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

Immigration authorities raid places of employment

Options
1234568

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Boggles wrote: »
    I highlighted the relevant bit for you. Again and this does seem be confusing you, it is absolutely nothing to do with me.

    You are welcome.

    If the parents decide they are going, the kids don't get a choice. But keep talking out of both sides of your mouth. I've never said this decision had anything to do with you. But you are the one whining about the Brazilians never setting foot in Brazil.


  • Options
    #213
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,611 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    If the parents decide they are going, the kids don't get a choice.

    Surely that penny will drop any minute now.


  • Options
    #214
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users Posts: 23,481 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    The Irish Times, as usual, with a puff piece concerning the control of immigration in to this country

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-is-illegally-turning-back-georgian-and-albanian-immigrants-1.4189447?__vfz=rtw_top_pages%3D11000002670848


  • Options
    #215
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    Kermit.de.frog wrote: »
    The Irish Times, as usual, with a puff piece concerning the control of immigration in to this country

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-is-illegally-turning-back-georgian-and-albanian-immigrants-1.4189447?__vfz=rtw_top_pages%3D11000002670848

    What is witg that paper and its love of open borders


  • Options
    #216
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    What is witg that paper and its love of open borders

    We don’t have open borders. Unsurprisingly, the paper has no love of open borders.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    Kermit.de.frog
    Registered Users Posts: 23,481 ✭✭✭✭Kermit.de.frog


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    What is witg that paper and its love of open borders

    A lot of the readership don't live anywhere near places that have absorbed actual mass immigration in Ireland.

    Easy to take a moral position when unaffected.

    When a few of the leafier suburbs have to sustain the same the narrative will change.


  • Options
    #218
    Kivaro
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Kivaro


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    What is witg that paper and its love of open borders
    It's the liberal bastion whose sole purpose now is to extol extreme liberal views.
    The Irish Times regards us as the common people who need direction ..... and obviously mass inward migration so as to increase our diversity and decrease our homogeneity.

    In other words, the Irish Times thinks that Ireland is too Irish.
    Themselves and RTE are doing untold damage to our country.


  • Options
    #219
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    alastair wrote: »
    We don’t have open borders. Unsurprisingly, the paper has no love of open borders.

    Im aware we dont have open borders, hence the times giving out about us rejecting migrants. They would like open borders, for whatever reason...


  • Options
    #220
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Im aware we dont have open borders, hence the times giving out about us rejecting migrants. They would like open borders, for whatever reason...

    There’s nothing in that article about either migrants or open borders.


  • Options
    #221
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,669 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Kermit.de.frog wrote: »
    The Irish Times, as usual, with a puff piece concerning the control of immigration in to this country

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ireland-is-illegally-turning-back-georgian-and-albanian-immigrants-1.4189447?__vfz=rtw_top_pages%3D11000002670848

    Not at all illegal whats happening and the IT know it. One minute illegal, then appears to be illegal.

    Just as well other measures have been put in place as well.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Not at all illegal whats happening and the IT know it. One minute illegal, then appears to be illegal.

    Just as well other measures have been put in place as well.

    It’s an op-Ed piece, and the writer is clear as to the specifics of the case they’re making.


  • Options
    #223
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Georgia and Albiania have zero reason to send asylum seekers to Ireland.
    It's just a part of the general "go to Europe" migrations we have seen for years.
    Being poor isn't enough reason to be a asylum seeker.


  • Options
    #224
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    biko wrote: »
    Georgia and Albiania have zero reason to send asylum seekers to Ireland.
    It's just a part of the general "go to Europe" migrations we have seen for years.

    Nobody is ‘sending’ asylum seekers, and given that we have accepted asylum claims from Albanians and Georgians in the past, I’m not sure how you can be so certain there’s no reason, ever. And both Albania and Georgia are in Europe.


  • Options
    #225
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    So let me get this straight. We deport the people who want to work.

    But we give free money to people who don't.

    Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't make sense to me.


  • Options
    #226
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    alastair wrote: »
    Nobody is ‘sending’ asylum seekers, and given that we have accepted asylum claims from Albanians and Georgians in the past, I’m not sure how you can be so certain there’s no reason, ever. And both Albania and Georgia are in Europe.
    Ireland returns 23 people denied asylum to Albania and Georgia
    This means the State considers them as safe and stable democracies.
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ireland-returns-23-people-denied-asylum-to-albania-and-georgia-1.4104861

    I don't see your source for that Ireland have accepted asylum seekers from there before.


  • Options
    #227
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    biko wrote: »
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ireland-returns-23-people-denied-asylum-to-albania-and-georgia-1.4104861

    I don't see your source for that Ireland have accepted asylum seekers from there before.

    Albania and Georgia were only designated safe countries two years ago - and there were five Georgians and one Albanian awarded asylum in 2018 (With three more Albanians awarded subsidiary protection status). Plenty more over previous years.


  • Options
    #228
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    alastair wrote: »
    Albania and Georgia were only designated safe countries two years ago - and there were five Georgians and one Albanian awarded asylum in 2018 (With three more Albanians awarded subsidiary protection status). Plenty more over previous years.


    If so few were approved, why are so many applying (more than anyone else for 2018).


    It seems to allude to an opportunistic, devious, organised people trafficking pattern. Whereby economic migrants (from a 2018 safe country that the uk's NCA are highly concerned about: in terms of highly organised criminality), are trying to play the system, for their own advantage.


  • Options
    #229
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Kye Refined Ozone wrote: »
    If so few were approved, why are so many applying (more than anyone else for 2018).

    That’s not the point. It’s clear that there HAVE been asylum applicants from both countries that were determined to have legitimate claims. Unlike the assertion made above.

    Most asylum claims are rejected. That doesn’t mean the obligation to assess claims is negated.


  • Options
    #230
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    alastair wrote: »
    That’s not the point.

    It's exactly the point, and as you also agree very few of the many, many Alb/Geo folks got accepted* Despite being the two largest source countries of applicants for 2018.

    That point is that highly organised criminal networks (people traffickers if you will) are overloading the system, month after month, for their selfish economic gain. Thus any genuine cases will suffer as a direct consequnece.

    *pending appeals (more time/expense) and pending actual voloutary removal or compliance with any order paperwork.


  • Options
    #231
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Kye Refined Ozone wrote: »
    It's exactly the point, and as you also agree very few of the many, many Alb/Geo folks got accepted* Despite being the two largest source countries of applicants for 2018.

    That point is that highly organised criminal networks (people traffickers if you will) are overloading the system, month after month, for their selfish economic gain. Thus any genuine cases will suffer as a direct consequnece.

    *pending appeals (more time/expense) and pending actual voloutary removal or compliance with any order paperwork.

    Nope. Not the point I was addressing at all.

    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=112701527&postcount=223


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    alastair wrote: »
    Nope.

    So you've no problem whatsoever with a significant trend (99.7%) of ineligible folks taking the place, time, funds, or resources over more clearly genuine cases, fair enough.


  • Options
    #233
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Kye Refined Ozone wrote: »
    So you've no problem whatsoever with a significant trend (99.7%) of ineligible folks taking the place, time, funds, or resources over more clearly genuine cases, fair enough.

    Still not the point I was addressing.


  • Options
    #234
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    alastair wrote: »
    Still not the point I was addressing.


    But the important point now is that you'll neither accept, address, nor condone it.
    A significant trend, month by month (99.7%) of ineligible folks from two particular countries, taking the place, time, funds, or resources over more clearly genuine cases.


  • Options
    #235
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Kye Refined Ozone wrote: »
    But the important point now is that you'll neither accept, address, nor condone it.
    A significant trend, month by month (99.7%) of ineligible folks from two particular countries, taking the place, time, funds, or resources over more clearly genuine cases.

    Your trying to crowbar your own issues onto a different point are your own business. Doesn’t make it any more important.


  • Options
    #236
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    alastair wrote: »
    Your trying to crowbar your own issues onto a different point are your own business. Doesn’t make it any more important.


    I.e. You'll neither accept, address, nor condone it.

    Very interesting!

    - Guess if for example (speculating of course for as an example) you had some vested interest for profit, benefit of whatever, then it does not matter one bit where people come from, or their status(genuine or not), just as long as they come, and keep coming.


  • Options
    #237
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Kye Refined Ozone wrote: »
    I.e. You'll neither accept, address, nor condone it.

    Very interesting!

    - Guess if for example (speculating of course for as an example) you had some vested interest for profit, benefit of whatever, then it does not matter one bit where people come from, or their status(genuine or not), just as long as they come, and keep coming.

    You speculate away. Still no closer to addressing the point to hand.


  • Options
    #238
    Yurt2
    Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    What other point is there other than the applicants from those two countries are overwhelmingly bogus and put an enormous strain on the capacity of the state to respond to genuine cases?

    Why tiptoe around it?


  • Options
    #239
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Yurt! wrote: »
    What other point is there other than the applicants from those two countries are overwhelmingly bogus and put an enormous strain on the capacity of the state to respond to genuine cases?

    Why tiptoe around it?

    Well - let’s see...

    Nobody outside the specific cases knows why the claims were rejected, so you can’t presume they were ‘bogus’. They might well have just not met the bar sufficient for award. Do you take the same attitude to every job application that you didn’t get - that your application was ‘bogus’?

    Every asylum claimant has their case assessed. Volume of applicants might slow the process, but it doesn’t lock anyone out. And - a reminder - we are legally obliged to assess all claims. It’s not a voluntary deal - it’s an obligation.


  • Options
    #240
    Yurt2
    Registered Users Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    A 99% rejection rate of a particular nationality is telling you something. If you want to plug your ears go ahead.

    I've been to Georgia, it's a stable country, and is categorised as a safe country of origin for very good reason.

    I'm not sure why you're so fond of b*ll****ters that make things difficult for genuine refugees.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Yurt! wrote: »
    A 99% rejection rate of a particular nationality is telling you something. If you want to plug your ears go ahead.

    I've been to Georgia, it's a stable country, and is categorised as a safe country of origin for very good reason.

    I'm not sure why you're so fond of b*ll****ters that make things difficult for genuine refugees.

    I’ve been to Georgia too. It’s only been designated a safe country a fresh day. It’s also only 12 years since it was involved in a war and ethnic cleansing. It’s still got occupied territory.

    I’m not sure why you confuse fondness for bull****ters with an acknowledgement of the legal obligation to assess asylum claims?


Advertisement