Child refugees -majority to be males aged 17???

alastair wrote: »

What leads you to believe that? Other than projection?

Because most of the "child" migrants are adults, they're in Europe illegally, and their culture has a history of incompatibility with us, and you seem to have no issue with those factors.

So, what does matter to you? Their crocodile tears?

AnGaelach wrote: »

Because most of the "child" migrants are adults, they're in Europe illegally, and their culture has a history of incompatibility with us.

So, what does matter to you? Their crocodile tears?

You've some evidence in relation to these 20 people that haven't been selected yet? That's some trick. The vast majority of refugee and asylum seekers in this, and every other European state, entered illegally - but the right of illegal entry for the purposes of seeking asylum is protected under international law. So if you've got a problem with the legality in this case, you're going to have to concede that you've got a problem with pretty much all refugees and asylum seekers. Not buying your broad brushstroke 'cultural incompatibility' either. The Syrian community in Ireland has been no bother historically. http://swansongfilms.ie/syrian-voices-ireland/

Your knee jerk assumptions are something of a bother to me. Does that count?

alastair wrote: »

You've some evidence in relation to these 20 people that haven't been selected yet? That's some trick. The vast majority of refugee and asylum seekers in this, and every other European state, entered illegally - but the right of illegal entry for the purposes of seeking asylum is protected under international law. So if you've got a problem with the legality in this case, you're going to have to concede that you've got a problem with pretty much all refugees and asylum seekers.

Under what law? Unless it has been given domestic effect in legislation, it has no power in the Courts here - hence why there is a lag of many years between when Ireland signs a treaty and when it actually enters into force. But you already knew that, right?

alastair wrote: »

Not buying your broad brushstroke 'cultural incompatibility' either. The Syrian community in Ireland has been no bother historically.

Yeah, because there's been a significant number of them at all in the first place. I guess Ireland is going to be the special case and what has happened in every other Western country surely won't happen here :rolleyes:

Edit:

Is there a reason why you linked some website? Any Tom, Dick and Harry can make a video and a website.

AnGaelach wrote: »

Under what law? Unless it has been given domestic effect in legislation, it has no power in the Courts here - hence why there is a lag of many years between when Ireland signs a treaty and when it actually enters into force. But you already knew that, right?

Yeah, because there's been a significant number of them at all in the first place. I guess Ireland is going to be the special case and what has happened in every other Western country surely won't happen here :rolleyes:

Edit:

Is there a reason why you linked some website? Any Tom, Dick and Harry can make a video and a website.

Any reason? Well it's actual Syrians in Ireland articulating for themselves. Aside from that, nope.

What exactly do you believe has happened in every other western nation? It's all rather vague scaremongering tbh.

The applicable law? UN Refugee Convention (1951), enacted into national law many years ago.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1996/act/17/schedule/3/enacted/en/html

Timberrrrrrrr

b_mac2 wrote: »

There you go.

My call out still stands, you're a spoof.

Where did I say xxx is a racist?

Call what you like kiddo you don't know me from Adam.

Walter H Price

At 17 (if that's even all they are) there far from kids , bad decision on the part of the government I'm sure there of plenty of women and actual children we could have taken if we have to take some. Thees young unaccompanied men have not integrated well anywhere in Europe look at Sweden , rape capital of Europe now.

But hey ho cant really argue with cultural enrichment , if you do your a racist.

Walter H Price wrote: »

At 17 (if that's even all they are) there far from kids , bad decision on the part of the government I'm sure there of plenty of women and actual children we could have taken if we have to take some. Thees young unaccompanied men have not integrated well anywhere in Europe look at Sweden , rape capital of Europe now.

But hey ho cant really argue with cultural enrichment , if you do your a racist.

17 year olds are minors. Nothing strange there. There's probably more instances of rape in Ireland than Sweden. It's a safer country than most in Europe. And plenty of young unaccompanied men have integrated well in Europe.

alastair wrote: »

What exactly do you believe has happened in every other western nation? It's all rather vague scaremongering tbh.

Oh, you know, the ghettoisation, failure of integration, and occasional terrorist attack...

alastair wrote: »

The applicable law? UN Refugee Convention (1951), enacted into national law many years ago.
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1996/act/17/schedule/3/enacted/en/html

I'm aware you're not good with the ole legal research so I'll quote the relevant part

1. 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.

[...]

1. The Contracting States shall not expel a refugee lawfully in their territory save on grounds of national security or public order.

This means that those leaving Syria can claim protection for being illegally in the first country they go to, not any and every country under the sun.

These "refugees" stopped having legal protection once they left Greece and Turkey.

Walter H Price

alastair wrote: »

17 year olds are minors. Nothing strange there. There's probably more instances of rape in Ireland than Sweden. It's a safer country than most in Europe. And plenty of young unaccompanied men have integrated well in Europe.

Barely and are we only taking ones with verified age cards ? why not look to help the real vulnerable , young children either alone or with unaccompanied women ? the Yazidi , Christians , atheists , homosexuals the ones fleeing the greatest threat.

To your second point it very much used to be but cultural enrichment sorted that out

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html

Walter H Price wrote: »

Barely and are we only taking ones with verified age cards ? why not look to help the real vulnerable , young children either alone or with unaccompanied women ? the Yazidi , Christians , atheists , homosexuals the ones fleeing the greatest threat.

Again - how exactly are you to know that the 20 (yet to be selected) are not Yazidi, Christians, atheists, or homosexuals?

Walter H Price wrote: »

To your second point it very much used to be but cultural enrichment sorted that out

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html

You're comparing apples and oranges. Swedish sexual assault stats will always come out on top of other European county, as long as they employ a different way of logging reported crimes. Every specific instance of sexual assault in an ongoing abusive relationship is counted as a single crime in Sweden - it counts as a single grouped crime elsewhere. And the actual instance of reported rapes has actually fallen slightly in Sweden since they changed over to their new classification system. It's down on 2005 figures - despite the large influx of refugees there in the last ten years. That doesn't really play into the whole scaremongering narrative though, does it?

AnGaelach wrote: »

Oh, you know, the ghettoisation, failure of integration, and occasional terrorist attack...

I'm aware you're not good with the ole legal research so I'll quote the relevant part

This means that those leaving Syria can claim protection for being illegally in the first country they go to, not any and every country under the sun.

These "refugees" stopped having legal protection once they left Greece and Turkey.

That's not actually the relevant part of the legislation, but thanks for trying. There's no legal obligation whatsoever under the 1951 convention for asylum seekers to make their claim in the first country they go to. That's the reason why every successful asylum seeker to Ireland, has attained asylum status.

jmayo

alastair wrote: »

The gender of the minors is really not of any importance to me. Sorry about that. I'm also rather bemused by how you managed to determine how I form my views on refugees, but let's just say that you're not winning any prizes for special insights there.

Of course their gender isn't important to you.
Shure aren't they all poor cratures from some warzone and haven't they had a terrible time in Calais.
Maybe you should actually have a chat with some truckers that experienced these poor minors, or better see how the citizens of Calais will miss them.

And the only prize you will be winning is one for gullibility.

alastair wrote: »

You seem a little confused about the responsibilities and obligations involved in asylum law. It's not 'bleeding heart buffooons' that enforce the obligation to review asylum applications - it's the application of the law. It's not an option to return refugees to Libya - it's once again a matter of adhereing to the law. So in a choice of letting people drown, or bringing them to Italy, what's your call? Nobody is covering up any crimes btw.

Ever hear the law is an ass ?

AFAIK we never signed up to take non EU migrants sitting in makeshift camps in other European states.

Personally I rather like the way Hungary have been looking at this issue.

alastair wrote: »

17 year olds are minors. Nothing strange there. There's probably more instances of rape in Ireland than Sweden. It's a safer country than most in Europe. And plenty of young unaccompanied men have integrated well in Europe.

Ah FFS.

As per the mods request on these type of threads please give us some stats to back up your assertion that Ireland has more instances of rape than Sweden.

alastair wrote: »

Again - how exactly are you to know that the 20 (yet to be selected) are not Yazidi, Christians, atheists, or homosexuals?

You're comparing apples and oranges. Swedish sexual assault stats will always come out on top of other European county, as long as they employ a different way of logging reported crimes. Every specific instance of sexual assault in an ongoing abusive relationship is counted as a single crime in Sweden - it counts as a single grouped crime elsewhere. And the actual instance of reported rapes has actually fallen slightly in Sweden since they changed over to their new classification system. It's down on 2005 figures - despite the large influx of refugees there in the last ten years. That doesn't really play into the whole scaremongering narrative though, does it?

Nah shure it's all grand in Sweden.

Perhaps you might tell that to the disabled lady gang raped by some of these refugees and then effectively raped by the law afterwards because she didn't put up enough of a fight.

What were you saying again earlier about laws and legal obligations ?

I don't have a problem with Poles coming in Jmayo but it is true that they like the Irish abuse alcohol and this of course means their health care costs if born by the HSE will be very high, this is a fact, its not racism to state this.

As I said Timberrr to back up his statement that The Irish are among the most racist in the world used his observations on the building site to come to this conclusion.The Poles joined together in the workplace to give a colleague a hard time, they herded together just like the workers on the building site did.This is my point, the Irish are no more racist than anyone else, any Irish person working on a building site in Poland is probably going to be uncomfortable unless there are a lot of other Irish people there too.

People do tend to stick to their own nationality, race or whatever you call it and that is people from within European countries too.The Poles, the French, the Swiss, the Germans come here to work, generally don't intend to stay for the long term and they send money home to their families.They don't impose their religious beliefs on us or demand segregated schooling or dress codes for the women.

There isn't a chance in hel that any large influx of Muslims is going to lead to any benefits for this country.They won't integrate socially because they don't drink and every social occasion int his country is alcohol fuelled.They want their women to cover up so as soon as the girls hit puberty their freedom to go where they please is taken away.The boys are taught that any woman who doesn't cover up is worthless so for both boys and girls their community becomes very closed and eventually it becomes a ghetto.This has happened everywhere in Europe where the Muslims have gone in great numbers and its one of the reasons that the British people voted for Brexit.I am very sorry that we are losing the UK from the European Union but do understand why the ordinary British citizen has said enough.Those who bleat on about wanting open borders so everyone can come in don't live in disadvantaged areas and they spend their lives with the not in my backyard stuff.Its all very well to let every Hussain Abdul etc in when you can pay for private schools and private health care and you aren't looking for maternity care in an area where Muslim women are breeding non stop.

alastair wrote: »

That's not actually the relevant part of the legislation, but thanks for trying.

You said they are given protection under international law, and I've just shown you that that protection does not encompass all countries, merely the first country they arrive directly in.

alastair wrote: »

There's no legal obligation whatsoever under the 1951 convention for asylum seekers to make their claim in the first country they go to.
That's the reason why every successful asylum seeker to Ireland, has attained asylum status.

No, but there is under the Dublin Protocols. I said that they are here illegally. You said that they're protected by international law, and I've provided evidence to the contrary.

Now, find proof that they are protected under law to illegally squat in a country, like you were asked to do so. Or are you just going to obfuscate, wait for me to get bored, and then peddle your lie again?

Chips Lovell

So no Poles because they drink too much?

And no Muslims because they don't drink enough?

Under the Dublin convention the country the illegal immigrants lands have to take them.

Angela Merkel did a solo run on this and decided she was breaking this convention, she did this because Germany needs young people and Angela thought Germany would get the best of the newcomers.It all turned sour when one of the teens allowed in to be fostered attacked train passengers with an axe.Then came the Cologne Sex attacks and the Berlin truck driver and well you know the rest.Angela then decided that she didn't want the Syrians after all and she bribed the Turks to take them all by hinting that EU membership might come their way if they agreed.

I didn't say no to Poles, the Poles aren't going to molest Irish young women in tshirts and nor are they going to plant bombs in O Connell street to further the cost of mad men in ISIS.The real danger though of ISIS is not the immigrants coming in, its from the Muslims who were born in the West and grew up with all the advantages and yet hate their country of birth so much they are prepared to drive refrigerated trucks into crowds of people including babies in buggies.The very worrying thing is even though we know Muslims have lived in France etc for maybe almost thirty years and it was so easy to radicalise them, why does anyone actually believe the new arrivals aren't going to be radicalised too even if we give them free houses, access to health care, education and all the other benefits of modern European countries.Its all so depressingly predictable and we never learn, we just keep on appeasing these people and their demands get more and more extreme, i.e. if someone doesn't stop drawing cartoons they will be shot to death in their workplace.

Mary63 wrote: »

The Poles joined together in the workplace to give a colleague a hard time

Really?
You said they spoke to each other in polish. Where did they give the poor Irish person a hard time?

bubblypop wrote: »

Really?
You said they spoke to each other in polish. Where did they give the poor Irish person a hard time?

If four Gaeilgoirí started speaking solely to each other in Irish when there was a German in the room who couldn't speak it, would you say they're doing no harm or that they're being rude?

Mary63 wrote: »

the Poles aren't going to molest Irish young women in tshirts and nor are they going to plant bombs in O Connell street

Gee Mary if you actually know this then you may have the answer to the crime problem in Ireland.
If you can predict who will and will not commit crime in future then you are wasted on an internet forum!

oh lord bubblypop, are you permanently this obtuse, I am really beginning to understand how Trump was voted in, its like talking to a brick wall.

Can you not understand how isolated you feel when everyone around you is speaking in a language you don't understand.I had this recently in a queue in Bray of all places and I couldn't wait to leave.I couldn't imagine what it would be like to face into work everyday and have no one address a single word in a language you could understand.If you can't understand that then good luck to you.End of.

I know who will plant the bombs in Dublin on behalf of Isis, I only have to look at the history of the people who planted bombs in Berlin, Brussels, Paris and the UK.Why on earth anyone thinks that won't happen here is beyond me, its only a matter of time and the people who are willing to do it are probably in here already.

I see the airport officials who smuggled people in are in Court today, I hope the book is thrown at them, they are endangering us for the sake of bagfuls of money, shame on them.

Mary63 wrote: »

Muslim women are breeding non stop.

These are people you are talking about. People. Not animals.
That's a disgusting way to speak about people

Mary63 wrote: »

oh lord bubblypop, are you permanently this obtuse, I am really beginning to understand how Trump was voted in, its like talking to a brick wall.

Can you not understand how isolated you feel when everyone around you is speaking in a language you don't understand.I had this recently in a queue in Bray of all places and I couldn't wait to leave.I couldn't imagine what it would be like to face into work everyday and have no one address a single word in a language you could understand.If you can't understand that then good luck to you.End of.

That's tough Mary, you didn't understand them, so what? If you felt uncomfortable then that's your problem.
I was in college with Irish speakers who spoke to each other in Irish, I didn't understand.
Did I get paranoid? Or did I even care? No!
I've been in many many different countries where I didn't understand the language, so what?

I didn't work with them I am glad to say, it was a young relative who did.If you were surrounded in college by Irish speakers you had the choice to find someone you could communicate with.You also choose to travel and again if someone you met on your travels could communicate with you in your language most people have enough civility to make the effort.
You have no choice in a workplace except to ask management on your behalf to request that the colleagues converse in a common language,you are obviously a very rude self centred person so you don't get how a sensitive working person would find this working environment intolerable so no point in debating this any further with you.
I wish you had as much consideration for Irish people as you have for immigrants.

The muslim women do breed non stop, what is the issue with that, we breed just as every other animal species does.The German and the italian native population and the French too have stopped breeding in sufficient numbers, this is a huge problem in France now as the Muslims are now twenty per cent of the population.If this keeps up and we continue to allow uncontrolled immigration white europeans are going to become a minority in Europe and with that goes our way of life and in comes the muslim way of life, thats not a very comforting thought.

b_mac2

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Call what you like kiddo you don't know me from Adam.

I don't, but I do know you're not fluent in any of the languages you've claimed to be proficient in.

Sorry for going off topic. I just have quite a fondness for catching out liars.

rgossip30

Mary63 wrote: »

Under the Dublin convention the country the illegal immigrants lands have to take them.

Angela Merkel did a solo run on this and decided she was breaking this convention, she did this because Germany needs young people and Angela thought Germany would get the best of the newcomers.It all turned sour when one of the teens allowed in to be fostered attacked train passengers with an axe.Then came the Cologne Sex attacks and the Berlin truck driver and well you know the rest.Angela then decided that she didn't want the Syrians after all and she bribed the Turks to take them all by hinting that EU membership might come their way if they agreed.

I didn't say no to Poles, the Poles aren't going to molest Irish young women in tshirts and nor are they going to plant bombs in O Connell street to further the cost of mad men in ISIS.The real danger though of ISIS is not the immigrants coming in, its from the Muslims who were born in the West and grew up with all the advantages and yet hate their country of birth so much they are prepared to drive refrigerated trucks into crowds of people including babies in buggies.The very worrying thing is even though we know Muslims have lived in France etc for maybe almost thirty years and it was so easy to radicalise them, why does anyone actually believe the new arrivals aren't going to be radicalised too even if we give them free houses, access to health care, education and all the other benefits of modern European countries.Its all so depressingly predictable and we never learn, we just keep on appeasing these people and their demands get more and more extreme, i.e. if someone doesn't stop drawing cartoons they will be shot to death in their workplace.

Interesting that Germany until 2011 had restrictions on poles coming to work . I would have thought it more convenient for them to work in Germany .

Mary63 wrote: »

I wish you had as much consideration for Irish people as you have for immigrants.

I have consideration for all people who deserve it, regardless of their nationality. I'm not sure why you think I should treat people differently based on what country they happened to be born in!

AnGaelach wrote: »

You said they are given protection under international law, and I've just shown you that that protection does not encompass all countries, merely the first country they arrive directly in.

No, but there is under the Dublin Protocols. I said that they are here illegally. You said that they're protected by international law, and I've provided evidence to the contrary.

Now, find proof that they are protected under law to illegally squat in a country, like you were asked to do so. Or are you just going to obfuscate, wait for me to get bored, and then peddle your lie again?

The Dublin protocols are not applicable to asylum seekers. They're an agreement between states, and don't imply any matter of illegality in aslysum seekers actions. And the 1951 convention is explicit in allowing for irregular entry for the purposes of seeking asylum, irrespective of whether that asylum is subsequently granted, or if the asylum seeker is referred back to a transit state. I'd once again point to you the telling fact of the asylum status granted to thousands of people who came to this country via intermediate third countries.

alastair wrote: »

17 year olds are minors. Nothing strange there. There's probably more instances of rape in Ireland than Sweden. It's a safer country than most in Europe. And plenty of young unaccompanied men have integrated well in Europe.

Ireland doesn't even make the list. Sweden, on the other hand....

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape