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

kupus · 29-01-2017 10:23PM

alastair wrote: »

A theory that makes no sense whatsoever. The flow of Libyan oil, and revenues for the international oil companies were far more valuable under the Ghadaffi regime.

I deleted about 3 paragraphs here.
whats the point?
you say right I say left. you say left i say right.

jmayo · 29-01-2017 10:23PM

bubblypop wrote: »

Some of them don't? Some of who, Spanish men don't?
What exactly are ya trying to say?

You know damn well what I mean.

And just to spell it out alittle more for you.
Care to tell us how many Spanish people living in France have driven a truck down a promendade killing innocent people in the last few years, nay make that decades.
And then remind us how many Spaniards living in Germany have hijacked trucks murdering it's driver and then drove it into a Christmas market to kill inocent people ?

And after you have tried to twist those facts, perhaps you can try figure out how to downplay fact that there have been no mass killings of tourists on Spanish beaches recently whereas there has on a beach in North Africa.
Oh and just to bring it home to you an Irish lady was one of the victims that day.
We are not immune to muslim fundamentalism.

29-01-2017 10:47PM

But we are not immune to any crime committed by any nationality.
How many Irish people have killed English people?
And how many refugees have committed any of these crimes?

jmayo · 29-01-2017 11:18PM

bubblypop wrote: »

But we are not immune to any crime committed by any nationality.
How many Irish people have killed English people?
And how many refugees have committed any of these crimes?

Ah FFS.
Why not just answer the questions ?
How many Spaniards have done what some North Africans have done on European soil in the last year ?

You asked Mary why she rathered Spaniards than North Africans, I gave a possible answer, but you of course chose to do the usual eel wriggling to divert and went off into the old Whataboutery.

Whataboutery would not have saved you on the promenade on Nice, nor would it have saved you in Berlin.

BTW the Tunisian who killed the innocent people in Berlin came to Europe seeking ayslum.
Of course you can go off an argue how different an asylum seeker is to a refugee.

Oh and while you are fooking at it, why not argue how a 19 year old is a minor as he claimed when he arrived in Italy.

gitzy16v · 29-01-2017 11:42PM

Mary63 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/zappone-seeks-urgent-review-of-pre-clearance-at-irish-airports-1.2956071

I'd rather p1ss off,anybody else except the Americans...
They got the nukes,economically and militarily.
Time to get serious now,
I wonder what enda will do.

Mary63 · 29-01-2017 11:55PM

Enda will get himself out to Washington if he knows whats good for him.Why should we alienate the Americans for the sake of citizens from Eitrea, Yemen, Somalia, what are these countries ever going to do for us.

It isn't possible for the whole of Africa to live in Europe or in the United States or in Australia.They will destabilise all these countries if they arrive in uncontrollable numbers.If we insult the President of the United States he won't forget it and nor will the American people.Dont think for one minute that the crowds of people protesting in the airports are accurately reflecting what most Americans think.Donald Trump was democratically elected with a mandate to deal with the immigrant issue and there is huge support for what he is doing.Theresa May knows the vast majority of the British people want something done about immigration too so she can't criticise Trump either.Ditto the French, the Germans, the Dutch and the Swedes, they would all like Muslim numbers controlled too and if Donald Trump manages to implement a workable immigrant policy other countries will follow suit.

30-01-2017 12:07AM

jmayo wrote: »

Ah FFS.
Why not just answer the questions ?
How many Spaniards have done what some North Africans have done on European soil in the last year ?

You asked Mary why she rathered Spaniards than North Africans, I gave a possible answer, but you of course chose to do the usual eel wriggling to divert and went off into the old Whataboutery.

Whataboutery would not have saved you on the promenade on Nice, nor would it have saved you in Berlin.

BTW the Tunisian who killed the innocent people in Berlin came to Europe seeking ayslum.
Of course you can go off an argue how different an asylum seeker is to a refugee.

Oh and while you are fooking at it, why not argue how a 19 year old is a minor as he claimed when he arrived in Italy.

But it's ridiculous to suggest that because some North African men committed crime, that we should ban ALL North African men.
It doesn't make sense to me at all that anyone can judge millions of people by the actions of a handful.
I judge people on their actions, not the actions of others.

30-01-2017 12:10AM

bubblypop wrote: »

But it's ridiculous to suggest that because some North African men committed crime, that we should ban ALL North African men.
It doesn't make sense to me at all that anyone can judge millions of people by the actions of a handful.
I judge people on their actions, not the actions of others.

How do you suggest we identify those who are coming here with the express intention of committing crimes?

30-01-2017 12:12AM

Mary63 wrote: »

Don't be so ridiculous Bubblepop, I can go to Spain and I won't be harassed by gangs of men from North Africa,of course I prefer the Spaniards so stop trying to force me into a corner with silly questions.I wouldn't go to Tunisia or Morocco on holidays because there is no law in these countries and I would be afraid to go for a walk on the beach.

LOL! Clearly you haven't been on a beach in Spain for many years!
The fact you think there is no law in Tunisia or Morocco is just embarrassing for you. You really don't need to be afraid, I have been to Morocco solo, and haven't been raped or murdered yet!

30-01-2017 12:14AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How do you suggest we identify those who are coming here with the express intention of committing crimes?

You can't identify people who are intending on committing crime!!!
Luckily in this country we wait till people actually commit a crime before punishing them.

Mary63 · 30-01-2017 12:21AM

There is no law in Morocco or Tunisia.

The Tunisian authorities knew the Berlin terrorist was one of their citizens and they refused to help the Germans to have him deported.He was on a known terrorist list and the Germans had to release him because they couldn't prove where he was from.If they had sent the Germans his passport when it was requested he would have been on the first flight out of Germany,,its absolutely terrible for the families of the people he murdered to come to terms with this.

Trump said what he intended to do while running for election and the American people voted him in.We are so used to politicians breaking their promises it is quite surprising to see a President doing what he was elected to do.If the European authorities had got their act together and banned a every undocumented person from entering the EU we wouldn't have had so many dead in Paris and Berlin and Brussels.We have plenty of Muslims who have spent their entire life in Europe ready to murder their colleagues, and neighbours but they don't need to be helped by others travelling freely through Europe on false papers.

The German Police took hundreds of North African men off trains this new years eve, they fitted the profile of the people who assaulted German women last year so no way was this happening again.There was no evidence the people taken off the trains were going to sexually assault women but are you saying better to wait until they did bubble pop, why should the rights of these men take precedence over the rights of women not to be raped.

Stheno · 30-01-2017 12:24AM

Mary63 wrote: »

There is no law in Morocco or Tunisia.

The Tunisian authorities knew the Berlin terrorist was one of their citizens and they refused to help the Germans to have him deported.

Have you a link to prove that there Mary?

dissed doc · 30-01-2017 12:26AM

Mary63 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/zappone-seeks-urgent-review-of-pre-clearance-at-irish-airports-1.2956071

This is a move in the right direction, all the countries black listed are the ones where the future terrorists will come from once ISIS is eliminated.

I completely agree. The Irish DFA clearly lists the countries as being highly dangerous, and that no Irish national should travel there. If you do, you should be heavily screened.

It is also just like OBama did. He banned Iraq citizens for 6 months. No upset, no whining entitlement cry-episodes.

Zappone would probably like to finish with US pre-clearance as she is worried it may limit her ability to move in unchecked nationals of countries with high risk of terrorist events that otherwise wouldn't be allowed in.

gitzy16v · 30-01-2017 12:31AM

bubblypop wrote: »

LOL! Clearly you haven't been on a beach in Spain for many years!
The fact you think there is no law in Tunisia or Morocco is just embarrassing for you. You really don't need to be afraid, I have been to Morocco solo, and haven't been raped or murdered yet!

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0628/711121-tunisia-attack/

Anybody coming from that country has to be extremely well vetted.

There's plenty more to that story.

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tunisia-terrorist-beach-massacre-inquest-9631533.amp?client=ms-android-htc-rev

And this has Tunisia wrote all over it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/24/europe/anis-amri-berlin-attack-milan/index.html

I'd be watching Tunisia closely if recent events are anything to go by.

30-01-2017 12:32AM

bubblypop wrote: »

LOL! Clearly you haven't been on a beach in Spain for many years!
The fact you think there is no law in Tunisia or Morocco is just embarrassing for you. You really don't need to be afraid, I have been to Morocco solo, and haven't been raped or murdered yet!

Hmm. Not quite the Utopia you experienced.

https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=17374

Crime statistics for Tunisia in 2013 reflect a continued stream of criminal activity. According to official statistics (for the country as a whole), theft and property crimes showed a slight decrease from 2013 to 2014, while there was a marked increase in the number of financial crimes/scams during that same period. A significant rate of violent (homicides, sexual assaults, personal robberies, residential break-ins) and nonviolent (financial scams, vehicle thefts, petty drug offenses) crimes exists in Tunis and other large/tourist cities.

Political Violence Rating: High

Terrorism Rating: High

https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=19236

Harassment of women is somewhat prevalent in both urban and rural areas. In 2Moroccan men will often engage in whistling/hissing/staring/yelling and, on occasion, inappropriate physical contact. Attempts to coax women into cars does occur with some frequency in the smaller cities and rural areas. In 2015, there was an uptick in reports of sexual assaults and rapes. Incidents of assaults and harassment typically affect woman who are walking alone at night. However, assaults have also taken place in broad daylight and at public events with many witnesses, though these incidents are rare. Legislation has been enacted to punish any form of sexual harassment; however, the law is new, and authorities are still trying to determine how best to enforce it.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons may face a great deal of pressure/discrimination. While there is a perceived level of tolerance, homosexuality is illegal, and open displays of affection will attract unwanted attention.

rgossip30 · 30-01-2017 12:32AM

dissed doc wrote: »

I completely agree. The Irish DFA clearly lists the countries as being highly dangerous, and that no Irish national should travel there. If you do, you should be heavily screened.

It is also just like OBama did. He banned Iraq citizens for 6 months. No upset, no whining entitlement cry-episodes.

Zappone would probably like to finish with US pre-clearance as she is worried it may limit her ability to move in unchecked nationals of countries with high risk of terrorist events that otherwise wouldn't be allowed in.

I think its getting forgotten the USA is at war in that region .The EU is not active there so taking in people is easier .

dissed doc · 30-01-2017 12:33AM

bubblypop wrote: »

But it's ridiculous to suggest that because some North African men committed crime, that we should ban ALL North African men.
It doesn't make sense to me at all that anyone can judge millions of people by the actions of a handful.
I judge people on their actions, not the actions of others.

The only North African country listed is Libya.

Here is the DFA Ireland's assessment:

"Security Status
We advise Irish citizens against all travel to Libya. Irish citizens in Libya are advised to leave immediately by commercial means"

"Latest Travel Alert
Due to the ongoing fighting and the risk of kidnapping or terrorist attacks throughout the country, the situation in Libya remains very dangerous. On 23 December 2016 a domestic flight from Sabha to Tripoli was hijacked and diverted to Malta."

"Security
Due to the ongoing fighting and the risk of kidnapping or terrorist attacks throughout the country, the situation in Libya remains very dangerous. The situation throughout the country remains dangerous and unpredictable. Fighting continues in many parts of Libya. It can be unclear in some areas which faction has control. This fighting includes extremist groups such as Ansar Al Sharia and affiliates of Da’esh and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQ-M).
We advise Irish citizens in Libya to leave immediately by commercial means."

If you are a dual Ireland and Libya passport holder, and despite those warnings arrive back on a plane from Libya to Dublin, I think you should be pretty much detained ASAP!!

Saying you are going on holidays doesn't cut the mustard. You were warned, it is recognised as very dangerous, and yet you still go? Why? No UN-mandated NGO participation. A dual passport holder coming back from a known warzone *IS* the person that becomes radicalised as a terrorist - that is who Trump is trying to stop. They use the warzones as training practice, come back to Europe or US, and shoot up a shopping mall, concert hall or drive a truck over people. That is basically what is happening at the moment.

gitzy16v · 30-01-2017 12:35AM

dissed doc wrote: »

I completely agree. The Irish DFA clearly lists the countries as being highly dangerous, and that no Irish national should travel there. If you do, you should be heavily screened.

It is also just like OBama did. He banned Iraq citizens for 6 months. No upset, no whining entitlement cry-episodes.

Zappone would probably like to finish with US pre-clearance as she is worried it may limit her ability to move in unchecked nationals of countries with high risk of terrorist events that otherwise wouldn't be allowed in.

All them lads coming over with Zappone will be gone to England in a week,and we'll be left paying for ghosts.

ancapailldorcha · 30-01-2017 12:36AM

Mary63, do not post in this thread again.

30-01-2017 12:38AM

bubblypop wrote: »

You can't identify people who are intending on committing crime!!!
Luckily in this country we wait till people actually commit a crime before punishing them.

Grand. So, we'll let in known ISIS fighters, and punish them after they've killed a few Europeans - because that's preferable to identifying them before we let them in, and consider the risk to be unacceptable?

I don't think the victims of ISIS terrorists would agree with your reasoning. Do you?

30-01-2017 12:44AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Grand. So, we'll let in known ISIS fighters, and punish them after they've killed a few Europeans - because that's preferable to identifying them before we let them in, and consider the risk to be unacceptable?

I don't think the victims of ISIS terrorists would agree with your reasoning. Do you?

Known ISIS fighters are clearly committing a crime, they are part of an organised terrorist group and as such would not be admitted into Ireland.

gitzy16v · 30-01-2017 12:47AM

bubblypop wrote: »

Known ISIS fighters are clearly committing a crime, they are part of an organised terrorist group and as such would not be admitted into Ireland.

And therefore would be detained in the compulsory checkpoint of people from that region on arrival.

Widdershins · 30-01-2017 12:53AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Grand. So, we'll let in known ISIS fighters, and punish them after they've killed a few Europeans - because that's preferable to identifying them before we let them in, and consider the risk to be unacceptable?

I don't think the victims of ISIS terrorists would agree with your reasoning. Do you?

I think the distinction should be made between *punishing* someone for a crime they *might* potentially commit, and trying to identify the people who pose risks.

I think the latter is vitally important.

30-01-2017 12:56AM

bubblypop wrote: »

You can't identify people who are intending on committing crime!!!
Luckily in this country we wait till people actually commit a crime before punishing them.

bubblypop wrote: »

Known ISIS fighters are clearly committing a crime, they are part of an organised terrorist group and as such would not be admitted into Ireland.

Ah! So, you can identify people who are intending on committing crime - in some circumstances, at least.

Now, how do you identify the known ISIS fighter if they are not carrying any ID?

You can't! So, do we let them in anyway, and allow them to commit an atrocity? The kicker is, we can't actually keep them out, if they claim asylum.

It would be really nice if this situation was conveniently black and white.
It's not.

It's wrong to refuse whatever help we can give to genuine refugees.
It's wrong to stand idly by and let ISIS members terrorize Europe.

Just to really make it tough - some genuine Syrian refugees are ISIS fighters.

How do we solve that one, do you think?

30-01-2017 01:06AM

Widdershins wrote: »

I think the distinction should be made between *punishing* someone for a crime they *might* potentially commit, and trying to identify the people who pose risks.

I think the latter is vitally important.

Of course. But then, I didn't suggest punishing someone for a crime they might potentially commit. I asked how you would identify someone coming here with the express intention of committing a crime.

An ISIS member intent on committing an atrocity would be well worth identifying in advance. The idea that I was suggesting punishing someone because they "might" commit a crime was entirely Bubblypops..

The same reasoning actually applies to those with criminal histories, by the way. Which is why Australia, America, etc. do not issue visas to "undesirables". The risk, based on the previous character of the person, is considered too high.

30-01-2017 01:14AM

Authorities are doing all they can to vet potential refugees coming to Ireland.
Obviously if we know they are ISIS they can be stopped.
There is no justification in blocking all Syrians from Ireland because some, may, be ISIS.
Surely this is completely obvious.

Widdershins · 30-01-2017 01:17AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Of course. But then, I didn't suggest punishing someone for a crime they might potentially commit. I asked how you would identify someone coming here with the express intention of committing a crime.

An ISIS member intent on committing an atrocity would be well worth identifying in advance. The idea that I was suggesting punishing someone because they "might" commit a crime was entirely Bubblypops..

The same reasoning actually applies to those with criminal histories, by the way. Which is why Australia, America, etc. do not issue visas to "undesirables". The risk, based on the previous character of the person, is considered too high.

You certainly didn't. I'm sorry it seemed like that was aimed at you. I had in mind Bubblypop's point about punishing people preemptively and then wanted to agree with your point because it resolved some uncertainty I had about that..I hope that makes sense. Time for a Boards break, I think

alastair · 30-01-2017 03:14AM

dissed doc wrote: »

The only North African country listed is Libya.

Here is the DFA Ireland's assessment:

"Security Status
We advise Irish citizens against all travel to Libya. Irish citizens in Libya are advised to leave immediately by commercial means"

"Latest Travel Alert
Due to the ongoing fighting and the risk of kidnapping or terrorist attacks throughout the country, the situation in Libya remains very dangerous. On 23 December 2016 a domestic flight from Sabha to Tripoli was hijacked and diverted to Malta."

"Security
Due to the ongoing fighting and the risk of kidnapping or terrorist attacks throughout the country, the situation in Libya remains very dangerous. The situation throughout the country remains dangerous and unpredictable. Fighting continues in many parts of Libya. It can be unclear in some areas which faction has control. This fighting includes extremist groups such as Ansar Al Sharia and affiliates of Da’esh and Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQ-M).
We advise Irish citizens in Libya to leave immediately by commercial means."

If you are a dual Ireland and Libya passport holder, and despite those warnings arrive back on a plane from Libya to Dublin, I think you should be pretty much detained ASAP!!

Saying you are going on holidays doesn't cut the mustard. You were warned, it is recognised as very dangerous, and yet you still go? Why? No UN-mandated NGO participation. A dual passport holder coming back from a known warzone *IS* the person that becomes radicalised as a terrorist - that is who Trump is trying to stop. They use the warzones as training practice, come back to Europe or US, and shoot up a shopping mall, concert hall or drive a truck over people. That is basically what is happening at the moment.

The DFA doesn't (and shouldn't) have any warnings about returning from Libya. There are plenty of reasons why a dual Irish/Libyan citizen might choose to travel to Libya - the obvious one being family visits. The notion that you round up anyone who has dared to come back from a state that the DFA issues travel advisories for is just a tad hysterical. Note also that US citizens who travel to any of the Trump-ban states are not restricted from re-entering the US either, so your rather bizarre defence of Trump's intentions really makes no sense.

gitzy16v · 30-01-2017 03:18AM

alastair wrote: »

The DFA doesn't (and shouldn't) have any warnings about returning from Libya. There are plenty of reasons why a duel Irish/Libyan citizen might choose to travel to Libya - the obvious one being family visits. The notion that you round yo anyone who has dared to come back from a state that the DFA issues travel advisories for is just a tad hysterical. Note also that US citizens who travel to any of the Trump-ban states are not restricted from re-entering the US either, so your rather bizarre defence of Trump's intentions really makes no sense.

But if they are dual citizens,thats a problem then?

30-01-2017 03:19AM

Have they arrived yet in Roscommon? If not why not?

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

Comments