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
Asylum Seekers in Ireland
Options
Comments
-
Exactly what aspect of our culture is being lost and how is it the Nigerian asylum seekers fault?
American culture has done more damage to Irish culture than African, Asian or Easten European, cultures will ever do?
It's been well documented that first generation migrants (from whatever political class) rarely integrate into their new societies. Their children generally do. Their grandchildren do so even more.
A case in point would be the Irish population in America, who, despite their proudness of their Irish heritage, have about as much connection to Ireland as any other American you'd like to pick.
I agree, what you call "american culture" can and has been quite damaging especially here in America. Witness the manipulative garbage spewed daily from american television. Are you a great fan of "survivor" or "lost", or do you have a "cold case county Wicklow", and notice how the Irish, especially the young people have (to their own detriment) soaked it up like a sponge.
It will be up to the Irish people whether they think anything of their culture should be preserved instead, of the one world, p.c., everyone think alike culture of the wonderful E.U. However it seems that there is a growing and simmering resentment which hasn't really found an outlet yet.
It might not be about Nigerians, or polish etc. specifically,but more about the numbers involved which are complete madness for a country as small as yours.
You're right, it is the american corporation "culture" which is turning Ireland into a human dumping ground of cheap labor which in the future will be completely subservient to their e.u. one world masters.
Where does Berte live anyway, in one of the Dublin neighborhoods now more than 50% non white.
If I mentioned crime statistics for any group of fpreigners, you'd scream that I was generalizing, and yet you do the very same concerning Irish in America.0 -
-
Not Irish crime(:rolleyes) I was referring to your generalization of the lack of connection of Irish in America to Ireland.
" A case in point would be the Irish population in America, who, despite their proudness of their Irish heritage, have about as much connection to Ireland as any other American you'd like to pick."0 -
Not Irish crime(:rolleyes) I was referring to your generalization of the lack of connection of Irish in America to Ireland.
" A case in point would be the Irish population in America, who, despite their proudness of their Irish heritage, have about as much connection to Ireland as any other American you'd like to pick."
Well it's difficult to prove, but it's the current viewpoint of those who are authorities on the matter.
At the 2007 US-Ireland forum, speaker Donald Keough discussed the distancing of Ireland's relationship with its dispora.
His summation was, and I quote "with each passing generation, Irish-Americans, in particular, view Ireland as more mentally distant."
So while my view may have no solids facts to back it up, it is the widely held view on the matter by the authorities in the area.
Add to that the fact that I live in the US and am Irish and my observational evidence (while a sample size of one) correlates with this view, I'd hardly class myself as generalising to the level you suggest above.0 -
I never said it was part of any study and I provided you with a link to the raw data when you asked without hesitation.He posted it as if it were part of some seperate independent study - which is why I asked him for a context and a date and a source.
The fact that you asked for a source several times while I was offline is irrelevant - I dealt with your request as soon as I encountered it. Stop trying to make out that I was intentionally attempting to deceive. Besides, I'm sure you are well aware of the fact that population data for most (if not all) developed countries is readily available on the internet.I disagree that it is there for people to view and judge for what it is - it is NOW because he was asked several times and finally clarified
Let us not forget that you have yet to provide a source for your initial statement, despite being asked at least once:
"I read somewhere that indigenous dutch in holland are set to become a minority in 2018"
But a 30.7% shift over 10 years is?!?1% over 10 years into the future with no margin of error is not credible imo.
I did consider the variables - I quite clearly explained my rationale. I have already stated that it is obviously not a 100% accurate estimate.If you put forward a number without considering any of the potential variables (and I only mentioned 2 or 3 that sprung to mind) then there is no way of knowing how far from reality the number you put forward actually is.
Absolutely impossible to accurately predict - including them would introduce an unnecessary degree of complexity. It makes far more sense to me to base an estimate on what we know to be true at this moment in time. The probability of mass refugee movements into the Netherlands occuring at any time over the next ten years is extremely low.Wars and refugee movements need to be looked at too.
How about I rephrase and say that, based on current trends, it seems likely that the native Dutch population in the Netherlands will be of the order of 79% of the total population in 2018, barring any major refugee movements within Europe or any genocide against the Dutch people.
From the politics guidelines:To my knowledge on boards/politics that is the first time anyone has posted a link to a graph or a chart and did not clarify that they had actually made it themselves.
“When offering fact, please offer relevant linkage, or at least source. Simply saying "a quick search on google...." is often, but not always, enough. If you do not do this upon posting, then please be willing to do so on request.”
I really don’t understand what the big deal is here. You asked for the source of the data, I provided it. Problem solved.
And to think, earlier in this thread, you accused the so-called “pc brigade” of “new depths of pedantic-ness and splitting hairs over and over and over into infinity or until boredom sets in.”
Now, can we get back to the topic at hand? Based on the figures I have presented, do you think the Dutch will be a minority in their own country in 2018? Do you think that they will be approaching this status? If so, why do think this will be the case?0 -
Advertisement
-
A racist is a person who makes and accepts a judgment of an individual based on a stereotype associated with the persons "race" (which more often than not means skin color, or ethnic origin).
This judgment is often excused by the people who make it by saying that such and such group of people are "too culturally different" to fit into Irish culture, which is why they object to Africans or Eastern European but for some reason don't mind Americans, French, Spanish, Scottish or English people coming and living here and destroying our native culture.
Why would you take note of that in the first place?[/QUOT
Wow, thanks for the info "wik". Growing up in Brooklyn, N.Y,in the 60's, I
became very aquainted with the term racism and the manipulative use of it by the media and various shills.
Unfortunately,racism is the term which stops all debate and dissent from the status quo, media controlled, so called public opinion. If someone is concerned about the future of the country because of the huge influx of immigrants,he is branded a racist. If you love you own people and culture, you must of course be a hater of every other people and culture, BULL****! It's the most natural thing in the world for people to want to be with others who share the same core beliefs, customs etc. thats how cultures developed in the first place, and why countries have borders. The hatred comes, following the resentment caused when people are forced together in large numbers by outside elements and "bought and paid for" politicians.
I've seen the collape of whole neghborhoods, because of the huge influx of
hispanics and carribeans (conga drums on a warm summer evening anyone?). Large increase in crime contributed of course but even more so because the day to day quality of life got so bad. The people forced to leave weren't Ku kluxers, or skinheads, just run of the mill working people. Was every immigrant a criminal? Of course not, but enough to make a big difference in the before and after picture. Then again we weren't supposed to notice because that would be "racist" and "Racial profiling".
Though it may ruffle you feathers a bit to realize it, one of the most basic of human rights is the right of association (who we wish to socialize with and be with on a day to day basis.) When that goes, it's a very slippery slope. 1984, big brother etc., etc., etc.
Do you actually, for a second believe that all cultures are exactly alike? RIDICULOUS, some are more literate, some more family oriented, some more vengeful, some more musical and so on. Forgive a broad sloppy analogy here... I am sure that in New Guinea say, that there are still medical shamins(ok, witch doctors). Would I want to interfere with their life style, make fun of them, hurt them in any way? Of course not, but as much as I respect holistic medicine, I wouldn't want them filling out my prescription.
(Ah Medical care!), have you seen a huge increase in the number of foreign born doctors and nurses in your hospitals, do they sometimes seem annoyed if they can't quite understand your "accent".. funny. I read about a case in Galway, last year, where an Irish catholic nurse was verbally abused by a muslim doctor because she was wearing her crucifix outside of her uniform, and it offended him. Very nice! Those quotas do have to be met though of course.
How are things in ole yeman, anyway?0 -
The provision of asylum (the moral obligation to provide protection for the persecuted) should be decoupled from the [permanent] immigration debate. A simple reform would be ending 'residence' as sufficient criterion for citizenship. Those judged to be persecuted could be granted 'residence' ,but not Irish nationality, until their own countries are judged safe and they can return.
Most obviously this could be effected by a constitutional amendment; that residence alone will not be sufficient grounds.0 -
"it is the widely held view on the matter by the authorities in the area."
Be wary of "authorities", P, especially if the're anywhere close to the mainstream media.
I'm a transplanted Brooklynite living in Boston, so maybe I'm getting a different perspective.0 -
I asked an off the cuff question to a person who happened to post in this thread who was dutch. I said :
Bloody dutch - coming over here taking all our job. ... (joking - sorry couldnt resist!)
Not to go off topic - but I read somewhere that indigenous dutch in holland are set to become a minority in 2018 - would you know if this is true /way off the mark - close to the mark ?
This was said almost as an aside.
That person answered "I dont know about 2018."
Fine - or so you would think except I was then accused of having made up the question. Which ironically is what many left leaning people do on here - force you to deny having said something which you actually did not by mis-representing what you said back to you.Ah yes, the old Fox News trick of putting forward an agenda in the form of questions and then retreating behind the excuse that they are just asking the question, not saying it is true.
"I hear your mother is a whore who likes to suck off donkeys. Is there any truth to that? What?!? I'm not saying your mum is a whore who likes to suck off donkeys. I'm just asking is that a true statement? I'm just asking a question"...
Or he could just say "I read it some where" :
I said I couldnt remember where exactly I read it - that it was probably a spectator or economist journalist or possibly a conference.
Turns out it was a combination of both. Voila ....a thinktank conference from 2006 called 'Jihad in Europe' where one of the participants was a spectator journalist.
Here is a video record of it.
http://www.stage6.com/user/Thanx_A_Lott/video/1799240/Jihad-in-Europe
Its approx an hour long and the part in question is at 44:30-ish
'The situation in holland is desperately worrying, there is no doubt about that. Deomgraphics for one are against us. More than half of the children in amsterdam schools are non dutch at the moment. Rotterdam is about to have a muslim majority, the 4 largest cities in the netherlands are predicted to have muslim majorities in the next decade. The dutch government in 2004 released a survey which said that by 2017 the majority of people in holland would be non dutch.'
So when I asked the question about how I read somewhere that in 2018 there was expected to be a majority non dutch in holland - what I meant to say was 2017 and heard not read.0 -
"it is the widely held view on the matter by the authorities in the area."
Be wary of "authorities", P, especially if the're anywhere close to the mainstream media.
I'm a transplanted Brooklynite living in Boston, so maybe I'm getting a different perspective.
I suppose if the authorities suppoerted you assertion it would be a different matter? :rolleyes:
In any case, I had already stated that it was my observation aswell and I'm an Irish-reared person who has lived in 3 different states, socialising and family includes 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation Irish.0 -
Advertisement
-
I suppose if the authorities suppoerted you assertion it would be a different matter? :rolleyes:
In any case, I had already stated that it was my observation aswell and I'm an Irish-reared person who has lived in 3 different states, socialising and family includes 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation Irish.
Now don't go "supposin" P. But,Most of the media are agenda whores, so we have to be careful.
However, we are all entitled to our cbservations and I respect yours.0 -
I said I couldnt remember where exactly I read it - that it was probably a spectator or economist journalist or possibly a conference.
Turns out it was a combination of both. Voila ....a thinktank conference from 2006 called 'Jihad in Europe' where one of the participants was a spectator journalist.
Here is a video record of it.
http://www.stage6.com/user/Thanx_A_Lott/video/1799240/Jihad-in-Europe
Its approx an hour long and the part in question is at 44:30-ish
'The situation in holland is desperately worrying, there is no doubt about that. Deomgraphics for one are against us. More than half of the children in amsterdam schools are non dutch at the moment. Rotterdam is about to have a muslim majority, the 4 largest cities in the netherlands are predicted to have muslim majorities in the next decade. The dutch government in 2004 released a survey which said that by 2017 the majority of people in holland would be non dutch.'
Guess which city i am from and guess why i left.......
Whether or not 2017/18 is indeed Doomsday depends also on what you would qualify as not native Dutch.
People with different agendas will have different opinions of what nationality a person, born in a country but has one or both parents who count as foreigner, has.
Moroccans for example, born outside Morocco, will always automatically also get the Moroccan nationality, including the passport.
Would you therefor count them as, in this case, Dutch or Moroccans?
If you only count being Dutch when you are born in Holland from parents both born in Holland, 2018 might be the day. Other ways of calculatiing say it will be 2050.
Whenever it happens, the thought fills me with horror.0 -
-
Join Date:Posts: 13662
Tha Gopher wrote: »Eh......right.
So if by some miracle Osama bin Laden boards a plane in Karachi bound for Canada with a stopover in JFK, the US authorities cannot legally* arrest him as Pakistan was the last state he was legally "logged" as being present in, and therefore they would have to try and get an extradition order by Pakistan through immediately? Or wait until he arrived in Canada, then request extradition? (something rather unlikely, as Im sure the Canadians would have issues extraditing people to face a death sentence)
*: imagining, of course, that the US doesnt engage in legally questionable kidnappings or speedy extraditions from Pakistan of course.
Well I can't speak for American law, but airports generally have a legal status similar to international waters. However, they are usually run by private companies who have the authority to direct persons for customs and security purposes (Iin the same way that the captain of a ship has the right to put someone ashore in a country). So the airport staff can direct a person to enter the territory of the USA where that person can then be arrested by the American authorities under American law. But until they cross the border, they are in effectively no man's land.Tha Gopher wrote: »What if I am flying through Singapore on my way to Oz and my bag bursts, spilling a kilo of cocaine on the airport floor. I hope I get you as my lawyer, as id rather take the rap for it in Britain than the Singapore justice system.
Doesn't change international law.Tha Gopher wrote: »Mother of god, stop, please.
Good point. I'm wrong.cabinteelytomm wrote:The provision of asylum (the moral obligation to provide protection for the persecuted) should be decoupled from the [permanent] immigration debate. A simple reform would be ending 'residence' as sufficient criterion for citizenship. Those judged to be persecuted could be granted 'residence' ,but not Irish nationality, until their own countries are judged safe and they can return.
Most obviously this could be effected by a constitutional amendment; that residence alone will not be sufficient grounds.
That is the position as it stands; if you are granted asylum you are granted residence. There is no automatic right to Irish Citizenship if you are resident. The only automatic right to Irish citizenship is for those born in Ireland (subject to this of course).
The OP's question has been answered, when will this thread end?0 -
Might I ask why?
Yes, you may.
Let me start that i dont have anything against people because they are a certain race before the professional Booo!!! yellers come out in numbers here.
What i do think is bad for a country is if it gets too many people that live their lives in a way that is so completely different to what we in Western Europe are used to. And yes, i am talking islamic people here.
Now i am not talking about the muslim who tries to live his life the European ( or Dutch or Irish, whatever you like) with some added Islamic ideas to eat. I mean... i really dont care if they dont want to eat pork.
The ones i do have something against are the ones wearing a "dress" when they are a man. the ones that cover up their wives from head till toe and let them walk 10 meters behind them i nthe streets while that is the only time when the woman is allowed to go outside.
I have a problem with the muslims who think it is fine to lie to me, to steal from or even kill me because i am not a muslim.
I dont appreciate if young Dutch girls are not able to walk in the streets without being called whores, because they dont cover their hair.
What i have difficulties with if Muslims start to demand that their religious holidays are made standard in Holland. So in stead of, lets say Eastern, they want their end of the Ramadan they celebrate, standard as an holiday.
How would you like it if i start demanding that the Dutch queens birthday should from now on be a national holiday here in Ireland in stead of St Stepehns day?
I have a problem with people who live for 20 years or more in Holland and still dont speak a word of Dutch.
What these people try to do is living the live they were used to live in marocco or Turkey or wherever they come from in a Western european country and expect that country to change for them.
When i planned to move away from Holland i looked where i could go to.
First of all it had to be a country where i can make myself understood, in other words, i had to be able to speak the language of that country.
2nd thing important to me. How do people live, is it very differnt from what i am used to, if yes, can i allow myself to change to that way of living.
Thinking like that might narrow a choice down but i think it makes it easier on yourself as well as on your hosts. Because that is still what i am, a guest in your country so i have to behave and live according to your rules.
My English is absolutely not 100% right but at least i manage to buy my food, i managed to get my pps number, get my tax sorted without someone having to translate everything for me.
Quite the opposite of what Muslims do.
In other words. New people in your country doesnt have to be a bad thing. You have to be careful though that you do get people who actually participate and that you dont get the ones who just sit back keep their hand up and try put their way of living down your throat.0 -
Thats how it works is it?Your continuing down the road of attacking the character/good faith of someone without any proof whatsoever.
If I call you on making posts like yours I'm calling you a liar and attacking your character because I don't just take it on good faith that everything you post is above board?
So surely you were attacking djpbarry's "character" by the same token by asking to see the statistics he put forward?
I wouldn't call it a "big crime"My big crime was that I asked a question to find out how much truth there was to it - rather than simply accept it at face value.
If I "learn some manners"We will see what exactly ?0 -
Fine - or so you would think except I was then accused of having made up the question.
That isn't what you were "accused of"
You really don't seem to be following the objection to the style of "Its only a question" type posts.
Go back to the "I hear your mums a whore? Is that true?" example and you might understand a bit better.0 -
I have a problem with the muslims who think it is fine to lie to me, to steal from or even kill me because i am not a muslim.
Is there anyone who you wouldn't have a problem with if they think its fine to lie to, steal from, and kill you?
Who are "these people"What these people try to do is living the live they were used to live in marocco or Turkey or wherever they come from in a Western european country and expect that country to change for them.
You started off with a nice little disclaimer that you have no problem with Muslims in general.
So what is the percentage of Muslims that you would actually have a problem with because of all the things above that you listed.
Is it 1%, 10%, 50%, 99%?
Or do you take the philosophy that we (Europe) shouldn't let anyone of them in so we can make sure that we keep out this 1%, 10%, 50% etc ...0 -
If I call you on making posts like yours I'm calling you a liar and attacking your character because I don't just take it on good faith that everything you post is above board?So surely you were attacking djpbarry's "character" by the same token by asking to see the statistics he put forward?
You ignore the fact that there is a difference between asking a question (what I did) and posting supposed statistics without saying 'I made this'.
If you post a statistic as fact without a source then its not unreasonable to ask for the source and context as a means of assessing how reliable it is.
The part your continuing to not get is the part where you had a go at me because I had asked a question which doubted the accuracy of a statistic that I found hard to believe (a statistic which you also found hard to believe btw).
You said :
_______________
Ah yes, the old Fox News trick of putting forward an agenda in the form of questions and then retreating behind the excuse that they are just asking the question, not saying it is true.
"I hear your mother is a whore who likes to suck off donkeys. Is there any truth to that? What?!? I'm not saying your mum is a whore who likes to suck off donkeys. I'm just asking is that a true statement? I'm just asking a question"
_______________
That is accusing me of having invented the question - unless of course the fox news presenter in your example was referring to an actual printed source which claimed the interviewee's mother actually sucked donkeys ? Stretching the limits of credulity now imo. Obviously the inference is that the original question is fictional and is used as a means to make a disparaging statement. So in other words you are backtracking now. Nice.
More proof of this is where I said
Why not post a link so people can evaluate the source and view it in context ?
and you replied :
______________
Or he could just say "I read it some where"
______________
Again implying that there was no source just a claim that it was read. I have since provided the source for why I asked the question in the first place - proving that it was not invented so instead of questioning me for a source you have changed tack to claim that you agreed there was a source to the question but that the act of asking the question in the first place is now where you see a problem.0 -
You ignore the fact that there is a difference between asking a question (what I did) and posting supposed statistics without saying 'I made this'.
There is a difference.
The difference is that you can hide behind the "Its only a question" which means you can put out ideas without having to even attempt to back them up.
I hear Morlar raped a Polish woman and then wrote "F**k off back home" on her face. Is that true?
You have to now explain why that isn't true, rather than the correct stance of me having to explain why it is true, because I can just go "Hey, its only a question"
It doesn't matter if I just made that up, or I over heard it from some one else. That isn't the point. The point is that these types of question are designed to put the emphasis on demonstrating the idea isn't true, rather than demonstrating that it is. It is manipulating the way human language works.I have since provided the source for why I asked the question in the first place - proving that it was not invented so instead of questioning me for a source you have changed tack to claim that you agreed there was a source to the question but that the act of asking the question in the first place is now where you see a problem.
You are again missing the point. TBH Morlar I'm not sure I would credit you with inventing any new idea on this forum.
You are recycling old ideas through a manner that means you can put it out there without actually having to back it up because its "just a question"
This is demonstrated precisely by how you are responding to my objections, by trying to demonstrate that yes you heard this idea somewhere, rather than actually supporting the idea itself.
And you would no doubt say you don't have to support the idea, you weren't putting the idea out there, you were just asking a question0 -
Advertisement
-
There is a difference.
The difference is that you can hide behind the "Its only a question" which means you can put out ideas without having to even attempt to back them up.
I hear Morlar raped a Polish woman and then wrote "F**k off back home" on her face. Is that true?
You need to break out of this habit you have of finding neat ways of insulting people while remaining technically within the letter of the board rules (about attacking posts and not posters) while in my view going way beyond the spirit of the rules.
Lets see - so far we have had 'your mothers a donkey sucking whore' and now 'you rape polish women'. Nice.
The difference is that when I asked a question it was based on something that an known international author and journalist mentioned.
I did not ask a question based on something I invented in order to be offensive - which is what you have done to me twice in this thread so far.The point is that these types of question are designed to put the emphasis on demonstrating the idea isn't true, rather than demonstrating that it is. It is manipulating the way human language works.
What ?? Says who ? When did you get the right to veto which questions can be asked on boards on the basis of you not agreeing with them or doubting the sincerity of the person asking the question (ie its one your not comfortable with)? You didnt get that right - so what the hell are you on about ?You are recycling old ideas through a manner that means you can put it out there without actually having to back it up because its "just a question"
I asked a question. It was not a statement of fact. I did not say -'So what are you going to do in 2018 when indiginous dutch become a minority in holland ?'
I specifically said - can you tell me if this is true, nearly true or far off the mark. I specifically did not present the question as a fact.by trying to demonstrate that yes you heard this idea somewhere, rather than actually supporting the idea itself.
I did hear it somewhere - almost a year ago in fact. Lucky for me I could remember where as it turns out. I would hate to think of someone asking a question on here on the basis of having heard/read something that they can no longer find the source to.And you would no doubt say you don't have to support the idea, you weren't putting the idea out there, you were just asking a question
Correct.0 -
You need to break out of this habit you have of finding neat ways of insulting people while remaining technically within the letter of the board rules (about attacking posts and not posters) while in my view going way beyond the spirit of the rules.
That is my whole f**king point Morlar :rolleyes:
Suggesting that you raped a Polish girl is an insult.
That doesn't change because I put a "?" at the end of it. It is an insult because it throws out the idea that you might have actually done that. that this idea is something that is within the realms of possibility. And then you have to defend yourself, when in fact it is me who should actually be supporting the accusation in the first place.
It shifts the whole emphasis to debating why something didn't or isn't going to happen, rather than if it actually did or is going to happen.
Saying "I hear the native Dutch will be a minority in 2018" throws that idea out as well, even if you put a "?" at the end. It throws it out as something that is a possibility and then people have to explain why it isn't going to happen, rather than explaining why it is. And people can say "Well I didn't find the explanation why it isn't going to happen very convincing". The fact that it has not been explained why it is going to happen in the first place has been left behind.
I don't know why I'm explaining this to you. You knew exactly what you were doing.
And by the way none of what you did is outside the charter. It is simply a bad/nonsense way to debate and discuss a topic.0 -
That is my whole f**king point Morlar rolleyes:
Suggesting that you raped a Polish girl is an insult.
Yes but the part you dont get is the difference between me asking a question and you being insulting.
If a renowned international author and journalist put forward a statistic you would then be free to ask for it to be verified. Which is what I did.
In the case of what you have done here there is a difference you seem unable to grasp.
You did not base your post on somones legitimate statement (by legitimate I mean a renowned published international author and journalist) - instead you based it on something insulting that popped out of your imagination. THAT is the difference in case you still missed it.0 -
Is there anyone who you wouldn't have a problem with if they think its fine to lie to, steal from, and kill you?
Who are "these people"
You started off with a nice little disclaimer that you have no problem with Muslims in general.
So what is the percentage of Muslims that you would actually have a problem with because of all the things above that you listed.
Is it 1%, 10%, 50%, 99%?
Or do you take the philosophy that we (Europe) shouldn't let anyone of them in so we can make sure that we keep out this 1%, 10%, 50% etc ...
I will have a problem with anyone who thinks it is right to steal etc from me.
Perhaps i should have added in the original post "Because they believe thier holy book tells them it is their right to do so because it is ok to steal lie and murder non-muslims"
That would have made my point more clear.
My nice little disclaimer.... i can not find that one in my post. I only said i dont have anything against people because they are a certain race. Muslim is not a race, it is a religion.
Who i meant with "these people" is pretty obvious i think. The ones i summed up in the lines before i used the term "these people".
I can not give you a percentage, simply because i dont know them all. What i do know is that there are now already complate parts of cities where the police dont go anymore, where the few Dutch people who still live there have to deal with intimidation, aggression and in the end are just chased out of their own home. Simply because the Dutch people are not one of "them".
I think it is hard, if not impossible, to deny a certain group of people access to a country but i think it should certainly be possible to send people back to where they come from when they make no effort to adjust to their new country at all. When they take care of 40% of all crime.
In the past the general idea was that it was good for a country to bring in guestlabour. To a certain degree i think this is right but it really depends on who you allow to come in.
Ireland isnt doing so bad (Celtic Tiger) and, correct me if i am wrong, for a big part because of foreigners coming in to work here.
Recent studies showed that guestlabour in Holland has cost the taxpayer €50.000.000.000 netto. And mostly because in the past they have not been picky enough about who to allow entry in the country. We allowed the farmers from Anatolia (eastert- Turkey) and the Riff mountains (Marocco). They came with complete villages, each and everyone of them without any education and without a clue how to write or read.
can you blame these people for that last part? Probably not but i certainly blame them for not making an effort to learn dutch, one way or the other, for not making sure their offspring behaves when they are out of the house.
I do blame those people for reacting like this: "Hey, he asked for it, he insulted the Islam, he got what he deserved" when Theo van Gogh ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director) )was slaughtered in the streets of Amsterdam, at 08.20 hrs november 2nd 2004.0 -
No there isn't because the way we both asked the question is the same.Yes but the part you dont get is the difference between me asking a question and you being insulting.
The question I asked is only insulting because of the implication of the question, the implication that what I'm asking you might be true.
The same holds for your question. You are implying that what you are asking is true without having to back that up with anything, because its "only a question"0 -
Well not really.I will have a problem with anyone who thinks it is right to steal etc from me.
Perhaps i should have added in the original post "Because they believe thier holy book tells them it is their right to do so because it is ok to steal lie and murder non-muslims"
That would have made my point more clear.
I would imagine you have just as much problem with an atheist thinking its right to steal and kill you as a Muslim or Christian.
So you have something against Muslims, in general.I only said i dont have anything against people because they are a certain race. Muslim is not a race, it is a religion.
Muslims?Who i meant with "these people" is pretty obvious i think. The ones i summed up in the lines before i used the term "these people".
Well then how do you know how many are here? How many do you know about who want to steal from you and kill you?I can not give you a percentage, simply because i dont know them all.
Such as?What i do know is that there are now already complate parts of cities where the police dont go anymore.
How many people live in these parts of the cities?
Certainly. But again how many people are we talking about here? 1% of the Muslim population? 5%? 10%?I think it is hard, if not impossible, to deny a certain group of people access to a country but i think it should certainly be possible to send people back to where they come from when they make no effort to adjust to their new country at all. When they take care of 40% of all crime.
Not people who want to kill you. But who are the people who want to kill you?In the past the general idea was that it was good for a country to bring in guestlabour. To a certain degree i think this is right but it really depends on who you allow to come in.
No one in the Anatolia region of Turkey can read and write?We allowed the farmers from Anatolia (eastert- Turkey) and the Riff mountains (Marocco). They came with complete villages, each and everyone of them without any education and without a clue how to write or read.
Considering Turkey has a 87% literacy rate I find that a little hard to believe.
How many haven't learned Dutch?Probably not but i certainly blame them for not making an effort to learn dutch
How many of those are involved in criminal activities?
How many don't make their offspring behave when they are out?, one way or the other, for not making sure their offspring behaves when they are out of the house.I do blame those people for reacting like this: "Hey, he asked for it, he insulted the Islam, he got what he deserved" when Theo van Gogh ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director) )was slaughtered in the streets of Amsterdam, at 08.20 hrs november 2nd 2004.
I would certain blame "those people" for saying that. who are those people? who said that?0 -
Wicknight.......
Statistics you want?
Statistics you ll get.
But not now because i have to bent over backwards in order to access this site from the job.
I also can not promiss you a stat for each and every claim i make as all i say is based on Dutch websites and i guess it is not really usefull to send you links that are in Dutch only??
But please, dont take 1 thing i say, join it with soemthing else i say and make a silly comment out of it.
I like a discussion and i dont mind when it cost me time to make myself clear. But that is now the 2nd time you take something completely out of context.0 -
Ah yes, the self-proclaimed neo-conservative Zionist, Douglas Murray. Hardly an authority on matters of demographics.'The situation in holland is desperately worrying, there is no doubt about that. Deomgraphics for one are against us. More than half of the children in amsterdam schools are non dutch at the moment. Rotterdam is about to have a muslim majority, the 4 largest cities in the netherlands are predicted to have muslim majorities in the next decade. The dutch government in 2004 released a survey which said that by 2017 the majority of people in holland would be non dutch.'
I wonder what he means when he says "demographics for one are against us"? Who do you suppose "us" is? Christians? White people? Both?
Anyway, just about everything he says is nonsense.
I presume you are referring to the shalwar kamis? I own two myself so presumably you must find me deeply offensive? What difference does it make to you how someone dresses?The ones i do have something against are the ones wearing a "dress" when they are a man.
The end of Ramadan (Eid ul-Fitr) does not clash with any Christian holidays, so in the unlikely event of, say, the Irish government deciding to make Eid a public holiday, it would mean everyone would have an extra day off per year.What i have difficulties with if Muslims start to demand that their religious holidays are made standard in Holland. So in stead of, lets say Eastern, they want their end of the Ramadan they celebrate, standard as an holiday.
I've actually celebrated Eid with friends in London; lots of food, lots of drink - 'twas good craic!
That's a pretty sweeping generalisation there. The majority of Muslims (or people from a Muslim background) have made valuable contributions to our society. If we were to remove all Muslims from, say, the UK, the NHS would come to a standstill.My English is absolutely not 100% right but at least i manage to buy my food, i managed to get my pps number, get my tax sorted without someone having to translate everything for me.
Quite the opposite of what Muslims do.
You think that all Muslims are thieves, liars and murderers?Perhaps i should have added in the original post "Because they believe thier holy book tells them it is their right to do so because it is ok to steal lie and murder non-muslims"
So, you're not racist, but you are anti-Islam. Is that what you're saying?My nice little disclaimer.... i can not find that one in my post. I only said i dont have anything against people because they are a certain race. Muslim is not a race, it is a religion.
Are we still talking about Muslims here? Got a source? You realise that if this were true, almost 50% of Muslims in the Netherlands would be criminals (on average)?When they take care of 40% of all crime.
Could you provide a source for this as well please?Recent studies showed that guestlabour in Holland has cost the taxpayer €50.000.000.000 netto.
In fairness, Theo van Gogh was no saint (I am of course not defending his murder). He consistently referred to Muslims as "goat-****ers" and I would also be very wary of anyone who looked up to Pim Fortuyn.I do blame those people for reacting like this: "Hey, he asked for it, he insulted the Islam, he got what he deserved" when Theo van Gogh ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theo_van_Gogh_(film_director) )was slaughtered in the streets of Amsterdam, at 08.20 hrs november 2nd 2004.
Anyway, we are going off-topic here. The discussion was about nationality but now we've moved onto religion. You initially said that you feared non-Dutch people would become a majority in the Netherlands, that the thought “filled you with horror.” But, now you’re saying you fear Muslims may become a majority. So which is it?0 -
Originally Posted by Morlar
Yes but the part you dont get is the difference between me asking a question and you being insulting.No there isn't because the way we both asked the question is the same.
The question I asked is only insulting because of the implication of the question, the implication that what I'm asking you might be true.
The same holds for your question. You are implying that what you are asking is true without having to back that up with anything, because its "only a question"
I dont know how can I spell this out any more plainly.
A) I asked a question based on something I heard which originated from an author & journalist at a conference.
You 'asked a question' based on something you imagined or invented.
You can not credibly fail to recognise that these 2 statements a & b are true.
You can not possibly fail to recognise that there is a difference between a & b.0 -
Advertisement
-
I dont know how can I spell this out any more plainly.
A) I asked a question based on something I heard which originated from an author & journalist at a conference. You 'asked a question' based on something you imagined or invented.
You can not credibly fail to recognise that these 2 statements a & b are true.
You can not possibly fail to recognise that there is a difference between a & b.
There certainly is. But then you might as well say that my question was different to yours because I used different words and letters than you did :rolleyes:
you know perfectly well why you asked that question the way you did.
You asked it because you knew you could not actually support in any way the idea of Holland being swamped by immigrants in ten years, but you still wanted to throw it out there anyway.
Why are you pretending (to great lengths) otherwise?0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement