Immigration and the Unmentionable Question

Post Reply New Topic

Well, my main issues are the fact that
1.Have an Indian night, chinese night or whatever - just if you have an english night - you'd better call it a fish and chip supper or there'll be uproar.
2.Certain people trying to change the names of our festivals i.e. Christmas.
You don't pronouce it Christ-Mass which is the religous version. Even if you did, it's not the point. We don't tell people to change 'Divali'.
Why should they tell us to change our holiday name?

sigholdaccountlost, often it's actually politically correct politicians beaurocrats and suchlike who try and enforce these sort of changes. most ethnic minority peoples i've come across in the uk don't seem to have a problem with british people celebrating britishness. not that i really care, i find british culture generally s**t to begin with anyway. but perhaps thats more to do with my scottishness...

But preferable to Sharia law, don't you think?

Here's some reading, peebo.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml

And some more:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/29/nmuslims29.xml

i don't think we really have to worry about sharia law in the uk. i mean, be serious.

and of course, the more alienated people such as yourself make muslims feel living in the uk (their home) clearly the more radical and anti british they will become.

and i can tell you, it's not only muslims that sympathise with the london underground bombers, i've met a fair few ethnic british individuals who have expressed similar sentiments, for whatever reasons. and again, it's not only muslim extremists who partake of that kind of behaviour, what about the soho nail bomber? the ira?

in fact, here is a prime example of a story that was apparently not covered in the mainstream press at all. now, imagine that the perpetrators of this bomb factory were muslims... the story would have been all over the front pages of the tabloids.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/10/353372.html

i mean, explosive substances, rocket launchers and nuclear suits? seems like the real deal to me. and yet, just look at the hysteria over that bogus liquid explosives scare story last summer...

And who gave them the right to breed? The world has LIMITED resources, if they suffer the consequences its not anyones fault but their own. It's not our responsibility to save those that made their own bed. You can be a bleeding heart all you like but to irresponsibly bring children into that world and then get a free ride immigrating to 1st world nation is dangerous, especially when you have lots of humans. You will destabilize an entire economy, tear apart the social fabric and not to mention plunge the nation into civil unrest. There is simply not enough resources to go around, period. Stupid humans breed without thinking, it's not up to us to save people that breed mindlessly and irresponsibly.

We have the luxury of considering being "moral" because we are relatively economically safe, if they threatened your standard of living and lifestyle, you can bet your ass you'd be pissed off and want them out or even to kill them because you're suffering because the are invading your economy illegally. Illegal immigration lowers wages (stealing your wages) from you while businesses make a killing making you compete against those who will work for slave wages.

I'd like to save everyone too but the earth has finite amount of people it can support. This is why there are immigration controls on countries, since if too many people immigrate, that country is going to go to s**t and all hell will break loose. Just look at the muslim population in Europe... they are most likely going to be totally f****d soon since muslims/islamics are breeding like rabits.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2RKBxR3BTI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY6t2ckpb5g

If you think the media is biased against minorities in its reporting, you are completely, 180 degrees wrong in my opinion.

Take the evidence from recent weeks.

Henry Webster, a white boy of 15 has his skull battered with a hammer by an Asian gang in Swindon. Does this provoke a public debate about the racism of the Asian community? Nope. Did this make the front page of the tabloids? Nope. The BBC on their website don’t even mention the ethnicity of his attackers.

Compare this with the furore over the bullying of Shilpa Shetty by three white girls in Celebrity Big Brother. Now of course bullying was dreadful. But it wasn’t the swearing and the shouting that really got the media interested. What really got them interested was that Shilpa is Indian, and that the treatment she was subjected to included being called “Poppadom”, being referred to as “the Indian” (technically correct) and having her accent mimicked behind her back. Cue professional grievance-mongers like Trevor Phillips and Keith Vaz lining up to lecture us about how much this reveals about nasty racist white society at large.

Or compare the media coverage given to the racist murder of the black teenager Anthony Walker by white thugs with the media coverage given to the racist murder of Christopher Yates by Asian thugs.

Or consider the racist murder of white teenager Kriss Donald by three Asians – one of the most appalling racist murders in British history – which was totally ignored by the media for three years until the murderers were convicted.

It seems there’s only so far the media can push their propaganda, and soon after the Kriss Donald verdist there were reports in the media that according to Home Office statistics, 50% of victims of racist crime were actually white. But even when the media seems to be providing some balance, there is usually still a politically correct agenda behind it.

Take this BBC report for instance --> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6128466.stm

"Racism was once defined as "prejudice plus power" - a definition which, in a British context, has tended to exclude all but the white population.

However, the "racist murders" of Kriss Donald in Glasgow in 2004 and Ross Parker in Peterborough in 2001, young white men killed by Asians, demonstrate how society has been forced to redefine racism.

The most recent analysis shows that in 2004, 87,000 people from black or minority ethnic communities (BME) said they had been a victim of a racially motivated crime. In the same period, 92,000 white people said they had also fallen victim.

Focusing on violent racial attacks, 49,000 BME were victims. Among whites, the number was 77,000.

Of those that involved wounding 4,000 were BME. Among the white population it was 20,000.
The numbers can be highly misleading, though. Since about 90% of people in Britain are white, the statistics actually show the risk of being a victim of race crime is significantly greater if you are from an ethnic minority."

See the problem with the last paragraph here? The journalist is banking on the reader’s mathematical illiteracy and disguising the un-PC truth by focusing on the victims. He should be asking the following question instead: since non-whites make up only 10% of the population of Britain, why are they responsible for 50% of racist crime?

your point can go both ways though codarac. if they make up only 10% of the population, why are they the victims of 50% of racist crime? i think you may wish to ask which came first.

also, your mention of racist crime is not really relevant to the point i was making, i was talking of the furore surrounding islamic terrorism in the british media over the last few years, while white fascist terror groups are all but ignored. my point was in response to what ascan said in his last post.

but i will say, i am pretty sure the murder of kriss donald was reported by the national media. i am pretty sure i saw it on national television news not long after it happened. the reason it sticks in my mind is that i was actually living in glasgow at the time.

No, it doesn't work like that. This is the point I was trying to make.

Let me explain.

If whites and non-whites are, on average, equally "racist", then the ratio of white-on-nonwhite racist crimes to nonwhite-on-white racist crimes should equal the ratio of whites to nonwhites in the population as a whole, i.e., 9:1.

So if whites and nonwhites are equally racist, then nonwhites should be the victims of 90% of racist crime, which is a lot higher than the true figure of 50%.

Yes, the indigenous population of these islands are remarkably tolerant; a bit too much so, at times.


What white fascist terror groups? Haven't seen any recently threatening death to non-believers:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/05/nflag05.xml

Or, flying planes into buildings come to think of it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11,_2001_attacks

Or, blowing up London trains and buses killing and maiming scores of innocent people:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4661059.stm

Or, planning to kidnap a serving British soldier and film him being murdered:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2577831,00.html

did you not read the link i posted about the bomb factory that was discovered and not reported in the mainstream media? apparently one of the perpetrators was robert cottage, the BNP candidate in pendle at the council elections last year, and among other things uncovered at the raid was a rocket launcher...

'The 22 chemical components recovered by police are believed to be the largest haul ever found at a house in this country.
'Cottage is an ex-BNP member who stood as a candidate in the Pendle Council elections in May.
'Mrs Christiana Buchanan, who appeared for the prosecution in Jackson's case, alleged the pair had "some kind of masterplan".
'She said a search of Jackson's home had uncovered rocket launchers, chemicals, BNP literature and a nuclear biological suit. ...
'06 October 2006'


also remember the bombings in brick lane, soho and brixton several years ago.

So what? That doesn't demonstrate anything. They're just one-offs, not organised terror on a nationwide scale. You'll have to do better than that! I'm sure we'd soon notice if they started flying aircraft at buildings; press coverage or not.

since we are talking about the uk here, i don't recall any terrorists of any sort flying aircrafts into buildings. and no, they are not just one offs. there are a few quite highly organised right wing groups that could be classed as terrorist organisations in the uk.

and what do you mean by a nationwide scale? i don't recall any threats from islamic terrorists affecting scotland, wales or ireland. although i am sre you'll correct me if i'm wrong...

Muslims have not be flying planes into buildings over here, yet, I was just giving an example of the type of behaviour others have been engaged in across the Atlantic. Of course, British Muslim extremists have murdered in those attacks in London. Others have attempted similar things as is evidenced by the recent trial we've seen on the news. Also, the police have carried out a number of other raids and made arrests, as you'll be aware. Although it's claimed that certain of those arrested and later released were "innocent", I somehow doubt if they really were, to be honest. Much as I may question the motives of this government at times, I'd be fairly confident that a lot of resources are going into finding those who seek to do us harm, and just because the police can't get enough evidence to convict, doesn't mean those they arrest haven't been up to no good.

And yes, it is a nationwide problem. There are Muslim communities across the UK, and each of these provides a source of potential recruits. Wales, Scotland and England are, for most purposes, rather arbitrary categories. I drive in and out of Wales quite frequently, and have visited Scotland regularly, too, in the past. I'm sure Islamic terrorists do the same. It's not as if there are border guards!

What successive governments have done is created a problem that has potential to be of greater magnitude than the problems in Ireland ever were. There are a number of similarities, too. Religion is the most obvious. If you want to get people to hate other people you can't beat it. Blind faith; no questions asked! I suppose you could argue that religion per se isn't the cause of the problem, but just helps to perpetuate it. If you consider Northern Ireland, you might say the troubles there were initiated by injustices committed fairly recently historically speaking (a few hundred years). With the muslims you could say that perceived injustices committed recently have sparked their anger. With the Irish situation the religous differences (Catholic/Protestant) helped to drive a wedge between the two groups, in a way highlighting the differences between them, and providing focus for attack. All the time, the two sides living cheek by jowl in the same communities, not just in N Ireland, but in communities in England and Scotland, too, where the catholic vs protestant rivalry is still strong today. The muslim terror problem is exacerbated not just by religious difference, but by skin colour and culture. These two criteria alone have been a recipe for enough misery without the volatile addition of Islam and Christianity.

Look how the N Ireland problems developed: communities eventually dividing and walls being erected between them (literally, not just figuratively!). I can see that happening over here. In fact, it seems almost inevitable, unfortunately. The majority might want peace, but the powerful minority with access to religous influence can always persuade enough young men to keep the fight alive. You mentioned right wing terror groups. You've not offered any evidence as to them being a credible threat, at present. But given a few more terrorist attacks by muslim extremists and those groups will develop and we'll be in a tit for tat terrorist situation just like the troubles of the 70s and 80s in Ireland. You want evidence of the way communities are already splitting? There are many Muslim areas of the UK where as a white male you'd need to be very careful. There are plenty of attacks on white people just because they are white. I could show you areas of the city where I used to live where most white people have been driven out. If you drive down those streets now you just see muslims covered head to foot in their distinctive black garb.

So, there you have it: the potential for decades of bloodshed all in the name of liberal tolerance and "inclusion" brought about by a criminal ignorance of the lessons of history, and the arrogance and greed that's now a hallmark of the British political system.