Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

And so it begins...

Options
12467…12

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,944 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    Rubberchikken wrote: »
    i don't see anythin wrong with what he's doing. a government should be looking out for and after their own country. isn't that part of why they're elected in the first place?

    this is actually a very important statement! have we lost our way, are our governments doing what they should be doing or what we require them to do?


  • Options
    #93
    vicwatson
    Registered Users Posts: 28,403 ✭✭✭✭vicwatson


    A stay has been put on the order, ACLU took it into court last night.

    Here's some stats for yis - 737 people killed by falling out of bed :D:D....only in America

    C3ShpWXWIAEoHEe.jpg


  • Options
    #94
    wakka12
    Registered Users Posts: 9,786 ✭✭✭wakka12


    eeguy wrote: »
    None are insignificant in and of themselves. They're all atrocious.

    My point is that they statistically pale in comparison to what's already going on in these countries yet recieved disproportionately huge media emphasis.
    Do you disagree with this?

    Why spend huge resources to prevent rare occurances instead of focusing on more prevalent, home grown threats?

    Hundreds of people being gunned down on the streets of Paris received suitably large media coverage imo. As did almost 100 people being run over by a truck whilst celebrating on the beach in Nice. I don't know how you can expect events such as that to not receive massive news coverage regardless of who perpetrated it. Mass murder receives huge coverage even if its not a muslim extremist attack, such as in Oslo in 2011.
    Car crashes and others which kill larger amounts of people over time are less talked about as they don't involve large amounts of people being murdered in one place at one time by one group of people. Your argument is silly


  • Options
    #95
    eeguy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,478 ✭✭✭eeguy


    wakka12 wrote: »
    And how is the fact that 90% of the people in the Bataclan survived relevant or important in this discussion? Would our fear of such an attack occurring again only be warranted if 100% of the guests had been murdered???:confused:
    Again you are really playing down 90 innocent people being murdered and dismembered in a theatre
    And what difference does it make that they thought it was a fire? Pretty irrelevant seeing as it ****ing well wasnt a fire ,they were confused and scared ,again I don't understand why you even mentioned this

    I'm not trying to normalise or play down terrorism. I'm saying that plenty worse things are normalised and played down, while we get huge media fear mongering and political debate on rare events. Why are things that kill a hundred times more people annually, getting a hundred times less funding to prevent?

    Why do people generalise immigrants over the actions of a few, while they don't do it when their own countrymen do far worse?

    Since we have exported economic migrants for hundreds of years, isn't it hypocritical that we refuse to take some in now?
    wakka12 wrote: »
    Mass murder receives huge coverage even if its not a muslim extremist attack, such as in Oslo in 2011.
    Car crashes and others which kill larger amounts of people over time are less talked about as they don't involve large amounts of people being murdered in one place at one time by one group of people. Your argument is silly
    So 130 people killed in the Bataclan gets worldwide coverage, while 130 people killed on French roads in 10 days gets nothing. I'm not taking away from the fact that it was an atrocity, but is the death of on person worse than another?

    My argument isn't silly. My argument is that people are getting manipilulated by the media, manipulated by politicians wanting to push their own agenda, letting their emotions and fears get the better of them and it's having a damaging effect on the world.


  • Options
    #96
    ChikiChiki
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭ChikiChiki


    Anyone is out of their mind if they think this is a good policy. The worrying thing about Trump is he signing off laws with no debate whatsoever.

    I'm all for heavily controlled immigration but these measures take the piss.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    ChikiChiki
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭ChikiChiki


    HONKEY TONK wrote: »
    I think with the US and the UK's reorganisation of their foreign policies and security, The EU as a whole need to do the same thing.

    With the Elections in France, Germany, Holland and so on coming up, The EU will collapse quickly if Immigration is not top priority in Brussels in 2017

    Not the same thing. We just need to put much heavier controls and vetting procedures in place than what we do at the minute which is none.


  • Options
    #98
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,944 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    vicwatson wrote: »
    A stay has been put on the order, ACLU took it into court last night.

    Here's some stats for yis - 737 people killed by falling out of bed :D:D....only in America

    i might be stepping out on a limb here and apologies if ive offended anybody, but wouldnt it be a good idea to tackle the gun related issues first? just sayin! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #99
    RandomName2
    Registered Users Posts: 5,566 ✭✭✭RandomName2


    eeguy wrote: »
    There's a weird disassociate humans make on things that kill us.
    Disease, suicide, car crashes, work accidents, attacks from our own people and on and on, yet we fixate on immigrants, even though they do statistically insignificant damage to our societies.

    [...]

    I think the world has gone mad with their fear of terrorism. I think media portrays it as much worse than it actually is. We have irish lads with 100s of convictions terrorising us and not a word said, while 24 hour coverage about all the "hidden terrorists" among the refugees. A grand claim to make, since either can't be proven right or wrong.

    I hate to Godwin the thread but i find it so hypocritical when people say "Oh we'd never let atrocities like the holocaust happen again" when we have hundreds of thousands killed in Syria, millions fleeing and people just don't want to know.

    Okay, I don't like doing this as it's running counter to the OP somewhat (which is about Trump and his bonkers policies)

    Some of the most significant conflicts in recent history have been caused by immigration. Irish conflicts have had their roots in the immigration from England (both 'natural immigration' and state sponsored like the plantations). Migrations of people in Europe that created large minorities in host countries have typically led to conflict and bloodshed (provided that immigrants in these countries weren't assimilated). We've seen it before, and we see it today.

    You're right that people ultimately shouldn't care about lone-wolf attacks, or about Guantanimo prisoners. They are a drop in the ocean. But you should care when you're talking about hundred of thousands (if not millions) of people. Germany has in all likelihood sown the seeds for future conflict within its borders: it might take 50 years for it to really kick off, but it probably will, and probably won't end well.

    You talked about Godwinning the thread with a really inapt analogy, but what would you have people do? Syria and Iraq are largely as they are because of people "trying to do the right thing" believe it or not. Would you stand idly by while dictators like Saddam and Assad butcher their citizens? Gassing of Kurds feels a bit like the Holocaust, doesn't it? But, I don't know, perhaps you could instead have Samantha Power attack Russia over helping Assad and invading Crimea, all while her government aided the Saudi blockade and bombing of Yemen.


  • Options
    #100
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    The only good thing about Trump is the kind of people he annoys


  • Options
    #101
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    The only good thing about Trump is the kind of people he annoys

    Women and minority ethnic groups?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Memnoch wrote: »
    Women and minority ethnic groups?

    People such as yourself


  • Options
    #103
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    People such as yourself

    You mean anyone who speaks out against blatant misogyny and racism?


  • Options
    #104
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Memnoch wrote: »
    You mean anyone who speaks out against blatant misogyny and racism?

    Go find a safe space


  • Options
    #105
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Go find a safe space

    It's the bigots who need 'safe spaces.' Crying 'PC' every two seconds when people call them out for their deplorable attitudes.


  • Options
    #106
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    Memnoch wrote: »
    It's the bigots who need 'safe spaces.' Crying 'PC' every two seconds when people call them out for their deplorable attitudes.
    Without Trump, how would you play the martyr?


  • Options
    #107
    Memnoch
    Registered Users Posts: 4,276 ✭✭✭Memnoch


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    Without Trump, how would you play the martyr?

    How am I a martyr?


  • Options
    #108
    C. Montgomery Gurns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭C. Montgomery Gurns


    Memnoch wrote: »
    Women and minority ethnic groups?

    When, during the campaign, did Trump slate all women?

    When did he slate all members of a minority group?

    I mean, ffs you want to be associated with this filth?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilCmywMin8I


  • Options
    #109
    jameorahiely
    Registered Users Posts: 825 ✭✭✭jameorahiely


    Has anyone here looked in to how the list of countries was compiled?


  • Options
    #110
    lazybones32
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,647 ✭✭✭lazybones32


    Libertarian Kant wrote: »
    Are not some of the things he does generally quite well reported?

    I've never met Enda Kenny but I still think he's a twat.

    That's a paraphrasing of a scene from The Simpsons (Homer Bad man) which highlights the stupidity of trial by Media.
    That said, I haven't read any articles from Irish Media about Trump and since he's only been inaugurated a few days, I doubt there is much that he has done which can be accurately reported on.


  • Options
    #111
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    C. Montgomery Gurns wrote: »
    Trump has never publicly uttered a racist comment.

    The "Muslim ban" is, at the moment, temporary. It has been temporary since the day in late 2015 when he called for the ban, when he said, and I quote, that there would need to be a ban until they figured out what exactly was going on. It is a temporary ban while the screening procedures are reviewed. Here in Ireland we don't have a screening procedure for these admissions. If we did have a screening procedure the government should be able to provide evidence of how many Syrians were denied entry- it is nigh on impossible that out of several hundred Syrians "vetted" that a handful would not hold a significant criminal record.

    Banning a certain religion from entering your country may not be properly defined as racist, but we all know what it is.
    We do have a screening procedure, don't know why you think we don't. And why would you need to know the amount of people turned away? Why would that make any difference? Surely the fact people are turned away is enough proof that screening is taking place


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    C. Montgomery Gurns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭C. Montgomery Gurns


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Banning a certain religion from entering your country may not be properly defined as racist, but we all know what it is.

    A temporary security measure?
    We do have a screening procedure, don't know why you think we don't. And why would you need to know the amount of people turned away? Why would that make any difference? Surely the fact people are turned away is enough proof that screening is taking place


    I would like to see proof that people have been turned away. If there has been 600 odd migrants admitted and zero turned away, it proves that we do not have any sort of accurate screening procedure, as it is patently impossible that out of 600 people a handful would not have serious criminal convictions.


  • Options
    #113
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    C. Montgomery Gurns wrote: »
    A temporary security measure?


    I would like to see proof that people have been turned away. If there has been 600 odd migrants admitted and zero turned away, it proves that we do not have any sort of accurate screening procedure, as it is patently impossible that out of 600 people a handful would not have serious criminal convictions.

    Unless you can prove that every member of a religion is a criminal, then you can't just blanket ban millions of people.
    What sort of proof would you like?


  • Options
    #114
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,512 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    ChikiChiki wrote: »
    Anyone is out of their mind if they think this is a good policy. The worrying thing about Trump is he signing off laws with no debate whatsoever.

    I'm all for heavily controlled immigration but these measures take the piss.

    And this different to every executive order Obama made.


  • Options
    #115
    C. Montgomery Gurns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭C. Montgomery Gurns


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Unless you can prove that every member of a religion is a criminal, then you can't just blanket ban millions of people.
    What sort of proof would you like?

    There are nightclubs in this town that operate over 21's only, over 25's only. The management reserves the right to refuse admission. I couldn't care less if Donald banned Irish tourists, it's his country he can do what he wants.


  • Options
    #116
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,944 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    C. Montgomery Gurns wrote: »
    it's his country he can do what he wants.

    no its not!


  • Options
    #117
    RobbingBandit
    Registered Users Posts: 18,099 ✭✭✭✭RobbingBandit


    Varik wrote: »
    And this different to every executive order Obama made.

    In one way Obama had the spectre of the Capitol Hill vetoes hanging over him, both houses are in republican control at this time so Trump can do as he pleases for now.


  • Options
    #118
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    C. Montgomery Gurns wrote: »
    There are nightclubs in this town that operate over 21's only, over 25's only. The management reserves the right to refuse admission. I couldn't care less if Donald banned Irish tourists, it's his country he can do what he wants.

    How is it his country?
    And you never said, what proof would you require?


  • Options
    #119
    C. Montgomery Gurns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭C. Montgomery Gurns


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    no its not!


    Well he was elected to office by the laws of the constitution so, err......


  • Options
    #120
    C. Montgomery Gurns
    Closed Accounts Posts: 163 ✭✭C. Montgomery Gurns


    bubblypop wrote: »
    How is it his country?
    And you never said, what proof would you require?


    A report detailing how many people were refused, and the specific reason for refusal of admission (prior criminal record, extremist political views, failing a medical, etc et)

    This report doesn't exist because nobody gets refused. Nobody gets refused because at most we only cross reference these people against photographs and files on known Syrian members of ISIS.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,944 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    C. Montgomery Gurns wrote: »
    Well he was elected to office by the laws of the constitution so, err......

    he doesnt 'own' the country, he was 'elected' to represent the people of america. using the term 'own' eludes to his narcissistic nature.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement