Ethnic cleansing involves forced population displacement and replacement. Are you claiming that immigrants who've moved to Blanchardstown have forced the native Irish population to leave? If you are, then you're talking out of some orifice other than your mouth.Originally Posted by Catalpa
Last edited by sondagefaux; 13th February 2010 at 08:12 PM.
Ethnic cleansing is about the forceable replacement in a particular area of the native inhabitants and their replacement by others.
Ethnic cleansing by stealth is about the pacific replacement in a particular area of the native inhabitants and their replacement by others.
Got it?
Europa Conventus Delenda Est
Rubbish. That's not ethnic cleansing. That's people moving house.
Some of the other posters have been going on about differences in wealth levels between different groups in Britain.
Here's some relevant info:
So Black African men are better educated than white British men but are less likely to be in employment and earn less when they do work.A larger proportion of Chinese, Indian and black African minority ethnic groups are better educated than their white British counterparts, yet despite this, they are less likely to be in paid employment than white British men and woman.
Nearly all Pakistani and Bangladeshi women do not work outside of the home.
On average, Indian Hindu and Sikh men and black Caribbean Christian men have roughly similar wages to white British Christian men; while male Jews earn 24 per cent more, but Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslim men and black African Christian men suffer a “pay penalty”, earning 13-21 per cent less than white British Christian men.
However, the National Equality Panel does point out that the gap between the children of migrants and white British are smaller than for their parents, and the differences between ethnic minorities and whites as a whole are smaller than they were a decade ago.
That can probably be accounted for by the fact that most of them are relatively recent arrivals to the UK.
Black Carribean men and women have been immigrating to the UK since the late 1940s. As the survey showed, Black Carribean men and white British Christian men earn more or less the same wages.
In time, Black African men should end up earning more or less the same wages as their white British peers.
UK is one of world's most 'unequal' societies - The Irish Times - Thu, Jan 28, 2010
Last edited by sondagefaux; 13th February 2010 at 08:11 PM.
Black Carribean men and white British Christian men
How many men in Britain would use those terms to describe themselves in a Survey?
Europa Conventus Delenda Est
If you understand that ethnic cleansing means the forceable replacement in a particular area of the native inhabitants and their replacement by others, why did you say repeatedly that this was happening in Dublin 15? Remember?
"Soon we will have areas here where most people will not be Irish - ethnic cleansing by another name really." "I take it you will agree that those who support the Ethnic Cleansing of Irish people in Ireland are Anti Irish Racists?" "Ethnic Cleansing is about clearing an area of one Ethnic group and replacing them with others. That is happening in Ireland right now. The Irish are being Etnically cleansed."
Why have you never admitted, despite relentless prodding, by me and others admitted that you were talking through your hole when you said all this?
I suppose a minority of people might rufuse to answer a survey with such questions, much that would mean census's would be inaccurate too.Black Carribean men and white British Christian men
How many men in Britain would use those terms to describe themselves in a Survey?
There's indication that population replacement ( which would result from mass immigration) was a secret policy of the Labour goverment in England. I'm not saying that this was the policy here but we tend to ape the brits and we have a common travel area.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a3e_1256329826according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.
He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that m More..inisters were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".
As a result, the public argument for immigration concentrated instead on the economic benefits and need for more migrants.
Last edited by Telemachus; 28th January 2010 at 07:47 PM.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
¦ . ¦ Gnosis desires dominion over being; in order to seize control of being the Gnostic constructs his system. -
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
They're the categories you choose on the census forms in the UK or on job application forms which most larger employers (and all public sector employers) give to job applicants.
They're perfectly normal statistical categories.
Here's a link to a fairly typical job application form from the UK. The Equal Opportunities Monitoring Form which asks whether applicants are Black, White, Asian etc is near the end (page 7).
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...S-OVEfflG36u5Q
Last edited by sondagefaux; 28th January 2010 at 08:08 PM.
Thank you.The point I previously made then about your own points being without merit or logic in the wider argument about the socio/economic impact of mass immigration therefore stands.I won't bother to ask then why you think the multi-ethnic nature of a place is a factor in their apparent success.you haven't offered a theory and so I conclude you have none.
I can only guess your point was to draw attention to this co-incidental factor (God knows why? ) without offering opinion one way or the other.Pointless....
Last edited by Son_Of_The_Republic; 28th January 2010 at 10:10 PM.
It seems that you- quite literally-- cannot see my posts properly. Go back and read the NEXT paragraph of my post above and see if you're capable of understanding it. Ah feck it, I'll make it easy for you. Here it is again.
The question I have is that IF, as you and countless other people on this site believe, mass immigration, multi-ethnicity or multiculturalism are so inherently dangerous and damaging to a place, failed philosophies that will drag countries down into the mud leading inevitably to societal ruin and disorder, then WHY are so many such places doing so well?
It's not as if this a new thing. Many, if not most, of these place have been multi-ethnic for generations, and yet measured objectively, the best places to live in the world are countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Germany, France, Holland, Sweden and, let it be said Britain. How can it be that if multi-ethnicity is SO poisonous to a country's well-being, these places have continued to thrive?
Posting links to individual stories of unhappy boxers, an atmosphere of racial tension in the aftermath of 9/11 and whatever raft of new delights you'll present us with now, doesn't change these broad, macro-level realities. If I say that Ireland's road-death rate dropped last year and you say that that's bullsh*t, that you know THREE people who died in crashes in the last six months and the statistics are therefore dodgy, most people would regard you as a nut. It's like Catalpa estimating the number of foreign people in Ireland based on what he sees in Blanchardstown labour office.
OF COURSE, these places have problems and difficulties. Everywhere does. Sadly for dewy-eyed idealists like yourself, there are no Utopias. But if you can maintain a little persepective, you'll understand that modern France and Holland and Britain and Canada are not seething ethnic hellholes but, for the vast majority of people, good places to live. It seems to me that you (and the other prophets of doom) have allowed your own personal experience and prejudices blinker you to the wider realities of life in these places
I can explain all this in simplified terms if you're struggling, but Jesus, I swear I've made this point about ten times. It's just not that complicated.
Yada Yada Yada. Lots of words,no point elucidated.....again.
No ethnic hellholes eh? Apparently not...
And terms like "for the vast majority of people" are meaningless.Political speak,nothing more.
In the Paris slums, no jobs, no sun
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/wo...aris.html?_r=1
Leaving slums of Paris, two Muslim teens turn to waging jihad
http://www.boston.com/news/world/mid..._waging_jihad/
Finnish professor: Muslim immigrants the population of future slums
http://infidelsunite.typepad.com/cou...ure-slums.html
Last edited by Son_Of_The_Republic; 28th January 2010 at 11:29 PM.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote