Petition for J.K. Rowling to take in muslim refugees in her 18 spare bedrooms

[Deleted]

Quite probable. Doesn't mean she represents a majority opinion or correct ethical position on this issue. And it doesn't decrease the likelihood that if she got her way, it would have long-term negative effects on the working-class (the majority) of her country.

She's entitled to her opinion, she has no political power so it's just opinions

[shimerra]

Calling this type of logic retarded, insisting anyone who thinks taking on refugees is a good thing should have to house refugees in their home, would be an insult to the mental capacities of anyone who is mentally challenged. It's like saying I can't have an opinion on the healthcare system because I'm not going to become a doctor myself and treat all the sick people for free. Or I can't have an opinion on police use of force because I'm not out there on patrol every night stopping criminals myself.

Quite probable. Doesn't mean she represents a majority opinion or correct ethical position on this issue. And it doesn't decrease the likelihood that if she got her way, it would have long-term negative effects on the working-class (the majority) of her country.

Your thinking it's a bad idea also doesn't increase the likelihood or counteract the possibility that done properly refugee programs can actually benefit both the refugee and the host country and the only possible outcome isn't the horrible zero-sum game you've created in your mind.

Burned my books this morning.

I hope she touches her self while rubbing the money you already gave her all over her naked body. Pathetic.

[Thalassian Bob]

She's entitled to her opinion, she has no political power so it's just opinions

Already commented on this. I'm not telling her to shut up. I'd just like to see her put more of her money where her mouth is.

She can foot more of the bill herself, if she is so concerned about the migrant crisis. She shouldn't expect to compel the rest of us into throwing our weight behind it though.

(I should add a disclaimer, I support helping genuine refugees (which apparently 60% of those involved in the migrant crisis are not), but I think if they are going to be coming to Britain they should be vetted extremely carefully and we should be allowed to be more picky about who we are taking in. My list of higher priority people would be; Yazidis, Kurds, atheists, Christians, LGBT people, unaccompanied children, Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslim families. I would not prioritise the thousands of young single men travelling alone.
Also, I'd prefer we work with Russia and, reluctantly, Assad to create safe zones within Syria and the Levant so as to keep these people in their own countries where we can and try to make it as safe as possible.)

Your thinking it's a bad idea also doesn't increase the likelihood or counteract the possibility that done properly refugee programs can actually benefit both the refugee and the host country and the only possible outcome isn't the horrible zero-sum game you've created in your mind.

Please, see my disclaimer above for my own opinion on the taking in of refugees. I'm not totally against it. It just needs to be done right. We need to be careful about who we are taking in, we should have the right to know who they are and where they are once they are here and we shouldn't feel obliged to take anyone in we feel might be a problem.

[Sam the Wiser]

I hope she touches her self while rubbing the money you already gave her all over her naked body. Pathetic.

Jokes on you, I stole them many years ago.

[Deleted]

Jokes on you, I stole them many years ago.

Sure you did

[shimerra]

Jokes on you, I stole them many years ago.

Not really, considering if you actually did burn the books you're still the type of person to lash out in perhaps one of the most idiotic ways imaginable over an ideological difference. Good book is a good book and if her political opinions changed your enjoyment of the literature that just means you're a small minded partisan incapable of honest disagreement.

So on top of being a thief you're petty and child like too and not to bright. More likely though you're probably just another internet lair talking up the big talk.

She can foot more of the bill herself, if she is so concerned about the migrant crisis. She shouldn't expect to compel the rest of us into throwing our weight behind it though.

She already would be. To use the right's favorite rhetoric when arguing for a "fair tax" she already pays massively more than you do in taxes. Hell I bet her tax bill for a year will crush what you pay in a life time.

Please, see my disclaimer above for my own opinion on the taking in of refugees. I'm not totally against it. It just needs to be done right. We need to be careful about who we are taking in, we should have the right to know who they are and where they are once they are here and we shouldn't feel obliged to take anyone in we feel might be a problem.

Which is a valid concern and stance to take and I have not said anything to indicate I take issue with that. However your comments on her being allowed to "force her opinions on others" etc because she dares to have an opinion on public policy in a public forum. She from the looks of it isn't doing anything immoral or coercive. Bout the closest criticism you could have against her is wealth and status give you a larger soap box to stand on.

[Thalassian Bob]

She already would be. To use the right's favorite rhetoric when arguing for a "fair tax" she already pays massively more than you do in taxes. Hell I bet her tax bill for a year will crush what you pay in a life time.

Which is a valid concern and stance to take and I have not said anything to indicate I take issue with that. However your comments on her being allowed to "force her opinions on others" etc because she dares to have an opinion on public policy in a public forum. She from the looks of it isn't doing anything immoral or coercive. Bout the closest criticism you could have against her is wealth and status give you a larger soap box to stand on.

Yes, yes, yes... No need to rub it in about mine and JK Rowling's comparative finances.

I wouldn't say she's forcing her opinion on others per se, but she is a person with a big platform and a lot of capital. Two things that can sway a lot. As I've said, she's entitled to her opinion, but she shouldn't expect many of us to like it.

As I've mentioned elsewhere in this thread, she might pay some of the economic cost for bringing refugees here, but she wouldn't be paying the "societal" cost. She wouldn't feel the strain on the NHS or state schools because she can afford private healthcare and public schooling for her children and she wouldn't be under threat from the apparent pattern of increased crimes (particularly sexual) around refugee housing areas (many of which include female refugees being attacked too) because she wouldn't be living anywhere near them. Those are all problems that the working-class will potentially have to face, not the extremely wealthy.

[ati87]

Burned my books this morning.

You know what would really teach her a lesson...you buying a few more of her books (entire series) and burn it again.

Also....

Muslims, blacks, Mexicans, east-Europeans are savages right...but you the book burner is genetically superior and civilized.

[Evangeliste]

Point me to where she's asking for other people to house refugees in their personal homes. She is "committed" to allowing these people into her country; I'm not seeing the hypocrisy. Her taxes would fund them just as much as anyone else's.

Not sure where it reads "others commitment" as it simply is about her in question and objectified in the beginning of the sentence therefore without referring to another being it's about her commitment... I'm saying as it quite easily says: JK Rowling if singing about commitment should potentially delivering otherwise it can be annoying, as it's all theoretical so it can't be hypocrisy can it? Think you're looking for an argument when I'm clearly saying throughout the post, it's a grey area and both sided just don't pledge if you can't deliver.

[Berndorf]

Uber wealthy people love the idea of refugees knowing full well they won't ever see them where they live or living in their neighborhoods. Not that all refugees are bad people but its easy to advocate things which don't affect you in any real way.

[Klaiden Potugye]

The only say you should have is enrolling you kid in another school if you don't like whats happening at that one. Otherwise no, you don't get to say whether another kid can go to school or not.

If you want more control in what happens, this is what gated/private communities/schools are a thing. Feel free to use them.

Do you understand the implications?? You just extended a big "Fuck You" to me, and told me to go and change my life and life of my kids, so someone else will be appeased and cuddled. You practically turned ME into refugee in my own country.

[Orange Joe]

Do you understand the implications?? You just extended a big "Fuck You" to me, and told me to go and change my life and life of my kids, so someone else will be appeased and cuddled. You practically turned ME into refugee in my own country.

Are you really trying to compare going to a different school with being displaced from your country? Seriously?

[Deleted]

This was posted by Robert Davi, a somewhat known actor in Hollywood:

An open letter to the Hollywood Elite and the rest of America:

My Dear friends and colleagues,

I have recently been pondering President Trump’s executive action with regard to our nation having extreme vetting and our immigration policy finally being enforced. It has pained me deeply to see such a violent reaction to something that, to my mind, makes absolute common sense.

Let me begin by saying that I am from a family of immigrants that came to this country for a better life. They came to the US “legally,” assimilated, integrated, and learned English to the best of their ability, and demanded we speak it. As we all know, we live in a time in which there are forces who wish to destroy our way of life.

There are thousands of illegal immigrant criminals in the United States whose country of origin will not take them back. These criminals are free on the streets of America.

We have recently heard from a plethora of Hollywood stars on this issue — Meryl Streep, Robert DeNiro, Ashley Judd, Madonna, major agencies, musicians, singers and even the indomitable Shia LaBeouf. After much prayer on this issue, I must now stand in solidarity with all of my Hollywood elite brethren. They are right! The rest of you are wrong!

It is now in this spirit that I make an appeal to all in Hollywood and the media for us to use the Oscars to take a stand for the entire world to see and hear. It is time for Hollywood to lead the way.

I propose that Meryl Steep, Chelsea Handler, Richard Gere, Robert DeNiro, Christoph Waltz and others lead an Oscar first: let’s do away with the rules, barriers, and tickets to the Oscars and after-parties, such as the swanky Vanity Fair party or the Weinsteins’ star-studded affair. I ask all migrants, all illegal immigrant criminals and all un-vetted refugees to converge on Hollywood to come to the Oscars and all the after-parties, even those held at the mansions or the Chateau Marmont or anywhere else. After all, we in the Hollywood community want to show all Islamic extremists that we have love in our hearts — and what better way to do that than by inviting them along on our most important night?

It’s time the walls and electronic security gates come down. There are roughly 3,600 seats to the Oscars; we should have at least 2,500 seats reserved for illegal aliens, refugees and migrants, or maybe even more. For those celebrities skipping the ceremony, each should invite at least 100 illegal aliens, refugees or migrants to come to their home to watch the Oscars with them. The Academy and the Vanity Fair people should also get the 150 criminals who have recently been deported from Los Angeles and bring them to the show as honored guests.

I find it curious that when President Obama did the same exact thing — and more — in terms of enforcing the law on illegal immigration, the Hollywood elite were silent. Why were they silent then, but are so vocal now when President Trump is doing basically the same thing? Is Hollywood racist? Why — when Christians are being slaughtered in Syria, Iraq, and other places in the Middle East — is Hollywood silent?

Of course, the people that wish death upon Christians, Jews, gay people and the West are greeted with open arms by the elite in Hollywood — so why can’t they come to our Oscar parties?

Additionally, I am now pleased to announce that Hollywood and the recording industry no longer require the protection of the Men in Blue at any of their events! We do not need a country of laws; only a country of illegal immigrants, refugees and migrants. How dare we ignore the words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty: “Give me your tired, your poor,
your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…”

So now, we ask you all: please come to the Oscars on February 26th at the Dolby Theater on Hollywood Boulevard. We welcome you to our homes with open arms and love in our hearts. Together, let us celebrate the Progressive left and its policies, which have helped make blue collar America Tired, Hungry, and Poor.

And the Oscar goes to…



With love in my heart,

Robert Davi

[Deleted]

Burning books is more in the tradition of Germany in the year 1933.

Reminds me to Erich Kästner.

[Deleted]

So aggressive. So ragey.
And because it's way highly probable that any refugee is going to be settled among the lower\mid-classes of any country. Not next to some rich person's mansion.

You're completely ignorant, truly. Splurging whatever bollocks comes to mind is a fascinating habit of the xenophobic.

[Darkeon]

You're completely ignorant, truly. Splurging whatever bollocks comes to mind is a fascinating habit of the xenophobic.

Yikes, that's harsh, matey.

[Orange Joe]

This was posted by Robert Davi, a somewhat known actor in Hollywood:

You do know the current vetting process to get in the US right?.


I mean, lets also not forget that if the government takes these refugees in. There are not in any definition of the word. illegal immigrants.

[Lollis]

When did UK become an oligarchy?

In around 1066.

[Deleted]

I mean, lets also not forget that if the government takes these refugees in. There are not in any definition of the word. illegal immigrants.

Fully aware.

Did you read the letter? "I ask all migrants, all illegal immigrant criminals and all un-vetted refugees".

besides which - it was a joke, he was poking fun at the asshole actors in Hollywood. The limousine liberals.

[Orange Joe]

Fully aware.

Did you read the letter? "I ask all migrants, all illegal immigrant criminals and all un-vetted refugees".

besides which - it was a joke, he was poking fun at the asshole actors in Hollywood. The limousine liberals.

How many steps is it currently to get into the US if you are a refugee?