Expulsion of Roma Gypsies From France

gurramok · 22-09-2010 2:04pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Its irrelevant that they are Roma to me. I would defend any group being ethnically targetted.

I could only imagine if boards was about in 1943. "Sure the Jews are terrorists, the Germans are entitled to select them for deportation".

Why do you keep attacking the French in this way? They did not deport the legal Roma nor send them to the gas chambers, so stop labelling this as a WWII concentration deportation to death camps.

Do you have racist tendencies towards the French considering their suffering along with Jews and Roma in WWII?

P. Breathnach · 22-09-2010 2:04pm

gurramok wrote: »

...
No.
Yes, as they are in illegal camps. That's breaking the law.
Most probably, as they have no means to survive on after 3 months.

Whats your answers to your own questions?

Okay, for the purpose of this discussion I'll accept your low threshold for defining criminality.

My answers would be the same as yours.

Here's where I see a problem: everybody living in an illegal camp is breaking the law in the same way as the Roma are; every alien who has exceeded his or her permitted time in France is breaking the law in the same way as the Roma are.

So where is the justification for putting others further down the priority list, to a place where they might never be reached?

opo · 22-09-2010 2:10pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So where is the justification for putting others further down the priority list, to a place where they might never be reached?

Did we not cover this ground?

I suggested that those who are non-nationals and illegally in the camps and the country are the easiest to deal with.

Those legally resident are a far trickier and longer term concern. Can you not see the difference?

P. Breathnach · 22-09-2010 2:13pm

gurramok wrote: »

You don't give a damn about the Roma? Pull the other one. You have a very high percentage of posts supporting the Roma.

How come I imagine voices muttering "nigger-lover"?

gurramok · 22-09-2010 2:13pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Here's where I see a problem: everybody living in an illegal camp is breaking the law in the same way as the Roma are; every alien who has exceeded his or her permitted time in France is breaking the law in the same way as the Roma are.

So where is the justification for putting others further down the priority list, to a place where they might never be reached?

To add to Opo's post, they can't deport French citizens who reside illegally at the side of the road in a camp, they're much easier to move on.

gurramok · 22-09-2010 2:15pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

How come I imagine voices muttering "nigger-lover"?

What are you on about now?

Perhaps you should see a doctor if you're imagining voices in your head

P. Breathnach · 22-09-2010 2:17pm

opo wrote: »

Did we not cover this ground?

I suggested that those who are non-nationals and illegally in the camps and the country are the easiest to deal with.

Those legally resident are a far trickier and longer term concern. Can you not see the difference?

So equality before the law is a matter of administrative convenience? Is it not at least as convenient to target other non-French groups?

P. Breathnach · 22-09-2010 2:19pm

gurramok wrote: »

What are you on about now?

I'm on about your using very dishonourable tactics in an effort to discredit somebody who opposes you in debate.

OhNoYouDidn't · 22-09-2010 2:24pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So equality before the law is a matter of administrative convenience? Is it not at least as convenient to target other non-French groups?

Beat me too it.

There is an immutible fundamental human right for these EU citizens to be treated equally under French law to all others.

This policy deviates from that basic.

gurramok · 22-09-2010 2:25pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I'm on about your using very dishonourable tactics in an effort to discredit somebody who opposes you in debate.

What tactics?

The R word and the holocaust has been used countless times in this thread by the anti-deportation supporters, you're stretching quite a bit there accusing me of using dishonourable tactics.

OhNoYouDidn't · 22-09-2010 2:26pm

gurramok wrote: »

Why do you keep attacking the French in this way? They did not deport the legal Roma nor send them to the gas chambers, so stop labelling this as a WWII concentration deportation to death camps.

Do you have racist tendencies towards the French considering their suffering along with Jews and Roma in WWII?

I'm 'attacking' the French (a country I lived in and visit regularly) because I think this policy stinks and is the anthitisis of the concept of the French Republic and its ideals.

The last time this concept was invoked, 8m people were gassed.

gurramok · 22-09-2010 2:32pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I'm 'attacking' the French (a country I lived in and visit regularly) because I think this policy stinks and is the anthitisis of the concept of the French Republic and its ideals.

The French state and a majority of the public support it(there was a link earlier in the thread). Deporting illegals happens every day in every country around the globe.

The Irish govt did the same at the M50, did we see you comparing the Irish to the Nazi's?

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The last time this concept was invoked, 8m people were gassed.

There you go again insulting the French nation as well as Jews using the holocaust to compare what's happening.

OhNoYouDidn't · 22-09-2010 2:40pm

gurramok wrote: »

The French state and a majority of the public support it(there was a link earlier in the thread). Deporting illegals happens every day in every country around the globe.

The Irish govt did the same at the M50, did we see you comparing the Irish to the Nazi's?

There you go again insulting the French nation as well as Jews using the holocaust to compare what's happening.

Are you 6? If they took the M50 approach, there would be no issue

The comparison with the Nazi's is the COLLECTIVE element of the action. Specifically, labelling immigrants responsible for crime (falsly) and deporting an entire ethnic group regardless of their legal status.

Its fundementally anti French Republican values.

gurramok · 22-09-2010 2:53pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are you 6? If they took the M50 approach, there would be no issue

The comparison with the Nazi's is the COLLECTIVE element of the action. Specifically, labelling immigrants responsible for crime (falsly) and deporting an entire ethnic group regardless of their legal status.

Its fundementally anti French Republican values.

Whats 6?

How do you know they were labelling illegal immigrants as criminally falsely?

They did not deport an entire ethnic group, they never deported legal Roma.

mike kelly · 22-09-2010 2:57pm

Germany plans to deport Roma back to Kosovo

gurramok · 22-09-2010 3:25pm

mike kelly wrote: »

Germany plans to deport Roma back to Kosovo

They have already been doing it. No sign of the outrage from the usual suspects accusing it of been a racist policy.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/97494/germany-denies-plan-deport-roma.html

wes · 22-09-2010 3:41pm

gurramok wrote: »

They have already been doing it. No sign of the outrage from the usual suspects accusing it of been a racist policy.
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/97494/germany-denies-plan-deport-roma.html

Your own article has the Germans denying they are doing the same thing as the French.......

Laminations · 22-09-2010 3:44pm

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Okay, for the purpose of this discussion I'll accept your low threshold for defining criminality.

My answers would be the same as yours.

Here's where I see a problem: everybody living in an illegal camp is breaking the law in the same way as the Roma are; every alien who has exceeded his or her permitted time in France is breaking the law in the same way as the Roma are.

So where is the justification for putting others further down the priority list, to a place where they might never be reached?

Every paramilitary is breaking the law, where is the justification of prioritising [x nationality/ethnicity] paramilitary over others? It comes from overlapping behavioural factors. In Britain in the 1980s/90s Irish paramilitaries would be prioritised not just because they were irish but because of the threat level (relative to other paramilitaries). In America islamist terror groups are prioritised over irish paramilitaries again due to behaviour of members of said cohorts. Again I stress this only justifies prioritisation of an already illegal froup, it does not allow for generalisations or persecution of the whole ethnic population.

The Roma are least likely to integrate, I dont say that because they are Roma, I say it because they have a tradition of nomadism and a history of poor integration. If you have facts to contradict this view, I'd love to hear them. You yourself have even acknowledged the tensions and trouble seen in the LEGAL French Roma population - the gens de voyage - they are legally in France, are French citizens, have been there for generations and have failed (for the most part) to integrate.

gurramok · 22-09-2010 3:47pm

wes wrote: »

Your own article has the Germans denying they are doing the same thing as the French.......

Not my article

They're all illegal, nothing different there.

Laminations · 22-09-2010 3:50pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are you 6? If they took the M50 approach, there would be no issue

The comparison with the Nazi's is the COLLECTIVE element of the action. Specifically, labelling immigrants responsible for crime (falsly) and deporting an entire ethnic group regardless of their legal status.

Its fundementally anti French Republican values.

Sorry could you explain the m50 approach? Are you saying each Roma camping illegally on the m50 had their own court hearing to determine their legal status before being individually deported

...or was it the case that they were asked to produce papers/visas/documents and deported as a group on the say so of the minister?

Up to 99 Roma from Romania were camped on Ireland's M50 at a roundabout and a nearby derelict house.
Lately they were deported from Ireland, by order of immigration minister Conor Lenihan.

You need to back up the bit in bold. Firstly, france is only labelling illegal immigrants as illegal, and it is only deporting illegals, not entire ethnicities, you have yet to back up your claim that they are targeting Roma regardless of legal status.

OhNoYouDidn't · 22-09-2010 3:50pm

Laminations wrote: »

Again I stress this only justifies prioritisation of an already illegal froup, it does not allow for generalisations or persecution of the whole ethnic population.

Which is why your analogy is irrelevent.

OhNoYouDidn't · 22-09-2010 3:52pm

Laminations wrote: »

Sorry could you explain the m50 approach? Are you saying each Roma camping illegally on the m50 had their own court hearing to determine their legal status before being individually deported

...or was it the case that they were asked to produce papers/visas/documents and deported as a group on the say so of the minister?

All deportation orders in Ireland go before a judge on an individual basis and can be appealed.

As is the law in France. Which for some reason has been bypassed here.

OhNoYouDidn't · 22-09-2010 3:55pm

gurramok wrote: »

Not my article

They're all illegal, nothing different there.

I don't think you are as thick as you are playing here.

NO-ONE has disputed France's right to deport illegals. The issue here is the political interference in the process ordering the plod to target a specific ethnic group and how this ties into a policy of linking crime and immigrants. Its the tactics that are the problem

Laminations · 22-09-2010 3:56pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

All deportation orders in Ireland go before a judge on an individual basis and can be appealed.

As is the law in France. Which for some reason has been bypassed here.

Are you sure that this isn't the case for cases involving refugees or asylum?

So you'd be happy if a judge asked to see papers before signing the deportation orders? You are again suggesting that legally resident immigrants with papers are being deported, can you back this up?

Laminations · 22-09-2010 3:57pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Which is why your analogy is irrelevent.

They are prioritising the already illegal Roma are they not?

wes · 22-09-2010 4:07pm

gurramok wrote: »

Not my article

The one you linked :P.

gurramok wrote: »

They're all illegal, nothing different there.

Except for you know the German ministers who says it is.......

Jeboa Safari · 22-09-2010 4:11pm

They're illegal, they're going to be deported anyway, why does it matter if they're being prioritized?

wes · 22-09-2010 4:21pm

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

They're illegal, they're going to be deported anyway, why does it matter if they're being prioritized?

Well, everyone should be equal under the law you see.

Laminations · 22-09-2010 4:26pm

wes wrote: »

Well, everyone should be equal under the law you see.

But you cant deport everyone at the same time. Are all paramilitaries equal under the law? Does the Irish or British government spend as much time and/or resources tracking down ETA members as it does tracking down IRA members? At the end of the day, they are all paramilitaries.

gurramok · 22-09-2010 4:33pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I don't think you are as thick as you are playing here.

NO-ONE has disputed France's right to deport illegals. The issue here is the political interference in the process ordering the plod to target a specific ethnic group and how this ties into a policy of linking crime and immigrants. Its the tactics that are the problem

I don't think you are as thick either as you are playing here.

You are making a mountain out of nothing saying they are targeting a whole ethnic group and comparing it to the holocaust, unreal fantasy stuff.

wes wrote:

Except for you know the German ministers who says it is.......

Deporting illegals.

Expulsion of Roma Gypsies From France

Comments