nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Gangland Shootings [Mod Note in Post #1]

JamBur

Nobody cares about scum killing scum, let them eradicate each other

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

MFPM

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

<snip>

Oh dear, this is really scraping the barrell.

[Deleted User]

MFPM wrote: »

why is the 'colour' of people who allegedly make up a gang important?

Without getting into anything else, it certainly be important from a descriptor point of view as far as security/identification goes anyway anyway. Same way it would be relevant if a young black teen went missing.

All Seeing Eye

MFPM wrote: »

What is it with this thread and the inability of some to read? Where did I 'stick up' for anyone?

Indeed, unfortunately anti social behaviour by sections of young people, is a problem - colour is irrelevant - if one wanted to generalise I suppose one could see it's overwhelmingly a male phenomenon.

Well come on down to Balbriggan. The gang are there most nights at the train station. It’s a great opportunity for you to get a look for yourself and put your mind at ease. As a previous poster said they are a black African gang with a couple of Irish scrotes and young wans with them trying be part of the ‘crew’.

All Seeing Eye

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

You don't need to scratch your heads about this issue. I've attached a graph that will be of help. Remember, IQ and criminality are inversely correlated.

Look at the average IQ of those Koreans. It's no wonder we're all driving their cars.

Thats a great map though I would have thought we’d have higher IQs than the brits! Look how the IQ changes at the ‘border’!

Wibbs

John Sacrimoni wrote: »

Same people think our media are right wing, i dont know why you bother.

The Right/Left stuff is too muddled and too damned American in nature. However I would say that the media tends much more towards the progressive types. Subjects and guests on Newstalk for example are often near stereotypes of the Right On™ types. Now whether this is for the audio version of clickbait... I suspect much of it is. Who runs such media outlets is little enough to do with it. It's all about the folding green. Whatever sells(as clickbait or otherwise) is produced.

MontgomeryClift wrote: »

You don't need to scratch your heads about this issue. I've attached a graph that will be of help. Remember, IQ and criminality are inversely correlated.

There are quite the few problems with such stats. Take for example the yellow bit on that map to the right of the Mediterranean over to India(with Egypt thrown in). That area of the planet is where human civilisation started, pretty much before anywhere else. The Indus Valley, Babylon, etc. Inventing maths, writing, laws, art, schools, armies, engineering on a large scale. When Europeans were living in straw huts for the most part, they were building enormous ziggurats in Ur, Ziggurats so enormous that they inspired the story of the Tower of Babel. The earliest such civilisation so far found is in Turkey.

Well, we're all of African descent

Well... Yes and no. That's an extremely simplistic angle on it. Yes, most of modern human genetics comes from Africa, but there was a fair bit of admixture(that's shagging for AH purposes

) going on with earlier peoples when Modern Humans left Africa for the rest of the world. Never mind that this exodus(s) was between 100,000 and 50,000 years ago. A lot can happen in that time. EG the human genome has had more changes in the last 15-20,000 years than in the preceding 40,000(many related to novel foods in the diet).

but that said why is the 'colour' of people who allegedly make up a gang important?

Why is it not? For descriptive purposes if nothing else. Never mind the obvious of identifying a problem within one social group and trying to nip it in the bud, rather than ignoring it, until it really boils over. But again like this idiocy of "multiculturalism" that has been pushed for decades with little benefit, this will be ignored like everywhere else that has had these social problems until it does boil over. Again.

TeaBagMania

All Seeing Eye wrote: »

Thats a great map though I would have thought we’d have higher IQs than the brits! Look how the IQ changes at the ‘border’!

i literally lol'd
same here, aint no way them canucks is any smarter than us mericans

Esel

Read the crap at the bottom of the map...

Fox_In_Socks

Wibbs wrote: »

But again like this idiocy of "multiculturalism" that has been pushed for decades with little benefit, this will be ignored like everywhere else that has had these social problems until it does boil over. Again.

It’s an ill defined thing that I see you’ve mentioned a few times. Do we not live in a multicultural society all of the time? Even 50 years ago? The culture of a small village ‘squinting windows’ vs culture of market town vs culture of a large town vs city. Then you got the cultures of various estates and various social groups and classes. The culture of a family that you grow up in. Even the culture of an all male football team and their dynamic is different to the culture of a mixed sex sports club like fencing.

There were already many cultures in our seeming ‘monoculture’. Would you be in contact with foreigners in other countries and compare and contrast your subculture with theirs, and imagine where you would fit in their cultural hierarchy? It’s not like your subculture that you belong to is unique...there will be something similar in other countries.

Wibbs

Fox_In_Socks wrote: »

There were already many cultures in our seeming ‘monoculture’. Would you be in contact with foreigners in other countries and compare and contrast your subculture with theirs, and imagine where you would fit in their cultural hierarchy? It’s not like your subculture that you belong to is unique...there will be something similar in other countries.

Which is all very fine and lovely and might fly in a first year sociology class, but your parameters are mostly extremely tenuous. But let's run with them and yes there are certainly socioeconomic class cultural differences and flash points and there can certainly be an urban/rural divide. However and overall, there is more of a general sense of a shared cultural underpinning. In practice when large enough groups of people who stand out from the indigenous culture, for all sorts of reasons, culture, religion, skin colour - essentially anything that marks them out - landing up in another culture always causes problems and for both sides and has done so throughout history.

It seems to be a factor of scale too. There tends to be a tipping point where these issues kick off. "Race" can come into it too. As can culture. EG White Eastern Europeans tend to not have nearly as much of a problem "fitting in" as Black African and African origin people. Racism is a large part of that of course, but the result is the same.

On the other hand Asians although of a different "race" tend to have and cause far fewer social social problems in the wider culture. This is reflected worldwide in the West. Take the example of the Vietnamese "Boat People" a few decades ago. The overwhelming trend was that within a generation in their new homes across the world they were moving up the educational and social and economic scale. It's got little to to do intrinsically with "race" either. If one looks at the UK, that original generation from the Caribbean and India etc tended to work bloody hard in their new land to make a home for themselves and did better than background in that pursuit. IT was their kids and grandkids that faced the problems and were the problems.

For all sorts of reasons, some internal, some external, some cultures and subcultures are less likely to cause social problems. Until this is acknowledged and delved into the reasons why others are more likely to cause such problems and those reasons tackled then we'll be going down the same route of every other nation that has ended up with way more social problems than they would have if they'd remained "monocultural".

Unfortunately these questions tend to not be asked and even the asking of them is taboo. The only ones who tend to ask such questions are actual right wingers and racists, but they've already made up their mind what the answers are. The Right On™ would do well to remember that.

Fox_In_Socks

I don’t disagree with that. A boy in our school in primary school was ostracised and bulled because he moved from a town and wasn’t rural like us. People will always looks to exclude others.

But you can look at history and see that Huegenot names are a thing here. Sean Nos singing may be Arabic. Original Irish Christianity had a Coptic bend to it. Sweden...that hell hole of multicultural corruption for everyone on the far right (nobody ever mentioned Sweden 5 years ago...hardly anyone was called a libtard either...funny enough) had so much German immigration in the 1400 and 1500s that the whole language changed.

You look at many subcultures all across the world including our own cork and Dublin tracksuit brigade and they’re all at the old snoop dog listening hash smoking hand down their cacks bull****e.

As with many gangs and wanna be hard men, they’ll grow out of it

emptyhouse2222

irish people aren't white
your atlantic celt, norman, viking and midlander

p1akuw47h5r3it

emptyhouse2222 wrote: »

irish people aren't white
your atlantic celt, norman, viking and midlander

So white then.

weldoninhio

emptyhouse2222 wrote: »

irish people aren't white
your atlantic celt, norman, viking and midlander

So a mongrel mix of 1/4 white, 1/4 white, 1/4 white and 1/4 white??

BBFAN

What the hell is now going on in here?

Wibbs

Fox_In_Socks wrote: »

I don’t disagree with that. A boy in our school in primary school was ostracised and bulled because he moved from a town and wasn’t rural like us. People will always looks to exclude others.

yep. Human nature. And the more different the more this happens and again if groups become larger those differences and reactions to them are amplified.

But you can look at history and see that Huegenot names are a thing here. Sean Nos singing may be Arabic. Original Irish Christianity had a Coptic bend to it.

Indeed, but these were either cultural influences and usually small ones, or small and sympathetic numbers of people were involved. Huguenots came in numbers of a couple of thousand and were welcomed by Protestant Ireland as examples of their kin being persecuted by the Catholics(in France with it). If a similar number of Catholics had shown up coming from Protestant persecution their welcome would have been very different. Take another small population of Irish who were different; Irish Jews. Until Daniel O'Connell and a few others raised ructions about it, Jews had to wear yellow on their clothing to mark them out. HItler didn't lick this stuff from a stone. And Jews tended to be urban, non Catholic(obviously), small in number and well educated and skilled workers. But just different enough.

Sweden...that hell hole of multicultural corruption for everyone on the far right (nobody ever mentioned Sweden 5 years ago...hardly anyone was called a libtard either...funny enough) had so much German immigration in the 1400 and 1500s that the whole language changed.

And again they were very similar in "race" and culture and religion and background.

You look at many subcultures all across the world including our own cork and Dublin tracksuit brigade and they’re all at the old snoop dog listening hash smoking hand down their cacks bull****e.

As with many gangs and wanna be hard men, they’ll grow out of it

If they're allowed to F. The difference is a fair number of the "tracksuit brigade" do grow out of it and end up with jobs and families and all that, something harder to pull off if your skin happens to be beyond the fashionable level of tanned.

Fox_In_Socks

I’d be optimistic in a pessimistic way. If Coptic Christians lived with Celtic pagans and morph into something in between, then they’ll be absorbed into the population eventually. Egyptian...actually Egyptian...some bibles found in Ireland are made from papyrus. There is even a folk memory of it in the form of Princess Scotia and in the early Irish books of invasions.

In 200 years, they’ll be homogenised. Just in time for human extinction ðŸ˜‚

p1akuw47h5r3it

Fox_In_Socks wrote: »

I’d be optimistic in a pessimistic way. If Coptic Christians lived with Celtic pagans and morph into something in between, then they’ll be absorbed into the population eventually. Egyptian...actually Egyptian...some bibles found in Ireland are made from papyrus. There is even a folk memory of it in the form of Princess Scotia and in the early Irish books of invasions.

In 200 years, they’ll be homogenised. Just in time for human extinction &#55357;&#56834;

Ok mate.

Wibbs

emptyhouse2222 wrote: »

irish people aren't white
your atlantic celt, norman, viking and midlander

So who are "White" then? No doubt "Germanics" or some such. As for the other categories? Atlantic has some leverage. Our genetics do tend towards an Atlantic flavour, an edge of European gene types. Mostly from some remoteness over the millennia.

"Celt" is a small word for a huge subject. Which "Celts"? The ones the Greeks called Keltoi who came from "the north" of them. The Greeks were fantastic artists, builders and philosophers, geographers they were not(though they, including the Spartans, thought of them as bloody good soldiers. "Keltoi" is thought to mean "big" and/or "brave"). The Romans? They considered what were a wide range of cultures, from Eastern Europe to Gauls, to Iberians, to what would become the Saxons, to the Scotti, to be "Celts". Even the notion of the Celts dies off after Rome fell. There are near zero reference to Celts or a Celtic idea of culture from the Dark Ages to well past the Renaissance. The modern idea of the Celts is almost exclusively a 19th century definition and in many ways an invention.

Vikings and Normans are essentially the same people. The clue is in the latter name Northmen/Norsemen/Normans. They usually didn't go in for intermarriage in France and elsewhere and avoided the local cultures too. Look at England under them. It was two centuries later and after a few Norman kings before they used the local language. That most "English" of kings, Richard the Lionheart had but few words of English and only spent a few months in the place. Hence the Normans shitting a brick over the Normans in Ireland getting with the locals and becoming "more Irish than the Irish themselves".

Feck knows who "midlanders" are??

Somalion

So about that gang...

emptyhouse2222

Wibbs wrote: »

So who are "White" then? No doubt "Germanics" or some such. As for the other categories? Atlantic has some leverage. Our genetics do tend towards an Atlantic flavour, an edge of European gene types. Mostly from some remoteness over the millennia.

"Celt" is a small word for a huge subject. Which "Celts"? The ones the Greeks called Keltoi who came from "the north" of them. The Greeks were fantastic artists, builders and philosophers, geographers they were not(though they, including the Spartans, thought of them as bloody good soldiers. "Keltoi" is thought to mean "big" and/or "brave"). The Romans? They considered what were a wide range of cultures, from Eastern Europe to Gauls, to Iberians, to what would become the Saxons, to the Scotti, to be "Celts". Even the notion of the Celts dies off after Rome fell. There are near zero reference to Celts or a Celtic idea of culture from the Dark Ages to well past the Renaissance. The modern idea of the Celts is almost exclusively a 19th century definition and in many ways an invention.

Vikings and Normans are essentially the same people. The clue is in the latter name Northmen/Norsemen/Normans. They usually didn't go in for intermarriage in France and elsewhere and avoided the local cultures too. Look at England under them. It was two centuries later and after a few Norman kings before they used the local language. That most "English" of kings, Richard the Lionheart had but few words of English and only spent a few months in the place. Hence the Normans shitting a brick over the Normans in Ireland getting with the locals and becoming "more Irish than the Irish themselves".

Feck knows who "midlanders" are??

i actually said irish are not white
what proof do you wan't

Wibbs

emptyhouse2222 wrote: »

i actually said irish are not white
what proof do you wan't

The semblance of a tan on them for a start E. If Irish people were any paler they'd be effin transparent, or handy stand ins for Persil commercials. "Do you want your whites to be as pale as an Irishman? Use Persil Extra. With added Paddy™"

If one is very quiet and good at tracking, sometimes one can observe the Irish in the wild and on occasion in one of their traditional mate grounds in Iberia. For a brief period on the Coast of Sun, they will in their mating dance, momentarily turn a bright red hue. A sight of nature to behold. There are rarer specimens that when exposed to that wondrous orb, the Sun, will find their freckles joining up. Just before they too go bright vermillion. As one African American comic quipped: "Ireland isn't just full of White people, it's where they manufacture the fcukers".

Genetics? We could be here all day E. But as European isolates go we're pretty up there as general population, certainly when compared to mainland Europe, or even our neighbour England.

Esel

Somalion wrote: »

So about that gang...

fatknacker

Well, yous wanted them to assimilate. So they're assimilating.

jim-mcdee

Somalion wrote: »

So about that gang...

It's a gang of black boys from Balbriggan, we should never have let the Nigerias in and the country is gone to hell. Can we just leave it at that. Direct all complaints directly to your local government representative because I doubt they read boards.ie

KevinCavan

Could it be time for our own indigenous ethnic minority group to take on this gang of another ethnic group?

MFPM

Omackeral wrote: »

Without getting into anything else, it certainly be important from a descriptor point of view as far as security/identification goes anyway anyway. Same way it would be relevant if a young black teen went missing.

The point being of course it's not being in that context at all, but then you knew that....2/10 for attempted deflection!

MFPM

Wibbs wrote: »

The Right/Left stuff is too muddled and too damned American in nature. However I would say that the media tends much more towards the progressive types. Subjects and guests on Newstalk for example are often near stereotypes of the Right On™ types. Now whether this is for the audio version of clickbait... I suspect much of it is. Who runs such media outlets is little enough to do with it. It's all about the folding green. Whatever sells(as clickbait or otherwise) is produced.

There are quite the few problems with such stats. Take for example the yellow bit on that map to the right of the Mediterranean over to India(with Egypt thrown in). That area of the planet is where human civilisation started, pretty much before anywhere else. The Indus Valley, Babylon, etc. Inventing maths, writing, laws, art, schools, armies, engineering on a large scale. When Europeans were living in straw huts for the most part, they were building enormous ziggurats in Ur, Ziggurats so enormous that they inspired the story of the Tower of Babel. The earliest such civilisation so far found is in Turkey.

Well... Yes and no. That's an extremely simplistic angle on it. Yes, most of modern human genetics comes from Africa, but there was a fair bit of admixture(that's shagging for AH purposes ) going on with earlier peoples when Modern Humans left Africa for the rest of the world. Never mind that this exodus(s) was between 100,000 and 50,000 years ago. A lot can happen in that time. EG the human genome has had more changes in the last 15-20,000 years than in the preceding 40,000(many related to novel foods in the diet).

Why is it not? For descriptive purposes if nothing else. Never mind the obvious of identifying a problem within one social group and trying to nip it in the bud, rather than ignoring it, until it really boils over. But again like this idiocy of "multiculturalism" that has been pushed for decades with little benefit, this will be ignored like everywhere else that has had these social problems until it does boil over. Again.

Well... Yes and no. That's an extremely simplistic angle on it. Yes, most of modern human genetics comes from Africa, but there was a fair bit of admixture(that's shagging for AH purposes ) going on with earlier peoples when Modern Humans left Africa for the rest of the world. Never mind that this exodus(s) was between 100,000 and 50,000 years ago. A lot can happen in that time. EG the human genome has had more changes in the last 15-20,000 years than in the preceding 40,000(many related to novel foods in the diet).

So you state (incorrectly) 'yes and no' and then essentially go one to acknowledge that it is the most widely accepted hypothesis. Evolution over historical time of course impacted but the central point remains - 'we're all of African descent.

Why is it not? For descriptive purposes if nothing else.

If a gang is engaged in public anti social behaviour their colour is utterly irrelevant unless one wishes to try and link the anti social behaviour to their race/ethnicity whiich is of course why many here are discussing the matter including you.

Never mind the obvious of identifying a problem within one social group and trying to nip it in the bud, rather than ignoring it, until it really boils over.

A social group of teenagers engaged in anti social behavior for example? Again colour utterly irrelevant.

But again like this idiocy of "multiculturalism" that has been pushed for decades with little benefit,

'Idiocy' is of course a matterof opinion. How do you define 'benefit'?

this will be ignored like everywhere else that has had these social problems until it does boil over. Again

And then just to prove my point - you link social problems to multi-culturalism - Finglas, North Clondalkin, Cherry Orchard, Ballyfermot, Southhill, Moyross etc, etc - it was all those migrants causing the social problems :rolleyes:

MFPM

jim-mcdee wrote: »

It's a gang of black boys from Balbriggan, we should never have let the Nigerias in and the country is gone to hell. Can we just leave it at that. Direct all complaints directly to your local government representative because I doubt they read boards.ie

They's ALL from Nigeria are they? What about those from Cameroon, Ghana etc?

MFPM

KevinCavan wrote: »

Could it be time for our own indigenous ethnic minority group to take on this gang of another ethnic group?

So you're critiquing gang activity and to counter it you want to create a gang and take them on - create a race base fight. What about non-white residents affected by gang activity - can they join your little gang? FFS....Either grow up and cop on or f@ck off with this filth.

Deebles McBeebles

jim-mcdee wrote: »

It's a gang of black boys from Balbriggan, we should never have let the Nigerias in and the country is gone to hell. Can we just leave it at that. Direct all complaints directly to your local government representative because I doubt they read boards.ie

Everyone from Nigerias should read this post and go on home. We don't want ye here lads, none of ye. Not even the hard working ones who contribute to society. YIZ ARE ALL DE SAY-EM!

KevinCavan wrote: »

Could it be time for our own indigenous ethnic minority group to take on this gang of another ethnic group?

Only if we can arm the lads from Balbriggan.

MFPM wrote: »

They's ALL from Nigeria are they? What about those from Cameroon, Ghana etc?

Lets be honest, to Jim that whole continent is Nigerias. Nigeria 3 is my favourite.