Failed asylum seekers flown to Nigeria

Sam Vimes · 06-04-2006 08:35AM

Hobbes wrote:

Correct.. EU country. While we don't have direct flights to Nigeria a Nigerian can still claim asylum in such instances of...

1) Boarding a flight from a non-EU country to Ireland.
2) Getting on a boat that is going directly to Ireland (if it started off or dropped by Nigeria is immaterial).

hobbes, every boat that is coming into ireland is coming direct. direct from france, or england or america or whatever. by that logic someone could come via mars and it would still be a "direct connection". having heard that they have to apply for asylum in the first safe country they get to, not the first EU country, i don't think we should accept any nigerian asylum applications. merely the act of applying for asylum in our country is breaking the law since they had to go through a safe country to do it

Hobbes wrote:

What exactly are you trying to say? What it says to me there are chancers trying to get here but they are getting turned away. Or are you trying to infer those who made it through the system don't deserve to be here?

anyone who's ever worked in retail, especially in high value products like electronics, will tell you that the chancers are by no means being turned away

miju wrote:

well actually 10 minutes on google didn't turn up his reason for claiming asylum (would you mind pointing me to a link where i can read it)

he's a poor little orphan. no wait he's a student. no wait he's a father. in fact hes a criminal and a scumbag

Hobbes wrote:

Another misconception is that the "PC brigade" see this as a bad thing. It isn't. They failed the tests to be proven as an asylum seeker then deporting them is a non-issue.

kunle failed the tests several times and committed crimes in the meantime. a lot of people in this country don't consider him a "non-issue"

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 08:59AM

Hobbes wrote:

D
I'm sorry I still don't understand wtf you are going on about. Of course people are denied asylum and in quite a few cases they are chancing thier arms to get here.

While here they cost money! They get here illegally and then cost us money. Other EU states were/are letting them come here

Hobbes wrote:

So? Are you saying only Nigerians should be refused entry to Ireland? How about Americans of Nigerian decent?

Nothing of the sort just pointing out we are talking about asylum seekers and not visas. Do you know of US citzens seeking asylumn in Ireland?

Hobbes wrote:

What stuff exactly? They can't work, they have to stay in camps set up for them and they are extremly limited cash access. What is your solution? To refuse everyone or let them starve?

They can't work leaglly. While on limited cash and they can see money about after getting here illegally and making a false claim do you really think they are acting legally once here? That is so unbelievable nieve at best. I am not surprised or shocked I just don't like it. Quicker return times and fines to EU states allowing entry to here. Deportation of any asylum seekr breaking the law no questions asked. Has anybody arrived in this country starving? How many of the 46000+ arrived starcving. Stop making up stuff.

Hobbes wrote:

You mean you haven't actually read up on the case? Why not go do it now.

AS you can't answer the question I am going to take it that you don't know. If for every question asked of you you claim it is out there it suggests your ignorance of other facts extends to all things you say. Still waiting for you to admitt you were completely wrong about Ireland .
I do know his legal challenge is not based on his original claim but what he did while in the country

Hobbes wrote:

I don't know where you live but you could get all manners of drugs from Irish criminal gangs as well.

Well that isn't true according to the news reports and Gardai who directly link crack to nigerian gangs. The Powdered form of crack was cornered by nigerian gangs because Dublin gangs didn't know how it was done. Simply heating the powder creates the cyrstals. Other fraud is directly linked to foreign nationals in this country. When you have no source of legitimate income you do illegal stuff. I am not surprised or blaming them it is just fact and human nature.

I have no idea why you avid answering what is asked of you but I am fully aware you like asking other people questions instead. When you are found to be wrong you ignore it. You a appear to be just a troll and geting some twisted pleasure in winding people up. It is all sad if you ask me as you have proved no point just countered everything said and never show anything supporting your argument.

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 09:31AM

MorningStar wrote:

While here they cost money! They get here illegally and then cost us money. Other EU states were/are letting them come here

So what is your solution then? Deny everyone Asylum?

Do you know of US citzens seeking asylumn in Ireland?

Actually there has been at least one case I know of where a US citizen claimed asylum in the EU. Its not unheard of. Even so if there are chancers coming via Asylum there are probably chancers coming via the Visa system as well.

While on limited cash and they can see money about after getting here illegally and making a false claim do you really think they are acting legally once here?

So you are saying every Asylum seeker that comes to Ireland does so illegally and breaks the laws once here. And you worked this out how exactly?

Well that isn't true according to the news reports and Gardai who directly link crack to nigerian gangs.

Not what was being claimed by the previous poster. They said they were setting up drug factories here. Total BS. There is a criminal nigerian gang helping to route drugs via Africa to Ireland (I did see that report). Different thing.

However even so, to make a leap that there is a criminal gang means that all people of that nationality are criminals is quite a stretch. May as well call all Irish terrorists then.

When you are found to be wrong you ignore it.

When found to be wrong on what exactly? If your still going on about Aids/TB the point was Ireland has its cases too. The assertion was to try and imply that people coming here are all diseased. Again we have another assertion that people coming here are all criminals. Its total tosh.

It is all sad if you ask me as you have proved no point just countered everything said and never show anything supporting your argument.

Supporting what argument exactly? I am countering the BS people are spouting?

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 09:42AM

Commander Vimes wrote:

hobbes, every boat that is coming into ireland is coming direct.

That is not true. You have transport boats that can make stops at various ports.

having heard that they have to apply for asylum in the first safe country they get to, not the first EU country,

There is absolutly no international law whatsoever that says an Asylum seeker must seek help in the first country they enter into. Only a law in relation to the EU. Some countries outside of the EU have the first country rule law so that they don't have to hear asylum cases.

Delboy05 · 06-04-2006 09:52AM

Hobbes wrote:

Riiighht. And where did they get the source from? You do know that government figures are pretty transparent and you can find pretty much anything on the net on a subject. Of course you took some guy on a radio as gospel.
You will have try a wee bit harder then that.

your away with the fairies. Sean Power is one of the more decent politicians in this country. He quoted the stats from official figures which I think were from the Dept of the environment if my memory serves me right. There were many other 'interested' parties on the panel and no one argued with him.
The Sunday Supplement is a reputable radio show......so you really are letting yourself down here - like I said, if you read up more on this topic or listened out for stories, you'd be all the better able to argue your side of things in a more rationale manner than just shouting everyone down and scraming about google all the time!!!!

Hobbes wrote:

http://www.google.com/search?q=cocai...en-US:official

Checked a number of the stories. See no mention of Nigerians. Then I added "Nigerian" to the search and found nothing.

your full of crap basically.

I said CRACK cocaine - not cocaine!!!! Do you know the difference? Or are you deliberately trying to skew the argument towards facts you CAN find, no matter how unrelated they are to what we're talking about. Maybe your the one struggling to use google properly.
I think the fact you insult me at the end of the above shows your lack of intelligence Keep it up and I'll report you -

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 10:00AM

Hobbes wrote:

So what is your solution then? Deny everyone Asylum?

Unless they come directly from the place they are fleeing yes. THe current system isn't working so what is your suggestion

Hobbes wrote:

Actually there has been at least one case I know of where a US citizen claimed asylum in the EU. Its not unheard of. Even so if there are chancers coming via Asylum there are probably chancers coming via the Visa system as well.

Again the list was for visas. The visa application system is very differnt and again you show ignorance on the subject. You have to apply for a visa before you work here. Most require an employer staing they will employ you and they can't find an Irish/EU citizen to do the work.

Hobbes wrote:

So you are every Asylum seeker that comes to Ireland does so illegally and breaks the laws once here. And you worked this out how exactly?

Well if you go look at the refugee council figures you will see that ther are no direct routes here from the top five countries . You never explained how people magically make it here with out entering another country that signed the international asylumn rules. Want to explain the route now or you going to ignore this as well I made it bold so it would be a little bit more difficult

Hobbes wrote:

Not what was being claimed by the previous poster. They said they were setting up drug factories here. Total BS. There is a criminal nigerian gang helping to route drugs via Africa to Ireland (I did see that report). Different thing.

You addressed me not the previous poster. I stand by my claim and you are just saying it isn't true doesn't make it so anyway.

Hobbes wrote:

However even so, to make a leap that there is a criminal gang means that all people of that nationality are criminals is quite a stretch. May as well call all Irish terrorists then.

I haven't claimed an entire nationality are criminals and nobody here has either. You keep saying this but it is not true. THere is a large criminal activity associated with people seeking asylumn are you denying this or not?

Hobbes wrote:

When found to be wrong on what exactly? If your still going on about Aids/TB the point was Ireland has its cases too. The assertion was to try and imply that people coming here are all diseased. Again we have another assertion that people coming here are all criminals. Its total tosh.

I did not imply this you think I did. REad what I said and stop making assumptions. It is a legitaimate concern that people entrying this country carry desease as porved by figure. You suggested strongly that irleland hadas big a problem which was wrong. When somebody proves you wrong you withdraw what you say not ignore it. NOBODY HAS MADE THE STATEMENTS YOU KEEP CLAIMING. If they do pick on them and I will join you but stop accusing me or others of it.

Hobbes wrote:

Supportng what argument exactly? I am countering the BS people are spouting?

YOu are making up BS and claiming peopl are saying it. Your counter arguement are flawed and when called on matters you avoid ging facts. When your facts show the case more you ignore it too. I can't find the reason for Kunle original deportation can you please state it as I get the impression you don't know becasue more than one person asked for it and you never said. Stop assuming views and start reading waht is being said. It is perfectl y understandable peopl think you are a PC loon if you ignore what is being said and decide what people mean.

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 10:15AM

MorningStar wrote:

Unless they come directly from the place they are fleeing yes. THe current system isn't working so what is your suggestion

The current system is working fine. Those that are not valid refugees are sent back. I get the impression that we must somehow treat all these people are liars and thieves before thier case is even heard.

The visa application system is very differnt and again you show ignorance on the subject. You have to apply for a visa before you work here.

Actually that is not always true and I am somewhat familar with the visa system here having to had to visit GNIB on a number of occasions.

You never explained how people magically make it here with out entering another country that signed the international asylumn rules.

What international asylum rules? There is no international law that states you must claim asylum in the first country. If I am wrong please dig out the law so I can read it. Kthx.

There is a large criminal activity associated with people seeking asylumn are you denying this or not?

I am saying that it is bull****. That what people have posted so far has no corrollation. Where are you getting your figures that the majority of Asylum seekers are criminals?

It is a legitaimate concern that people entrying this country carry desease as porved by figure.

Sorry but your figure proved dick. While the figure for 2004 may of been at 50% no where in the facts posted does it show that those people came to this country via Asylum process.

arguement are flawed and when called on matters you avoid givng facts.

rofl. Yea right. You mean you avoid reading the facts.

I can't find the reason for Kunle original deportation can you please state it as I get the impression you don't know becasue more than one person asked for it and you never said.

I already posted it and I already had known. There have been numerous threads on this guy already. You would think you would actually read up on the stuff you are spouting about.

understandable peopl think you are a PC loon if you ignore what is being said and decide what people mean.

Better to be called names then be totally ignorant.

rkeane · 06-04-2006 10:30AM

Hobbes, the 1951 convention states that asylum seekers must seek refuge in the first safe country. Unless there is a hot air balloon service direct from Nigeria - we should be deporting thousands of them. They are simply economic spongers for the most part. I look forward to Kunle loosing his appeal as it will act as a reminder to the Irish people that we are being exploited as a Nation by criminal elements from Nigeria (and elsewhere)

Every single day I work with Asylum seekers, frankly I'm at the end of my tether listening to the absolute dog **** stories they come up with. When it comes to verifying their stories - they can't! Then they get RAR involved to start very expensive legal battles with the department of Justice....I'm sick to death with my taxes being wasted on these spongers. The recognition rates for Nigerian Asylum seekers in Ireland at the 1st instance is 0.6% - you do the Maths.

miju · 06-04-2006 10:40AM

ok thanks for that quick google lesson but again i've not been able to find the reason he's claiming asylum in the first 7 pages of google following your search term other than the link you provided which states

Mr Eluhanla claimed asylum in Dublin after his father was killed in a shooting in Lagos.

if this is the basis of his claim he should be booted out tomorrow not even granted a judicial review wasting the tax payers money as NO WHERE in the world would recognise this claim as a genuine refugee, this is in no way shape or form a basis for a claim for asylum, his father was shot and killed not him, if he feared for his life he could have relocated somewhere else in Nigeria (it's a pretty big place with a massive population) he wasn't being persecuted in any way

miju · 06-04-2006 10:46AM

http://www.ufsia.ac.be/~dvanheul/migration/genconv.html

some good reading for people to educate themselves on the definition of a reguee / asylum seeker

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 10:52AM

Hobbes wrote:

The current system is working fine. Those that are not valid refugees are sent back. I get the impression that we must somehow treat all these people are liars and thieves before thier case is even heard.

No it isn't. People enter this country aren't granted aylumn and then stay anyway.

Hobbes wrote:

Actually that is not always true and I am somewhat familar with the visa system here having to had to visit GNIB on a number of occasions.

Go with the majority of cases and not the exception for one moment countering everything has to have reason and logic.

Hobbes wrote:

What international asylum rules? There is no international law that states you must claim asylum in the first country. If I am wrong please dig out the law so I can read it. Kthx.

So according to you there is no international agreements. THe Geniva convetion for example and other such agreements cover many countries explain how apeople are missing other countries that signed the same agreements as us. There is not the Dublin II which means EU countries are responsible for people who enter the EU through them. YOumentioned it yourself so explain a route that menas people can only seek asylum here. If these people are truely running as you suggest then why come here? If it is becasue conditions are better here than the first country they can ask asylumn that is a finacial migrant

Hobbes wrote:

I am saying that it is bull****. That what people have posted so far has no corrollation. Where are you getting your figures that the majority of Asylum seekers are criminals?
WHo said that? Point out where it was saidThe majority of seekers are false claims as proved by your facts

Sorry but your figure proved dick. While the figure for 2004 may of been at 50% no where in the facts posted does it show that those people came to this country via Asylum process.
THe majority of people enterying this country from the AFrican contenent are trought the aslyumn process directly or indirectly. THat is a fact and to claim otherwiase you will have to prove it. A large portion of people with certain medical condition s are from the same place. You are stupid to deny this and that is not countering but ignorance.

Hobbes wrote:

rofl. Yea right. You mean you avoid reading the facts.

Name one fact I ignored and I will list what you claim is being said and what is actually been said

Hobbes wrote:

I already posted it and I already had known. There have been numerous threads on this guy already. You would think you would actually read up on the stuff you are spouting about.

Post it again becasue your links tend to be not what is asked for. WHat is the reason?

Hobbes wrote:

Better to be called names then be totally ignorant.

YOu are ignoring what is being said and making up stuff.

Delboy05 · 06-04-2006 10:54AM

Hobbes wrote:

Here is a question for you. What was the level of waiting list that makes up 5% I am curious if you cross referenced that with the number of Refugees in Ireland at that time to see if they corrolate? Can you point me to the figures in question?

i've done some more work for you Hobbes, and got you a link
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2003/0430/347070624HM5ASYLUM.html
As of December 03, 5% of the housing waiting list was made up of former asylum seekers. And yes the figures do correlate i.e. there are'nt more former asylum seekers on the list than ever came here in the 1st place (if thats what you were getting at), and yes the figures are from official sources, and yes The Irish Times is a reputable paper, and yes..........

Victor wrote:

Is that one former asylum seeker on a list of three people?

Very funny Victor - good way to disprove my point!!!! Very mature.

Miju - I would'nt waste my time googling for evidence that Hobbes apparently finds.....see my last post on his Google for Crack Cocaine - he only actually googles for Cocaine....I think his googling is selective, to say the least

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 11:17AM

Delboy05 wrote:

i've done some more work for you Hobbes, and got you a link
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/ireland/2003/0430/347070624HM5ASYLUM.html
As of December 03, 5% of the housing waiting list was made up of former asylum seekers.

Ok so your whole basis for the current day argument is facts of over 3 years ago. You can't do better then that?

Can you also post the headline link to that page as I can't read it (you need to pay to read it), but if I have the headline and a portion of the text I can find it.

Btw, Percentages mean dick without figures behind them. If there are a 100 people on the Laois waiting list that means that 5 people were refugees. Which means what exactly? That there is a huge influx of refugees onto the housing waiting list?

Hobbes, the 1951 convention states that asylum seekers must seek refuge in the first safe country.

http://www.ufsia.ac.be/~dvanheul/migration/genconv.html

I have read it. I missed the bit where it says that. Prehaps you can point it out for me.

No it isn't. People enter this country aren't granted aylumn and then stay anyway.

They can stay on appeal but once that is seen then if they fail they can be sent back.

So according to you there is no international agreements.
... There is not the Dublin II which means EU countries are responsible for people who enter the EU through them.

Correct. There is no international agreement that says first country you must apply for asylum there. The links been posted. Go read it if you don't believe me.

Dublin II is not an international agreement. It is an EU agreement.

Delboy05 · 06-04-2006 11:27AM

Hobbes wrote:

Ok so your whole basis for the current day argument is facts of over 3 years ago. You can't do better then that?

Can you also post the headline link to that page as I can't read it (you need to pay to read it), but if I have the headline and a portion of the text I can find it.

Btw, Percentages mean dick without figures behind them. If there are a 100 people on the Laois waiting list that means that 5 people were refugees. Which means what exactly? That there is a huge influx of refugees onto the housing waiting list?

Not my fault you dont have the Times on-line. I'm not infinging copyright.
And the reason I use figures that far back is that they are the last widely available figures published - 2005 figures to be released this year. I'd guess thats where Sean Power got his heads up on the Portlaoise figures - and I'd be fairly certain there are more than 100 people on the waiting list in Laois....common sense would tell you that!!!!
I also made it clear when i originally mentioned by stats that the figures were from 2002/03...so don't try and rubbish what i say. i prove something to you and you then try and attack it from another angle!!!!!

And I also think it's fair to assume that the figure for asylum seekers on the housing waiting list has shot up nationally, and that Portlaoise is not an isolated case. Lets face it, the majority of people claiming residency here under the baby rule and thus opting out of the asylum process, happened between 2001 and 2004. So i await the figures for 2005 with great interest....

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 11:36AM

Delboy05 wrote:

Not my fault you dont have the Times on-line. I'm not infinging copyright.

Cut and pasting the title would not be infringing copyright.

I'd be fairly certain there are more than 100 people on the waiting list in Laois....common sense would tell you that!!!!

Well lets say its 1,000 people. That is 50 people who are refugees. 10,000 it is 500 people.

How big is Laois? Like I said until you have figures to corralate against the percentage it is meaningless.

Even so, please tell me what a refugee should do instead of going onto the housing list? Live on the streets?

And I also think it's fair to assume that the figure for asylum seekers on the housing waiting list has shot up nationally,

I say it probably multipled by 10,000... Whats 0 x 10,000 again? Oh wait its 0. Asylum seekers cannot be put on the housing list. Only refugees can.

thus opting out of the asylum process, happened between 2001 and 2004. So i await the figures for 2005 with great interest....

Look just because you had a child here before didn't mean you were magically removed from the Asylum process. You still had your case worked on. Also prior the constitution change there was already a case that proved having a child here does not guarantee you can stay here.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 11:47AM

Hobbes wrote:

Correct. There is no international agreement that says first country you must apply for asylum there. The links been posted. Go read it if you don't believe me.

Dublin II is not an international agreement. It is an EU agreement.

You absolute troll. Dublin II is an international agreement and an EU agreement. More than one nation signed it. The 1951 agreement is signed by more than one nation so is international. Many countries are denied aid or trade untill they sign it.

Explain why so many comes to ireland over the first country they can ask for asylumn?
Explain the route people use where ireland is the first country they can ask for asylumn.

Forget the law and just explain the reasons they come here!

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 11:54AM

MorningStar wrote:

You absolute troll. Dublin II is an international agreement and an EU agreement.

No. It is an EU agreement only. It relates to where an Asylum seeker is processed in the EU when they enter the EU. If they enter Ireland from an non-EU state then they would be processed in Ireland.

The 1951 agreement is signed by more than one nation so is international.

You are referring to the "1951 Convention on Refugees and 1967 Protocol". Which does not detail anything about having to declare asylum in the first country you go into..

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm

Also while it is an international agreement many countries around the world ignore it.

Forget the law and just explain the reasons they come here!

Who are *they* exactly?

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 12:14PM

Hobbes wrote:

No. It is an EU agreement only. It relates to where an Asylum seeker is processed in the EU when they enter the EU. If they enter Ireland from an non-EU state then they would be processed in Ireland.

Trolling still. More than one nation signs an agreement that makes it international as I pointed out and you ignore.

Hobbes wrote:

You are referring to the "1951 Convention on Refugees and 1967 Protocol". Which does not detail anything about having to declare asylum in the first country you go into..

http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_c_ref.htm

Also while it is an international agreement many countries around the world ignore it.

Didn't say it did

Hobbes wrote:

Who are *they* exactly?

You don't know what you are talking about now?
Asylum seekers

Now will you answer the questions put to you?

Delboy05 · 06-04-2006 12:26PM

Hobbes wrote:

Cut and pasting the title would not be infringing copyright.

Well lets say its 1,000 people. That is 50 people who are refugees. 10,000 it is 500 people.

How big is Laois? Like I said until you have figures to corralate against the percentage it is meaningless.

Even so, please tell me what a refugee should do instead of going onto the housing list? Live on the streets?

I say it probably multipled by 10,000... Whats 0 x 10,000 again? Oh wait its 0. Asylum seekers cannot be put on the housing list. Only refugees can.

Look just because you had a child here before didn't mean you were magically removed from the Asylum process. You still had your case worked on. Also prior the constitution change there was already a case that proved having a child here does not guarantee you can stay here.

thats it - finished with you. I am now certain you cannot argue a topic in a rationale manner and that you are completely ignorant of the whole process:

1. i told you earlier the figures for Portlaoise were 30% in 05. The 5% relates to the national waiting list in 02/03. You are now trying to impose the 5% figure on to Laois to suit your argument. Makes absolutely no sense especially as your plucking your 1,000 figure from thin air - something you criticise other people for doing.

2. I never ever said that asylum seekers were on the housing list. I always used the term FORMER asylum seekers, meaning they managed to win their cases in whatever manner, to be allowed stay here. You completely ignore me saying that and rant on....

3. People who had children here after the govt. and embassies removed application forms for irish born baby citizenship and before the referendum changes came into effect, withdrew themselves from the asylum process as they were sure they'd still be allowed stay here as they were having or due to have a baby. This is the reason we recently had 18,000 people involved in the amnesty to stay here that McDowell announced...these people withdrew themselves from the process because of irish born children. Read the papers for the last few months.....you'll see lots of stories on this - i did...and practically all of the 18,000 were given leave to remain. God bless the sucker irish taxpayers...

Your points are incoherent, your googling is terrible, you contradict yourself and misquote people, you don't seem to read papers or listen to the radio.....you are either trolling (which from previous topics I doubt) or are just totally misguided on this topic...in my opinion. So no point arguing further with you on this....

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 01:17PM

Delboy05 wrote:

1. i told you earlier the figures for Portlaoise were 30% in 05. The 5% relates to the national waiting list in 02/03.

Yet when I ask you for the source of the 05 figures you quote 03 and tell me the figures were on a radio station for 05.

Even so 30% is meaningless again without figures. I picked a 1000 as an example. Lets say 100,000 does that number look more scary?

I am still trying to figure what you find so wrong about refugees being on the housing list. Are you saying that Refugees don't need to be on the house waiting list? That they are magically able to come to Ireland and afford a house?

I always used the term FORMER asylum seekers,

Except for your last post on the subject you did.

3. People who had children here after the govt. and embassies removed application forms for irish born baby citizenship and before the referendum changes came into effect, withdrew themselves from the asylum

You have no clue. There is a huge fricken thread on the citizenship referendum on the subject. The facts in the matter was there was a court case a couple of years before the constitution changed that showed that having a child here did not guarantee you could stay here. After the court case the number people applying based on a child dropped dramatically.

I don't know what your going on about an application form in embassies as it would have nothing to do with Asylum seekers.

More than one nation signs an agreement that makes it international as I pointed out and you ignore.

roffle. nitpicking now to try and prove your point.

Nice to see we have moved away from Nigerians and just talking about Asylum seekers now as for your questions.

Explain why so many comes to ireland over the first country they can ask for asylumn?

Can you prove that more Asylum seekers come to Ireland over the first country they can ask for asylum?

Explain the route people use where ireland is the first country they can ask for asylumn.

Any route that doesn't start off in an EU state.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 01:32PM

Hobbes wrote:

Nice to see we have moved away from Nigerians and just talking about Asylum seekers now as for your questions.

Not my fault you can't pay attention

Hobbes wrote:

Can you prove that more Asylum seekers come to Ireland over the first country they can ask for asylum?

That's a question not a not answer

Hobbes wrote:

Any route that doesn't start off in an EU state.

That is not an answer either and EU states are not the only place people can seek asylumn.

So you still haven't answered the questions so you must be trolling. I don't know why a mod of Islam would keep lying and denying the truth. I must visit this section of boards and see what Islamic views are on lying, denying truth and refusal to answer.

miju · 06-04-2006 02:27PM

Hobbes wrote:

Can you prove that more Asylum seekers come to Ireland over the first country they can ask for asylum?

no proof is really need, put simply the country of Ireland is an island therefore you have to pass through AT LEAST 1 other country to get here

ferdi · 06-04-2006 02:29PM

there are 137,000,000 people in nigeria, 9th in the world. thats not important, just interesting.

Hobbes · 06-04-2006 02:34PM

miju wrote:

no proof is really need, put simply the country of Ireland is an island therefore you have to pass through AT LEAST 1 other country to get here

Yea but the point is that they will be seen here if that other country is not in the EU. Which is why I am wondering how he knows that they actively targetting this country.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 02:48PM

Hobbes wrote:

Yea but the point is that they will be seen here if that other country is not in the EU. Which is why I am wondering how he knows that they actively targetting this country.

STILL IGNORING THE QUESTIONS PUT TO YOU!

noanarchistfan · 14-04-2006 08:48PM

Sorry to hurt your feelings (to those who favour the contentious 'allow every asylum seeker in policy) but surely an asylum seeker is obliged to have their case processed rather than just 'allowing them in'. Correct me if I'm wrong but that is what most people in this country favour.

Nightwish · 14-04-2006 09:01PM

Look they guy failed the asylum process twice. He lied about how he got here and thus breached the Dublin Convention, commited minor road traffic offences while here. The Irish people changed the law with regards asylum seekers attempting to stay here on the grounds of having a child, so he has no case to answer here. Its sad that he has made friends while here, but he had no right to be here in the first place and still has no right to be here.

RoundyMooney · 14-04-2006 10:57PM

Hobbes wrote:

Yea but the point is that they will be seen here if that other country is not in the EU. Which is why I am wondering how he knows that they actively targetting this country.

To be fair, Hobbes, the dogs on the street are privy to the following facts, and no amount of googling is necessary to back them up;

(1) Nigeria is ranked as the second most corrupt country in the world today (Bangladesh is numero uno). Therefore, it naturally follows that (a) folk will want to escape, and (b) a fair proportion of said folk will bring with them socially undesirable traits of skullduggery of varying degrees of seriousness and malice. Going on my experiences, I would be loath to trust any Nigerian, and will be happy to explain why. However the very fact that they come from such a sh1thole engenders sympathy in me, and I think it only fair to take them as I find them, bearing in mind, that they are generally *economic* refugees, and not as such escaping social persecution. The desire to get something for nothing is unfortunately not unique to any asylum seeker (we have enough spongers of our own, thanks to our lamentable welfare system). If it was, life would be a hell of a lot easier...

Anyway that's a total aside to your point. Moving on to

(2) You can be very certain that Nigerian would be emigrants know damn well that Ireland is a promised land in terms of staring a new life, for whatever reason. They don't sever all ties when they get here. I remember an interesting (if ill written) report you posted a while back. A thesis of some kind by a Nigerian student I believe, which actively proves that they do target this great little country *ahem*, and goes some way to explaining why. Again, our system of coping with these people is a travesty, failing both to weed out the scum, and give the honest a kick-start.

I get depressed just thinking about it.

I remember we spoke a while back about Kunle. It seems his chickens have come home to roost at last, and not before time...

Yook · 15-04-2006 12:56AM

Nightwish wrote:

Look they guy failed the asylum process twice. He lied about how he got here and thus breached the Dublin Convention, commited minor road traffic offences while here. The Irish people changed the law with regards asylum seekers attempting to stay here on the grounds of having a child, so he has no case to answer here. Its sad that he has made friends while here, but he had no right to be here in the first place and still has no right to be here.

Bingo! And its also sad that people feel they have to defend him so they themselves wont be called by others for not being PC. I hate what this country has become.

edit: Irish people standing up for this guy are making a difference. They are wasting money that could be put into our degrading hospitals and terrible road network.

bounty · 15-04-2006 07:10AM

send them all back to nigeria, send all the scumbags off to nigeria too, people with bad attitudes should have their citizenship revoked

Failed asylum seekers flown to Nigeria

Comments