That's a stereotype. It may be true in places, but there're plenty of migrant workers who do a good job. Similarly, there are plenty of "Indigenous British People" (although I'm not sure if the BNP have been able to define that yet) who would show disregard for food hygiene laws a\nd be a threat to public safety.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
BBC Question Time 22-10-09
- Thread starter TrainBrain185
- Start date
- Status
That's a stereotype. It may be true in places, but there're plenty of migrant workers who do a good job. Similarly, there are plenty of "Indigenous British People" (although I'm not sure if the BNP have been able to define that yet) who would show disregard for food hygiene laws a\nd be a threat to public safety.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
thefab444
Established Member
Agree with the above.
It's definately only a minority, such as only a minority of white, English, builders and tradesmen are out to rip you off - yet if you believe those Rogue Traders' programmes, they are all out to get you.
But of course, the camera never lies does it?
It's definately only a minority, such as only a minority of white, English, builders and tradesmen are out to rip you off - yet if you believe those Rogue Traders' programmes, they are all out to get you.
But of course, the camera never lies does it?
Kneedown
Established Member
Thats Fascism isn't it?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You're probably right, which is why those able bodied people on benefits need to get out into the fields. Work for your benefits or get nothing. Simple.
Tom B
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Messages
- 4,681
Wow, thats some question huh? Have you watched these Rogue Restaurant TV programmes lately where your immigrant friends are cooking your food in absolutely unthinkable appalling conditions......rotten meat, cross contamination, rodents, cock-a-roaches, human excrement from unwashed hands, dirty crockery, layers of old grease and oil, maggots etc etc??? The undercover camera never lies huh?? Whats more, they hire illegal immigrant workers to cook your lovely takeaway too. How tasty mmmm!!
Well after that gastronomic comment, I would rather be a political corrective "rascist and BNP voter" than be slowly food poisoned by those horrible dirty so and so's.
By the way, enjoy your next E-Coli Special. I will enjoy my good old British Steak and Chips home cooked.
By implication, if we have that some cafes have poor hygiene, and some cafes are run by immigrants, it is quite possible that there exists a cafe such that it is run by immigrants and has poor hygiene. It doesn't mean that all cafes run by immigrants have poor hygiene.
Actually, an awful lot of chippies are run by immigrants these days. The gentlemen who run my local one are from Poland, and do an excellent job of it.
Oh, and it's E. coli...
TrainBrain185
Member
I agree with you, perhaps I had my antagonsitic head on with my earlier reply. I know there are lots of "British" run food establishments flout hygiene laws in a big way and even even hire illegals because they are cheap labour.
A typical programme is on TV tonight called "Dish the Dirt". I digress though from the original topic.
Like everything in Politics, every Party have policies that are both liked and disliked. I have to stand firm and say I believe in some of the BNP's beliefs and policies. I would be a liar to say otherwise. I have tolerated enough of this New Labour. Not only have they allowed uncontrolled immigration over the years, they have also been too easy on paying out easy benefits to the bone idle Brit who will not work because he/she gets more money on Benefits. Unfortunately, this has led to immigrants taking up these lower paid jobs. I will certainly never put a X in the box for Labour after what they have done to our Armed Forces, sending lads into Iraq and Afghanistan to try and right the wrongs for people who don't appreciate the work our Army lads are trying to do.
Calling BNP supporters "Nazi's, Bigots, Fascist, Rascist" is wrong. You will be surprised to see how many people who are none of the above actually agree with the BNP and would consider voting for them if their policies were the only alternative.
Personally, I think we are losing the old traditional Britain I once loved and I simply do not like it and blame this Labour Party. Uncontrolled immigration is only one part of many problems.
When the Elections come, if BNP have the best views for me, then they will get my Vote, as with the Conservatives too, if they have a good manifesto to get this county right again, but never, never Labour.
Finally, how democratic is it where people have actually lost their jobs because they have been found out to be members of the BNP Party? What a terrible place this country has turned into!!
Dennis
Established Member
Anyone else think the BNP has missed the boat by about 30 years on this issue? What is their policy on interbreeding?
It seems a bit late to pull up the drawbridge now (a policy supported by at least one of the more mainstream parties).
As long as anyone in this country is making a positive contribution to society, that's fine by me. Let's ship out the criminal scum, spongers and dangerous religious fanatics, whatever their origin, but let decent, integrated 'ethnics' stay.
It seems a bit late to pull up the drawbridge now (a policy supported by at least one of the more mainstream parties).
As long as anyone in this country is making a positive contribution to society, that's fine by me. Let's ship out the criminal scum, spongers and dangerous religious fanatics, whatever their origin, but let decent, integrated 'ethnics' stay.
EM2
Established Member
There is no 'uncontrolled immigration'. The only people allowed free access to live and work in the UK are those from the EU. Now you can argue that that is amistake under Labour, and I'm inclined to agree. but it is not 'uncontrolled'.
There is a piece in tonight's Evening Standard discussing this, but unfortunately my work computer doesn't seem to like their homepage, so I don't know if it's in the online edition.
There is a piece in tonight's Evening Standard discussing this, but unfortunately my work computer doesn't seem to like their homepage, so I don't know if it's in the online edition.
Old Timer
Established Member
I am sorry but there IS uncontrolled Immigration into the UK despite your assertion.
It happens in this way.
A person enters on a visitors Visa and overstays.
They work illegally, almost certainly seek to marry a UK Citizen and then they apply for, and are given permission to stay. You can contact serviceds offering arranged marriages in practically all UK Cities and big towns.
They do not marry but remain at large, and when caught apply for leave to stay because they have become "settled".
Labour have reduced our Immigration Service to little more than a few people working at an incredible rate but still only leaving little more than a scratch on the surface.
Just watch the Fly on the Wall TV series which follows the Borders and Immigration Agency and see how people routinely ignore the system and are then allowed to stay. Only the most flagrant of cases of abuse ever seem to be put forward for Deportation, and then as we know, the likes of Cherie Bliar are waiting to fight your corner no matter how "guilty" you are of failing to comply with the system.
Contrast this with a certain Foreign Country (EU) where I was recently.
If you get married, you do NOT get any "Right" to stay, neither can you claim Citizenship on the back of your marriage partner for (as I recall) 7 years. Medical care only applies to EU Passport holders. No Benefits, no free housing.
Yet another Country.......You are required to apply for an extension to your 30 day Visitors Visa within that period. It will be granted ONLY if you can prove that you have a valid reason and can support yourself. You are not entitled to any form of free medical care, you are required to insure yourself and pay for your treatment. Contrast this with the UK where it is a known fact that we suffer from "medical tourism".
Same Country.....You cannot buy anything beyond food, drink, hotels, etc without a tax card. This card proves that you are a citizen of the Country or you have leave to remain. Without the card you cannot rent property, buy anything on credit, obtain a credit card or even purchase a PAYG mobile phone.
If you are given leave to stay (EXCEPTIONAL) circumstances only, you are required to make your own medical provision and are not entitled to any form of Government support, i.e. no benefits, healthcare, etc, etc. You are also required to provide guarantors and live only at the address you have notified.
Leave to stay is not given to anyone with a prison record, and you are required to provide documentary evidence of this.
All applications HAVE to be done in the UK or other Country BEFORE departure. If you later opt to stay then its back home for you and re-apply to re-enter.
If you go missing at the end of your stay you WILL be found and imprisoned, no questions, and deported when you have served your sentence.
This is a Country proud of its Human Rights but more importantly it is fiercely protective of its borders and the people it lets in.
THAT is Controlled Immigration
By the way here is the link to the London Evening Standard article.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...obe-into-labours-partisan-immigration-plan.do
It happens in this way.
A person enters on a visitors Visa and overstays.
They work illegally, almost certainly seek to marry a UK Citizen and then they apply for, and are given permission to stay. You can contact serviceds offering arranged marriages in practically all UK Cities and big towns.
They do not marry but remain at large, and when caught apply for leave to stay because they have become "settled".
Labour have reduced our Immigration Service to little more than a few people working at an incredible rate but still only leaving little more than a scratch on the surface.
Just watch the Fly on the Wall TV series which follows the Borders and Immigration Agency and see how people routinely ignore the system and are then allowed to stay. Only the most flagrant of cases of abuse ever seem to be put forward for Deportation, and then as we know, the likes of Cherie Bliar are waiting to fight your corner no matter how "guilty" you are of failing to comply with the system.
Contrast this with a certain Foreign Country (EU) where I was recently.
If you get married, you do NOT get any "Right" to stay, neither can you claim Citizenship on the back of your marriage partner for (as I recall) 7 years. Medical care only applies to EU Passport holders. No Benefits, no free housing.
Yet another Country.......You are required to apply for an extension to your 30 day Visitors Visa within that period. It will be granted ONLY if you can prove that you have a valid reason and can support yourself. You are not entitled to any form of free medical care, you are required to insure yourself and pay for your treatment. Contrast this with the UK where it is a known fact that we suffer from "medical tourism".
Same Country.....You cannot buy anything beyond food, drink, hotels, etc without a tax card. This card proves that you are a citizen of the Country or you have leave to remain. Without the card you cannot rent property, buy anything on credit, obtain a credit card or even purchase a PAYG mobile phone.
If you are given leave to stay (EXCEPTIONAL) circumstances only, you are required to make your own medical provision and are not entitled to any form of Government support, i.e. no benefits, healthcare, etc, etc. You are also required to provide guarantors and live only at the address you have notified.
Leave to stay is not given to anyone with a prison record, and you are required to provide documentary evidence of this.
All applications HAVE to be done in the UK or other Country BEFORE departure. If you later opt to stay then its back home for you and re-apply to re-enter.
If you go missing at the end of your stay you WILL be found and imprisoned, no questions, and deported when you have served your sentence.
This is a Country proud of its Human Rights but more importantly it is fiercely protective of its borders and the people it lets in.
THAT is Controlled Immigration
By the way here is the link to the London Evening Standard article.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...obe-into-labours-partisan-immigration-plan.do
Last edited:
EM2
Established Member
Old Timer
Established Member
As Many Rice Davies said...He would say that wouldn't he.
Labour have long tried to persuade the Country that uncontrolld Immigration has positive advantages, and actively removed what controls there were to do this.
Straw's hype and spin of course is contrary to what the House of Lords Econmics Affairs Committee Inquiry discovered. He is their conclusion :
Labour continually peddle four key areas where they seek to persuade that uncontrolled Immigration is good for the UK. In all cases they are wrong.
1. 600,000 vacancies need to be filled
Disproved by the facts. Net immigration since 2001 when the government first made this claim is approaching 900,000 but vacancies are still at about 600,000. The reason is that immigrants fill jobs but also create demand. To argue from vacancies is therefore to advocate an endless cycle of immigration. It is also to fall into the lump of labour fallacy.
2. Immigrants comprise 8% of the workforce but contribute 10% of GDP.
Rejected by the Statistics Commission. This takes no account of the higher unemployment among immigrants and the lower participation by women. Correcting for these factors shows migrants making up 10% of the working age population and contributing 10% of GDP.
In May 2006, the government revised their claim to 10.5% of adults and 11% of GDP. (House of Lords answer HL 5379). Even this calculation was biased by the omission of children. Correcting for this omission gives 11.2% for the immigrant population and 10.9% for their contribution to GDP slightly negative.
3. Immigrants earnings are 13% higher than those of indigenous workers.
Dismissed by Statistics Commission for the same reason. Correcting for lower participation rates and higher unemployment among immigrant communities makes average wages across the working age population of immigrants the same as for the population as a whole. Only about 1 in 5 of the foreign born population earns more that the average salary for full time work the same proportion as the UK born.
4. Immigrants are needed to pay our pensions
The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee dismissed this argument in November 2003. They reported We conclude that it is neither appropriate nor feasible to attempt to counter the trend towards a more aged society in the UK through a manipulation of immigration policy.
The Turner Commission on pensions reached a similar conclusion in their interim report.
Of course the final position they resort to is personal vilification and accusations of Racism when such facts are put to them.
To prevent those who do not read and comprehend posts properly, and for the ske of clarity, I would like to make it clear that my comments refer to Uncontrolled Immigration, whicis a much different thing to a properly managed Controlled Immigration policy, which generally positively benefits most Countries.
Labour have long tried to persuade the Country that uncontrolld Immigration has positive advantages, and actively removed what controls there were to do this.
Straw's hype and spin of course is contrary to what the House of Lords Econmics Affairs Committee Inquiry discovered. He is their conclusion :
Labour continually peddle four key areas where they seek to persuade that uncontrolled Immigration is good for the UK. In all cases they are wrong.
1. 600,000 vacancies need to be filled
Disproved by the facts. Net immigration since 2001 when the government first made this claim is approaching 900,000 but vacancies are still at about 600,000. The reason is that immigrants fill jobs but also create demand. To argue from vacancies is therefore to advocate an endless cycle of immigration. It is also to fall into the lump of labour fallacy.
2. Immigrants comprise 8% of the workforce but contribute 10% of GDP.
Rejected by the Statistics Commission. This takes no account of the higher unemployment among immigrants and the lower participation by women. Correcting for these factors shows migrants making up 10% of the working age population and contributing 10% of GDP.
In May 2006, the government revised their claim to 10.5% of adults and 11% of GDP. (House of Lords answer HL 5379). Even this calculation was biased by the omission of children. Correcting for this omission gives 11.2% for the immigrant population and 10.9% for their contribution to GDP slightly negative.
3. Immigrants earnings are 13% higher than those of indigenous workers.
Dismissed by Statistics Commission for the same reason. Correcting for lower participation rates and higher unemployment among immigrant communities makes average wages across the working age population of immigrants the same as for the population as a whole. Only about 1 in 5 of the foreign born population earns more that the average salary for full time work the same proportion as the UK born.
4. Immigrants are needed to pay our pensions
The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee dismissed this argument in November 2003. They reported We conclude that it is neither appropriate nor feasible to attempt to counter the trend towards a more aged society in the UK through a manipulation of immigration policy.
The Turner Commission on pensions reached a similar conclusion in their interim report.
Of course the final position they resort to is personal vilification and accusations of Racism when such facts are put to them.
To prevent those who do not read and comprehend posts properly, and for the ske of clarity, I would like to make it clear that my comments refer to Uncontrolled Immigration, whicis a much different thing to a properly managed Controlled Immigration policy, which generally positively benefits most Countries.
richa2002
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2005
- Messages
- 2,298
As far as I know, the last part of your post is actually the BNP's policy.
EM2
Established Member
I find it interesting that the areas of the country where there is large support for the BNP (e.g. Norfolk, Mid-Wales, East Coast, Dorset) are generally NOT areas where there is a large immigrant population.
Swift-Deere
Member
I find it interesting that the areas of the country where there is large support for the BNP (e.g. Norfolk, Mid-Wales, East Coast, Dorset) are generally NOT areas where there is a large immigrant population.
Its the fear of Difference and ignorance!!! that why people vote for them many voters are naive to the true intent of the BNP
Old Timer
Established Member
Sorry guys but this is just raw data.
What does "high" mean ?
Underneath it indicates 0.4% of Population. What does that mean ?
Without any information as to how this data is related it is almost meaningless. Very Guardian.
What does "high" mean ?
Underneath it indicates 0.4% of Population. What does that mean ?
Without any information as to how this data is related it is almost meaningless. Very Guardian.
Swift-Deere
Member
Yes I know that the info's not perfect because its from the Guardian
i think the 0.4% means the percentage of people who are member of the BNP (From when their member list was leaked) in a given town or area.
TrainBrain185
Member
Hi, pardon my ignorance, but I don't understand the first part of your reply??
As that UK map appears, it can be proved as "fact" in all seriousness that London is as Nick Griffin mentioned, "a lost cause" for the BNP, just as lots of places in the North would vote Labour even if a Chimpanzee was standing for election in their constituency!!
I was bemused how that map stated Racist was BNP against non white. The immigration issue is non biased to our coloured immigrants, but also white skinned immigrants too.
My estimation of the same map if produced in 20 to 30 years time....there will be a lot less grey and blue parts and a whole lot more pink!!
Old Timer
Established Member
So "high" equates to 1 in 2,500 people :roll::roll:
THe whole thing is just some sick Left Wing Liberal joke.
If they want to discuss TRUE Racism then they should talk about Israel, the Middle East, or Central Africa.
Indeed true racism is closer to their own home if only they bother to go to Golders Green and ask what happens to any Jewish person who dares to marry "Outside".
Except of course this does not fit the sterotype.
Some months back a London Labour Councillor made some VERY disparaging remarks about a Conservative Asian Councillor.
Her response ?
"I cannot be Racist because I am Black. ONLY white people can be racist"
Labour of course took no sanction against her.
Here is yet another example of racism this time from a Muslim Labour Councillor.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...row-candidate-told-white-Jewish-selected.html
Swift-Deere
Member
I don't think that will be the case as immigrants tend to go where other immigrants go ie london, East Lancashire, the midland cities etc
Yes it is from an unreliable paper (i much prefer the paper you have linked to)
and the councillor comment was disgraceful
Yes. The "high" is in terms of BNP membership; the threshold for marking this on the map is where membership exceeds 1 in 2,500, .04%. This is because the BNP is not a mass membership party. The threshold for one of the larger parties would have to be larger, or else the entire map would be coloured.
Old Timer
Established Member
Thank you for clarifying, but in my own personal opinion classifying 0.04% of the population as "high" given what this actually amounts to when the actual voting population of the UK is extrapolated.
Forgive my cynicism but I have been around too many years now to trust anything that is published in the Left Wing press unless it is properly supported and verifiable independently.
Whilst I hold my own particular beliefs (which incidentally do not fit neatly into any specific Party) demonisation of the BNP is not the answer.
I believe that the answer is for the subjects which cause people to move to the extreme Parties need to be aired publicly and properly without fear of the Left calling in the Race card.
I might as well believe that there are fairies at the bottom of my garden.
Forgive my cynicism but I have been around too many years now to trust anything that is published in the Left Wing press unless it is properly supported and verifiable independently.
Whilst I hold my own particular beliefs (which incidentally do not fit neatly into any specific Party) demonisation of the BNP is not the answer.
I believe that the answer is for the subjects which cause people to move to the extreme Parties need to be aired publicly and properly without fear of the Left calling in the Race card.
I might as well believe that there are fairies at the bottom of my garden.
Last edited:
Swift-Deere
Member
They do in Iceland
Old Timer
Established Member
If they are youngish and female and blonde then maybe I should move ?
Hence why I like Amsterdam
Hence why I like Amsterdam
Kneedown
Established Member
Another problem with the "chart" posted is that it only refers to the "Non White" population. It takes no account of white immigrants, East Europeans for example, of which there are many in Lincolnshire and Norfolk.
So many people are ignorant of the fact that the BNP are an anti immigration party, not an anti black/brown/yellow/purple spotted party.
Absolutely agree (I presume you meant "without"). I think this was actually the strongest message from the original broadcast. When it was raised from the audience, only Baroness Warsi seemed to understand what was being asked.
BlythPower
Member
So we can expect the BNP's equivalent of brownshirts to go round Earls Court and hassle Australians, then?
Old Timer
Established Member
Sorry not sure what you mean ?
Just as a quick aside it is nice and indeed unusual that this subject has been conducted in a rational, non-controversial, and non-confrontational manner so far.
This sort of subject normally descends into name calling and flaming very quickly normally.
All credit to participants on both sides of the argument.
Your original post said "with fear
Old Timer
Established Member
Sorry, understand now. Old age you see. I read your quote (which I assume you had altered to read correctly), rather than going to mine
Anyway thanks, I have updated mine now.
EM2
Established Member
Just a quick note on the graphic I posted. I had to use a copy on a different webpage to the one where it was originally published, due to work webfilters.
Here's the original posting:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25541021@N00/4038713677/
and here's the links for the data:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2009/oct/19/bnp-membership-uk-map
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget_print.asp?ID=1700
Here's the original posting:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/25541021@N00/4038713677/
and here's the links for the data:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/interactive/2009/oct/19/bnp-membership-uk-map
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget_print.asp?ID=1700
Kneedown
Established Member
The BNP don't "hassle" anyone. Their fight is via the ballot box. More than can be said for Labour's stormtroopers who hurl abuse and egg's at democratically elected BNP representitives, gather for more troublemaking at BNP get togethers and the BBC studio's, attempt to damage the reputations of law abiding BNP members (and Ex-BNP members) who had their names and addresses made public via the infamous "leaked list", by submitting bogus financial applications in those names along with downright violent threats! Also, it's Labours socialist stasi who violently manhandle pensioners out of the Labour conference for the crime of exercising their right of free speech!
Just remind me again, who are the thugs and fascist's here?
Last edited:
- Status