Expulsion of Roma Gypsies From France

joseph brand

Memnoch wrote: »

Ah, it all makes sense now. So the police shoot a 22 year old dead(the exact circumstances of this remain in dispute.), and this provokes a reaction from SOME Roma. And this justifies targeting an entire ethnicity, based on the actions of a few.

Yes, I can see how race is not at all an issue here. Nor are people being tarred with the same brush and singled out based on ethnicity. Just as it wouldn't have been if the police in London had rounded up and deported all the Irish because of the actions of the IRA.
Please continue your sensible stand against illegal immigrants.

What a stupid stupid statement. Are you a member of the bleeding hearts brigade?

While I'm not a supporter of the IRA, almost all the Irish in England were working, and working hard. They also had to deal with discrimination. They paid taxes and spent a lot of their wages in England.

The Roma are a different kettle of fish altogether. They don't work, never have done, and never will, . .EVER!! They only beg and steal, beg and steal. Are you listening?

You may aswell compare cats and shoelaces.

AlekSmart

The more populated this thread becomes,the more it resembles the late lamented Pamela Izevbekhai thread (The Thread,not Pammy herself !)

Endless circular debate,eventually whirlpooling into a single pinpoint row over a fáda,or more likely an accusation of racism !!.

I`m coming to the conclusion that the core issue which bothers a substantial amount of people here is the ability and willingness of a State to actually take action,as opposed to merely talking about it...(for a very extended period)

It appears the Irish,as a people,prefer the Churchillian Maxim,Jaw Jaw,not War War in preference to ever being seen as taking a stand on anything.

We have developed a cultural preference for standing for nothing....ever willing to straddle a handy fence or wag a disapproving finger in the direction of those who do attempt a robust defence of their own principles of living.

This reality schism explains so much, from why we drive as we vote-Middle of the Road,to why our most senior Judiciary remain unsure of what they can do with vexatious litigants who have been exposed as liars and frauds.

Not to mention the inability of the State to even determine if we ever had any laws which applied to high flying Financiers and Developers,in the absence of which the wrongdoings of these groups go unpunished.

We see career criminals such as John Gilligan derided for claiming his fortune came from astute gambling,but yet the State continues it`s attempts to seize these assets......yet oddly enough we nod sagely as a former Taoiseach uses exactly the same explanation for his good financial standing...no talk of seizure there....:rolleyes:

Ireland needs to get with it rapidly,before we really are left behind in the wake of the rest of Europe,although perhaps that actually is our alloted spot....

Memnoch

joseph brand wrote: »

What a stupid stupid statement. Are you a member of the bleeding hearts brigade?

What is the bleeding hearts brigade exactly? Please do elaborate.

While I'm not a supporter of the IRA, almost all the Irish in England were working, and working hard. They also had to deal with discrimination. They paid taxes and spent a lot of their wages in England.

I'm sure the people who discriminated against the Irish thought their discrimination was perfectly justified and that the Irish deserved it for being spongers and terrorists.

The Roma are a different kettle of fish altogether. They don't work, never have done, and never will, . .EVER!! They only beg and steal, beg and steal. Are you listening?

Generalisation and stereotyping of an entire ethnicity. Well done.

Memnoch

Laminations wrote: »

All the Roma are not being targeted, illegals (many of which are Roma are being targeted)....

Bull****. A government circular showed that they "prioritised" the Roma. Even for coded government speech this is as flagrant as it gets. It seems like for you to accept that there is an issue of race involved some french official would have to actually say "Kill all those Roma," or some such. In short, your ignoring all the indications in order to spin away from the obvious.

I'm not saying that ethnicity is the only issue here. THere are probably a bunch of complex factors, but to argue that ethnicity isn't one of them is highly disingenuous.

Also all this illegal crap is BS. They are EU citizens, which gives them right to free passage and even if that right hasn't yet transpired in France it WILL in a year or two, so deporting them now is a futile gesture at best designed to appease the xenophobe and galvanise them in favour of a government that is rapidly losing popularity on other issues. A cynical and base ploy.

Illegal dwellings? I like that. Where should these people live exactly? People live on the streets all the time, so now that is justification to arrest them and try to deport them?

I could understand if the government felt such camps were unsafe for the inhabitants and wanted to move them to more standardised and safe low cost housing. But the way the French have behaved, it's just a convenient way to gather them up and feck them out of the country.

To be honest, I don't think it's possible for us to have a reasonable discussion on this issue because you and I seem to come from very different stand points.

What irks me is your almost religious belief that your stance is based solely on justice and everything I say is coloured by bias and that that is not a factor at all in any of the arguments you are making. Sadly, I would say that your own stance is not just unfair but deliberately steps around and tries to explain away all the indications that ethnicity and discrimination are serious factors at play(amongst others) here.

But then, considering your continual defence of Israel in the flotilla incident and attempts to equivocate their actions and that of those bringing aid as "equally wrong," I shouldn't really have expected anything else.

What you fail to realise is that this kind of racial stereotyping is exactly the kind of thing that leads to the ghettoisation of a peoples, which results in these kinds of incident that results in further stereotyping and so on.

Memnoch

Memnoch wrote: »

Bull****. A government circular showed that they "prioritised" the Roma. Even for coded government speech this is as flagrant as it gets. It seems like for you to accept that there is an issue of race involved some french official would have to actually say "Kill all those Roma," or some such. In short, your ignoring all the indications in order to spin away from the obvious.

Ok, I'm tired of this. If its so obvious that only the Roma are being targeted and deported, then I'm sure it'll be easy for you to find reputable links to back you up. [oh and no "may", "might", "could" language in the links. Definite language.]

Also all this illegal crap is BS. They are EU citizens, which gives them right to free passage and even if that right hasn't yet transpired in France it WILL in a year or two, so deporting them now is a futile gesture at best designed to appease the xenophobe and galvanise them in favour of a government that is rapidly losing popularity on other issues. A cynical and base ploy.

Being a EU citizen provides the right of passage across borders, it does not make you a complete citizen of every country in Europe. The host country continues to have their own LAWS regarding immigration and citizenship. Hence the reason why many immigrants used to come to Ireland instead of the UK as a way to gain a EU Visa because our immigration requirements were easier to achieve.

The Roma had free passage in France. For months on end they set up camps, and stayed in them. The obvious point is that they did not leave those camps and move into conventional accommodation, or gain meaningful work which would indicate their ability to fulfill French immigration laws.

Tell me something. In your eyes, would you give EU citizens free rein to move around, and set up camps regardless of the laws of the country, without apparent sources of income? Where does the financing come from? What land is allocated to them (if they haven't already taken it themselves)? Do they gain full welfare entitlements like any other citizen? etc

Illegal dwellings? I like that. Where should these people live exactly? People live on the streets all the time, so now that is justification to arrest them and try to deport them?

Yup. Pretty much. But lets be completely honest here. A French citizen could live on their streets without being deported. A non-French EU citizen can be deported for living on the streets, and unable to prove that they have a regular legal income.

I could understand if the government felt such camps were unsafe for the inhabitants and wanted to move them to more standardised and safe low cost housing. But the way the French have behaved, it's just a convenient way to gather them up and feck them out of the country.

Tell me something. IF the inhabitants of these camps do not have regular work (and income), where does the money come from to support them? Why should the French government provide an income (and welfare) for these people?

What you fail to realise is that this kind of racial stereotyping is exactly the kind of thing that leads to the ghettoisation of a peoples, which results in these kinds of incident that results in further stereotyping and so on.

Oh come on. You're throwing away all the other reasons for ghettoisation, like that the people themselves seek to make themselves different, and keep apart. The Roma have extremely strict guidelines against one of them marrying a non-Roma person. With many other such rules to keep themselves apart, they carry their own responsibility to the problems they're facing and.. could face in the future.

BlaasForRafa

Memnoch wrote: »

Illegal dwellings? I like that. Where should these people live exactly? People live on the streets all the time, so now that is justification to arrest them and try to deport them?

I could understand if the government felt such camps were unsafe for the inhabitants and wanted to move them to more standardised and safe low cost housing. But the way the French have behaved, it's just a convenient way to gather them up and feck them out of the country.

Why should the french provide free accomodation for people who don't contribute to society and just leech from whatever country they are in. The french are right to expel them and if Ireland had any sense it would expel them as well. Then maybe they'd learn that they can't just get by on begging and stealing.

artful_codger

here's a BBC documentary on the Roma issue that people might find interesting.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mkjyd

and the video is here

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=RJGQB21Y

Nodin

AlekSmart wrote: »

It appears the Irish,as a people,prefer the Churchillian Maxim,Jaw Jaw,not War War in preference to ever being seen as taking a stand on anything.

You mean take a stand you approve of. Some of us are quite clear in saying this is wrong.

BlaasForRafa

Nodin wrote: »

You mean take a stand you approve of. Some of us are quite clear in saying this is wrong.

And some of us are quite clear in saying that it isn't.

Chinasea

joseph brand wrote: »

While I'm not a supporter of the IRA, almost all the Irish in England were working, and working hard. They also had to deal with discrimination. They paid taxes and spent a lot of their wages in England.

The Roma are a different kettle of fish altogether. They don't work, never have done, and never will, . .EVER!! They only beg and steal, beg and steal. Are you listening?

Have you ever lived in the UK. Have you ever seen the thousands of Irish Travellers who live over in the UK and claim every type of welfare available since the welfare systems began?? Never working nor paying tax. There are thousands of Irish on welfare in the UK, thousands of them and more to the point you probably are unware of this because the English have put up with it quietly for years. Just because they are entitled to it doesn't make it their divine right. Perhaps the English should adopt a send the Irish Roma back to Ireland, it would save them millons of ££'s on welfare. A repatriation scheme - wow that would be a right deserved wallop for our economy.

Chinasea

Chinasea wrote: »

Have you ever lived in the UK. Have you ever seen the thousands of Irish Travellers who live over in the UK and claim every type of welfare available since the welfare systems began?? Never working nor paying tax. There are thousands of Irish on welfare in the UK, thousands of them and more to the point you probably are unware of this because the English have put up with it quietly for years. Just because they are entitled to it doesn't make it their divine right. Perhaps the English should adopt a send the Irish Roma back to Ireland, it would save them millons of ££'s on welfare. A repatriation scheme - wow that would be a right deserved wallop for our economy.

In all honesty, I think you're both missing the point. The thousands of Irish in the UK on welfare, and the whatever number of British over here on welfare (because of the higher dole amounts) are doing so within the requirements of the laws for the UK and Ireland. Anyone that is doing so outside of the law, should be stopped, and frankly more than just deportation should be applied to them. [Since they would be breaking the law]

The UK and Ireland have had a special relationship for decades regarding the migration of workers, and peoples. This relationship is completely different to that of the Roma in France. Even the Traveller scene which incorporates families of both Irish and British backgrounds is completely different to the situation of this thread.

Laminations

Memnoch wrote: »

Bull****. A government circular showed that they "prioritised" the Roma. Even for coded government speech this is as flagrant as it gets. It seems like for you to accept that there is an issue of race involved some french official would have to actually say "Kill all those Roma," or some such. In short, your ignoring all the indications in order to spin away from the obvious.

I dont base my opinions on indications, I base it on fact, fact is this operation is about deporting illegals, you wish to overlook the illegal activity and staus of individuals based on their ethnicity, I do not.

I'm not saying that ethnicity is the only issue here. THere are probably a bunch of complex factors, but to argue that ethnicity isn't one of them is highly disingenuous.

And I'm not saying ethnicity isn't an issue, I'm just saying that where there is an overlap between illegal status, criminality and ethnicity (an overlap you fail to recognise exists) that I prefer to focus on the illegality end where you get hung up on ethnicity.

Also all this illegal crap is BS. They are EU citizens, which gives them right to free passage and even if that right hasn't yet transpired in France it WILL in a year or two, so deporting them now is a futile gesture at best designed to appease the xenophobe and galvanise them in favour of a government that is rapidly losing popularity on other issues. A cynical and base ploy.

I'm glad to know where you stand on legality. This is perhaps the most ludicrous point you have made. Even if the Roma are fully regularised and allowed free movement in 2 years, the FACT is they are not entitled to remain in France now. I am aware you dont like dealing in facts but that is the case. If they stay past 3 months and dont contribute or get a job then they become an illegal immigrant. The French are not targeting all Roma, they are targeting illegals, many (possibly most) of which happen to be Roma. Would you argue so quickly that it is ok to have sex with a 15yr old as they'll be legal anyway in 2 years. Idiotic, and shows your respect for a country's laws.

Illegal dwellings? I like that. Where should these people live exactly? People live on the streets all the time, so now that is justification to arrest them and try to deport them?

I could understand if the government felt such camps were unsafe for the inhabitants and wanted to move them to more standardised and safe low cost housing. But the way the French have behaved, it's just a convenient way to gather them up and feck them out of the country.

Sorry I jumped the gun before saying that your previous comment was the most ludicrous point you have made.

You asked what the bleeding heart brigade were. Well they consist of people who make similarly stupid comments, mixing up the responsibility a country has for its own citizens and that which it has for illegal immigrants. I dont care where they live, they are not entitled to be in France, whether thats on the street, in camps or in houses - THEY ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS - France has no responsibility to house them, they contribute nothing and you expect them to be catered for? They have not gone to France claiming asylum, they are there illegally. And before you jump down my throat for saying 'they', I am not referring to Roma, but all and any illegal immigrants who live in these street camps. Please explain why France should be responsible for 'moving them to more standardised and safe low cost housing' because comments like that qualify you for membership of the bleeding heart brigade.

To be honest, I don't think it's possible for us to have a reasonable discussion on this issue because you and I seem to come from very different stand points.

I couldn't agree more.

What irks me is your almost religious belief that your stance is based solely on justice and everything I say is coloured by bias and that that is not a factor at all in any of the arguments you are making. Sadly, I would say that your own stance is not just unfair but deliberately steps around and tries to explain away all the indications that ethnicity and discrimination are serious factors at play(amongst others) here.

No I like to deal with the facts of the situation, not argue based on some slippery slope notion thats coloured by my own intentions to allocate the illest of intent on the motivations of others. I see overlap in this case between ethnicity and illegality of status and criminality, and recognise that in dealing with the illegality part there are bound to be overlapsd with ethnicity but that ethnicity is in no way being used as a selection criteria for which to discriminate against a whole ethnic minority. I tried to explain this with a diagram as well as a simple classroom example but you dont seem to grasp it, so maybe the psuedo-venn diagram below will enlighten you. Your only weapons, rather than rational debate, seem to be implying racism on your opponents behalf, whereas funnily from what all you say, making allowances for illegal behaviour and thinking France should accommodate illegals because they are Roma, I find your stance to be quite racist, even if you are positively discriminating, it is still discrimination.

But then, considering your continual defence of Israel in the flotilla incident and attempts to equivocate their actions and that of those bringing aid as "equally wrong," I shouldn't really have expected anything else.

Ah yes, try and strawman me. MY ONLY POINT in that thread was that holding anti-israeli marches and protests would not be a roadmap to peace and instead I advocated a pro-peace march. I at no point defended the flotilla attack or Israeli behaviour in the conflict, in fact I condemned it numerous times. You seemed to find an Isreli boycott to be a legitimate protest, punishing all isralis for the actions of a few (if not a majority) and then you have the cheek to lecture others on discrimination, stereotyping and generalisations?

What you fail to realise is that this kind of racial stereotyping is exactly the kind of thing that leads to the ghettoisation of a peoples, which results in these kinds of incident that results in further stereotyping and so on.

I dont agree with racial stereotyping, but I dont see that as happening in this case. There shouldn't be ghettos because the people being targeted shouldn't be allowed remain in France, they are illegal, regardless of their ethnicity.

The focus in France is on illegal immigrants. See the venn diagram below. Taking the behaviour of these illegals and generalising to the greaster Roma population in France or Roma in general is wrong soI cannot agree with comments such as

joseph brand wrote: »

The Roma are a different kettle of fish altogether. They don't work, never have done, and never will, . .EVER!! They only beg and steal, beg and steal. Are you listening?

However when dealing with an overlapping subset (illegals) we can prioritise the deportations based on the makeup of this group and the amount of criminal activity within each population. For example if Ireland were to clamp down on bank robberies, many of which were (hypothetically) being carried out by nigerian gangs, then targeting all nigerians is discriminatory, but prioritising nigerian roberries may have a legitimate grounds if those robberies were more violent or indeed more widespread - however all the nigerians prioritised in this case would still all be bank robbers and the government would not be turning a blind eye on bank robberies committed by non-nigerian gangs.

Now do you want France to release figures showing the Roma illegals make up a significant chunk of illegal immigrants (EDIT: they are targeting 300 camps, 200 of which are Roma) or that within these camps is an increasing rate of criminal activity (EDIT: see comments made by French ministers re illegal activity in these camps)? I think anecdotal evidence is good enough to prioritise but never generalise to a whole group of people. Now the venn diagram may be speculation but its aim is to show that there may be valid reasons (quantity and criminality) to prioritise the Roma illegals other than just simply because they are Roma. The issues all overlap, but you like to focus on ethnicity.

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

In all honesty, I think you're both missing the point. The thousands of Irish in the UK on welfare, and the whatever number of British over here on welfare (because of the higher dole amounts) are doing so within the requirements of the laws for the UK and Ireland. Anyone that is doing so outside of the law, should be stopped, and frankly more than just deportation should be applied to them. [Since they would be breaking the law]

The UK and Ireland have had a special relationship for decades regarding the migration of workers, and peoples. This relationship is completely different to that of the Roma in France. Even the Traveller scene which incorporates families of both Irish and British backgrounds is completely different to the situation of this thread.

Spot on.

When are folks gonna' give up this lame and pathetic comparison between Roma, a group pf sponging thieves and beggars and parasites, and Irish people in England?

Only yesterday at Queen Street there was 4 or 5 of them harassing motorists for money whilst dousing the car in whatever piss was in their containers. And, where were the Gardai? I can tell you, if a Dub tried this he/she would be ****ing lifted out of it. Move on a bit and there hanging around street corners all over town looking for some poor unfortunate to rob.

Picking up scabby cig butts I saw a few of them doing? What use are these people to our society? They aren't here for anything to do with benefiting us, helping us, or integrating with us. It's scabbing and robbing that they do best, well, at least about 99.99 percent of them. Don't want to leave myself open to the other lame excuse, "you can't tar them all with the same brush.":rolleyes:

Laminations

walshb wrote: »

Spot on.

When are folks gonna' give up this lame and pathetic comparison between Roma, a group pf sponging thieves and beggars and parasites, and Irish people in England?

Only yesterday at Queen Street there was 4 or 5 of them harassing motorists for money whilst dousing the car in whatever piss was in their containers. And, where were the Gardai? I can tell you, if a Dub tried this he/she would be ****ing lifted out of it. Move on a bit and there hanging around street corners all over town looking for some poor unfortunate to rob.

Picking up scabby cig butts I saw a few of them doing? What use are these people to our society? They aren't here for anything to do with benefiting us, helping us, or integrating with us. It's scabbing and robbing that they do best, well, at least about 99.99 percent of them. Don't want to leave myself open to the other lame excuse, "you can't tar them all with the same brush.":rolleyes:

Even if there is a 0.001 percent decent Roma out there, that generalisation to all Roma is wrong, I'd like to say it is not what I am basing my points on. Look at the venn diagram, even if the criminal element bubble was huge in the Roma side and the illegal immigrant subset also made up a majority, it is not fair to tar them all with the same brush (as you rightly recognise but still go and do).

walshb

walshb wrote: »

When are folks gonna' give up this lame and pathetic comparison between Roma, a group pf sponging thieves and beggars and parasites, and Irish people in England?

If you read back over my posts not once have I made any such remarks about the Roma. In fact, the only references to what the Roma do, relates to the requirements under French immigration law about regular working incomes... I'd prefer to leave those kind of comments out of a reasonable discussion. Stick to the practicalities of the situation.

P. Breathnach

Laminations wrote: »

I dont base my opinions on indications, I base it on fact, fact is this operation is about deporting illegals....

Never let the truth get in the way of a good rant. The operation is about dismantling illegal encampments. The controversy is about prioritising some illegal camps ahead of others, based on ethnicity.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/14/world/la-fg-france-roma-20100914
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=120113
It might also be noted that many of the Roma in illegal encampments are French citizens.

walshb

Deleted User wrote: »

If you read back over my posts not once have I made any such remarks about the Roma. In fact, the only references to what the Roma do, relates to the requirements under French immigration law about regular working incomes... I'd prefer to leave those kind of comments out of a reasonable discussion. Stick to the practicalities of the situation.

I said those remarks; I am well aware that you did not, and nor did I say that
you did.

Laminations, if you want to cling onto such a negligible amount (holding countries to ransom) of "good" Roma, so be it. Of all my encounters with them, I saw none, so in my world it's actually 100 percent. I guess I was just being generous with the 99.99 figure.

Laminations

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Never let the truth get in the way of a good rant. The operation is about dismantling illegal encampments. The controversy is about prioritising some illegal camps ahead of others, based on ethnicity.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/14/world/la-fg-france-roma-20100914
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=120113
It might also be noted that many of the Roma in illegal encampments are French citizens.

Jeez. Look at the venn diagram. Targeting all Roma on the basis of illegal actions of a few (even if a majority) is wrong because the other Roma haven't done anyhting wrong. Prioritising the dismantling of camps is not being done simply because someone is Roma, there is oviously an overlap between ethnicity, criminality and contribution to the illegal population.

In other words, Roma camps may (and it seems they do) make up the bulk of camps. 200 out of the 300 being targeted are Roma and will be prioritised. The Roma camps may also have a higher level of criminality. If you think this is simply about Roma, are the French going to be searching out all Roma i.e. going into an illegal pakistani camp and only pulling out the few Roma that are there. You fail to acknowledge any overlap in the issues. Prioritising the Roma could be seen as a form of generalisation but they are taking the illegal activities of a few (if not a majority) of the illegal Roma and using them to prioritise all illegal Roma, but the difference between this discrimination and discrimination based simply on ethnicity is that all the other illegal Roma are not innocent, they have done something wrong, they are all illegal.

walshb

walshb wrote: »

I said those remarks; I am well aware that you did not, and nor did I say that
you did.

Ahh, I thought you were being sarcastic. Sorry.

P. Breathnach

Laminations wrote: »

Jeez. Look at the venn diagram. Targeting all Roma on the basis of illegal actions of a few (even if a majority) is wrong because the other Roma haven't done anyhting wrong. Prioritising the dismantling of camps is not being done simply because someone is Roma, there is oviously an overlap between ethnicity, criminality and contribution to the illegal population.

In other words, Roma camps may (and it seems they do) make up the bulk of camps. 200 out of the 300 being targeted are Roma and will be prioritised. The Roma camps may also have a higher level of criminality. If you think this is simply about Roma, are the French going to be searching out all Roma i.e. going into an illegal pakistani camp and only pulling out the few Roma that are there. You fail to acknowledge any overlap in the issues. Prioritising the Roma could be seen as a form of generalisation but they are taking the illegal activities of a few (if not a majority) of the illegal Roma and using them to prioritise all illegal Roma, but the difference between this discrimination and discrimination based simply on ethnicity is that all the other illegal Roma are not innocent, they have done something wrong, they are all illegal.

Are you acknowledging that this is not an operation about deporting illegals?

Laminations

walshb wrote: »

Laminations, if you want to cling onto such a negligible amount (holding countries to ransom) of "good" Roma, so be it. Of all my encounters with them, I saw none, so in my world it's actually 100 percent. I guess I was just being generous with the 99.99 figure.

There is no holding countries to ransom, I believe countries have the right to deal with illegal elements regardless of ethnicity. If as you say 99% are illegal, then they can deport 99%, but they cannot just deport 100% as that includes people who are innocent and being deported just because they are Roma and it then becomes nothing to do with illegality

P. Breathnach

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Never let the truth get in the way of a good rant. The operation is about dismantling illegal encampments. The controversy is about prioritising some illegal camps ahead of others, based on ethnicity.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/14/world/la-fg-france-roma-20100914
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=120113

These links were posted previously, and don't provide any proof that the Roma are the only ones being deported. Anything else?

It might also be noted that many of the Roma in illegal encampments are French citizens.

More links please since the two you posted hold no reference to the Roma in question being French citizens.

Laminations

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Are you acknowledging that this is not an operation about deporting illegals?

No.
Are you reading my posts upside down?

There is a difference between a generalisation that would persecute innocents because they share the same ethnicity as criminals, and prioritising certain illegals because the criminal elements are larger within their camps or because they make up the bulk of illegals. The point is, they are all illegal

Laminations

I'll try this another way.
Two men are committing burglaries. One has robbed 200 houses, the other has robbed 100. The robberies of the first man who hit 200 houses were more brutal and more damage was done, the 100 houses robbed by the second man were still of great concern to the gardai who were clamping down on burglaries but they decided to prioritise the 200 houses and catch that guy. It just so happens that that guy is black while the second guy is white.

Now are they targeting him because he is black? I mean you would argue that they set out to target burglaries and that now they are prioritising simply based on race (while you ignore all other interacting factors).

The French are targeting illegal camps, 300 camps. 200 are Roma, and the conditions in these camps and criminality in these camps is particularly bad. But of course they are only prioritising them because they are Roma :rolleyes:

P. Breathnach

Laminations wrote: »

No.
Are you reading my posts upside down?

Sometimes I think I might as well. You said that the operation was about deporting illegals. That is simply not so: the operation is about dismantling illegal encampments. It's in the links I furnished.

P. Breathnach

Deleted User wrote: »

These links were posted previously, and don't provide any proof that the Roma are the only ones being deported. Anything else?

I cited those sources to make a quite different point.

P. Breathnach

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I cited those sources to make a quite different point.

Fine. But you did state that "It might also be noted that many of the Roma in illegal encampments are French citizens. ". Where did you get that from?

Laminations

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Sometimes I think I might as well. You said that the operation was about deporting illegals. That is simply not so: the operation is about dismantling illegal encampments. It's in the links I furnished.

Great. Are you acknowledging that this is not an operation about persecuting Roma?

The operant word that both our points share is 'illegal'. This is about illegality as myself and other posters have been saying from the start despite the efforts from you and others to paint it as an ethnic cleansing similar to the holocaust.

P. Breathnach

Laminations wrote: »

Great. Are you acknowledging that this is not an operation about persecuting Roma?

Try reading the pieces I cited. The entire controversy is about unequal application of the law. It's about targeting Roma.

err... my head is starting to spin.