Romanians Victims of Racist Attacks

djpbarry

johnathan woss wrote: »

But I'm not arguing that everyone ELSE should be housing, feeding, educating, etc foreign gypsies with THEIR tax money and THEIR services.

I don't recall anyone arguing any such thing.

wes

johnnyc wrote: »

Ah wes everybody is entilted to an opinion maybe dracula_son has had more experience to the roma gypsies then you or I. So would you be at least courteous to the fella

Um, did you read the post I replied too? It was clear that the poster didn't know much about them, due to them saying it. I am just going on what was said, so I think I was plenty fair.

johnnyc wrote: »

Fair play to your mother she was a hard worker, but the vast majority of roma gypsies have been brought up in a begging tradition. I remember a report was compiled by a It lecturer (having the link to hand at the moment will find it soon) about the irish traveller and why they are the poorest section in irish society. One of the major parts in the report was on about the education of the travellers( this could be applicable to gypsies as well), and that their children were going to fail due to nomatic lifestyle and this would continue until the nomatic culture was broken. The lecturer also was on about that they were brought up in a culture of failure( education wise). So to get back to your point that Roma can support themselves by working, regardless of there education if they cant speak ,spell english and there children loose out on a education how are they going to advance in the 21st century

Sorry, but you are coming to a conclusion on the Roman, based on information on Irish traveler's? They aren't necessarily the same and I am going to have to simply disagree due to this.

johnnyc wrote: »

We are'nt advocating discrimation against gypsies but they are helping there cause by leeching off the rest of society, begging people for money next atm machines. This behaviour in ireland is not acceptable and only creates distain for the roma throughout indigenous population and other nationalities as well

The post I replied to did advocate discrimination (at least it seemed that way to me):

dracula's son wrote: »

the authorities in NI and ROI should make some "spring cleaning" not the angry mobs, and this will send the mesage to the gypsies "dont go there they stopped the free money"

It calls for the Irish and British governments to do the same thing the racist mob did. Just to make it clear, I am talking about the post i replied to specifically and it certainly seemed to be advocating discrmination. Now, I am open to correction on it, but I don't think I got it wrong.

wes

dracula's son wrote: »

your mom could work in NI and/or ROI without any restrictions (work permit) she knows the language and she's respecting the laws of the country, and the most important one your mom had the will to work, something the gypsies never had (and I'm talking about a lifetime experience)
I have a lot of respect for your mother.

Thanks.

Just reading your post, it seemed to me your were saying you didn't know much about the Roma, so your conclusion made no sense to me.

I still disagree. I know there is a problem within the Roma community, but they aren't all the same and they need to be treated as individuals like everyone else.

dracula's son wrote: »

but did you ever asked yourself how come gypsy's childrens adopted by irish families have performed well in schools, and were raised in Ireland and become good citizens, and in the same time childrens of gypsyies raised by gypsies (in IRL) are begging on the streets instead of being in the clasroom with other childrens. The gypsy parents they don't realise they are confiscating the future of their childrens by pushing them on the streets to beg. These are real problems, not the fact that I'm not loving them. If you want to be politically corect and not discriminating them, fine with me, we have another million in Romania... take them all I don't mind.

I could care less, about being PC.

What I do care about, is doing whats right and treating the Roma the way you suggested would simply be wrong.

dracula's son

Wes,

I would like to agree first on some terms, and please take it in a constructive way, the only reason for this is to avoid confusion.
Please do not use the term romans or roman comunity, which sounds like "people from Rome" or "citizens of Rome". The correct term is the Romanian community or Romanian people.
the term rroma (by the way this was adopted by western countries) which means "generic gypsy" (generic as in slovak, hungarian, ukranian, bulgarian, serbian or romanian gypsy) has absolutelly nothing in common with romanian.
The name of the country "Romania", was given because we were occupied, by the Roman empire, before this the name of the place was "Dacia" and the people were a kind of tracians (tracians were populating the Balcan peninsula from actual Greece to the Carpathians (mountains) in the midle of todays Romania.
After hundreds of years of ocupation the roman empire culture mixed with the dacian culture.
So we are related with Italians, our official language is romanian, a language very similar with italian language (a romanian can speak basic italian in about 4 week if he moves in Italy)
The gypsy polulation originates from southern Asia (India) and came much later in europe (after the Roman empire domination) there ar no language similarities between romanian language (latin language) and gypsy languge because are from totally different cultures separated in time and by georaphic position.
Romanians do not speak gypsy language, but roamnian gypsies are encouraged by the romanian govern to preserv their language and special clases are in place in some schools where they can receive education (for free) in gypsy language
(unfortunatelly they do not attend the courses)

so please do not make the confusion rroma (generic gypsy) and romanian (a person which has a romanian passport)
when you say romanian you are talking about a population of 22 milion people and aprox 2 milions are gypsies, and they are not represeantive for our culture.
I would preffer to call them romanian gypsies - this is self explanatory, they are romanian citizens (they bear a romanian passport) and they belong to the ethinc minority gypsy.
Other minorities livining in Romania are hungarians (aprox 3 milions) and they have even universities whith teaching language hungarian, so we are multicultural by nature.

bottom line: call them gypsy, the term rroma is generating confusion.


I don't know why I gave the impresion that I don't know much about gypsies, It must be my (lack of) english, I do aplogise for my ignorance.

Wes, I do respect your opinion, even if we don't agree.
D's s

What do average Romanians think of Ireland and Great Britain accepting so many Roma into our countries ?

I'm not the voice of the romanians but what I think as an individual is the following:
give them a chance, to do the right thing, and a limited period of time to proove they can sustain themself by working, apply the same rules of empoyment like all romanians (not gypsy) if they fail, invite them politely to leave (this is going to work with imediate results because when a gypsy will realise that he has to work he will run like hell, if he's an exception keep him, make this period short, like 6 months

The system in place right now is a free meal paid by taxpayers

johnnyc

The unemployment rate for romas is close to 100% in slovakia and i recon thats the same for ireland as well.

http://romnews.com/community/modules...rticle&sid=371

"Due to Vincent Danihel, representative of the Slovak government for the Roma, the unemployment of Roma amounts to nearly 100 %. They can exist only by government aid. "

The above point has been previously stated by me, so the argument that the majority of gypsies contribute to this country through prsi has been disaproved.

oscarBravo

johnathan woss wrote: »

None.

But I'm not arguing that everyone ELSE should be housing, feeding, educating, etc foreign gypsies with THEIR tax money and THEIR services.

Neither am I. I'm still waiting for evidence that the Roma victims in this case were unemployed or otherwise causing trouble, and for an explanation as to how this justifies burning them out of their homes, even if it's true.

wes

dracula's son wrote: »

Wes,

I would like to agree first on some terms, and please take it in a constructive way, the only reason for this is to avoid confusion.
Please do not use the term romans or roman comunity, which sounds like "people from Rome" or "citizens of Rome". The correct term is the Romanian community or Romanian people.

Those are typo's I keep making. I have tried to edit post to remove them, but probably missed a few.

dracula's son wrote: »

the term rroma (by the way this was adopted by western countries) which means "generic gypsy" (generic as in slovak, hungarian, ukranian, bulgarian, serbian or romanian gypsy) has absolutelly nothing in common with romanian.
The name of the country "Romania", was given because we were occupied, by the Roman empire, before this the name of the place was "Dacia" and the people were a kind of tracians (tracians were populating the Balcan peninsula from actual Greece to the Carpathians (mountains) in the midle of todays Romania.

Thanks for the history lesson. Sorry again for the typo's.

dracula's son wrote: »

After hundreds of years of ocupation the roman empire culture mixed with the dacian culture.
So we are related with Italians, our official language is romanian, a language very similar with italian language (a romanian can speak basic italian in about 4 week if he moves in Italy)
The gypsy polulation originates from southern Asia (India) and came much later in europe (after the Roman empire domination) there ar no language similarities between romanian language (latin language) and gypsy languge because are from totally different cultures separated in time and by georaphic position.
Romanians do not speak gypsy language, but roamnian gypsies are encouraged by the romanian govern to preserv their language and special clases are in place in some schools where they can receive education (for free) in gypsy language
(unfortunatelly they do not attend the courses)

so please do not make the confusion rroma (generic gypsy) and romanian (a person which has a romanian passport)
when you say romanian you are talking about a population of 22 milion people and aprox 2 milions are gypsies, and they are not represeantive for our culture.
I would preffer to call them romanian gypsies - this is self explanatory, they are romanian citizens (they bear a romanian passport) and they belong to the ethinc minority gypsy.
Other minorities livining in Romania are hungarians (aprox 3 milions) and they have even universities whith teaching language hungarian, so we are multicultural by nature.

bottom line: call them gypsy, the term rroma is generating confusion.

Gypsy can refer to several different groups. Again, I will try and avoid any typo's to reduce confusion, but as they are unintentional, I can't guarantee there won't be any. I think the correct term is Romani?!?

dracula's son wrote: »

I don't know why I gave the impresion that I don't know much about gypsies, It must be my (lack of) english, I do aplogise for my ignorance.

From your first post, I got the impression you didn't know much about them. Apologies for my mistake.

dracula's son wrote: »

Wes, I do respect your opinion, even if we don't agree.
D's s

I'm not the voice of the romanians but what I think as an individual is the following:
give them a chance, to do the right thing, and a limited period of time to proove they can sustain themself by working, apply the same rules of empoyment like all romanians (not gypsy) if they fail, invite them politely to leave (this is going to work with imediate results because when a gypsy will realise that he has to work he will run like hell, if he's an exception keep him, make this period short, like 6 months

The system in place right now is a free meal paid by taxpayers

Well, I don't know about the system elsewhere, but you need to work here for 2 years before you can claim social welfare. So there really is no need to change the system, as it already doesn't cater to people who don't bother working.

opo

oscarBravo wrote: »

Neither am I. I'm still waiting for evidence that the Roma victims in this case were unemployed or otherwise causing trouble, and for an explanation as to how this justifies burning them out of their homes, even if it's true.

Really?

I am am still waiting for anyone covering this story to mention the most basic information, such as, how many houses the 100+ "victims" lived in and why they were there; before moving on to the various preferred, sublimed, racism, intolerance and pre-genocidal slants.

djpbarry

johnnyc wrote: »

...the argument that the majority of gypsies contribute to this country through prsi has been disaproved.

1. Nobody made such an argument.
2. You have not disproved anything.

dracula's son

Well, I don't know about the system elsewhere, but you need to work here for 2 years before you can claim social welfare. So there really is no need to change the system, as it already doesn't cater to people who don't bother working

gypsies are not claiming the benefits under the PRSI scheme, they came in this country (ROI) claiming refugee status. They are "refugees" from a country called Romania where they have granted free education in their own language, lying about romanian authorities discriminating them. That's why we love them that much. They can not claim PRSI because they have never worked here there and anywhere. Back in 1992 more than one family of gypsies were claming money from germans (refugee schemes) and they were registered in more than one city, due to lack of integrated IT system gypsys were abusing the system, and the germans have discovered in many cases the same gyspsies taking money from 7 different places with a total of 7000 DM (deutch marks) when a decent salary was 2500 DM. And this is not an urban mith I was there and I was ashamed as romanian citizen.
The worst thing for a Romanian is that we know who they are, what they do (not working) and we are amaized how easy they are fooling the authorities in so many different countries.
D's s

wes

Well, I have no real idea about the refugee status, but the people up North weren't refugee's, so no all Romani are refugee's here.

djpbarry

dracula's son wrote: »

gypsies are not claiming the benefits under the PRSI scheme, they came in this country (ROI) claiming refugee status. They are "refugees" from a country called Romania...

Seeing as how Romania is a member of the EU, I can't imagine too many Romanian asylum applications are going to be successful. As of 2005, there were just 321 Romanian refugees in Ireland (source).

valery

djpbarry wrote: »

Seeing as how Romania is a member of the EU, I can't imagine too many Romanian asylum applications are going to be successful. As of 2005, there were just 321 Romanian refugees in Ireland (source).

Look , folks, I thought the thread was about some refugees getting assaulted.

prsi, tax, entitlements, to hell with all that , invite those innocent folk down here and look after them, thats the proper thing to do , we all know that, so lets get it done. These people are in trouble.

oscarBravo

opo wrote: »

I am am still waiting for anyone covering this story to mention the most basic information, such as, how many houses the 100+ "victims" lived in and why they were there...

I'm not sure what your point is. What number of houses would justify them being terrorised out of those houses? What reason for their being there would justify them being terrorised out of their homes?

It seems you feel that terrorising people out of their homes is perfectly acceptable behaviour. Forgive me if I disagree.

opo

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm not sure what your point is. What number of houses would justify them being terrorised out of those houses? What reason for their being there would justify them being terrorised out of their homes?

It seems you feel that terrorising people out of their homes is perfectly acceptable behaviour. Forgive me if I disagree.

Once again you show your ability not just to miss the point but to also mangle your own perverse meaning out of it.

There is a difference between a family living in a house that are working and contributing to society and several families piled into a house, contributing nothing but a nuisance to society.

And my point remains that it is impossible to determine from the various emotional reports (that play so well with knee-jerkers like yourself) what the situation on the ground was.

I would like to know the raw facts, just as I like to know when any story is presented with holes.

If you really take that to mean I want them terrorised, given your status here, I feel sorry for you and boards in general.

oscarBravo

opo wrote: »

Once again you show your ability not just to miss the point but to also mangle your own perverse meaning out of it.

What is the point I'm missing?

There is a difference between a family living in a house that are working and contributing to society and several families piled into a house, contributing nothing but a nuisance to society.

...and it's OK to terrorise people out of a house as long as there are several families living there and they aren't working?

Have we established that none of them were working, by the way?

And my point remains that it is impossible to determine from the various emotional reports (that play so well with knee-jerkers like yourself) what the situation on the ground was.

Then let me ask, hypothetically: how many families living in a house would justify them being terrorised out of it? More generally, what situation on the ground justifies such actions?

I would like to know the raw facts, just as I like to know when any story is presented with holes.

If you really take that to mean I want them terrorised, given your status here, I feel sorry for you and boards in general.

Sorry, but mealy-mouthed tacit condoning of vigilante violence doesn't play well with me. If you don't think these people should have been terrorised out of their homes, how hard would it be to say so?

opo

Yet again, the quality of post I expected.

A moderator pursuing every angle to accuse a poster of cheerleading attacks on the homes of immigrants - who has done no more than point out the lack of information surrounding the issue.

It would be refreshing if your vitriolic holier than thou overreaction was particularly original or informative.

That it's neither is perhaps the biggest disappointment.

Carry on.

bernardo mac

Sorry for introducing a new topic to the discussion but I believe it may be relevant.An open top tourist bus was attacked by young hoodies in West Belfast,near a nationalist area yesterday.We will be more enlightened re.the assault later today.It is obvious that the siege mentality is still alive in its unhealthy embodiment in other areas of the social and political divide.These tourists did not arrive in armoured cars or tanks and were not a threat to the any section of the communities;maybe this attack indicates something more sinister than mere xenophobia,it may be part of an anarchic political agenda.It's time to turn up heat of the political bonfire by letting the pups of war loose. . Young malleable minds are not exclusive to any particular flag colour,religion, race,social group or political creed

Nodin

bernardo mac wrote: »

Sorry for introducing a new topic to the discussion but I believe it may be relevant.An open top tourist bus was attacked by young hoodies in West Belfast,near a nationalist area yesterday.We will be more enlightened re.the assault later today.It is obvious that the siege mentality is still alive in its unhealthy embodiment in other areas of the social and political divide.These tourists did not arrive in armoured cars or tanks and were not a threat to the any section of the communities;maybe this attack indicates something more sinister than mere xenophobia,it may be part of an anarchic political agenda.It's time to turn up heat of the political bonfire by letting the pups of war loose. . Young malleable minds are not exclusive to any particular flag colour,religion, race,social group or political creed

As I pointed out elsewhere, in Winter every year a few suburbs of Dublin lose bus services after dark, due to attacks on the vehicles and personnell. Its been going on for as long as I can remember too, and I'm near on 40. Thus its not a "northern" phenomena.

Zambia

I have to state again , in some suburbs in Belfast if you are not loyalist , protestant , on benefits and support Rangers. Like wise in some catholic areas with obivous changes.

These Romas just got themselves noticed.

Nodin

opo wrote: »

Yet again, the quality of post I expected.
A moderator pursuing every angle to accuse a poster of cheerleading attacks on the homes of immigrants - who has done no more than point out the lack of information surrounding the issue..

Your focus seems to be on the lack of "information" relating to certain elements which would lead to a derogatory view of the Roma/Romanians, as if that would somehow ameliorate the baseness of their treatment. However theres very few things that can make such mob violence 'understandable' and fewer again those that could be used to justify it. None have thus far appeared or been hinted at.

gurramok

Further evidence that the culprits are from the loyalist Village area
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/21/race-northern-ireland-romanian-gypsies

Guardian wrote:

The "Village", with its long rows of Victorian terraced houses running down towards Windsor Park stadium, home of the Northern Ireland football team, has been for some time the pressure point for racism in the province. In April, 46 Polish nationals fled from their homes after a series of co-ordinated attacks. The orgy of violence was carried out by a gang of loyalist youths in retaliation for the behaviour of Polish football hooligans who started a riot outside Windsor Park before the Northern Ireland-Poland World Cup clash, which the home side won 3-2.

Since the middle of the decade, foreign nationals from across the world who have moved into the area have been the target of racists. First, it was the Chinese whose homes were attacked, then the Poles and Slovakians, and latterly the Roma. At the end of 2004 there were an estimated 453 race hate crimes a year reported to the PSNI across Northern Ireland; in the past 12 months that figure has risen to 1,000

Even in the most deprived Protestant working-class redoubts, the far right remains electorally irrelevant. Nonetheless, neo-Nazi micro-groups have been trying to exploit the upsurge in racist violence. One is the Ulster British People's party (UBPP), which is linked to a breakaway faction of the British National party. Following the campaign of vandalism and intimidation of the Roma families, the UBPP has bragged about further racially motivated violence ahead.

"The latest attack on Romanian immigrants in Belfast serves as evidence that the previous incidents were not isolated ones," the fascist group warned this weekend. "It remains clear that the local population of Belfast are deeply disconcerted by the mass influx of immigrants, and by the looks of things, there will be more attacks to come unless something is done about the situation."

Taking time off from negotiations with the British government about moves by the UDA to disarm, the loyalist leader said he believed the gang were "copycat racists" who were adopting Combat 18's name to instil fear into the immigrant community. "They [the BNP, UBPP and other neo-Nazi parties] have been stirring things up at time when the loyalist groups are trying to transform our communities," he added.

_Nuno_

johnnyc wrote: »

Ah a good portion of the romas dont work and as a people i have no respect for, all they seem to do is to build another generation of beggars . I have no problem people who try to find work, but the majority of these people dont want to work. You may call me a racists but i aint, a majority of irish people think the same way as i do.

I have met to this day two gypsies that actually broke free from that mentality, but most of them never do. They're raised from little children to respect nothing and no one but their own group and they never make the least effort to integrate in society, just the least necessary so they can parasite it as they mostly do.

In Portugal you have whole neighborhoods with hundreds of gypsy families in houses given to them by the government with a monthly rent of 5 euro. Some of these neighborhoods owe 1.5 million euro in rent. They all claim social welfare, and many actually stalk the social welfare inspectors that went to their house to check how they're living until they get what they want. Everyday you get home and there's a gypsy standing there and he says, "hey, don't forget about our little help", or something similar.

There's not much that can be done. I'd move in a second if I had them near my house.

That being said, I do not condone these kind of coward attacks on anyone.

oscarBravo

opo wrote: »

A moderator pursuing every angle to accuse a poster of cheerleading attacks on the homes of immigrants - who has done no more than point out the lack of information surrounding the issue.

I've given you ample opportunity to clarify your position. You've refused to do so.

It would be refreshing if your vitriolic holier than thou overreaction was particularly original or informative.

I asked some simple questions. Instead of answering them, you fall back on this sort of aggressive-defensive rhetoric.

So, let me ask you again: are there any circumstances that you feel would justify terrorising people out of their homes?

djpbarry

_Nuno_ wrote: »

I have met to this day two gypsies that actually broke free from that mentality, but most of them never do. They're raised from little children to respect nothing and no one but their own group and they never make the least effort to integrate in society, just the least necessary so they can parasite it as they can.

Somebody mentioned earlier the case of Slovakia, where, officially, the Roma population makes up just under 2% of the total. However, unofficial estimates put the figure closer to about 9%. One of the main reasons for this discrepancy is the fact that many ‘settled’ Roma do not refer to themselves as such, but rather state their ‘ethnicity’ as Slovak (or some other nationality) in the official census. So those who have settled and attained a standard of living comparable to the majority of the population in the country are estimated to make up (at least) a sizeable minority of the total Roma population. Now, granted, much of the evidence is anecdotal, but it is obviously not without basis. The point is, referring to the entire Roma population of Europe as a single, homogenous group is pretty ridiculous.

opo

oscarBravo wrote: »

I've given you ample opportunity to clarify your position. You've refused to do so. I asked some simple questions. Instead of answering them, you fall back on this sort of aggressive-defensive rhetoric.

So, let me ask you again: are there any circumstances that you feel would justify terrorising people out of their homes?

Why don't you start a thread on your preferred topic?

I don't apologise for not prostrating myself on the alter of political correctness before making a point or failing to post my perfect pc credentials everytime I enter one a one sided discussion with a sanctimonious bore.

Yet again, I find myself objecting to a moderator inferring that I would justify violence against immigrants because I don't explicitly state otherwise.

Zambia

opo wrote: »

Yet again, I find myself objecting to a moderator inferring that I would justify violence against immigrants because I don't explicitly state otherwise.

It would be a bit of a boolean question IMO

opo

Zambia232 wrote: »

It would be a bit of a boolean question IMO

Would a moderator allow a poster on this site that posted in the affirmative?

I wouldn't nor would I ask such an unreasonable and absurd question in the first place.

Bottle_of_Smoke

djpbarry wrote: »

Somebody mentioned earlier the case of Slovakia, where, officially, the Roma population makes up just under 2% of the total. However, unofficial estimates put the figure closer to about 9%. One of the main reasons for this discrepancy is the fact that many ‘settled’ Roma do not refer to themselves as such, but rather state their ‘ethnicity’ as Slovak (or some other nationality) in the official census. So those who have settled and attained a standard of living comparable to the majority of the population in the country are estimated to make up (at least) a sizeable minority of the total Roma population. Now, granted, much of the evidence is anecdotal, but it is obviously not without basis. The point is, referring to the entire Roma population of Europe as a single, homogenous group is pretty ridiculous.

They wouldn't be culturally roma though, ethnically yes, but I don't think that's what the poster was referring to. He specifically said the mentality and these "settled" working roma wouldn't be in that category

NormanNicetouch

I think one of the big problems with the Roma in these islands is that they always end up in working class neighbourhoods where their culture isn't properly appreciated by their unemployed/badly educated/poorly housed neighbours. Surely our government can step in and invite them down here to show how much more enlightened we are and then accomodate them (with benefits obviously) in a leafy middle-class area like Dun Laoghaire or Blackrock amongst all the liberal multicultural-society-loving Irish Times readers who will fully be able to appreciate the delightful Roma culture unlike the working-class ignoramuses. I'm sure they'd all get along splendidly.