Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Policeman killed in Paris; Yet another terrorist attack
Topic Started: Apr 20 2017, 09:20 PM (1,183 Views)
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
So, here we are again in France, at the Champs Elysee' where a terrorist with a Kalashnikoff opened fire on a police "minibus"?

One police officer is dead, another is injured.

The Killer was shot dead.

3 days before the French Primaries.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
It's a mistake to say that because you get Ethnic Asian gangs then such an ethnicity is in general malignant in large groups. Gangs form around any common feature (can be just a postcode or a football team) they see as necessary to give them a cause to rage against the rest of society

Look at any EDL demo and one could erroneously conclude that all whites in numbers are a problem we must act against.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:23 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 12:57 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 12:37 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Very well.

My wife and I are both British citizens (and proud of it) of immigrant extraction, Irish in my case, Indian in hers.

We were both brought up with a strong work ethic and have worked our entire adult lives and never claimed a penny in benefits.

We are as culturally British as anyone I'm a passionate supporter of England's national sports sides and my wife loves god awful (imo) popular British culture like soap operas, x-factor etc.

We work hard, get on well with neighbours and colleagues and have never given anyone a moments trouble.

Despite all this however, we've experienced both directly and indirectly a lot of hostility because of what we are up to and including physical violence. We've spent our whole lives having to justify and defend our right to live in our own country.

We've seen political parties being formed and campaigning to forcibly remove us from our home. Weve had people tell us that our children are an act of genocide against the indigenous British population.

Yet all we've heard in response to all this from those who bemoan a lack of social cohesion is a deafening silence. Surely deliberately alienating entire groups of people must be a contributing factor to the lack of social cohesion?

No we're told, it's all down to people like us, must be all that villanous tax paying we do.
See - this is the problem as usual!

You are seeing this from a micro level, not a macro level.

A person for the most part is not an issue, even small groups aren't, it's when you increase the numbers that trouble starts to form, that's where I am, in large area where the people have no reason - be it Polish or Arab or whatever to integrate, but whenever people have brought this up we get the same excuse, similar to what you wrote, but that individual person other there is doing alright, we aren't going after that single person(well some do, but the majority don't), but looking at things on top down level.

Also, that Irish issue has always been weird to me, you are white, Celtic and western European I could only imagine it had something to with the past with Ireland leaving and/or Travellers which caused the friction or some other event that started it and the genocide part, yeah some do get upset by that, I'm apathetic on the subject.

But you do play the victim card well, for someone who espouses that person should avoid such a few posts ago, who'd of thought a ethnic British person had to deal with both religious and racial discrimination in less then 30 years, I guess some would see that as poetic justice for some of my ancestors.
Firstly I am nobody's victim, I'm merely recounting my experiences and yes believe it or not, me being of Irish catholic extraction in the 80s when the IRA were carrying out atrocities on the mainland was an issue for some people, go figure as the Americans say.

Secondly, you asked to hear about my experiences then complain I'm talking from an individual level?

Thirdly, when you talk in general terms about immigrants and their descendants you include individuals like me, naturally we defend ourselves.

Fourthly, I notice you don't even mention, let alone condemn the indegenous Brits contributing to the lack of social cohesion by alienating immigrants and their descendants.

Fithly, for someone who has complained a lot about people not listening to your concerns and experiences, you seem very dismissive of mine.

If you won't listen to me why should I listen you?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 01:29 PM
It's a mistake to say that because you get Ethnic Asian gangs then such an ethnicity is in general malignant in large groups. Gangs form around any common feature (can be just a postcode or a football team) they see as necessary to give them a cause to rage against the rest of society

Look at any EDL demo and one could erroneously conclude that all whites in numbers are a problem we must act against.

I didn't say that, I said it's a symptom of such, which obviously it is, ghettos do see an increase level of crime, also isn't helped that many don't won't to integrate, which will also raise tensions, I should know the arrival of the Polish led to some tricky times if you didn't want to get caught up.

The trick should have always been dripped fed, nice and slowly, then you wouldn't have this issues, people would be forced to integrate and people already here wouldn't be perturb by such.

To be fair the shit we throw at the EDL kinda covers them, but they did get a bit crazy even Tommy left them, actually I don't mind Tommy these days, he's acquitted himself quite well lately, even became a reporter, who'd of thought.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 01:37 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:23 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 12:57 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
See - this is the problem as usual!

You are seeing this from a micro level, not a macro level.

A person for the most part is not an issue, even small groups aren't, it's when you increase the numbers that trouble starts to form, that's where I am, in large area where the people have no reason - be it Polish or Arab or whatever to integrate, but whenever people have brought this up we get the same excuse, similar to what you wrote, but that individual person other there is doing alright, we aren't going after that single person(well some do, but the majority don't), but looking at things on top down level.

Also, that Irish issue has always been weird to me, you are white, Celtic and western European I could only imagine it had something to with the past with Ireland leaving and/or Travellers which caused the friction or some other event that started it and the genocide part, yeah some do get upset by that, I'm apathetic on the subject.

But you do play the victim card well, for someone who espouses that person should avoid such a few posts ago, who'd of thought a ethnic British person had to deal with both religious and racial discrimination in less then 30 years, I guess some would see that as poetic justice for some of my ancestors.
Firstly I am nobody's victim, I'm merely recounting my experiences and yes believe it or not, me being of Irish catholic extraction in the 80s when the IRA were carrying out atrocities on the mainland was an issue for some people, go figure as the Americans say.

Secondly, you asked to hear about my experiences then complain I'm talking from an individual level?

Thirdly, when you talk in general terms about immigrants and their descendants you include individuals like me, naturally we defend ourselves.

Fourthly, I notice you don't even mention, let alone condemn the indegenous Brits contributing to the lack of social cohesion by alienating immigrants and their descendants.

Fithly, for someone who has complained a lot about people not listening to your concerns and experiences, you seem very dismissive of mine.

If you won't listen to me why should I listen you?
1)I actually forgot about the IRA :shitstorm: Yeah, that would cause tensions, I came to be just when it was cooling down, so I don't think of it regularly.

2)I did ask about your experience, but are you saying I can not respond or disagree?

3)I have nothing against you disagreeing, but where's this unity - don't worry I am just jabbing yer.

But to give a fuller answer, so to avoid any offence we must ignore any issues that arise from mass migration? Because that would probably make things worse.

4)Well, if they had voted for such a change then I would be right on their back, but because they are the recipients and did not ask for such, I kinda side with them, but I wouldn't agree with them attacking people over it, as I said in another posts I am democrat and believe large decisions should be voted by the people.

But to give an example would you make someone accept something if they didn't want it in the first place?

5)No I didn't, I listened, you are a person who had a poor background, with people discriminating against you because of your background(Irish, Catholic), you've tried your best to fit in and done you best to succeed, so there I've listened/read, me disagreeing isn't me dismissing you.

So, let me get this straight, just because you've done well as an immigrant a person can not speak of the issues of immigration or advocate for the reduction of such?

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 01:52 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:37 PM
To be fair the shit we throw at the EDL kinda covers them, but they did get a bit crazy even Tommy left them, actually I don't mind Tommy these days, he's acquitted himself quite well lately, even became a reporter, who'd of thought.



Stephen Lennon aka Tommy Robinson is an unreformed and unmitigated shit. A violent football thug gang member who migrated to other violent and criminal expressions of his self fuelled anger.

You praise him if you like, it won't wash off

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 01:59 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:37 PM
To be fair the shit we throw at the EDL kinda covers them, but they did get a bit crazy even Tommy left them, actually I don't mind Tommy these days, he's acquitted himself quite well lately, even became a reporter, who'd of thought.



Stephen Lennon aka Tommy Robinson is an unreformed and unmitigated shit. A violent football thug gang member who migrated to other violent and criminal expressions of his self fuelled anger.

You praise him if you like, it won't wash off

You should keep up, he's changed quite a bit, he works for the Rebel Media.

Still advocating against Islam, though who isn't these days.

But yeah, changed quite a bit, I thought you'd be one of those redemption guys.

I believe he even talked/debate at the Oxford Union.
Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 02:06 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:52 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 01:37 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:23 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Firstly I am nobody's victim, I'm merely recounting my experiences and yes believe it or not, me being of Irish catholic extraction in the 80s when the IRA were carrying out atrocities on the mainland was an issue for some people, go figure as the Americans say.

Secondly, you asked to hear about my experiences then complain I'm talking from an individual level?

Thirdly, when you talk in general terms about immigrants and their descendants you include individuals like me, naturally we defend ourselves.

Fourthly, I notice you don't even mention, let alone condemn the indegenous Brits contributing to the lack of social cohesion by alienating immigrants and their descendants.

Fithly, for someone who has complained a lot about people not listening to your concerns and experiences, you seem very dismissive of mine.

If you won't listen to me why should I listen you?
1)I actually forgot about the IRA :shitstorm: Yeah, that would cause tensions, I came to be just when it was cooling down, so I don't think of it regularly.

2)I did ask about your experience, but are you saying I can not respond or disagree?

3)I have nothing against you disagreeing, but where's this unity - don't worry I am just jabbing yer.

But to give a fuller answer, so to avoid any offence we must ignore any issues that arise from mass migration? Because that would probably make things worse.

4)Well, if they had voted for such a change then I would be right on their back, but because they are the recipients and did not ask for such, I kinda side with them, but I wouldn't agree with them attacking people over it, as I said in another posts I am democrat and believe large decisions should be voted by the people.

But to give an example would you make someone accept something if they didn't want it in the first place?

5)No I didn't, I listened, you are a person who had a poor background, with people discriminating against you because of your background(Irish, Catholic), you've tried your best to fit in and done you best to succeed, so there I've listened/read, me disagreeing isn't me dismissing you.

So, let me get this straight, just because you've done well as an immigrant a person can not speak of the issues of immigration or advocate for the reduction of such?

I never said that people can't discuss immigration or the issues it causes of that people should be forced to accept anything.

What I am saying is that people who point blank refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants no matter how well they integrate cannot complain about a lack of integration and expect any credibility from me. And I'm not talking about any democratic decisions here either.

To deliberately and knowingly obstruct integration then complain about a lack of it is glaringly hypocritical, surely you can see that?

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 02:04 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:52 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 01:37 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
1)I actually forgot about the IRA :shitstorm: Yeah, that would cause tensions, I came to be just when it was cooling down, so I don't think of it regularly.

2)I did ask about your experience, but are you saying I can not respond or disagree?

3)I have nothing against you disagreeing, but where's this unity - don't worry I am just jabbing yer.

But to give a fuller answer, so to avoid any offence we must ignore any issues that arise from mass migration? Because that would probably make things worse.

4)Well, if they had voted for such a change then I would be right on their back, but because they are the recipients and did not ask for such, I kinda side with them, but I wouldn't agree with them attacking people over it, as I said in another posts I am democrat and believe large decisions should be voted by the people.

But to give an example would you make someone accept something if they didn't want it in the first place?

5)No I didn't, I listened, you are a person who had a poor background, with people discriminating against you because of your background(Irish, Catholic), you've tried your best to fit in and done you best to succeed, so there I've listened/read, me disagreeing isn't me dismissing you.

So, let me get this straight, just because you've done well as an immigrant a person can not speak of the issues of immigration or advocate for the reduction of such?

I never said that people can't discuss immigration or the issues it causes of that people should be forced to accept anything.

What I am saying is that people who point blank refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants no matter how well they integrate cannot complain about a lack of integration and expect any credibility from me. And I'm not talking about any democratic decisions here either.

To deliberately and knowingly obstruct integration then complain about a lack of it is glaringly hypocritical, surely you can see that?

Well, you kinda did, by saying that criticism of immigrants and immigration will get everyone upset, so best not say anything.

But why should people who never voted or tacitly agreed to mass immigration be accepting?

Anyway they aren't normally the ones asking for integration more for deportation.

Also, it's the immigrant's job to integrate not the natives, but also you have to name something done on a nationally level that hurts integration, it seems the intransigence is coming for immigrant groups not natives, obviously in the last 20 years.
Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 02:15 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:04 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 01:59 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:37 PM
To be fair the shit we throw at the EDL kinda covers them, but they did get a bit crazy even Tommy left them, actually I don't mind Tommy these days, he's acquitted himself quite well lately, even became a reporter, who'd of thought.



Stephen Lennon aka Tommy Robinson is an unreformed and unmitigated shit. A violent football thug gang member who migrated to other violent and criminal expressions of his self fuelled anger.

You praise him if you like, it won't wash off

You should keep up, he's changed quite a bit, he works for the Rebel Media.

Still advocating against Islam, though who isn't these days.

But yeah, changed quite a bit, I thought you'd be one of those redemption guys.

I believe he even talked/debate at the Oxford Union.
He's now wrapped himself in the flag of Pegida UK, basically a German hate organisation that barely disguises its message of persecuting all muslims

Evil little shits don't really change their spots once they've been convicted for violence multiple times.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:13 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 02:04 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 01:52 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I never said that people can't discuss immigration or the issues it causes of that people should be forced to accept anything.

What I am saying is that people who point blank refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants no matter how well they integrate cannot complain about a lack of integration and expect any credibility from me. And I'm not talking about any democratic decisions here either.

To deliberately and knowingly obstruct integration then complain about a lack of it is glaringly hypocritical, surely you can see that?

Well, you kinda did, by saying that criticism of immigrants and immigration will get everyone upset, so best not say anything.

But why should people who never voted or tacitly agreed to mass immigration be accepting?

Anyway they aren't normally the ones asking for integration more for deportation.

Also, it's the immigrant's job to integrate not the natives, but also you have to name something done on a nationally level that hurts integration, it seems the intransigence is coming for immigrant groups not natives, obviously in the last 20 years.
I said that when you talk in general terms about immigrants you include individuals like me and it shouldn't be a surprise when said individuals defend themselves.

I never said "best not to mention it".

The emphasis should be on immigrants to integrate I've always said that myself. But you can only integrate if the host population allows you to. Without their consent it is impossible.

As to examples, the BNP campaigned to halt all attempts at integration and simply remove immigrants and their descendants, as Steve says you mention asian gangs but not the likes of tge EDL, you mention ghettoisation but not white flight. The latter is interesting, the fact that we have two different words for what is essentially the same thing is very revealing imo.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 02:17 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:04 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 01:59 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You should keep up, he's changed quite a bit, he works for the Rebel Media.

Still advocating against Islam, though who isn't these days.

But yeah, changed quite a bit, I thought you'd be one of those redemption guys.

I believe he even talked/debate at the Oxford Union.
He's now wrapped himself in the flag of Pegida UK, basically a German hate organisation that barely disguises its message of persecuting all muslims

Evil little shits don't really change their spots once they've been convicted for violence multiple times.
I think he's doing better, considering at one point he wanted to punish all Muslims, now he seems more focused on radicalisation also knows the Koran quite well, catching a lot of people off guard, though you got read something while in Prison :P

I guess I met so many working class lads, he seems rather normal, compared to the genocide all the inferiors, he does not seem so bad.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 02:38 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 02:27 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:13 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 02:04 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Well, you kinda did, by saying that criticism of immigrants and immigration will get everyone upset, so best not say anything.

But why should people who never voted or tacitly agreed to mass immigration be accepting?

Anyway they aren't normally the ones asking for integration more for deportation.

Also, it's the immigrant's job to integrate not the natives, but also you have to name something done on a nationally level that hurts integration, it seems the intransigence is coming for immigrant groups not natives, obviously in the last 20 years.
I said that when you talk in general terms about immigrants you include individuals like me and it shouldn't be a surprise when said individuals defend themselves.

I never said "best not to mention it".

The emphasis should be on immigrants to integrate I've always said that myself. But you can only integrate if the host population allows you to. Without their consent it is impossible.

As to examples, the BNP campaigned to halt all attempts at integration and simply remove immigrants and their descendants, as Steve says you mention asian gangs but not the likes of tge EDL, you mention ghettoisation but not white flight. The latter is interesting, the fact that we have two different words for what is essentially the same thing is very revealing imo.
But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?

Well, it's hard to convince the natives to relent when they didn't approve of such changes, also with the increasing ill-effects of migration isn't going to help either, it was fine when numbers were small and the numbers arriving was small, maybe people are on to something when they suggest less immigration.

Again you two are making the same mistake thinking natives should be the ones making the effort, when they've never voted for it, now many are trying to avoid it, but sadly working class people don't have that option, but again name me one thing done nationally forcing these people to form ghettos, there isn't, they are doing this under their own volition and no, natives aren't chasing them into such.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 02:40 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:37 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 02:27 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:13 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I said that when you talk in general terms about immigrants you include individuals like me and it shouldn't be a surprise when said individuals defend themselves.

I never said "best not to mention it".

The emphasis should be on immigrants to integrate I've always said that myself. But you can only integrate if the host population allows you to. Without their consent it is impossible.

As to examples, the BNP campaigned to halt all attempts at integration and simply remove immigrants and their descendants, as Steve says you mention asian gangs but not the likes of tge EDL, you mention ghettoisation but not white flight. The latter is interesting, the fact that we have two different words for what is essentially the same thing is very revealing imo.
But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?

Well, it's hard to convince the natives to relent when they didn't approve of such changes, also with the increasing ill-effects of migration isn't going to help either, it was fine when numbers were small and the numbers arriving was small, maybe people are on to something when they suggest less immigration.

Again you two are making the same mistake thinking natives should be the ones making the effort, when they've never voted for it, now many are trying to avoid it, but sadly working class people don't have that option, but again name me one thing done nationally forcing these people to form ghettos, there isn't, they are doing this under their own volition and no, natives aren't chasing them into such.

I never said the natives should be making all the effort, read my post again, I clearly said the emphasis should be on immigrants to integrate.

And again I never said people should have to accept anything, but if you use that argument then why should immigrants have to integrate when they didn't vote for it?

Neither should be forced imo, but integration is a desirable outcome for us all imo and whilst immigrants need to integrate they can't do so without the cooperation of the host population.

You don't have to accept immigrants, but anyone who demands integration whilst simultaneously obstructing it is imo a hypocrite and part of the problem.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stonefish
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 12:57 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 12:37 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 12:27 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Well go on then.

But as addendum, my mum left my dad(well the other away round) and her new partner is from Antigua, so if anyone is thinking a person in a place where he's close to being a minority doesn't spend time with other groups, you are massively wrong.

But maybe and also many people from said other groups who have been here for a while, thinks the governments should maybe look out for us first, instead of filling their pockets first.
Very well.

My wife and I are both British citizens (and proud of it) of immigrant extraction, Irish in my case, Indian in hers.

We were both brought up with a strong work ethic and have worked our entire adult lives and never claimed a penny in benefits.

We are as culturally British as anyone I'm a passionate supporter of England's national sports sides and my wife loves god awful (imo) popular British culture like soap operas, x-factor etc.

We work hard, get on well with neighbours and colleagues and have never given anyone a moments trouble.

Despite all this however, we've experienced both directly and indirectly a lot of hostility because of what we are up to and including physical violence. We've spent our whole lives having to justify and defend our right to live in our own country.

We've seen political parties being formed and campaigning to forcibly remove us from our home. Weve had people tell us that our children are an act of genocide against the indigenous British population.

Yet all we've heard in response to all this from those who bemoan a lack of social cohesion is a deafening silence. Surely deliberately alienating entire groups of people must be a contributing factor to the lack of social cohesion?

No we're told, it's all down to people like us, must be all that villanous tax paying we do.

Oh not this post again,is this one you bring out on special occasions ?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rich
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
"You don't have to accept immigrants"

HH, Are you intimating that we do not have to accept their presence here or that we can stop them coming here?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stonefish
Apr 22 2017, 03:29 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 12:57 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 12:37 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Very well.

My wife and I are both British citizens (and proud of it) of immigrant extraction, Irish in my case, Indian in hers.

We were both brought up with a strong work ethic and have worked our entire adult lives and never claimed a penny in benefits.

We are as culturally British as anyone I'm a passionate supporter of England's national sports sides and my wife loves god awful (imo) popular British culture like soap operas, x-factor etc.

We work hard, get on well with neighbours and colleagues and have never given anyone a moments trouble.

Despite all this however, we've experienced both directly and indirectly a lot of hostility because of what we are up to and including physical violence. We've spent our whole lives having to justify and defend our right to live in our own country.

We've seen political parties being formed and campaigning to forcibly remove us from our home. Weve had people tell us that our children are an act of genocide against the indigenous British population.

Yet all we've heard in response to all this from those who bemoan a lack of social cohesion is a deafening silence. Surely deliberately alienating entire groups of people must be a contributing factor to the lack of social cohesion?

No we're told, it's all down to people like us, must be all that villanous tax paying we do.

Oh not this post again,is this one you bring out on special occasions ?
Want some pork scratchings with your bitter?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 03:13 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:37 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 02:27 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?

Well, it's hard to convince the natives to relent when they didn't approve of such changes, also with the increasing ill-effects of migration isn't going to help either, it was fine when numbers were small and the numbers arriving was small, maybe people are on to something when they suggest less immigration.

Again you two are making the same mistake thinking natives should be the ones making the effort, when they've never voted for it, now many are trying to avoid it, but sadly working class people don't have that option, but again name me one thing done nationally forcing these people to form ghettos, there isn't, they are doing this under their own volition and no, natives aren't chasing them into such.

I never said the natives should be making all the effort, read my post again, I clearly said the emphasis should be on immigrants to integrate.

And again I never said people should have to accept anything, but if you use that argument then why should immigrants have to integrate when they didn't vote for it?

Neither should be forced imo, but integration is a desirable outcome for us all imo and whilst immigrants need to integrate they can't do so without the cooperation of the host population.

You don't have to accept immigrants, but anyone who demands integration whilst simultaneously obstructing it is imo a hypocrite and part of the problem.
Hang on, there's a flaw in your thinking.

They come here(in sense voted or at-least agreed to accept change by their actions), they should make the effort, or don't be surprised when people want their removal if they don't, I would accept the same reaction.

I just can not agree, we have a very welcoming and generous state, if they can not integrate here, it's their problem not the other way around, this isn't the 60s/70s.

Well, it's been decades and things haven't really improved, I think it's fair people take issue with such immigration, maybe they've been left to their own devices too much, been too laissez faire.
Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 05:02 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Rich
Apr 22 2017, 03:48 PM
"You don't have to accept immigrants"

HH, Are you intimating that we do not have to accept their presence here or that we can stop them coming here?
Well, you could do both.

But he's point is that we aren't being welcoming enough, when we've pretty much bent our backs out.

But he probably means the former.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 04:59 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 03:13 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 02:37 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I never said the natives should be making all the effort, read my post again, I clearly said the emphasis should be on immigrants to integrate.

And again I never said people should have to accept anything, but if you use that argument then why should immigrants have to integrate when they didn't vote for it?

Neither should be forced imo, but integration is a desirable outcome for us all imo and whilst immigrants need to integrate they can't do so without the cooperation of the host population.

You don't have to accept immigrants, but anyone who demands integration whilst simultaneously obstructing it is imo a hypocrite and part of the problem.
Hang on, there's a flaw in your thinking.

They come here(in sense voted or at-least agreed to accept change by their actions), they should make the effort, or don't be surprised when people want their removal if they don't, I would accept the same reaction.

I just can not agree, we have a very welcoming and generous state, if they can not integrate here, it's their problem not the other way around, this isn't the 60s/70s.

Well, it's been decades and things haven't really improved, I think it's fair people take issue with such immigration, maybe they've been left to their own devices too much, been too laissez faire.
If they've come here its proof that they elected to do just that, not that they have voted to integrate within our culture and customs. So if the natives shouldn't have to accept something they didn't ask or vote for why should immigrants and their descendants?

As to flawed thinking, you say lots of indigenous British people haven't accepted immigrants and shouldn't have to, but now you are also saying that immigrants have been welcomed with open arms. A contradiction surely?

I would say the very existence of the likes of the BNP, EDL, Britain First, Blood and Honour etc is proof that not everyone in Britain is as welcoming as you are now suggesting.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:01 PM
Rich
Apr 22 2017, 03:48 PM
"You don't have to accept immigrants"

HH, Are you intimating that we do not have to accept their presence here or that we can stop them coming here?
Well, you could do both.

But he's point is that we aren't being welcoming enough, when we've pretty much bent our backs out.

But he probably means the former.
So defending people who refuse to accept immigrants is you putting your back out to welcome them?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:40 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 04:59 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 03:13 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Hang on, there's a flaw in your thinking.

They come here(in sense voted or at-least agreed to accept change by their actions), they should make the effort, or don't be surprised when people want their removal if they don't, I would accept the same reaction.

I just can not agree, we have a very welcoming and generous state, if they can not integrate here, it's their problem not the other way around, this isn't the 60s/70s.

Well, it's been decades and things haven't really improved, I think it's fair people take issue with such immigration, maybe they've been left to their own devices too much, been too laissez faire.
If they've come here its proof that they elected to do just that, not that they have voted to integrate within our culture and customs. So if the natives shouldn't have to accept something they didn't ask or vote for why should immigrants and their descendants?

As to flawed thinking, you say lots of indigenous British people haven't accepted immigrants and shouldn't have to, but now you are also saying that immigrants have been welcomed with open arms. A contradiction surely?

I would say the very existence of the likes of the BNP, EDL, Britain First, Blood and Honour etc is proof that not everyone in Britain is as welcoming as you are now suggesting.
More flaws.

Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort, considering the main cost is pushed on current tax payers, no-one pays back their expenditure on the nation for quite a while, also the way the government works could take a generation to pay back.

Also it seems you are confusing the state with the population, the state is very accepting to a fault, it's the people who haven't been giving a choice, even though any cost accrued is levied on them.

Also why use minority groups, while the majority are very tolerate and aren't connected in any way, neither religion or politics and only the in the last few elections have shown more anti-immigration sentiments, something to do with the numbers and many not integrating.

So considering all that, they've chosen to come here and have been allowed such, they should at-least make the effort to conform and integrate, I would expect the same of me, if in another country.
Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 05:59 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:43 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:01 PM
Rich
Apr 22 2017, 03:48 PM
"You don't have to accept immigrants"

HH, Are you intimating that we do not have to accept their presence here or that we can stop them coming here?
Well, you could do both.

But he's point is that we aren't being welcoming enough, when we've pretty much bent our backs out.

But he probably means the former.
So defending people who refuse to accept immigrants is you putting your back out to welcome them?
You might want to re-word that, read that a few times, still not understanding.

It isn't the natives job to make it easier or harder, it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:55 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:40 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 04:59 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
If they've come here its proof that they elected to do just that, not that they have voted to integrate within our culture and customs. So if the natives shouldn't have to accept something they didn't ask or vote for why should immigrants and their descendants?

As to flawed thinking, you say lots of indigenous British people haven't accepted immigrants and shouldn't have to, but now you are also saying that immigrants have been welcomed with open arms. A contradiction surely?

I would say the very existence of the likes of the BNP, EDL, Britain First, Blood and Honour etc is proof that not everyone in Britain is as welcoming as you are now suggesting.
More flaws.

Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort, considering the main cost is pushed on current tax payers, no-one pays back their expenditure on the nation for quite a while, also the way the government works could take a generation to pay back.

Also it seems you are confusing the state with the population, the state is very accepting to a fault, it's the people who haven't been giving a choice, even though any cost accrued is levied on them.

Also why use minority groups, while the majority are very tolerate and aren't connected in any way, neither religion or politics and only the in the last few elections have shown more anti-immigration sentiments, something to do with the numbers and many not integrating.

So considering all that, they've chosen to come here and have been allowed such, they should at-least make the effort to conform and integrate.
I absolutely agree that they SHOULD integrate. I also think that the indigenous SHOULD allow them to integrate. I just don't agree with forcing people to do either.

But if you're saying that immigrants who don't integrate should accept hostility from the indigenous then by the same logic indigenous Brits who refuse to allow immigrants to integrate and/or refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants as equal British citizens regardless of how well integrated they are should accept hostility from immigrants.

Its just senseless and needlessly confrontational.

If you want integration you have to ALLOW people to integrate. If you disagree, then explain to me exactly how an immigrant goes about integrating without the consent of the host population.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:57 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:43 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:01 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
So defending people who refuse to accept immigrants is you putting your back out to welcome them?
You might want to re-word that, read that a few times, still not understanding.

It isn't the natives job to make it easier or harder, it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves.
I repeat, explain to me exactly how an immigrant goes about integrating without the consent of the host population.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:57 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:43 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:01 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
So defending people who refuse to accept immigrants is you putting your back out to welcome them?
You might want to re-word that, read that a few times, still not understanding.

It isn't the natives job to make it easier or harder, it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves.
More broad brushing ^

So because some immigrants don't want to integrate you believe you can use messages that condemn all immigrants? Surely the same logic applies that because the BNP and EDL have blatantly harassed then you must be saying all whites are such intolerant bastards. Anything else would be hypocritical

Me I believe in as far as is reasonably practical judging people as individuals for their individual actions or inactions. So those individuals (across all ethnic and religious spectra) that spread hate messages are the ones we should seek to expel. Of course a lot of the BNP/EDL types would suddenly find a fondness for the HRA and say that was illegal but only for them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:10 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:55 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:40 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
More flaws.

Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort, considering the main cost is pushed on current tax payers, no-one pays back their expenditure on the nation for quite a while, also the way the government works could take a generation to pay back.

Also it seems you are confusing the state with the population, the state is very accepting to a fault, it's the people who haven't been giving a choice, even though any cost accrued is levied on them.

Also why use minority groups, while the majority are very tolerate and aren't connected in any way, neither religion or politics and only the in the last few elections have shown more anti-immigration sentiments, something to do with the numbers and many not integrating.

So considering all that, they've chosen to come here and have been allowed such, they should at-least make the effort to conform and integrate.
I absolutely agree that they SHOULD integrate. I also think that the indigenous SHOULD allow them to integrate. I just don't agree with forcing people to do either.

But if you're saying that immigrants who don't integrate should accept hostility from the indigenous then by the same logic indigenous Brits who refuse to allow immigrants to integrate and/or refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants as equal British citizens regardless of how well integrated they are should accept hostility from immigrants.

Its just senseless and needlessly confrontational.

If you want integration you have to ALLOW people to integrate. If you disagree, then explain to me exactly how an immigrant goes about integrating without the consent of the host population.
The problem isn't allowing integration which seems to be a tangent will have falling into.

But the lack of integration by groups who've been here for a while now and doesn't seem to be improving, which probably isn't helped with the increased numbers.

Alright give me an example of larger enough movement, not just rallies of British people not allowing integration, this you haven't proven, immigrants also have the government on their side.

As I said the ball is in their court, which you fail to see, this isn't as was when you were growing, ironically I am more susceptible to such, because I'm the "majority" and can not face such discrimination.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 06:41 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 06:15 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:57 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 05:43 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You might want to re-word that, read that a few times, still not understanding.

It isn't the natives job to make it easier or harder, it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves.
More broad brushing ^

So because some immigrants don't want to integrate you believe you can use messages that condemn all immigrants? Surely the same logic applies that because the BNP and EDL have blatantly harassed then you must be saying all whites are such intolerant bastards. Anything else would be hypocritical

Me I believe in as far as is reasonably practical judging people as individuals for their individual actions or inactions. So those individuals (across all ethnic and religious spectra) that spread hate messages are the ones we should seek to expel. Of course a lot of the BNP/EDL types would suddenly find a fondness for the HRA and say that was illegal but only for them.
You guys love you to strawman, don't you.

Show me once where I said punish the ones integrating, maybe don't broad brush my responses, it's seems you attack without any precision.

Again, those are natives who haven't agreed to such, no native has, or even old immigrants, who also seem quite anti-immigration, me talking about the ones who haven't integrated and the general issues when there's been a lot of immigration, sneak peak doesn't go well.

Also some, seems generous, don't you mean a large contingent who live within self imposed ghettos.

But a quick question, you'll both agree with me, to remove the immigration issues, if I agree to remove the BNP(pretty much dead party, should have used Britain First) & and EDL, seems like a fair deal, pretty much remove the immigration issues and those disappear anyway.

It's funny you two always bring it down to immigrants, while I like to keep it to immigration, I guess you try to drag me down and make it a moral argument.
Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 07:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:30 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:10 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:55 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I absolutely agree that they SHOULD integrate. I also think that the indigenous SHOULD allow them to integrate. I just don't agree with forcing people to do either.

But if you're saying that immigrants who don't integrate should accept hostility from the indigenous then by the same logic indigenous Brits who refuse to allow immigrants to integrate and/or refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants as equal British citizens regardless of how well integrated they are should accept hostility from immigrants.

Its just senseless and needlessly confrontational.

If you want integration you have to ALLOW people to integrate. If you disagree, then explain to me exactly how an immigrant goes about integrating without the consent of the host population.
The problem isn't allowing integration which seems to be a tangent will have falling into.

But the lack of integration by groups who've been here for a while now and doesn't seem to be improving, which probably isn't helped with the increased numbers.

Alright give me an example of larger enough movement, not just rallies of British people not allowing integration, this you haven't proven, immigrants also have the government on their side.

As I said the ball is in their court, which you fail to see, this isn't as was when you were growing, ironically I am more susceptible to such, because I'm the "majority" and can not face such discrimination.

I repeat, explain to me how an immigrant goes about integrating if the host population refuses to allow them to.

If you refuse to answer again I will take it as an indication on your part that you have conceded the point.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:40 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 06:15 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:57 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
More broad brushing ^

So because some immigrants don't want to integrate you believe you can use messages that condemn all immigrants? Surely the same logic applies that because the BNP and EDL have blatantly harassed then you must be saying all whites are such intolerant bastards. Anything else would be hypocritical

Me I believe in as far as is reasonably practical judging people as individuals for their individual actions or inactions. So those individuals (across all ethnic and religious spectra) that spread hate messages are the ones we should seek to expel. Of course a lot of the BNP/EDL types would suddenly find a fondness for the HRA and say that was illegal but only for them.
You guys love you to strawman, don't you.

Show me once where I said punish the ones integrating, maybe don't broad brush my responses, it's seems you attack without any precision.

Again, those are natives who haven't agreed to such, no native has, or even old immigrants, who also seem quite anti-immigration, me talking about the ones who haven't integrated and the general issues when there's been a lot of immigration, sneak peak doesn't go well.

Also some, seems generous, don't you mean a large contingent who live within self imposed ghettos.

But a quick question, you'll both agree with me, to remove the immigration issues, if I agree to remove the BNP(pretty much dead party, should have used Britain First) & and EDL, seems like a fair deal, pretty much remove the immigration issues and those disappear anyway.

It's funny you two always bring it down to immigrants, while I like to keep it to immigration, I guess you try to drag me down and make it moral argument.
Your penultimate paragraph is pretty much what I've been saying all along.

Immigrants should make the effort to integrate and the indigenous shouldn't be putting up barriers to integration.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:45 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:30 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:10 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
The problem isn't allowing integration which seems to be a tangent will have falling into.

But the lack of integration by groups who've been here for a while now and doesn't seem to be improving, which probably isn't helped with the increased numbers.

Alright give me an example of larger enough movement, not just rallies of British people not allowing integration, this you haven't proven, immigrants also have the government on their side.

As I said the ball is in their court, which you fail to see, this isn't as was when you were growing, ironically I am more susceptible to such, because I'm the "majority" and can not face such discrimination.

I repeat, explain to me how an immigrant goes about integrating if the host population refuses to allow them to.

If you refuse to answer again I will take it as an indication on your part that you have conceded the point.
You making the positive claim, not me, where has the native population in the last 20 years been actively stopping integration?

This is your claim, not mine, back it up.

I didn't once say the natives should block such, but you used a strawman against me, I said it's down to the immigrants to integrate, especially when they gain significant support from the state, which is paid by the natives, isn't that support enough.

So many flaws from you.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:49 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:40 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 06:15 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepas far as is reasonably practical judging people as individuals for their individual actions or inactions. So those individuals (across all ethnic and religious spectra) that spread hate messages are the ones we should seek to expel. Of course a lot of the BNP/EDL types would suddenly find a fondness for the HRA and say that was illegal but only for them.
You guys love you to strawman, don't you.

Show me once where I said punish the ones integrating, maybe don't broad brush my responses, it's seems you attack without any precision.

Again, those are natives who haven't agreed to such, no native has, or even old immigrants, who also seem quite anti-immigration, me talking about the ones who haven't integrated and the general issues when there's been a lot of immigration, sneak peak doesn't go well.

Also some, seems generous, don't you mean a large contingent who live within self imposed ghettos.

But a quick question, you'll both agree with me, to remove the immigration issues, if I agree to remove the BNP(pretty much dead party, should have used Britain First) & and EDL, seems like a fair deal, pretty much remove the immigration issues and those disappear anyway.

It's funny you two always bring it down to immigrants, while I like to keep it to immigration, I guess you try to drag me down and make it moral argument.
Your penultimate paragraph is pretty much what I've been saying all along.

Immigrants should make the effort to integrate and the indigenous shouldn't be putting up barriers to integration.
But the general population isn't putting up any barriers, lets be real now how many immigrants are actually affected by the BNP or EDL, if you avoid their rallies, you wouldn't even notice them.

But how many are affected by mass migration a far larger number, counting wage drops, competition, housing shortages and price rise, increased criminality, cultural & religious issues.

But you seem worried about a few thousand agitators who come out a few times a year and normally wouldn't be noticeable otherwise, they even tell you when they go on rallies, which normally has people attacking them, probably why the rise in support for them.

You've made these artificial barriers, while many immigrants haven't integrated, which in this current time it's only their fault, this isn't the 50s or 60s, when there most likely actual barriers.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 07:13 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:49 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:45 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:30 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I repeat, explain to me how an immigrant goes about integrating if the host population refuses to allow them to.

If you refuse to answer again I will take it as an indication on your part that you have conceded the point.
You making the positive claim, not me, where has the native population in the last 20 years been actively stopping integration?

This is your claim, not mine, back it up.

I didn't once say the natives should block such, but you used a strawman against me, I said it's down to the immigrants to integrate, especially when they gain significant support from the state, which is paid by the natives, isn't that support enough.

So many flaws from you.
You have said yourself repeatedly that many British people refuse to accept immigrants and what's more you don't think they should. This is YOUR claim.

Now if ordinary British citizens, not EDL or BNP but ordinary people refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants no matter how well integrated they are and more besides like you encourage them then that is a clear barrier to integration.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 07:24 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:49 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 06:45 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You making the positive claim, not me, where has the native population in the last 20 years been actively stopping integration?

This is your claim, not mine, back it up.

I didn't once say the natives should block such, but you used a strawman against me, I said it's down to the immigrants to integrate, especially when they gain significant support from the state, which is paid by the natives, isn't that support enough.

So many flaws from you.
You have said yourself repeatedly that many British people refuse to accept immigrants and what's more you don't think they should. This is YOUR claim.

Now if ordinary British citizens, not EDL or BNP but ordinary people refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants no matter how well integrated they are and more besides like you encourage them then that is a clear barrier to integration.
Hang on there a minute, how is ones choice of not being accepting of immigration, just personally, stopping someone from adopting and following the culture and customs of said nation?

There isn't, I don't particularly like Communists, but it does not stop them from involving themselves, there's no actual barriers, there's been people who probably didn't like you, still didn't stop you from integrating.

So again, prove your claim that natives are actively stopping immigrates from integrating, they just aren't, as I said, many aren't integrating under their own volition, and as I said numerous times probably has something to do with the sheer numbers, giving them no reason to, when you can set up your own personal country here.

Also if everyone did do as you say, then people would probably just leave, hence I wouldn't stay in the Middle East, I would be a social pariah there.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 07:45 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:40 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 06:15 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 05:57 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
More broad brushing ^

So because some immigrants don't want to integrate you believe you can use messages that condemn all immigrants? Surely the same logic applies that because the BNP and EDL have blatantly harassed then you must be saying all whites are such intolerant bastards. Anything else would be hypocritical

Me I believe in as far as is reasonably practical judging people as individuals for their individual actions or inactions. So those individuals (across all ethnic and religious spectra) that spread hate messages are the ones we should seek to expel. Of course a lot of the BNP/EDL types would suddenly find a fondness for the HRA and say that was illegal but only for them.
You guys love you to strawman, don't you.

Show me once where I said punish the ones integrating, maybe don't broad brush my responses, it's seems you attack without any precision.

Again, those are natives who haven't agreed to such, no native has, or even old immigrants, who also seem quite anti-immigration, me talking about the ones who haven't integrated and the general issues when there's been a lot of immigration, sneak peak doesn't go well.

Also some, seems generous, don't you mean a large contingent who live within self imposed ghettos.

But a quick question, you'll both agree with me, to remove the immigration issues, if I agree to remove the BNP(pretty much dead party, should have used Britain First) & and EDL, seems like a fair deal, pretty much remove the immigration issues and those disappear anyway.

It's funny you two always bring it down to immigrants, while I like to keep it to immigration, I guess you try to drag me down and make it a moral argument.
So who hacked your account to post these broadbrushisms then

"But the lack of integration by groups who've been here for a while now "

" it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves"

"Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort,"

"But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?"

"name me one thing done nationally forcing these people to form ghettos, there isn't, they are doing this under their own volition "


All communicate the message that it's a default that an immigrant is at fault unless show otherwise

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 07:36 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 07:24 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:49 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
You have said yourself repeatedly that many British people refuse to accept immigrants and what's more you don't think they should. This is YOUR claim.

Now if ordinary British citizens, not EDL or BNP but ordinary people refuse to accept immigrants and their descendants no matter how well integrated they are and more besides like you encourage them then that is a clear barrier to integration.
Hang on there a minute, how is ones choice of not being accepting of immigration, just personally, stopping someone from adopting and following the culture and customs of said nation?

There isn't, I don't particularly like Communists, but it does not stop them from involving themselves, there's no actual barriers, there's been people who probably didn't like you, still didn't stop you from integrating.

So again, prove your claim that natives are actively stopping immigrates from integrating, they just aren't, as I said, many aren't integrating under their own volition, and as I said numerous times probably has something to do with the sheer numbers, giving them no reason to, when you can set up your own personal country here.

Also if everyone did do as you say, then people would probably just leave, hence I wouldn't stay in the Middle East, I would be a social pariah there.

Well let's take an example I mentioned earlier, so called "white flight". An immigrant moves himself and his family to a predominantly white British neighborhood to help him and his kids to integrate. His white British neighbors refuse to have anything to do with him and eventually move. Clearly there is a lack of integration but is it really the fault of the immigrant? Entirely his fault?

Or the newly arrived immigrant decides to pop into his local for a drink, what could be more British eh? Only the landlord refuses to serve him. And before you say this is a thing of the past believe me it isn't.

Now you apply this to hundreds, even thousands of similar interactions up and down the country and it all adds up to a big contribution to the lack of social cohesion.

I don't dispute that there are immigrants who refuse to integrate, of course they are a big problem, probably the biggest part of the problem. I'm just saying that there are also members of the indigenous population who can and have contributed to the problem.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 07:47 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:40 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 06:15 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepas far as is reasonably practical judging people as individuals for their individual actions or inactions. So those individuals (across all ethnic and religious spectra) that spread hate messages are the ones we should seek to expel. Of course a lot of the BNP/EDL types would suddenly find a fondness for the HRA and say that was illegal but only for them.
You guys love you to strawman, don't you.

Show me once where I said punish the ones integrating, maybe don't broad brush my responses, it's seems you attack without any precision.

Again, those are natives who haven't agreed to such, no native has, or even old immigrants, who also seem quite anti-immigration, me talking about the ones who haven't integrated and the general issues when there's been a lot of immigration, sneak peak doesn't go well.

Also some, seems generous, don't you mean a large contingent who live within self imposed ghettos.

But a quick question, you'll both agree with me, to remove the immigration issues, if I agree to remove the BNP(pretty much dead party, should have used Britain First) & and EDL, seems like a fair deal, pretty much remove the immigration issues and those disappear anyway.

It's funny you two always bring it down to immigrants, while I like to keep it to immigration, I guess you try to drag me down and make it a moral argument.
So who hacked your account to post these broadbrushisms then

"But the lack of integration by groups who've been here for a while now "

" it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves"

"Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort,"

"But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?"

"name me one thing done nationally forcing these people to form ghettos, there isn't, they are doing this under their own volition "


All communicate the message that it's a default that an immigrant is at fault unless show otherwise

"But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?"

"Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort,"

Minus those two, the first being tongue in cheek and second one being a question has no relevance about broad bruising, again swing and miss by you, don't post out of context it's bad form.

But you last sentence I agree, considering where the state provides and protects them, its' down to them to integrate, you two make this seem controversial, that immigrants should make the effort.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 08:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 07:58 PM
Steve K
Apr 22 2017, 07:47 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 06:40 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deepas far as is reasonably practical
So who hacked your account to post these broadbrushisms then

"But the lack of integration by groups who've been here for a while now "

" it's the people coming here to put in the effort, if only the ingratiate themselves"

"Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort,"

"But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?"

"name me one thing done nationally forcing these people to form ghettos, there isn't, they are doing this under their own volition "


All communicate the message that it's a default that an immigrant is at fault unless show otherwise

"But how's anything meant to get solved if you immigrants :P get all hot and bothered when people bring up issues around it?"

"Then immigrants should accept them being removed, if they aren't going to make the effort,"

Minus those two, the first being tongue in cheek and second one being a question has no relevance about broad bruising, again swing and miss by you, don't post out of context it's bad form.

But you last sentence I agree, considering where the state provides and protects them, its' down to them to integrate, you two make this seems controversial, that immigrants should make the effort.

Neither Steve or myself have disputed your argument that immigrants should make the effort to integrate.

You are having an argument with yourself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 07:56 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 07:36 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 07:24 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Hang on there a minute, how is ones choice of not being accepting of immigration, just personally, stopping someone from adopting and following the culture and customs of said nation?

There isn't, I don't particularly like Communists, but it does not stop them from involving themselves, there's no actual barriers, there's been people who probably didn't like you, still didn't stop you from integrating.

So again, prove your claim that natives are actively stopping immigrates from integrating, they just aren't, as I said, many aren't integrating under their own volition, and as I said numerous times probably has something to do with the sheer numbers, giving them no reason to, when you can set up your own personal country here.

Also if everyone did do as you say, then people would probably just leave, hence I wouldn't stay in the Middle East, I would be a social pariah there.

Well let's take an example I mentioned earlier, so called "white flight". An immigrant moves himself and his family to a predominantly white British neighborhood to help him and his kids to integrate. His white British neighbors refuse to have anything to do with him and eventually move. Clearly there is a lack of integration but is it really the fault of the immigrant? Entirely his fault?

Or the newly arrived immigrant decides to pop into his local for a drink, what could be more British eh? Only the landlord refuses to serve him. And before you say this is a thing of the past believe me it isn't.

Now you apply this to hundreds, even thousands of similar interactions up and down the country and it all adds up to a big contribution to the lack of social cohesion.

I don't dispute that there are immigrants who refuse to integrate, of course they are a big problem, probably the biggest part of the problem. I'm just saying that there are also members of the indigenous population who can and have contributed to the problem.
We're going around in circles, can we just do one part of the subject and then file it.

Your premise is flawed, we all know why they left, it was down to sheer numbers, you'd be hard pressed to find a common occurrence of people moving when there's just a few.

Another flawed premise, this does not happen, also if it did, why aren't they leaving, being so unwelcoming.

I just can not accept your premise, these scenarios barely happen, there's probably a large number of people who are anti-immigration and immigrant who just deal with it, waiting for elections, kinda seeing that now, but there's no real barrier to integration, even the media goes the extra mile, BBC actually got into shit-storm over it.

Your concept seems to be making people who probably didn't agree with mass migration to be super welcoming, even then those people aren't exactly making it hard to integrate, the current trend of not integrating is most likely down to sheer numbers, why would a person care to learn the language, customs and culture if they don't need to.

Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 08:07 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Happy Hornet
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 08:04 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 07:56 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 07:36 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Well let's take an example I mentioned earlier, so called "white flight". An immigrant moves himself and his family to a predominantly white British neighborhood to help him and his kids to integrate. His white British neighbors refuse to have anything to do with him and eventually move. Clearly there is a lack of integration but is it really the fault of the immigrant? Entirely his fault?

Or the newly arrived immigrant decides to pop into his local for a drink, what could be more British eh? Only the landlord refuses to serve him. And before you say this is a thing of the past believe me it isn't.

Now you apply this to hundreds, even thousands of similar interactions up and down the country and it all adds up to a big contribution to the lack of social cohesion.

I don't dispute that there are immigrants who refuse to integrate, of course they are a big problem, probably the biggest part of the problem. I'm just saying that there are also members of the indigenous population who can and have contributed to the problem.
We're going around in circles, can we just do one part of the subject and then file it.

Your premise is flawed, we all know why they left, it was down to sheer numbers, you'd be hard pressed to find a common occurrence of people moving when there's just a few.

Another flawed premise, this does not happen, also if it did, why aren't they leaving, being so unwelcoming.

I just can not accept your premise, these scenarios barely happen, there's probably a large number of people who are anti-immigration and immigrant who just deal with it, waiting for elections, kinda seeing that now, but there's no real barrier to integrate, even the media goes the extra mile, BBC actually got into shit-storm over it.

Your concept seems to be making people who probably didn't agree with mass migration to be super welcoming, even then those people aren't exactly making it hard to integrate, the current trend of not integrating is most likely down to sheer numbers, why would a person care to learn the languages, customs and culture if they don't need to.

Well this post seems to be made up almost entirely of assumptions.

White flight is a thing, Google it if you don't believe me.

As to numbers you said yourself there was more hostility towards immigrants in the 50s and 60s and there were considerably fewer immigrants then.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dan1989
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 08:11 PM
Dan1989
Apr 22 2017, 08:04 PM
Happy Hornet
Apr 22 2017, 07:56 PM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
We're going around in circles, can we just do one part of the subject and then file it.

Your premise is flawed, we all know why they left, it was down to sheer numbers, you'd be hard pressed to find a common occurrence of people moving when there's just a few.

Another flawed premise, this does not happen, also if it did, why aren't they leaving, being so unwelcoming.

I just can not accept your premise, these scenarios barely happen, there's probably a large number of people who are anti-immigration and immigrant who just deal with it, waiting for elections, kinda seeing that now, but there's no real barrier to integrate, even the media goes the extra mile, BBC actually got into shit-storm over it.

Your concept seems to be making people who probably didn't agree with mass migration to be super welcoming, even then those people aren't exactly making it hard to integrate, the current trend of not integrating is most likely down to sheer numbers, why would a person care to learn the languages, customs and culture if they don't need to.

Well this post seems to be made up almost entirely of assumptions.

White flight is a thing, Google it if you don't believe me.

As to numbers you said yourself there was more hostility towards immigrants in the 50s and 60s and there were considerably fewer immigrants then.
Well, if you bring up hypothetical scenarios of course there's going to be assumptions.

I didn't disagree with white flight, you might want to re-read.

I just gave you the reason for such, being the sheer numbers of immigrants, you don't see it happening when numbers are lower.

That was a different era, when they had actual barriers.
Edited by Dan1989, Apr 22 2017, 08:22 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Europe · Next Topic »
Add Reply