Very interesting rumour RE: immigrants

RoundyMooney wrote:

I cannot divulge the source. I believe the person who told me, it is your decision whether you choose to believe me or not. Suffice to say, that my source was "involved".QUOTE]



Yea, isn't it strange that when the Paddy Cullen myth was doing the rounds years ago, no one could divulge the source either, but everyone had it on good authority!!!

Litcagral wrote:

Yea, isn't it strange that when the Paddy Cullen myth was doing the rounds years ago, no one could divulge the source either, but everyone had it on good authority!!!

It may well be strange. I have never heard of Paddy Cullen, however. Presumably he does not permeate to the other 25 counties outside the pale?

Any number of examples can be given. The fact that the dogs in the street knew that Terry Keane's bed was littered with Charvet shirts, that Fr. Michael Cleary was on first name terms with adoption officials...that senior Irish politicians and civil servants were all ridin' the train...all events which failed to "make" the Irish media at the time, although journalists were aware of them, either in detail, or through anecdotal evidence.

There are certain things that mass media will not report, unless it is *very* *very* sure of itself, or if it is certain that it is a palatable story that the public will accept. Either way, in this litigious age, hard evidence is a must. Stories that do not conform to the ridiculous PC world we live will also see the light of day. In the case of racist or inciteful material this is a good thing.

We owe progressive and brave journalists such as Veronica Guerin more than we realise.

Hobbes wrote:

Here let me spell some out for you.
- The Irish government forbids all asylum seekers from working..

But they do on the side, scams galore. the Irish would be hunted down and have their benefits taken off them. But the a/s's are left alone, for fear they will be branded racists. cowards.

Hobbes wrote:

The government sends asylum seekers to various parts of the country to live in hostels, caravan parks, reception centres, etc. ....

Dont forget the private rented accomodation.

Hobbes wrote:

Asylum seekers have no choice about where they are ordered to live. ....

Where are you getting the 'ordered' part from?? they are 'placed' in temp accomodation until they are given longer term.

Hobbes wrote:

Asylum seekers are NOT entitled to local authority housing

My ex asylum neighbours were given a house in blanchardstown.

Hobbes wrote:

http://www.amnesty.ie/content/view/full/764/
* They are NOT given mobile phones by the government.
* They are NOT given grants for cars.
* They are NOT given extra money for socializing.
Thus ends the lesson.

Do you believe this, are you really that naive?
The same ex-neighbour told me what they got - laughing may I add. Im finding it hard to understand why he would lie..
We shall agree to differ on this one Hobbes.

Enii wrote:

Do you object to foreign people dressing in a certain way? Everyone is entitled to dress in whatever fashion they wish.

What next :rolleyes:

Hobbes wrote:

What an evil media we have! Being forced to deal only in facts. :rolleyes:

Political orientation has as much to do with a story decision as the threat of litigation, or are we in the grey area again? :rolleyes:

Hobbes wrote:

So its BS basically.

Wrong. I do not BS on a public forum. There is a very thin line between a thing being anecdotal debate and a newspaper publishing same, and thus placing it in the public domain. That is not to say that everything you see written on a pub toilet wall is gospel fact. If one however is privy to info from one or more sources of different origin, then one can make an informed decision. That is all any of us are doing here.

Hobbes wrote:

Because the official statement is that he was never convicted of any crime and was only deported because his Asylum request was denied. That is McDowells official statement.

Who mentioned a conviction? I certainly did not. In any case a conviction or lack therof is not a prerequisite of criminal activity or tendency.

Hobbes wrote:

"Although I heard you got arrested for shoplifting. Someone close to the incident told me but I cannot divulge my source." Does that sound convincing to you? Because it doesn't to me.

If I were a shoplifter,I would congratulate you on your source. I am not in the business of making up stories to prove a point. I have no personal connection with the incident under discussion, or any of the legal process involved and thus have no axe to grind...

Hobbes wrote:

Someone posting a comment does not equal facts. If the comment can't be backed up by a valid source it is 99.9% bull****.

In your opinion. There are a lot of facts in this world that cannot be quantified or proven. Everyone's lawyers are watching these days, even the state sponsored ones. In my opinion, your refusal to dip a toe in the grey area is naive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggle
An example of this (according to the paper) is where people generally refer to youths having unprotected sex as a major cause of the HIV boom in the UK whereas it was actually more to do with the amount of immigrants coming in from HIV "infested" parts of Africa at the time.
It's off topic, I know but interesting none the less...

Quote
That sounds a little unfounded. Judging by the state of public order today, I think it more likely to be drink fuelled stupidity than a massive influx of African disease.

Todays english Daily Mail carried this story. A story was pulled on BBC radio 4 when someone from teh NHS was going to say that the the vast majority of new HIV cases in the UK were from immigrants from sub-sahara africa. Instead BBC4 put on a minister from the Govt who said condoms needed to be more wideley available to stop the increase in HIV infection!!!!!!


it happens here too.....for the last few years in Ireland, more than half of new HIV cases relate to immigrants from sub-sahara africe. Even Kevin Myers in his Irish mans Diary referred to this some time ago...he stated that Ireland should not be allowed to become the HIV outpatients clinic for Africa.

Shock_treatment wrote:

The best thing they can do there is give the us the feicin' cars so we don't have to look at their faces on public transport. no wonder Irish people become racist. The asylum seekers want for nothing off this country, and we are to let smile at us with a full set of gold choppers? you got to be joking me.

You speaka engrish???

There are very few asylum seekers left in the system in ireland. Most now have their cases heard within 15 weeks, appeals within 7 weeks after that and then the crazy part….instead of being immediately deported they are left for months/years. By the time the govt. makes a half arsed attempt to deport them, local do-gooders etc have campaigns set up to keep them here, solicitors (paid for by the tax payer) start taking out injunctions……

Asylum in this country is a joke, a mess…..and is very 1-sided in favour of the asylum seeker and very much against the tax payer. Even though the number of asylum applications have fallen by 40% odd in the last 2 years, it is now costing in the region of €370m to keep asylum seekers in direct provision in this country each year, compared to €345m 2 years ago. These costs do not include the costs of court cases, deportations, Garda time and resources, Prison costs, grants to the dozens of councils and support groups set up etc etc..
It is my opinion that the asylum system costs this country well over €0.5 billion a year even though we have had about 40,000 asylum seekers in total since 1995. That is phenomenal money.
And that is without mentioning the costs that asylum seekers who remain here after getting through the system in whatever manner (see below) place on the state….in 2002, 5% of the national housing waiting list was made up of former asylum seekers – what is that figure at now (and asylum seekers make up less than 1% of the population) !!!.

Even though only about 6% of asylum applications are successful first time off (about another 15% on appeal), my estimate is that over 80% of asylum seekers have been allowed remain in ireland. How is this? – the irish-born child scenario is how. Before the referendum, 10,000 asylum seekers applied to remain here based on having an irish-born child. In the ‘amnesty’ since then, another 18,000 have been given leave to remain. A complete joke which makes a mockery of our asylum system. And this is without mentioning the Dublin Convention which states that asylum seekers should apply for asylum in the 1st country they land in – if this was enforced Ireland would have zero asylum cases – instead we could take in quotas from other EU countries, to share the case-load, and then Irish people would have no grounds to believe we are being ripped off. Racism in this scenario would be hard to breed.

The Geneva convention needs to be dumped or amended…..cheap, and plentiful flights did not exist when this agreement was drafted….people are blazingly taking advantage of this convention and the taxpayers of Ireland are paying for it through the nose. Lets sort it all out now before we turn into the sort of country that our ‘nearest and dearest’ neighbour across the water now is…..

(all the facts and figures quoted above can be referenced to the Dept. of Justice, Dept of the Environment etc)