Fred Swanson wrote: » This post has been deleted.
Paramite Pie wrote: » Wow, you really put an interesting spin on that didn't you. It's against the law for Asylum seekers to get a job in Ireland, and they could be jailed for working. That is what she's complaining about -- as she clearly said she could've worked under apartheid but not in Ireland.She wants to be taken OFF benefits and look for work/place to live. And yet your outraged...:rolleyes:
Arthur Beesley wrote: » I would object to the use of squalid for a start. There may have been a few isolated cases of sub standard accommodation, the vast majority do not live in squalor.
As for working, it is entirely legitimate that they not work, they are undocumented at this point and they are well aware of this restriction when applying, it should not come as a surprise.
Nodin wrote: » No, those who take transfer flights can claim here. EU travel area has nothing to do with it.
RDM_83 again wrote: » thats my point because those people never clear immigration so they don't actually "enter" another country. However this only works if they have a ticket booked for ireland. Otherwise they fall foul of either receiving a visa once they pass arrival gates to buy another ticket from another Dublin reg country or they enter another Dublin reg country illegally. ............
but at the one that's your intended destination
Nodin wrote: » Indeed. Thus you don't have apply at the first country you physically arrive in, but at the one that's your intended destination.
This means it should be ridiculously easy to prove that someone has satisfied the initial requirements for claiming asylum because they will have all the travel doxumentation on them
AnonoBoy wrote: » A whole family (or families) living in one room is not squalid? This occurs regularly, not in isolated cases. I'm not saying they should be allowed work while in direct provision - I'm saying that the amount of time people spend in direct provision should be decreased, the system needs to be overhauled. Then people can leave Ireland or start to actually live their lives here. At the moment it's not living. There's more people in direct provision in Ireland than there are in our prisons. Serious time for an overhaul. Your attitude seems to be let them rot for a few years and send them back? Since you don't want some of these people here wouldn't you rather their cases get dealt with quickly and then they could be sent back quicker?
smurfjed wrote: » Then its not asylum, .......
RDM83_Again wrote: Hmmm I think "intended destination" misrepresents the rules, to avoid either getting stung by either of the two rules i mentioned they would have had to have actually bought a ticket to ireland in a country outside the Dublin Regs as AFAIK ticket sales are outside the immigration gates.
It is. You just don't like it.
smurfjed wrote: » True.... I just cannot understand how someone can travel from the Middle East across the whole of Europe and claim asylum in Ireland, and i certainly don't understand why the Irish society should be made pay for their accommodation and legal support. In the case of people from the Middle East, why don't they claim asylum in Saudi Arabia or Qatar?
Arthur Beesley wrote: » The problem as referenced earlier is that these people go to any lengths to extend the appeals process. It's their choice to continue appealing once they have been denied.
bear1 wrote: » I'm curious. I'm Irish and have a Polish wife. If my child was to be born in Poland for example is he/she entitled immediately to Irish citizenship? Stupid question I know, just wondering.
Nodin wrote: » ...because they couldn't have booked tickets over the internet, or had them arranged.......
RDM_83 again wrote: » Ok they might buy two separate tickets or whatever, but it doesn't change my point that they would have to have them bought before the first flight in all likelihood and that if the Dublin Regs are being followed there is only a couple of hours (unless your thinking of that Tom Hanks film) in which any evidence of their travel documentation can go missing in an extremely well policed area.There is no reason anybody could legitimately claim that anybody arriving in Ireland that can't show easily checked official travel documentation isn't breaking the Dublin Regs themselves
Yet you're here complaining about the tiny number allowed in Ireland?
You do realise that various middle eastern countries are packed with hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of refugees?
AnonoBoy wrote: » But everyone on Direct Provision isn't going through a lengthy appeals process. There are people who have been on it for years and haven't even had a denial. They're still waiting for their case to be heard. That's not their fault, they haven't lengthened out the process through repeated appeals.
donkey balls wrote: » Speaking from experience anytime I transit through an airport like Heathrow for example my passport was checked in both T3 & T4 before heading on to Dublin,Also as an ex airline employee while traveling on company aircraft my passport would be checked by my colleagues before boarding the aircraft. The same happens with every airline that I have traveled on no passport no flight so I have always being amused how people wanting to claim asylum have no official documents on them,Saying that the GNIB over the last few years are busy with deportations whether it be using commercial flights or charter flights organised with other EU countries.
Donkey Oaty wrote: » Fred is right if you were born in Ireland - but if you are an Irish citizen who wasn't born in Ireland, your child is not automatically an Irish citizen but is entitled to become one (i.e. it has to be applied for via foreign births registration).
Freddie Dodge wrote: » A friend of mine (Irish) is engaged to a South African. Their child will be born here... automatically a citizen or will that child have to apply for citizenship? Does their marital status matter? How do we know the child is ACTUALLY the child of an irish national?
oppenheimer1 wrote: » It's only outrageous if her case hadn't been heard. As almost all cases get heard within 12 months it's likely anyone there longer is appealing a rejection of their application.
Alf. A. Male wrote: » Nice. Say that to your friend. Let us know how you get on.
Alf. A. Male wrote: » How do you know they've exaggerated their circumstances? South Africa may be a safe country in some respects, but it's far from safe for all its inhabitants. Yes, if you are a white South African you can claim asylum. As can Americans. You can claim asylum no matter where you are from, so long as you're outside your country of habitual residence. The success or failure of your claim will depend on the reasons you are outside that country and the existence of more appropriate options for you, such as dual nationality, among other criteria. If you're goiong to bother starting a thread, make a little effort to educate yourself, this information is all freely available and will save you from stupid opening posts.