Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

"Welfare" for asylum seekers

  • 15-07-2010 08:35PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    OK, so you believe that asylum seekers should be kept in squalid conditions, deprived of food, shelter and medical care?

    How wonderfully humanitarian of you.

    No, I believe they should be given Ferraris, citizenship, the keys to your home and your wallet.


«13

Comments

  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Moved to a new thread.
    opo wrote: »
    No, I believe they should be given Ferraris, citizenship, the keys to your home and your wallet.
    No, you don't. But you also clearly don't believe they should be housed, fed, and given medical care. So, what should we do with asylum seekers?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    OK, so you believe that asylum seekers should be kept in squalid conditions, deprived of food, shelter and medical care?

    Don't recall saying that :eek:

    But don't let that stop you. Hasn't so far.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    This post has been deleted.

    In response to a mature reply:

    I believe we should adopt a pre-screening procedure. It is beyond madness processing the same stories from the same countries and rejecting thousands of claims.

    If it looks like there is a chance that a potential asylum seeker may have a case - they should be admitted to the procedure and every assistance given. If not, they should be told so and required to leave.

    The fact that this will streamline the asylum determination procedure alone will prevent the insane delays and discourage bogus claims.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,938 ✭✭✭caseyann


    If found to be genuine given welfare till they locate a job and then allowed to work.Limbo welfare isnt way to go either.And to show they are actively trying to seek work.
    In order to stop welfare fraud finger printed and sent to other EU countries to check if already claimed there or still claiming there,along with a photo of said person.Also sent to their alleged home countries and checked for dangerous criminal pasts.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,667 ✭✭✭Frank Grimes


    caseyann wrote: »
    Also sent to their alleged home countries and checked for dangerous criminal pasts.
    That wouldn't be a particularly good idea seeing as many of the genuine asylum seekers are likely to be considered 'criminals' by their own governments to begin with. Also it's just leaving it open to those governments saying 'yeah, s/he's dangerous, send them back here'. Unless you're willing to trust the Chinese, Iranian, Burmese etc. authorities to tell the truth about their political dissidents.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    opo wrote: »
    Don't recall saying that :eek:
    No, you seem to have a problem with actually nailing your colours to the mast and saying what you actually think.

    When you develop the courage of your convictions, feel free to contribute something constructive to the conversation. I'll be holding my breath.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No, you seem to have a problem with actually nailing your colours to the mast and saying what you actually think.

    When you develop the courage of your convictions, feel free to contribute something constructive to the conversation. I'll be holding my breath.

    No I don't.

    You have a problem reading posts and responding in a fair and even handed manner - quoting - rather than wildly speculating what you believe someone "thinks".

    Now, if there is a particular quote you want clarified on topic; feel free to try again.

    I'll not be holding my breath.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    This post has been deleted.
    Agreed.
    Certainly, treat asylum seekers humanely while they are in our country, but don't keep them in limbo for years.
    So you disagree with the views of those who object to us providing food, shelter and medical care to them while we're processing their claims?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Agreed. So you disagree with the views of those who object to us providing food, shelter and medical care to them while we're processing their claims?

    Who would say that?

    Can we get real quotes?


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    opo wrote: »
    Now, if there is a particular quote you want clarified on topic; feel free to try again.
    OK, let's start with this one, where you first dragged an immigration thread off-topic into a discussion of asylum seeking:
    opo wrote: »
    Unlike the asylum system - where they can enjoy instant and comprehensive access to welfare...
    If you don't have a problem with us providing the bare minimum necessities for people to live with a modicum of dignity, why did you bring this up, and characterise it as "instant and comprehensive access to welfare"?

    If you do have a problem with us providing the level of food, shelter and medical care that we do for asylum seekers, just how badly would you prefer we treat them?

    You also suggested that it is easy for asylum seekers to work illegally. In response, djpbarry asked you:
    djpbarry wrote: »
    Hypothetical situation: I'm an asylum seeker - exactly how 'simple' is it for me to find work, assuming I'm not selling my body for money or some such? Could you, for example, point me in the direction of a prospective employer?
    Care to answer that question, this time without taking the easy path and avoiding it?


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    opo wrote: »
    Who would say that?

    Can we get real quotes?
    I'm just trying to figure out what your position is. Your point-blank refusal to state it isn't helping.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    OK, let's start with this one, where you first dragged an immigration thread off-topic into a discussion of asylum seeking: If you don't have a problem with us providing the bare minimum necessities for people to live with a modicum of dignity, why did you bring this up, and characterise it as "instant and comprehensive access to welfare"?

    I stated this in context and in comparison to the rights enjoyed by legal immigrants. It strikes me as wrong that legal immigrants have limited access to welfare, yet, illegal immigrants posing as asylum seekers have extensive access and sometimes do work (illegally) at the same time.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I'm just trying to figure out what your position is. Your point-blank refusal to state it isn't helping.

    My position on what? underwater welding? (I say go for it)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    opo wrote: »
    It strikes me as wrong that legal immigrants have limited access to welfare, yet, illegal immigrants posing as asylum seekers have extensive access and can and sometimes do work at the same time.
    First, there is no such thing as an illegal immigrant posing as an asylum seeker, and to conflate the terms in such a way betrays a prejudice that you are at pains to otherwise hide.

    Secondly, asylum seekers don't have extensive access to anything other than the direct provision of their basic needs, in accordance with the international agreements to which we are signed up.

    Are you arguing that (a) legal immigrants should be given free food, board and medical care, or that (b) asylum seekers should not be given these things?

    Thirdly, you avoided answering djpbarry's question again.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    First, there is no such thing as an illegal immigrant posing as an asylum seeker, and to conflate the terms in such a way betrays a prejudice that you are at pains to otherwise hide.

    So you are speculating my "prejudices" again. How original. Moderators privelege? Can I return the favour?
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Secondly, asylum seekers don't have extensive access to anything other than the direct provision of their basic needs, in accordance with the international agreements to which we are signed up.

    Remind me what they are missing out on. Include those outside direct provision.
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Are you arguing that (a) legal immigrants should be given free food, board and medical care, or that (b) asylum seekers should not be given these things?

    Neither. Read my post again. Try hard to read all the words. The clue is in the answer.
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Thirdly, you avoided answering djpbarry's question again.

    Do you not think you are having enough difficulty with your own questions without trying to confuse yourself with someone elses posts?


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    opo wrote: »
    Do you not think you are having enough difficulty with your own questions without trying to confuse yourself with someone elses posts?
    The only difficulty I'm having with questions is your refusal to answer any. I'll draw my own conclusions as to why you're not prepared to speak plainly; I'm sure others will do the same.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    The only difficulty I'm having with questions is your refusal to answer any. I'll draw my own conclusions as to why you're not prepared to speak plainly; I'm sure others will do the same.

    I'm sure all your little pals will be thrilled - if you feel like engaging in any sort of a normal manner - quotes etc - feel free.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19 IPRIreland


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    ...there is no such thing as an illegal immigrant posing as an asylum seeker...

    For clarification (and just out of curiosity), in your opinion or otherwise, are you saying or suggesting that there is nobody who attempts to defraud the immigration procedures of Ireland by attempting to gain entry to the country by claiming asylum instead?


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    IPRIreland wrote: »
    For clarification (and just out of curiosity), in your opinion or otherwise, are you saying or suggesting that there is nobody who attempts to defraud the immigration procedures of Ireland by attempting to gain entry to the country by claiming asylum instead?
    No, I'm saying that there are clear differences between asylum seekers, refugees, legal immigrants and illegal immigrants.

    If someone presents at immigration and claims asylum, by definition they are not an illegal immigrant. Whether or not their claim is valid, they are an asylum seeker. The phrase "illegal immigrants posing as asylum seekers" is prejudicial, whether or not the person who utters it is prepared to admit that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,923 ✭✭✭donaghs


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    No, I'm saying that there are clear differences between asylum seekers, refugees, legal immigrants and illegal immigrants.

    If someone presents at immigration and claims asylum, by definition they are not an illegal immigrant. Whether or not their claim is valid, they are an asylum seeker. The phrase "illegal immigrants posing as asylum seekers" is prejudicial, whether or not the person who utters it is prepared to admit that.

    Getting a bit caught up in semantics here. There are dictionary definitions (e.g. of the words "asylum" and "seeker"), and there are legal definitions, and they are not always the same thing. The law could in theory at any time in the future, redefine "asylum seeker" to mean something different entirely again. But that still won't stop people constructing sentences from those words. I believe the OP simply means "someone seeking asylum". So perhaps rather than derailing the thread, does the OP mean "someone who entered the country illegally, posing as as a person who is seeking asylum (i.e. not actually fleeing persecution)"?


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    donaghs wrote: »
    Getting a bit caught up in semantics here. There are dictionary definitions (e.g. of the words "asylum" and "seeker"), and there are legal definitions, and they are not always the same thing. The law could in theory at any time in the future, redefine "asylum seeker" to mean something different entirely again. But that still won't stop people constructing sentences from those words.
    This isn't a question of semantics, but of facts. To conflate the terms "illegal immigrant" and "asylum seeker" is to confuse two mutually contradictory things.

    It's comparable to describing someone standing trial for a crime as "a convicted criminal posing as a defendant". It's prejudicial.
    I believe the OP simply means "someone seeking asylum".
    If that's what the OP meant, then the term to use is "asylum seeker".
    So perhaps rather than derailing the thread, does the OP mean "someone who entered the country illegally, posing as as a person who is seeking asylum (i.e. not actually fleeing persecution)"?
    If someone is seeking asylum, then they haven't entered the country illegally. Their claim may be bogus, but that doesn't make them illegal immigrants; it makes them asylum seekers without grounds for refugee status - which can only be determined by examining their claim on its merits.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 746 ✭✭✭opo


    As usual not a hint of a link to a single law that supports any of this garbage.

    OB - please research article 31 of the Refugee Convention and let the fan club know if there is anything there that helps you.
    The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of Article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    opo wrote: »
    As usual not a hint of a link to a single law that supports any of this garbage.
    As distinct from the reams of documentation you've produced to support your assertion that asylum seekers are illegally working.
    OB - please research article 31 of the Refugee Convention and let the fan club know if there is anything there that helps you.
    Someone who enters the country illegally (in other words, who circumvents immigration controls) is an illegal immigrant. When that illegal immigrant presents him/herself to the authorities and requests asylum, that person then becomes a...?

    I'll give you three guesses.

    Stow the "fan club" remarks, by the way. You're not in a playground.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    This isn't a question of semantics, but of facts.

    Interesting how there "facts" here, here while in the NI thread perfectly obvious things such as NI is not in Britain as simply "semantics".
    When that illegal immigrant presents him/herself to the authorities and requests asylum, that person then becomes a...?

    When that illegal immigrant presents him/herself to the authorities and requests asylum, then that person is an illegal immigrant who has presented a case to be excused the usual penalties for illegal immigration by virtue of having a case for asylum (showing good cause for their illegal entry or presence). (as Opo's post above).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,353 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    That wouldn't be a particularly good idea seeing as many of the genuine asylum seekers are likely to be considered 'criminals' by their own governments to begin with. Also it's just leaving it open to those governments saying 'yeah, s/he's dangerous, send them back here'. Unless you're willing to trust the Chinese, Iranian, Burmese etc. authorities to tell the truth about their political dissidents.

    We don't get those type of asylum seekers. Instead we get the nigerians. Does anyone actually believe that any nigerians require asylum? We should ready introduce a system of legal immigration for countries like nigeria and only accept their citizens that way.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    ardmacha wrote: »
    Interesting how there "facts" here, here while in the NI thread perfectly obvious things such as NI is not in Britain as simply "semantics".
    If you want to discuss Northern Ireland, do it on the appropriate thread.
    When that illegal immigrant presents him/herself to the authorities and requests asylum, then that person is an illegal immigrant who has presented a case to be excused the usual penalties for illegal immigration by virtue of having a case for asylum (showing good cause for their illegal entry or presence). (as Opo's post above).
    There's a two-word phrase that describes such a person. Can you guess what it is?


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,858 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    We don't get those type of asylum seekers.
    None at all?
    Instead we get the nigerians. Does anyone actually believe that any nigerians require asylum?
    Has any Nigerian ever been granted refugee status anywhere in the world?
    We should ready introduce a system of legal immigration for countries like nigeria and only accept their citizens that way.
    We have a system of legal immigration from every country in the world, and we're obliged to accept refugees from wherever they come.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,089 ✭✭✭✭rovert


    What is this thread trying to accomplish seriously?

    What is the topic?


Advertisement