Expulsion of Roma Gypsies From France

Scofflaw

opo wrote: »

Nothing to offer again I note.

Put down the handbag or lose it.

moderately,
Scofflaw

johnnyskeleton

Voodoo_rasher wrote: »

the roma s in question are arguably 'welfare tourists' to begin with. plus they have illegally built homes , without planning permission. Suppose Parisians are sick to the gills with their itinerant noisy unsightly brass-band street buskers. they won't learn english, never mind integrate. agree with sa r ko zy on this occasion, lol

Why would they learn english if they want to live in Paris (i.e. in France, where they speak French)?

opo

Nodin wrote: »

So, to counter what we know from leaked official documentation, you present baseless speculation.

They didn't "leak" the population composition of all the camps which would underpin or rubbish the speculation that discrimination is the sole purpose of the excercise; the point of this entire thread and the entire EU "controversy".

You (and significant others) might also be pleased to know that there was not a single mention of gas chambers in any of this documentation.

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

They didn't "leak" the population composition of all the camps which would underpin or rubbish the speculation that discrimination is the sole purpose of the excercise; the point of this entire thread and the entire EU "controversy".

This is an effort to derail a discussion by introducing an irrelevancy.

Bring something to the table, or admit that you have nothing to offer.

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

This is an effort to derail a discussion by introducing an irrelevancy.

I'm surprised that you consider the ethnic composition of the camps an irrelevancy when you are arguing ethnic discriminination.

Major inconvenience to your theory perhaps - but hardly an irrelevancy.

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

I'm surprised that you consider the ethnic composition of the camps an irrelevancy when you are arguing ethnic discriminination.

Major inconvenience to your theory perhaps - but hardly an irrelevancy.

Bollocks. All that is necessary is that more than one ethnic category is there, and that fact was "leaked".

Now, how about bringing something to the table, instead of trying, by specious means, to derail the discussion.

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Bollocks. All that is necessary is that more than one ethnic category is there, and that fact was "leaked".

So if there was 50,000 Roma and 1 South African - the whole excercise descends into ethnic discrimination huh?

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

So if there was 50,000 Roma and 1 South African - the whole excercise descends into ethnic discrimination huh?

Yes, if the South African is disregarded because he is not Roma.

Now, how about your stopping playing silly buggers and bringing something to the table?

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Yes, if the South African is disregarded because he is not Roma.

She is. And she's naturalised French.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

Now, how about your stopping playing silly buggers and bringing something to the table?

How about you stop ordering me to do anything and entering the debate like an adult. You may also spare me the profanity exhibited in your previous post.

Now. Have you anything to show that the fundamental focus for prioritisation was not nationality rather than ethnically based yet?

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

She is. And she's naturalised French.

How about you stop ordering me to do anything and entering the debate like an adult. You may also spare me the profanity exhibited in your previous post.

Now. Have you anything to show that the fundamental focus for prioritisation was not nationality rather than ethnically based yet?

I have been forgetful of the adage that cautions me about the danger of being beaten by experience.

When you bring something to the table, I might deal with it.

Scram

So when will..oh wait we cant..we need them outside out post-offices begging..

Nodin

opo wrote: »

They didn't "leak" the population composition of all the camps which would underpin or rubbish the speculation that discrimination is the sole purpose of the excercise; the point of this entire thread and the entire EU "controversy".

You (and significant others) might also be pleased to know that there was not a single mention of gas chambers in any of this documentation.

I've never mentioned Gas chambers or nazis in any post on the subject, to the best of my knowledge. As regards the idea of discrimination -

"Three hundred camps or illegal settlements must be evacuated within three months; Roma camps are a priority," the memo reads. "It is down to the préfect [state representative] in each department to begin a systematic dismantling of the illegal camps, particularly those of the Roma."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/13/france-deportation-roma-illegal-memo

- its perfectly clear there.

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I have been forgetful of the adage that cautions me about the danger of being beaten by experience.

When you bring something to the table, I might deal with it.

I'm not sure what would complement profanity and bad manners at your table.

opo

Nodin wrote: »

I've never mentioned Gas chambers or nazis in any post on the subject, to the best of my knowledge. As regards the idea of discrimination -


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/13/france-deportation-roma-illegal-memo

- its perfectly clear there.

Nodins Link wrote:

Today Besson repeated his claim: "France has not taken any measure specifically against the Roma [who] are not considered as such but as natives of the country whose nationality they have," he said.

My point all along.

Thanks Nodin.

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

Originally Posted by Nodins Link
Today Besson repeated his claim: "France has not taken any measure specifically against the Roma [who] are not considered as such but as natives of the country whose nationality they have," he said.

My point all along.

Thanks Nodin.

That is an outrageously dishonest exercise in taking something out of context. The piece from which it is taken shows that Besson was found to have been saying something that was untrue.

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

I'm not sure what would complement profanity and bad manners at your table.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68163873&postcount=782

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That is an outrageously dishonest exercise in taking something out of context. .

ROFL :) Were you drunk writing this?

The French Minister for Immigration responding to direct questions about the deportation of Roma.

What was the actual context??

The price of garlic?????

P. Breathnach wrote: »

The piece from which it is taken shows that Besson was found to have been saying something that was untrue. .

Do you have some divine wisdom you would like to share or are you voicing your opinion like the rest of us mortals?

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

ROFL :) Were you drunk writing this?

The French Minister for Immigration responding to direct questions about the deportation of Roma.

What was the actual context??

The price of garlic?????

Do you have some divine wisdom you would like to share or are you voicing your opinion like the rest of us mortals?

It looks to me as if you are intentionally misrepresenting things in order to provoke.

Just in case anybody is taken in, here is the piece you quoted, together with the paragraphs immediately following:

Today Besson repeated his claim: "France has not taken any measure specifically against the Roma [who] are not considered as such but as natives of the country whose nationality they have," he said.

However, a leaked memo, dated 5 August 2010 and signed by the chief of staff for interior minister Brice Hortefeux, reminds French officials of a "specific objective" set out by Sarkozy.

"Three hundred camps or illegal settlements must be evacuated within three months; Roma camps are a priority," the memo reads. "It is down to the préfect [state representative] in each department to begin a systematic dismantling of the illegal camps, particularly those of the Roma."

Besson told France 2 state television that he was not aware of the leaked circular: "I wasn't a recipient, and therefore I didn't need to know about it," he said.

So who's telling porkies?

Laminations

Boozed-up British students, who have turned a quiet Spanish resort into a mini "sin city", face a crackdown by tourism chiefs.

Local officials have been ordered to get tough after thousands more revellers have descended on the Costa Doradan town of Salou for a second week of drunken debauchery.

What's this? Lots of nationalities are drunk and disorderly in Spain I'm sure but authorities decide to crackdown on the Brits?

Cue calls of racists! Discrimination! It's like the blooming holocaust!

You may think you are debating when you simply dismiss my comparisons as silly games but the parallels are there. There is an illegal act (paramilitarism in my previous example, drunk and disorderly in the Spanish case and illegal immigration in the French case). There are numerous nationalities engaged in these acts. Targeting perpetrators of these acts in no way affects law abiding citizens of those nationalities, e.g. I'm not affect in a crackdown on the IRA, a sober Brit in Spain is not affected by a crackdown on drunk and disorderly Brits and a legal naturalised Roma is not affected by a crackdown on illegal Roma. Thirdly, prioritisation happens not merely because of nationality or ethnicity but because of overlapping behavioural factors. It is acknowledged that drunken Brits in Spain are more of an issue than drunken Germans, so prioritising dealing with drunk and disorderly behaviour from Brits is sensible but it doesn't mean german disorderly conduct will be overlooked or unpunished. Similarly, everyone here acknowledges problems with Roma and integration and accepts they have a tradition of nomadism that is a problem in modern Europe.other people might be illegally resident in France just like other people are getting drunk in Spain but Roma are a particular problem, not because they are Roma but because of overlapping behaviour. A boozy Brit tells you nothing about a sober Brit but if you are a boozy Brit you can't claim you are being stereotyped and punished for disorderly behaviour simply because you are British. Likewise if you are an illegal roma you can't claim you are being stereotyped if you are actually illegally resident in an illegal street camp, nor can you argue you are being targeted simply because you are Roma.

Address any inconsistencies in these parallels I draw but try not to strawman them and make out like you are thick and you think I'm saying that it is a crime to be Roma.

Nodin

opo wrote: »

My point all along.

Thanks Nodin.

Quote mining.

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

It looks to me as if you are intentionally misrepresenting things in order to provoke.?

I kinda focussed on what the Minister said:

"France has not taken any measure specifically against the Roma [who] are not considered as such but as natives of the country whose nationality they have,"

Besson told France 2 state television that he was not aware of the leaked circular: "I wasn't a recipient, and therefore I didn't need to know about it," he said.

"The concept of ethnic minorities is a concept that does not exist among the government."

I try not take a reporters version of events as God - even a Grudian one.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

So who's telling porkies?

Kate Adie?

opo

Nodin wrote: »

Quote mining.

Your link - remember? Do you want me to thank you again?

Done.

P. Breathnach

opo wrote: »

I kinda focussed on what the Minister said...

The story is that the Minister was telling untruths. It takes a strange mindset to extract anything else from the linked account, and it is hard to accept the idea that you did it in good faith.

As I said before, it looks to me as if you are intentionally misrepresenting things in order to provoke.

Nodin

opo wrote: »

Your link - remember? Do you want me to thank you again?

Yes, I do indeed remember. The minister was contradicted by the memorandum, thus showing he was either (a) uninformed of its existence, as he implied or (b) lying. He's also incorrect in then stating that "The concept of ethnic minorities is a concept that does not exist among the government". because rather clearly it does.

Laminations

So whats the difference between this prioritisation and the ones below?


Salou tourism chiefs set to crack down on boozy Brits

I'm sure there are other nationalities getting drunk in Spain? And whats this? Other European countries recognising BRITISH drunkeness as a problem (as distinct to just drunkeness)

Police work together to crack down on drunken British in Greece
Prague plans a crackdown on the drunken Britons

Wheres the outrage and chants of 'racists!!' ?

French police crack down on ill-prepared British motorists

I'm sure there are other nationalities breaking this particular law (not carrying high vis jacket in car)


So its not discrimination to prioritise british bad behaviour but it is when you prioritise Roma bad behaviour?

opo

P. Breathnach wrote: »

As I said before, it looks to me as if you are intentionally misrepresenting things in order to provoke.

I know I know - it's going from repetition to almost chanting. Or maybe a little bit of self-reinforcement.

Or perhaps it's a faint little cry for help.

I wonder who will hear the call.......

opo

Nodin wrote: »

Yes, I do indeed remember. The minister was contradicted by the memorandum, thus showing he was either (a) uninformed of its existence, as he implied or (b) lying.

Well we know he did not write the memo nor was he copied on the contents so think what you wish.

Nodin wrote: »

He's also incorrect in then stating that "The concept of ethnic minorities is a concept that does not exist among the government". because rather clearly it does.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

opo

Laminations wrote: »

So its not discrimination to prioritise british bad behaviour but it is when you prioritise Roma bad behaviour?

To condense what I think is being said:

It's fine to discriminate - just don't write any memo's about it that mention race or sex or whatever. It's more of a grammatical excercise.

Then the conspiracy threads can take over screaming racism and discrimination because only one type of people seem to be involved.

BlaasForRafa

Laminations wrote: »

So its not discrimination to prioritise british bad behaviour but it is when you prioritise Roma bad behaviour?

For some people it seems only Roma, Travellers, Northern Irish nationalists and palestinians can be discriminated against...;)

Laminations