Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 9:12:20 GMT
They have closed legal routes into the UK. I'm not sure what you mean by this, but you do realise that the purpose of asylum is to get people to safety, not to get them specifically into the UK? Clearly, if people are in safe countries, they don't need to get to safety because they are already safe. But they do have a legal right to. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 9:14:07 GMT
Of course you did 'large scale immigration', Brits are not the immigrants. How do you define race? Are Poles a different race, are the French and Germans different races. The point as ever is culture, the fact that most incompatible cultures come with those of different races is just a fact. Kenny Lynch was a different ethnicity but culturally did not appear any different, same for Shirley Bassey, same for Derek Griffiths and a host of others, these were not immigrants either. It is the cultural separation that is the problem. Those that integrated into the resident culture(s) rarely had a problem except for a few idiots common to all cultures. "A group of people sharing a common cultural, geographical, linguistic, or religious origin or background". British people are not immigrants into Britain. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 9:17:47 GMT
You do not know what will happen under a Labour government but we do know what has happened under the Tories. They have closed legal routes into the UK. Instead of dealing with asylum seekers they are putting them in hotels. They have shrunk our border force. No checks at the borders are a smugglers paradise, different topic but linked. They have created a 'hostile' environment for asylum seekers. They use words like 'invasion' and 'criminals' to whip up fear and hatred. The Tories know exactly what they are doing but too many 'English' are too blind to see it. So that is clear. They will reopen legal routes, they will increase processing times, they will increase our border force (to do what as regards illegal immigration?), Labour will present a friendly environment for asylum seekers ( that should reduce numbers dramatically), Labour say it is not an invasion and there are no large groups of criminals. It sounds like Labour will facilitate even greater numbers of both legal and illegal immigration which is broadly what I said. The public want people to deal with it by stopping it, or greatly reducing it. Labour are out of touch. Yes. Yes. Yes. Not a 'friendly' environment but a fair one. Not as large as the groups being touted by the right wing rags and the media. A police force might come in handy here. Labour will 'control' immigration, not like the free for all we have under the Tories. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 9:18:29 GMT
No - except to stupid people who like shouting racist and bigot at anyone who opposes uncontrolled immigration. It's actually not about race - it's about culture. And in this case it's about muslims who have a very different culture from our western culture. It doesn't apply to, say, Indian Hindus - who are the same race as the Pakistani muslims - but behave in a very different way. They're not involved in terrorism and they don't rape and abuse young white girls. There is a reason why muslims are unwelcome in so many countries - it's because they cause trouble wherever they go, and the more you have of them the more trouble you get. There is a reason why the only "religion" that has a word for people who despise it is Islam - Islamophobia. Most cultures who come here fit in. The problem with muslims is that, while some actually do fit in (usually young females, who like the freedom and the fact that they're treated equally to men) many more actually react against the Western culture and become "radicalised". It's notable that some of the most extreme terrorists are those who have been educated in the West - and have come to hate it. The lazy assumption of the sociologists was that, while the first generation muslims might be troublesome, subsequent generations would adopt our culture and fit in. Wrong. In fact the opposite has happened. The second and third generation muslims are far more "conservative" and hard-line than their parents. Basically the problem is getting worse. Immigrants are always foreign. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 17, 2023 9:19:25 GMT
I'm not sure what you mean by this, but you do realise that the purpose of asylum is to get people to safety, not to get them specifically into the UK? Clearly, if people are in safe countries, they don't need to get to safety because they are already safe. But they do have a legal right to. They have a right to something they already have? Sure - if you say so |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 17, 2023 11:23:23 GMT
So that is clear. They will reopen legal routes, they will increase processing times, they will increase our border force (to do what as regards illegal immigration?), Labour will present a friendly environment for asylum seekers ( that should reduce numbers dramatically), Labour say it is not an invasion and there are no large groups of criminals. It sounds like Labour will facilitate even greater numbers of both legal and illegal immigration which is broadly what I said. The public want people to deal with it by stopping it, or greatly reducing it. Labour are out of touch. Yes. Yes. Yes. Not a 'friendly' environment but a fair one. Not as large as the groups being touted by the right wing rags and the media. A police force might come in handy here. Labour will 'control' immigration, not like the free for all we have under the Tories. Thought so. Thought so. Thought so. Fair to whom? What is fair to vast numbers of asylum seekers is not fair to the British people of whom it is demanded they pay for it. Which immigration that has occurred under the Tories have Labour challenged as being too many and they have said has not been controlled in terms of numbers. They have demanded more staff to process claims but that will not reduce numbers, it may empty out the hotels but then that cost will move to deportation costs, court cases, refusals, family reunions and a host of other responsibilities incumbent on us all to pay. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 17, 2023 11:24:14 GMT
No - except to stupid people who like shouting racist and bigot at anyone who opposes uncontrolled immigration. It's actually not about race - it's about culture. And in this case it's about muslims who have a very different culture from our western culture. It doesn't apply to, say, Indian Hindus - who are the same race as the Pakistani muslims - but behave in a very different way. They're not involved in terrorism and they don't rape and abuse young white girls. There is a reason why muslims are unwelcome in so many countries - it's because they cause trouble wherever they go, and the more you have of them the more trouble you get. There is a reason why the only "religion" that has a word for people who despise it is Islam - Islamophobia. Most cultures who come here fit in. The problem with muslims is that, while some actually do fit in (usually young females, who like the freedom and the fact that they're treated equally to men) many more actually react against the Western culture and become "radicalised". It's notable that some of the most extreme terrorists are those who have been educated in the West - and have come to hate it. The lazy assumption of the sociologists was that, while the first generation muslims might be troublesome, subsequent generations would adopt our culture and fit in. Wrong. In fact the opposite has happened. The second and third generation muslims are far more "conservative" and hard-line than their parents. Basically the problem is getting worse. Immigrants are always foreign. But not always different races. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 17, 2023 12:21:34 GMT
Immigrants are always foreign. But not always different races. Legally they are - Equality Act 2010 |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 17, 2023 15:28:08 GMT
How do you define race? Are Poles a different race, are the French and Germans different races. The point as ever is culture, the fact that most incompatible cultures come with those of different races is just a fact. Kenny Lynch was a different ethnicity but culturally did not appear any different, same for Shirley Bassey, same for Derek Griffiths and a host of others, these were not immigrants either. It is the cultural separation that is the problem. Those that integrated into the resident culture(s) rarely had a problem except for a few idiots common to all cultures. "A group of people sharing a common cultural, geographical, linguistic, or religious origin or background". British people are not immigrants into Britain. You are confusing ethnicity and race. Race is physical, ethnicity is cultural |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 14:59:58 GMT
Yes. Yes. Yes. Not a 'friendly' environment but a fair one. Not as large as the groups being touted by the right wing rags and the media. A police force might come in handy here. Labour will 'control' immigration, not like the free for all we have under the Tories. Thought so. Thought so. Thought so. Fair to whom? What is fair to vast numbers of asylum seekers is not fair to the British people of whom it is demanded they pay for it. Which immigration that has occurred under the Tories have Labour challenged as being too many and they have said has not been controlled in terms of numbers. They have demanded more staff to process claims but that will not reduce numbers, it may empty out the hotels but then that cost will move to deportation costs, court cases, refusals, family reunions and a host of other responsibilities incumbent on us all to pay. Labour have continuously challenged the Tories attitude to allowing the boat crossing. The best way to deal with immigration is at the source. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 15:00:37 GMT
Immigrants are always foreign. But not always different races. We are all one race if you are going to be pedantic. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 18, 2023 16:38:39 GMT
Thought so. Thought so. Thought so. Fair to whom? What is fair to vast numbers of asylum seekers is not fair to the British people of whom it is demanded they pay for it. Which immigration that has occurred under the Tories have Labour challenged as being too many and they have said has not been controlled in terms of numbers. They have demanded more staff to process claims but that will not reduce numbers, it may empty out the hotels but then that cost will move to deportation costs, court cases, refusals, family reunions and a host of other responsibilities incumbent on us all to pay. Labour have continuously challenged the Tories attitude to allowing the boat crossing. The best way to deal with immigration is at the source. Challenging an attitude is not a solution. What do you mean at source as there are multiple sources? |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 18, 2023 16:44:13 GMT
But not always different races. We are all one race if you are going to be pedantic. You could argue we are all one ethnic group but in law we have to have a definition of each if we are to apply the race laws if someone feels their rights under those laws have been breached. Your previous definition was as regards both race and ethnicity yet English and Scots ethnic groups are the same race but the discrimination laws can still be applied |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Feb 18, 2023 16:51:11 GMT
I'm not sure what you mean by this, but you do realise that the purpose of asylum is to get people to safety, not to get them specifically into the UK? Clearly, if people are in safe countries, they don't need to get to safety because they are already safe. But they do have a legal right to. A legal right to escape to safety? However, they are already safe and so are unable to 'escape to safety' It's a bit like saying they have a legal right to leave their house when they are already outside. ...humm |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Feb 18, 2023 17:26:25 GMT
Thought so. Thought so. Thought so. Fair to whom? What is fair to vast numbers of asylum seekers is not fair to the British people of whom it is demanded they pay for it. Which immigration that has occurred under the Tories have Labour challenged as being too many and they have said has not been controlled in terms of numbers. They have demanded more staff to process claims but that will not reduce numbers, it may empty out the hotels but then that cost will move to deportation costs, court cases, refusals, family reunions and a host of other responsibilities incumbent on us all to pay. Labour have continuously challenged the Tories attitude to allowing the boat crossing. The best way to deal with immigration is at the source. The source was Tony Blair. |
|
