George Carey, Archbisop of Canterbury until 2002, has written in today’s Times, in which he just stops short of calling for Christians to be given priority in a migration point system.

Deeply unfair characterization of what he actually says, since he explicitly excludes that policy:

This is not to say that I am calling for Christians as a group to be given priority in any migration points system.

near the end of the piece.

“What exactly does it mean that we need to “seriously address their concerns”?”

The fact that you need to ask that question suggests to me that you, and those like you, deserve the ‘period of reflection’ that the electorate are about to give you.

Michael,

Thanks very much for that very illuminating explanation. Cleared up the issue a treat.

@5cc

In the interests of mutual kindness, thank you very much for that illuminating post – dealt with the issue a treat

Carey made a good point about the “deeply socially divisive” nature of “immigrants who immediately establish their own tribunals to apply Sharia”

Given that, as far as I understand it, those Sharia tribunals exist only to provide binding arbitration of private civil disputes, I’m not at all convinced that it is a good point. What is “socially divisive” about allowing the parties to a private civil dispute to resolve the matter according to whatever standards they like (provided, of course, that the eventual outcome is enforceable under British law)? It’s a private matter (by definition), and if they want to resolve it by casting chicken bones or consulting the FSM, it’s really none of anybody else’s business.

In fact, it’s even worse, as he says “the idea that Britain can continue to welcome with open arms immigrants who immediately establish their own tribunals to apply Sharia, rather than make use of British civil law, is deeply socially divisive” [my empahsis]. But the concept of allowing the parties at dispute to use whatever arbitration service they like is itself part of British civil law, and the decisions reached by such arbitration (or any other set of contractual arrangements) are only enforceable by British civil law.

Unless he’s talking about something completely different which I am unaware of, it’s a blatant misrepresentation of the basic facts of the matter.

Can someone please sort out the initial paragraph?
It looks mangled and it didn’t look like that when originally posted. Thank you 🙂

Is it any surprise that Thatcher made him arch Bishop? He is a revolting little man.

Like all right wingers his religion is pick and mix. So he had no trouble supporting Prince Charles get a divorce and still be head of the church when he becomes King. You see like all right wing Conservatives morality applies to thee and not me.

Tesco have calculated that the UK population is already 75 million. It’s the poor who’ll get screwed as always.

@Dick the Prick,

I’ve seen that bandied about before and I’d genuinely like to see the evidence, link please.

If the population is already 75M, does that mean the worrywarts who claim that the sky will fall down if we hit 70M have already been proved wrong?

“Tesco have calculated”?!?!?

Regarding this articles answer a, isn’t it exactly the point that popular debate has not translated into debate in the political arena? That indeed, immigration has been ‘discussed relentlessly’ by ordinary people but that politicians have been reluctant to engage in these debates. And as far as mature debate goes, how about this, lets make our article’s headline a character slur against someone trying to start a debate on immigration? Can’t make this stuff up

God almighty, whoops , the fact is we have to many people in the country we are filling up, and we have no land left, except in Wales Scotland England.

So how do we stop people getting past the 70 million well labour working on it, but the wars are not killing enough, so lets have a war here, or better still deport all Christians to Italy, all Christians are Roman catholics anyway. Non believers can go to hell , labour will help by paying you £10,000 each, my self allow me to take all my benefits with me and I’ll move to Spain no problem

It’s not a brilliant link – just from the business section in the Indy but you can’t really grumble about the methodolgy that much perhaps. I’m certainly not saying it’s true or anything but just that it’s certainly worth considering that the numbers we’re accustomed to working with may be a bit dodgy.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/comment/city-eye-facts-on-a-plate-our-population-is-at-least-77-million-395428.html

Dick the Prick

What the hell are you on about?

There isn’t any method or methodology there to grumble about. What the article claims exist are statistics used by a private organisation with a financial interest (at the time) in showing a larger UK population than current estimates. Right or wrong, your figures are hardly robust!

Further, what the article shows, if anything it says is true at all, is that shouting about the inevitable tragedy once the population reached 70M is pointless scaremongering. If we’re already between 75-80M it turns out we can support a lot more than we – and by “we” I mean anti-immigration bastards running rags like the Express – thought and the people claiming 70M is a magic number that will make the country catch on fire are wrong.

Douglas @12

Indeed, you can’t make it up. Except in your case. Because the “debate” that people have been having in the papers has been “Britain’s Full: Darkies Go Home!” or “Eek, Turns Out All Muslims Are Terrorists!” or “Dirty Dirty Gyppos, Fuck Off Parking Your Thieving Wagons In Our Town.” Oh, wait, that last one’s more of a 1980s headline. Still, same thing.

Meanwhile, the government, far from responding sensibly, has been so reactionary in its response to fearmongering and – I’m not afraid to say it – racist headlines that it would rather arrest and imprison children than face accusations of being “soft on immigration”. Which just goes to show how stupid it is, because what the “debate” shows is that as long as some people can hear a foreign accent on the tube they’ll rant on about foreign people coming over here taking all our jobs government should deport them all wuuuurgggh!

Here’s some facts for your debate. The government can do very little about the natural migrationary pressures exerted on populations. The reason we exist as white skinned people in Northern Europe to complain about dark skinned people from Waziristan is because of naturally occurring pressures within populations to expand and migrate to where the resources are. It’s the reason people in Africa and India are poorer in the first place, because our population naturally expanded in an Imperial way and nicked all their bloody stuff for a century – not that you could tell that to most people in this country because they still believe in the Eugenicist theories that black people are naturally stupider and that it’s the Africans’ fault if they can’t make a go of their own continent.

Fact is, these pressures happen all the time. They always have happened and always will happen. Populations move about. Since the ones that show up in this country aren’t actually showing up with gunships and a slave trade and flags, I reckon they’re probably not as much of a threat as all that.

Trouble is though, whenever white, western people get wind of this fact, they always – always – believe that the sky is going to fall in and the earth is going to crumble beneath our feet, that foreign people are going to take our jobs and eat our food and bring diseases and have too many babies and eradicate the local population and soon there’ll be none of “us” left, whoever the hell “us” is supposed to be. And it’s like this until the last round of immigrants have successfully integrated – even though none of them had any interest in doing so according to the racists who wanted to have a go – and there’s a new batch, and then we’ll complain about them instead.

We’re not all Jewish, Hugenot, Afro-Carribbean, Chinese or Polish. People throughout history have complained that we all would be, that it was inevitable, that we wouldn’t be able to cope, and yet it turns out they were invariably, without exception, utterly wrong. Immigration is a natural part of living in a world where some people come from different physical locations on its surface. Policing it is a mug’s game, and mostly the government knows this even though it tries to appease the racist bastard right wingers as much as possible by deporting way too many people in horrendous conditions and basically being shitty to foreign people because nobody will dare stand up and say that Paul Dacre and George Cary are, in fact, ignorant fucks. The home office still won’t accept that refugees from Iraq should be allowed into the country because apparently it’s safe over there, even though it’s not, because we invaded and started a couple of civil wars. But we can’t accept the refugees because there’s a new term “asylum seekers” that we can use to categorise people from the world’s shitholes as dirty thieving scroungers who come over here and want our stuff – even if the reason they’re on the scrounge is because we bombed their stuff in the name of “freedom” – and can thus deny we have a responsibility to be basically decent human beings.

AND YOU’RE STILL NOT HAPPY, ARE YOU??

So what possible reason could any of the rest of us have for wanting any more of a bloody “debate” with you? You don’t WANT a debate, you want to go “wurrrgh, seventy million! wuurgh, foreign people! Wuurrgh, taking our jobs, benefits, scroungers! Wuuurhg, diseases, cantmakeitup!” Just shut the hell up, you awful, awful excuse for a human being. Take it down the pub, have it out with the Sun readers down there, but don’t pretend that you have a bloody argument worth listening to any more than your type have ever been worth listening to.

Carey makes sense. Britian has become a much more troubled country thanks to Third World immigration, with a sad increase in diversity, a phenomenon that generally makes societies more unstable.
And since this article drags the pervert issue into play, yes, of course re-criminalisation would be a good thing. We have now got to the point that some ACPO dork in Lancashire has told his coppers not to disturb revolting sodomites doing their stuff in public view.
Again, diversity – next you guys will be agitating for bestiality, polygamy and paedophilia…wait a minute, though, with so-called ‘gay’ adoption, you have already given lots of paedophiles some glorious opportunities.

Yay! I love it when people show their true colours.

If you want to lock up the gays and the darkies raise your hand!

OK, now, you guys with your hands in the air – welcome to minority status! The pussy commie leftie faggotarians won. Don’t like it, solve the population crisis in your own heads by moving somewhere people think more like you. How about Uganda or Saudi Arabia? They love bigots like yourselves there, you’d fit right in.

F*ck me pity we cannot go back to the sixties we had running fights in the towns as groups of different whites fought with each other ,just because they were different the Mods Rockers the hell angels the gays the non gays. it does not take Muslims or any other faith to have riots.

But labour have one area which is something which annoys me they have detention camps which hold women and children, detention camps are another name for of course concentration camps, to concentrate people. nothing to laugh about is it.

@ Mcduff

Haha, not worth my time talking to you, its allright for some isn’t it, all afternoon to rant on a message board. As you can see I was up at six to go to work and have only just finished. Thankyou for taking the time to set out my opinions for me. I know the recession is hard and one does tend to get angry when unemployed, but we must muddle through.

@ Mcduff

Oh, I just linked to your ‘journal’, so you’re angry becasue no one will ever publish you rantings. You want to get into academia mate, crank our some nonsense for a PhD in social anthropology from the LSE, nice easy job as a tutor, academic journals will publish any old nonsense. All I had to do was spend 6 years learning Japansese (all paid for by the gov), 2 years living in a fishing village in Japan (cruel, cruel race). Plus the best part, you can make can make commoners call you Dr!

17. Should be deleted.

McDuff @16

Here’s some facts for your debate. The government can do very little about the natural migrationary pressures exerted on population

This is demonstrably false. Governments can do a great deal to resist such pressures if the political will is there to do so. For a country like Britain with no shared physical borders it is even easier still.

It is only western liberal states which are paralysed into inaction, the rest of the world has no trouble at all in admitting who they want and excluding those they don’t.

There is nothing inevitable or irresistible about mass migration. That is a falsehood propagated by the charlatans of the immigration industry and swallowed whole by its gullible camp followers.

“It is only western liberal states which are paralysed into inaction, the rest of the world has no trouble at all in admitting who they want and excluding those they don’t.”

So you want to go and live in Sudan then. Bye!

There are many advanced countries which do not subscribe to the open doors philosophy. All the Asian tiger economies, for example.

Fundamentally it is only the western liberal democracies that accept unwanted immigrants, unwanted by the majority of their own populations, that is.

25.
Of course it doesn’t even cross your mind that the “asian tigers” have a totally different background, history, geography, migration patterns.

You did not say ” many advanced countries ” you said “the rest of the world. “

@26

‘Migration patterns’ of the sort we are experiencing now are a very recent phenomenon. There is nothing traditional or historical about them.

17. Should be deleted.

No. It shouldn’t.

It should be preserved for posterity to show what a tosser he is.

Douglas @ 20

” As you can see I was up at six to go to work and have only just finished. “

Aww, bless you mate. I’ve got much better working hours than that. One of the perks of my job, in fact.

Funny thing though: despite the fact that we live in a joined-up, web 2.0 world where everyone’s got a computer at work, people work from home, people are freelance, people work at unusual hours… yet all one has to do is post two comments in an afternoon disagreeing with you about something and immediately you make an assumption that people are dole-bound scroungers, angry people sat there bitter because we don’t have the opportunity to get up at the asscrack of dawn every weekday like your good self. Funny what happens when you’re naturally inclined to think the worst of people, isn’t it? You might even find yourself believing that what’s going on in our pissant press is a “debate,” or that our milksop government locking up more and more people in a desperate bid to appear tougher and tougher on the curse of foreigners is somehow them not listening to the fascists on Fleet St.

Incidentally, while not a doctor myself, if I weren’t so sure it would annoy the life out of her, I could introduce you to a certain doctor of history of Cambridge and Manchester who could give you dates, times and references of all the people who’ve claimed immigration will be the end of us all. Apparently the arguments are so similar that you could take a piece from the 1920s, change the nouns referring to this year’s undesirable foreigners and slap it into a modern paper and nobody would be any the wiser. It’s probably what they do, in fact, and really why I’ve no interest in listening to anybody who can’t offer an actual new argument as to why I should be afraid of foreign people this year.

If you have a reason other than “wuurgh, foreigners!” then feel free to tell the rest of the class. Because from where I sit, “we need a full and honest debate” sounds very much like people saying “I know my arguments are totally racist so I’m going to claim that I’m not allowed to say them so I don’t have to be racist in public.”

Dan Dare @ 26

“‘Migration patterns’ of the sort we are experiencing now are a very recent phenomenon. There is nothing traditional or historical about them.”

Cor blimey guv’nor, you got me bang to rights there. Why, looking back, I see that when we compare migration patterns to other periods in our history when global human population was within spitting distance of 7Bn that….

um…

hang on a mo.

Well, when we compare migration patterns to those in the immediate century following the dissolution of massive, globe-spanning empires built on the looting of entire continents and the transfer of that wealth to Europe we’ll find that…

give me a second…

must be here somewhere….

OK, well, when we compare migration patterns to those in other periods where the technological base provided instantaneous point-to-point communications to anywhere on the planet’s surface, and a global trade network linking manufacturers with suppliers across continents as a matter of course, then we’ll surely find that…

wait, really?

Well blow me down. Turns out there are lots of unique things about the modern age that have impacts on demographics and migrationary pressures! So not only are they not unique, but not a lot else is unique either! Turns out, you see, that we’ve never tripled the population of the planet AND invented the jet engine and the internet in one century before. Who knew? I thought that kind of thing happened all the time! What with people saying that certain things are unprecedented, I would have thought they’d have comparable periods of history on which to base that claim!

Imagine my surprise when it turns out they’re basically saying “things are different these days: as well as being loads more of us, and us getting really fat because of this massive globe-spanning trade empire that provides us with a relatively luxurious lifestyle due to our net accumulation of the world’s wealth, it also turns out that there are more people in other countries too, and that a small percentage of them want to move to where all the money’s gone.” Because, really, when you put it like that, it sounds like a statement of the bloody obvious.

Of course, I do understand the sentiment that we should be allowed to nick all their money and keep it for ourselves and nobody except a particular class of folk should ever be allowed any chance at it, but, pft, you know these foreign types, amirite!!??! No reasoning with them.

Yeah you’re right. The ‘You took all our stuff and now it’s payback time’ argument is a really, really good one. Hard to argue against.

I’m dashing off a letter right now to the Italian government demanding a nice villa in Tuscany as compo for all that tin, lead and wool that their lot nicked when they were here. How d’you fancy my chances?

‘You were there so now we’re here’ is a good one too.

Not so sure about ‘follow the money’ though. In not too many years the Chinese will have a bigger GDP than the entire EU but I don’t think they’ll be falling for that one somehow. Bloody bigots.

“The ‘You took all our stuff and now it’s payback time’ argument is a really, really good one.”

Its one that is bandied around a lot but never put in any manifesto, poster, leaflet or speech; funny that.

Also using the concept of ‘paypack’ is pretty inflammatory and is most certainly a two way street; especially as most working class kids under NuLiebour can barely read and write, let alone fathom history.

“especially as most working class kids under NuLiebour ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzz

Shorter troll, I am a robot , I am a robot, I am robot.

Sally,

Thanks for that powerful insight.

When you are not hysterically screaming obscenities at people who disagree with you, you reveal yourself to be quite an odd one indeed.

As soon as you use terms as Nuliebour you reveal yourself to be a jerk.

What ever you think of me, I am not as odd as trolls like you, who hang out on a site with people that don’t agree with you.

Billy no mates is you.

Ah, Mr Dare, not really following along, are you?

Migrationary pressures follow the resources. If the resources flow one way, the people follow. It’s nothing to do with “payback”, and not even on any particular notion of fairness, even though since we clearly built our vast wealth in the west on “free trade” that relied upon a particular notion of border permeability that applied to goods and credit but remained solid and opaque when it came to people seeking wage parity it seems fairness would be a good argument to make. But while it’s the moral, even indeed the just thing to allow people freedom of movement as much as we believe we allow them freedom of speech and association, it’s not really what I’m talking about when I mention pressures.

People go where the money is. Doesn’t matter how it got there or why. We went and robbed their countries and now, for reasons which have nothing to do with payback but everything to do with human desires to seek out better lives for themselves, some people want to seek out those better lives here. Perhaps foolishly so, but then Dick Whittington thought the streets of London were paved with gold, didn’t he?

And we can, you’re right, stop some people some of the time, if we’re willing to devote massive resources to it and don’t mind being bastards. I think you’re a little mistaken about the Chinese approach though. Chinese real wages are hardly the stuff dreams are made of, and they’re already expanding their manufacturing and mining bases into the African countries where real wages are lower, thus taking China to the immigrants. Indeed, should real Chinese wages rise drastically over the next half century and the Chinese find that they are faced with an influx of people from neighbouring countries I have no doubts that they’ll use the same strategies they employ with any ethnic minorities they don’t like – declare them terrorists and enemies of the state and have them driven out, locked up and tortured.

Of course, I guess we could do that with our immigrant populations as a deterrent to the new ones too. Does that sound like a good idea? Should the British treat the Uygurs like the Chinese treat them? We already lock up children for years at a time, what’s a little more brutality in the aim of keeping foreign people off our shores, hmm?

Aren’t the reich-whingers mates with each other? I suppose that counts, in a way.

37

I think some of them are just the same person who keep using various names.

They just repeat the same troll central message that has been drilled into them by their masters..

Sally,

Thanks again Sally. Once more, powerful logic.

But to paraphrase you (without the obscenities): Nobody gives a flying —- what you have to say troll.

You are a troll who screams hysterical abuse at people who disagree with you and you have been pulled on it many times.

As one commentator remarked, you are indeed “repellent.”

39

Ah yes, another civility lecture from a troll. Priceless.

Sally,

Ah yes, another lecture from a ‘repellent’ troll. Priceless.

Curious Freedom

I, too, am curious. Do you have an argument or point of some kind to make here? If so, what is it?

On the contrary McDuff, I understand exactly what you are saying. It is nothing more or less than the standard litany we have been hearing from immigration enthusiasts since Noah was a lad.

Of course people follow the money, it’s natural and rational. I don’t blame them in the slightest. But that doesn’t mean we have to let them in if we don’t want to. I know you probably think it’s very naughty to say so but I don’t actually care about being a bastard about it.

As for whether we should treat our immigrants like the Chinese treat their Uighurs (who aren’t technically immigrants as I understand it), well why not. Perhaps a lot of them will then go away on their accord and we won’t have to bribe like NuLabor is doing at the moment. Let’s repeal the Race Relations Act, that’d be a good start.

Now, show me where I’m going wrong.

I had already made my point McDuff and would have expanded upon it were I asked any actual questions or offered any debate rather then the hysterical rants of a well known troll.

Care to address that question at Sally now instead? Are you a biased hypocrite?

Come to that, what exactly was your point anyway? Let we should allow whoever, whenever and in as many numbers to enter without any checks at all, let alone balances?

Ah, so Dan Dare is in favour of summary imprisonment and torture. Or, at least, not exactly against it if it will scare off some foreigners. As I said, nice when people reveal their true colours!

Curious

My point is that immigration always happens, people always have a rant about how it is going to destroy the country, and the country, so far, is not destroyed. In competitions about who’s got the “same old arguments”, I’d suggest that these are, in fact, the same old rebuttals to the same old arguments – arguments that have historically always been wrong.

Further, the point is that the extent to which we can “control” immigration is more or less dependent on the amount to which we wish our government to be utter fucks to the less fortunate. Personally, as somewhat of a liberal, I prefer to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted rather than the other way around. You may disagree with this, and at the next ballot you can, indeed, vote for the people running on the platform of afflicting the afflicted and being egregiously awful to other human beings because they ain’t from round ere, innit. But having a right to do something doesn’t make you, y’know, not a cock for actually doing it.

McDuff

This country has certainly never experienced anything like this level of immigration and as an island it wouldn’t be very difficult at all to control the flow.

The humanitarian argument for immigration is one of the most easily disputed because unless we take in every person from the countries suffering from war, famine or whatever the problem is then we have solved any problem at all and caused one for ourselves.

Always best in humanitarian cases to help solve the problem with the country in question itself so that everyone there benefits.

You say immigration has not destroyed the country ‘so far’ which is hardly a great assessment in any case, but it most certainly has brought much higher levels of crime, new types of crime, enclaves, immense pressure on resources and jobs and a fair degree of social in cohesion already.

As no country has ever inflicted this kind of mass immigration from such diverse and alien peoples and cultures, many of which conflict, we can only guess what will happen in the longer term.

Certainly the clash of cultures does not sit well in the Balkans as last flare in Bosnia. It is worth remembering too that the last serious race riot in the UK that resulted in loss of life was between Blacks and Asians in Birmingham and had nothing to do at all with the traditional first stay cause of ‘white racism / police brutality.’

These are the current realities at the level of immigration we already have.

Indeed, we have never experienced this level of immigration. Nor this level of wealth. Look it up – a loaf of bread costs a lower percentage of the median wage today than it ever has done. So not only are we not destroyed “so far”, we are not even close.

And as far as it being easy, again, apparently fucking not, since the government is doing its utmost to be increasingly cuntish to all the foreigners it can be and you are still unhappy. I imagine that their unwillingness to classify british born citizens with foreign parents or grandparents as immigrants and deport them all by force has something to do with it, right? You seem to forget that, while we are an island, very few of the people currently living on it want to huddle down behind barricades and eke out a small, petty little existence without going anywhere else lest the French invade. Haven’t felt that way in years. We’re all off to Malaga each year at the very least. We all want to buy and sell stuff on the continent, which is unsurprising because we’re a nation of lager drinkers who’ve never worked out how to brew the stuff properly. So people and things move across the border all the time. Some of those will be illegal immigrants, some of them will be British tossers moving to Spain for the final time, even while keeping their subscription to the Daily Mail, complaining about immigrants in a completely unironic manner. So it goes, all part of the natural cycle of life.

As no country has ever inflicted this kind of mass immigration from such diverse and alien peoples and cultures, many of which conflict, we can only guess what will happen in the longer term.

Ever been to New York City? Marvellous place. Don’t much like what the white people did down in Wall St, but the cuisine is spectacular.

Oh, I’m sorry, we were talking about massive immigration levels from diverse, clashing cultures being unprecedented. I assume you just plain old forgot about Ellis Island. New York, not to mention our own fair old London Town, is a pretty good example of just what happens when you smoosh a load of foreigners into one place together. Both London and New York, as it happens, are not just among the most culturally vibrant cities in the world but also among the wealthiest.

Meanwhile, the evidence you have that immigration is bad seems to be conflating immigants with non whites and then blaming all our troubles on them ex recta.

What crime is it that they’re supposed to have brought? If you’re right and we’re flooded with masses of unprecedented immigration, isn’t it a little odd to you that violent crime should be on a steady decline over the last two decades? Since you’re so convinced that “immigrants cause crime,” I wonder where you think they’re committing it, since it’s not here. Or, are they perhaps stealing crimes from honest, hard working, white criminals who are now unable to make a dishonest living flogging dodgy TVs down the market?

And as far as “the Balkans” goes, mate, believe me, if you would like to go there you really can, but you will get your ass handed to you on a very small plate. I know this since even mentioning it in terms of UK immigration shows that you have all the understanding of the historical context of the Balkans as a very small cocktail sausage has of the rules of chess. But then, people who rant about immigration always do tend to be uneducated, petty minded louts with all the grace of generic meat products, so I guess it makes sense. That you would pick the Balkans as an example of problems caused by a clash of immigrant cultures is offensively ignorant. Not offensive because of the content, mind, but because of the level of ignorance on display. It actually offends me that someone could be that cocksure about something while knowing, literally, less than nothing about what they are talking about. But then, that kind of thing probably goes down well in your local boozer, doesn’t it?

Apologies for the double post; my mistake.

Cutting to the chase – most of the new wave anti-immigration types, whether they are archbishops or Labour voters persuaded to switch to the BNP, or just ordinary people driving cabs or drinking down the pub, really mean is that they are anti-Muslim.

A referendum seeking a ten year moratorium on letting any more Poles into this country would fail. Ditto probably Hindus. But a referendum banning further immigration from Islamic countries would almost certainly pass – and with the support of the majority of the working class.

Immigration is just a convenient code for talking obliquely about Muslims. Or, at least, much of the time it is. I see the archbish is preoccupied with it, for instance.

@ McDuff

The comment has too many links to go through in tact so I have removed most; if you really dispute any of the figures I can post them back a few at a time.

As usual with your type, you cannot handle any dissent at all on your pet subject and have to resort to the most illiberal devices of angry insults, expletives and inventions.

To start off with, you claim that the UK has never been so wealthy but that is a load of rubbish; we are in the worst recession with the worst job losses in living memory; average personal debt last year the average household debt in the UK was £9,280 (excluding mortgages). This figure increased to £21,570 if the average is based on the number of households who actually have some form of unsecured loan.

Add mortgages and the average household debt in the UK was £58,370.

And that is without adding the £16,700 of national debt for every man, woman and child in the UK last year alone.

This country and its people are not wealthy it all; it is all a house of cards; an illusion; a mirage.

We are all heavily in debt and don’t actually own very much at all in reality.

You also claim this government is doing its “utmost to be increasingly cuntish to all the foreigners” without actually elaborating.

It was this government that brought immigration to the fore in this country with its extremist policies, brought in secretly by a deeply corrupt and anti-British government without mandate to “make the UK truly multicultural” and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date” we now know from former governemnt advisor Neather; all the while, surreally, the government allowed the public to believe that it was just woefully incompetent.

The folly of your statement and the contempt of this government for the British people can be gauged by the fact that even though we are approaching 3 million unemployed including around 200,000 construction workers, Liebour are planning to bring in more immigrants to work the 25,000 jobs for the Olympic Village project.

Frank Field sums it up: “When you consider the amount of public money going into these projects, not to consider British workers is near criminal.”

You ask if I have been to New York and yes I have, a few times, many years ago when the crime rate was so horrendously bad that it was world renowned and the city was largely a hell hole outside the elite enclaves; I understand it is much better now but it has certainly had its problems. I have been to the Balkans too. Have you? Incidentally, you invent that fact that I claimed “immigration” caused the problems there…

As for what for your question “what crime is it that they’re supposed to have brought” the first one that springs to mind is gang rape. Virtually unheard off in the UK (or indeed Europe) until recently, now it is common place and virtually exclusively a BME crime, primarily Afro-Caribbean.

In fact 10 years ago after research found that in 8 out of 10 cases of gang rape, black men were the defendants, even Darcus Howe had to comment on it.

More recent figures reveal that in 92% of gang rape cases the offenders are from the BME, primarily Afro-Caribbean’s.

The problem is fully acknowledged in the black community; so much so an African journalist recently produced a documentary on gang rape and the black community entitled: ‘Gang rape and our lost black youth.’ See below.

Just as gang rape is acknowledged as a primarily uniquely black issue even (and especially) in the black community, so is gang problems and violence.

As Detective Inspector George Rhoden, president of the National Organisation of Black Law Enforcement Executives puts it: ‘In the black community we are all aware that there is major concern with gun and knife crime.

The black newspaper The Voice reports:

“According to a report from the Metropolitan Police, black people in London are four times more likely to be murdered as whites and 12 times more likely to be suspects in homicide cases. Bailey [Black Community Activist] said: “We live in more violent times at the moment.”

Leaked figures on knife crime revealed that 73% of those charged with knife crime were BME (whist the biggest victim group was whites.)

In fact violent crime, especially shootings in London is bad and so primarily fixed upon one ethnic group, Afro-Caribbean’s, that the police have an exclusive full time unit to deal with the issue, and this unit has the full support of the leading black community organisations. It reports that:

“75% of London’s gun crime involves the victim and suspect both coming from the capital’s black communities.”

And as a result of all of this, there are 5 times more young blacks in prison then whites.

Then there is the serious issue of organised Asian grooming of white children in areas of the UK, either acceptable in their country of origin or treated to a ‘blind eye’ which is exactly what is happening in this country with the police largely ignoring this crime in fear of the backlash and of being branded racist.

The issue is so serious and damaging that even ‘Searchlight’ acknowledges the extent of the problem and its role in popularising the BNP:

http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=139

One shocked Liebour MP Ann Cryer, a Labour member of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee found this:

“A hidden world in which Asian men “groom” young white girls for sex has been exposed with the jailing yesterday of two men for child-abuse offences

The trial came amid growing concern at the attitudes of some Asian men towards white girls which campaigners for women claim few people wish to address.

Parents have complained that in parts of the country with large Asian communities white girls as young as 12 are being targeted for sex by older Asian men yet the authorities are unwilling to act because of fears of being labelled racist.

Ann Cryer, a Labour member of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, has been at the forefront of attempting to tackle the problem after receiving complaints from mothers in her constituency about young Asian men targeting their under-age daughters.

Although campaigners claim that hundreds of young girls are already being passed around men within the Asian community for sex, she said that attempts to raise the problem with community leaders had met with little success, with most of them being in a state of denial about it.

However, Ms Cryer added: “I think there is a problem with the view Asian men generally have about white women. Their view about white women is generally fairly low. They do not seem to understand that there are white girls as moral and as good as Asian girls.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2237940.ece

I could go on, but I think I have demonstrated amply here that in complete contrast to your sunny ideological twaddle, the reality of mass immigration and multiculturalism is much, much different and it has, as I said, brought new types of crime and much more crime in its wake.

In fact, it actually offends me that someone could be that cocksure about something while knowing, literally, less than nothing about what they are talking about. But then, that kind of thing probably goes down well in your local wine bar, doesn’t it?

McDuff @43:

Ah, so Dan Dare is in favour of summary imprisonment and torture.

Well in mitigation M’Lud I did propose starting off small by repealing the RRA and then building up from there.

But I’m curious about a couple of things you’ve said yourself. A principal rationale for opening the borders to anyone who wishes to turn up is said to be based on ‘fairness’ and ‘comforting the afflicted’ while ‘afflicting the comfortable’. While recognising that such things do afford liberals like your goodself lovely feelings of gooey warm fuzziness what’s in it for the rest us?

You’ve cited cultural vibrancy and spectacular cuisine as particular benefits. But we’re already familiar with the role that ethnic cuisine, exciting new dance syncopations and colourful dress styles play in the standard litany of immigration benefits. Frankly it’s all we ever here about.

What else ya got?

@51 Dan Dare
“You’ve cited cultural vibrancy and spectacular cuisine as particular benefits. But we’re already familiar with the role that ethnic cuisine, exciting new dance syncopations and colourful dress styles play in the standard litany of immigration benefits. Frankly it’s all we ever here about.”

Incidentally, look at what 760,000 Brits are currently benefitting Spain, Dan Dare. High horse, right?

Fights, street-binge drinking, street-puking, entire villages snatched by people demanding English-only schools, British pubs and British shops dominating entire Spanish regions, hospitals clogged up by people who are not even registered with the local councils, hordes of people setting up shop without bothering to pick up the local language…

If Iris Robinson spoke against immigration she’d be one of those Brits!

@51 Dan Dare.

Open your eyes, use your brain, you racist plonker, if you have one.
Look at all the jobs that a lot of people like yourself would not even consider doing. Think of the people who package your microwaveable ready-made E-number packed Tesco meals. Think of the NHS nurses, the people who pick your fruit & vegetables for under the minimum wage, the people who clean the crap you leave at your overpriced hotel, etc etc etc etc… You racist dipstick.

Now now claude, don’t get your knickers in a twist.

I’d have thought a card-carrying leftie do-gooder would be decrying denuding the third world of its medical staff or importing foreigners to perform menial tasks at starvation wages but you seem to be all in favour of it.

Think of the people who package your microwaveable ready-made E-number packed Tesco meals. Think of the NHS nurses, the people who pick your fruit & vegetables for under the minimum wage, the people who clean the crap you leave at your overpriced hotel

Nice work if you can get it.

Perhaps someone should tell the 4 million unemployed about these career opportunities before advertising them at the ends of the Earth.

Dan Dare

Do try to follow along. You came out in favour of being a racist, pro torture cock. This makes you a bad person and means I don’t have to listen to you. Keep talking though, I’m sure there are some idiots in the peanut gallery who will agree with anything implicitly prefaced by “pro torture racist Dan Dare says: …” Not me though!

Eventually, you will catch up with the rhetorical strategy here. I shan’t hold my breath for it, because in my experience racist torture apologists aren’t very bright.

@ Curious Racist

“we are in the worst recession with the worst job losses in living memory; “

Except for the great depression. Which is the fault of immigrants. Oh, no, wait, it’s the fault of a perfect storm of resource shortages and a stateside housing bubble and a global banking crisis. Right. So nothing to do with black people at all. And, even despite the current recession, we’re still significantly better off as a country than we were in, say, 1900, 1950 or 1980.

So, your point is…? “Darkies go home, wurgh!”?

As for the rest of it, your efforts to conflate immigrants with black people are noted. But, alarmingly, your efforts to claim that “gang rape” is a singularly foreign invention marks you out as someone who has never heard of “football” and thus can’t actually be British. I suspect, therefore, Mr Curious Bastard, that you are in fact some kind of fifth column, sent here by the forces of Foreignistan to portray British folk as being ignorant racist cunts and undermine the nation.

Further evidence:

“Who did all these jobs before the advent of mass immigration then?”

Who cleaned all the telecommunications and IT buildings before 1980? My goodness me, I simply cannot imagine. Obviously, some kind of conspiracy exists to hide the fact that non-existent jobs were manned by non-existent British folk before the dirty foreigners came here with their crime and disease, or at leat that crime and disease that the Jews and the Hugenots didn’t bring with them.

Or, alternative conspiracy, you’re a fifth columnist who hates this country so much you’re trying to pretend everyone here is absurdly – absurdly! – ignorant. Which is it, Mr Curious Fascist?