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; } } }

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

[Deleted User]

She's permanently on twitter now tweeting links to wacky stories from a few years ago and every single conspiracy theory she can get her hands on

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

AngryHippie

Stephen15 wrote: »

Yes because Black people and Muslim people usually come from a part of the world known as the third world. People from the third world are culturally incompatible with the first world countries as they will engage in a third world mentality. That's not racist that's fact.

I have yet to see facts or evidence to back up is statement regarding third world mentalities. From a factual or research basis, it is a non sequitur but I'm guessing from the tone it can only be in reference to public behavior, treatment of women, treatment of homosexuals etc. but as previously pointed out, immigrants while possibly having those attitudes privately, tend not to act on them or exhibit negative behaviors once they have have been accepted into a new society. Understandably when they are relocated but rejected and congregate into isolated communities, they don't get exposed to or understand the new cultural norms. Thus through xenophobic behavior and isolation, people have inadvertently proven their own case. But the causality lies as much with them as it does with the immigrants.

Not to ring the PC Brigade bell, but the attitude, generalizations and lack of factual support displayed by the poster show a distinct lack of respect and a crude understanding of foreign cultures. Certainly parts of the world have backwards, brutal and even barbaric traditions, but to suggest that they involve all people from the region, or a particular religion is by definition discriminatory and racist.

If you don't believe me, have a look at how particularly worded Executive Order 13780 had to be to get through the Supreme court, and that was pertaining to countries that the US had effectively been conducting military operations in or sanctions against (Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, North Korea and Venezuela). That was just to restrict travel on people from those countries without the law itself being discriminatory and thereby racist. (And a stacked supreme court now to boot....)

It's one of my biggest issues with that bell end in the oval office is that he has effectively associated the legitimacy of the US govt. with ignorant attitudes and behaviors to the point that a whole new wave of ar$e holes feel like their views are valid and worthy of public discourse because a POS like Trump would agree with them.

Kimsang

AngryHippie wrote: »

immigrants while possibly having those attitudes privately, tend not to act on them or exhibit negative behaviors once they have have been accepted into a new society.

The problem is though, how long does it take immigrants to be 'accepted into a new society'? There are generations of immigrants in the Uk/Us/all across Europe that haven't successfully integrated, and continue to live in isolated communities together.

AngryHippie wrote: »

Understandably when they are relocated but rejected and congregate into isolated communities, they don't get exposed to or understand the new cultural norms. Thus through xenophobic behavior and isolation, people have inadvertently proven their own case. But the causality lies as much with them as it does with the immigrants.

Shouldn't it be the job of the immigrant to learn and understand the new culture? Why is the onus on that country to 'adopt' the immigrant?
E.g. the immigrant should learn the language of the country they're moving to, the country does not have to learn the language of the immigrant.

98.5% of the population of Japan are Japanese, would you call Japan xenophobic?

batgoat

Kimsang wrote: »

The problem is though, how long does it take immigrants to be 'accepted into a new society'? There are generations of immigrants in the Uk/Us/all across Europe that haven't successfully integrated, and continue to live in isolated communities together.

Shouldn't it be the job of the immigrant to learn and understand the new culture? Why is the onus on that country to 'adopt' the immigrant?
E.g. the immigrant should learn the language of the country they're moving to, the country does not have to learn the language of the immigrant.

98.5% of the population of Japan are Japanese, would you call Japan xenophobic?

Yes, Japan effectively has state endorsed xenophobia. This is well recognised and international bodies such as the un have called them out over it. I'm from a pretty middle class area btw which had an influx of refugees, the local area thrived from it and continues to do so. The likes of Gemma and others who are intent to spread propaganda, they seem to have had very little exposure to the people they're smearing.

Kimsang

batgoat wrote: »

Yes, Japan effectively has state endorsed xenophobia. This is well recognised and international bodies such as the un have called them out over it.

Let's say you have a house and you let people come and visit you. You make a point that they're visitors in your house and not actually living there, and they must abide by the rules of your house.

This makes you xenophobic?

"The[UN] committee was critical of the lack of anti-hate speech legislation"

A lack of hate speech laws does not make a country xenophobic

AngryHippie

Kimsang wrote: »

Let's say you have a house and you let people come and visit you. You make a point that they're visitors in your house and not actually living there, and they must abide by the rules of your house.

I think that is where you are getting mixed up. You are oversimplifying the situation then grabbing hold of the wrong end of the stick.

They aren't visitors.
They are coming here to live.
Its not YOUR house it belongs to everyone that already lives in it. (CITIZENS)

They must obey the rules like anyone else. (LAWS)

Demanding that immigrants granted residential status maintain some sort of visitor status is xenophobic and discriminatory. They deserve to be given the same rights as any other residents and have the same pathways to full citizenship and participation. To do otherwise will create the ghettos that you so fear.

Tourists are visitors. Immigrants are new residents.
Like it or not.

Kimsang wrote: »

A lack of hate speech laws does not make a country xenophobic

No, but it enables racist, hateful and xenophobic views to be broadcast without consequence, fueling division and allowing a$$holes to denigrate, mistreat, humiliate and abuse minority and vulnerable groups.

Not much of a history student there pointing at Japan....

Blueshoe

You are not allowed to have a negative view on the migration into Europe and Ireland.

No opinions or questions are permitted.

It's a sad situation but at some stage the tide will turn as it always does.

AngryHippie

Blueshoe wrote: »

You are not allowed to have a negative view on the migration into Europe and Ireland.

No opinions or questions are permitted.

It's a sad situation but at some stage the tide will turn as it always does.

You are allowed to have whatever view you wish.
If its racist, discriminatory, xenophobic or an opinion formed on a web of right wing lies, expect to get called out on it. particularly around here.

It's one of the things I like about Boards.

as this thread is about Gemma, would you consider her to be racist, xenophobic, paranoid, delusional, or even remotely of sound mind(unless she's playing a long game to try and get into the loony right echo chambers and online communities)

Blueshoe

AngryHippie wrote: »

You are allowed to have whatever view you wish.
If its racist, discriminatory, xenophobic or an opinion formed on a web of right wing lies, expect to get called out on it. particularly around here.

It's one of the things I like about Boards.

as this thread is about Gemma, would you consider her to be racist, xenophobic, paranoid, delusional, or even remotely of sound mind(unless she's playing a long game to try and get into the loony right echo chambers and online communities)

Mass immigration into Europe is eu policy. I linked the 100 page plus report a few days ago Reasons are given as to why this is policy. Also contained in the report are possible outcomes which would derail this policy

The tide will turn. There are plenty of examples already of push back.

I'm not interested in engaging with anyone who says things like "loony right echo chambers"

I am against non EU immigration unless the immigrants are highly skilled and have qualifications in demand

Wanderer78

Blueshoe wrote: »

Mass immigration into Europe is eu policy. I linked the 100 page plus report a few days ago Reasons are given as to why this is policy. Also contained in the report are possible outcomes which would derail this policy

The tide will turn. There are plenty of examples already of push back.

I'm not interested in engaging with anyone who says things like "loony right echo chambers"

I am against non EU immigration unless the immigrants are highly skilled and have qualifications in demand

so exploit them from afar, could be a better tactic i guess

Blueshoe

Wanderer78 wrote: »

so exploit them from afar, could be a better tactic i guess

Explain your point

Exploit who? Exploit them how?

Wanderer78

Blueshoe wrote: »

Explain your point

theres plenty of evidence to support that a large proportion of wealth created in developing countries ends up in developed countries such as ours, a large proportion of goods consumed here, come from developing countries, maybe these are a part of some of reasons why many of these people try to make it to countries such as ours, maybe we should try share this wealth a bit better?

pjohnson

Ah I do like Gemma. Shes like the Penny's version of Infowars.

enricoh

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Anyway this nonsense about mass uncontrolled immigration is hysterical drivel

56% on the homeless list are non irish, if thats controlled immigration id hate to see what the percentage would be if we had uncontrolled. Hysterical drivel i guess!

Btw thats before brexit pulls down the shutters across the pond. Surely ireland will, eh, benefit with increased numbers.

Beta Ray Bill

Blueshoe wrote: »

Mass immigration into Europe is eu policy. I linked the 100 page plus report a few days ago Reasons are given as to why this is policy. Also contained in the report are possible outcomes which would derail this policy

Can you link again?
Sorry...

Blueshoe wrote: »

The tide will turn. There are plenty of examples already of push back.

I'm not interested in engaging with anyone who says things like "loony right echo chambers"

I am against non EU immigration unless the immigrants are highly skilled and have qualifications in demand

I get what you're saying, but Mass immigration is just a symptom of a bigger problem.

You need to ask yourself: where are they coming from? and then: why are immigrants coming here?
That's the first step of understanding the problem

First question is easy: It's obvious that people are coming from the Middle East (Syria) and North Africa (Libya,Egypt,Sudan) .
Second question not so much: They're coming here cause they want a better life. Most of them are prepared to work.

So as a result of the second question, we now have a third question: what makes life here better than life where they are coming from? The answer is an array of things:
Slavery, Dictatorships, War, Ethnic persecution, Health, Religious persecution, Education, Wealth distribution, Social Issues, Climate, Food Supplies/Famine, Corruption, Poverty etc.

So now it's obvious that based on the countries above and peoples motivations, that they are mostly coming here to escape War/fallout of the Arab spring.
Syria and Libya are in bits.
The EU removed the Gaddafi dictatorship by destroying the countries security forces and supplied rebels with weapons.
The EU and US tried to do the same thing in Syria.

The result is millions of people displaced with their homes and all their belongings destroyed.
The EU played a role in creating this mess.

If there was mass immigration into the EU because "Europe is so great" , the people would be coming from everywhere. EG: Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia.
But migration is low from these countries.

So to fix the immigration problem, you need fix the problems in the countries that these people are coming from.

To add:
I've never been to a third world country, my Dad has though as have a few of my mates and all said they'd never go back. The poverty is sickening.
My Dad said there were guys coming out of little shacks that were 8ft by 8ft with hotel uniforms that matched the uniforms of the workers of the hotel he was staying in. Outside the hotel was filthy. Awful place.

Kimsang

AngryHippie wrote: »

They aren't visitors.
They are coming here to live.
Its not YOUR house it belongs to everyone that already lives in it. (CITIZENS)

They must obey the rules like anyone else. (LAWS)

Which non-european country could you go to and become a citizen of that country?

Seanachai

AngryHippie wrote: »

You are allowed to have whatever view you wish.
If its racist, discriminatory, xenophobic or an opinion formed on a web of right wing lies, expect to get called out on it. particularly around here.

It's one of the things I like about Boards.

as this thread is about Gemma, would you consider her to be racist, xenophobic, paranoid, delusional, or even remotely of sound mind(unless she's playing a long game to try and get into the loony right echo chambers and online communities)

You are allowed, in theory at least, in reality it would be career\social suicide to express certain views, even if you're not in the public eye. People that fall under the 'progressive' banner in the media can label you as a xenophobe\bigot for even questioning large scale immigration. They've appointed themselves as the voice of all 'right-thinking', 'decent' folk.

If and when the negative effects of globalisation and EU policies really come home to roost in this country will these right-on, progressive voices still be crowing so loudly?

Modern liberals pour scorn on the US voters in the 'flyover' states who backed Trump, with the assumption that they actually like the man. I'd say a good proportion of them would find him unpalatable to say the least, or even completely against their religious values. But they are so scared of the progressive project and globalisation that they were willing to swallow hard and vote him in.

They would want to take heed and not p**s these people off so much that they'll swallow even harder and vote an actual hard right leader in. The same applies in Europe, if liberals are frightened by the rise of the right they should stop bulling ahead with a project that ordinary workers are dead set against and actually listen to their concerns, instead of knee-jerking and calling them racists.

Annasopra

enricoh wrote: »

56% on the homeless list are non irish, if thats controlled immigration id hate to see what the percentage would be if we had uncontrolled. Hysterical drivel i guess!

Btw thats before brexit pulls down the shutters across the pond. Surely ireland will, eh, benefit with increased numbers.

Maybe you need to join a queue at gnib someday then?

Ha Long Bay

enricoh wrote: »

56% on the homeless list are non irish, if thats controlled immigration id hate to see what the percentage would be if we had uncontrolled. Hysterical drivel i guess!

Btw thats before brexit pulls down the shutters across the pond. Surely ireland will, eh, benefit with increased numbers.

Can you post a link or evidence of that statistic?

Stephen15

batgoat wrote: »

Yes, Japan effectively has state endorsed xenophobia. This is well recognised and international bodies such as the un have called them out over it. I'm from a pretty middle class area btw which had an influx of refugees, the local area thrived from it and continues to do so. The likes of Gemma and others who are intent to spread propaganda, they seem to have had very little exposure to the people they're smearing.

Japan is also probably the most advanced country in the world both technologically and socially speaking. I don't think the Japanese government care about someone in Ireland thinking they are racist.

Kimsang

john4321 wrote: »

Can you post a link or evidence of that statistic?

I was just checking myself, I thought i'd save others the time and throw it up.

Of the total usually resident homeless population(6871), 3,853 persons described their ethnicity as ‘Irish’.

56%

Of the total usually resident homeless population(6871), 5,171 person described their nationality as 'irish'

75%

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp5hpi/cp5hpi/nat/

ohnonotgmail

enricoh wrote: »

56% on the homeless list are non irish, if thats controlled immigration id hate to see what the percentage would be if we had uncontrolled. Hysterical drivel i guess!

Btw thats before brexit pulls down the shutters across the pond. Surely ireland will, eh, benefit with increased numbers.

Kimsang wrote: »

I was just checking myself, I thought i'd save others the time and throw it up.

56%

75%

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp5hpi/cp5hpi/nat/

I think it is safe to say that enricohs number was pulled from somewhere unpleasant.

Ha Long Bay

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think it is safe to say that enricohs number was pulled from somewhere unpleasant.

Thanks for the link Kimsang.

"As can be seen in Figure 3.1, 84.6 per cent of homeless persons who lived in Dublin were Irish with 15.4 per cent non-Irish. For the rest of Ireland, 88.5 per cent of homeless persons were Irish, while 11.5 per cent were non-Irish."

Kimsang

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think it is safe to say that enricohs number was pulled from somewhere unpleasant.

Good point, but its not a huge difference between 56% and 44%, I think that is within reasonable bound of error.

Kimsang

john4321 wrote: »

Thanks for the link Kimsang.

"As can be seen in Figure 3.1, 84.6 per cent of homeless persons who lived in Dublin were Irish with 15.4 per cent non-Irish. For the rest of Ireland, 88.5 per cent of homeless persons were Irish, while 11.5 per cent were non-Irish."

These figures you quote are skewed somewhat. It only includes those that provided a nationality.

So it is safe to assume there is a larger percentage of non-irish homeless in Dublin, since those that don't provide an nationality were excluded from these figures.

ohnonotgmail

Kimsang wrote: »

Good point, but its not a huge difference between 56% and 44%, I think that is within reasonable bound of error.

the majority of that 44% are eu citizens. So nothing to do with mass immigration.

enricoh

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I think it is safe to say that enricohs number was pulled from somewhere unpleasant.

Yeah, that hate filled right wing rag - the indo!
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/we-have-done-nothing-wrong-a-day-in-the-life-of-a-homeless-family-38260238.html

It has its own thread on here - non national homeless:

This mother at least trying to work and make an effort. But this story shows the reality behind the homeless figures. 56 percent are non national. This woman and the oldest 2 kids are Moldovan. How are they even here. That's not an EU country. So we have to house educate and medically care for this family of 4 where daddy is no longer on the scene. 2 eldest kids also awaiting hip replacements.

I wonder do these eastern European countries think we are a bunch of eegits. Move to Ireland and hop on the gravy train.

ohnonotgmail

enricoh wrote: »

Yeah, that hate filled right wing rag - the indo!
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/we-have-done-nothing-wrong-a-day-in-the-life-of-a-homeless-family-38260238.html

It has its own thread on here - non national homeless:

This mother at least trying to work and make an effort. But this story shows the reality behind the homeless figures. 56 percent are non national. This woman and the oldest 2 kids are Moldovan. How are they even here. That's not an EU country. So we have to house educate and medically care for this family of 4 where daddy is no longer on the scene. 2 eldest kids also awaiting hip replacements.

I wonder do these eastern European countries think we are a bunch of eegits. Move to Ireland and hop on the gravy train.

I cant see that article. can you quote the part that says that 56% of homeless are non-irish?

enricoh

john4321 wrote: »

Thanks for the link Kimsang.

"As can be seen in Figure 3.1, 84.6 per cent of homeless persons who lived in Dublin were Irish with 15.4 per cent non-Irish. For the rest of Ireland, 88.5 per cent of homeless persons were Irish, while 11.5 per cent were non-Irish."

Reasonable numbers in 2016, we have been blessed with many more since, now at 56%. Where will it stop - 80%?, should keep the homeless industry motoring along.

Kimsang

enricoh wrote: »

Reasonable numbers in 2016, we have been blessed with many more since, now at 56%. Where will it stop - 80%?, should keep the homeless industry motoring along.

These figures aren't an increase, they are entirely different subsets.

The figures John quotes are skewed.

In 2016 the nationwide non-ethnically Irish homeless was 44% of total.

enricoh

Kimsang wrote: »

These figures aren't an increase, they are entirely different subsets.

The figures John quotes are skewed.

In 2016 the nationwide non-ethnically Irish homeless was 44% of total.

Ah, i get you.
So 44% in 2016 is now 56% in 2019. In a time of full employment, wow, a never ending crisis so.
We are truly blessed!