FAS proposes Green-card-type system for non-EU workers

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Well, if as I proposed, the EU proposal on sending asylum-seekers to safe countries outside the EU while their applications are processed comes to fruition, then that will be one way, as we can then check their criminal records (assuming they have one) in their home countries and elsewhere. In the age of international terrorism, we are justified in going out on a limb to protect our freedoms and values (not to mention our lives).

Are you suggesting that terrorists enter countries only as asylum seekers?
What freedom and values are you talking about exactly btw?

billy the squid

Well, if as I proposed, the EU proposal on sending asylum-seekers to safe countries outside the EU while their applications are processed comes to fruition, then that will be one way, as we can then check their criminal records (assuming they have one) in their home

I have a problem with this in that someone like Aung San Suu Kyi has a criminal record in Burma. her only crime is her belief that her country should be a democracy.

there are others who might be considered criminals by their government but in reality are not.

arcadegame2004

billy the squid wrote:

I have a problem with this in that someone like Aung San Suu Kyi has a criminal record in Burma. her only crime is her belief that her country should be a democracy.

there are others who might be considered criminals by their government but in reality are not.

Oh come on! What I am talking about are "criminals" in the Western sense of the word, not pro-democracy activists. I am talking about people who have committed what in most Western countries constitutes a crime. :rolleyes:

billy the squid

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Oh come on! What I am talking about are "criminals" in the Western sense of the word, not pro-democracy activists. I am talking about people who have committed what in most Western countries constitutes a crime. :rolleyes:

in the fluffy world your living in dictatorships dont lie i guess

Ok how about sudan, what government would you tell they havent had a propper government for the past ten years.

mycroft

pete wrote:

our "values"?????

Arcade game is in phase four of one of his arguments

Phase 1, confidently state opinion as fact

Phase 2, after been challenged on said facts, he posts info that after a cursory check prove to be suprious

Phase 3, attacks the challenger, alledges that their links support his argument, and the using specious logic to draw spurious assumtions to support statistics which support his claims

Phase 4, resorts to retortic about national idenity and the idealogy of the founders of our state and the psychology of the people. He accuses anyone of confronting him that he's a racist with Justin Barret esque logic accusations back at them, then gets his back up when he's obviously compared to barrett.

Phase 5 challenged on this he starts long rants about cultural idenity and sub standard SF retoritic about our ancestors fight to preserve cultural idenity

Phase 6 retreats under a rock when it's pointed out that many of the people who died to support the ideals he has, had in fact been things like socialist (bhhhaaaddd) idealogy, an anthema to Arcade game, he'll disappear for a while and phase one will return again...

Plus ca change......

arcadegame2004

mycroft wrote:

Arcade game is in phase four of one of his arguments

Phase 1, confidently state opinion as fact

The GAMA issue was fact. So is partition. I am entitled to express opinions too, as are you are those who call me "racist, fascists" and other terms the Irish Left are obsessed with.

attacks the challenger, alledges that their links support his argument, and the using specious logic to draw spurious assumtions to support statistics which support his claims

Any criticism I made of my opponents in this debate was well due, after an unbelievable amount of accusations thrown my way e.g. racist, fascist, Justin Barrett-esque etc. :mad:

Phase 4, resorts to retortic about national idenity and the idealogy of the founders of our state and the psychology of the people. He accuses anyone of confronting him that he's a racist with Justin Barret esque logic accusations back at them, then gets his back up when he's obviously compared to barrett.

Some people dish out accusations but can't take them. I am not a "racist" (there you go again) :rolleyes: . I have nothing against foreigners, but we have our own country and you don't to let all your friends move into your house to prove that you don't hate them!

Phase 5 challenged on this he starts long rants about cultural idenity and sub standard SF retoritic about our ancestors fight to preserve cultural idenity

I resent being placed in the same sentence as SF. They actually want liberal immigration policies. But our ancestors did fight for independence and cultural preservation, and territorial integrity. The last was not achieved because of mass-migration.

Zombrex

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Some people dish out accusations but can't take them. I am not a "racist" (there you go again) :rolleyes: . I have nothing against foreigners, but we have our own country and you don't to let all your friends move into your house to prove that you don't hate them!

You racism and bigotry comes from your belief that all your "friends" want to move into your house in the first place, and that while they are there they would eat all your food. But your EU living "friends" wouldn't. You have never properly explained your belief that the 3rd world is full of criminals just waiting to abuse our welfare systems, apart from spouting the rather ridiculous argument about human nature and other bulls**t. I have asked you before why you believe a Nigerian is more likely to attempt to come to Ireland to abuse our systems than say a French person or a German.

You have also never given any evidence what so ever that this "flood of imigration" is actually likely to happen. You just keep saying it as if it is the obvious out come of not tightening immigration law. You ignore the fact that asylum applications have been dropping in recent years, and that asylum applications were never that hight to begin with, relative to other countries.

What everyone on this thread is saying to you Arcade, is that your suggestion that the immigration and asylum laws need to be tighed in simply wrong. And you have never shown any facts or evidence to actually support your argument, other than simply saying "if we don't tighten our boarders this this and this will happen". But it is all your own warped opinion, with nothing actually behind it exact your warped idea of what foreign people will or won't do. I have challagned you on this before you simply pull out the responce card of every Stormfront/Anti-Multiculture/Anti-Immigration nut on Boards.ie, you call me naive, as if simply saying "it will happen" with no evidence or proof, wins you the argument. It is all rather pathetic.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

But our ancestors did fight for independence and cultural preservation, and territorial integrity. The last was not achieved because of mass-migration.

THere has never been "mass-migration" into Ireland ... not in the last 10000 years. There isn't "mass" migration into Ireland now, and their doesn't look like there will be in the for seeable future. So excuse me but WTF are you talking about ...

sackville

Wicknight wrote:

You racism and bigotry comes from your belief that all your "friends" want to move into your house in the first place, and that while they are there they would eat all your food. But your EU living "friends" wouldn't. You have never properly explained your belief that the 3rd world is full of criminals just waiting to abuse our welfare systems, apart from spouting the rather ridiculous argument about human nature and other bulls**t. I have asked you before why you believe a Nigerian is more likely to attempt to come to Ireland to abuse our systems than say a French person or a German.

The 'racism and bigotry' as you put it is based not on racism and bigotry but on a superior understanding of the push-pull factors which determine mass population movement.

Ask yourself, for example, why the U.S. isn't overran by Canadians, while it experinces a constant influx from Mexico and other parts of Latin America?

Relative population size and relative standard of living differences are the big players.

The same applies to Ireland. You must also see Ireland just not as a Country but as a region of the British Isles and the E.U. It is a gateway to the West for those desperate to achieve a better life outside the devolping world.
This would make an overly liberal Country very vulnerable.

wicknight wrote:

You have also never given any evidence what so ever that this "flood of imigration" is actually likely to happen. You just keep saying it as if it is the obvious out come of not tightening immigration law. You ignore the fact that asylum applications have been dropping in recent years, and that asylum applications were never that hight to begin with, relative to other countries.

I think you should bear in mind that if you fail to take the precautions to ensure secure borders and as a consequence your grandchildern are going to too grateful to you. The Precautionary principle is the only responsible approach. A government is charged after all with protecting national security- not persuing blindly the current fad opinion.

wicknight wrote:

What everyone on this thread is saying to you Arcade, is that your suggestion that the immigration and asylum laws need to be tighted in simply wrong.

I don't think he's wrong.

wicknight wrote:

And you have never shown any facts or evidence to actually support your argument, other than simply saying "if we don't tighten our boarders this this and this will happen". But it is all your own warped opinion, with nothing actually behind it exact your warped idea of what foreign people will or won't do. I have challagned you on this before you simply pull out the responce card of every Stormfront/Anti-Multiculture/Anti-Immigration nut on Boards.ie, you call me naive, as if simply saying "it will happen" with no evidence or proof, wins you the argument. It is all rather pathetic.

Like I said failure to take proper precaution and there's no going back.
btw there's a distinct unreality and state of denial about the general pro-mass immigration brigade-a much more telling sign of mental disorder.

wicknight wrote:

THere has never been "mass-migration" into Ireland ... not in the last 10000 years. There isn't "mass" migration into Ireland now, and their doesn't look like there will be in the for seeable future. So excuse me but WTF are you talking about ...

There's never been never six billion people in the world before combined with easy global transportion,communcations and such a gap between the rich 'north' and poor 'south'. not to mention demographic difernces between the two hemispheres.

You like many of your co-cultists seem to be living in denial of many of the realities of our world.

People who insist on living in fairyland are in no position to comment on the real world IMO.



.

Frank Grimes

arcadegame2004 wrote:

I have nothing against foreigners

But still you suggest that tightening our immigration laws will somehow decrease the "risk" of an Islamist terrorist attack.
Care to explain how this is going work? Or are you still avoiding the question.

Frank Grimes

sackville wrote:

The 'racism and bigotry' as you put it is based not on racism and bigotry but on a superior understanding of the push-pull factors which determine mass population movement.

If you and the likes of AG have such a superior understanding of all of this, why can you not string together a coherant arugement to support your case then?

btw there's a distinct unreality and state of denial about the general pro-mass immigration brigade-a much more telling sign of mental disorder.

Denial of what exactly? And some vague post about a "threat" isn't enough, can you give any sort of definite facts or even theories regarding what we're all in denial about?

MrPudding

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Oh come on! What I am talking about are "criminals" in the Western sense of the word, not pro-democracy activists. I am talking about people who have committed what in most Western countries constitutes a crime. :rolleyes:

How many of the AQ guys involved in September 11th had criminal records back home?

MrP

Zombrex

sackville wrote:

The 'racism and bigotry' as you put it is based not on racism and bigotry but on a superior understanding of the push-pull factors which determine mass population movement.

Sorry didn't reply earlier ... had to pick myself up of the ground ... was laughthing so hard ... on no here it comes again ... waahhhhahhhhhahahahahahahaha

sackville wrote:

Ask yourself, for example, why the U.S. isn't overran by Canadians, while it experinces a constant influx from Mexico and other parts of Latin America?

America is over run by Canadians (what ever over run means), there are currently nearly a 1 million living in the USA and millions more work in the country but live in Canada. But thats ok but Mexicans aren't because ... why exactly ...???

sackville wrote:

Relative population size and relative standard of living differences are the big players.

Big players in what exactly?? ... I am still waiting for someone to show me any evidence that an actually problem exists or is likely to exisit in the for seeable future, something Arcade has consisitantly failed to do.

sackville wrote:

This would make an overly liberal Country very vulnerable.

Arcade (and you I seem) thinks that this massive invasion is just around the corner. It hasn't happened yet, there is no sign of it happening, but damn it we have to do something!!! :rolleyes:

sackville wrote:

I think you should bear in mind that if you fail to take the precautions to ensure secure borders and as a consequence your grandchildern are going to too grateful to you.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN!!!!!! The seas will boil, the sky will fall ... we will have **** living next door .... sweet jesus!

The USA, an example you keep rolling out, has had massive massive immigration for the last 100 years. And they are the most powerful economy in the world. Ireland had no immigration for the last 100 years but since immigration started we have improved our economy 100 fold. Immigration goes hand in hand with economic booms. Put simply if the government f**k up our economy than you won't have to worry about immigrants because they won't come here, if they do not f**k it up then you won't have to worry about immigrants because everyone will still be rich and we will bloody well need them to give us a health service.

Still waiting for any evidence that immigration is harming our society or our economy.

sackville wrote:

The Precautionary principle is the only responsible approach. A government is charged after all with protecting national security- not persuing blindly the current fad opinion.

The government is charged with doing what is best for the people of Ireland. Right now we need more immigrants than are currently coming into this country. And by god we need a bit of gene-pool mix up, we are about 200 years overdue. And you think it would be a good idea to stop them coming altogether because you are concerned for my grand children ... well I am glad you ain't in government, considering you seem to have no clue about immigration or economics.

sackville wrote:

I don't think he's wrong.

Why not?

sackville wrote:

Like I said failure to take proper precaution and there's no going back.
btw there's a distinct unreality and state of denial about the general pro-mass immigration brigade-a much more telling sign of mental disorder.

Unreality ... are you kidding me ... careful you nearly had me back on the floor. Both you and Arcades entire argument is to simply dream up the absolute worst think that you believe could happen (Islamic terrorist on mass entire the country, out number the population and vote for an Islamic state ... think of the children!) and then calmly and cools say this will happen if we don't stop it. Can you not see how completely ridiculous that type of arguing is.

I could just as easily say If we do not completely open our borders now in 10 years time we will have 50% unemployment in this country. Ridiculous you say, and I have nothing to back that up with. Would you entertain an argument like that? Of course not, so why do you expect us to entertain Arcades ridiculous scaremongering arguments of doom and gloom with absolutuly nothing but bigotry and racism behind them.

sackville wrote:

There's never been never six billion people in the world before combined with easy global transportion,communcations and such a gap between the rich 'north' and poor 'south'. not to mention demographic difernces between the two hemispheres.

Er, yes there has, for the last 60 or more years. America started with waves of immigration 100 years ago, Britian 60 years ago (both countries still seem to be there by the way, not sure if you noticed). Europe the same. Ireland didn't experience immigration because our economy was so crap, though we did our fair share of people leaving the country. What you fail to realise is that immigration into a country is a sign or economic growth and prosperity. People go where they can get jobs. If our economy couldn't handle it then they would stop coming. That is the true "push-pull" economics.

sackville wrote:

You like many of your co-cultists seem to be living in denial of many of the realities of our world.

It must be great to be able to put forward a completely ridiculous argument and then we people challange you to back it up with something that is anywhere close to reality you can simply dismiss them as being naive or in denial. Please for the love of god show me what I am in denial about

sackville wrote:

People who insist on living in fairyland are in no position to comment on the real world IMO.

Funny that is the argument people have been using against Arcade for months

sackville

Wicknight wrote:

Sorry didn't reply earlier ... had to pick myself up of the ground ... was laughthing so hard ... on no here it comes again ... waahhhhahhhhhahahahahahahaha

Whatever method you use to reinforce the truth from penetrating your fraglile self image mate. I don't really want to hurt your feelings.

Wicknight wrote:

America is over run by Canadians (what ever over run means), there are currently nearly a 1 million living in the USA and millions more work in the country but live in Canada. But thats ok but Mexicans aren't because ... why exactly ...???

So one million in a Country of approx 300 million- so percentage wise . this is your defination of being over ran- help us now we've at least 5% non-nationals by the most moderate estimates. Time to close our borders now then :rolleyes:

as for the old witch hunt insinuation, well I could even be bothered.
why don't just burn the whole 80% of theCountry who voted 'yes' in the June referendum. Herr witch finder general

Wicknight wrote:

Big players in what exactly?? ... I am still waiting for someone to show me any evidence that an actually problem exists or is likely to exisit in the for seeable future, something Arcade has consisitantly failed to do.
Arcade (and you I seem) thinks that this massive invasion is just around the corner. It hasn't happened yet, there is no sign of it happening, but damn it we have to do something!!! :rolleyes:

The concept is of the 'precautionary principle' is yet another lost on you it seems.

Wicknight wrote:

WHAT WILL HAPPEN!!!!!! The seas will boil, the sky will fall ... we will have **** living next door .... sweet jesus!

strawman alert,strawman alert, strawman alert...................

Wicknight wrote:

The USA, an example you keep rolling out, has had massive massive immigration for the last 100 years. And they are the most powerful economy in the world.

well really I just mentioned the U.S. in the last to try to illustrate to the slow types around that the wealth, political stabilty etc of the West is a major pull factor in attracting mass migration from the developing world which in the specific case of the U.S. includes its entire southern border.

It's probably the most clear cut case of this reality in the world.

as for being the most powerful economy in the world quite true, but it's also noted for being a highly unequal, 'winner takes all society'.

If that's the model you want for here ,fair enough ( in fact some ideologues in the likes of 'the open republic institute' and I'm sure many PDs do)- but Is that what peole here realise they're selling into by allowing IBEC and co dictate the immigration policy like they do now?

Wicknight wrote:

Ireland had no immigration for the last 100 years but since immigration started we have improved our economy 100 fold. Immigration goes hand in hand with economic booms. Put simply if the government f**k up our economy than you won't have to worry about immigrants because they won't come here, if they do not f**k it up then you won't have to worry about immigrants because everyone will still be rich and we will bloody well need them to give us a health service.

Still waiting for any evidence that immigration is harming our society or our economy.

On your first point you're obviously confusing effect for cause. The boom comes first then follows the immigration!!! not the other way round as you seem to think.

If the economy collapses, as it may well do for any amount of reasons, be they local, global both etc then is when you will begin the see the fruits of the folly of the liberal policy that was pursued in the ’boom’ years.

More competition for lessening resources hurts the buyer (the worker) and pays the seller (the Boss).it’s all simple supply and demand. Social and racial tensions rise during such a time in like Brixton, Toxteth, broadwater farm in th elate 70s and early 80s in UK.

Wicknight wrote:

The government is charged with doing what is best for the people of Ireland.

agreed in theory ,yes!

Wicknight wrote:

Right now we need more immigrants than are currently coming into this country.

says who? IBEC? The neo-liberal Think TANKS? You have brought into the neo-liberal spin that what's good for business is always good for everyone.

But they would say that now , wouldn't they?
and think about who is actually funding these Parties in the first place and then ask yourself why are they?

Wicknight wrote:

And by god we need a bit of gene-pool mix up, we are about 200 years overdue. And you think it would be a good idea to stop them coming altogether because you are concerned for my grand children ... well I am glad you ain't in government, considering you seem to have no clue about immigration or economics.

So you're now on a eugenics vibe. Perhaps If you have such a low opinion of your own genetic heritage ( not that I suggest that you should ) but logically it would your duty to volunteer for sterilisation.


(All the rage in Sweden right up to the 70s you know, maybe you could start a fad in the entire 'anti-racist' movement).
I would reply to the rest except well ...............

Zombrex

sackville wrote:

Whatever method you use to reinforce the truth from penetrating your fraglile self image mate. I don't really want to hurt your feelings.

Will reply in full after the West Wing but I would just like to point out on 2 seperate places I asked sackville to back up his arguments and on 2 seperate occations he didn't.... the rest of you can make up your own mind about that ... :rolleyes:

sackville wrote:

The concept is of the 'precautionary principle' is yet another lost on you it seems.

Yes it is ... explain it to me ... for the love of god man at least attempt to back up what you are saying with evidence. Very very simple question, on what basis should we be cautionary .... show me, with backup not just your wacky opinion, what will happen if we don't tighten our immigration laws ....

sackville wrote:

strawman alert,strawman alert, strawman alert...................

I asked you "what will happen" and you didn't answer. My logical response to that is to assume you don't have a flying clue about what you actually believe will happen. Please, prove me wrong (see above)......

sackville wrote:

So you're now on a eugenics vibe. Perhaps If you have such a low opinion of your own genetic heritage ( not that I suggest that you should ) but logically it would your duty to volunteer for sterilisation.

Or maybe I will just have a kid with a black lady ... it sounds like more fun than sterilistation

sackville

Wicknight wrote:

Or maybe I will just have a kid with a black lady ... it sounds like more fun than sterilistation

not for her it wouldn't :eek:

mycroft

arcadegame2004 wrote:

The GAMA issue was fact. So is partition. I am entitled to express opinions too, as are you are those who call me "racist, fascists" and other terms the Irish Left are obsessed with.

Uh huh doesn't detract from the fact that in the past dozen or so pages you've had the entirity of your statistics and logic discredited therefore the fact that you're working off intimidation and propaganda means you're working of the similar tactics the nazis used....

Any criticism I made of my opponents in this debate was well due, after an unbelievable amount of accusations thrown my way e.g. racist, fascist, Justin Barrett-esque etc. :mad:

No we think they're flawed, incorrect and push towards the based and worst aspects of humanity.

Good for you.

Some people dish out accusations but can't take them. I am not a "racist" (there you go again) :rolleyes: . I have nothing against foreigners, but we have our own country and you don't to let all your friends move into your house to prove that you don't hate them!

uh huh you don't hate foreigners you dislike how they smell and damage property prices.


And the "our country" let me remind you about our country. Less than fifteen years ago the anti divorce crowd were running posters in the referendum which said "he gave her flowers chocolates and bruises don't give him a divorce" In 1987 a child outside marriage was refered to as a bastard. Less then 15 years ago people were prosceuted for selling condoms. Sean LeMass the leader of our govt said "I am a catholic first and an irishman second."

Simply put we need to change and accept our society because hey it was
beyond ****ed up 30 years ago

I resent being placed in the same sentence as SF. They actually want liberal immigration policies. But our ancestors did fight for independence and cultural preservation, and territorial integrity. The last was not achieved because of mass-migration.

Oh dear fu*king god you do make it so easy.

You have similary to sinn fein claimed a preogiative over the ethics and attitude of the people who fought for Irish independence.

Do you not remember saying in previous threads "down with socialism" and while at the same time in a similar thread saying "is this what the heroes of 1916 died for" Which is why I loath you and SF you both try and claim that you are the personnification of the ethics ideals and morals of the heroes of irelands last great rebellion

While to remind you YOU AROGANT PIG IGNORANT BIGOT....

That one of said leaders of the rising you claim fought to support the ideals of ireland you claim matter, was a socialist, James Connolly, and the men and women who fought beside him were both socialist and trade unionists (somethings that are an anthema to you) yet you have no problem stating that died to create your ideal ireland when in fact they fought for an ireland which would run you out of here in a rail (hopefully) into the atlantic.

So frankly Arcade f*ck right off claiming that your ireland is the ireland that they died fighting for, and f*ck right off claiming that you are trying to defend a cultural idenity that never existed.........

arcadegame2004

Originally Posted by wicknight
THere has never been "mass-migration" into Ireland ... not in the last 10000 years. There isn't "mass" migration into Ireland now, and their doesn't look like there will be in the for seeable future. So excuse me but WTF are you talking about ...

There HAS NEVER been mass-migration to Ireland? Read your history books! What was the Ulster Plantation if not mass-migration? It led to the disintegration of the territorial integrity of our country (Ireland not just the Republic of Ireland).

Pickarooney has mentioned (perhaps in the visa post) the difficulties of integration/assimilation for immigrants into a new national society. Just as the Unionist descendents of the planters never lost their separate identity and steadfastly refused to assume an Irish identity, culminating ultimately in partition in 1920 (followed by 50 years of Stormont tyranny), there has to surely be a risk that if too many people are let in, history could repeat itself. Look at the Sri Lanka problem, with the Tamils insisting on a separate breakaway state. Look at Bosnia 10 years ago. Look at Africa's decades of war since the Western powers lumped certain ethnic groups together. Learn the lessons of history, that the more ethnically homogenous states tend to be the most peaceful.

arcadegame2004

mycroft wrote:

Uh huh doesn't detract from the fact that in the past dozen or so pages you've had the entirity of your statistics and logic discredited therefore the fact that you're working off intimidation and propaganda means you're working of the similar tactics the nazis used....

Comparing me with the Nazis is the ultimate hysteria! I assure you I have no intention of calling for immigrants to be sent to gas chambers! Nor am I in favour of mass-executions of men, women and children! Nor do I favour painting "******" on shops owned by genuine legal African migrants (like the Nazis painted Jew on Jewish shop windows). I think if you research your history properly you will find that I am no Joseph Goebbels! The Nazis said the Jews were rats, inferior peoples, and that they must be exterminated. I have never made such wild crazy statements and I utterly despise the Nazis and I think it is the ultimate insult to those who died at the hands of the Nazis to compare their suffering to mere calls for immigration controls.

No we think they're flawed, incorrect and push towards the based and worst aspects of humanity.

Think as you please. The majority in this forum were out of touch in the citizenship referendum so while I respect your opinions, I have a feeling that my views on immigration issues generally are closer to mainstream opinion than yours. Maybe the real extremists are people of your outlook?

uh huh you don't hate foreigners you dislike how they smell and damage property prices.

Again you twist what I am saying. I do not have anything against foreigners personally. But as Sackville has correctly pointed out, it is obvious that economic pull-factors influence the flow of immigration from one country to another. To deny that people migrating from poor countries to rich countries are ever influenced by the comparative wealth of the rich country is naiveity bordering on senility!

And the "our country" let me remind you about our country. Less than fifteen years ago the anti divorce crowd were running posters in the referendum which said "he gave her flowers chocolates and bruises don't give him a divorce" In 1987 a child outside marriage was refered to as a bastard. Less then 15 years ago people were prosceuted for selling condoms. Sean LeMass the leader of our govt said "I am a catholic first and an irishman second."

Which has nothing to do with immigration. If anything it shows that change is sometimes needed. I advocate a more hardline immigration policy to protect Ireland from cheap labour competition for jobs and excessive burdens on the hospitals and housing-sector.

Do you not remember saying in previous threads "down with socialism" and while at the same time in a similar thread saying "is this what the heroes of 1916 died for" Which is why I loath you and SF you both try and claim that you are the personnification of the ethics ideals and morals of the heroes of irelands last great rebellion

While to remind you YOU AROGANT PIG IGNORANT BIGOT....

That one of said leaders of the rising you claim fought to support the ideals of ireland you claim matter, was a socialist, James Connolly, and the men and women who fought beside him were both socialist and trade unionists (somethings that are an anthema to you) yet you have no problem stating that died to create your ideal ireland when in fact they fought for an ireland which would run you out of here in a rail (hopefully) into the atlantic.

So frankly Arcade f*ck right off claiming that your ireland is the ireland that they died fighting for, and f*ck right off claiming that you are trying to defend a cultural idenity that never existed.........

What evidence have you that James Connolly supported mass-migration? And anyway, the founders of this state were a mixes bag ideologically, e.g. Cosgrave = right-wing.

mycroft

arcadegame2004 wrote:

There HAS NEVER been mass-migration to Ireland? Read your history books! What was the Ulster Plantation if not mass-migration? It led to the disintegration of the territorial integrity of our country (Ireland not just the Republic of Ireland).

Christ this is just pathetic

The plantations were organised by the current rulers of this land the english and they ensured through law and force, and taxation that the Non catholic majority would thrive and succeed as a form of oppression of the majority of the population.

Your argument is like comparing forced migration due to enviromental or necessity and then comparing it to a gold rush.

Christ your logic, isn't.

Pickarooney has mentioned (perhaps in the visa post) the difficulties of integration/assimilation for immigrants into a new national society. Just as the Unionist descendents of the planters never lost their separate identity and steadfastly refused to assume an Irish identity, culminating ultimately in partition in 1920 (followed by 50 years of Stormont tyranny), there has to surely be a risk that if too many people are let in, history could repeat itself. Look at the Sri Lanka problem, with the Tamils insisting on a separate breakaway state. Look at Bosnia 10 years ago. Look at Africa's decades of war since the Western powers lumped certain ethnic groups together. Learn the lessons of history, that the more ethnically homogenous states tend to be the most peaceful.

Uh huh thats comparing a planters taking a forced land take over (despite your barrett hysteria its not like Ahere is kicking irish famlies out of houses, to subplant them with Nigerians)

The idea you compare the situation to include, forced land takeover groups with a long suffering ethic problem (and we're trying to sort the north out and your thinking isn't helping) this would require a masssive shift in a short space of time and a change in laws to support one ethic group, one of which you're actively persuing

Oh and lets look at your logic;

to expose your naked logic. You claim that the most homogenised societies are the most peaceful

WORLD WARS ONE AND TWO You ignorant ****ing muppet the two worst wars this planet has ever seen has been over the perception of ethic groups trying to dominant the globe (btw bully for you trying to fight this perception) and ethic groups trying to expand past their borders.

~Christ your ignorance is like a black whole

sackville

arcadegame2004 wrote:

There HAS NEVER been mass-migration to Ireland? Read your history books! What was the Ulster Plantation if not mass-migration? It led to the disintegration of the territorial integrity of our country (Ireland not just the Republic of Ireland).

Pickarooney has mentioned (perhaps in the visa post) the difficulties of integration/assimilation for immigrants into a new national society. Just as the Unionist descendents of the planters never lost their separate identity and steadfastly refused to assume an Irish identity, culminating ultimately in partition in 1920 (followed by 50 years of Stormont tyranny), there has to surely be a risk that if too many people are let in, history could repeat itself. Look at the Sri Lanka problem, with the Tamils insisting on a separate breakaway state. Look at Bosnia 10 years ago. Look at Africa's decades of war since the Western powers lumped certain ethnic groups together. Learn the lessons of history, that the more ethnically homogenous states tend to be the most peaceful.

Yes, totally AG! Balkanisation is even more likely on a geographically isolated entity like an relatively small Island like Sri Lanka or here!

What was/is northern Ireland about but the political/sectarian balkanisation of Ireland which occured initially over Home Rule?

And let's not forget that Iraq was also an ethnicially divided entity deliberately designed that way by the empiral powers to keep it internally weak.so no cahnge there.

mycroft

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Comparing me with the Nazis is the ultimate hysteria! I assure you I have no intention of calling for immigrants to be sent to gas chambers! Nor am I in favour of mass-executions of men, women and children! Nor do I favour painting "******" on shops owned by genuine legal African migrants (like the Nazis painted Jew on Jewish shop windows). I think if you research your history properly you will find that I am no Joseph Goebbels! The Nazis said the Jews were rats, inferior peoples, and that they must be exterminated. I have never made such wild crazy statements and I utterly despise the Nazis and I think it is the ultimate insult to those who died at the hands of the Nazis to compare their suffering to mere calls for immigration controls.

And if thats what you were doing we'd be cool, but you're not

Think as you please. The majority in this forum were out of touch in the citizenship referendum so while I respect your opinions, I have a feeling that my views on immigration issues generally are closer to mainstream opinion than yours. Maybe the real extremists are people of your outlook?

Uh huh and it depresses me but then I think about how many people fell under nazi and extremist hystesria, you just appeal to our base and lowest emotions

Again you twist what I am saying. I do not have anything against foreigners personally. But as Sackville has correctly pointed out, it is obvious that economic pull-factors influence the flow of immigration from one country to another. To deny that people migrating from poor countries to rich countries are ever influenced by the comparative wealth of the rich country is naiveity bordering on senility!

Uh huh and to suggest the expotential growth of a rich country will to constricted by the same flood of migratation that created the boom is just idiocy.

What evidence have you that James Connolly supported mass-migration? And anyway, .

Um workers of the world united? Connolly was part of the global idealogy of a maxist workers uprising to create a socialist uptopia for the workers a concept that i suspect brings you out in a worry rash,

Zombrex

sackville wrote:

not for her it wouldn't :eek:

very clever :rolleyes:

what does "Dear Lurker" supposed to mean?

Zombrex

arcadegame2004 wrote:

There HAS NEVER been mass-migration to Ireland? Read your history books! What was the Ulster Plantation if not mass-migration? It led to the disintegration of the territorial integrity of our country (Ireland not just the Republic of Ireland).

The Ulster Plantation was a plantation! It wasn't immigration! The plantations were an attempt by the British government to systematical destroy the Irish economy and culture by implanting loyal English land owners onto Irish lands. It would be like calling the Spanish army destroying the native south americans "immigration".

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Just as the Unionist descendents of the planters never lost their separate identity and steadfastly refused to assume an Irish identity,

That was the entire point of the plantation! That was the plan! Are you seriously saying that the Chinese, or Nigrian governments or whoever, are attempting to systematically implant their countrymen into Ireland in an attempt to destroy Irish culture. Because if you are I kinda wonder what the point of arguing with you is, you are so far into tin-foil hat land it would be pointless.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

There has to surely be a risk that if too many people are let in, history could repeat itself.

What history?? Immigration is not implantation. You have to have another plantation before you can worry about the effects of it.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Learn the lessons of history, that the more ethnically homogenous states tend to be the most peaceful.

Arcade I have told you before how ridiculous the we-cant-have-immigrants-because-they-cause-racism argument is, but yet you still percist in rolling it out ... bravo

By the way I hope you do realise you used the word "ethnically" in that statement .... nope, not a racisit at all, your arguments are purely based on economics .. I see that now :rolleyes:

arcadegame2004

to expose your naked logic. You claim that the most homogenised societies are the most peaceful

WORLD WARS ONE AND TWO You ignorant ****ing muppet the two worst wars this planet has ever seen has been over the perception of ethic groups trying to dominant the globe (btw bully for you trying to fight this perception) and ethic groups trying to expand past their borders.

Okay in the case of WW1 remember what caused that? It started largely because of the ethnic powder-keg that was Austria-Hungary with millions and millions of differernt ethnic-groups wanting to break away. Regarding WW2, remember how the Sudeten Germans in Czechoslovakia and the Germans in Danzig and former West Prussia demanded incorporation into Nazi Germany (The pro-Nazi parties won a majority in Danzig City Council and about 99% of the Sudeten German vote), giving Hitler the excuse to invade, dragging the world into its worst ever nightmare possible? Then look at Bosnia, Rwanda etc. Get the message yet? More homogenous states are far less likely to fall in on themselves or get embroiled in war.

The Ulster Plantation was a plantation! It wasn't immigration! The plantations were an attempt by the British government to systematical destroy the Irish economy and culture by implanting loyal English land owners onto Irish lands. It would be like calling the Spanish army destroying the native south americans "immigration".

The plantation was carried out via immigration.

billy the squid

The plantation was carried out via immigration.

:rolleyes:

its like pissing against the wind tbh

there is a difference between plantation and immigration. Plantation is where people are offered incentives from their own government to move to another country.

imigration is where people move to another country of their own free will.

The british conquered ireland so they felt within their rights to incentivise people to move to ireland. as far as they were concerned Ireland was part of their domain so it wasnt really imigration.

but I'm talking to a brick wall of course.

arcadegame2004

Plantation is where people are offered incentives from their own government to move to another country.

Well if we do what some people on this forum seem to want, and allow our asylum system to be used for economic migration, as well as letting the whole world and her mother come here (to avoid charges that we are "racist" :rolleyes:), then as far as I am concerned, we are doing the same "offering incentives" as was done to us in that instance, and thys potentially beginning the Plantation of Southern Ireland. This is wrong.

It has to be controlled (immigration).

billy the squid

Well if we do what some people on this forum seem to want, and allow our asylum system to be used for economic migration, as well as letting the whole world and her mother come here (to avoid charges that we are "racist" ), then as far as I am concerned,

your confusing assylum seekers and immigrants again. and if the world's mother is willing to do work that is below us irish then who are we to stop her from coming into this country.

i take it by your logic that anyone who is poor should remain poor right? just so us greedy irish can get massive wages for sitting on our holes surfing the internet during work.

sackville

billy the squid wrote:

your confusing assylum seekers and immigrants again. and if the world's mother is willing to do work that is below us irish then who are we to stop her from coming into this country.

i take it by your logic that anyone who is poor should remain poor right? just so us greedy irish can get massive wages for sitting on our holes surfing the internet during work.

Most of the 'asylum seeking' is immigration in an dishonest, opportunistic and illegal form.
Immigration policy is not a form of altruism ( except perhaps as an immediate resonpse to a specific situation e.g. ex-colonial powers recieving refugees like tHe UK did with Ugandian 'Asians' in the 70s)- and liberal immigration policy is certainly not a form of altruism as far as the native low-skilled population is concerned. Your description of your lifestyle confirms my belief that much professed 'liberalism ' is nothing more than yuppie 'im alright jack'ism disguised as morality.

MadsL

Your description of your lifestyle confirms my belief that much professed 'liberalism ' is nothing more than yuppie 'im alright jack'ism disguised as morality.

Much as I view relatively articulate people whinging about johnny-foreigner taking our jobs when the reality is they can't be arsed to get off their backside, upskill and get a decent job in a full-employment economy. Instead they repeatedly scaremonger at all hours of the day and night on the net.

Not that anyone here fits that bill :rolleyes:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/search.php?searchid=382414

MrPudding

sackville wrote:

as for the old witch hunt insinuation, well I could even be bothered.
why don't just burn the whole 80% of theCountry who voted 'yes' in the June referendum. Herr witch finder general

When was this? I didn't realise that the entire country voted! Why was I not told? Here was me thinking that less than 40% of the *country* voted yes. As you can appreciate this is a big shock for me. Could you please post some links that show 80% of the Country voted yes in June?

MrP