The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #123889 Message #2734761
Posted By: Richard Bridge
30-Sep-09 - 03:32 AM
Thread Name: BS: The BNP conundrum
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum
Thank you Keith.
To turn now to immigration.
1. Even if it was at unprecedented levels in mid 2007, is it not true that it is now NOT at unprecedented levels so that the projections referred to in the Telegraph article linked to are thereby undermined?
2. Discrimination comes in two kinds, direct and indirect. Direct discrimination is (for example) "This job is for men only". THat is direct sex discrimination. Indirect discrimination is the application of a criterion that is less likely to be capable of satisfaction by the discriminee - for example "Must be capable of lifting a full barrel of beer above the head" (unless that is a genuine occupational requirement). Therefore the statement "there are too many immigrants" is indirectly racially discriminatory in itself, and teh burden of proof that a restriction on immigration is not racially discriminatory lies on the discriminator. It is accordingly for MigrationWatch to show that it is not tending to discriminate on racial grounds.
3. The BNP list of places that it would automatically put on a stop list is directly discriminatory.