East wall #Irelandisfull

[whitey]

I'm just back from Ireland and an elderly relative has a home health care aid that's a lovely black fella

If he's there and working he's obviously identifiable and vetted.

Anyone who has a problem with identifiable and vetted migrants is a racist

Anyone who has a problem with unidentifiable and unvetted migrants is not a racist

Confused with the first line, he's just a lovely fella, I don't need to know his colour at all

Unconfuse yourself then. (that's how the almost 90 year old Irish person described their carer to me, so it's entirely relevant to the discussion  at hand and allegations of racism that are being bandied about)

I'm with MR2 on this, his colour is irrelevant or how someone  described that person to you.

He's an immigrant who legally entered the county and is entitled to work, and by all means a throughly nice guy.

We do have Irish black people as well you know 

Great-you're entitled to your opinion

Thanks for sharing it

[HokeyPokey]

Anyone who has a problem with identifiable and vetted migrants is a racist

Anyone who has a problem with unidentifiable and unvetted migrants is not a racist

That's extremely simplistic.

If I want to convince or win someone to my side, you go after the low hanging fruit, the issues where there are valid concerns, but which are then gradually perpetuated and used to push people towards views which might be characterised as bigoted. There's plenty of examples of this, where a fringe issue where there are things which are tricky and need to be worked out, are exploited to feed into an overarching agenda.

The one that comes to mind is people raising issues about trans women playing women's sport. Obviously there are concerns around different physiques. In the example of rugby, this related to TWO trans women in the whole country. I don't know their physique, but the odds are that there are far more cis women out there that would be a danger to other women or indeed issues with size differences with children especially. Having a set of rules and/or going on a case by case basis was surely very doable.

Similarly, there's plenty of people who have issues with Israel / Palestine. Some of them are islamophobic or anti-semitic. You can be sure every anti-semitic person will focus on raising all the very real issues with Israel. That doesn't mean those points are not valid because they are made by a bigot, not does it mean that person is not a bigot because they make some valid points.

Bigots always try to present themselves as respectable and reasonable 'just asking questions etc.'. Some of this is very transparent. Other times not. Like anything, if people want to convince someone of something they try and find the issues or points which someone might be sympathetic with.

[Itchy]

The black people I know are sound but the ones I don't aren't. Rascist Whitey. Do us a favour and stay away wherever you are.

[whitey]

Anyone who has a problem with identifiable and vetted migrants is a racist

Anyone who has a problem with unidentifiable and unvetted migrants is not a racist

That's extremely simplistic.

If I want to convince or win someone to my side, you go after the low hanging fruit, the issues where there are valid concerns, but which are then gradually perpetuated and used to push people towards views which might be characterised as bigoted. There's plenty of examples of this, where a fringe issue where there are things which are tricky and need to be worked out, are exploited to feed into an overarching agenda.

The one that comes to mind is people raising issues about trans women playing women's sport. Obviously there are concerns around different physiques. In the example of rugby, this related to TWO trans women in the whole country. I don't know their physique, but the odds are that there are far more cis women out there that would be a danger to other women or indeed issues with size differences with children especially. Having a set of rules and/or going on a case by case basis was surely very doable.

Similarly, there's plenty of people who have issues with Israel / Palestine. Some of them are islamophobic or anti-semitic. You can be sure every anti-semitic person will focus on raising all the very real issues with Israel. That doesn't mean those points are not valid because they are made by a bigot, not does it mean that person is not a bigot because they make some valid points.

Bigots always try to present themselves as respectable and reasonable 'just asking questions etc.'. Some of this is very transparent. Other times not. Like anything, if people want to convince someone of something they try and find the issues or points which someone might be sympathetic with.

So is every person who is against unvetted and unverified immigration a racist or far right bigot in your view?

[whitey]

The black people I know are sound but the ones I don't aren't. Rascist Whitey. Do us a favour and stay away wherever you are.

I never said I knew the guy

[Gmac]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

[HokeyPokey]

Anyone who has a problem with identifiable and vetted migrants is a racist

Anyone who has a problem with unidentifiable and unvetted migrants is not a racist

That's extremely simplistic.

If I want to convince or win someone to my side, you go after the low hanging fruit, the issues where there are valid concerns, but which are then gradually perpetuated and used to push people towards views which might be characterised as bigoted. There's plenty of examples of this, where a fringe issue where there are things which are tricky and need to be worked out, are exploited to feed into an overarching agenda.

The one that comes to mind is people raising issues about trans women playing women's sport. Obviously there are concerns around different physiques. In the example of rugby, this related to TWO trans women in the whole country. I don't know their physique, but the odds are that there are far more cis women out there that would be a danger to other women or indeed issues with size differences with children especially. Having a set of rules and/or going on a case by case basis was surely very doable.

Similarly, there's plenty of people who have issues with Israel / Palestine. Some of them are islamophobic or anti-semitic. You can be sure every anti-semitic person will focus on raising all the very real issues with Israel. That doesn't mean those points are not valid because they are made by a bigot, not does it mean that person is not a bigot because they make some valid points.

Bigots always try to present themselves as respectable and reasonable 'just asking questions etc.'. Some of this is very transparent. Other times not. Like anything, if people want to convince someone of something they try and find the issues or points which someone might be sympathetic with.

So is every person who is against unvetted and unverified immigration a racist or far right bigot in your view?

No. What would make you think that from what I wrote?

[Itchy]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Source?

[general_lee]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Source?

Graham Carey 

[screenexile]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Source?

"Alternative facts"

[Gabriel_Hurl]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Source?

The UNHCR

[tonto1888]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Why would a refugee return? They have left their home country due to persecution of some kind

[burdizzo]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Why would a refugee return? They have left their home country due to persecution of some kind

If the war ended, for example. Or if the regime changed.

[Kidder81]

Less than 3% of refugees ever return home so the government should have a plan in place for the present and the future  because once they are in the country they are not leaving .

Why would a refugee return? They have left their home country due to persecution of some kind

Allegedly

[Milltown Row2]

This is a government problem but attacking these people is a lot easier