Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority

ThunbergsAreGo

Gravelly wrote: »

Why?

"I wont bother voting, he has this sown up"

Omackeral

knipex wrote: »

Can you please quote where he incited hatred ?

Omackeral wrote: »

No he can't and he never will. He'll tell you to ''look it up''.

Here it is in living colour.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Shall we review this thread as as a sample of the hate he incited? What do you think we will find?

Unreal.

mickdw

No new polls whatsoever in mainstream media based on info taken after casey comments.
What a corrupt little island this is.

Gravelly

Hulk Hands wrote: »

How does that make sense? People are less like to vote if they think he's a dead cert, so why would that be adventagous for their preferred candidate?

What makes you think that?

It is far more likely that people prevaricating on whether to vote for Casey will make it their business to if they think he has a chance.

Gravelly

naughtb4 wrote: »

"I wont bother voting, he has this sown up"

Far more likely, I would think, that the huge number of people thinking "I'd vote for Casey but he hasn't a hope" would be spurred on to do so if they thought he could win.

McMurphy

naughtb4 wrote: »

Not updating the polls is more likely to work against Higgins, not for him

Not when they can just keep regurgitating the 16th of October polling results, make.it look like the latest ones, and still claim that Higgins is waaaaaay ahead, and then then something about Casey eating babies.

ThunbergsAreGo

Gravelly wrote: »

Far more likely, I would think, that the huge number of people thinking "I'd vote for Casey but he hasn't a hope" would be spurred on to do so if they thought he could win.

Nope I think those who vote Casey generally have a reason, no matter how spurious it is.

Those who vote Higgins (and not all), are more likely to be voting to vote

FrancieBrady

knipex wrote: »

Can you please quote where he incited hatred ?

I have heard multiple people claim this but never have I head them support the claim.

I am expressing my opinion of what he said and how he said it and what he did next.
First of all, he targeted a community.
Secondly, he said something that is simply not true about SEMS.
Thirdly, he generalised about that community.
And Fourthly, he went to a location for a photo op, singularly designed (and successfully) to stoke anger against a community.

All the hallmarks of an incitement campaign. The results of which are all around you on this thread.

Gravelly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am expressing my opinion of what he said and how he said it and what he did next.
First of all, he targeted a community.
Secondly, he said something that is simply not true about SEMS.
Thirdly, he generalised about that community.
And Fourthly, he went to a location for a photo op, singularly designed (and successfully) to stoke anger against a community.

All the hallmarks of an incitement campaign. The results of which are all around you on this thread.

He "targeted" a "community" by expressing the opinion that they should be treated equally to everyone else.

He is literally hitler.

FrancieBrady

naughtb4 wrote: »

Not updating the polls is more likely to work against Higgins, not for him

Absolutely agree. But the truth that it could work both ways will never be allowed to impinge on a good excuse/conspiracy theory. :rolleyes:

DEFTLEFTHAND

Personal Responsibility is what Casey is promoting. Everybody held to the same standards.

Lagging behind in education: - send your children to school, encourage them at home, avail of all the educational supports available.

Lower life expectancy: promote healthy living in the community, attend regular check ups with physician. Stop certain breeding patterns, create a larger gene pool.

Suicide: Once again avail of mental health services provided by the state. Support members who suffer with depression, don't ridicule or shun them. Accept people for who they are. (especially sexual orientation)

Finally address the wide spread issues with criminality in the travelling community, change can only come from within. Don't blame guards, lawyers, courts, judges. There's no vendetta being waged. Accept responsibility.

mariaalice

He has become a lightning rod for a sort of ill define group of beliefs, resentment against others is a coping mechanism for a lot of individuals, but it's also a sort of fantasy they imagine the issue to be larger than it is.

On boards, its those on social welfare, travelers, immigrants, the tiny far left, snowflakes and so they tend to believe the various groups are a massive issue in society, and the mainstream media is biased and not reporting a 'true' picture of the issue. Its social media, not a lot can be done about it.

Gravelly

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Personal Responsibility is what Casey is promoting. Everybody held to the same standards.

Lagging behind in education: - send your children to school, encourage them at home, avail of all the educational supports available.

Lower life expectancy: promote healthy living in the community, attend regular check ups with physician. Stop certain breeding patterns, create a larger gene pool.

Suicide: Once again avail of mental health services provided by the state. Support members who suffer with depression, don't ridicule or shun them. Accept people for who they are. (especially sexual orientation)

Finally address the wide spread issues with criminality in the travelling community, change can only come from within. Don't blame guards, lawyers, courts, judges. There's no vendetta being waged. Accept responsibility.

Personal responsibility is the left's Kryptonite.

FrancieBrady

Gravelly wrote: »

He "targeted" a "community" by expressing the opinion that they should be treated equally to everyone else.

He is literally hitler.

Why would he have not just said 'everyone should be treated equally' referencing all the social injustices in the country?

I believe (an I think we are still entitled to our opinions around here) that in common with other election candidates of all hues that the interviewer was supplied with leading questions the interviewee would expand on. And that he chose this question having a very clear strategy lined out and photo op trip to Tipp already in mind. As was his 'taking a break' strategy. Which was in reality only a few hours long, if his interview and re-entry was to be ready for Sunday paper print deadlines.

All the hallmarks of a carefully contrived stunt that a percentage will of course buy into.

Gravelly

mariaalice wrote: »

He has become a lightning rod for a sort of ill define group of beliefs, resentment against others is a coping mechanism for a lot of individuals, but it's also a sort of fantasy they imagine the issue to be larger than it is.

On boards, its those on social welfare, travelers, immigrants, the tiny far left, snowflakes and so they tend to believe the various groups are a massive issue in society, and the mainstream media is biased and not reporting a 'true' picture of the issue. Its social media, not a lot can be done about it.

That, or possibly, it's just that an awful lot of people in Ireland believe that yes, travellers should be treated the same as the rest of us, and it's not some kind of "rise of the far right" nightmare to say so.

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why would he have not just said 'everyone should be treated equally' referencing all the social injustices in the country?

I believe (an I think we are still entitled to our opinions around here) that in common with other election candidates of all hues that the interviewer was supplied with leading questions the interviewee would expand on. And that he chose this question have a very clear strategy lined out and photo op trip the Tipp already in mind, as was his 'taking a break' strategy. Which was in reality only a few hours if his interview and re-entry was to be ready for Sunday paper print deadlines.

All the hallmarks of a carefully contrived stunt that a percentage will of course buy into.

Wasn't that Casey's big crime in your eyes Francie?

mariaalice

Gravelly wrote: »

That, or possibly, it's just that an awful lot of people in Ireland believe that yes, travellers should be treated the same as the rest of us, and it's not some kind of "rise of the far right" nightmare to say so.

That a preferably reasonable point of view, but you can't discount the visceral ill-defined hatred which makes up a lot of the discussion.

Gravelly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why would he have not just said 'everyone should be treated equally' referencing all the social injustices in the country?

Because he was speaking specifically about travellers. This is what has so many people on his side - travellers are some kind of sacred cow, who should only ever be mentioned if it is to heap praise upon them.

FrancieBrady

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Wasn't that Casey's big crime in your eyes Francie?

Absolutely. And opinions that incite hate for the sake of it, should never be aired or given oxygen.

Do you think this kind of stuff can be put back in the box Johnny? Seen any other examples of it in your lifetime in Ireland and elsewhere?

Gravelly

mariaalice wrote: »

That a preferably reasonable point of view, but you can't discount the visceral ill-defined hatred which makes up a lot of the discussion.

I'm seeing very little of that. I'm seeing ordinary people who are tired of travellers status as sacred cows who are being abused and called names by people who do not want to allow the issue to be discussed.

FrancieBrady

Gravelly wrote: »

Because he was speaking specifically about travellers. This is what has so many people on his side - travellers are some kind of sacred cow, who should only ever be mentioned if it is to heap praise upon them.

Oh yeh, that is what happens in Ireland alright. Jesus, have you looked at the stats on media presentations of travellers?
Do you know what you are talking about at all?

mariaalice

Gravelly wrote: »

Because he was speaking specifically about travellers. This is what has so many people on his side - travellers are some kind of sacred cow, who should only ever be mentioned if it is to heap praise upon them.

No, but it should be factual and using natural language, the fact that travelers make up a far bigger proportion of the prison population is a fact, extrapolating from that some hate fill tirade is opinion.

BattleCorp

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Absolutely. And opinions that incite hate for the sake of it, should never be aired or given oxygen.

Do you think this kind of stuff can be put back in the box Johnny? Seen any other examples of it in your lifetime in Ireland and elsewhere?

How did he incite hatred? Seriously. You are clutching at straws there bud.

I don't see where he encouraged people to hate travellers. Saying that everybody should be treated equally isn't incitement to hatred.

If I say I don't like travellers (which I don't based on my own personal experience), am I inciting anyone to hatred? I don't think so. I'm expressing my own personal opinion.

FrancieBrady

Gravelly wrote: »

I'm seeing very little of that. I'm seeing ordinary people who are tired of travellers status as sacred cows who are being abused and called names by people who do not want to allow the issue to be discussed.

That is totally wrong. I have said there are issues with travellers all the way through this thread.
What I want is reasonable debate about them. You cannot have that if some idiot is rocking up to the debate spouting wrong and generalised comments, especially if that person is the President.

Gravelly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Oh yeh, that is what happens in Ireland alright. Jesus, have you looked at the stats on media presentations of travellers?
Do you know what you are talking about at all?

"the stats on media presentations of travellers" ah here.

Speaking of stats, did you find me those cases of non-travellers refusing houses because they didn't have stables yet?

BattleCorp

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is totally wrong. I have said there are issues with travellers all the way through this thread.
What I want is reasonable debate about them. You cannot have that if some idiot is rocking up to the debate spouting wrong and generalised comments, especially if that person is the President.

Eh, no you don't. You want to shut down any opinion that doesn't agree with your own.

You even said it a few posts up. I've quoted you below.

Absolutely. And opinions that incite hate for the sake of it, should never be aired or given oxygen.

Gravelly

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That is totally wrong. I have said there are issues with travellers all the way through this thread.
What I want is reasonable debate about them. You cannot have that if some idiot is rocking up to the debate spouting wrong and generalised comments, especially if that person is the President.

Ah Francie.

You don't want debate, you want us all to either pretend travellers are saints, or shut our mouths. Be some bit honest.

jmayo

Technocentral wrote: »

Doubt if many employers take on travellers, they are in the position of the Irish in Britain in the 50s, prejudice eventually declines though.

Actually if you knew anything at all you would know that the Irish that were in Britain during the 1950s, people like my father, were always in work.
Now my father had a trade and was very employable, but the Irish were mainly working as manual labourers.
They may not have been welcome in some boarding houses or other establishments ala the famous notice in the window, but as sure as shyte they were very welcome on building sites.

Sadly the ones often employing them were other Irish, who had made it to be subbies and contractors, and they often rode them along with the pubs where they were often paid.

Also many from the West of Ireland headed over to Lincolnshire every Autumn, after the summer work was done, to work as tattie pickers and make some money for the winter.



I wrote about this earlier and no one picked up on it.

There are the Mickie D supporters claiming he will romp home and he has over 60% of the vote, etc.

But this all got me thinking about his actual support base.

He has the support of 4 political parties: Labour, FF, FG and PBP or one of the other leftie clowns.

But he is really a Labour man.
That is his party.

And it is the party leadership of FF, FG telling their members and supporters to vote for Higgins because they haven't bothered fielding their own candidates.

For these voters it is not the same as having one of their own to stand behind come hell or high water.
He was the best of a bad lot.

There were people, even some high ranking ones, in the two main parties who felt they should have run their own candidate.
Maybe a vote for Casey will be their way of sticking it to the party leaderships that they should have for "the party's sake" fielded a candidate.

Even as it is there would be some of the FF and FG background who were never fans of Labour (and Higgins) and they would have voted for him rather than let a shinner near the place.
A bit like giving a preference to a Labour candidate because they might be the ones to help your lads into government.
There isn't that incentive at play here.

Now some of these voters might see Casey, who they might actually agree with, as a viable alternative.
And this is especially true for rural voters.

If Higgins is relying on core Labour voters and the "more enlightened intellectuals" in FF and FG, he might not have anywhere near 60%.

So it could get very interesting.

Omackeral

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What I want is reasonable debate about them. You cannot have that if some idiot is...

Hmmm.

McMurphy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Absolutely. And opinions that incite hate for the sake of it, should never be aired or given oxygen.

Do you think this kind of stuff can be put back in the box Johnny? Seen any other examples of it in your lifetime in Ireland and elsewhere?

Bearing in mind that I may come across as a husky chasing his own tail, I don't think anyone yet has given any sort of coherent argument as to how calling for equality equals hatred.

Casey was asked a question and answered it.

Perhaps the makers of the podcast should have edited it out?
Perhaps Casey shouldn't have said what what he believed in (thats called lying)?
Perhaps his comments shouldn't have been used to try and incite hatred (against Casey)

Only in Ireland could you be asked a bloody question, answer it truthfully, and be accused of stoking up hatred.