site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   774 thread views

Transnational Thursday for June 4, 2026

Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Grafton Street, a bustling pedestrianised street in Dublin's city centre, is one of the biggest shopping streets in the country. It's often one of the first places tourists go to when they arrive in Ireland, and accordingly on weekends will be thronged with buskers looking to make a few bob from Americans who can afford to splash out.

On South Anne Street, just off Grafton Street, there's an establishment called Club 22. I've been in there once, and the clientele was overwhelmingly made up of black men and white women (many of the latter, to my eyes, looked underage). In February of last year, the club was hosting a gig when an argument erupted outside in which a 34-year-old Nigerian asylum seeker, Quaham Babatunde, was stabbed to death. One of the perpetrators fled to Belfast where he was picked up by the PSNI (Police Service of Northern Ireland) and returned by them to Dublin. All four perpetrators were eventually charged and convicted:

Bruno Tache with an address at Trimleston, Balbriggan in Co Dublin, Rory Carr from Ard Na Gréine, Seapoint Lane in Balbriggan, David Oloo Omee of The Lawn, St Marnock's Bay, Dublin 13 and Sean Forde from Bath Road in Balbriggan, pleaded guilty to affray and assault charges.

All four men have previous convictions for violent crimes and drug dealing.

Mr Carr has 34 previous convictions, Mr Oloo Omee has 25, Mr Tache has 20 and Mr Forde has 8.

Mr Carr, Mr Tache and Mr Oloo Omee were on bail on other charges at the time of the attack while Mr Carr and Mr Tache were serving suspended sentences for other offences.

Tache and Carr received three years each. Reports from earlier in the year claim that Oloo Omee and Forde were due to be sentenced in April, but I can't find any articles about their sentencing.

(Without wishing to speak ill of the dead, the victim was no angel, having been scheduled for deportation from Italy owing to a rape allegation.)

Last weekend, history repeated itself as tragedy. The Bewley's café on Grafton St was hosting a hip-hop gig when a fight erupted outside. A 21-year-old club promoter, Qayyam Balogun, was chased to nearby Clarendon St (less than 300 metres from Club 22) and stabbed to death. Police have arrested a suspect (whose name they have yet to release), who apparently fled to Northern Ireland and then Scotland immediately after the stabbing. In the immediate aftermath of the stabbing, he apparently bragged about it online, and is well-known to the police, being out on bail for a different stabbing at the time. Police have also arrested his girlfriend.

The whole thing is just a bit eerie. Two Nigerian men stabbed to death in a very affluent part of Dublin, separated in time and space by less than eighteen months and 300 metres, by killers with mile-long rap sheets who subsequently fled to Northern Ireland.

I know progressives tend to be big believers in "rehabilitative justice", but I have to ask the obvious question. Does anyone actually believe that any of these five men will ever go on to be productive, law-abiding members of society? How much of a hardened criminal do you have to be to rack up thirty-four previous convictions by the age of 22? This most recent perpetrator stabbed someone, got arrested and charged, was mercifully granted bail, almost immediately stabbed someone else, then went on social media and bragged about it. This is a lack of forethought and impulse control I'd expect from a prepubescent. It's extremely difficult for me to avoid the conclusion that this man will be in and out of prison for his entire life, every few years getting out only to stab someone else and be back inside within a year. His life will end in one of two ways: either someone will finally stab him before he manages to stab them, or he'll realise he's getting too old for this shit and live out the rest of his miserable life on some combination of social welfare and disability payments for a fictitious medical condition. His entire life will be lived at the taxpayer's largesse.

What the hell does one do with a person like this?

being out on bail for a different stabbing at the time.

This isn't really addressing the core of your post but something I don't understand is why so many legal systems seem to allow clearly dangerous people like this to be allowed out on bail. What's the argument supposed to be?

Frankly, at this point I'd be all in favour of only allowing bail for defendants charged with non-violent offenses.

Unfortunately, knowing the UK, I'm fairly sure "violent-offense" would quickly be redefined to mostly mean "people posting non-governmental approved memes on social media".

It's a combination of resource stewardship and modern day politics, as everything is.

A few things make this vaguely feasible though - the criminal underclass is the criminal underclass, these people are out there "safely" being repeat offenders without causing significant issues, we just notice the fraction that do cause problem and not the 9 others who don't. Likewise a large fraction of people causing trouble are mentally ill or behaving in a way that gets them in front of the healthcare system, if you decarcerate you hope they head over to medicine and get managed that way.

The steelman is that two- or even three-year delays between initial arrest and actual trial are common for any nontrivial crime, especially in Blue Tribe spheres; that restricting bail makes arrests into a serious punishment, sometimes even the full breadth of any plausible punishment, and thus police officers into judges; and turns the jails into psuedo-prisons and final adjudication of charges into advisory opinions.

I'd argue that's more of a reason we should fix the fucking trial system, or, failing that, do a better job of separating dangerous alleged criminals from nondangerous ones than a judge squinting. But it's not a fake argument.

That makes sense. I agree with you though that this seems like a reason to streamline other parts of the process; having violently criminals just wandering around seems like a pretty blatant societal failure mode.

club promoter

Side note, but is this actually a job? Or just a fig leaf for payments? Like, what does a "club promoter" actually do? I can imagine a few legitimate things (put up flyers, social media programs, etc.), but I have a weird and baseless hunch none of what I'm thinking is what this fellow was doing.

Contrary to the other responses, the job can extend to include many of the responsibilities of management of a club. It can be a real, full time job.

The promoter can be the one to book/organize/run logistics for live acts and DJs, control the guest list, be head host, run all of marketing, head of sales, ect.

I think a lot of adults who work professionally in nightclub management and operations (almost all of them, really) start as promoters. Being able to consistently get people to show up is the single central requirement when starting a club, and traditional lenders (even those who are willing to lend to restaurants and bars) balk at clubs because of their compliance issues, almost universal ties to drugs and organized crime, extreme failure rate and high likelihood of being defrauded even if the business is profitable. The investors are therefore almost always other club owners or investors, or dumb rich kids (ie club goers).

Yes, your job is essentially to get hot women into the club so men come in and buy drinks. Clubs work a bit on a network effect. Nobody wants to go to a club that is empty, everyone wants a “popping” club

Yes, your job is essentially to get hot women into the club so men come in and buy drinks.

So I reckon you need to be a hot man for that?

No, not exactly.

I'd guess you need to be some male equivalent of a hot woman, in this case likely charismatic.

Fun little marketing anecdote about this. There's a new-ish bar/club in my city, walked by a few times after it opened and there was originally never more than one or two people waiting to get in on Saturday nights, if any.

A few weeks ago, they put up a big sign on the outside window about how you could use some app to pay extra to skip the long lines, along with some stanchions. Next thing you know, the place is packed and there's always a huge line to get in. Nice piece of social engineering.

In Ireland and the UK it's often a part-time job for university students, they'll go around campus selling tickets for events and earn commission. I haven't seen any suggestion that this wasn't his real job. I'm not ruling out the possibility that he may have been supplementing his income by selling drugs, but many club promoters earn their money entirely legitimately.

Much as the hang em all crowd is obviously correct, polite European society cannot countenance irredeemability. Even white european murderers like Brevik get consideration and comforts that would be considered insane luxuries by shithole dwellers, and the black drug dealers offering cheap drugs to teenage girls to conquer Europe through the womb are the actual victims here so polite Europeans can't do anything bad.

You know what polite Europeans can so? Be good!

Every sob story streetshitter traumatized convert needs the care and love the Polite European demands they be entitled to, and the state is obviously failing its duty to accommodate theae poor traumatized people of colour, so obviously the polite european should take them in. Every refugee must be colocated with any polite european as a sponsor. Sponsors get a special twitter and bluesky handle and invites to MEP functions and an entitlement of supermarket end of day castoffs. Since refugees can't actually commit crimes because their trauma overwhelmed their innocent brains the sponsor will bear all legal responsibility for the actions of the precious migrants and go to jail on behalf of the refugee. Oh, of course this extends to funders too. Soros, Carnegie, MSF.

Put money where ones mouth is. Sponsor a refugee. Let him into your house. Fucking do it.

Much as the hang em all crowd is obviously correct, polite European society cannot countenance irredeemability.

Unless the the 'irredeemability' of 'Nazis' is concerned.

Put money where ones mouth is. Sponsor a refugee. Let him into your house. Fucking do it.

Reminds me of this oldie but a goodie: https://youtube.com/watch?v=JYtbLCa65eA

The same thing, Aboriginal land rights edition: https://youtube.com/watch?v=u5OlBT2OcGg

Idealism is a cancer.

Imo - hanging, drawing, quartering, in public.

What the hell does one do with a person like this?

If I wanted to channel some Dread Jim, I would say public humiliation and then public execution. Make it very clear that they are not a role model and make them look as pathetic as possible, so every would-be gangster can see exactly badass they're going to look as they're publicly shamed before being hanged. The general deterrent value is debatable, but the specific deterrent value is quite high (hard to re-offend after being executed).

rehabilitative justice

Rehabilitative justice mostly doesn't work, it just allows repeat convicts more time and resources to spread their violent genes in your population. Better to do capital punishment after the n+1 conviction and if your society has the stomach for it, take out their useful organs to help law-abiding productive people live longer. Asset seizures of convicts are of course a given if we're already taking their organs.

Does capital punishment sometimes get the wrong person? Surely it does, but the general population is probably satisfied if police forces can blame and catch the right criminal most of the time (90%? 95%?), perfection is unrealistic. Is organ harvesting a crime against humanity? Maybe it is, but it's only used to mitigate the tax burden of dealing with criminals, so it's not necessary. Harvesting organs of repeat criminal offenders is just a way to force convicts to repay their victims, which includes taxpayers, in the event they have no other resources to give.

I further propose that a convicted Nigerian's organs be given to a law-abiding Nigerian as a priority on the organ recipient wait list. Non-nigerians would only have second priority on the convict organ transplant list. In this way we sustain Nigerians with better genes, and avoid the apperance of Nigerians being harvested purely for the benefit of other ethnicities.

Restorative justice was a stupid attempt to reduce black incarceration rates by playing to the in vogue theories about breaking the truama spiral. It presumes blacks didnt have agency and were caught in a spiral of escalation and if you just talk it out you'd avoid further costs. State administrations loved it because it allowed shrinking the bloating prison and school security budgets and the NGOs promised it would help blacks.

Every crime problem is downstream of the inconvenient fact that crime commission rates are disproportionate and blacks especially complain about being arrested more without considering that they commit crimes that fucking much more often. Rehabilitative/restorative justice makes the VICTIM forgive the attacker and thus removes the crime from the official books.

Actually the solution of making good nigerians beneficiaries of policing bad nigerians has precedent in Europe. Algerians in the French security establishment are especially clear eyed about how fucking shitty Africans are and have no qualms recommending extraterritorial action.

Great now all George Soros needs to do is frame a healthy white guy, or jew depending on the current Schrodinger's minority status, in order to get his heart transplant. Way to invent the rich harvesting the organs of the poor.

The rich already harvest the organs of the poor because the rich already game the system to be prioritized.

https://www.cuimc.columbia.edu/news/study-finds-link-between-income-and-organ-transplant-access

If it's going to happen anyway society at large may as well get some benefit from it while eliminating criminality.

I suspect Soros has no problem getting any transplant he needs, no need to frame anyone when he is going to be the top of the waiting list anyway.

What do you mean, "invent"? Canada has had MAiD for years.

But Canada's MAiD agents are too busy targeting soldiers with bodies ruined by war, not exactly prime blood boy donor targets. Maybe they are building Frankensteinian super soldiers from the bodies?

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats