FreudianSlippers wrote: » This argument certainly carries significant weight compounded with the vast evidence you have provided that immigrants and/or immigration-related issues are the root cause of crime in Ireland and/or other EU countries. Oh... wait.
batgoat wrote: » And this has absolutely nothing to do with the EU...
Redneck Culchie wrote: » There is a protest against Ireland signing the UN Migration Pact without any debate,
protest is outside the Dail tomorrow 6/6.30pm. Organised by Irexit party but all those who oppose the signing of the UN Migration Pact are welcome to attend. Expecting a decent crowd hopefully. It won't be the usual PBP types at it either.
hill16bhoy wrote: » Ireland has national sovereignty. It has used that sovereignty to enter into agreements re internal migration as part of the EU. Ireland has complete national sovereignty over migration from outside the EU. Why are you implying it doesn't, when you know it has? Why are you comparing the EU to the British empire, when any cursory reading of the situation could tell you the two things are entirely different, and that far from being an "empire", the EU is the exact opposite of such? Do you support free movement within the EU? If you don't, why not just come straight out and say you're in favour of Ireland leaving the EU, given that that would be the logical upshot of being against free movement? If there is a causation effect between in-migration and wages going down, surely then, there should be a causation effect between out-migration and wages going up? Surely then the USA, the world's greatest ever experiment in large scale in-migration, would thus prove that wages go down when there is large scale in-migration? Surely the countries with significant out-migration would thus see the biggest rise in wages? How did that ever work out for Ireland? Do you support internal migration within countries? I mean, Dublin has changed beyond all recognition in the last 100 years? Why do you think that is? The main reason is because massive numbers of people have migrated to it - the vast majority from other parts of Ireland. In your language, that's "mass migration". It doesn't matter whether somebody moves to Dublin from Letterkenny or Lahore, they're still a migrant. Was this a good thing or a bad thing for Dublin? How about Galway, which has grown massively in recent years? Is the fact that massive numbers of Dubs have moved to Navan, Drogheda and Portlaoise a good thing for those towns? They're "outsiders", they have migrated on a large scale to a different place. How about pretty much every major city in the world, which all grew because of massive in-migration from other parts of whatever country they're in? Should Britain have abolished the Common Travel Area during the Troubles? The Common Travel Area enabled/enables free movement for residency purposes from Ireland to the UK and vice versa. From the 1970s to the 1990s, Irish people carried out large numbers of terrorist attacks in Britain. Surely then, by the same rationale that you use above, Irish people should have been stopped from moving to Britain? Yes? On the flipside of that, if one was to be paranoid enough, couldn't one have argued back then - hell, you could argue it now - that if enough British people moved here as a result of free movement, we could have ended up rejoining the UK? Would that have been a legitimate reason to oppose the Common Travel Area? I'm just trying to get your angle on all these questions, because it appears to me you're just one more poster trying to claim that racism has nothing to do with your views when it appears bleedin' obvious that it has everything to do with it.
Redneck Culchie wrote: » There is a protest against Ireland signing the UN Migration Pact without any debate, protest is outside the Dail tomorrow 6/6.30pm. Organised by Irexit party but all those who oppose the signing of the UN Migration Pact are welcome to attend. Expecting a decent crowd hopefully. It won't be the usual PBP types at it either.
Chaos Marine wrote: » I'm against it. National sovereignty is important. Ireland was under the yoke of British rule for almost a thousand years. The idea of giving up our right to self govern to the EU makes my blood run cold. Ever since the EU forced the Irish government at the time to undergo a second vote for The Lisborn Treaty I've been skeptical of the EU. Then you have the EU trying to exert political pressure on Ireland to do away with the tax concessions that brings businesses into Ireland because it's "unfair" to the other states. The censorship articles that they're trying to push to how they're treating the UK as it attempts to leave after a lawful election smacks of fascism. Keep in mind that a woman had her human right of free speech taken away because she said Muhammed was a paedophile by the EU Human Rights Tribunal and shortly enough, the EU is trying to make criticizing migrants a hate crime. I have absolutely no problem with the EU as a trading bloc only. I'd be more than happy with the EU if that was all it was but I don't want Ireland to be subjected to being forced, either militarily or politically into Guy Verhofstadt's "Empire of the good". Keep in mind, when the British leave the EU, if Macron, Verhofstadt and Merkel's European Army becomes reality, who's going to foot the bill? How can we guarantee it's not going to be deployed in European nations just because? Mass or unchecked immigration is not something Ireland should be considering when we have a rampant homeless and housing crisis because what else happens when you introduce masses of low or unskilled labour? Wages go down as the volume of workers increase. This isn't a conspiracy or fear mongering, this is what happens. More Irish people being unable to afford rent or mortgage payments and more homeless who won't have the benefit of a "progressive" government footing their food and housing bills. To those who are, in this threat criticizing Poland and Hungry? Check out the number of terrorist attacks in those countries compared to those in Germany and France. I'm not against migration either. Just unchecked or mass migration like the EU is proposing. We need to know who is coming into our country, if they're really adults or children as I'm not entirely comfortable with seeing pictures from some kid's phone of an adult male wearing a school uniform trying to pass themselves off as a teenager coming from Irish students.
demfad wrote: » On the contrary Poland and and particularly Hungary are puppet Governments of the Kremlin. Russia is a State more or less controlled by a mixture of USSR KGB, oligarchs and criminals. If you think any State under the influence of Russia is safe or in a good place then you are naive or you believe in Fascism.
no.8 wrote: » What culture???? How ignorant. Go there to both of these countries and educate yourself will you! Yes a part of the culture is based on Christian values but so what. That's their history, that's engrained. How they survived I don't know.
Gravelly wrote: » When the first point is utterly ridiculous, it rather discourages the reader from investigating further. I did on this post of yours, and, as I suspected, it didn't get any better.
FreudianSlippers wrote: » I have 17,500+ posts... a significant percentage of which are in Legal Discussion. I'm not sure what qualifies you to opine that these posts are "idiotic".
Gravelly wrote: » I was extrapolating from the few I read. Since 100% of those are idiotic, I think it's a fair assumption to make that you haven't suddenly degraded from being a genius previously.
no.8 wrote: » How ignorant.
no.8 wrote: » However it has to be at a controlled level imho... And acceptance varies so respect that. A mass influx of foreign bodies is bad in every situation (see the history of South America, Australia etc.)
no.8 wrote: » Why? Is it because they have a backbone? Or is it for historical reasons? If you look back you'd be understanding as to why the Poles distrust uncontrolled influx or outsiders
weisses wrote: What culture ? ...Christian values ?
weisses wrote: Poland and Hungary will reject anything and anyone that inst Caucasian ...Cannot take them seriously at this stage
Gravelly wrote: » I was extrapolating from the few I read. Since 100% of those are idiotic
I think it's a fair assumption to make that you haven't suddenly degraded from being a genius previously.
Gravelly wrote: » You seem to be angry and idiotic in most of your posts.
FreudianSlippers wrote: » 4) I answered your question if you bothered to read past the first point in my post. Unfortunately, you won't see this answer if you continue previous form of not reading past the first point. Ironic.
Eric Cartman wrote: » Attachment not found.http://www.civitas.org.uk/content/files/crime_stats_oecdjan2012.pdf Poland has some of the lowest rates of rape, robbery, homicide etc.. in the world, not just the EU. Its identified as one of the least likely places for a terrorist attack to occur. Despite low wages and a not free for all welfare state, burglaries remain low.https://www.politico.eu/article/politics-nationalism-and-religion-explain-why-poland-doesnt-want-refugees/ Poland wants to keep its culture and society that it has cultivated, while being quite religious and it reminds us of times gone by here, the Catholic Church does not have the legislative grip that it had here. Poland only stands to lose by loosening its immigration rules or taking migrants, there is no upside for them. I never said they had 0% crime , saying they are relatively safe does not mean 0 crimes and you know this, you're just throwing this crap around.
Gravelly wrote: » The fact that you replied to a simple question with idiocy and ad hominem gives one the impression you are an angry little person. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt regarding idiocy.
Gravelly wrote: » What does that make you I wonder?
FreudianSlippers wrote: » Very nice. I'm not angry at all by the way (I'm not even sure what would give you that impression tbh). I'm very happy to understand the purpose and scope of UN resolutions and other instruments such as this.
Gravelly wrote: » I very much doubt it. You seem to be angry and idiotic in most of your posts.
FreudianSlippers wrote: » You should probably keep reading that past point 1. I'm not sure, why don't you tell me... Smarter than you?
Gravelly wrote: » You believe we should sign UN charters in order to "annoy the far right"
What does that make you I wonder?
FreudianSlippers wrote: » 1) To annoy the far right and to get them to identify themselves on the public stage. 2) To outline a framework as to how international governments might work together in the future to ensure that countries like Ireland aren't engaging in barbaric practices like direct provision.
Gravelly wrote: » Out of curiosity, if this is non-binding, doesn't change our laws, and makes no difference as some posters seem to allude, then why do we need to sign it at all?
