Peter Casey's beliefs of Travellers' ethnicity Part II

Fann Linn

irishproduce wrote: »

The journal are not reporting this Drogheda story?

I find the journal great craic. Their journos are flaky excessive liberal types but the readers in comments then are the polar opposite.
It always makes me smile.

'A love which dare not speak its name'.

tabby aspreme

Fann Linn wrote: »

ESB assets being ripped off from the National grid. Mmmm, I wonder who it could be.

There only redistributing the robbin gubberments assets

end of the road

erica74 wrote: »

Travellers are so disadvantaged... Travellers aren't supplied with traveller specific accommodation... Maybe, just maybe, that money could've been used to buy themselves some land and build their own ****ing houses.

and if they did buy their own land and build their own houses, i have a niggling feeling that the people suggesting that is what they should do, would be the most vocal in complaining about them doing that.

tretorn wrote: »

Not everybody is afraid to speak out.
Peter Casey did and hopefully he has shamed the authorities into action.
The younger travellers think they can do what they like, past time someone stood up to them.

i would be surprised if the government were shocked into action that they were probably always planning anyway, by someone who only got 23% of a vote for an office that has no real power.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

i would be surprised if the government were shocked into action that they were probably always planning anyway, by someone who only got 23% of a vote for an office that has no real power.

Do they care about the 23% that gave him a first preference though?

Edit: I see you amended your sentence above by adding in “that they were probably always planning anyway”.

fin12

end of the road wrote: »

and if they did buy their own land and build their own houses, i have a niggling feeling that the people suggesting that is what they should do, would be the most vocal in complaining about them doing that.


i would be surprised if the government were shocked into action that they were probably always planning anyway, by someone who only got 23% of a vote for an office that has no real power.

Why do u always have to downplay Peters Casey’s achievement. There is nothing only about getting 23% vote,if Michael D didn’t run, Peter Casey would probably be president now.

end of the road

fin12 wrote: »

Why do u always have to downplay Peters Casey’s achievement.

because ultimately it isn't an achievement that has been earned. he simply made a generalised statement, which ultimately told some people what they wanted to hear and next thing he has 23% of the vote. so yeah i have no problem downplaying it given he didn't earn it and he would never have been in a position to do anything about any of the issues he raised.

fin12 wrote: »

There is nothing only about getting 23% vote,if Michael D didn’t run, Peter Casey would probably be president now.

maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. we will never know for sure (thankfully) . perhapse another candidate may have ran instead of mdh.

tretorn

What did Michael D do to deserve to be President.(Twice)

Dont you keep saying that its a pointless role with no power to do anything.

Then in the next breath you have to show evidence of some achievement to entitle you to 347,000 votes.

Make up your mind.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

end of the road wrote: »

i would be surprised if the government were shocked into action that they were probably always planning anyway, by someone who only got 23% of a vote for an office that has no real power.

That 23 percent could easily decide the next General Election.

Gentrify this

I thought someone might have mentioned this on this discussion.
Did anyone hear the part on travellers on Morning Ireland today?
They kept saying discrimination was holding them back etc., but the one quote I couldn't get my head around was a traveller saying he gets discriminated against because he has no education, and that when he left school at 12, it was discrimination because the authorities never came after him and made him go to school. How can he point the finger at authorities in this case? He's hanging around his relatives all day long in a caravan park and he puts the blame on the authorities? Sure they probably had no idea where he lived. There's probably 50 different John Joe Joey Joo Joo Cash Wards in every camp.
The whole thing is a lost cause. The Gov aren't going to get involved too much because their term in office is finite, the Garda are under resourced/afraid of them, and the media are in love with them.
Lads nothing's going to change. The only thing you can do is pressure your TDs to demand more Garda in rural areas. I live slap bang in Dublin City so it's not even an issue for me, but I really do feel for the people especially old people downt country who are being terrorised.

Varik

maccored wrote: »

4g is not a replacement for fibre.

Fibre is cost effective, in that politicians can re use the same speeches and the same pledges for rural broadband in 5 years time when we still don't have anything in place.

I'm building now on what would be one of eirs fibre rural "blue line" where they already get about 15Mb and currently live in a town a bit from the exchange and getting 30Mb. I'm lucky to get those.

There is something to be said for 4G, as a stop gap measure it has the added bonus of having additional use. At the end of the day it would improve the phone network which would benefit people.

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

because ultimately it isn't an achievement that has been earned. he simply made a generalised statement, which ultimately told some people what they wanted to hear and next thing he has 23% of the vote. so yeah i have no problem downplaying it given he didn't earn it and he would never have been in a position to do anything about any of the issues he raised.

Or as it should correctly be termed "the electorate finally had a politician with the courage of his convictions, unafraid to bow down to politically correct nonsense and was rewarded with an increase in votes"

end of the road

tretorn wrote: »

What did Michael D do to deserve to be President.(Twice)

Dont you keep saying that its a pointless role with no power to do anything.

Then in the next breath you have to show evidence of some achievement to entitle you to 347,000 votes.

Make up your mind.

i said it is a "pointless" roll with no ability to do anything? interesting, could you quote where i said that?
what i did say, is that it is a roll which has no real powers, which is true is it not? that doesn't automatically make it "pointless" in fact the president's work in visiting whoever and selling the country is very much work with a point. however, it still doesn't change the reality that peter casey as president would have been unable to (and possibly unwilling to if he was able) to do anything to deal with the issues he raised.
and yes, being president is a privelage which one should ultimately earn on the basis of something other then making generalised statements about groups of people from the country you are supposed to be representing.

end of the road

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Or as it should correctly be termed "the electorate finally had a politician with the courage of his convictions, unafraid to bow down to politically correct nonsense and was rewarded with an increase in votes"

i'm not sure making generalised statements equates to one having the courage of their convictions myself. even sticking by those statements wouldn't equate to it either in my view.

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

i'm not sure making generalised statements equates to one having the courage of their convictions myself. even sticking by those statements wouldn't equate to it either in my view.

Even when they are patently true ?

fin12

end of the road wrote: »

because ultimately it isn't an achievement that has been earned. he simply made a generalised statement, which ultimately told some people what they wanted to hear and next thing he has 23% of the vote. so yeah i have no problem downplaying it given he didn't earn it and he would never have been in a position to do anything about any of the issues he raised.



maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't. we will never know for sure (thankfully) . perhapse another candidate may have ran instead of mdh.

So what exactly has Michael D done to earn his 55.8% vote except lie threw his teeth about his expenses and never answer a straight question, typical politician.

Spanish Eyes

If Travellers have separate ethnicity, they should be so described. Why hide it if it's exactly what they fought for?

Baffled.

end of the road

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Even when they are patently true ?

yes. because ultimately, the statements made while they are true for some within the groups casey mentioned, something that has not been disputed, they are not true for all within the various groups he crowed about. i don't remember casey at any stage stating that he was only refering to some people and not all within the groups he made statements about.

fin12 wrote: »

So what exactly has Michael D done to earn his 55.8% vote except lie threw his teeth about his expenses and never answer a straight question, typical politician.

i believe he has been involved in championing various good causes over the decades.
he is also willing to represent all of the country, regardless of race, ethnicity or religion. was peter casey willing to do that i wonder?

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

Gentrify this wrote: »

They kept saying discrimination was holding them back etc., but the one quote I couldn't get my head around was a traveller saying he gets discriminated against because he has no education, and that when he left school at 12, it was discrimination because the authorities never came after him and made him go to school.

And if the authorities were coming around and chasing children back to school, Travellers would be screaming discrimination because their traditions were being ignored.

You can't win.

fin12

end of the road wrote: »

yes. because ultimately, the statements made while they are true for some within the groups casey mentioned, something that has not been disputed, they are not true for all within the various groups he crowed about. i don't remember casey at any stage stating that he was only refering to some people and not all within the groups he made statements about.



i believe he has been involved in championing various good causes over the decades.
he is also willing to represent all of the country, regardless of race, ethnicity or religion. was peter casey willing to do that i wonder?

Yes if they just admit there are not an ethnic minority.

end of the road

fin12 wrote: »

Yes if they just admit there are not an ethnic minority.

and why would they do that when they are an ethnic minority?

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

and why would they do that when they are an ethnic minority?

I will donate a year's salary to Pavee Point in your name if you can explain scientifically why this is true.

FrancieBrady

fin12 wrote: »

Yes if they just admit there are not an ethnic minority.

The 'just want to win' mentality right there ^^.

Ethnic minority status is no threat to any settled person.

Plumbthedepths

end of the road wrote:

i would be surprised if the government were shocked into action that they were probably always planning anyway, by someone who only got 23% of a vote for an office that has no real power.

Actually FF are examining their policy as regards Travellers after an RTE exit poll showed 1 in 3 voters voted for Casey. You think FG ignored such a significant vote? That's sweet of you.

James Brown

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I will donate a year's salary to Pavee Point in your name if you can explain scientifically why this is true.

It's not about DNA. It's pertaining to culture and tradition in their case.

whisky_galore

end of the road wrote: »

and why would they do that when they are an ethnic minority?

If the inhabitants of a small village marry cousins and ride the holes off each other for say a few hundred years...does that make them an ethnic minority?

whisky_galore

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It's not about DNA. It's pertaining to culture and tradition in their case.

A culture we could do well without. Mangy piebald ponies and bareknuckle boxing.

Omackeral

Watching the news here on Virgin One.

Describing the Drogheda feud as ''two rival groups'' and nothing else. Scope for innocents to be caught up in it and many of the wider public are nervous.

A hold on all Garda annual leave in Drogheda as a result.

Scum.

Brendan Bendar

end of the road wrote: »

and why would they do that when they are an ethnic minority?

As defined by a bunch of cretins who cannot differentiate between customs and genetic origin.

Bunch of stults.

tayto lover

Ethnic Minority is just an excuse to act like thugs, take all the freebies going and leave your local area in fear. It serves no purpose for anyone but is used as an excuse to behave badly.

Roger Hassenforder

Things picking up
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/cars-and-cash-seized-in-series-of-raids-by-cab-37524377.html

"Staff from the Electricity Supply Board provided assistance and made safe unauthorised electricity connections"


*In before "howdoyouknowitstravellers"?