 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The BNP conundrum
|
|
|
Subject: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 26 Sep 09 - 07:58 PM I'm not normally a fan of Fraser Nelson, the current editor of The Spectator magazine; but, although I disagree with many of his views and conclusions based on a traditional Tory perspective I nevertheless feel that he raises some valid issues too in the Coffee House "....ask why I'm so keen to trash the BNP and Griffin – and ask if I'm guilty of the same kneejerk liberal reaction that I accuse others of. A fair point: 'racist' can seem like a playground chant, and any rebuttal of the BNP needs more detail to be credible. Yet I oppose them for the racism reason. The party incubates and legitimises genuine racism The BNP has cleverly learned to bury these racist sentiments beneath legitimate concerns about immigration. When Hitler started National Socialism in Germany it started off with 2 percent of the vote. So I don't think you can write the BNP off on account of its small support Simon Stephenson says it's time to explain better why we hate the BNP. I totally agree. The lobotomized left (which I distinguish from New Labour at its peak) are characterized by debating via two main tools: hysteria and name-calling. A look at the opinion polls shows how successful this tactic is. But the voters repelled by this are not all coming to the Tories. It's a reminder just how counter-productive namecalling is." Previous BNP thread (click) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: jeddy Date: 26 Sep 09 - 08:14 PM i don't just hate the BNP for its racist views, its veiws about immigration or even its hatred of anyone not seeming to be normal. of course all this i dispise, but not only for the obvious reasons. i would hate with the same passion any party whos idea of a debade was to use violence. to use lies and intimidation for any reason, is disgusting to me. more to follow, just thought i would start what i am thinking about this. take care jade x x x x |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 26 Sep 09 - 08:27 PM Meanwhile - look out Plaid Cymru and the SNP! The BNP is hijacking your heroes too! The BNP group's merchandise website, Excalibur, is selling items emblazoned with images of St George, William Wallace and Owain Glyndwr together with slogans such as "British by birth, Welsh by the grace of God". A 4.5m high bronze statue of Glyndwr mounted on a horse was presented to the people of Corwen, Denbighshire – the town of Glyndwr's birth – in September 2007 at a cost of £125,000. The sculptor Colin Spofforth spent four years creating it and said he was "shocked" when he found out it was being used by the BNP. "First of all, what they have done is against the law," he told The Western Mail. "I certainly did not give any permission for it to be used and I never would have done." from The Independent on Sunday 27 September 2009 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 26 Sep 09 - 08:43 PM "The lobotomized left" is an obvious example of what the man complains about later in the same line - "hysteria and name-calling". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: akenaton Date: 26 Sep 09 - 09:10 PM Emma...I dont think there is one member here who would support racism or the BNP for that matter, but there are issues (like immigration, which need to be debated, that debate is not happening here, because, whenever the issue is raised, the usual suspects start screaming. On Question Time on Thursday Mrs Harmon was asked about the effects of economic migration, she made no attempt to answer the question, but embarked on an attack on the BNP, to large cheers from the audiance. Now that.... and what often happens on this forum when race or immigration issues are raised, seems to me to be a form of fascism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Joe Offer Date: 26 Sep 09 - 10:26 PM Yeah, it would be interesting to discuss this subject without the screaming, wouldn't it? I get a lot of complaints about the BNP threads, mostly because there's so much screaming and because the bullies allow so little in the way of rational discussion. I've been labelled a BNP sympathizer because of my complaints about the bullying. I've heard from at least a couple of people who no longer want to be associated with Mudcat because of the nastiness of the BNP threads. Maybe it's time to tone things down and deal with the subject without hysteria? See the quote Emma posted above:
-Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: jeddy Date: 26 Sep 09 - 11:14 PM how anyone could call you a BNPer joe is beyond me, you have proved time and again your feelings on the matter. ok, trying to take the emotion out of this subject could be rather difficult and i hope we can manage it on the... what ..6th go? just because we disagree with people about the things they believe to be right does not make them unreachable. we have no idea of how exactly they came to think the way they do. take the 12 year old girl, do we think she is racist....or brainwashed? maybe she has no other source of knowledge, her parents probably are very scary to her when they talk about these things. at that age you believe what your parents tell you, most of us did, at least about certain things. i imagine that the family concerned have get togethers where there are lots of people talking the same way, just as we do here, in our own weird family. so who do you think is responsible for her actions? i know i haven't been consistant in the way i would like to handle those who are truely racist, one minuite i want to lock them all up the next i want to TRY to educate them... WHY?... coz no one has all the answers, hell if i even had one i would be happy. every person that is driven to the BNP has their own reasons. it is hard to be reasonable, but i think we must be with geniune people who have found an understanding with them. immigration: are we overcrowded? still not sure, there were alot of interesting facts in the last thread that i had no idea about. maybe it is the actual location of the majority of housing that makes us feel like we can't cope with anymore people. look around in towns, there are so many empty properties,surely we don't always have to build new ones? even when new housing is called for, look where they build it, smack bang in the midle of a flood plain....DUH!!!! so when we do get flooded out, there are so many people trying to find spaces in the emergency lodgings, that they can't cope! OK...breathe......sorry i got myself abit worked up, which was what i was tying to avoid doing.....this is going to be harder than i thought. what i am trying to say, is what would happen if we did close the boarders now?... it would give the government time to think through what could be done with the great numbers of occupiable properties or land. fair enough this would be one way of doing something to help. the other option is to leave open the boarders, welcome those with building experiance and say help to reform this area, house, plot and we will pay you. it would certainly help them, us, and it would creat jobs for everyone as it is such a huge task. ok my rant over for this evening. take care all jade x x x x x does any of this make sense? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: jeddy Date: 26 Sep 09 - 11:24 PM oh yeah, i have just figured out why this wouldn't be possible. the labour government has lost all our money!!!! i knw about the recession, i don't know why it came about and i know even less why why the banks were bailed out yet they still award themselves with offencive bonuses(?). i am shocked that someone isn't saying that is down to migrants and their families! j x x x x |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: ButterandCheese Date: 27 Sep 09 - 12:31 AM So the same old tired name calling and arguements drift to yet Another BNP thread, sorry Emma, I know you mean very well indeed, and are one of the very few who can put together valid arguements in a sensible manner. If this particualr thread is to survive I believe the founder of the thread can be given editing and modding rights. I think perhaps this might be a good idea, that way the thread stays on track. I've always felt that the left has always had a certain lobotomisation to it, feed'em the right script lines and they'll do the knee-jerk "how high do you want us to jump" thing, Seen it too often at actions and demos over the years, put me off attending the events for quite awhile. I realised that the few shouldn't be allowed to ruin it for those who genuinely cared and genuinely wanted to work for change. Name calling and making fun doesn't work and the people that indulge themselves in this sort of things (you know who you are)are not contributing anything. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: akenaton Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:53 AM Emma is one of my favourite contributers here, so please leave off with your patronising remarks......after 4 posts! Fascists are ridiculous....especially the hypocritical left wing variety! They deserve to be made fun of. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: The Sandman Date: 27 Sep 09 - 06:13 AM Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: akenaton - PM Date: 26 Sep 09 - 09:10 PM Emma...I dont think there is one member here who would support racism or the BNP for that matter, but there are issues (like immigration, which need to be debated, that debate is not happening here, because, whenever the issue is raised, the usual suspects start screaming. On Question Time on Thursday Mrs Harmon was asked about the effects of economic migration, she made no attempt to answer the question, but embarked on an attack on the BNP, to large cheers from the audiance. Now that.... and what often happens on this forum when race or immigration issues are raised, seems to me to be a form of fascism with respect mbs george who is a member here,supports the BNP. I understand why many people fell disenfranchised and turn to the BNP,the other parties need to cop on,it is obvious that the mainsteam parties are filled with career politicians,however [imo]the BNPs policies would not solve our economic predicament. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Jack Campin Date: 27 Sep 09 - 06:26 AM The BNP is indeed clever in capitalizing on legitimate fears about immigration. The fears about immigration the BNP exploits are the same as those the Daily Mail and the rest of the Britist right promulgate, and they are *not* legitimate. They are all the result of spin-doctoring, misrepresentation and outright lies. We don't need to offer ANY concessions to the fear-mongering scum who are manufacturing the issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 27 Sep 09 - 07:31 AM Jack, I agree with you wholeheartedly about your comment that the 'fears' about immigration and danger it presents to the country have been cynically manipulated and exaggerated by the right wing press - I think I have posted some examples of their, totally unfounded, scariest headlines in a thread once but this, however deplorable, is a fact! I said I didn't agree with much of what Fraser Nelson writes, he represents a very different political viewpoint to my own, but nevertheless, he recognizes the the real fear of the racist BNP when he sees it and advocates a course of action that is NOT yeliing expletives or simply dismissing them as loonies. Kevin, - as Captain Mainwaring would say, 'well spotted McGrath' :) Jeddy makes a good point about overcrowding and housing stock. There is a long history why affordable housing from local authorities etc is in desperately short supply and demographics related to employment policy etc why a lot of it is simply in the 'wrong place' Ake, believe it or not as a left winger (although I believe my prefrontal cortex is still very much connected), I actually feel disenfranchished myself from mainstream politics in this country probably every bit as much as some feel disillusioned. In fact, the article I quoted from shares your views (if not mine) that the left is, in some of its attitudes, also 'fascist' but bear in mind this is the view of an economic libertarian who is also sceptical about global warming Joe, I hope people recognize you as the fairminded person you are; a friend of the UK if sometimes as bemused and confused by the Brit way of life as we are about the US (tries not to mention health care :) ) Well folks, as I think I've pointed out before - no one 'owns' a thread - they have a very real life (or self destrction suicide) of their own. Thank you Joe for allowing a further thread to arise from the bitter ashes of the last and allowing yet another opportunity for rational discussion (not I hope without the relief of some humour) "But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread carefully because you tread on my dreams" 'Em' |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Sep 09 - 07:32 AM It seems to me that concerns expressed about the flood of economic migrants into this country might have more credibility, were it not for the fact that the flood in question has taken more than fifty years to reach the horrendous total of.........five percent of the current population. In the last five years numbers of EU workers have come here in pursuit of earning a living, just as numbers of Brits have been doing in other EU countries ("Aufwiedersehn Pet") for many MORE years. So would somebody tell me please where this "FLOOD" of spongers and cheats are disappearing to, while their doppelgangers are doing all the jobs our fastidious work force don't want to dirty their hands on? Anybody who thinks that the immigrants in this country are not overwhelmingly an asset, is being taken in by racist propaganda, mainly from the BNP. That is the measure of how insidious and dangerous that organisation is. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Sep 09 - 07:47 AM So anyone who has any reservations about an unprecedented scale of immigration is "scare mongering scum" and can only have been duped by BNP propaganda. I do not think that I will join this debate. keith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Andrez Date: 27 Sep 09 - 08:01 AM Hmmmmmmmmm the UK seems to be getting more and more scary these days and when I read through this thread and recall some of the other BNP threads I cant help but hear Billy Braggs lines about the "sounds of ideologies clashing". So having said that my solution to the problem is the same one I use when I am confronted by people of the "born again christian" persuasion. I usually choose not to engage because they are locked into their point of view and are unwilling to entertain the possibility that a point of view other than their own might have some validity. Regrettably, I have some in-laws of this ilk and regardless of what evidence might be provided to challenge their views they inevitably resort back to their biblical dogma and come out with a variation of the line "if your not with us your 'agin us". At this point there is little left to say. This is the closed mind syndrome in full flight and it just isnt possible to work through ideas let alone the values that underpin these ideas. So having said that its also important to understand that ideas have power and that by repeating a particular "line" often enough that idea can gain traction in peoples minds.......... especially in this day and age when so many of the certainties of the "past": the things that gave us a sense of community and national identity have lost their binding ability and people just want an instant package to grab onto and believe in..... just like the "born agains". And yes we've seen before what happens when ideas take off like this thank you Mr Hitler and Co......... so having a good knowledge and understanding of the patterns of history helps to ground you in understanding what is happening as a result of the kind of ideas and values being promoted by the BNP and similar groups. Its about keeping perspective and your cool regardless of all the shouting going on in the streets, the media or even this forum. From the prophet Bragg again: "When one voice rules the nation, Just because they're on top of the pile, Doesn't mean their vision is the clearest". Thats a useful line to keep in mind when groups like the BNP ( or the Nazis in days of yore) try to capitalise on the hate and forms parties like the BNP to promote their ideas in the world at large. And having then said that its also important to decide when its time to take a stand, when things have crossed the line marked out by your own personal beliefs and values. So that might be at the ballot box, it might be in a street march, it might be in writing a song that expresses something that millions of other people feel and recognise through your words....... well the response is always going to differ from person to person but the point is that at some point or another it is important to challenge the people or parties that are promoting hate and division and separation regardless of whether this is in the local community or at a national level. Despite all the negative PR about Indians being bashed in Australia, a few months ago I joined about sixty thousand people who felt the need to support multiculturalism in our community by making a statement and marching through the city. It was a great day and I believe it sent a message to all of the haters out there that the majority of people do not support their views or the values that go with them. Having said that, good luck with the thread EB :-) Cheers, Andrez |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 27 Sep 09 - 08:47 AM Thanks for your post Andrez we hear too little about the situation in Australia which must surely be a country with an interesting history of immigration! OK - immigration To start with some objective figures, unfortunately 5 years out of date but that is a problem with collecting this type of information Nevertheless it probably reflects the trend of immigration this century Fact or fiction in the great UK immigration debate Some of this obviously is still very pertinent - CLAIM: Immigrants place a burden on Britain's public services. Reliable data on the use of services are hard to come by. One solid figure is that 27 per cent of health professionals in the UK were born abroad, suggesting that the NHS at least benefits from immigration and some ties in with the demographic problems about adequate housing stock, fear of ghettoization etc CLAIM: Immigration is an important issue all across the UK. Actually, immigrants are not evenly spread across the UK. South-east England draws almost half of all immigrants, despite making up barely 20 per cent of the UK population. However the recent recession has caused some very real concerns about economic migration both inside and outside the EU ACAS in its report on the action at the Lindsey oil refinery concluded "Whilst the report shows no evidence of the law being broken there is a source of tension around the Posted Workers Directive and its application to construction work and the UK's industrial relations system. These issues have been highlighted by the recession." Although immigrants into the UK come from all over the world there is undoubtably a racist agenda in many of the 'concerns' expressed about immigration policy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: pdq Date: 27 Sep 09 - 08:53 AM "immigration: are we overcrowded?" Yes, the United Kingdom is overcrowded, with about 640 people per square mile. Ireland has an about 150. As in the United States, the discussion should be about helping legal immigrants and discouraginging illegal ones. People who apply and are granted entry to any country are an asset. Those who sneek in usually cause problems. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Lox Date: 27 Sep 09 - 08:59 AM "but there are issues (like immigration, which need to be debated, that debate is not happening here, because, whenever the issue is raised, the usual suspects start screaming." Ake. If you want to talk about immigration and you think it is an important issue, then start a thread and call it "the tricky issue of immigration" or something like that. Then you will have a forum in which you can discuss the issues around immigration. People will be able to express their views. You will be able to explain your views and if anyone disagrees you will have the opportunity to support your views or learn from those of others depending on how you feel You will also get the oportunity to provide information supprorting your claims as will others. I will then be free to open up mudcat withut reading another whingeing post about how noone talks about immigration. The reason noone else has started such a thread is that noone else has felt motivated to do so. So here's your chance. You are now free, just as you always have been, to start a discussion on immigration. Then finally you might stop banging on about your fantsay that somehow you are being censored or you civil liberties are somehow being curtailed. -------------------------- In the meantime, isn't Emma's thread on the subject of the BNP very interesting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:11 AM "One solid figure is that 27 per cent of health professionals in the UK were born abroad, suggesting that the NHS at least benefits from immigration" And you think that is a good thing Emma? The majority of these come from countries much poorer than us. Countries with much higher levels of disease and infant mortality, and much lower life expectancy. Can it be right for a rich country like ours to entice away their desperately needed doctors, nurses and technicians just to spare ourselves the cost of training, and paying competitive salaries. That is a throwback to a racist, colonialist, exploitative past. It shames us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Lox Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:20 AM "And you think that is a good thing Emma?" She made no comment one way or the other. The point was that those who claim that immigration is a burden on the NHS are wrong. In fact it benefits the NHS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:26 AM 'the discussion should be about helping legal immigrants and discouraginging illegal ones People who apply and are granted entry to any country are an asset. - no argument! 'Those who sneek in usually cause problems.' Illegal immigrants are often very real victims themselves - remember the Morecambe Bay tragedy btw I was glad to see this report a couple of weeks ago "Hundreds of people a year are illegally brought into Britain, often under the promise of lucrative work, and a significant number end up working as virtual slaves for families. They often have their false identity papers confiscated, are given little or no pay and suffer mistreatment. Bondage can occur when illegal immigrants are forced to work to pay off "debts" for non-existent services such board and lodging. People who want to leave or go to the police are sometimes threatened with violence or told their families will suffer." from a report in The Independent from SIX years ago! Four years ago Spain, who had a very large problem, launched a programme granting legal amnesty to up to 800,000 undocumented immigrants. It was estimated that more than one million people lived and worked in Spain illegally - thousands in two of Spain's most important industries: agriculture and construction without any legal status, they formed the most vulnerable layer of Spanish society. Applicants who could prove they arrived before a specified date, had a job contract and no criminal record, had three months to sign up as taxpayers. A member of the Spanish government explained at the time "We have a number of illegal immigrants in Spain who are not contributing to the system, to the social system, with their taxes and who have been working here on an irregular basis where they are exposed to illegal gangs." The 'solution' was not without its critics The Panorama programme : Immigration - Time For An Amnesty? - was shown on BBC One at 8.30pm on Monday 9 March 2009. Boris Johnson, mayor of London, the city where the majority of the UK's illegal immigrants reside, is in favour of an amnesty. He told the programme - "If it does look as though they could make a contribution to society, we should regularise their status or offer them the chance of regularising their status. There would be some very tough criteria. Obviously no criminal record would be one, an ability to support yourself and support your family, commitment to society and the most, the most important thing is they should have been here for a considerable period of time." link |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:42 AM "One solid figure is that 27 per cent of health professionals in the UK were born abroad, suggesting that the NHS at least benefits from immigration" And you think that is a good thing Emma? No Keith I have the same reservations as you - a similar situation exists in North America I believe "Stealing From the Poor to Care for the Rich" NY Times December 14, 2005 Because American-trained doctors usually preferred university hospitals or metropolitan areas Foreign-trained doctors who qualified tended to stay in the community, where they worked hard. Many who left went to other small communities and small hospitals where there was a need. But in all this time, I noticed that virtually none of these doctors returned home our gain was the developing world's loss According to a study published in October in The New England Journal of Medicine, 25 percent of all doctors in the United States are foreign medical school graduates. A large majority - 60 percent - come from the developing world, where doctors are scarce and countries are being destroyed by AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis and other infectious diseases." The author, a retired doctor, concludes 'The United States and other Western countries have not only ignored the appalling lack of qualified doctors in undeveloped countries, but because of self-interest have perpetuated this problem. We should resolve our shortage by ourselves, without stealing doctors from countries that desperately need them.' What solutions would you offer Keith? Maybe better financial backing for students from all backgrounds to undertake a long and expensive training? More funds available to reward qualified staff who opt to remain in their own country? Unfortunately we DO live in a world of economic migration, in 2005 it was reported that Britain has lost more skilled workers to the global "brain drain" than any other country, according to a report by the World Bank. "More than 1.44 million graduates have left the UK to look for more highly paid jobs in countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia. That far outweighs 1.26 million immigrant graduates in the UK, leaving a net "brain loss" of some 200,000 people." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: jeddy Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:47 AM an amnesty sounds like a wonderful idea, the no criminal background check i am totally i favour of, it would take away alot of power from those who smuggle these people in. i would have thought that taking power away from the gangland bosses and at the same time giving those who are desperate enough to use them a fresh start. however, if we would be rejecting poeple on the grounds of criminality, what do people think about sending migrants home when they break our laws? , maybe it could be any sentance over say 3 years? i know that sounds sarcastic but it isn't. it costs so much to keep someone in prison, that money could go to help someone who will respect the laws into starting a new and safe life instead of keeping someone banged up. just a thought. take care all jade x x x x x |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 27 Sep 09 - 09:57 AM Jade, deportation orders already exist Under UK immigration law a deportation order may be made against a foreign national. A deportation order not only authorises the individual's removal from the UK but also makes him liable to be held in custody until he is removed. A deportation order also means that the foreign national is ineligible to return to the UK while the order remains in force and takes precedence over any visa or other leave the foreign national previously obtained Criteria A foreign national may be made the subject of a deportation order for a number of reasons. These include: The Secretary of State believes that is in the interests of the public good that the foreign national is removed from the UK; The foreign national is the spouse, civil partner or child of an individual who is the subject of a deportation order; or, The foreign national is over 17 years old, has been convicted of a criminal offence which carries with it a prison sentence and the court which sentenced the foreign national recommended that he be deported once he has served his sentence. For further information on The Effect of a Deportation Order Family Members of an Individual Facing Deportation and Deportation After a Criminal Conviction see link |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: pdq Date: 27 Sep 09 - 10:30 AM The figures people believe are the figures they want to believe. I see claims that over 9 million people living in the United Kingdom are foreign-born if you include the children they produced. That is 15%, not 5% as mentioned above. When they concentrate in their own neighborhoods and continue to speak their native languages, they are not really very "British". Yes, many British citizens are leaving and their numbers offset the immigration numbers, but only for one year. The following year's numbers start with the net increase figures. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Sep 09 - 10:40 AM Harriet Harmon isn't my favourite politician (a short list that would be) but it's fair to point out, in respect of that Question Time response, the questioner did specifically plug the BNP as a source of reliable information in his question. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Owen Woodson Date: 27 Sep 09 - 10:59 AM I didn't see the programme, but that is potentially worrying, since it sounds as though this guy was either a member or sympathiser. Are we likely to see BNP plants asking questions in order to plug the BNP. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Emma B Date: 27 Sep 09 - 11:04 AM If children are born in the UK they may accurately, for statistical purposes, be described as being born to foreign born parents or, in some cases, the children of forign nationals if their parents are not British citizens. However it is simply illogical and misleading to include children of British citizens, who may themselves be born outside the UK, as 'foreign born' and just plays along with the BNP image of a non-British population of second or third generation descendants of immigrants. As I stated earlier 'ghettoization' can be a very real problem as indeed the Spanish feel about the estimated 100,000+ UK ex pats who lead a very seperate unintegrated lifestyle from their host communities. In an English town I once worked in all the mayors for over 20 years had had Irish family names! Some of the reasons for this are too obvious to go into any detail but would include the need for family and community support networks, availability of accomodation coupled with 'white flight' etc Some of the 'solutions' are not so obvious but we have a thread that is open for discussion! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: theleveller Date: 27 Sep 09 - 11:43 AM So the same old tired name calling and arguements drift to yet Another BNP thread, ...........I've always felt that the left has always had a certain lobotomisation to it, feed'em the right script lines and they'll do the knee-jerk "how high do you want us to jump" thing," Yup! Same old tired name calling! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 27 Sep 09 - 11:55 AM The background to this has been the way that globalisation has been promoted in respect to finance and manufacturing and just about everything else. Jobs, and entire industries, can move freely from country to country, regardless of the impact this has, but the one exception has been people, so far as movement across pretty arbitrary boundaries are concerned. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: The Sandman Date: 27 Sep 09 - 01:27 PM MCGRATH,thats why the BNPS policies are not the solution,they can no more deal with multinational capatilism than any other party. I also find the violence that some of their members indulge in appalling . Richard Barnbrook - the BNP's third highest elected official - has been exposed fabricating two murders in a high profile BNP campaign. He has been found guilty of bringing both the Greater London Authority and the Barking and Dagenham Council into disrepute. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Owen Woodson Date: 27 Sep 09 - 01:30 PM Radio 4 6pm news has just run an announcement that Jack Straw has agreed to appear on the same edition of Question Time as Nick Griffin. For more details see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8277399.stm . The show will go out on Thursday October 22nd, from London. I'm not surprised at the Labour Party's choice, but I am deeply disappointed. Apart from the fact that Straw totally fails to impress me as a politician, there are one or two things in his background which make me think he is not the man to stand up to a bully boy like Griffin. I'm thinking in particular of his comments about Muslim veils making him feel uncomfortable. And there was the instance of him caving in to pressure and letting the supposedly sick and senile Pinochet flee the country. let's hope that at least one of the other panellists can show a bit more fire and commitment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Owen Woodson Date: 27 Sep 09 - 01:41 PM I've just caught the end of an important edition of File on 4 on the growth of violent extremism among the British far right. The show has now finished but is available on Listen Again http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006th08 . Today's edition is a repeat of last Tuesday's broadcast, and it looks as though it will be taken down from Listen Again at 20-00 on Tuesday 22.09. If you want to grab it, grab it now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Sep 09 - 02:07 PM ""So anyone who has any reservations about an unprecedented scale of immigration is "scare mongering scum" and can only have been duped by BNP propaganda. I do not think that I will join this debate. keith."" That's the way to promote rational discussion Keith....NOT! Where in my comment do you imagine you found the words "Scaremongering" and "scum"? What is it about the plain FACTS I quoted, that leads you to the supposition that I feel that way about those who have, as you put it, reservations. And lastly, can you adduce actual evidence of an "unprecedented" scale of immigration, or is it your contention that an increase to five percent, over a period of fifty+ years, IS a "flood". As far as I can see, we have a situation where immigrants tend to congregate in certain locations in large numbers, possibly because they feel safer so, after the somewhat unenthusiastic welcome the first arrivals received. I can't honestly say I blame them. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: ButterandCheese Date: 27 Sep 09 - 02:24 PM In my short time actually posting, as opposed to observing, I have been constantly reminded of the song Which Side Are You On? written in 1931 by Florence Reece Pete Seeger's version is probably the most well known, but Billy Bragg does an intereting version of it |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: GUEST,Jenny Brampton Date: 27 Sep 09 - 02:25 PM Here we go again, another BNP thread that will degrade into a mudbash! Jenny B |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Sep 09 - 02:45 PM ""More than 1.44 million graduates have left the UK to look for more highly paid jobs in countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia. That far outweighs 1.26 million immigrant graduates in the UK, leaving a net "brain loss" of some 200,000 people."" It would appear that the tide of immigration, like any other, ebbs and flows according to circumstances. Not exactly the claimed flood! --------------------------------------------------------------------- ""I see claims that over 9 million people living in the United Kingdom are foreign-born if you include the children they produced."" The children permanent immigrants have are no more immigrants than the children I have. Mine are English, born and bred, and SO ARE THEIRS. --------------------------------------------------------------------- On the subject of immigrant healthcare professionals, I have some slight inside knowledge of this area, and it is certain that:- 1. No British government department has ever forced a foreign doctor or nurse to immigrate. 2. No customs or other official at sea or air ports has ever prevented a doctor or nurse, immigrant or British, from leaving our shores. 3. Most immigrant healthcare and social care professionals regularly send money home to support their extended families in their countries of origin, and I know personally one or two who virtually support whole villages. I am in favour of prevention of illegal immigration, but I cannot see the number of legal immigrants we have as anything less than a benefit to this nation. Ake, and others, make much of their claims that nobody discusses or addresses this question, when what they really mean is nobody enthusiastically joins their proposed witch hunt, except of course the BNP. If I had to support the agenda of a racist, Fascist, bigot in order to put forward my argument, I'd keep my mouth shut. Since time immemorial, it has been the habit of the uninformed to blame all the ills of a nation on "Johnny Foreigner", and it always was, and still is, true that the root cause is generally much nearer home. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: ButterandCheese Date: 27 Sep 09 - 03:00 PM A few try to convince us that the BNP are no real threat, that the true threat comes from the major parties. If I recall my history rightly Neville Chamberlain try to convince Britain that Mr. Hitler was no threat either. I am reminded of the David Low cartoon inwhich Mr. Hitler hands Chamberlain a piece of paper upon which is written "I promise to be good". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Sep 09 - 03:48 PM Don, I was adding your comments to those of Jack Campin who said "The fears about immigration the BNP exploits are the same as those the Daily Mail and the rest of the Britist right promulgate, and they are *not* legitimate. They are all the result of spin-doctoring, misrepresentation and outright lies. We don't need to offer ANY concessions to the fear-mongering scum who are manufacturing the issue. " Sorry I misquoted "fear mongering scum " for "scare mongering scum." Also Don, it is simply a fact that the current level of immigration is unprecedented in our history, and that England is about the most densely populated nation on Earth. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:16 PM "No British government department has ever forced a foreign doctor or nurse to immigrate" I did not claim that they had Don. The word I used was enticed. Does that make the plundering of the third world for their trained medical staff acceptable to you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Royston Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:17 PM Keith: Also Don, it is simply a fact that the current level of immigration is unprecedented in our history, and that England is about the most densely populated nation on Earth. That's a couple of quite sweeping statements. You say they are facts. So I presume you can prove them and quote the sources for both facts. On the first one, I am still looking for data to tell me if the current level of immigration is unprecedented. I'm having trouble with it, so I need to ask you to provide your source for your claim. My instinct tells me that you are wrong and that immigration 1935-1945 was probably steeper than now. I suspect that the immigration rates in the 'Windrush' era were a lot higher as well. But you're ahead of me Keith, so set the record straight for us please. On the second one, you are certainly wrong because (as was reported widely in the press last week) Britain is actually 52nd in the population density league table. That does not amount to "...about the most densely populated nation on Earth." If you look at the list then it is quite fatuous to draw comparisons between UK density and that of, say, a windswept boggy wasteland (albeit a beautiful boggy wasteland) like Eire, or a useless desert like Saudi Arabia or much of the USA. You see Keith, if you want to start a debate about immigration then you, that's YOU!, need to start talking truth, rather than lies and hysteria. You prove Don's point rather well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:45 PM Thanks Royston, for saving me the effort of typing that. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:54 PM ""No British government department has ever forced a foreign doctor or nurse to immigrate" I did not claim that they had Don. The word I used was enticed. Does that make the plundering of the third world for their trained medical staff acceptable to you?"" No Keith, plundering any other country is emphatically NOT acceptable, and as soon as you show me the evidence that these people WERE enticed, rather than simply choosing to come here, then I will agree with you that it was wrong. So far, all I can see is a number of people who have come into England as legal immigrants, and performed functions of great benefit to the country, and the indigenous population. Many of course, came as students, and achieved their qualifications at English colleges and universities, before applying to stay on and pursue their careers here. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:57 PM Royston and Don, I said England was about the most densely populated nation on Earth. I was not comparing it with Saudi Arabia?! Among major nations, England comes third in density after Bangla Desh and South Korea. It is double that of Germany and quadruple ythat of France. So I was right in what I said. You ask me to justify that current (10-15years) levels of immigration are unprecedented in our history. They are. I could offer you periods when it was less, but I doubt that would satisfy you. Why not prove me wrong by finding a period when it was higher. Good luck! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: ButterandCheese Date: 27 Sep 09 - 04:59 PM Actually the most densely populated country on Earth is currently Bangladesh with a population density of 2,200 people per square mile. The most densely populate area in the world is the principality of Monaco with a population density of 42,000 per square mile. And the UK you ask....? 637 per square mile, which rates the country at 48th in the world my source is the 2001 census for the UK figure |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 27 Sep 09 - 05:02 PM ""Here we go again, another BNP thread that will degrade into a mudbash! Jenny B"" Another GUEST post with the thinly veiled intention of starting a slanging match. No thank you, Jenny. I think we'll keep this one civil, which is why I am bothering to reply to you. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 27 Sep 09 - 05:15 PM Butter and Cheese, my post was about England. We are both correct. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: Royston Date: 27 Sep 09 - 05:18 PM No Keith, you were wrong. You are still wrong. You are still talking shit. Re-order the latest list in descending order of total population (the measure of the 'major'-ness of all countries) and GB is 20th. You just can't get anything right can you? league table I didn't say that you made a comparison between GB and Saudi Arabia. I made that comparison. I made it because when considering relative population density, you have to consider that some countries have a high percentage of their land-mass which is uninhabitable. Also, France sits at 110/km2 against GB's 246/km2. That is a little over double, not quadruple. And you seriously believe that intelligent people should be debating with you. Why? What a waste of time... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The BNP conundrum From: ButterandCheese Date: 27 Sep 09 - 05:27 PM Oh right, Wikipedia a REALLY reliable source of information (not) keith's source of information came from figures that were obtained in a parliamentary answer from the Office of National Statistics. (please name you sources where possible, it saves alot of trouble and name calling) |