|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 18, 2023 8:00:07 GMT
link
"Denmark, a relatively homogeneous country, has implemented strict migration policies that are centred around two main goals: one area focuses on making it less attractive for migrants to come to Denmark. The other focuses on creating incentives for migrants that are already in Denmark to work". I think our govt needs to take a good look at Denmark. They are making the country less attractive to migrants by various policies like cutting benefits for immigrants, making it more difficult for them to bring in relatives etc etc. And they're doing it despite rulings against them by the ECHR. This is the kind of approach I've been recommending for years. The first thing we should do is remove the exemption that allows Halal slaughter to be practised - and any other forms of religious slaughter that don't obey our laws - and ban import of any meat that doesn't conform to our laws. That would make a good start. Ok but if we are going there can you tell me what the difference is between halal slaughter and kosher slaughter I ask because back in the eighties i was sitting in this room in the uni with others considering the damage done to your circulation after a heart attack and what to do about it and i had an idea. Next thing i know i’m standing in a Herefordshire abbatoir holding a big plastic dustbin while a bloke cuts the bulls balls off as the carcasses come through and throwimg them in my bucket. While i was there this bloke wearing a sash like Charlton Heston wore to hold his robe in place in ‘the ten commandments’ came in, wandered off, came back dressed in the staff gown and set about a slaughtering session i found bloody impressive as a licensed animal experimenter. Im not sure i would have stayed licensed if i had done what he did. And then i remembered the chap who sometimes gave me a lift to school if he was taking his son mentioning his pal Isiah who went and did the kosher slaughter off Dumballs Rd and who came out like hed bathed in blood. That would be 1971 I think we allowed jews to donwhat islamics do for centuries That's why I said " The first thing we should do is remove the exemption that allows Halal slaughter to be practised - and any other forms of religious slaughter that don't obey our laws". The situation is that the UK has laws concerning animal slaughter, but the law provides exemptions for religious slaughter. I propose that we abolish ALL religious exemptions from our laws. This is perfectly legal - and many EU countries already have laws that don't allow ritual slaughter. I think most allow the import of Halal/Kosher meat, but not all. Obviously we'd have to ban Halal/Kosher import also - otherwise we're just moving the problem. We can also start shutting down the mosques that disseminate extremist teachings - as they're doing in Italy - and we should repeal the exemptions to corporal punishment laws also - and the exemptions to broadcasting amplified music (call to prayer and nonsense like that). Et cetera. The aim should be to make the country LESS attractive to the people who cause trouble. And people are talking about "international law" as if it's written in stone. The laws on refugees were written in about 1950 when the world was a different place. They make no sense nowadays and we should withdraw from those that don't work. There's no international body that enforces these laws anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 18, 2023 8:23:59 GMT
how many 'real' refugees do we get in the UK every year? I think I read on this forum that most of the people arriving in dinghies have their asylum applications accepted. So, that many, I suppose. That simply shows how lax the UK asylum system is (far more so than France for instance) - which is not news to anyone actually living here. It doesn't mean these people are real refugees. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Feb 18, 2023 9:11:28 GMT
Ok but if we are going there can you tell me what the difference is between halal slaughter and kosher slaughter I ask because back in the eighties i was sitting in this room in the uni with others considering the damage done to your circulation after a heart attack and what to do about it and i had an idea. Next thing i know i’m standing in a Herefordshire abbatoir holding a big plastic dustbin while a bloke cuts the bulls balls off as the carcasses come through and throwimg them in my bucket. While i was there this bloke wearing a sash like Charlton Heston wore to hold his robe in place in ‘the ten commandments’ came in, wandered off, came back dressed in the staff gown and set about a slaughtering session i found bloody impressive as a licensed animal experimenter. Im not sure i would have stayed licensed if i had done what he did. And then i remembered the chap who sometimes gave me a lift to school if he was taking his son mentioning his pal Isiah who went and did the kosher slaughter off Dumballs Rd and who came out like hed bathed in blood. That would be 1971 I think we allowed jews to donwhat islamics do for centuries That's why I said " The first thing we should do is remove the exemption that allows Halal slaughter to be practised - and any other forms of religious slaughter that don't obey our laws". The situation is that the UK has laws concerning animal slaughter, but the law provides exemptions for religious slaughter. I propose that we abolish ALL religious exemptions from our laws. This is perfectly legal - and many EU countries already have laws that don't allow ritual slaughter. I think most allow the import of Halal/Kosher meat, but not all. Obviously we'd have to ban Halal/Kosher import also - otherwise we're just moving the problem. We can also start shutting down the mosques that disseminate extremist teachings - as they're doing in Italy - and we should repeal the exemptions to corporal punishment laws also - and the exemptions to broadcasting amplified music (call to prayer and nonsense like that). Et cetera. The aim should be to make the country LESS attractive to the people who cause trouble. And people are talking about "international law" as if it's written in stone. The laws on refugees were written in about 1950 when the world was a different place. They make no sense nowadays and we should withdraw from those that don't work. There's no international body that enforces these laws anyway. Ok, i think the key point is the jews have been doing it for over two centuries (when was Disraeli Prime Minister, it had been going on a LOT long before he got the hot seat) so you might have more trouble clamping down on them (to say nothing of the influence they wield) Of course, the thing is the Jews were savvy enough to keep it quiet. Not once did i see a ‘kosher bacon used here’ sign on a sixties caff but now you cant get proper haram ham. And the islamic attitude on demanding halal meat in school dinners is the 92% of Newport who are not moslem can eat vegetarian options if halal offends them. Definitely a case for having it explained what ‘integration’ means … |
|
|
|
Post by Toreador on Feb 18, 2023 9:45:11 GMT
That's why I said " The first thing we should do is remove the exemption that allows Halal slaughter to be practised - and any other forms of religious slaughter that don't obey our laws". The situation is that the UK has laws concerning animal slaughter, but the law provides exemptions for religious slaughter. I propose that we abolish ALL religious exemptions from our laws. This is perfectly legal - and many EU countries already have laws that don't allow ritual slaughter. I think most allow the import of Halal/Kosher meat, but not all. Obviously we'd have to ban Halal/Kosher import also - otherwise we're just moving the problem. We can also start shutting down the mosques that disseminate extremist teachings - as they're doing in Italy - and we should repeal the exemptions to corporal punishment laws also - and the exemptions to broadcasting amplified music (call to prayer and nonsense like that). Et cetera. The aim should be to make the country LESS attractive to the people who cause trouble. And people are talking about "international law" as if it's written in stone. The laws on refugees were written in about 1950 when the world was a different place. They make no sense nowadays and we should withdraw from those that don't work. There's no international body that enforces these laws anyway. Ok, i think the key point is the jews have been doing it for over two centuries (when was Disraeli Prime Minister, it had been going on a LOT long before he got the hot seat) so you might have more trouble clamping down on them (to say nothing of the influence they wield) Of course, the thing is the Jews were savvy enough to keep it quiet. Not once did i see a ‘kosher bacon used here’ sign on a sixties caff but now you cant get proper haram ham. And the islamic attitude on demanding halal meat in school dinners is the 92% of Newport who are not moslem can eat vegetarian options if halal offends them. Definitely a case for having it explained what ‘integration’ means … It's been going on since Cromwell relaxed the ban on Jews imposed in the 13th century, at which time Jews were made to leave Britain. He relaxed it to allow the Jews to help Huguenots flee from France. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Feb 18, 2023 11:48:18 GMT
I think I read on this forum that most of the people arriving in dinghies have their asylum applications accepted. So, that many, I suppose. That simply shows how lax the UK asylum system is (far more so than France for instance) - which is not news to anyone actually living here. It doesn't mean these people are real refugees. What's the basis for that claim, Doc? Did you just pull it out of your ass? If you're going to claim that applications for asylum aren't properly processed, you need to back it up. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 18, 2023 16:47:57 GMT
That simply shows how lax the UK asylum system is (far more so than France for instance) - which is not news to anyone actually living here. It doesn't mean these people are real refugees. What's the basis for that claim, Doc? Did you just pull it out of your ass? If you're going to claim that applications for asylum aren't properly processed, you need to back it up. Just how can you properly process a claim with no documents (which seems to be 98% of illegal arrivals)? A real refugee is someone who has fled for the Convention reasons, if they are lying they are not real refugees. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Feb 18, 2023 17:30:21 GMT
What's the basis for that claim, Doc? Did you just pull it out of your ass? If you're going to claim that applications for asylum aren't properly processed, you need to back it up. Just how can you properly process a claim with no documents (which seems to be 98% of illegal arrivals) A real refugee is someone who has fled for the Convention reasons, if they are lying they are not real refugees. Duh! Of course, they're not real refugees if they're lying. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 18, 2023 18:24:47 GMT
That simply shows how lax the UK asylum system is (far more so than France for instance) - which is not news to anyone actually living here. It doesn't mean these people are real refugees. What's the basis for that claim, Doc? Did you just pull it out of your ass? If you're going to claim that applications for asylum aren't properly processed, you need to back it up. The UK grants more asylum cases (75% of initial claims) than any other country in Europe - compared to France where only 25% of claims are approved. One of the reasons for the lax approval system is that even when claimants lie (which is common) Home Office staff are told that it does not mean that their claim for asylum should be rejected. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Feb 18, 2023 18:46:13 GMT
What's the basis for that claim, Doc? Did you just pull it out of your ass? If you're going to claim that applications for asylum aren't properly processed, you need to back it up. The UK grants more asylum cases (75% of initial claims) than any other country in Europe - compared to France where only 25% of claims are approved. One of the reasons for the lax approval system is that even when claimants lie (which is common) Home Office staff are told that it does not mean that their claim for asylum should be rejected. Ah! Links would be helpful, Doc. If what you say is true, the French have good grounds for their claim that the UK is the author of its own misfortune. They are royally pissed off about their country being used as a stepping stone to the UK. They say that the UK is drawing refugees and economic migrants through France. If you are correct that the government is not operating a proper asylum process, then they are justified in their claims. If the government is handing out refugee status to all and sundry, no wonder French beaches are filling up with asylum seekers with their sights set on Dover. Maybe you could take that into account the next time you set out on one of your 'frog' bashing sprees. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 18, 2023 21:56:47 GMT
Just how can you properly process a claim with no documents (which seems to be 98% of illegal arrivals) A real refugee is someone who has fled for the Convention reasons, if they are lying they are not real refugees. Duh! Of course, they're not real refugees if they're lying. Well the perception is that most are not real refugees but are still treated as real refugees. Processing does not necessarily reveal lying and therein lies the main problem. Getting here is the aim, staying here is usually not a problem either as a real refugee, a lying refugee, a bogus refugee but found out and aided by a plethora of lawyers and charities to stay here. And of course as an illegal migrant. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Feb 18, 2023 22:38:02 GMT
The UK grants more asylum cases (75% of initial claims) than any other country in Europe - compared to France where only 25% of claims are approved. One of the reasons for the lax approval system is that even when claimants lie (which is common) Home Office staff are told that it does not mean that their claim for asylum should be rejected. Ah! Links would be helpful, Doc. If what you say is true, the French have good grounds for their claim that the UK is the author of its own misfortune. They are royally pissed off about their country being used as a stepping stone to the UK. They say that the UK is drawing refugees and economic migrants through France. If you are correct that the government is not operating a proper asylum process, then they are justified in their claims. If the government is handing out refugee status to all and sundry, no wonder French beaches are filling up with asylum seekers with their sights set on Dover. Maybe you could take that into account the next time you set out on one of your 'frog' bashing sprees. Which is as I said - these people are here due to the lax asylum system in the UK. And for your information (you are desperately in need of some) I have never blamed the Frogs - consistently I have said it is up to the UK to police its own borders. Paying France ever larger amounts of cash is a fools errand. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Feb 18, 2023 23:42:54 GMT
Duh! Of course, they're not real refugees if they're lying. Well the perception is that most are not real refugees but are still treated as real refugees. Processing does not necessarily reveal lying and therein lies the main problem. Getting here is the aim, staying here is usually not a problem either as a real refugee, a lying refugee, a bogus refugee but found out and aided by a plethora of lawyers and charities to stay here. And of course as an illegal migrant. Well, that's probably why the French are so pissed off. |
|
|
|
Post by Einhorn on Feb 18, 2023 23:43:57 GMT
Ah! Links would be helpful, Doc. If what you say is true, the French have good grounds for their claim that the UK is the author of its own misfortune. They are royally pissed off about their country being used as a stepping stone to the UK. They say that the UK is drawing refugees and economic migrants through France. If you are correct that the government is not operating a proper asylum process, then they are justified in their claims. If the government is handing out refugee status to all and sundry, no wonder French beaches are filling up with asylum seekers with their sights set on Dover. Maybe you could take that into account the next time you set out on one of your 'frog' bashing sprees. Which is as I said - these people are here due to the lax asylum system in the UK. And for your information (you are desperately in need of some) I have never blamed the Frogs - consistently I have said it is up to the UK to police its own borders. Paying France ever larger amounts of cash is a fools errand. No links, Doc? |
|
|
|
Post by steppenwolf on Feb 19, 2023 7:39:30 GMT
Johnofgwent said: "Ok, i think the key point is the jews have been doing it for over two centuries (when was Disraeli Prime Minister, it had been going on a LOT long before he got the hot seat) so you might have more trouble clamping down on them (to say nothing of the influence they wield)"
Of course no religions would be very happy if all their exemptions to the laws of this country were repealed, but laws change. We only fairly recently repealed the laws against blasphemy - which the muslims don't seem to have realised yet.
The point is that the religious laws concerning the slaughter of animals were drawn up with the express purpose of limiting the suffering of animals. Unfortunately they were drawn up many hundreds of years ago and there are now better ways of doing the job. So the only people that will be inconvenienced by a law change will by the hard-liners who take the words of their holy book as sacrosanct - mainly the hard-line muslims. And they're the people we want to get rid of.
Obviously the muslims will squeal like stuck pigs but that's tough. They can either turn vegetarian or eat meat slaughtered by legal methods - or go and live in a muslim country. After all when I lived in the UAE I had to obey their laws. And I OBJECT to the fact that most of the meat now is slaughtered by Halal methods. It's about time that this stopped. And like I said, this is enforced by several EU countries so there can be no legal objection - and it will reduce the pull factor for these vermin..
|
|
|
|
Post by seniorcitizen007 on Feb 19, 2023 19:55:58 GMT
Back in the 90s an African Christian church hired an empty factory close to where I was living ... and held a TWO DAY "praising God" gathering during which they kept up a continuous loud chant. I responded by placing a notice on the door saying that if they did it again I'd burn the place down. That was the last we saw of them.
|
|
