Peter Casey to contest the European elections

Bambi wrote: »

Matt Carthy never struck me as being overburdened with intellectual capacity, maybe he just interviews and parliaments badly.

Yeh, you can almost see the cogs whirring at times.

Samuel Vimes

bells of shandon wrote: »

It is heartening to see ,that at least one forum member here is aware of the racket that is the EU.
The EU Parliament has no ability to initiate or amend legislation. It is a fig-leaf for a pretend democracy.
Laws are made by the unelected ,unaccountable 27 man Commission.
The Laws are superior to Nation State Law.
Members of the EU are vassal States.Members of the Eurozone currency system are enslaved in a dysfunctional currency union.

More Claptrap
And highly inaccurate
But dont let facts get in the way of a good oul uneducated rant

Geuze

bells of shandon wrote: »

It is heartening to see ,that at least one forum member here is aware of the racket that is the EU.
The EU Parliament has no ability to initiate or amend legislation. It is a fig-leaf for a pretend democracy.
Laws are made by the unelected ,unaccountable 27 man Commission.
The Laws are superior to Nation State Law.
Members of the EU are vassal States.Members of the Eurozone currency system are enslaved in a dysfunctional currency union.

Please note that this is incorrect.

The EU Commission initiates laws, they do not decide on laws.

Decisions are actually made by the European Parliament and the European Council of Ministers.

BarryD2

Faugheen wrote: »

But he has no policy or means in which to address them.

Why are you voting for someone who just says things? If he had an actual policy which could reasonably address these issues then I’d reconsider what I’m saying about people who vote for him. Until then, while they’re happy for him to shout about immigrants and doing nothing about it then I’ll continue to group people in the way that I am.

You really, really are not getting this whatsoever. I’ve said the above dozens of times in this thread and all I get back are people saying ‘but but he’s speaks the truth.’

He has no policies to address ‘the truth’, so why are you bothering? He’s no different to any of the rest of the political class.

I understand completely your point. In an ideal world, every voter would examine the policies of every candidate and their past record if applicable. But that's not how most voters think, we're more inclined to react to personality and perception. Casey is a personable candidate who can catch some of the public mood, that's one reason why he'll do well again.

gaelwave

Casey is not to be trusted but his comments on illegal immigration are welcome.

Faugheen

gaelwave wrote: »

Casey is not to be trusted but his comments on illegal immigration are welcome.

He didn't even make any comments on illegal immigration.

gaelwave

Faugheen wrote: »

He didn't even make any comments on illegal immigration.

He spoke about freeloaders in direct provision centres, you think all the people in DP came here legally?

gaelwave wrote:

He spoke about freeloaders in direct provision centres, you think all the people in DP came here legally?

A certain individual who was in the running for the SD in springs to mind.

Faugheen wrote: »

He didn't even make any comments on illegal immigration.

It's Casey's 'nod and wink' style, say something that is not in itself disparaging 'but everyone knows what he really means'.

Old as the hills as a rabblerouser.

In this case, the 'truth' he is telling will end up being along the lines of 'all them foreigners coming in from foreign taking our wimin and jobs'.

jmayo

Faugheen wrote: »

And the racists will vote for Casey, which was my point. Thank you for agreeing with me.

Ah FFS.
More of the modern liberal leftie lunacy that is seeing racists everywhere, akin to the loonies in 50s America that saw Reds everywhere, that ultimately causes more issues that you would ever solve.

You want a witch hunt of anyone you disagree with much like the media tried against Casey in the presidential election.

What exactly did Casey say that is racist ?
Oh yeah why were travellers made a distinct ethnic group in Ireland?
Well then half the country are racist because half the country are asking the exact same question as to why people with the same basic genetic makeup and that look the exact same as the rest of us are now a distinct ethnic group.
Or does the fact they have a bit of a language, like to live a semi nomadic lifestyle, like to beat the shyte out of each other at family gatherings, give the two fingers to the laws of the land and normal hardworking citizens mean they are a distinct ethnic group?

AFAIK low-resolution genetic analysis shows they have a common Irish origin with the settled population.
And a lot of the differences may be down to the high level of consanguinity due to inter marriages within in families.

He asked why were they being given special treatment over the rest of society?
He didn't ask that they be discriminated against, he asked why they were the subject of positive discrimination.

Faugheen wrote: »

Not at all. They could vote for a number of candidates that I would disagree with. That doesn't make those people racists.

If they're voting for Casey then they are, in my opinion, which I have said multiple times in this thread.

People praise Casey for 'sticking to his guns and not apologising' whereas I'm being ridiculed for sticking to mine and being told I need to apologise.

It's funny how it works out when people disagree with your views, isn't it?

Do you want a medal for sticking to your guns ?
Well all us racists will have a whip around for you and get you one if you want.

eagle eye wrote: »

How did the Peter Casey thread end up as an abortion thread?

Some brought up one of our few right wing conservative parties which was just concerned about bringing us back to the days of Archbishop mcquade.

The thing is we need a so called conservative party that stands on non religious grounds, wants tigher immigration controls, less welfare for life, harder stance on law and order.

bells of shandon wrote: »

It is heartening to see ,that at least one forum member here is aware of the racket that is the EU.
The EU Parliament has no ability to initiate or amend legislation. It is a fig-leaf for a pretend democracy.
Laws are made by the unelected ,unaccountable 27 man Commission.
The Laws are superior to Nation State Law.
Members of the EU are vassal States.Members of the Eurozone currency system are enslaved in a dysfunctional currency union.

To a degree I rather the idea of the council of ministers or commission being in control because we have more representation and some sort of parity.
Yes I know qualified majority voting was introduced a number of years ago with Nice/Lisbon and I know the countries have weightings for voting based on populations.
The 55% of member states backing was one way of rebalancing for smaller states like Ireland.

In the commission/council of ministers to a degree we have a 1 in 27 (28) chance.

In the parliament with our 11 MEPS out of 751 members we have a lot less influence.
And all those 11 MEPS are not even from the same party, but could actually side with opposing views.

To me the EU parliament suits larger populated states.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's Casey's 'nod and wink' style, say something that is not in itself disparaging 'but everyone knows what he really means'.

Old as the hills as a rabblerouser.

In this case, the 'truth' he is telling will end up being along the lines of 'all them foreigners coming in from foreign taking our wimin and jobs'.

Is this not a bit rich coming from a SinnFein supporter?
Didn't the bould Gerry do something similar if not more sinister when he declared that "they haven't gone away you know"?

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Is this not a bit rich coming from a SinnFein supporter?
Didn't the bould Gerry do something similar if not more sinister when he declared that "they haven't gone away you know"?

I am not a SF voter or supporter.

Adams said that during the de-commissioning process, in the mid 90's when the IRA had indeed 'not gone away', they still had to put their weapons beyond use at that stage and agree a deal.

It has been used as a quote since as if he said it yesterday. :rolleyes:

FrancieBrady wrote:

I am not a SF voter or supporter.

Just spewed out my coffee laughing.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am not a SF voter or supporter.

Adams said that during the de-commissioning process, in the mid 90's when the IRA had indeed 'not gone away', they still had to put their weapons beyond use at that stage and agree a deal.

It has been used as a quote since as if he said it yesterday. :rolleyes:

It was said as a threat. And it's one of many examples of SF politicians dogwhistling to their supporters. Remember the problems SF had with dealing with Kingsmill McElduff?

Though it is a feature of NI politics generally.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It was said as a threat..

Of course it was a threat.

The talks had stalled and needed to move forward to a deal and the start of the peace process.

Adams was attempting to bring an armed force down the road of peace, and that armed force didn't trust the British...who were stalling the process/negotiations.

It worked, the deal got done.

And it is entirely different to Casey's dithering around a topic and getting the rabble roused.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Of course it was a threat. The talks had stalled and needed to move forward to a deal and the start of the peace process.

Adams was attempting to bring an armed force down the road of peace, and that armed force didn't trust the British...who were stalling the process/negotiations.

It worked, the deal got done.

And it is entirely different to Casey's dithering around a topic and getting the rabble roused.

Funny he could command an armed force even though he was never on its army council, or indeed even a member.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Funny he could command an armed force even though he was never on its army council, or indeed even a member.

Open a thread on it. :rolleyes:

I think this one is about Casey.

Diceicle

Listened to 2 casey-related interview recently. No big take-aways from myself. I still think he's a bit of a bluffer - and am certain his knowledge on the EU institutions as well as their workings is near zero. If the conversation moves to the mechanics of the institutions he'll be lost there.
However, I'd still agree with him on certain topics. He's right on immigration and refugees - seeing as how we enfore < 20% of our deportation orders for example.

MrMusician18 wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's Casey's 'nod and wink' style, say something that is not in itself disparaging 'but everyone knows what he really means'.

Old as the hills as a rabblerouser.

In this case, the 'truth' he is telling will end up being along the lines of 'all them foreigners coming in from foreign taking our wimin and jobs'.

Is this not a bit rich coming from a SinnFein supporter?
Didn't the bould Gerry do something similar if not more sinister when he declared that "they haven't gone away you know"?

In fairness, he said racists world vote for Casey - and they probably will; racists are not known for their intelligence - he did NOT say everyone who votes for Casey WAS racist. Big difference.

Also, you don't need a new conservative party (like there aren't enough of them?) - what you need is one of the existing ones taking a stance on immigration is that's your belief. And you get that by contacting TDs in your area and engaging them. Have you done that? Beacuse that's how they find out what your going to vote on.

Scoundrel

Peter Casey is an absolute moron who knows nothing about any of the issues he speaks about. Hes invited onto radio TV etc to drum up a bit of interest about his next outpouring of ignorance for his seal clappers its lowest common denominator garbage. There are plenty of reasonable points to be made about travellers or immigration etc but this pathetic Trump wannabe isn't going to make them and anyone who can't see through him shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Scoundrel wrote:

Trump wannabe isn't going to make them and anyone who can't see through him shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Hmmm.... So you're in favour of only allowing people vote for certain candidates that meet your approval. I think there's a word for that, care to guess what it is?

BarryD2

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It's Casey's 'nod and wink' style, say something that is not in itself disparaging 'but everyone knows what he really means'.

Well in that case, is he not in the tried and trusted mould of many an Irish politician?

Scoundrel wrote: »

and anyone who can't see through him shouldn't be allowed to vote.

How do you answer that??

Scoundrel

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Hmmm.... So you're in favour of only allowing people vote for certain candidates that meet your approval. I think there's a word for that, care to guess what it is?

Is it Fascism? are you going to make a point about Hitler ooooh how original. Casey is a total charlatan who cares so much about Ireland that he only recently moved here. I'd be in favour of deporting Casey back to America entirely the freeloading immigrant that he is.

Scoundrel wrote:

Is it Fascism? are you going to make a point about Hitler ooooh how original. Casey is a total charlatan who cares so much about Ireland that he only recently moved here. I'd be in favour of deporting Casey back to America entirely the freeloading immigrant that he is.

Fascism wasn't reserved to 30's Germany. It has a long and inglorious past. Nice that you recognise your own behaviour for what it is. Casey is from Derry why would you seek to deport him? as for calling him a freeloader your ignorance is hilarious.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am not a SF voter or supporter.

Adams said that during the de-commissioning process, in the mid 90's when the IRA had indeed 'not gone away', they still had to put their weapons beyond use at that stage and agree a deal.

It has been used as a quote since as if he said it yesterday. :rolleyes:

Says the man with the most posts in the "why I'm voting SF" thread.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

But I have watched my local MEP's in action...like actually done research on them, and during this term Mairead McGuinness comes in as my number 1 followed by Matt Carthy of SF.

What Carthy has done would come under the heading of 'actions' too, as would the work of the other SF MEP's - but of course some people only want to see the stuff that fits the narrative/spin they wish to post.
...

So you are voting SF then. Hmm...

jmayo

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

In fairness, he said racists world vote for Casey - and they probably will; racists are not known for their intelligence - he did NOT say everyone who votes for Casey WAS racist. Big difference.

Ahh please don't go there, Francie is bad enough without delusion that he is Will Self debating with Mark Francois.

Also a bit rich listening to shinners lecture others about rabble rousing.
Pot say hello to kettle.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Also, you don't need a new conservative party (like there aren't enough of them?) - what you need is one of the existing ones taking a stance on immigration is that's your belief. And you get that by contacting TDs in your area and engaging them. Have you done that? Beacuse that's how they find out what your going to vote on.

WE DO NOT HAVE CONSERVATIVE PARTIES.
All major parties believe in copious amounts of social services and social welfare, non strict sentencing for habitual repeat criminal offenders, distancing of state and church, some sort of abortion, marriage equality, etc.

Now some members of the major parties may be against some of the above, but it is never a party stance, bar the religiously conservative flutes in say Renua and that party started by ex shinner Peader Tobin.

I would say the vast majority of the conservatives politicans in Ireland for the most part are just thinking conservatively in terms of sexual preferences and abortion.

The issue for me, and from my experience I would say a fair amount of people, is that we are fiscally conservative regarding use of government funds, want end to career welfareists and money spent on the true needy like disabled or chonically ill and the carers, want tighter controls on immigration, want tougher sentences for habitual criminals and dangerous criminals, but couldn't give a rats ass which adult sexual partner you want and think women should have a right to not be forced to have a baby against their will.

I don't think I have come across any politician that espouse those views and inherits that space.

IMHO that is where there is a gap in the market.