Italy deals with unwanted immigrants

[BT]

According to UP's reports the govt is rousting prostitutes and drug dealers, some of whom are Roma.

What is to be against? The laws are on the books. The libertarians (do they exist in Italy?) haven't had the clout to get them repealed.

[Religious Dick]

So you have no problems with what the Italian Government is doing?

Let me put it this way - it may be unfortunate when an idiot gets mauled when teasing a lion, but I'm not going to waste much time wringing my hands over the injustice of it all.

Considering the lefties and other cosmopolitan types have been teasing this particular lion for quite a few decades, I'm not going to lose much sleep over the inevitable backlash occurring. If the fascists are the only political entity to address the concerns of the people, whose fault was that? This could have easily been headed off decades ago.

If the beleaguered peasants are finally revolting by the only means available to them, good on them!

♪Leftists roasting on an open fire...
Lions nipping at their toes!....

[_JS]

Bt, you are so concerned with laws - legality does not make something right and you know that. The Pope did not speak out against putting prostitutes in jail, don't you think? So, the government is inciting violence and that is where the EU's concerns lie. Do you support a government that incites violence?

RD, so you have no problems with it because it is time-related? Doesn't that make you the ultimate relativist? Your ethics are completely based on time. You've said that this response is OK because there was enough time for it to be resolved. Since leftists are ostensibly the ones getting hurt (politically I suppose) while Roma are the ones getting hurt in reality then it is perfectly fine.


I find it interesting that the police stood by and did nothing while the violence took place (The Independent).

Bt said this: "The Roma have been on the low end of the social stick for centuries.

Is Burlesconi a leader driving his country to a hate filled rage or is he simply a reflection of his people at this point in time."


Now imagine it said this way:

"The Jews have been on the low end of the social stick for centuries.

Is Hitler a leader driving his country to a hate filled rage or is he simply a reflection of his people at this point in time."


It is a valid point, but does it make it right?

[BT]

Where we disagree is the charge that the govt is inciting violence.
My position is the mob was predisposed to violence.

The Pope would be better served speaking to his flock if he wants to affect change.

[Religious Dick]

RD, so you have no problems with it because it is time-related? Doesn't that make you the ultimate relativist? Your ethics are completely based on time. You've said that this response is OK because there was enough time for it to be resolved. Since leftists are ostensibly the ones getting hurt (politically I suppose) while Roma are the ones getting hurt in reality then it is perfectly fine.

As has been pointed out, the Roma are hardly angels. I have no problem with the native population giving foreign criminals the bum's rush at any time. Period.

[Universe Prince]

I seem to have missed the report where the govt was heaving the cocktails.

I don't recall accusing the government of heaving them. Does the government have to when it all it has to do is sit by and let it it happen, as it apparently did?

[Universe Prince]

Why is it when a Chavez is elected the people's will is done but when a Burlesconi is elected the sheeple have been mislead.

I don't recall anyone saying the people are off the hook for this. Just the opposite, in fact.

[BT]

Does the government have to when it all it has to do is sit by and let it it happen, as it apparently did?

Right and the feds just let the Rodney King Riots happen.

[Universe Prince]

Does the government have to when it all it has to do is sit by and let it it happen, as it apparently did?

Right and the feds just let the Rodney King Riots happen.

According to reports I have read, the police stood by and did nothing to stop the burning of the camp. They were there, and did nothing to stop it. I'm not what I'm supposed to take away from that if not that they let it happen.

According to UP's reports the govt is rousting prostitutes and drug dealers, some of whom are Roma.

If we're going to go the articles I used, they also say anti-immigrant/anti-gypsy hostility is  "fuelled by often inflammatory attacks by the new rightwing government". They also do not talk about the government merely rousting prostitutes and drug dealers as you keep suggesting. They talk about the government rounding up immigrants in a crack down on immigration. So if we're going to go by the reports, let's get it right.

[fatman]

Bill: Won't the police protect my loved ones and me? Isn't it sensible that the police should be the only ones to own and utilize firearms?

Me: U.S. Courts have ruled over and over again that the police have no legal obligation to protect individuals from harm, only the public in general.[1] Consider Warren v. D.C. in which the court affirmed, " . . .when a municipality or other government entity undertakes to furnish police services, it assumes a duty only to the public at large and not to individual members of the community."[2]

Armed and secure

[Universe Prince]

Okay. I'm not quite sure what your point is, Fatman. Are you arguing that the police should not have interfered with the burning of the gypsy camp?

[fatman]

Okay. I'm not quite sure what your point is, Fatman. Are you arguing that the police should not have interfered with the burning of the gypsy camp?

No.  This is in reference to BT's point about the Feds letting the Rodney King Riots happen.  When those happened several Korean storekeepers used semi-auto rifles (now banned, btw) to protect their stores from rioters.  I recall that some stores were looted, and there was a lawsuit against the city of LA for failing to provide adequate protection, and the Warren vs. D.C. case was cited, but I can't find that link.  BT will probably point out that this is the city's problem, but I don't think that it is too far off of the mark in that a Federal Court backed the city.

[Universe Prince]

Ah-so. Good point, Fatman, as usual.

[_JS]

Where we disagree is the charge that the govt is inciting violence.
My position is the mob was predisposed to violence.

The Pope would be better served speaking to his flock if he wants to affect change.

The Vatican would be remiss to not address this situation. The Holy See has faithfully defended immigrants in the United States and they certainly will in Italy. We are all God's children and life is sacred, whether the man, woman, or child be Roma, Honduran, or American makes no difference.

To ignore the Fascist component of incitement to violence is peculiar. Are we no longer responsible for our statements? If the American politicians rant and rail against Mexican immigrants, they would be morons to not expect a violent incident or even a violent movement against those very people.

So why the defense of these people? That is what I find puzzling.

RD is clearly racist and that comes right out in his statements. "The Roma are no angels..." i.e. they deserve to be treated with violence. As if any group of people ARE angels!

The unwillingness to condemn the action by the others amongst the right is very interesting.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"Isn't it very important to point out that Fascists are people?
Isn't it important to observe that responsibility is individual?
HOw, if you insult all of fascism can you ever encourage moderate fascists?
Fascism isn't monolithic is it? Does it not behoove us to encourage the growth of moderate Fascism?"

LOL
Plane that is one of your best.
Thanks for the tears running down my cheeks.