Farage highlighting illegal migration chaos

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

It's impossible to discount your first point as it means nothing. And no, I don't think people eating a curry is diversity.

I am not opposed to diversity but once it happens naturally and not to the detriment of native culture and is done legally.

If you can't understand the value in a company having people from a particular background and culture involved in developing products/services for markets other than those in which the company is physically located, I don't know what to tell you.

Why don't you consider eating food from other cultures to be a sign of diversity? I'm betting because it is something which is so common place, it is now seen as normal.

Just to be clear, I am in no way advocating completely free and open migration, just that all elements of the situation be considered and not just a with a 'No, No, No' approach.

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm a firm believer that if you move to a place, you respect the culture, obey the laws and try to integrate as best you can by adapting to your surroundings and not expecting your new surroundings to adapt to you.

You could read Thomas H O'Connor's 'The Irish in Boston' to see how many of those who arrived in the first hundred years did none of what you are suggesting all migrants should do.

And the reasons for this, I expect the Irish then, as many migrants now, when they arrive in a new country, felt unsafe, unfamiliar, insecure and unwanted. It is understandable that they would seek to stay within their own community where they feel they have support and understanding and are less likely to be taken advantage of.
Instead of demanding all migrants assimilate to the country in which they have arrived, societies should try to find ways to make those that do arrive to feel welcome.

Not to mention, that what you are suggesting is that we just demand that the current cultural norms in each society right now are the ones which must be adhered to when the world is what it is because of cultural movement.

Kidchameleon

Tell me how wrote: »

I didn't.

Danzy did.

Tell me how wrote: »

Or, another way to put it.

The UK, which invaded all but 22 countries in its history, currently has less than 2% of its population living there illegally.

Tell me how

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

PRevious post

My answers in bold.

Why is diversity automatically seen as a good thing to you?

Because the evidence of it being a good thing is seen in virtually every country in the world.

What about those that do not have any valuable skills? If their skills were so valuable why would they come illegally?

Because their ability to feel safe or to have opportunity in their own country has been removed or is non-existent. AS for those that do not have valuable skills, just because they don't arrive with qualifications, does not mean that they are unskilled.


What does this even mean, and why is it a benefit? Bearing in mind most of the illegals, and refugees, come from areas of the world were the idea of gay and women's rights are within the realms of science fiction, I fail to see why their cultural experiences (whatever it is exactly that you mean by that) are automatically seen as a benefit.

Every March, Americans celebrate St Patricks day to varying degrees, some cities have massive parades. Many claim Irish heritage, but many who don't still take part and enjoy the shared cultural experience.

Cultural experiences do not have to be revolutionary or a permanent change, people attending a yoga or salsa class are enjoying an experience which has come from a different culture.

You are also conveniently forgetting Irish recent history in terms of womens rights or sexual orientation. I disagree entirely with the constraints put on women still in many parts of the world but let's not play the holier than thou card.

How are either of these benefits to the host country?

Recognition for partial responsibility that modern day refugees find themselves in the situation they are in in many cases.
Empathy for having helped those in need. The wheel is always turning, the Irish were down for so long, who's to say we won't again looking for a welcome somewhere.

Most of us are fully aware of this. However saying this as an argument as to why we have to accept illegal immigration, or large numbers of refugees, is nothing more than an appeal to emotion.

I'm not saying you 'have' to, I'm saying here's why you should.

Tell me how

Kidchameleon wrote: »

This is the second time which you have used that post to suggest that I said that people should accept large scale migration?

You can't even build a strawman argument.

You can keep posting, but if I stop responding, it's because there is nothing of value in your posts to respond to.

CtevenSrowder

Apologies I messed up the formatting of my initial response.

Tell me how wrote: »

My answers in bold.


Because the evidence of it being a good thing is seen in virtually every country in the world.

I'm not being facetious, but what is this evidence?

Tell me how wrote: »

Because their ability to feel safe or to have opportunity in their own country has been removed or is non-existent. AS for those that do not have valuable skills, just because they don't arrive with qualifications, does not mean that they are unskilled.

The first bolded part is not an excuse to come illegally. As for the second bolded part: Whilst potentially true, in our countries you need to have qualifications to show you are skilled, and in order to work, these qualifications are likely to be a legal requirement.

Tell me how wrote: »

Every March, Americans celebrate St Patricks day to varying degrees, some cities have massive parades. Many claim Irish heritage, but many who don't still take part and enjoy the shared cultural experience.

Cultural experiences do not have to be revolutionary or a permanent change, people attending a yoga or salsa class are enjoying an experience which has come from a different culture.

Ah ok, I see what you mean. Yes I'll concede this is a benefit, as long as it is seen as distinct from cultural practices?

Tell me how wrote: »

You are also conveniently forgetting Irish recent history in terms of womens rights or sexual orientation. I disagree entirely with the constraints put on women still in many parts of the world but let's not play the holier than thou card.

I'm not forgetting them, and I'm not playing the houlier than thou card. However Ireland's history in this regard is irrelevant, as we've moved on. We should not want a situation were we let in a large number who want to return us to those times, and pass their values onto their children.

How are either of these benefits to the host country?

Tell me how wrote: »

Recognition for partial responsibility that modern day refugees find themselves in the situation they are in in many cases.
Empathy for having helped those in need. The wheel is always turning, the Irish were down for so long, who's to say we won't again looking for a welcome somewhere.

Ireland has no responsibility in the situation refugees find themselves in. Also, if we do find ourselves in difficult times again, I doubt many Irish peoples destination of choice will be sub-saharan Africa, North Africa or the likes of Syria and Iraq.

Furthermore, neither of your points show how

"In many instances, as a recognition for the damage that was done to their country by the government and military of the country they are travelling to" or how "Empathy for a shared cultural experience of not being safe in your home country."

are benefits to the host country.

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm not saying you 'have' to, I'm saying here's why you should.

Fair enough, however, it's still an appeal to emotion.

Kidchameleon

Tell me how wrote: »

This is the second time which you have used that post to suggest that I said that people should accept large scale migration?

You can't even build a strawman argument.

You can keep posting, but if I stop responding, it's because there is nothing of value in your posts to respond to.

Or it is because you don't have a response (something which you have demonstrated quite a number of times). We are diametrically opposed. You make a claim with no substance, I counteract it with evidence, you make a different claim, I counteract that, it just goes on and on

biko

Tell me how wrote: »

So much for the country being flooded.

That's not how you count.
1900 is only one single source - small boat across the channel.

You take the one million unauthorised immigrants already living in UK, and then you add the 1900 from one single source (small boat from France) plus all other ways they get to UK.

4068ac1elhodqr

Any update on the 3million that Turkey (receiver of EU funds to accomodate these) no longer wants, and has pushed (even bused) across the border in to the EU(Greece)?

After 1 Jan 2021 there is zero chance indie britian will accept them in any eu type agreement.
This likely leaves the rest of NW (desired welfare destinations) of Europe, to accept if the Turks play hard ball.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

If you can't understand the value in a company having people from a particular background and culture involved in developing products/services for markets other than those in which the company is physically located, I don't know what to tell you.

Why don't you consider eating food from other cultures to be a sign of diversity? I'm betting because it is something which is so common place, it is now seen as normal.

Just to be clear, I am in no way advocating completely free and open migration, just that all elements of the situation be considered and not just a with a 'No, No, No' approach.



You could read Thomas H O'Connor's 'The Irish in Boston' to see how many of those who arrived in the first hundred years did none of what you are suggesting all migrants should do.

And the reasons for this, I expect the Irish then, as many migrants now, when they arrive in a new country, felt unsafe, unfamiliar, insecure and unwanted. It is understandable that they would seek to stay within their own community where they feel they have support and understanding and are less likely to be taken advantage of.
Instead of demanding all migrants assimilate to the country in which they have arrived, societies should try to find ways to make those that do arrive to feel welcome.

Not to mention, that what you are suggesting is that we just demand that the current cultural norms in each society right now are the ones which must be adhered to when the world is what it is because of cultural movement.

Are you equally as adamant that Saudis must allow open homosexuality and should allow numerous pubs be open and bacon to be made freely available in order to make westerners feel welcome?

Anyway, my point is, that no illegal immigrant should be made feel welcome. They are illegal. Migrants are a different kettle of fish but again, I don't think any host nation should change based on an influx of people who chose to move there.

A migrant should choose to move to a country they want to move to based on what they feel most fits their ideals. If they are moving from a country which they feel is inferior to one they are moving to, why the **** would they want to import their cultures beliefs.

2u2me

Here is racist xenophobe Bill Clinton in his state of the union speech of 1995. He was never a real president anyway!

All Americans, not only in the States most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.

Standing ovation from entire room.

C-NET

A time when the whole country could get behind him. What on earth has changed since.

Danzy

2u2me wrote: »

Here is racist xenophobe Bill Clinton in his state of the union speech of 1995. He was never a real president anyway!


Standing ovation from entire room.

C-NET

A time when the whole country could get behind him. What on earth has changed since.

The left, of all hues, became very middle class and a lot cosier to big business and its needs.

Some of the more radical voices in the Democrat party now have taken a position on migration that economically is far to the right of Reagan. Well in to Ayn Rand libertarianism.

rgossip30

Tell me how wrote: »

My answers in bold.

Why is diversity automatically seen as a good thing to you?

Because the evidence of it being a good thing is seen in virtually every country in the world.

What about those that do not have any valuable skills? If their skills were so valuable why would they come illegally?

Because their ability to feel safe or to have opportunity in their own country has been removed or is non-existent. AS for those that do not have valuable skills, just because they don't arrive with qualifications, does not mean that they are unskilled.



What does this even mean, and why is it a benefit? Bearing in mind most of the illegals, and refugees, come from areas of the world were the idea of gay and women's rights are within the realms of science fiction, I fail to see why their cultural experiences (whatever it is exactly that you mean by that) are automatically seen as a benefit.

Every March, Americans celebrate St Patricks day to varying degrees, some cities have massive parades. Many claim Irish heritage, but many who don't still take part and enjoy the shared cultural experience.

Cultural experiences do not have to be revolutionary or a permanent change, people attending a yoga or salsa class are enjoying an experience which has come from a different culture.

You are also conveniently forgetting Irish recent history in terms of womens rights or sexual orientation. I disagree entirely with the constraints put on women still in many parts of the world but let's not play the holier than thou card.

How are either of these benefits to the host country?

Recognition for partial responsibility that modern day refugees find themselves in the situation they are in in many cases.
Empathy for having helped those in need. The wheel is always turning, the Irish were down for so long, who's to say we won't again looking for a welcome somewhere.

Most of us are fully aware of this. However saying this as an argument as to why we have to accept illegal immigration, or large numbers of refugees, is nothing more than an appeal to emotion.

I'm not saying you 'have' to, I'm saying here's why you should.

I think this reads like its good because I say so . I doubt ' you can never have enough of a good thing ' applies to asylum seekers as most fail refugee status . The question is at what point is there a limit as many become welfare dependant . Immigration is good for paying the pensions .Do you seriously feel enriched by diversity and the ideal of a multicultural utopia actually existing .

Cordell

Because the evidence of it being a good thing is seen in virtually every country in the world.

Last year Ireland had the first couple convicted because they performed a FGM on their girl, so clearly this adds to the evidence of why Europe needs more diversity.

Mr. Karate

2u2me wrote: »

Here is racist xenophobe Bill Clinton in his state of the union speech of 1995. He was never a real president anyway!


Standing ovation from entire room.

C-NET

A time when the whole country could get behind him. What on earth has changed since.

He [and Hilary when she was a Senator] along with Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi all supported border control, including a wall [or a barrier of some sort as Hillary once put it] at one point. Shows you how phony the outrage against Trump for wanting to curb illegal immigration.

Mr. Karate

Tell me how wrote: »

My answers in bold.

Why is diversity automatically seen as a good thing to you?

Because the evidence of it being a good thing is seen in virtually every country in the world.

Violent crime, rape, sexual assaults all skyrocketing to record highs since this "Refugee Crisis" is good thing? The Child grooming gangs that covered up by local Councils, Police and the media for years in England.

What about the violent gangs of "New Irish" that have already taken over parts of Dublin? They're a good thing?

j8wk2feszrnpao

Cordell wrote: »

Last year Ireland had the first couple convicted because they performed a FGM on their girl, so clearly this adds to the evidence of why Europe needs more diversity.

Using your logic, the actions of our Church (child sexual abuse) add to the evidence that Europe needs more diversity. Do the actions of a few define the majority?

Some serious amount of channeled anger on here. It's all the foreigners fault for issues in their own lives.

CtevenSrowder

munstermagic11 wrote: »

Using your logic, the actions of our Church (child sexual abuse) add to the evidence that Europe needs more diversity. Do the actions of a few define the majority?

Some serious amount of channeled anger on here. It's all the foreigners fault for issues in their own lives.

Oh look the usual insinuation of racism/xenophobia. Quelle suprise. Challenging the aft unchallenged idea of diversity being simply great, or asking for evidence of it being a benefit to society, is not xenophobic.

Cordell

What do you mean, we need more diverse child abuse? On top of the Church child abuse we need some more mutilation and some more child grooming gangs for the sake of diversity?

DelaneyIn

Many Africans are managing to evade coronavirus lockdown barriers in Niger, the Sahel’s migrant crossroads, as they press on with their perilous desert trek to the Mediterranean Sea and ultimately Europe.

The migrant flow has slowed down but not dried up despite tight checks in the capital Niamey, and an increase of desert security patrols that have detained hundreds of people as desperate as ever to reach Europe, officials and former smugglers said.

“Gambians, Senegalese, Malians, they are all determined to head there,” said Alassane Mamane, a retired civil servant who lives in Agadez, a desert crossroads and departure point for many migrants heading to Libya on the Mediterranean.

“One migrant said to me: ‘I would rather die from coronavirus than live in misery,” Mamane said.

Slipping through the holes of the net is becoming increasingly difficult.

Since the anti-migrant plan set up in 2015 to reinforce patrols, security forces “have intensified further their surveillance to enforce border closing measures aimed at fighting the coronavirus,” a local official said.

Former people smuggler Idrissa Salifou confirmed it was now much harder for migrants.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/coronavirus-or-not-african-migrants-push-on-toward-europe/

Coronavirus or not, still they wish to flood in. I'm so tired of this being an issue. Italy has enough to deal with, one would think having an organised, sensible immigration system would be one of the easier ones to solve. You literally have a great model to emulate in the form of Australia.

BarnardsLoop

Mr. Karate wrote: »

What about the violent gangs of "New Irish" that have already taken over parts of Dublin?

The ones for which there's no evidence beyond randos ringing Adrian Kennedy? Why, it's almost like there's a concerted effort going on by fringe elements online to shape Irish public opinion against immigrants by making up bogus stories. :^)

Now go find one story and claim it demonstrates that parts of Dublin have been """taken over""".

Mr. Karate

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

The ones for which there's no evidence beyond randos ringing Adrian Kennedy? Why, it's almost like there's a concerted effort going on by fringe elements online to shape Irish public opinion against immigrants by making up bogus stories. :^)

Now go find one story and claim it demonstrates that parts of Dublin have been """taken over""".

If they're constantly fighting in the streets and people are afraid to walk out their door then Yes they have essentially Taken over.

https://www.politicalirish.com/threads/african-gangs-run-riot-in-donabate-terrorize-workers-and-shoppers.11520/

https://itv.ie/false-diversity-blanchardstown-residents-live-in-fear-as-migrant-gang-culture-takes-over-estates/

osarusan

Mr. Karate wrote: »

If they're constantly fighting in the streets and people are afraid to walk out their door then Yes they have essentially Taken over.

https://www.politicalirish.com/threads/african-gangs-run-riot-in-donabate-terrorize-workers-and-shoppers.11520/

https://itv.ie/false-diversity-blanchardstown-residents-live-in-fear-as-migrant-gang-culture-takes-over-estates/

What a pair of sources!

Cordell

Well, some will say having them there is a disaster, some other will say it's not that bad, but is there anyone saying they made the estate better?

Mr. Karate

Cordell wrote: »

Well, some will say having them there is a disaster, some other will say it's not that bad, but is there anyone saying they made the estate better?

I guarantee they will say No.

Mr. Karate

osarusan wrote: »

What a pair of sources!

Blanchardstown was all over the media. If you want to live in a vacuum then that's on you.

BarnardsLoop

Mr. Karate wrote: »

If they're constantly fighting in the streets and people are afraid to walk out their door then Yes they have essentially Taken over.

https://www.politicalirish.com/threads/african-gangs-run-riot-in-donabate-terrorize-workers-and-shoppers.11520/

That's some anonymous user on a forum. The head image on the post you linked to is even taken from www.americasfreedomfighters.com/ (https://americasfreedomfighters.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/BLAK.jpg), an American right-wing site. Very cheeky.

So.

I think it's quite clear what the agenda of the people over there is. Also, from looking at some of the other threads, it seems to be haven of far-right goons and conspiracy theorists.

I'm looking for evidence, not random people on the internet claiming that something happened.

https://itv.ie/false-diversity-blanchardstown-residents-live-in-fear-as-migrant-gang-culture-takes-over-estates/

And that is a site very obviously trying to pass itself off as being associated with the British channel ITV.

Their most popular "channels" include Ben Gilroy, EuroWars, and Reloader, who is the source of the oft-linked assortment of randos ringing Adrian Kennedy.

That the also have a section on "Irexit" (lads, seriously, stop trying to make it a thing, it's not going to happen), and climate change deniers should give some more insight into the very obvious agenda of that site.

Put short: it's a right-wing blog trying to pass itself off as news.

So, once again: do you have any evidence that gangs have "taken over" parts of Dublin? Just so we're clear, I'm not interested in random posts from forums or blogs from obviously biased sources.

Mr. Karate

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

That's some anonymous user on a forum. The head image on the post you linked to is even taken from www.americasfreedomfighters.com/ (https://americasfreedomfighters.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/BLAK.jpg), an American right-wing site. Very cheeky.

So.

I think it's quite clear what the agenda of the people over there is. Also, from looking at some of the other threads, it seems to be haven of far-right goons and conspiracy theorists.

I'm looking for evidence, not random people on the internet claiming that something happened.



And that is a site very obviously trying to pass itself off as being associated with the British channel ITV.

Their most popular "channels" include Ben Gilroy, EuroWars, and Reloader, who is the source of the oft-linked assortment of randos ringing Adrian Kennedy.

That the also have a section on "Irexit" (lads, seriously, stop trying to make it a thing, it's not going to happen), and climate change deniers should give some more insight into the very obvious agenda of that site.

Put short: it's a right-wing blog trying to pass itself off as news.

So, once again: do you have any evidence that gangs have "taken over" parts of Dublin? Just so we're clear, I'm not interested in random posts from forums or blogs from obviously biased sources.

Since you want to dispute my sources why don't you prove that this isn't happening?

BarnardsLoop

That's not how the burden of proof works. You made the claim that it's happening, so you have to prove it is.

Besides which, it's well known that you can't prove a negative.

BarnardsLoop

Something else, though, are these two images from that blog post:

http://www.thetricolour.com/pictures/fsdffewrfagreggregrewggtewwygsgrdshrhgrhtewhewh5.jpg

That one could be from anywhere in the world. There's nothing there to indicate it's in Ireland.

However, it's been used in obviously racist blogs covering England (it's from Birmingham, apparently), e.g.: https://localrights.org/african-fathers-are-useless-their-sons-end-up-criminals-and-overcrowding-english-prisons/ and https://www.defendevropa.com/2018/news/per-capita-crime-uk/ Both use the same image.

And this one from the US (which itself links to a site that can't be reached any more): http://republicbuzz.com/rampaging-black-gang-pennsylvania-viciously-beats-two-white-teens-in-racial-attack-patriotupdate-com-patriotupdate-patriotupdate

So which is it? Is it from the UK? The US? Ireland? Can't be all of them.

Most likely story: it's all bull****.

And then this: http://www.thetricolour.com/pictures/DOMIMyZWkAUM52w.jpg

The graininess could simply be due to heavy jpg compression but the whole thing just looks... weird. I can't find any source for it, apart from racist twitter accounts and blogs like The Liberal, which just lists a "Sean Fennelly" but the image has no EXIF or metadata, curiously.

The fact that the first image I linked is being used by different racist groups in different countries certainly lends credence to the idea it's been photoshopped. These people are absolutely not above it.

And that's just two images! The first one has been posted to Boards a few times, too, but it doesn't appear anyone called the users out on their racist bull****.

I'm sure I could spend days, weeks, months even pointing out all this crap but why bother? The people who so desperately want to believe it will continue to do so.

Mr. Karate

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

That's not how the burden of proof works. You made the claim that it's happening, so you have to prove it is.

Besides which, it's well known that you can't prove a negative.

Apparently you don't know how debating works. I proved that gangs were terrorizing parts of Dublin. You disputed my sources so its now its on you to prove it didn't happen [which you can't because it made headlines all over the world]