No need for confusion Jeddy.

Put simply, Keith is desperate to prove or persuade that we are drowning under a tidal wave of uncontrolled and unnecessary immigration.

To do this he will dredge up polemics and half truths from various sourcers and then lie about them and twist them around a lot to suit his objectives. He will find various facts and figures and mis-represent them for the same reasons.

He asks people to comment about the issues rather than the figures and then just refuses to address those issues and...guess what...goes back for another go at misrepresenting some new information.

Take the latest post. Let's assume that 2007 net arrivals were 237,000 (or even 333,000 - it doesn't matter). Keith thinks, because he read it in a migration watch polemic of April 2009, that this is 25 times greater than at any point in our history.

Yet Gervase quite rightly calculated from one of Keith's other sources (BBC) that between 1945-1970 there were on average 37,000 immigrants annually, which makes the 2007 figure either 6 times or 9 times greater than in the whole 25 years 1945-1970.

Keith gave you half the truth about marriage-related immigration policy and half the truth about asylum and work-permit entrants. You just need to ask yourself why he keeps doing this. This is what the BNP do. They insinuate things, they tell half the truth.

I don't think Keith is a BNP supporter, but he has an axe to grind about immigration. He is not someone who has been lied to and who is seeking proper information; he is someone desperate to prove - against all the facts - that there is a far greater problem around immigration than there really is. At least that is the conclusion from his actions here.