Incident at Roscommon hotel (asylum seekers)

pumpkin4life

Fr. Hiroshima Twinkie wrote: »

Well that's it, you've convinced me!

Truly, the people whose hotel was burned down need to accept the arsons had perfectly legitimate concerns. In fact, they shouldn't be prosecuted! After all, when your country's being invaded by hordes of rapists (who're also dole-sponging, work-stealing terrorists) who've left Europe a burning ruin in their wake, isn't anything justified?

Who cares if innocent people get killed! Who cares if people lose their homes or livelihoods! We need to send a message that people with different coloured skin or who have different beliefs from us aren't welcome! :mad:

It is a legitimate concern when the population of your town changes without your consent, without you knowing any of the people coming in; when your tax payers money is spent to take care of them. And, while the guy who burned down the place is nuts, the reaction is entirely predictable and completely avoidable.

To prevent future fires and lads going rogue, try:

Listening to rural communities and stop this shìt. You're only doing it to feel like a nice person anyway.

Economic migrants don't get hurt. Locals don't get hurt. Things continue on.

Otherwise, Ireland's going to converge with the rest of Europe and their will be a massive increase in social dysfunction.

pumpkin4life

pumpkin4life wrote: »

It is a legitimate concern when the population of your town changes without your consent, without you knowing any of the people coming in;

No population of a town has any knowledge or gives consent about any newcomers to their town.
I can go live wherever I want in this country & no one needs to be consulted beforehand

nice_guy80

bubblypop wrote: »

No population of a town has any knowledge or gives consent about any newcomers to their town.
I can go live wherever I want in this country & no one needs to be consulted beforehand

As it should be

What if 100 people move in next door overnight

Wibbs

Zorya wrote: »

I got carded for far less personally directed abuse than is going on at the moment and has been going on in this thread. It is frustrating when the rules of engagement are arbitrary.

I have found in my time as a mod that among those of all sorts who live to hit the report post button, the so called "left" are generally more likely to hit report a post* and in a busy forum/thread most mods are not reading replies and rely on reports to get a heads up. In my experience and opinion it's very rarely "bias" Z, more like the squeaky wheel gets the oil.





*I reckon because the "right" types tend to be convinced Boards and mods are biased so don't bother. Joke being the "left" types are often equally convinced Boards and mods are biased against them. Which for me at least suggests more balance than either "side" will admit.

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

I can go live wherever I want in this country & no one needs to be consulted beforehand

Yeah like you moving on your own to a small town is in any way equal to a couple of hundred people, any people, moving all at once to a small town.

malinheader

Fr. Hiroshima Twinkie wrote: »

Too ****ing right! The people of Ireland need to know that random acts of violence will continue until the demands of people that have these perfectly legitimate concerns are delivered upon! :mad:



I live in all of those places! And let me tell you this: I can't ****ing step outside my door without running into Sharia court officials armed with Muslamic ray-guns, telling me I need to start praying five times a day or they'll cut my head off!

What the **** happened to this country? Why can't I go about my business without being molested by this subhuman scum? And what the hell is going on when people can't even burn down buildings without these do-gooder right-on types telling them not to! This is OUR country! We don't want these dirty, smelly foreign types milling about OUR towns! :mad:

Sorry I asked. Was hoping for a sane person from one of these areas to give there opinion on the clips. Ie is it as bad or hyped up. Watch out for those ray guns. Ffs.

Wibbs

dav3 wrote: »

Are you going to continue to hijack these threads posting the same points ad nauseam?

By "hijack" do you mean disagree with you in a group discussion? Because that's how discussion works. Do you mean ask questions where your only answers appear to be go reactive, deflect and attack? And you suggest I want an echo chamber? Really? Do you ever hold up a mirror to your own posts? Apparently not.

Kivaro

Reports on the Irish Times today state that claims for asylum in Ireland have reached a 10 year high. Why?
The generous social welfare mecca that we have here is most likely the number one reason. According to the Irish Times in a FOI request, the recent new employment rights for asylum seekers is also driving it. They come here and do one or two years work (if that) and then they are on welfare for life after that if they decide that work is not for them. We know already that many lower-paid workers with children are much better off on the welfare system than working. Low-paid asylum seekers will also see welfare as a better alternative to working. And with billions being spent on social housing in the next few years, there will be brand new homes for the new arrivals.

The Irish Times article mentioned the fears by the Department of Justice of the arrival of illegal immigrants from Britain who "may" come to Ireland after Brexit and claim asylum. And after Brexit, other asylum seekers worldwide will see Ireland as an alternative to Britain to seek asylum.

The head of the Irish Refugee Council was quoted on the Irish Times article that Ireland should "be well able to provide accommodation and appropriate services for newly-arrived asylum seekers". What planet is this man on? I understand that tax payers are paying his salary and that of the staff there, so higher numbers of asylum seekers will correspond to more funding that they receive.

According to internal briefings prepared within the Department of Justice and obtained by the Irish Times, there is a warning of rising tensions “between and among” residents and staff at existing direct provision centres.

Some questions: do we accept asylum seekers indefinitely and in what numbers? Are there enough hotels around the country to handle the influx?
Is it time to admit that a substantial number of asylum seekers are economic migrants? Why have we not learned from other European countries' experiences?

And last question: Is it time to have a rational impartial discussion on the topic yet?

dav3

Wibbs wrote: »

By "hijack" do you mean disagree with you in a group discussion? Because that's how discussion works. Do you mean ask questions where your only answers appear to be go reactive, deflect and attack? And you suggest I want an echo chamber? Really? Do you ever hold up a mirror to your own posts? Apparently not.

There is no need for your asinine rant. A simple answer of 'yes' to the question would have sufficed.

Wibbs

dav3 wrote: »

There is no need for your asinine rant. A simple answer of 'yes' to the question would have sufficed.

So far in this thread and by a few people, I along with others have been accused of being a racist, a bigot, a child, a hysteric, paranoid, arrogant, a snivelling little shit and a number of other charming epithets and "LOLs" in place of debate. I suppose I can add "asinine" to the list. Meh, keep them coming as in lieu of debate at least it's amusing.

So have you anything to say to actually engage with debate, or will you continue along the same well trodden path?

Wibbs

Kivaro wrote: »

And last question: Is it time to have a rational impartial discussion on the topic yet?

I can't see it happening and I wouldn't hold your breath. It seems to be a fait accompli at this stage and discussion will only kick off when we're facing the same problems as every other country in Europe with similar setups, though hopefully - and I suspect this will be the case - we'll have less of it, because of our small population and the general Irish cultural response of centrism. We tend not to go fully daft to either end of the political spectrum. Politically we as a nation could be summed up with "be grand".

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Yeah like you moving on your own to a small town is in any way equal to a couple of hundred people, any people, moving all at once to a small town.

It happened. A lot. Many many little towns had hundreds of houses built during the boom. Small villages became big towns overnight. No one had any right to vet the people moving in.

pumpkin4life

bubblypop wrote: »

No population of a town has any knowledge or gives consent about any newcomers to their town.
I can go live wherever I want in this country & no one needs to be consulted beforehand

A village of a population with 564 people according to the last census.

Add 80 people.

564+80=644 people.

644/564 = That's a 14% increase in population in one go, all economic migrants.

That's enough to completely change the structure of the town.

This isn't some random lad buying a holiday home round the corner.

pumpkin4life

pumpkin4life wrote: »

A village of a population with 564 people according to the last census.

Add 80 people.

564+80=644 people.

644/564 = That's a 14% increase in population in one go, all economic migrants.

That's enough to completely change the structure of the town.

This isn't some random lad buying a holiday home round the corner.

So?

BBFAN

tretorn wrote: »

Please stop with this nonsense.

If asylum seekers are Muslim they won’t integrate here. How as a woman can you integrate with Irish people if you can’t be in male company without a chaperone. How can you integrate with other women if you are covered head to toe with just your eyes visible.

Muslims have lived in great numbers in France and the UK for decades, these two countries have suffered the most from terrorism, France in particular is destroyed and Germany will be the same in two decades.

Ultimate Seduction wrote: »

I think your the first person on this thread to mention religion?

Emmmmm?

dav3

Wibbs wrote: »

So far in this thread and by a few people, I along with others have been accused of being a racist, a bigot, a child, a hysteric, paranoid, arrogant, a snivelling little shit and a number of other charming epithets and "LOLs" in place of debate. I suppose I can add "asinine" to the list. Meh, keep them coming as in lieu of debate at least it's amusing.

So have you anything to say to actually engage with debate, or will you continue along the same well trodden path?

Right on cue you start playing the victim card again.

Do you honestly believe you're debating? I doubt you have an original thought in your head on this subject. Every comment you make is parroted from one of the many crackpot conspiracy theorists, some of which were even posted in this thread.

It's the arrogance and aggression from yourself on your friends that turns so many people off commenting on here.

How many threads like these are you going to continue to hijack with logical fallacy, desperately trying to convince people that Ireland is on a slippery slope?

pumpkin4life

bubblypop wrote: »

So?

Increased community distrust and breakdown.
Increased pressure on services like housing and health.
Increased actual racism brought about by seeing an economic migrant cared for in a hotel room, to the one crazy lad who sexually harasses/assaults some young one.
Increased voting against the interest of the Irish people, once citizenships are granted, leading to more polarization in society.

And, back to the whole point of this thread, the increased probability of arson attacks where innocent people (a lot of us would do the same thing if we had the same opportunity as these economic migrants from Pakistan, Georgia, Congo etc, this is not a case of hating on these lads being moved into Rooskey) might be burned alive.

If you don't dump 80 people into a town of 564 people, then hotels won't get burned down, typically. That's way more effective than bullshìt statements like "fight hate" and "Irish people are wacists" and "lets have a rational discussion even though rational means agreeing with me".

Wibbs

dav3 wrote: »

Right on cue you start playing the victim card again.

Nope, you may play that game and assume others do, I don't. I'm merely pointing out what has been said by those like yourself because ye're claiming to be seeking an honest and open debate. Hell at one point you yourself were musing on my longevity; You could could have a week left to live, you may have 10 years left to live. This is no way to see out the remaining years of your life. Surely you can see that. You can't live in a constant state of fear right up until the end. There is still time to change. And that's not "aggressive" and "arrogant"? Never mind some feverish projection on your part. I do know that if just one of those things had been aimed at you you'd be hitting report post like a flipper button on a pinball machine. BTW I didn't report any posts. I generally don't as it happens.

Do you honestly believe you're debating? I doubt you have an original thought in your head on this subject. Every comment you make is parroted from one of the many crackpot conspiracy theorists, some of which were even posted in this thread.

Point out an example of "crackpot conspiracy" I've posted? I have said the many decades long evidence from other European nations that have run the multicultural experiment have led to social problems and why are we hellbent on trying to repeat them near verbatim? Ghettoisation, racism towards the indigenous population and in turn from them, increases in social problems in the following generations of immigrant folks, increases in poverty among ethnic groups, community mistrust of each other and especially authorities, and that's for a start, all the way up to civil disturbances. Do you deny that these social issues exist and continue to exist in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Holland, Sweden? You seem to think the extreme right wing have all but gone away, so anything is possible.

However I also said a few times and in my last post with it hopefully - and I suspect this will be the case - we'll have less of it, because of our small population and the general Irish cultural response of centrism. We tend not to go fully daft to either end of the political spectrum.

I have also suggested possible solutions to some of the issues. At least to the point of going beyond pie in the sky stuff like "fight racists". EG local consultation and dialogue before centres are set up. People are much more likely to welcome a thousand people in when they feel they have a choice in the matter, rather than a hundred people when they feel they don't. If local and governmental authorities are wary of giving locals a choice what message does that send? They don't care or value local opinion? They don't trust them to make the right choice? That too many might be racists? That's a damned good way to encourage the minority of nutters to get the wider community behind them. And if that's the case what the hell do they think is wise about dropping people into that environment, especially if it's vulnerable families actually fleeing war zones?

Though TBH I don't see it as that complex a response from the local authorities, never ascribe conspiracy or complexity to something when basic incompetence is by far the more likely reason.

Most of all we should have an open dialogue on where other countries got it wrong and got it right and try to being in more of the latter. It's pretty clear by the slipshod approach by the Irish government and local authorities that they're not doing this.

That's asking questions looking for answers.

dav3

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope, you may play that game and assume others do, I don't. I'm merely pointing out what has been said by those like yourself because ye're claiming to be seeking an honest and open debate...

I never made that claim. The debate on this subject has raged on for years. You need to stop being so disingenuous by suggesting otherwise.

You also need to knock the 'butter wouldn’t melt in your mouth' spiel on the head. What exactly did "almost your entire posting history on this website and across a couple of previous accounts has been a political agenda" mean earlier?

Using emotive language such as 'men of fighting age' or 'open borders' brings nothing to the discussion, yet we see it popping up time and again on threads like these. It's designed to spread fear and hostility, and is typically directed to a particular type of person.
I doubt you have the statistics for asylum centres in Ireland, the feedback from the local population, or indeed the history. Yet you appear to be an expert on the subject and continue to push the slippery slope theory about Ireland at any opportunity.

How about you bring your "debate" to one of the many other threads running around boards and leave this one as it should be. These discussions do not evolve naturally. They are constantly hijacked by the same people within the first couple of pages pushing their agenda looking to spread fear and hate among people.

Although it is presented as 'just asking questions', it is anything but. Thankfully the majority of Irish people can see through this.

SnakePlissken

bubblypop wrote: »

pumpkin4life wrote: »

A village of a population with 564 people according to the last census.

Add 80 people.

564+80=644 people.

644/564 = That's a 14% increase in population in one go, all economic migrants.

That's enough to completely change the structure of the town.

This isn't some random lad buying a holiday home round the corner.

So?

This is the calibre of debate we're dealing with.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Couldn't find much on Roosky in terms of actual local response, but Grand Torino covered Wicklow Town and Rosslare, he filmed the whole thing. To say the locals are pissed is an understatement:

As for increased crime and protests, Balbriggan is turning into a ghetto.

To be honest, apart from local radio calls and Youtubers like Grand Torino/The Don, the Irish Times/RTE are refusing to cover this.

Crime is certainly up in certain areas, but down in others:

https://www.thejournal.ie/cso-recorded-crimes-september-2018-4409176-Dec2018/

Thanks for replying. I was afraid the question would go unanswered!

BBFAN

The amount of posters here saying "yes arson is wrong but...…." is unbelievable.

Wibbs

dav3 wrote: »

I never made that claim. The debate on this subject has raged on for years. You need to stop being so disingenuous by suggesting otherwise.

I was speaking of this thread in particular and well you should know it. The same thread that you want me to "bring [my] "debate" to one of the many other threads running around boards and leave this one as it should be". IE one that agrees with you and doesn't ask questions that you quite simply seem incapable of answering. Oh you'd love if I was the Muslamic Raygun type, but someone who isn't and doesn't get into the "LOLS" and linking some Yank nutter on Youtube is not so easy to rebuke, so you resort to deflection and insult. Consider this thread: Between the apparent "right wingers" and the apparent "right on", which group has resorted more to deflection and covert, even overt insult? For a nice change it isn't the "nazis".

You also need to knock the 'butter wouldn’t melt in your mouth' spiel on the head.

I have never claimed to be anything much beyond a thundering gobshite, who knows stuff about the oddest stuff and that's about it.

Using emotive language such as 'men of fighting age' or 'open borders' brings nothing to the discussion, yet we see it popping up time and again on threads like these. It's designed to spread fear and hostility, and is typically directed to a particular type of person.

OK..

Me. On open borders. Earlier wrote:

Well I wouldn't class them as "open border types". The vast majority of people outside of a few nutters - funny enough on the extremes of socialism and capitalism - aren't calling for open borders.

So nope, not the stereotype you need me to be.

I doubt you have the statistics for asylum centres in Ireland, the feedback from the local population, or indeed the history. Yet you appear to be an expert on the subject and continue to push the slippery slope theory about Ireland at any opportunity.

You haven't answered my direct and repeated question put to you and similar cheerleaders: Do you deny that these social issues exist[because of multiculturalism] and continue to exist in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Holland, Sweden?

How about you bring your "debate" to one of the many other threads running around boards and leave this one as it should be.

So you can all hold hands and agree? Nope. And I'd do the exact same if it was a love in for Nazis. Indeed I've been accused of being both a "Jew apologist" and an "Anti Semite", the latter because I questioned the near century long land grab and plantation and abuse of Palestinians by Israel.

Although it is presented as 'just asking questions', it is anything but. Thankfully the majority of Irish people can see through this.

Jaysus I may be arrogant, but you have the pulse of the majority of Irish people? Fair play.

malinheader

BBFAN wrote: »

The amount of posters here saying "yes arson is wrong but...…." is unbelievable.

Funny how we differ.
The amount of posters here saying no we don't have a problem with direct provisions or hundreds of migrants being dropped into small communities with no amenities etc, is unbelievable.

Wibbs

BBFAN wrote: »

The amount of posters here saying "yes arson is wrong but...…." is unbelievable.

The arson attack was wrong. It was a crime. It was almost certainly a crime based on xenophobia. Whoever is responsible should be hit with the full weight of the law. Can I be any clearer? I don't know how as I and others have repeatedly said this.

The "but" part is simply asking the whys behind it, how we got here, and shouting "racists!" while comforting in its simplicity, is not the whole story and until we have the whole story and background to this crime, this idiocy will be sure to happen again.

SnakePlissken

BBFAN wrote: »

The amount of posters here saying "yes arson is wrong but...…." is unbelievable.

Quote just one.

greenpilot

Question.

Is there anybody posting on this thread actually living in Ballagh or Rooskey?

dav3

Wibbs wrote: »

...

What exactly did "almost your entire posting history on this website and across a couple of previous accounts has been a political agenda" mean earlier?

What data have you accessed to lead you to such an erroneous statement?
and
Have you shared this data?

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

The "but" part is simply asking the whys behind it, how we got here, and shouting "racists!" while comforting in its simplicity, is not the whole story and until we have the whole story and background to this crime, this idiocy will be sure to happen again.

No.
Sorry.
There is no justification for crime. There is no justification for arson. There is no justification for taking the law into your own hands & deciding that arson is the answer.
Offenders are always wrong.

greenpilot

greenpilot wrote: »

Question.

Is there anybody posting on this thread actually living in Ballagh or Rooskey?

I am from a small leitrim town, we had a direct provision centre in the town a few years ago. There was no issues at all. People settled there or they moved somewhere else after their time in the centre. It gave employment to many people in the town & everyone welcomed the occupants with no problems.

Sweetemotion

bubblypop wrote: »

No.
Sorry.
There is no justification for crime. There is no justification for arson. There is no justification for taking the law into your own hands & deciding that arson is the answer.
Offenders are always wrong.

What if you are the oppressed?

Sweetemotion

bubblypop wrote: »

No population of a town has any knowledge or gives consent about any newcomers to their town.
I can go live wherever I want in this country & no one needs to be consulted beforehand

That's great that you can do that in your "assuming" home country.

Try moving to America or Australia without consulting anyone and you'll be on the next plane home.

Sweetemotion

Sweetemotion wrote: »

That's great that you can do that in your "assuming" home country.

Try moving to America or Australia without consulting anyone and you'll be on the next plane home.

If you are legally in a country then it doesn't matter where the country is.

yamaha50

yamaha50 wrote: »

Jaysus
Scarlet for ya mate

Really?
Don't be. Don't know why you would be.

Sweetemotion

bubblypop wrote: »

If you are legally in a country then it doesn't matter where the country is.

How can you be legally in America or Australia without consulting with anyone?

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

No.
Sorry.
There is no justification for crime. There is no justification for arson. There is no justification for taking the law into your own hands & deciding that arson is the answer.
Offenders are always wrong.

No. Sorry, yourself. Nobody is justifying the crime. Some are asking explanations for the crime beyond the simplistic. Justification - Explanation. One of these days you may yet understand the difference.

Wibbs

dav3 wrote: »

What exactly did "almost your entire posting history on this website and across a couple of previous accounts has been a political agenda" mean earlier?

What data have you accessed to lead you to such an erroneous statement?
and
Have you shared this data?

Christ, but you're about as subtle in your machinations as a house brick to the kneecap. Sorry, but you're barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

No. Sorry, yourself. Nobody is justifying the crime. Some are asking explanations for the crime beyond the simplistic. Justification - Explanation. One of these days you may yet understand the difference.

Oh no, I understand what you want to do here. But sorry, there is no justification for any crime.
It doesn't matter if the offender has his/her own reason for doing something. The offender is always wrong. In every criminal case.
It doesn't matter what they think or what their reasons are.
Break the law........ You are wrong.

Sweetemotion

Sweetemotion wrote: »

How can you be legally in America or Australia without consulting with anyone?

You can't.
Same as Ireland. Any refugees or asylum seeker is here legally

bubblypop

bubblypop wrote: »

Really?
Don't be. Don't know why you would be.

I would. You glibly brush off a troubling statistic, as if you were absently chewing the cud.

Sweetemotion

bubblypop wrote: »

I am from a small leitrim town, we had a direct provision centre in the town a few years ago. There was no issues at all. People settled there or they moved somewhere else after their time in the centre. It gave employment to many people in the town & everyone welcomed the occupants with no problems.

If it was such a success, why is it. We had, there was and it gave?

Surly it would be. We have, there is and it gives.

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh no, I understand what you want to do here. But sorry, there is no justification for any crime.
It doesn't matter if the offender has his/her own reason for doing something. The offender is always wrong. In every criminal case.
It doesn't matter what they think or what their reasons are.
Break the law........ You are wrong.

You seem incapable of understanding that nobody is arguing or justifying that.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

You seem incapable of understanding that nobody is arguing or justifying that.

But you are, you seem to think that there is some reason behind what happened.
It doesn't matter.

Sweetemotion

Sweetemotion wrote: »

If it was such a success, why is it. We had, there was and it gave?

Surly it would be. We have, there is and it gives.

No, because there are private companies that provide this service.
When it's not profitable anymore, they stop providing the service.
I don't see how you couldn't understand that!

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

Oh no, I understand what you want to do here. But sorry, there is no justification for any crime.
It doesn't matter if the offender has his/her own reason for doing something. The offender is always wrong. In every criminal case.
It doesn't matter what they think or what their reasons are.
Break the law........ You are wrong.

Though on second thoughts and after an all too brief visit to the local hostelry and more a general observation; there are all sorts of flaws with your above reasoning as a position.

Cast your mind back 30 years. Being Gay was illegal, against the law. A crime. "But sorry, there is no justification for any crime. It doesn't matter if the offender has his/her own reason for doing something. The offender is always wrong. In every criminal case. It doesn't matter what they think or what their reasons are. Break the law........ You are wrong"

I would respectfully(actually genuinely) suggest to avoid absolutes in law and morality. These are goalposts that shift with the slightest breeze.

But you are, you seem to think that there is some reason behind what happened. It doesn't matter.

This again is a very simplistic two tone view of the world. It most certainly matters. All actions, negative or positive, have reasons, however misguided or retarded or just plain insane. If the reasons and causes behind any crime are not examined then how do you hope to stop further crimes?

dav3

Wibbs wrote: »

Christ, but you're about as subtle in your machinations as a house brick to the kneecap. Sorry, but you're barking up the wrong tree I'm afraid.

You're the one who made the claim. I see you're attempting to laugh it off now, I'm not sure you fully understand the implication.
I think people would be well within their rights to assume rogue moderators could, or are, accessing the data of users they disagree with, based on your comment. Moderators who put 2 & 2 together and end up with 5. After that, who knows where the data ends up.

Would you like to take another attempt at explaining it? I'm sure it's just another misunderstanding on your behalf.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Though on second thoughts and after an all too brief visit to the local hostelry and more a general observation; there are all sorts of flaws with your above reasoning as a position.

Cast your mind back 30 years. Being Gay was illegal, against the law. A crime. "But sorry, there is no justification for any crime. It doesn't matter if the offender has his/her own reason for doing something. The offender is always wrong. In every criminal case. It doesn't matter what they think or what their reasons are. Break the law........ You are wrong"

I would respectfully(actually genuinely) suggest to avoid absolutes in law and morality. These are goalposts that shift with the slightest breeze.

This again is a very simplistic two tone view of the world. It most certainly matters. All actions, negative or positive, have reasons, however misguided or retarded or just plain insane. If the reasons and causes behind any crime are not examined then how do you hope to stop further crimes?

Are you seriously trying to argue that someone was right in trying to burn this hotel down?
I am going to assume not.
So please don't try to put arson of this hotel in the same category as discrimination against homosexuality.
If there's a law that discriminates, then there are procedures in place to overturn that law.
I doubt very very much that there is anything that can overturn criminal damage to a private dwelling.

yamaha50

yamaha50 wrote: »

Sweet jaysus
Lay off the marching powder mate

??

yamaha50

yamaha50 wrote: »

Go to bed mate
Nobody believes a word you type here

Well, for sure no-one is listening to you!

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

Are you seriously trying to argue that someone was right in trying to burn this hotel down?
I am going to assume not.

That was nice of you. And no, I'm not and it would take deep dive into a world of surrealism to even begin to think I was.

So please don't try to put arson of this hotel in the same category as discrimination against homosexuality.
If there's a law that discriminates, then there are procedures in place to overturn that law.
I doubt very very much that there is anything that can overturn criminal damage to a private dwelling.

You yet again can't seem to grasp the point and the nuances. Oh and by the by the same criminal would likely have gotten a medal in any number of dodgy societies. And if you had grown up in same, you'd likely be one of the ones cheering along at his investment. The vast majority of us would.