racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Open or closed borders?
User avatar
OpenMind
Posts: 8645
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 3:54 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by OpenMind »

anastrophe wrote: admittedly what i describe is the theoretical broad presumption of the 'your home is your castle' concept. normally, if someone wandered into a house, there would be other extenuating factors that would make it obvious it wasn't done with criminal intent - it was your next door neighbor, they saw that the door was open, etc - however if the person found in the house is unknown to the occupants, has a weapon of some sort on his/her person, can't provide a plausible explanation for being there - then it becomes an easier interpretation.


An Englishman's home is his castle. I remember that old saying. But, I'm afraid that hasn't been the case in reality for a very long time.

By law, every piece of our land belongs to the monarch. Freeholds and leaseholds are actually permits by our monarch to use a piece of specified land accordingly. This part of land law still stands today. I know that because I looked it up recently. Well, ok, the research is about 2 years old and maybe it has changed, but I doubt it.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Accountable »

spot wrote: In both your examples, the act is illegal where and when the person commits it. That's the distinction I was playing with. I still feel that there are good reasons, outlined in this thread, for holding the government responsible rather than the black guy with the feeble use of English. One has power, the other has none.
The act of entering a country illegally is illegal where and when the person commits it.



What's the difference between a person coming into a country on a visa then staying past the deadline without renewing the visa, and a person living in an apartment on a lease then staying past the deadline without renewing the lease (or paying rent)?



In fairness, I'm assuming it is against the law in the UK to stay beyond the visa deadline. There is actually no such law in the US ... yet.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Accountable »

Issie wrote: So, YOU know 100% conclusively that he was not asked to stop.? yeh right.

Thanks for the compliment...a git I may be, but evil ? God will be the judge of that NOT ******* YOU :mad:



So, you don`t think I am who I say I am,? why, are pensioners to have a dumb worn out brains by the age they reach 60.?



You call me a blight on the Nation, Sonny boy people like me made this nation for you to wallow and whinge in today.



I was born in 1946 end of, I`ve just retired from working in the NHS all my life, now do you want to know how many times I get shagged a week these days as well.?



So, what is it about this forum then, we all agree with Spot ?

How about we all agree with his idea of open the flood gates and let the whole ******* lot of them in.



I never said he deserved to get shot, so stop twisting my words, just like you tried to yesterday over the issue of speaking the lingo.

I was pointing out the media coverage and money spent on an illegal, rather than focussing on the 52 people who had been blown up the day before, but **** you too, if you think he deserves more than the victims of the bombs.

And yes, women pensioner swear when they are angry.
:wah: Issie I hope you're for real. I'd love to meet ya now!
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Accountable »

spot wrote: I ask that the big powerful government be blamed for not immediately deporting all of the illegal immigrants and for not barring the border to illegal immigration, since then nobody would want to blame the legal immigrants for anything and we'd all be in a paradise of our own making.


I agree with blaming the gov't for not stopping illegal immigration, just as I would place partial blame on the home owner for not locking the door. But that hardly leaves the illegal immigrant lilly white, just as the burglar.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Accountable »

spot wrote: You must be joking. I keep my private lives in separate compartments.Good. I personally would appreciate if you did so in this instance as well, keeping your RR attitudes out of this.



The thread's hard enough to follow as it is.
Issie
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:42 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Issie »

Accountable wrote: :wah: Issie I hope you're for real. I'd love to meet ya now!
I`m for real, I am who I say I am, I cannot prove my identity other than I have already done, by directing you to the other forum that I sometimes go on.

If you take the time to read my posts, you will see that I speak with the same bluntness that I do in here.

You will also see that there is no post that can (in any way) be interpreted as racist.

It took me some time to figure out last night what RR stood for.....

Race Relations.

I`d sure love to meet you too.

BTW, thanks, I`m not very computer literate, but have managed to turn the PM facility on, thank you for pointing this out to me.:yh_flower
Issie
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:42 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Issie »

In fairness, I'm assuming it is against the law in the UK to stay beyond the visa deadline. There is actually no such law in the US ... yet.

You assume correct...the Brazilian who was shot the day after the London bombings in July of last year....was in fact an illegal, his visa had run out.
xpressbooks
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:53 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by xpressbooks »

I couldn't agree more with the sentiments expressed by 'Hopki'. But I would go further. In the 50 years that immigrants have been flooding into this country, not once has the indigenous population been asked for its views. Multiculturalism has been forced upon us whether we like it or not. Of all the forces at play in immigration, democracy has been completely absent.

Feelings in Britain are running higher than I can ever remember and I suspect - indeed I hope - that the backlash is not far off. Don't just send illegal immigrants packing - let us get rid of 90% of the others.

This reply written in accordance with the principles of free speech.

BB
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

I'm delighted that you should speak up to give your opinion.

As for "not once has the indigenous population been asked for its views", what mechanism other than support for manifesto commitments - the counter to "democracy has been completely absent" - does England have, constitutionally? We've had one single referendum ever in the history of the country, it's not exactly a precedent. I'd be perfectly happy to have one on whether we should "get rid of 90% of the others", of course - you'd be howled out of sight and put in your place if we did.

Regarding illegal immigrants, the thread has shown unanimity in a desire that they should be expelled the day they become illegal. Who are you fighting against? Nobody who's spoken wants anyone without a lawful right to be here.

Multiculturalism has been offered to us, not forced upon us. There's still plenty of whites-only segregationist communities you can choose to live among if that's how twisted you are, and they'll last beyond your lifetime. As for me, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to mix. Rather like the Celts and the Angles, or the Saxons and the Normans, a few generations of romantic passion will bury the controversy.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
xpressbooks
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:53 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by xpressbooks »

I cannot agree that multiculturalism has not been forced upon us. The media makes a great deal of it without ever allowing the opposing argument to be aired. No-one objects to small, controlled degrees of immigrations such as those we have had for hundreds of years in the past. The present situation is different and we have had nothing on such a scale before. In addition none of the past waves of imnmigration have been so distantly alien.

The greatest change I am seeing at the moment is that of people who only a few years ago were liberal in their attitudes to race. For some reason their views have swung, not merely to the right but to the extreme right.

It is not simply a question of black and white skins. I live in North Wales where the Welshness of many communities have been eroded partly by migration from England. I don't think this is desireable and I would not oppose a quote on immigration into rural areas. I certainly do not want to see Caernarvon change in the way that London has.

Low level immigration is fine but large scale, it quickly becomes an invasion.

BB
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

I agree with this sentiment entirely. We have been invaded and, little by little, we are becoming a minority in our own country. England's darkest hour is at hand and I think we shall see blood shed before long. Immigration on this scale should never have been permitted in the first place - it is disasterous for all concerned.

WE
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

Who is "we" who are becoming a minority in our own country, William? Would you like to give us a few number which support the use of the word "minority" here?

By all means "Immigration on this scale should never have been permitted in the first place", that's a condemnation of past generations of politicians. It has nothing at all to do with dealing with the state of the nation today. Personally, I'm delighted that their extraordinarily short-sighted ignorant approach to their temporary labour problem has resulted in today's culture here, but that's just my viewpoint.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

By 'we' I refer to the indigenous British (most of whom have few scruples where the condemnation of past politicians are concerned). The correspondent who said that we had never been asked if we wanted to share this country with an influx of immigrants, was quite right. No-one was ever asked and debate has been stifled because to raise the subject results in shrill cries of 'racist'.

How you deal with the state of the nation today is a question that makes me shudder but blood will be spilt and I think sooner rather than later.

BE
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

Thatcher managed to spill blood while destroying the unions, but I don't recall that the unions set out to provoke her into it. It was entirely her own desire to engage them that brought the mounted police into play. Your suggestions have the same taste.

Would you like to give us a few numbers which support the use of the word "minority" in "we are becoming a minority in our own country"?
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

xpressbooks wrote: It is not simply a question of black and white skins. I live in North Wales where the Welshness of many communities have been eroded partly by migration from England. I wonder what the Argentines think of the Welsh-speaking community in Patagonia? They immigrated 140 years ago and they still speak Welsh for preference. The Patagonian-ness of the region is surely altered, don't you think?

Over half the people living in Wales today descend from those who emigrated there from the English Midlands in the 19th century to work the mines. That's what pushed Welsh into obscurity. To say that "we have had nothing on such a scale before" is historically inaccurate. What we had before - speaking from the perspective of Wales, which you raised - was far far more invasive than anything taking place at the moment.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

You say: 'Thatcher managed to spill blood while destroying the unions, but I don't recall that the unions set out to provoke her into it. It was entirely her own desire to engage tham that brought the mounted police into play.'

I can only assume from this that your were too young or too remote to know what was going on. I was in the West Riding mining community at the time and there is no question that the NUM, under the disasterous leadership they had at the time, orchestrated the entire thing. The miners had been instrumental in bringing down the Heath government in 1974 and Scargill's burning ambition was to better this by bringing down Mrs Thatchers administration. (Doubtless you will rememberl that the early Thatcher government, mindful of Edward Heath's downfall, were extremely reluctant to do anything that would provoke trouble with the miners.

Had you been around at the time you would recall that the country generally was fed to the back teeth with the antics of the unions and Mrs Thatchers raison d'etre 25 years ago was to curb the excessive powers of the unions. This she did and most union leaders accepted, if somewhat grudingly, the fact she had the country behind her.

Scargill on the other hand decided to try his luck by inventing a completely spurious pretext upon which to base industrial action, insensed many of his own supporters by failing to carry out ballots in the proper way and eventually achieved what no-one else had ever managed to do - he split the miners union.

The miners challenged the authority of government and received a bloody nose for their pains. But it was of their own making and due to their own blisteringly incompetant leadership.
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

spot wrote: I wonder what the Argentines think of the Welsh-speaking community in Patagonia? They immigrated 140 years ago and they still speak Welsh for preference. The Patagonian-ness of the region is surely altered, don't you think?

Over half the people living in Wales today descend from those who emmigrated there from the English Midlands in the 19th century to work the mines. That's what pushed Welsh into obscurity. To say that "we have had nothing on such a scale before" is historically inaccurate. What we had before - speaking from the perspective of Wales, which you raised - was far far more invasive than anything taking place at the moment.


I really think you ought to study history and geography before you launch such preposterous statements. The mines in Wales were located in a thin belt that stretched from Newport to Carmarthen and was a mean of about 25 miles from the coast. They were worked by people who were indigenous Welsh and any migration from England was balanced by the Welsh who left to work the English mines - the three mining communities of Kent were almost entirely Welsh speaking - and the London milk trade. However, even if your statement was true, that would still leave 95% of the area of Wales (the part without mines) to be dealt with.

If you are going to make a case for large-scale migration, try and base it on fact rather than supposition. (Your 'half the population' should read 'half of one percent')

As for Patagonia, you had better ask someone from Argentina.
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

spot wrote: Would you like to give us a few numbers which support the use of the word "minority" in "we are becoming a minority in our own country"?


To begin with there is Leicester which is 55% Asian. A generation ago it was 100% English apart from a few Irish. Parts of Bradford, Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Derby have suburbs in which the Asians are in the majority. Then you have the North Lancashire towns and London................

By any understanding of the expression, we have been invaded - and you are not allowed to criticise them.

WE
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

In what sense do those numbers support your contention that "we are becoming a minority in our own country"? Surely it merely indicates that if you go to a sufficiently fine grid you can paint a few squares which in which "we" (whoever "we" are) form a minority. That's true of any complex distribution pattern.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

I hardly think that Leicester can be classed as a couple of pixels on a fine grid; neither can the other locations mentioned. What matters above all else is the propensity for trouble and my feeling is that the pressure is building up.

My view, for what it is worth, is that the first step to be taken is a recognition of the gravity of the problem by the introduction of a nationality bill which will draw a distinction between English, Scots and Welsh and those whose forbears arrived in this country after the war. The main thrust of the bill in my view should be prohibit immigrants from standing for any public office.

A measure of that kind might relieve the pressure a little.

WE
User avatar
Lulu2
Posts: 6016
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:34 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Lulu2 »

Stepping in here to say...I don't know when or how or even WHY it became a "politically incorrect" thing to stand up and say we value our culture and want to preserve it, despite pressures from uncontrolled immigration!

It IS "correct" of course to speak of how much we value other cultures, etc, etc....but when someone says they grieve the loss of their own culture, certain segments of society sneer and point "pc" fingers!

It's a mystery to me.

Last time I was in Holland, I spoke for a couple of hours to a man who said the biggest problem the Dutch face is that, within one lifetime, everything they knew as "Dutch" has been changed. Huge segments of Turkish immigrants are demanding classes taught in Turkish, are receiving stipends and job assistance while Dutch citizens stand by, feeling helpless and resentful.

Anyone who lives in parts of So. California knows the sentiment, especially when driving down once familiar streets and seeing block after block of businesses which advertise in foreign languages. A city near me has been a magnet for thousands of Armenian immigrants. They've run for office and are demanding school holidays for the Armenian genocide, holy days, etc. They brought long-time ethnic tensions with them and murders at local high schools have resulted. Imagine how people whose families have lived for generations in Glendale feel about this new culture.

Immigrants who once had to struggle to get into the "new" country were willing and eager to embrace the culture in their new home. Now, what we see is immigrants demanding that the new country adjust to and accomodate them.
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

[QUOTE=Lulu2]Stepping in here to say...I don't know when or how or even WHY it became a "politically incorrect" thing to stand up and say we value our culture and want to preserve it, despite pressures from uncontrolled immigration!

It IS "correct" of course to speak of how much we value other cultures, etc, etc....but when someone says they grieve the loss of their own culture, certain segments of society sneer and point "pc" fingers!

It's a mystery to me.QUOTE]

It is a mystery to most people but probably has a good deal to do with the Fabian principles of the media who have never allowed the opposing view to give their side of the story. When a story concerning the environment is featured on the news, organisations such as the Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace are allowed generous lengths of airtime to give their point of view. When immigration is mentioned, do the British National Party ever get their chance to sit round the table and give their point of view. Absolutely not.

WE
User avatar
Lulu2
Posts: 6016
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:34 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Lulu2 »

Why IS this?
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

Lulu2 wrote: Why IS this?




Why is what?
User avatar
Lulu2
Posts: 6016
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:34 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Lulu2 »

Sorry...why IS the media so biased against the idea that preservation and love of one's culture is a GOOD thing? Why is it not "correct" to value one's own culture over that of a stranger?
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

Lulu2 wrote: Sorry...why IS the media so biased against the idea that preservation and love of one's culture is a GOOD thing? Why is it not "correct" to value one's own culture over that of a stranger?


Mainly because the media (and government) is heavily influenced by the international socialism of the Fabian movement which is the origin of most PC thinking. Pride in one's culture and country, for example, is seen as a form of secular isolationism which runs counter to internationalism.

If you want a living example, look at the reporting of the Iraq conflict. Whatever the rights and wrongs of entering the conflict, you would think the media might support the team even if it doesn't like the game. Frankly our media, which never hesitates to criticise whenever the slightest opportunity presents itself, must be one of the biggest boosts to the Bin Laden morale this is.

The Fabian view is largely the result of intellectualism without experience and is probably a greater danger to the West than ten third Reichs!

WE
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15823
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Bryn Mawr »

William Ess wrote: I hardly think that Leicester can be classed as a couple of pixels on a fine grid; neither can the other locations mentioned. What matters above all else is the propensity for trouble and my feeling is that the pressure is building up.

My view, for what it is worth, is that the first step to be taken is a recognition of the gravity of the problem by the introduction of a nationality bill which will draw a distinction between English, Scots and Welsh and those whose forbears arrived in this country after the war. The main thrust of the bill in my view should be prohibit immigrants from standing for any public office.

A measure of that kind might relieve the pressure a little.

WE


Tell me about the preasure that's building up in Leicester due to the ethnic minorities.

Come to think about it, you can also tell me how long you count a generation to be - using the generally accepted measure of 25 years Leicester was 35% ethnic minority and not 100% English as you claim.
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

About thirty years.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15823
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Bryn Mawr »

William Ess wrote: About thirty years.


Then the percentage was still above 30 - not zero as you would have us believe.

And how about describing these racial tensions that are building up - I'd be facinated to hear about them.
William Ess
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:15 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by William Ess »

I think you are splitting hairs. Leicester was 100% white in the 1960's and that doesn't seem much more than a generation to me. The real point is that we have been obliged to absorb a ridiculously high number of immigrants who have almost nothing in common with us. It is not a question of the colour of their skin - my feelings would be just the same had the influx come from Italy or France. A small number of immigrants adds a welcome variety but the numbers we have taken - without any sort of reference to those whose country it is - is by any reckoning an invasion.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15823
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Bryn Mawr »

William Ess wrote: I think you are splitting hairs. Leicester was 100% white in the 1960's and that doesn't seem much more than a generation to me. The real point is that we have been obliged to absorb a ridiculously high number of immigrants who have almost nothing in common with us. It is not a question of the colour of their skin - my feelings would be just the same had the influx come from Italy or France. A small number of immigrants adds a welcome variety but the numbers we have taken - without any sort of reference to those whose country it is - is by any reckoning an invasion.


Was it 'eck as like - why do you think the Ugandan Asians came to Leicester in the first place?

and I'm still waiting to hear all about the racial pressure that's about to explode all over me.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

William, you mustn't egg your cake. I could easily put you in touch with someone whose school class in the 1960s in Leicester included both first generation asian and second generation caribbean immigrants. As a microcosm of Leicester in the 1960s it's first-hand evidence against your "100% white" slur.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Spinner
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:15 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Spinner »

I support communities joining together for their mutual benefit in times of crisis. Don't wait until the poop has hit the fan to find out where to go, or who is friend or foe.



Illegal aliens are just that: Illegal. They should be round up and sent home. The only exception are those who apply for sanctuary.



Using "illegal" + "immigration" in the same sentence is like using "honest" + "politician" in the same sentence. Inconceivable.



You have "immigration" and then you have "invasion".



Now...as to the comment about the bomb. That was either the actions of a totally naive and/or stupid person OR it was bait thrown out there to see who would bite.



Since 9/11...one would have to have been living in a cave not to know that statements like that are monitored. I'll bet his email transmissions are now being intercepted and all the list he posts to are being watched.



What a total idiot.
Carl44
Posts: 10719
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:23 am

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Carl44 »

Spinner wrote: I support communities joining together for their mutual benefit in times of crisis. Don't wait until the poop has hit the fan to find out where to go, or who is friend or foe.



Illegal aliens are just that: Illegal. They should be round up and sent home. The only exception are those who apply for sanctuary.



Using "illegal" + "immigration" in the same sentence is like using "honest" + "politician" in the same sentence. Inconceivable.



You have "immigration" and then you have "invasion".



Now...as to the comment about the bomb. That was either the actions of a totally naive and/or stupid person OR it was bait thrown out there to see who would bite.



Since 9/11...one would have to have been living in a cave not to know that statements like that are monitored. I'll bet his email transmissions are now being intercepted and all the list he posts to are being watched.



What a total idiot.


i totally agree 100%
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Galbally »

I think that its becomming pretty obvious that multi-culturalism is not working in Britain. I also think that the current problems are mostly between muslims and native English people, it doesn't seem to be as difficult for other cultures to integrate, so lets be frank about that. I also think that the most positive way of dealing with it, is for British people and more specifically English people to regain a positive sense of their own identity and their country (like the Scots and the Irish do), and promote it as something that immigrants to Britain have to integrate into, in a positive way. To do that firstly its vital that the English language is made a basic requirement for all children, as well as citizenship, and a proper understanding of British history and British values, all of that can be done without offending anyone, and if they are offended, then they should probably be questioning why they are in Britain in the first place.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Galbally »

Pinky wrote: As a bit of an old hippy, I consider everyone to be part of the community of the earth. I am happy to accept and accommodate anybody that comes into my path. As someone who works with kids that have been dragged over here by their parents in search of a better life, I understand why they want to come here.

However, I do think that wherever you go, you should at least make an effort to blend into the culture that you're going to, and speaking the lingo is of tantamount importance. It's a serious disadvantage if you don't!


I think that in general, most normal people don't want to not get along with each other, and as I experienced what it was like to be the child of an Irish immigrant family in Birmingham in the 1970s, I am not into blaming immigrants for everything thats wrong in a country. What I would say is that something is obviously going badly wrong in that it seem some British citizens have no feelings of allegiance to Britain and even percieve their fellow citizens as enemies in extreme cases, thats a very bad state of affairs and it can't be ignored. The answers obviously lie in tolerance and understanding amoung people, but also giving people a very definite set of values and citizenship that they need to have allegiance to if they are to be fully integrated. I don't see any other way.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
User avatar
Spinner
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:15 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Spinner »

Galbally, I think you "hit the nail on the head" so to speak.

Everyone has their heritage and traditions. If a person is from a multicultural family, they have blended heritage and traditions. I do believe that this should be honored and not swept under the carpet however, if they have immigrated to a new culture, they should try to embrace their new homeland as well. And they should not demand that their new homeland celebrate their customs.

Here in America, we have become so "politically correct" (thanks to "Hitlerett" Clinton)..than we try to embrace all newcomer's customs at the expense of our own.

The result of this is that people coming here no longer want to assimilate into this culture and become Americans...and we must accommodate their heritage.

My heritage within the US is Confederate. Most of ancestors settled in the south. Our Confederate heritage is maligned due to ignorance and the media perpetuating the lies about the causes of the War of Northern Aggression. (It was over taxes -- not slavery.)

Did you know that April of officially Confederate Heritage Month but you won't find anything about it come April. But in June we celebrate "Juneteenth" a holiday for Blacks celebrating the end of slavery, we celebrate Cinco de Mayo for the Mexicans, We celebrate Kwanzaa, a made up holiday ("It is a fact that Kwanzaa was invented in 1966 by a black radical FBI stooge, Ron Karenga, aka Dr. Maulana Karenga. Karenga was a founder of United Slaves, a violent nationalist rival to the Black Panthers and a dupe of the FBI.").

But we are no longer allowed to celebrate OUR southern heritage, holidays and heroes for fear we'll offend someone.

And this is OUR land! Bought with the blood of our fore fathers. It makes me ill to see how far removed this country has become from the principles it was founded upon.

Perhaps returning to OUR roots would be a good thing. Maybe I'll go to Scotland and look up the Clan MacLaren..see if they'll welcome a Texan Cousin??

Speaking of returning to your roots....I don't see the offended people in my country going home. If America is so offensive..why is everyone trying to get here? LOL!!!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 38218
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by spot »

Spinner wrote: Here in America, we have become so "politically correct" (thanks to "Hitlerett" Clinton)..than we try to embrace all newcomer's customs at the expense of our own.It’s always a delight to see someone fight against historical inaccuracy, I do hope you’ll expand on the causes of the War of Northern Aggression. Even historians have been infected by this notion that social stratification based around slavery was one of the defining distinctions between North and South from as far back as the seventeenth century. I was just reading Paul Johnson’s “A History of the American People” and found the following example:The proprietors wanted religious toleration, in order to attract the maximum numbers of settlers. The planters were Anglicans, insofar as they were anything: they agreed with Charles II that it was 'the only religion for gentlemen.' So they made it their business to enforce second-class status on people from other faiths. The proprietors opposed slavery. The planters needed slaves, and got them. In one sense the wishes of the proprietors were carried out - the Carolinas got a stratified society, with three classes: a small ruling class of plantation owners or gentry, a large class of laborers, and an enormous number of slaves.

The earliest origins of each colony are well documented. We know who, and why, and when, and how many. We can see foreshadowed the historical shape of things to come. With remarkable speed, in the first few decades, the fundamental dichotomy of America began to take shape, epitomized in these two key colonies - Massachusetts and Carolina. Here, already, is a North–South divide. The New England North has an all-class, mobile, and fluctuating society, with an irresistible upward movement pushed by an ethic of hard work. It is religious, idealistic, and frugal to the core. In the South there is, by contrast, a gentry-leisure class, with hereditary longings, sitting on the backs of indentured white laborers and a multitude of black slaves, with religion as a function of gentility and class, rather than an overpowering inward compulsion to live the godly life.The British certainly embraced the prevalent indigenous culture wherever we emigrated. So many of us adopted the Hindu religion when we administered India, for example. The Diwali festivals were brightened by our civil service wallahs, in their solar topee and spats, gaily exchanging idle banter with the natives as we mingled. Ah, those were the days. The wogs never had it so good.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Galbally »

spot wrote: It’s always a delight to see someone fight against historical inaccuracy, I do hope you’ll expand on the causes of the War of Northern Aggression. Even historians have been infected by this notion that social stratification based around slavery was one of the defining distinctions between North and South from as far back as the seventeenth century. I was just reading Paul Johnson’s “A History of the American People” and found the following example:The proprietors wanted religious toleration, in order to attract the maximum numbers of settlers. The planters were Anglicans, insofar as they were anything: they agreed with Charles II that it was 'the only religion for gentlemen.' So they made it their business to enforce second-class status on people from other faiths. The proprietors opposed slavery. The planters needed slaves, and got them. In one sense the wishes of the proprietors were carried out - the Carolinas got a stratified society, with three classes: a small ruling class of plantation owners or gentry, a large class of laborers, and an enormous number of slaves.

The earliest origins of each colony are well documented. We know who, and why, and when, and how many. We can see foreshadowed the historical shape of things to come. With remarkable speed, in the first few decades, the fundamental dichotomy of America began to take shape, epitomized in these two key colonies - Massachusetts and Carolina. Here, already, is a North–South divide. The New England North has an all-class, mobile, and fluctuating society, with an irresistible upward movement pushed by an ethic of hard work. It is religious, idealistic, and frugal to the core. In the South there is, by contrast, a gentry-leisure class, with hereditary longings, sitting on the backs of indentured white laborers and a multitude of black slaves, with religion as a function of gentility and class, rather than an overpowering inward compulsion to live the godly life.The British certainly embraced the prevalent indigenous culture wherever we emigrated. So many of us adopted the Hindu religion when we administered India, for example. The Diwali festivals were brightened by our civil service wallahs, in their solar topee and spats, gaily exchanging idle banter with the natives as we mingled. Ah, those were the days. The wogs never had it so good.


I think your last sentence was a bit over the top, but anyway, I'm not going to debate the ponts, just to say I have that book by Paul Johnson, its good, I've read it twice.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
User avatar
Spinner
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:15 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Spinner »

Lord...where do I start... ! :-3



Due to the war debt incurred from the Revolutionary War, the new country was making payments from the money brought in by southern agriculture. Washington (the gov't seat---not George) voted to increase the taxes on the tobacco & cotton crops. The southern tobacco, cotton plantation owners said basically "hell no!" and when argueing..appealing to reason, debating..petitioning, etc failed..the south voted to secede from the Union.

See: "The South Was Right!" by James Ronald & Walter Donald Kennedy, pages 48 & 49.



Had not one single thing to do with slavery. That was the propaganda machine at work.



Let's say that 10 of us formed a club to buy a piece of property so that we could all use it. And that 3 members were doing very well in their current business, outside of the club. So the other seven decide to increase those 3's membership dues so that it won't be such a burden on those who aren't making as much money.



So those 3 revolt, leave and the group leader picks up a stick and says, "You can leave. This group is forever and you have been out voted..if you don't come back and give up the extra money...I'll get some people together and beat you into submission". So a few of the other members say, "Hey...that isn't right..we're leaving too. You can't act that way." So the leader declares himself the "King" so to speak, rescinds all the group charter, rules, guidelines...etc.. and the battle is on. Now...he knows that those around won't go for it because... it stands to reason that as individuals with Rights, (sovereign states--10th Amendment States Rights) you can come & go as you please, so he has to dream up some thing to win public symphathy...Ah Ha! Slavery is a hot button right now..Instant scapegoat.."

"The North, ignoring its own role in the establishment of slavery through the slave trade, and rife with the racism that tragically characterized the majority of Americans in the 19th century, was also judged by God in this war......Slavery, therefore, was merely the pretext to justify the destruction of the old constitutional order of our union. By means of the war, political sovereignty was wrested from the States and placed exclusively in the hands of the Federal government. The central government, which was originally created to be the servant of the states, became their master. In this way, the war was the means by which God judged both the North and the South.



We can all rejoice over the demise of slavery in this country. But the war of 1861 resulted only in the formal abolition of the institution. The enduring legacy of that war is not the abolition of slavery, but the creation of an unconstitutional, unrestrained, leviathan-like central government which has effectively destroyed our liberties and enslaved us all." -- A Statement on Slavery and the War Between the States,by Rev. Steve Wilkins





'British Historian J.F.C. Fuller observed that at the time of the outbreak of war Southerners and Northerners "could no longer even think alike: the one was composed of field-men, the other of men of the city; and the one was an aristocracy, whilst the other was a pluto-democracy. In the South the military, religious and artistic spirits preponderated; in the North the commercial, matter-of-fact and practical. The South was eighteenth century, the North nineteenth century; the one looked backward to Cavalier and King's man, the other forwards to the Roundheads and Cromwells of an all-conquering mechanical age." ...



Southerners, then as now, put great store in law. The Constitution clearly and expressly recognizes the rights of the individual states as sovereign political entities. The South took the constitutional framers at their word. In Southern eyes, a solemn compact entered into by a free, sovereign state could be dissolved when it no longer provided sufficient benefit to that state, and particularly when the limited national government provided by that compact began to drift towards centralization and tyranny. The individual sovereign states would not have ratified the Constitution had they been told that once ratified, in no circumstances could they ever withdraw. ...



Reconstruction, which was a wholly illegal series of outrageous usurpations by the federal government, the author portrays correctly as "barbarism in power over civilization." All of the states in "rebellion," once subdued, were treated as "conquered provinces," ruled by a triumphant federal army. All citizens who had in any way participated in the war on the side of the Confederacy, or who had even given "aid and comfort" to the forces of the Confederacy (which included essentially every white adult), were disenfranchised and treated to myriad humiliations. The right to vote was then granted only to ex-slaves, most of whom were illiterate the helpless minions of ruthless carpetbaggers from the North.



At least two things strike one on reading this section on Reconstruction. The first is that for a time after the South's defeat, a frame of mind that can only be described as an absolute delirium of extreme vengefulness seized much of the Northern government during which a new kind of war was made on the helpless, disarmed Southern citizenry. The infamous Thaddeus Stevens, a U.S. congressman from Pennsylvania and a leader among the radical Republicans, insisted that the South must suffer "punishments quite as appalling and longer remembered than death." -- Your Southern Heritage by FR. James Thornton







And one of my favorites.."The Real Lincoln". (Lincoln was a traitor.)



Facts the northern sympathizers don't like to discuss:

To silence his critics in the North, Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus. The political prisoner count from this move was estimated by some to be as high as forty thousand.



Violated the First Amendment right to freedom of the press by shutting down 300-plus newspapers and journals by executive order. (these were the papers that were printing articles and editorials against his actions)



Promoted Colonel John B. Turchin to the rank of Brigadier General of the United States Volunteers even though he was under a court-martial for crimes against civilians (and later convicted)







In an 1858 debate Lincoln made the following statements:"I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races -- that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races. . . .I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."--Abraham Lincoln, as cited in The Lincoln-Douglas

Debates of 1858, edited by R.W. Johannsen (Oxford

University Press, New York, NY: 1965), pp. 162-63





And speaking of the Reconstruction Acts....they have NEVER been repealed..therefore they are still in force. This means that the USA is STILL UNDER MARTIAL LAW.



And for a little tidbit that was found totally by accident in the archives of a library in Austin, Texas (state capital)..read this and see if you comprehend the significance. Richard Henry Dana Brief



Sorry.....Didn't mean to write a book.



Spinner
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Galbally »

I think we have gone off topic on this one again.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
User avatar
Spinner
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 6:15 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Spinner »

Scrat wrote: Got anymore on this?


Well..yes...but I do tend to get carried away. And Galbally was right...it is off the original topic.



Is there a "Anything Goes" forum here? :wah:



Spinner
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15823
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Bryn Mawr »

Galbally wrote: I think that its becomming pretty obvious that multi-culturalism is not working in Britain. I also think that the current problems are mostly between muslims and native English people, it doesn't seem to be as difficult for other cultures to integrate, so lets be frank about that. I also think that the most positive way of dealing with it, is for British people and more specifically English people to regain a positive sense of their own identity and their country (like the Scots and the Irish do), and promote it as something that immigrants to Britain have to integrate into, in a positive way. To do that firstly its vital that the English language is made a basic requirement for all children, as well as citizenship, and a proper understanding of British history and British values, all of that can be done without offending anyone, and if they are offended, then they should probably be questioning why they are in Britain in the first place.


Dr G. :)

Don't you think that much of the current problems between the English and the English Muslims is a creation of the media? Hardly a day goes by without an inflamatory article in the press of on the TV which is bound to polarise the situation.

The vast majority of the English born muslims I know are well integrated. With the first generation immigrants the ratio is no worse that the English ex-pat community in Spain, many of whom refuse to learn Spanish.

Get someone's back up and they will take offence at the slightest hint of nothing. I believe that that's happening on both sides of the current equasion.
User avatar
Galbally
Posts: 9755
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 5:26 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Galbally »

Bryn Mawr wrote: Dr G. :)

Don't you think that much of the current problems between the English and the English Muslims is a creation of the media? Hardly a day goes by without an inflamatory article in the press of on the TV which is bound to polarise the situation.

The vast majority of the English born muslims I know are well integrated. With the first generation immigrants the ratio is no worse that the English ex-pat community in Spain, many of whom refuse to learn Spanish.

Get someone's back up and they will take offence at the slightest hint of nothing. I believe that that's happening on both sides of the current equasion.




Yes I do, the media is sesationaling everything about Muslims at the minute as its good copy, but its pretty dangerous to be doing it, as there are real problems of integration at the moment, and the media are helping to inflame the situation. I would also say that there is a huge problem with very extreme muslim clerics and teachers been given platforms to say things that are creating disquiet in the traditional community, and thats what they want, as they are into polariztion as it helps them in their ojective of radicalizing the young muslim people in Britain. No body really seems to be willing to take such people on, which just reinforces their view that they can use the liberalism of the west as a means to destroy its societies. Also the people that killed 52 people on the tube last year were young british men from the north of england, who had got to the point where they felt justified in killing fellow British people, that was an unprecendented attack in modern times, and its implications can't be ignored however ugly they are to us.

Something has definetly gone wrong in Britain, but its not isolated to Britain, and if you look across the world and watched what has happened its obvious that a very high profile sector of the islamic world have tried to use violence and force to both beat down opposition to their particular world view from within, and also start some sort of a general confrontation with the west (which the U.S. and Britain helpfully provided by invading Iraq). Over the longer term I hope that this current climate of hatred and intolerance will work itself out, but in the short term I think things are going to get worse, and I'm not sure where this is going.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"



Le Rochefoucauld.



"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."



My dad 1986.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15823
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

racial crime up 600% in london (sky news)

Post by Bryn Mawr »

Galbally wrote: Yes I do, the media is sesationaling everything about Muslims at the minute as its good copy, but its pretty dangerous to be doing it, as there are real problems of integration at the moment, and the media are helping to inflame the situation. I would also say that there is a huge problem with very extreme muslim clerics and teachers been given platforms to say things that are creating disquiet in the traditional community, and thats what they want, as they are into polariztion as it helps them in their ojective of radicalizing the young muslim people in Britain. No body really seems to be willing to take such people on, which just reinforces their view that they can use the liberalism of the west as a means to destroy its societies. Also the people that killed 52 people on the tube last year were young british men from the north of england, who had got to the point where they felt justified in killing fellow British people, that was an unprecendented attack in modern times, and its implications can't be ignored however ugly they are to us.

Something has definetly gone wrong in Britain, but its not isolated to Britain, and if you look across the world and watched what has happened its obvious that a very high profile sector of the islamic world have tried to use violence and force to both beat down opposition to their particular world view from within, and also start some sort of a general confrontation with the west (which the U.S. and Britain helpfully provided by invading Iraq). Over the longer term I hope that this current climate of hatred and intolerance will work itself out, but in the short term I think things are going to get worse, and I'm not sure where this is going.


The only thing you've said here that I'd even remotely think of disagreeing with is that the people using violence are a high profile sector of the Islamic world. They may be Islamic (possibly) but they are using Islam as a tool rather than being driven to it by virtue of being Islamic.

And sadly, it will get worse before it gets better.

Return to “Immigration”