »

When are we going to finally kick her out?

I think we know the answer to that one.

mike kelly

snubbleste wrote: »

I think we know the answer to that one.

The government can't expect people to accept cutbacks while we are paying for freeloaders like her.

AlekSmart

Is anybody aware of developments in the Izevbekhai case or has the Government simply upped sticks and left it all for the next crowd to sort out ?

AlekSmart

Well,the "Next-Crowd" are out of the traps running.

Minister Shatter makes a comprehensive statement here on the Zambrano ruling and it`s implications for Irish Governmental policy on childer......

http://www.merrionstreet.ie/index.php/2011/03/statement-by-minister-for-justice-equality-and-defence-mr-alan-shatter-td-on-the-implications-of-the-recent-ruling-of-the-court-of-justice-of-the-european-union-in-the-case-of-ruiz-zambrano/

The lack of Media Interest in Ms Izevbekhai`s situation since the collapse of her initial case(s) would appeart to indicate that the State has equally lost interest in it`s own mechanisms ?

However I would Imagine the Law Library will be gearing up for a renewed burst of interest in Belgian/EU/Irish Law synergies.....

johnnyskeleton

AlekSmart wrote: »

Well,the "Next-Crowd" are out of the traps running.

Minister Shatter makes a comprehensive statement here on the Zambrano ruling and it`s implications for Irish Governmental policy on childer......

http://www.merrionstreet.ie/index.php/2011/03/statement-by-minister-for-justice-equality-and-defence-mr-alan-shatter-td-on-the-implications-of-the-recent-ruling-of-the-court-of-justice-of-the-european-union-in-the-case-of-ruiz-zambrano/

The lack of Media Interest in Ms Izevbekhai`s situation since the collapse of her initial case(s) would appeart to indicate that the State has equally lost interest in it`s own mechanisms ?

However I would Imagine the Law Library will be gearing up for a renewed burst of interest in Belgian/EU/Irish Law synergies.....

God damn lawyers, applying mandatory E.U. laws that cause so much pain to AlekSmart.

Zambrano has nothing to do with Izevbekhai by the way, except that both have the capacity to dredge up this kind of thread.

AlekSmart

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

God damn lawyers, applying mandatory E.U. laws that cause so much pain to AlekSmart.

Zambrano has nothing to do with Izevbekhai by the way, except that both have the capacity to dredge up this kind of thread.

Sound Johnnyskeleton,I was hopin that it would be the legislature which would be applying the mandatory EU laws,whilst I`m relying on the "God Damn Lawyers" to inflict the pain by seeking out ever more inventive methods of moulding and reshaping them to suit various scenario`s as required ?

I`d be happy enough that Zambrano and Pamela Izevbekhai`s Irish case are not,as yet,complimentary.

However,given the way public perception and it`s management works,I`d not be flushed with surprise if Zambrano was`nt the hot topic of the day in and around African marketplaces...:)

The "businessmen" behind the Trafficking trade will be only too happy to spin Zambrano and Mr Shatters soothing Press Release to give a somewhat different impression to their potential customers.

johnnyskeleton

AlekSmart wrote: »

The "businessmen" behind the Trafficking trade will be only too happy to spin Zambrano and Mr Shatters soothing Press Release to give a somewhat different impression to their potential customers.

That has to be the weakest criticism of a judgement I have ever seen. Basically, you are saying that the judgement is bad because it gives criminals an opportunity to lie to people. But criminals lie to people all the time - they don't need Zambrano to help them lie.

AlekSmart

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

That has to be the weakest criticism of a judgement I have ever seen. Basically, you are saying that the judgement is bad because it gives criminals an opportunity to lie to people. But criminals lie to people all the time - they don't need Zambrano to help them lie.

I`m not necessarily criticising the Zambrano judgement at all,but I`m heartened to know I can evoke such a level of critical enthusiasm

Zambrano stands as it is,unless challenged and overturned or amended.

What I am pointing to is the increased potential offered to the "Trafficking Industry" by our Governments response as enunciated by Minister Shatter.

I note this opinion from an interested party in a letter to the Irish Independent....

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/shatters-policy-shift-on-families-to-be-welcomed-2592631.html

In choosing to review all decisions pending in court, Mr Shatter has indicated he does not want to tie up the courts unnecessarily nor to keep eligible families waiting longer than necessary. This is a marked departure from the practice of the past administration.

Now,I fully accept the writers expression of admiration but I feel it underlines a belief that Zambrao has,in some way opened the door for everybody wishing to embrace the "Irish way"

I`m wondering what definition of the word "all" the NEW COMMUNITIES PARTNERSHIP believe applies in this instance ?

Mena

AlekSmart wrote: »

What I am pointing to is the increased potential offered to the "Trafficking Industry" by our Governments response as enunciated by Minister Shatter.

Could you expand on that point, I'm not seeing how Zambrano affects, positively or negatively, traffickers...