Travellers protesting the lodging of refugees in a local authority house(read post 1)

Glenster

To be honest with you you're just swapping like for like.

Now, if you were to turf out the travellers and get some working immigrants in I'd be all for it...

Glenster

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

Today’s paper, P15 “Another homeless man dies”

P17 “Irish Navy to travel to Lebanon to bring back 420 refugees”.

If you have places for 420 people, YOU GIVE THEM TO OUR OWN FREEZING TO DEATH ON THE STREETS.

How can anyone disagree with that ?

People on the streets are junkies and bums. The only way you're getting junkies off the street is by giving them a house and money for drugs, and I sure as heck aint doing that.

Realt Dearg Sec

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

You're talking sense - therefore will be shouted down.

Right wing argument="telling it like it is"
Left wing argument="shouting opponents down".

Glad you've set us straight on that.

Realt Dearg Sec

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

So we have no choice but to leave our own country so others can come in ????

You for real ???

That's not what he said. He just thinks you leaving would be great.

Special Circumstances

currants wrote: »

Migrants, including economic migrants, not the same group as Syrian refugees.
...

In 2015 only 34% of those claiming asylum in Germany were Syrians. That figure also includes those people who entered Germany under fake Syrian passports.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36130000

Are you saying you're against these migrants coming into Europe? Should the Mediterranean sea taxi be stopped?

Mortpourvelo

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Are you saying you're against these migrants coming into Europe? Should the Mediterranean sea taxi be stopped?

Yes.

currants

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

Show me how you tell the difference ?

Because the back row of the Afghan XV masquerading as "vulnerable kiddies" couldn't be checked so how do you differentiate??

Could it possibly be that a genuine refugee fleeing for their life is actually in a refugee camp near Syria as they were just glad to be out and the economic migrants are here having passed through 14 different safe countries and are now being prioritised over homeless Irish people ?

You mean a camp like the 420 you mentioned collected from Lebanon?

Mortpourvelo

currants wrote: »

You mean a camp like the 420 you mentioned collected from Lebanon?

Thank you for proving my point.

The ones we're picking up are clearly not fleeing a war are they ? Keep them there.

currants

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Are you saying you're against these migrants coming into Europe? Should the Mediterranean sea taxi be stopped?

I'm saying economic migration should be controlled, Syrian refugees should be housed by the state on humanitarian grounds. They are not the same group of people.

currants

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

Thank you for proving my point.

The ones we're picking up are clearly not fleeing a war are they ? Keep them there.

Um, Lebanon is next door to Syria

dav3

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

Today’s paper, P15 “Another homeless man dies”

P17 “Irish Navy to travel to Lebanon to bring back 420 refugees”.

If you have places for 420 people, YOU GIVE THEM TO OUR OWN FREEZING TO DEATH ON THE STREETS.

How can anyone disagree with that ?

How about todays paper with actual links like...

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/charity-wants-tax-on-dublins-35000-empty-houses-as-capital-sees-record-level-of-homelessness-766467.html

Charity wants tax on Dublin's 35,000 empty houses as capital sees record level of homelessness

Taxes should be slapped on Dublin's 35,000 empty homes as the number of rough sleepers in the capital soars, homelessness campaigners have said...

..."There are just over 35,000 vacant private homes in Dublin,"

Or how about since FG have been in power from 2011, we've had a net migration in this country of -124,600. Meaning there have been 124,600 more people leaving the country than entering.

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2016/

Damn those immigrants and refugees, it's all their fault. It's certainly not the government's fault and their yearly giveaway budgets to the wealthiest in society, who also happen to be their biggest donators.

Realt Dearg Sec

dav3 wrote: »

How about todays paper with actual links like...

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/charity-wants-tax-on-dublins-35000-empty-houses-as-capital-sees-record-level-of-homelessness-766467.html

Charity wants tax on Dublin's 35,000 empty houses as capital sees record level of homelessness



Or how about since FG have been in power from 2011, we've had a net migration in this country of -124,600. Meaning there have been 124,600 more people leaving the country than entering.

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/pme/populationandmigrationestimatesapril2016/

Damn those immigrants and refugees, it's all their fault. It's certainly not the government's fault and their yearly giveaway budgets to the wealthiest in society, who also happen to be their biggest donators.

Shh, that's "shouting down your opponents" who, I think you'll find, have exclusive rights to "telling it like it is".

Mortpourvelo

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

Apples and oranges.

The IRA had proscribed targets - ISIS are compelled to "destroy the Infidel".

Do some research.

Not At all, the IRA had prescribed targets, but it didn't stop them killing plenty of innocents.
ISIS may have a different type of target,.
Terrorists are terrorists.

Are you on with countries banning Irish Catholics, because they could be terrorists?
It's the same argument

Widdershins

bubblypop wrote: »

Not At all, the IRA had prescribed targets, but it didn't stop them killing plenty of innocents.
ISIS may have a different type of target,.
Terrorists are terrorists.

Are you on with countries banning Irish Catholics, because they could be terrorists?
It's the same argument

It is not the same, for one thing the IRA was not a religious terrorist group and their aim was nothing to do with spreading Catholicism whereas ISIS is a religious terror group and do want to spread ISLAM. The IRA were not brainwashed and indoctrinated by religion, ISIS members are.

You can't convert someone to be Irish or spread Irishism so it's not comparable. But is it was the case that IRA were like ISIS I would not mind if the Irish were temporarily banned from entering the UK until they were thoroughly checked out.

Realt Dearg Sec

Widdershins wrote: »

until they were thoroughly checked out.

Meaning what, exactly?

Your other points don't seem relevant to the core issue that English people in the 70s and 80s conflated the IRA and all Irish people, and that this was a means through which to characterise an entire ethnic group as fundamentally dangerous and incompatible with British values. That is to say, it was a means through which to create an Other to hate. The specific aims of one organisation or another aren't relevant to that process, it's about fostering mistrust and hatred. It wasn't right then and it's not right now, and all of the efforts of people on the right to pretend that THIS TIME is a different situation because Muslims, is wilfully ignoring the basic fact that it's the exact same social process. And that process is utterly ugly and reprehensible, no matter what justifications you come up with based on a very shaky and self-serving understanding of Islam or Muslims.

NoFreeGaffs

bubblypop wrote: »

Ridiculous.
Do you know if anyone in Ireland now are members of Isis?

This is not Minority report, police are not psychic.
This is exactly the same as banning all Irish Catholics because they may be members of the IRA

The Brits couldn't plausibly keep the Irish out. The trouble was that they considered part of Ireland to be British. If Irish people were committing terrorist attacks there, we didn't share a border and they didn't lay claim to part of the island of Ireland, then they absolutely would have implemented stringent immigration controls on Irish people.

Thankfully, the Middle East is a continent away. We can absolutely shut our borders to people from the region.

Widdershins

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Meaning what, exactly?

Your other points don't seem relevant to the core issue that English people in the 70s and 80s conflated the IRA and all Irish people, and that this was a means through which to characterise an entire ethnic group as fundamentally dangerous and incompatible with British values. That is to say, it was a means through which to create an Other to hate. The specific aims of one organisation or another aren't relevant to that process, it's about fostering mistrust and hatred. It wasn't right then and it's not right now, and all of the efforts of people on the right to pretend that THIS TIME is a different situation because Muslims, is wilfully ignoring the basic fact that it's the exact same social process. And that process is utterly ugly and reprehensible, no matter what justifications you come up with based on a very shaky and self-serving understanding of Islam or Muslims.

The simplest - most moral thing to do is to prioritize Yazidis, Christians and secular Muslims (like the Kurds) - they are genuine refugees for horrific attrocities - and their need is greatest.
As for what I meant by checking people out, I have asked a garda on Boards what the procedure for vetting people is but they were unable to answer. It means ascertaining whether they have links to ISIS or other 'rebel' groups, and whether they have a history of ties to insurgents or fanatics.


The aims of each group are highly relevant, your use of ridiculous terms like ''Other'' are not.
I won't bother with the rest of your comment because A) It is not the same, and you haven't the depth of comprehension to understand it no matter how many people explain it to you and you're the one with the shaky understanding of Islam. Such a laughable thing to say. I am well informed and know my history. Throwing words like ugly and reprehensible around doesn't intimidate me in the least, knowing what I know and what my secular Muslim friends and extended family have to say about Islam.

NoFreeGaffs

bubblypop wrote: »

Where are you getting this figure From? I heard approx 4000, altogether, plus the 200 or so from Calais.

Ireland is to accept at least 2,900 more refugees and migrants fleeing to Europe’s borders. The increase coupled with existing commitments takes the total to about 4,000 with a series of reception and accommodation centres to be opened around the country over the coming weeks.


The decision was made at a special Cabinet meeting this morning to discuss arrangements for the arrival of several thousand refugees.


The State will now accept up to 2,900 additional persons on top of commitment earlier this year to take in 600 under the proposed EU relocation programme, and 520 programme refugees currently being resettled to Ireland under a previously-agreed scheme.
The scheme is to run for an initial two years.


Priority is to be given to unaccompanied minors, the Government said.


However, the overall number of refugees could rise to approximately 20,000 over the coming years as family members of each person with refugee status are entitled to arrive in Ireland under family reunification rules.


The average number of family members per refugee has been in excess of four in past programmes.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/ireland-to-take-4-000-refugees-in-new-programme-1.2346948

Bubblypop wrote:

Why does everyone assume that state will have to support them? Maybe these people are better educated than us?
What makes you think that they won't work?

They will need housing, language classes, education, welfare etc.

As for them being better educated than us, perhaps they're more educated than you. I don't know. But they're not well educated as a whole. These people are wholly unprepared to enter the labour market of any European country.

Months ago, NRW set up 47 specific "Integration point" centers where refugees can find help with integration classes, guidance counseling, recognition of foreign credentials or finding a kindergarten spot.

Trained staff who speak several languages, often including Arabic and Farsi, also help refugees find their way into the German labor market.

About one out of three refugees has no formal school diploma, the NRW employment agency told DW in an email, adding that young people with little or no schooling rarely have a chance of finding a trainee position.

Seventy percent of the refugees in the state's October unemployment statistics are male, and poorly educated - and the only kind of job they seek is untrained labor.

http://www.dw.com/en/the-challenge-of-finding-jobs-for-refugees-in-germany/a-36574268

Widdershins

NoFreeGaffs wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/ireland-to-take-4-000-refugees-in-new-programme-1.2346948

They will need housing, language classes, education, welfare etc.

As for them being better educated than us, perhaps they're more educated than you. I don't know. But they're not well educated as a whole. These people are wholly unprepared to enter the labour market of any European country.




http://www.dw.com/en/the-challenge-of-finding-jobs-for-refugees-in-germany/a-36574268

Wait and watch and three pages later the ''it's only a few hundred'' nonsense will be trotted out yet again. Followed by ''where are you getting 20,000? '' Followed by another swift change of subject.

Widdershins

Widdershins wrote: »

Wait and watch and three pages later the ''it's only a few hundred'' nonsense will be trotted out yet again. Followed by ''where are you getting 20,000? '' Followed by another swift change of subject.

Coventry just said 4000, and when their families come to join them the figure will be 10 to 12 thousand.
So, not 20000.

Widdershins

bubblypop wrote: »

Coventry just said 4000, and when their families come to join them the figure will be 10 to 12 thousand.
So, not 20000.

If you read the article quoted in the same comment as the video of simon coveney you will see where the figure of 20000 is from. However eve if it was 'only' (!)10 to 12 thousand that is far more than ''a few hundred'' and the associated costs are going to be far higher than some would admit. Denying it is just plain dishonest.

conorhal

dav3 wrote: »

It must be difficult when so many people don't listen to your shouty daily mail rants.

The refugees are coming, no amount of hysterical tabloid stories will stop it. If you have a problem with it I'll gladly drive you to the airport.

How about I give you a lift instead since you're the one so eager live among them?
You talk as if their coming was some immutable law of physics. It isn't. It can absolutely be stopped.
To that end I'd encourage everybody to contact their local TD and express their displeasure about this nonsense, I have. If enough people do so the virtue signalling eejits might think twice.

conorhal

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

So we have no choice but to leave our own country so others can come in ????

You for real ???

In all fairness, he could be on to something, I'd happily swap Dav for a Syrian Christian. That lot really do have no future in the Middle East, we could give them his future and he can go virtue signal his moral superiority to Daesh and explain inclusiveness to them.

Realt Dearg Sec

Widdershins wrote: »

The simplest - most moral thing to do is to prioritize Yazidis, Christians and secular Muslims (like the Kurds) - they are genuine refugees for horrific attrocities - and their need is greatest.
As for what I meant by checking people out, I have asked a garda on Boards what the procedure for vetting people is but they were unable to answer. It means ascertaining whether they have links to ISIS or other 'rebel' groups, and whether they have a history of ties to insurgents or fanatics.


The aims of each group are highly relevant, your use of ridiculous terms like ''Other'' are not.
I won't bother with the rest of your comment because A) It is not the same, and you haven't the depth of comprehension to understand it no matter how many people explain it to you and you're the one with the shaky understanding of Islam. Such a laughable thing to say. I am well informed and know my history. Throwing words like ugly and reprehensible around doesn't intimidate me in the least, knowing what I know and what my secular Muslim friends and extended family have to say about Islam.

Why is Other a ridiculous term? Except that it draws attention to obvious historical parallels that don't suit you. Not sure what you mean by saying those terms don't intimidate you. Nobody is trying to intimidate you. Claiming that those with opposing viewpoints are trying to intimidate you by making their views clear is a fairly standard feature of right-wing rhetoric so I'll assume that's what you were doing there. Would you like a safe space where you aren't exposed to words you don't like?

Speaking of standard right-wing rhetoric..."I know my history" and "some of my best friends are [insert ethnic group being targetted]".

As to the substantial point, your non-answer to the question of how you would go about "checking people out", I'll take that to mean you haven't the faintest clue. Good luck chief.

Widdershins

Realt Dearg Sec wrote: »

Why is Other a ridiculous term? Except that it draws attention to obvious historical parallels that don't suit you. Not sure what you mean by saying those terms don't intimidate you. Nobody is trying to intimidate you. Claiming that those with opposing viewpoints are trying to intimidate you by making their views clear is a fairly standard feature of right-wing rhetoric so I'll assume that's what you were doing there. Would you like a safe space where you aren't exposed to words you don't like?

Speaking of standard right-wing rhetoric..."I know my history" and "some of my best friends are [insert ethnic group being targetted]". Good luck chief.

It's ridiculous because you are making an emotive issue out of a practical one. You are the one obsessed with ethnicity when religion is the root of this problem. Apparently you're fine with the oppression of various minority ethnicities by the religion in question.

I'm not ''right wing'' as it happens, not that it is any of your business. Why would I need a safe space when I'm not the least upset? There you go again dragging emotions into it. You ignore the extensive list of disparities in the histories of the two terrorist groups and think there's a significant historical parallel in the fact that some British people mistrusted Irish people, and some people mistrust people from places where ISIS are active.

I didn't say anything about my best friends being of an ethnic group. I said some of my friends and extended family are ex muslims. Some are also involved in the islamic reform movement, and one was married to a Muslim man. Whereas you can't even understand glaring differences between terror groups and fixate on ethnicity. You're still not grasping the fact that the conversations revolving around religious beliefs, are you?

What is the matter with people like you who can't hold a conversation without labeling people with a political leaning as an insult and distorting everything they say? I don't know if it's lack of intelligence or spite.

This part appears to be new: ''As to the substantial point, your non-answer to the question of how you would go about "checking people out", I'll take that to mean you haven't the faintest clue''. Well, you didn't ask that. You asked what checking out means. It seems to be a difficult thing to do that and I have been trying to ascertain how it's going to be done, if at all, prior to bringing migrants to Ireland for resettlement. So you have just supported my own concern.
My point was that it needs to be done before anyone can be permanently allocated accommodation. There is a process and waiting period for everyone else who immigrates to this country.

NoFreeGaffs

dav3 wrote: »

It must be difficult when so many people don't listen to your shouty daily mail rants.

The refugees are coming, no amount of hysterical tabloid stories will stop it. If you have a problem with it I'll gladly drive you to the airport.

You want Irish people who have issue with this to leave and make room for foreigners?

Special Circumstances

currants wrote: »

I'm saying economic migration should be controlled, Syrian refugees should be housed by the state on humanitarian grounds. They are not the same group of people.

Oooh that's practically neo Nazi talk according to folks on here! Mind yourself!

Special Circumstances

Widdershins wrote: »

The simplest - most moral thing to do is to prioritize Yazidis, Christians and secular Muslims (like the Kurds) - they are genuine refugees for horrific attrocities - and their need is greatest.
As for what I meant by checking people out, I have asked a garda on Boards what the procedure for vetting people is but they were unable to answer. It means ascertaining whether they have links to ISIS or other 'rebel' groups, and whether they have a history of ties to insurgents or fanatics.

Considering the hoo hah made about a homophobic bigot such as mike pence being invited to Ireland I assume all the anti bigotry people will be clamouring for some sort of conditions to be put on all these others we are inviting. Any penchant for throwing gays off buildings, beating the shi-ite out of women for asking to learn to drive, a longing for sharia law to be applied in their areas etc should be grounds for "not tonight lads".

Unless tis only "them shtoopid American bigots" that we want to keep out?

Consistency in a world gone mad. Too much to ask?

Widdershins

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Considering the hoo hah made about a homophobic bigot such as mike pence being invited to Ireland I assume all the anti bigotry people will be clamouring for some sort of conditions to be put on all these others we are inviting. Any penchant for throwing gays off buildings, beating the shi-ite out of women for asking to learn to drive, a longing for sharia law to be applied in their areas etc should be grounds for "not tonight lads".

Unless tis only "them shtoopid American bigots" that we want to keep out?

Consistency in a world gone mad. Too much to ask?

Apparently none of it matters because the core issue is actually anti irish prejudice in the 70s and 80s :eek:

conorhal

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Considering the hoo hah made about a homophobic bigot such as mike pence being invited to Ireland I assume all the anti bigotry people will be clamouring for some sort of conditions to be put on all these others we are inviting. Any penchant for throwing gays off buildings, beating the shi-ite out of women for asking to learn to drive, a longing for sharia law to be applied in their areas etc should be grounds for "not tonight lads".

Unless tis only "them shtoopid American bigots" that we want to keep out?

Consistency in a world gone mad. Too much to ask?

You expect consistency from the loons that loudly proclaim that VP Pence isn't welcome here due to his views on homosexuality and his support for conversion therapy, yet splooge all over condolence books for Castro ....who believed exactly the same thing?