Time to re evaluate enoch powells "rivers of blood" speech

Where To

This you OP?

Duzzer

Nodin wrote: »

But what you really mean is that any African who becomes an Irish citizen is by default "dodgy".

You call them dodgy! Think about it they have arrived at the far side of Europe from countries with no direct travel links to ireland. We provide good welfare and housing provisions to citizens so why not use your refugee credentials to get these benefits without having to work for it. It would be like us winning the lotto and having a much bigger and better house without having to work!

markesmith

In about 30-40 years time we'll be able to have a mature discussion on this.

Not now.

Bannasidhe

markesmith wrote: »

In about 30-40 years time we'll be able to have a mature discussion on this.

Not now.

Or when those 'dodgy' Africans coming over here claiming citizenship and takken our houses and dole start winning Olympic medals for 'us'.

RDM_83 again

Not really commenting on the the issues raised in the thread but Enoch Powell was not necessarily the card-board cut out racist* people might think and he probably wasn;t talking about literal rivers of blood!
He demanded enquiries into extra judicial killings by the british in what might be considered an actual race war (the Mau Mau in Kenya), was for nuclear disarmament, and this is a quote from him in relation to anti terrorism legislation in the 70's

"The House is engaged on a difficult operation, that is, in haste and under the immediate pressure of indignation on matters which touch the fundamental liberties of the subject; for both haste and anger are ill counsellors, especially when one is legislating for the rights of the subject"

In relation to the thread I do think a states prime duty is to its citizens however this is not an argument for ethnic/cultural purity or racist stereotyping more that the reasonable and logical questions about the social and economic aspects of migration do need to be taken into account and not shouted down.

Not a fan of Powell btw

Fromthetrees

Much of what he said in this speech is grounded in truth although his rhetoric is inflammatory and racist.
Unlimited immigration into a country is not a good thing, that's the main point he is making here.
He doesn't actually use the words "rivers of blood" in the speech so it's title is misleading.

Nodin

Duzzer wrote: »

You call them dodgy! Think about it they have arrived at the far side of Europe from countries with no direct travel links to ireland. We provide good welfare and housing provisions to citizens so why not use your refugee credentials to get these benefits without having to work for it. It would be like us winning the lotto and having a much bigger and better house without having to work!

Yep, thats where I thought you were going.

geeky

Slurryface wrote: »

In retrospect he was quite a visionary.

There are pills you can get for that these days.

Shame there's no cure for being a racist d**khead.

Slurryface

geeky wrote: »

There are pills you can get for that these days.

Shame there's no cure for being a racist d**khead.

Personally abusive, post reported.

Slurryface

Duzzer wrote: »

You call them dodgy! Think about it they have arrived at the far side of Europe from countries with no direct travel links to ireland. We provide good welfare and housing provisions to citizens so why not use your refugee credentials to get these benefits without having to work for it. It would be like us winning the lotto and having a much bigger and better house without having to work!

I think you are confusing refugees with economic migrants.
Refugees are fleeing for their lives, such as Cambodians in the 1970's or people in Dharfur in recent years.
In the case of genuine refugees we have an obligation in law to assist them.
We have no obligation however to allow economic migrants to remain the state and quite rightly we should root them out, prosecute them , and deport them.

Shenshen

Duzzer wrote: »

Vast majority are Economic migrants as they are arriving here to seek better economic conditions rather than just pure safe haven to get away from immediate danger.

You know, starvation, poverty and high criminality are perceived by most people as immidiate danger.
Labelling it "economic situation" doesn't change the fact that they come here trying to leave behind living conditions that would be called "inhumane" if we came across them over here.

markesmith

Some of his comments were prescient, but open to ignorant misappropriation - and I think he knew that. He was part playing to the gallery.

El Weirdo

Slurryface wrote: »

Personally abusive, post reported.

Reporting the post is enough. There really is no need to announce it to everybody.

geeky

Slurryface wrote: »

Personally abusive, post reported.

Actually that was a reference to Enoch Powell. I don't know you, or your views.

Slurryface

geeky wrote: »

Actually that was a reference to Enoch Powell. I don't know you, or your views.

Well you quoted my post and put your remarks underneath it, how did you expect it to be read?

karma_

Slurryface wrote: »

Well you quoted my post and put your remarks underneath it, how did you expect it to be read?

There, there precious.

Slurryface

karma_ wrote: »

There, there precious.

Wow, how enlightening! You have really added to the debate there bubba!

Mr Benevolent

Duzzer wrote: »

Are you inferring some one here is in stormfront?

Inferring? No. Saying? Yes.

geeky

Slurryface wrote: »

Well you quoted my post and put your remarks underneath it, how did you expect it to be read?

'Enoch Powell was a visionary' - 'there are pills for that'.

I don't know how that could be honestly read as anything but a snippy remark towards Enoch Powell and his general lunacy. And then I opined that the man was a racist d**khead.

As I said, I don't know you or your views, aside from your apparent admiration for crypto-fascists. And for someone who endorses the 'rivers of blood' speech, I have to say you're being extremely sensitive.

purplepanda

Can anyone show me any evidence that Powell was a racist & or believed in white racial supremacy. He actually commends the struggle of Black Americans for civil rights in that very speech and rallies against a society with unequal citizens.

If he was actually a racist he would have joined Oswald Moselys Fascist Party & fought for Hitler in WW2. He would have later joined forces with the extreme far right / National Front after he left the Tories.

Powell was in fact fluent in many Indian languages, he was a politician of principle, even calling for the abolition of Britain's Cold War era Nuclear defences.

If he predicted the future of mass uncontrolled immigration then he is guilty according to Marxist dogma. :rolleyes:

Nowadays there are many British people of West Indian heritage who are calling for drastic cuts in mass immigration. :eek: Are they racist? :pac:

profitius

purplepanda wrote: »

Can anyone show me any evidence that Powell was a racist & or believed in white racial supremacy. He actually commends the struggle of Black Americans for civil rights in that very speech and rallies against a society with unequal citizens.

If he was actually a racist he would have joined Oswald Moselys Fascist Party & fought for Hitler in WW2. He would have later joined forces with the extreme far right / National Front after he left the Tories.

Powell was in fact fluent in many Indian languages, he was a politician of principle, even calling for the abolition of Britain's Cold War era Nuclear defences.

If he predicted the future of mass uncontrolled immigration then he is guilty according to Marxist dogma. :rolleyes:

Nowadays there are many British people of West Indian heritage who are calling for drastic cuts in mass immigration. :eek: Are they racist? :pac:

Only if they're White Indians.

Nodin

Slurryface wrote: »

Wow, how enlightening! You have really added to the debate there bubba!

There you are. Care to get back to me on the questions I asked you earlier....?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80947861&postcount=11

Duzzer

Back in from work now, someone has to pay the taxes for all these benefits and free houses!

El Weirdo

Duzzer banned.

profitius

El Weirdo wrote: »

Duzzer banned.

For what?

parrai

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPze0dRgW8

This is very interesting, taken from Frost 1969

Nodin

parrai wrote: »

This is very interesting, taken from Frost 1969

Rather than us sit through an hour of it, you might explain why its "very interesting", or at least sum up its contents......

El Weirdo

profitius wrote: »

For what?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=63136991#post63136991


Thanks.

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy

So you want all Irish people to be forcebly removed from all other nations?

Don't forget we have immigrated for centuries.

Clareboy

It's an awfull pity that we did not have someone in this country with the guts to speak out like Enoch Powell. Mass Immigration has destroyed Britain and the same is happening here.

Clareboy

Toshchiy Imperatritsy Vselennoy wrote: »

So you want all Irish people to be forcebly removed from all other nations?

Don't forget we have immigrated for centuries.

The fact is that most Irish immigrants, with the exception of the UK, immigrated to New World countries such as the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, countries with vast empty wide open spaces and unlimited natural resources and mineral wealth. We are a tiny country with very limited resourses, which should be used for the benefit of our own people.

Bannasidhe

Clareboy wrote: »

It's an awfull pity that we did not have someone in this country with the guts to speak out like Enoch Powell. Mass Immigration has destroyed Britain and the same is happening here.

Somehow I doubt you mean the mass immigration of Irish people in to other people's countries.

More than 87,000 people emigrated from Ireland in the year to April, an increase from just over 80,000 the previous year, according to new figures from the CSO.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/87000-people-emigrate-in-12-months-to-april-568431.html

summerskin

Clareboy wrote: »

The fact is that most Irish immigrants, with the exception of the UK, immigrated to New World countries such as the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, countries with vast empty wide open spaces and unlimited natural resources and mineral wealth. We are a tiny country with very limited resourses, which should be used for the benefit of our own people.

One of the most ridiculous posts I've ever read. This island is sparsely populated, plenty of room for immigrants.

What you really mean to say is "We irish should be allowed to go anywhere, but we don't want dem fordiners here."

D1stant

Ah lads... lets have a song

Enoch Powell gave us a job digging away to Annascaul......and when we finished digging then he closed the whole an all..... dum de dee did da

Ellis Dee

Enoch Powell was just a major narcissist, who should have stuck to simple things like Greek conjugations. The world of the 20th century was far too complex for him and he thought he could arrest the "winds of change" of which another major Tory, Harold Macmillan, spoke.:rolleyes:

He got it wrong about other things as well. When the Ulster Unionist Party in the Six Countries threw out one leader after another - all landed gentry who sported Dad's Army titles like Captain and Major - he became their new leader and saw himself as some kind of Messiah who would lead Ulster to the Promised Land.;);)

But as another major Tory, Quintin Hogg (aka Squintin' Pig) disdainfully remarked. "Now they have another leader to desert, and he has a new cause to betray.":):)

parrai

Nodin wrote: »

Rather than us sit through an hour of it, you might explain why its "very interesting", or at least sum up its contents......

It's self explanatory. You can only come to your own conclusion, therefore must be watched, rather than explained. If you have no real interest in though, I wouldn't bother.

old hippy

Slurryface wrote: »

Point is bubba, it WAS homegrown Talabanis! That is what counts.

Nope, it was a bunch of easily led tossers.

You get a lot of them here; anyone remember David Copeland?

old hippy

Clareboy wrote: »

It's an awfull pity that we did not have someone in this country with the guts to speak out like Enoch Powell. Mass Immigration has destroyed Britain and the same is happening here.

Where are you posting from? Have you ever left Clare?

Britain's fine, thanks all the same. The only people intent on "destroying" it are small minded folk with your views. IMHO.

kunst nugget

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Or when those 'dodgy' Africans coming over here claiming citizenship and takken our houses and dole start winning Olympic medals for 'us'.

Railing against racism by using racial stereotyping. Nice one!

Bannasidhe

kunst nugget wrote: »

Railing against racism by using racial stereotyping. Nice one!

If your read back through the thread you will see that it was another poster who referred to African immigrants -in particular asylum seekers - as being dodgy. That was why I used inverted commas - to indicate I was quoting someone else. Was I too subtle?

Rawhead

We have no direct air, sea or land links with Africa. You can call everyone a racist and spout all the usual left wing ****e you want, but the simple fact remains that a large proportion of the asylum seekers who came to Ireland did so because of our generous benefit system at the time. The fact that the situation in large parts of Africa has got progressively worse in the last ten years yet the number of asylum seekers from Africa has drastically reduced suggests that the tightening up on the asylum process has deterred "asylum tourists".
The fact that a large proportion of asylum seekers passed through as many as 10 countries en route to Ireland clearly suggests a cherry picking with regards the country they claimed asylum in. It has always baffled me why the smallest country on the farthest western reaches of Europe with the climate least like Africa would attract so many of its population.

Bannasidhe

Rawhead wrote: »

We have no direct air, sea or land links with Africa. You can call everyone a racist and spout all the usual left wing ****e you want, but the simple fact remains that a large proportion of the asylum seekers who came to Ireland did so because of our generous benefit system at the time. The fact that the situation in large parts of Africa has got progressively worse in the last ten years yet the number of asylum seekers from Africa has drastically reduced suggests that the tightening up on the asylum process has deterred "asylum tourists".
The fact that a large proportion of asylum seekers passed through as many as 10 countries en route to Ireland clearly suggests a cherry picking with regards the country they claimed asylum in. It has always baffled me why the smallest country on the farthest western reaches of Europe with the climate least like Africa would attract so many of its population.

Do you also have an issue with the Irish going to Australia as economic migrants? Or the US? Or Canada? I seem to recall all of those used to belong to non-Europeans until a bunch of pasty faced boat people landed on their shores and said 'Mine' - killing anyone who disagreed with them.

Perhaps you can enlighten me as to the fabulous bounty Asylum seekers got when they landed on our rain lashed shores - a link to a verifiable source for preference.

Nodin

parrai wrote: »

It's self explanatory. You can only come to your own conclusion, therefore must be watched, rather than explained. If you have no real interest in though, I wouldn't bother.

Its an hour of enoch powell. If you can't explain it, it musn't be worth the effort.

Nodin

Rawhead wrote: »

We have no direct air, (............)opulation.

They're perfectly entitled to come here and claim asylum, and they did. Considering the length of time it takes to get processed, the high refusal rate, and the fact that the benefits system is no better than elsewhere, I'd suggest you rethink your notions.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

They're perfectly entitled to come here and claim asylum, and they did. Considering the length of time it takes to get processed, the high refusal rate, and the fact that the benefits system is no better than elsewhere, I'd suggest you rethink your notions.

Now, now - we can't expect a few facts to get in the way of a good notion.

Rawhead

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you also have an issue with the Irish going to Australia as economic migrants? Or the US? Or Canada? I seem to recall all of those used to belong to non-Europeans until a bunch of pasty faced boat people landed on their shores and said 'Mine' - killing anyone who disagreed with them.

Perhaps you can enlighten me as to the fabulous bounty Asylum seekers got when they landed on our rain lashed shores - a link to a verifiable source for preference.

I never once said that I had problem with people coming here as economic migrants, I have a problem with people claiming refugee status who aren't entitled to it. I asked a genuine question and you reply with the usual crap about whitey ruining the world.
Did a large part of the people who came all the way to Ireland to claim "asylum" do so as a cover for economic migration?
If the threat to their lives was so immediate or grave why put yourself through additional weeks of travel to come all the way to Ireland when all the countries you where traveling through would provide you protection and safe haven under international law.

Nodin

Rawhead wrote: »

I never once said that I had problem with people coming here as economic migrants, I have a problem with people claiming refugee status who aren't entitled to it. I asked a genuine question and you reply with the usual crap about whitey ruining the world.
Did a large part of the people who came all the way to Ireland to claim "asylum" do so as a cover for economic migration?
If the threat to their lives was so immediate or grave why put yourself through additional weeks of travel to come all the way to Ireland when all the countries you where traveling through would provide you protection and safe haven under international law.

...if their motives were economic why didn't they all go to Germany or Denmark, where its easier to get in?

You do realise that the vast majority that apply get refused, I presume. Are you saying people have been granted citizenship who should have been rejected?

Pherekydes

Rawhead wrote: »

We have no direct air, sea or land links with Africa. You can call everyone a racist and spout all the usual left wing ****e you want, but the simple fact remains that a large proportion of the asylum seekers who came to Ireland did so because of our generous benefit system at the time. The fact that the situation in large parts of Africa has got progressively worse in the last ten years yet the number of asylum seekers from Africa has drastically reduced suggests that the tightening up on the asylum process has deterred "asylum tourists".
The fact that a large proportion of asylum seekers passed through as many as 10 countries en route to Ireland clearly suggests a cherry picking with regards the country they claimed asylum in. It has always baffled me why the smallest country on the farthest western reaches of Europe with the climate least like Africa would attract so many of its population.

Asylum seekers only form a small percentage of total immigration. Most Africans come here to work.

Bannasidhe

Rawhead wrote: »

I never once said that I had problem with people coming here as economic migrants, I have a problem with people claiming refugee status who aren't entitled to it. I asked a genuine question and you reply with the usual crap about whitey ruining the world.
Did a large part of the people who came all the way to Ireland to claim "asylum" do so as a cover for economic migration?
If the threat to their lives was so immediate or grave why put yourself through additional weeks of travel to come all the way to Ireland when all the countries you where traveling through would provide you protection and safe haven under international law.

How many who claimed asylum were granted it?

Still waiting for proof of these very generous payments made - any chance you will be supplying that soon?

Why is economic migration ok but not seeking asylum?
Since you have no issue with economic migration why should it bother you if some asylum seekers were coming here for economic reasons?

Hardly weeks of travel unless travelling by a slow boat. Flight time to Australia is just over a day - Africa is a hell of a lot closer than that.

Never said whitey ruined the world - simply pointed out the fact that whitey tried to take over large sections of the world and Irish people are still availing of that.

Shenshen

Rawhead wrote: »

I never once said that I had problem with people coming here as economic migrants, I have a problem with people claiming refugee status who aren't entitled to it. I asked a genuine question and you reply with the usual crap about whitey ruining the world.
Did a large part of the people who came all the way to Ireland to claim "asylum" do so as a cover for economic migration?
If the threat to their lives was so immediate or grave why put yourself through additional weeks of travel to come all the way to Ireland when all the countries you where traveling through would provide you protection and safe haven under international law.

Actually, by far the largest numbers of asylum seekers apply for asylum in the UK, France, Norway and Greece.

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product_details/dataset?p_product_code=TPS00021

But, you know, as another poster said, don't let facts get in the way of a good notion.

And Ireland isn't "weeks of travel" from anywhere on this planet. Quaint as the notion of poor people dressed in rags chased by political militias and wandering through desserts and swimming through oceans might be, most will actually arrive by plane these days.