Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

KilnerLUFC

Foreigner In My Own Country?!?!

Recommended Posts

KilnerLUFC
As for the point that there are many immigrants who "live off the welfare system", that's dwarfed infinitely by the number of people who live off it as born or naturalised citizens.

Why is this even being brought into the argument? If someone is born in this country, then it's up to our Government to sort this out. I'm getting at the Illegals who flood into this country, find the loophole in the benefits system, and take advantage of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A J

Melchior, you got to realise that within the unemployed such as myself - currently, there are those looking for work and unable to find any, volunteering and trying their best to make ends meet, whilst at the same there are those that are perfectly happen to not contribute, feel no shame when collecting their Jobs seekers allowance and even purposely make no effort to find work. Without a shadow of any doubt, before removing any of the british born scrougers along with the excess of immigrants wrongly soaking up our benefit systems like leeches, you'd have to deport people on an individual basis, case by case, never going to happen , logistics and so forth, and ultimately you are right, it would be detrimental to pride, hence why I am never going to be a politician lol !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England.

I fear you have missed my point somewhat. The issue is that the outlawing of "free speech"- or at least some freedom of expression- is endemic of autocratic dictatorships and corrupt regimes. Now, there are boundaries that cannot be over-stepped- wishing violence, encouraging murder or hatred of others based on origin, culture and the suchlike- but these work both ways. How many of these people do you really think there are? Across the entire country, maybe a couple of hundred- there certainly weren't more than 100 or so out on Armistice Day. I'm equally sick of seeing the platform that the gutter press provides hate-speech and radical Islamism, but I hold the press responsible for that, and not the government, or the Islamists, or anyone else. The press have an agenda to stoke up tensions and to present events in an out-of-proportion way- sensationalism sells, and damn the consequences. The simple fact of the matter is that you can't tar everyone with the same brush- some individuals have perfectly legitimate concerns about British government and British policy, which they should be free to express. Those who wish violence, racial hatred or segregation on others should be dutifully punished for doing so, but that must apply to those who attack Islam as a religion, as well as Islamists who attack British society. All must be equal in the eyes of law, otherwise you end up with a segregated society and issues of radicalisation becoming worse.

 

 

If loving his own country and standing up for it against people who would rather pose and wank themselves off as the "informed" kind that knows the truth and will stand up for the people in OP's post well then I'm guilty. If you'd rather blame people that inspire such dramatic hatred of our country than the people that buy into the sh*t the radicals spew, the same ignorant people that will use just about any excuse to attack our country for living differentlythen maybe you don't actually care about this country at all? Obviously you picked up on the fact it sounds more intelligent and well advised to have a go at ignorant, xenophobes than the human filfth that sh*t on the country with its desacration of war memorials and such. Well you came across just as how you wanted to, thank god you stopped us from having our stupid, pointless ill-advised debate. I'm sure Robinksi will give you a pat on the back. I apoligise for any bigotry on my part, obviously I hate the BNP, and I love all immigrants that come to our country. Of course reading the daily mail would have you believe that there are muslims in this country that abuse it daily, and have no respect for our culture while living as british citizens. But this is all rubbish written to anger people like myself, silly me for being so naive. I'm off to burn my english flag and tell myself we live in a terrible, capitalist country.

I just cannot believe the utter hypocrisy of most of what you say. You aggressively and without basis accuse entire swathes of the population of inspiring hatred and attacking the United Kingdom, yet the only person bringing the country into disrepute in this argument is yourself. From your interpretation, there's a radical, firebrand preacher on every street corner, backed up by an army of indifferent and self-hating upper-middle-class Guardian readers, positively welcoming Islamists and violent radicals in by the dozen and demanding the end of the democratic system. It's a work of hyperbole, utter Daily-Mail-esque dystopian fiction with no bearing on reality at all. How many radical Islamists do you think there are in the country? In reality, there aren't more than a few hundred- you're more likely to find an anti-Semite than you are an Islamist. The problem is, this gutter-press fiction actually breeds a new generation of radicalism and makes things worse for everyone concerned. Why do you think the far right has seen such a resurgence in the last few years? It's sure as hell not because the Islamist threat has increased to any measurable proportion; it's merely stupid and naive people being illogical and reactionary about issues that they mostly don't understand, palming their responsibility for their own failures onto others. "Oh, I'm too lazy to get a job, I'll blame the immigrants". It's utterly absurd and little could be further from the truth. The whole thing is a self-perpetuating cycle- if the press demonises Islam and inspires individuals to openly display xenophobia towards immigrants- or in many cases second or third-generation families who are just as British as those who attack them- then radicalisation is going to get worse, not better.

 

Yes, there are Islamists in this country who perform actions that demonstrate a disregard, even a hatred, for British values. Yes, there are native individuals who perform actions that are offensive to British culture, and to the British way of life. But I can categorically say that in both cases, they are an extremely small minority that has been blown out of all reasonable proportion by certain elements of the media. Besides, what's more of an affront to the British culture? Foreign individuals who mock the war dead and desecrate cenotaphs, or British citizens who fire-bomb mosques and Synagogues, conduct anti-Semitic attacks whilst all the while claiming to be a bastion of the "British way of life"? Personally, I think they're as bad as each other. That's right, bigots are as bad as Islamists. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that in many cases the bigots are worse than the Islamists. There are certainly more of them, and at least political Islam has some kind of cohesive idea of identity, rather than this confused, muddled notion of "British nationalism" which seldom serves as anything more than a vessel for racism, xenophobia and violence against others.

 

A true patriot should never preach senseless aggression against others, regardless of their actions. They should support the democratic system, the freedoms of other individuals to express their views, and other fundamental rights; should act as a group to prevent the actions of groups that undermine the idea of Western societal values and culture, but always logically, with sensible argument, rather than descending into bigotry and rhetoric. There are ways of dealing with the threat of militant Islamism which maintain the agreeable "face" of British values without descending into violence and racism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldMugginsPartridge

No one has any national identity, what f*cking difference does it make if someone is born on the same piece of land as you?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robinski

To be fair, the press only publish what sells, and that applies to nearly all publications. Even the "gutter press" is actually quite left wing on the inside, it's just the type of person the profession attracts, same as teaching. It just happens that those in the right-wing press are a little looser with their morals. It's a vicious cycle: people believe this sh*t because they read it in the papers, and they read it in the papers because they always buy them when they hear about it.

 

Also:

 

self-hating middle-class Guardian readers

You leave me out of this! tounge.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KilnerLUFC
Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England.

I fear you have missed my point somewhat. The issue is that the outlawing of "free speech"- or at least some freedom of expression- is endemic of autocratic dictatorships and corrupt regimes. Now, there are boundaries that cannot be over-stepped- wishing violence, encouraging murder or hatred of others based on origin, culture and the suchlike- but these work both ways. How many of these people do you really think there are?

Honestly don't know, but what I can tell you is that one of the most prolific preachers in the UK is somehow receiving benefits, in a country he wishes destruction upon. Now, I'm not sure if is still receiving said benefits, but the very fact that he was earning them is a disgrace, and mockery of our country. I understood you're point exactly, and it's funny to see you mention this so-called 'Free Speech' thing, of which seems only available to anyone who doesn't dare mention the state of this country.

 

I'm not asking for this far-right nation you speak of, but a country that stands up to anyone and anything that makes a mockery out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem
Honestly don't know, but what I can tell you is that one of the most prolific preachers in the UK is somehow receiving benefits, in a country he wishes destruction upon. Now, I'm not sure if is still receiving said benefits, but the very fact that he was earning them is a disgrace, and mockery of our country. I understood you're point exactly, and it's funny to see you mention this so-called 'Free Speech' thing, of which seems only available to anyone who doesn't dare mention the state of this country.

 

I'm not asking for this far-right nation you speak of, but a country that stands up to anyone and anything that makes a mockery out of it.

If you are talking about Abu Hamza al-Masri, he's currently in HMP Bellmarsh awaiting extradition to the US on charges that could see him executed, so isn't getting any kind of benefits. In fact, there's a £1m+ civil lawsuit currently being enacted against him to seize all of his assets. If you are talking about Anjem Choudary, he's a British national born in South London and therefore has exactly the same right to exploit our useless benefit system as any other citizen does. He's also been very careful in his use of language- he's maintained a clean criminal record by actively supporting Al-Muhajiroun and Islam4UK/Muslims Against Crusaders whilst never taking the step of directly wishing violence on British citizens. He's a xenophobic, racist and utterly despicable radical, but he's also a trained lawyer so he knows what he does sits just on the "legal" side of the law. That's not to say that he's not being investigated for links to terrorist organisations, or under constant surveillance by the security services, but much of what he's said and done is technically legal, though disgusting.

 

The problem is, it's difficult to pass legislation preventing people from "making a mockery" of a country as you put it without infringing on people's right to freedom of expression. There's a clear legal boundary where inciting violence or hatred is concerned, but it's much harder to apply the kind of rule you suggest without severely impacting on the concept of "free speech" (I use inverted quotation marks as "free speech" doesn't actually exist in reality, but I'm referring to clauses claiming to encourage freedom of expression in the British legal framework and ECHR). I mean, it's evidently targeted at Islamists in this case, but it could also be used against armchair pundits who denounce government policy; against political radicals on both the left and the right who support fundamental changes in our political or legislative system, people who express dislike of "classic" British institutions, those who disagree with our foreign policy and all manner of other circumstances that, if implemented, would border on the illiberal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA_stu

I think if you asked the average person who held a right-wing view if they had actually witnessed first hand any of the so called "making a mockery of the country" incidents that a few people in here have mentioned, a vast majority would say no. It's just not as bad as the media make out, not even remotely close. Any little "anti-britsh" incident gets such a great deal of attention and it is just a complete and absolute misrepresentation of the actual reality.

 

It's a complete mockery, and a reminder of the sad state of affairs that our media and particularly tabloid newspapers are in. The redtops are glorified celebrity magazines with very little actual "news" and even then it's usually completely biased. Unfortunately they are read by the masses who believe the vitriolic nonsense which is hissed out. You'd get a better perspective of things by just reading the daily thought of the page 3 girl.

 

"kelly 22 from baseldon thinks the marriage of coleen and wayne is a good thing as it teaches young kids the importance of marriage and instills important social values." > rest of the bullsh*t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango
Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context? What I want is a Government who stand behind the REAL British person, someone who is sick of all these hate preachers getting what they want in a country they prepare to 'destroy' with their extremist views, sick of seeing them get all the attention for ruining a day designed to remember some British War Hero, all the while forcing us to take down anything slightly related to showing our pride for England.

I fear you have missed my point somewhat. The issue is that the outlawing of "free speech"- or at least some freedom of expression- is endemic of autocratic dictatorships and corrupt regimes. Now, there are boundaries that cannot be over-stepped- wishing violence, encouraging murder or hatred of others based on origin, culture and the suchlike- but these work both ways. How many of these people do you really think there are?

Honestly don't know, but what I can tell you is that one of the most prolific preachers in the UK is somehow receiving benefits, in a country he wishes destruction upon. Now, I'm not sure if is still receiving said benefits, but the very fact that he was earning them is a disgrace, and mockery of our country. I understood you're point exactly, and it's funny to see you mention this so-called 'Free Speech' thing, of which seems only available to anyone who doesn't dare mention the state of this country.

 

I'm not asking for this far-right nation you speak of, but a country that stands up to anyone and anything that makes a mockery out of it.

Withholding benefits based on political beliefs would set quite an unattractive precedent, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs

"The real British person"... what does that mean? White Protestants only?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

I'm sure no one in this topic is a racist or a xenophobe, but rhetoric about national identity and immigration always invites the accusation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs
I'm sure no one in this topic is a racist or a xenophobe, but rhetoric about national identity and immigration always invites the accusation.

I'd question that. I've not yet heard what a "real British person" is from those members making that statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vercetti27

 

I just cannot believe the utter hypocrisy of most of what you say. You aggressively and without basis accuse entire swathes of the population of inspiring hatred and attacking the United Kingdom, yet the only person bringing the country into disrepute in this argument is yourself. From your interpretation, there's a radical, firebrand preacher on every street corner, backed up by an army of indifferent and self-hating upper-middle-class Guardian readers, positively welcoming Islamists and violent radicals in by the dozen and demanding the end of the democratic system. It's a work of hyperbole, utter Daily-Mail-esque dystopian fiction with no bearing on reality at all.

 

 

Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context?

 

bored.gif

 

you are having an argument with yourself. seriously your abusing this sub-forum if your going to make assumtpions and take things out of context. And I'm glad I'm not the only one who's picked up on it as you've done it before.

 

@Robinksi- so it's fair to hate a whole demographic based on they're choice of paper but not a race of people based on they're ACTUAL beliefs?

 

this forum sometimes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs
I just cannot believe the utter hypocrisy of most of what you say. You aggressively and without basis accuse entire swathes of the population of inspiring hatred and attacking the United Kingdom, yet the only person bringing the country into disrepute in this argument is yourself. From your interpretation, there's a radical, firebrand preacher on every street corner, backed up by an army of indifferent and self-hating upper-middle-class Guardian readers, positively welcoming Islamists and violent radicals in by the dozen and demanding the end of the democratic system. It's a work of hyperbole, utter Daily-Mail-esque dystopian fiction with no bearing on reality at all.

 

 

Do you enjoy over-exaggerating and taking things out of context?

 

bored.gif

 

you are having an argument with yourself. seriously your abusing this sub-forum if your going to make assumtpions and take things out of context. And I'm glad I'm not the only one who's picked up on it as you've done it before.

 

@Robinksi- so it's fair to hate a whole demographic based on they're choice of paper but not a race of people based on they're ACTUAL beliefs?

 

this forum sometimes...

How is he exaggerating anything? Look through this f*cking thread. He's probably sick of seeing his countrymen spew retarded, overexaggerated racist bullsh*t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Clem Fandango

 

I'm sure no one in this topic is a racist or a xenophobe, but rhetoric about national identity and immigration always invites the accusation.

I'd question that. I've not yet heard what a "real British person" is from those members making that statement.

Someone who speaks English, has a job, and keeps their mind on their business (ie, isn't from a fringe political minority) I'd imagine. I'm sure he doesn't just mean white people whose heritage lies in the Isles, but I suppose he could tounge.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs
I'm sure no one in this topic is a racist or a xenophobe, but rhetoric about national identity and immigration always invites the accusation.

I'd question that. I've not yet heard what a "real British person" is from those members making that statement.

Someone who speaks English, has a job, and keeps their mind on their business (ie, isn't from a fringe political minority) I'd imagine. I'm sure he doesn't just mean white people whose heritage lies in the Isles, but I suppose he could tounge.gif

Go look at silvis' posts to myhame and his bullsh*t about how the "Pakis" don't work. It turns out that South Asian immigrants are some of the hardest workers in the British economy, and most employed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tejewelry
- No advertising in this subforum or any other - Edited by sivispacem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

you are having an argument with yourself.

Am I really? I don't think so. I'm disputing the complete lack of evidence to support your arguments, and what I perceive as your bigoted attitude. You've come stomping in, laying down idiotic claims which basically account to "people who don't agree with my personal view on what it means to be British should be treated like criminals", and then attacked anyone who disagrees with you. You claim no less than twice that there are "plenty of people who identify with radical Muslim population", even thought it's evidently a figment of your imagination and the real number is, at the highest, in the hundreds; you claim that "anarchists twats are trying to start a revolution"- really? You honestly believe a minuscule segment of the population with no access to the mechanisms of government, no tangible support and no form of sustenance are rising up against the Crown and British government? If so, where's the evidence? And seen as the security services, whose primary mandate is to protect the government against threats of insurrection, espionage and physical violence, have had minimal involvement in the issue, don't you think that you might be living in some kind of paranoid fantasy world? Allegations of "political correctness" are the last bastion of the desperate and the hopeless- essentially, an admission that you can't win an argument by simple logic or evidence, so the next step is to accuse someone else of pandering to a a certain set of rules and not really expressing how they actually feel, despite not having the first clue what's in the other person's head. It's truly idiotic. If Islamism is rampant across the country, sodding prove it. If Anarchists are rising up to destroy the government, prove it. If ethnic minorities hate the UK, prove it. Every single one of your allegations is taken the bigoted vitriol from radicals every bit as dangerous as any Islamic militant, and I hope you realise quite how absurd you sound when you present these points without a scrap of evidence, without a scrap of support from any knowledgeable sector of society, and without a single "new" idea that hasn't been the bastion of the stereotypically-working-class, pseudo-far-right, sieg-heil, attack-a-minority-but-it's-okay-I'm-really-a-patriot hate-speech for the last five decades.

 

Seriously, go back and read some of the posts you've made again. Then compare them to the kind of comments you get on the Daily Mail website on stories covering issues such as these. I'm sure the similarity will become immediately apparent.

 

 

seriously your abusing this sub-forum if your going to make assumtpions and take things out of context. And I'm glad I'm not the only one who's picked up on it as you've done it before.

Am I? Read the original quote you just used again, in context. Butters' objection was me comparing a plan that criminalised freedom of expression (his example was Pakistan's lack of tolerance for those who insult Islam) with the governments that come up with those kind of plans- violent police states, dictatorships and juntas. I merely argued that, by saying that we should be "more like Pakistan" in our dealings with people who flout what some individuals consider to be the "rules" of common decency, it actively encourages us to become "more like Pakistan" in other ways too- the first bastion of an aggressive, autocratic or dictatorial regime is to strangle people's ability to express themselves, usually under a guise of "insulting the nation" or it's leadership. See the similarity? I'm not quite sure what the objection was, as the two are generally complimentary. And exactly how am I "abusing the sub-forum". I've not had anyone report my posts for being against the rules of the forum- and I'd know, seen as that report would come straight to me. How have I taken anything out of context? Show me where I've made assumptions that haven't been based entirely on the comments that other posters have made.

 

 

@Robinksi- so it's fair to hate a whole demographic based on they're choice of paper but not a race of people based on they're ACTUAL beliefs?

Yes. Race is not a choice; people can't be held responsible for it and even if they could, they couldn't change it. The newspaper you read and political views you hold are a choice, and you can be held responsible for them. Besides, what "actual beliefs"? Are you, yet again, trying to imply that all Muslims in this country, or at least a large percentage of them, offer support, either overt or covert, for violent extremism of any kind? Because if you are, you really need to do some research into the subject rather than just cherry-picking from tabloid headlines. Members of current and former violent far-right groups outnumber suspected Islamists and Islamist supporters by nearly 100 to 1- even assuming a very high figure of around 1000 violent Islamists, there are around 100,000 supporters of organisations like the EDL. And who are these people? Well, a good chunk of them are members of the old football firms; all the leaders are ex-members of organisations like Combat 18. Remember David Copeland? How about David Myatt? He's an ex-Combat 18 Nazi radical who converted to violent Salaffi Islam- these organisations are much of a muchness in terms of the kind of people they promote. And whatsmore, how many people have violent Islamists killed in the last two decades in the UK? 52. How many people have been killed in attacks by far-right organisations and "lone wolves" who support their ideologies? Around 70. How many people have been killed by the IRA inside the UK in the same time? Well over 100.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DareYokel

Hey, look at me! I'm so proud to be born in a specific place on Earth. And it's not like I would be proud if I was born in another place on Earth, right? No, because only this place is special, and I was blessed to be born on such an awesome piece of territory.

 

Ah, if only we could live in a world without patriotism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vercetti27

 

and then attacked anyone who disagrees with you
where?

 

my comment on anarchy is true, just look at the way they tried to hijack the recent strike by the public sector concerning the pensions, they had nothing to do with it but at the first chance swooped in and tried to make the headlines.

 

 

Allegations of "political correctness" are the last bastion of the desperate and the hopeless- essentially, an admission that you can't win an argument by simple logic or evidence, so the next step is to accuse someone else of pandering to a a certain set of rules and not really expressing how they actually feel, despite not having the first clue what's in the other person's head.
but political correctness plays a big part in the world these days. don't make me sound like some bigoted twat becuase I said so. political correctness tries to protect people from being offended or getting hurt by mindless thickos, theres nothing wrong with it until it starts getting in the way of your own life. when you can't display your own countries flags and you can't tell people that you hate the fact that some people burn poppies and you get ganged up upon by a bunch of jumped up tits on the internet becuase of it, thats when it has become a problem.

 

 

If ethnic minorities hate the UK, prove it

 

your doing it again, this exaggeration and sensationalist bullsh*t. I've never said all ethnic minorites has the uk, but there are sections that do. read the papers, there are planned terrorist attacks against this country every year, planned by usually islamic citizens that live and were born in this country. Its the truth, if you want proof find it yourself, don't make me do all the work, you know its true, don't be all uppity because I'm saying things that aren't fashionable. I know its tempting to jump in and flash the words bigoted, ignorance, blah blah blah and it makes you sound like a hero but I'm just like you.

And seriously, stop mentioning the daily mail. I hate that paper but I hate people such as yourself that believe that all ill-advised right wing nutjobs read it and spout off about it. your just as bad as them, tell me one thing, an actual quote of mine that is incorrect and give sufficient reasoning. you haven't as of yet, you've just made up your own translations and you've got them wrong to fit your agenda.

 

sivispacem you might be more informed on the subject, you might have an actual interest in this subject and be better at owrding yourself but don't try and play me as some kind of fool, I know what I've said and I have slightly exaggerated at times but that is simply human nature, this subject is always blown out of proportion and taken out of context. The last quote about it being ok to hate a race but not a demographic of tabloid readers was tongue in cheek, I usually don't sink low as to slate a whole demographic based upon a paper, I've just picked up on the vile rubbish Robinski has come out with which I find hypocritical when you were having a go at me for describing the demographic of guardian readers. Did you tell Robinski off or tell him to prove it? Nope, becuase it fitted in with your view, and he's "on your side".

 

@Irviding- no offence but mayeb you should stay out of this seeing as you seem to not really be aware of the situation in the uk, nothing in here has been racist, no-one here has said "The english race is superior to the polish, they should be slain down and have they're heads smashed in with a malett with the union jack printed on it. Hail our Queen"! myhame might have come close in other threads but he is defintely in the minority there and no-one takes his views seriosuly. Butters might have generalised but as I've said before, it comes from slight ignorance and ignorance is shared by everyone whether you like it or not. He is young and may have been fed mistruths but what he said has some truth in it.

Edited by Vercetti27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

where?

You attacked Ivirding for casting doubt on your assumptions, claiming that because he's from the US, he's got no right to discuss these issues. It's utter tripe. He probably knows more about these issues than many of the posters in the thread do; whatsmore, he can look at it objectively as he isn't exposed to any of the media hyperbole and latent bullsh*t around the topic. Basically implying that someone has no right to discuss an issue just because they haven't been exposed to the same propaganda as yourself is the absolute height of bigotry. It's practically the dictionary definition.

 

 

my comment on anarchy is true, just look at the way they tried to hijack the recent strike by the public sector concerning the pensions, they had nothing to do with it but at the first chance swooped in and tried to make the headlines.

Is it? Are they? You can't insist "my comments are true" without providing some evidence to support it. But you may struggle there, because, in short, there isn't any. "Anarchists" is just a right-wing media term for anyone who doesn't consign to a "Daily Mail" blueprint of thinking. I've had people call me an "anarchist" before. Do these people want to see the fall of the democratic system? No, they do not. The object to the actions of political and economic institutions working inside that system; some object to capitalism in principal; but neither of these defining characteristics have anything to do with Anarchy. So, care to rephrase what you are saying? If not, care to demonstrate that these politically-motivated individuals who you claim have "swooped [sic] in and tried to make the headlines" are in fact Anarchists, rather than Socialist, centre-left activists, social libertarians, greens, anti-Capitalists, human rights advocates or union members?

 

The mistake you made was using the term "anarchists"- if you'd used the term "political radicals" (for most of them are) I would have agreed with you to some extent. But the implication that these people are out to destroy the democratic system, the structure of society and the Crown is just a complete falsehood. They may want to see the end of a political regime, or even a political style, but who hasn't? I couldn't wait for the day that Gordon Brown was kicked out of office; in fact, I actively celebrated at seeing Labour getting handed their arse in my local constituency with party food and drinks. Does that make me an Anarchist? Does it make me anti-British? That's, in principal, the same logic as you are using.

 

 

 

but political correctness plays a big part in the world these days. don't make me sound like some bigoted twat becuase I said so. political correctness tries to protect people from being offended or getting hurt by mindless thickos, theres nothing wrong with it until it starts getting in the way of your own life. when you can't display your own countries flags and you can't tell people that you hate the fact that some people burn poppies and you get ganged up upon by a bunch of jumped up tits on the internet becuase of it, thats when it has become a problem.

Does it, or do you just think it does? Do you seriously buy into all of these "political correctness gone mad" scams- for that's what most of them are? Then you've obviously never been exposed to politicians or civil servants when they're out doing their job, because I can categorically say that whilst they are political, they're certainly not politically correct in many of the things they say and the way they behave. I mean, are the things that the press interprets as "political correctness gone mad" actually anything to do with political correctness? The "examples" given in the first post of this thread aren't anything to do with it- there are all underlying and quite sensible reasons for many actions that have been interpreted as "political correctness" by the press, but the sensationalist media don't have an interest in reporting these reasons (or intentionally obscure them behind a wall of passive-aggressive sarcasm or plain vitriolage) because getting people up in arms about issues increases their bottom line. The perfect example is all the Euro horse-sh*t that's going around at the moment- the press would have you believe that the Euro zone is done and dusted, and aren't we all glad we didn't join back in 1999? It's completely false- the Sterling is in a far worse state than the Euro, and if we'd joined the single currency we'd probably be out of recession by now.

 

My advice? Look a bit more carefully at what you read. Not just what it says, but where it says it, who says it and what motivation they may have to do so. Then you'll start to realise that most of what you are claiming is fact is sensationalist tripe.

 

 

your doing it again, this exaggeration and sensationalist bullsh*t. I've never said all ethnic minorites has the uk, but there are sections that do.

??? You were the one who suggested it was okay to hate "a race of people based on their actual beliefs"; I was merely summarising what race you were talking about and asking you to provide evidence that it's their actual belief as a whole racial group. In essence, you have said "ethnic minorities hate the UK"; by insisting that radicalisation is a far larger and more significant phenomenon than it actually is, you've basically given away that you've got an intrinsic bias towards siding with the "chuck 'em all out" philosophy; even if you didn't, you suggestion that a different set of rules should apply for individuals who are British-descended British nationals expressing their opinions, and foreign descended British nationals expressing their opinions, is bigoted and racist. Can you not see that?

 

 

read the papers

I do, but only the broad-sheets. This is where I fear you are going wrong.

 

 

there are planned terrorist attacks against this country every year, planned by usually islamic citizens that live and were born in this country.

Actually, the vast majority of terrorist attacks foiled in the last few years have been related to violent Republicanism and the Far Right. That isn't to say that there haven't been quite significant Islamist plots that have been brought down by the security services, but the threat of violent Islamism is falling- radicalisation levels are dropping, less and less violent plots are being uncovered- whereas, in contrast, right-wing extremism is becoming more and more common. There's been a 35% increase in attacks on Mosques and Synagogues in the last two years alone, yet you barely ever hear about that. There were no less than 50 attempted violent attacks in Northern Ireland in 2010 alone, mostly bombs varying in size and potential threat. Only around 30% of those arrested in the UK under Anti-Terror legislation have actually been Muslims- far and away the largest proportion in terms of numbers are Irish Catholics with close links to the Republican movement.

 

 

Its the truth

Well, evidently, it isn't given that the statistics I've just provided indicate that your entire argument is fundamentally wrong.

 

 

if you want proof find it yourself, don't make me do all the work,

No, that's not how it works. You can't make an argument and then go "well if you want to know if I'm telling the truth, then go look it up yourself". It's lazy and essentially invalidates everything you say.

 

 

you know its true

Except, as the figures I've provided show, it isn't.

 

 

don't be all uppity because I'm saying things that aren't fashionable.

They are fashionable, though- that's part of the problem. It's become fashionable to go off on these senseless diatribes against foreign nations- "oh, the immigrants are stealing our jobs", "oh, the immigrants hate this country", "oh, the immigrants take all our benefits", "oh, the immigrants are all terrorists". This is why we've seen the rise of right-wing organisations like the BNP and EDL over the last few years- because all this "blame an immigrant"- or, even worse- "blame a Muslim" rhetoric is being banded around by the gutter press, being seized on by the stupid and the ignorant, and used to propagate and justify hatred towards others based on complete falsehoods.

 

 

I know its tempting to jump in and flash the words bigoted, ignorance, blah blah blah and it makes you sound like a hero but I'm just like you.

No you aren't. I don't irrationally hate Islam, I don't support the idea of kicking people with different political or social beliefs to myself out of the country, and I think that the way to tackle radicalisation is through deterrence and dialogue, not aggression. So, in essence, our views on the issue are diametrically opposed.

 

 

And seriously, stop mentioning the daily mail. I hate that paper but I hate people such as yourself that believe that all ill-advised right wing nutjobs read it and spout off about it.

So, go on then, what's your source for all this vitriol and rhetoric? It's certainly not one of the mainstream broadsheet papers, because I read both the Telegraph and the Times and I've never noticed and of this thinly veiled racism that you appear to present as being the bastion of the British media. Where are you getting these ideas from? Besides, I don't think I ever categorically claimed that you read the Daily Mail- just that many of the arguments that you use are reminiscent of those presented in the Mail.

 

 

your just as bad as them, tell me one thing, an actual quote of mine that is incorrect and give sufficient reasoning. you haven't as of yet, you've just made up your own translations and you've got them wrong to fit your agenda.

Okay, let's look at a few-

 

 

problem with great britain in the 21st century is it is a soft touch, its a socialist state where it lays down the red carpet for incoming immigrants

Quite simply, statistically untrue. Have a look at this-

 

user posted image

 

As you can see, net migration into the UK dropped by nearly 1/3 between 2004 and 2008. True enough, before this time it had risen significantly, but that's due in part to the large numbers of individuals emmigrating from the UK, as well as the demand for highly skilled foreign workers in the pre-recession boom years. The same story is true with asylum applications- between their peak in 2002 and 2008 when the most recent verified statistics are available, asylum claims dropped by more than 65%. So, there you have it- statistically verified proof that Britain does not "lay down the red carpet for incoming immigrants". Oh, and whilst we're on the subject, the definition of Socialism is-

 

 

A political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole

 

So claiming that the UK is a "socialist state" (besides having no bearing on reality) also has absolutely no bearing on immigration, as socialism is a predominantly economic theory.

 

How about another?

 

 

I think the problem is som people think now that a lot of the population is made of people that weren't born or don't have british descent that it is racist to have a rant against the immigrants that don't respect this country.

 

Lets look at this one in two parts. First, you say that "a lot of the population is made up for people that weren't born or don't have British descent". Well, if you're going to be truly pedantic about descent, only a tiny proportion of the population are actually purely "British descended"- the vast majority are Roman, Norman and/or Nordic, rather than truly "British". It's very difficult to talk about "descended"- I'm a British citizen who the vast majority would class as British, but I've only got 1/4 British blood- am I "British descended". How about the influx of foreign nationals who fought to protect the UK in the Second World War- they integrated into British society, married British women and gave birth to the "baby boomer" generation- are their offspring British descended? How about the offspring of North Africans who came over in the inter-war period? Those who fled Nazi and post-war Germany to the UK? Caribbean or Indians who came from parts of our Empire to the UK? Or is it just a term to describe anyone who you don't personally like? Without defining exactly what you mean by "British descent", you make it very hard to take your argument seriously. As for "lots of the population"- 86% of the British population are White British in ethnicity, with another 5% being white individuals from elsewhere in Europe. That makes 9% of the British population who belong to an ethnic minority. That's much lower than it is in many other countries- the US, with all it's archaic immigration laws, has a much higher percentage of ethnic minorities. Even Australia which as notoriously hard for even British citizens to emigrate to, has around 10% of its population being ethnic minorities.

 

Now, the second part- you claim that this has resulted in an environment where it's racist to "have a rant against immigrants that don't respect this country". Now, how do you define "respect"? All individuals are equal in the eyes of the law, so what differentiates a working, second-generation immigrant who states that he dislikes the way this country's political system works, or claims that the British have been involved in unjust acts abroad, and a British national who makes the same claims? Nothing. Do you have any evidence to suggest that white, British nationals are less likely to make claims such as this? No, you do not. So why the targeting of foreign nationals or those who are foreign descended? Can you explain that to me? I mean, there's so must variety in immigration it's very hard to make accurate or conclusive statements about exactly what each ethnic group brings to the country, but did you know that Muslims of all kinds in the UK have an employment rate exactly parallel with that of white, British nationals? Did you know that they also have less chance of having a criminal record than average? That, on average, a Muslim household has a lower welfare bill than a white British one?

 

Do you have any evidence to suggest that there is legislation in place that creates a dichotomy between the "British nation" and the immigrant, as you claim? That immigrants and foreign descended nationals get favourable treatment? You seem to imply this, but you've not provided any real support for this idea, and from everythng I understand it's completely contradictory to the truth of the matter. So, care to explain where you're getting these ideas from?

 

I can provide some more, if you like?

 

 

Did you tell Robinski off or tell him to prove it? Nope, becuase it fitted in with your view, and he's "on your side".

No, I didn't tell him to "prove it" because he's only expressed a personal opinion- how he feels about Daily Mail readers. He doesn't need to provide evidence for it, because it's an opinion and an emotional expression. Whereas you levelled the allegation that Guardian readers are responsible for the perceived decline of this country, which is a serious factual implication that therefore must be supported with evidence if it is to be listened to. If you'd made it clear it was your opinion, rather than a perception of fact, that Guardian readers are bringing about the end of the UK, then we could have all just laughed at you and moved on, but because you expressed it as if it was a factual statement, you need to prove it if you want it to have any weight or veracity. It's got nothing to do with my view or any "side"- it's because he expressed opinions and you claimed to express fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KilnerLUFC
where?

You attacked Ivirding for casting doubt on your assumptions, claiming that because he's from the US, he's got no right to discuss these issues. It's utter tripe. He probably knows more about these issues than many of the posters in the thread do; whatsmore, he can look at it objectively as he isn't exposed to any of the media hyperbole and latent bullsh*t around the topic. Basically implying that someone has no right to discuss an issue just because they haven't been exposed to the same propaganda as yourself is the absolute height of bigotry. It's practically the dictionary definition.

Without any form of media, since that's getting attacked now, how does irviding have any clue as to what we are on about? Even if has happened to have visited this country, it's still not enough to be adding his comments to this topic. I don't mind it if he was adding some form of comment that added to the topic in some way, but just adding a one-lined sentence that's only there to further an argument is not contributing to a topic in any way.

 

Maybe other members may have stepped too far over the lne, but from the start I have mentioned that I am not racist in any shape or form, but sick of seeing people enter this country and make a mockery of it. Living in Bradford has seen me work with plenty of ethnics, and I had no problem having a black boss, not any problem whatsoever.

 

I have also stated that I believe a Multi-cultured Nation is possible. What I stated though was that the Government are so scared of being branded racist, that it seems any English pride is frowned upon.

 

If I am racist, then why do I think this woman is the most ignorant piece of sh*t I've seen in years:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vercetti27

 

You attacked Ivirding for casting doubt on your assumptions, claiming that because he's from the US, he's got no right to discuss these issues.
you are on some roll aren't you? I don't know where you learnt to misinterpret words but your bloody good at it. If you re-read you'll notice I told him maybe he should not discuss it as he was accusing members of racism and bigotry without any actual understnading of whats happening in the UK at this moment in time.

 

political radicals, anarchists, f*cking hell I don't like labelling people and I don't really care, most of them haven't got any solid goal or target, they're just using the current strike to bolster any mayhem or controversy that is born out of they're own movement. I don't know whether or not they are actual anarchists, I don't really care either.

 

Political Correctness? I'll tell you what I hate, my neighbour hung an england flag over his front fence on st.georges day, he ended up getting bricks and stones thrown through the window by a bunch of lowlife chavs that happen to have asian roots, they all live on my road and they got comments on facebook that weren't very pleasent afterwards and one of them got stabbed the next week. Did I defend them? No but I told the people who were shouting sh*t outside they're house to leave them alone and was accused of being a "Paki lover" so I can see it's advantages, but I don't like it's stronghold over society.

 

 

You were the one who suggested it was okay to hate "a race of people based on their actual beliefs
Oh dear lord..

I'll tell you something, I got accsued of being a racist by some e-thug on another forum about 3 months ago, regarding a rule in england where football clubs had to give a job interview to at least ONE black person when applying for a new manager. This rule was only in discussion, but I made a joke regarding it. Basically I said if you have to give job interviews to at least one black person, regardless of experience, qualifications or expertise, why not go the whole hog and employ disabled children as ballboys. Ok, they won't get the ball thrown out on time being in a wheelchair and all, but no-one could accuse us of being politically incorrect! Everyone ignored the joke, along those words, apart from one who ended up posting ten paragraph essay condemning "people like me" and telling me I'm an oxygen waster, and that I probably vote for the BNP. He in fact ended going quite overboard and used some forum pictures of me and edited the nazi swastike over my clothes and sent the picture to everyone on the forum.

What I'm trying to say is when your reading certain things, don't try and use your mind to guess what I'm saying, the racism is in your head, and if it's in your head I could accuse you of racism too. I hate that aspect of modern society wheb people actively ENJOY accusing others of racism, similar to what Butters said when it actually gets people off being so "un-ignorant".

 

Broadsheets are better than tabloids for one thing- using as a carpet for your house when your training your dog not to take lumpy sh*ts all over the house. As journalistic enlightenment I find most of it on tv, coming from BBC News. I don't listen to everything in the papers unless it has proof and I know hasn't got an agenda either way.

 

Seeing as you've been busting my balls over proof, please find a suitable source for your stats on terrorist attacks on the UK as many of them are involving people of islamic faith, again please don't mis-interprate what I'm saying, I'm not saying all muslims are terrorists, neither am I saying I'd choke a baby to death if I knew it was born by parents of islamic faith.

 

And I never said anything about "immigents stealins our jobs" like Moe Syzlak from the simpsons, and if you pay attention to what I read on certain forums the most fashionable thing to do while listening to racially abusive/igornant rants is to scoff, sip some of your latte from your tall coffee mug, and flip your scarf over your shoulder (even though its actually quite warm) and say in your finest home counties accent "must be a daily mail reader..har har", then sniff your own fart.

 

When I said Britain lays down the red carpet for immigrants I meant that it in the sense that it provides them with everything they need, and asks nothing in return. And I think its strange how you jumped on me for generalising Guardian readers yet when Robinski does the same for Daily Mail its his "personal preference" or whatever. My personal preference is to live in a Britain where everyone is equal, there are no benefit cheats that live off the state, people who disprespect war memorials and attack britain will be given long sentences in prison, and displaying your own flag outside your house doesn't equate to BNP membership and people can have a joke about a stupid peice of discriminative legislation without being aligned with the nazi party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

Without any form of media, since that's getting attacked now, how does irviding have any clue as to what we are on about? Even if has happened to have visited this country, it's still not enough to be adding his comments to this topic. I don't mind it if he was adding some form of comment that added to the topic in some way, but just adding a one-lined sentence that's only there to further an argument is not contributing to a topic in any way.

A fair point, but not all media in this country- or worldwide for that matter- is so ridiculously partisan as to render the information that they present as unreliable. Some source- the BBC, for instance- are legally bound to maintain a degree of political impartiality and to present little in the way of "opinion" pieces. There are also other sources of information- books and scholarly articles (though these also have a bias, they also explore the issues much more deeply), and perhaps more importantly government policy- which is usually published and available worldwide. The statistics I've presented in my arguments have almost exclusively been from the ONS or other independent organisations, and good arguments can be made from the statistics. Also, do you think that issues such of these are isolated to the UK alone? These attitudes exist in just about every country, and the US is no exception. Sometimes an outside perspective on topics like this is helpful to "get away" from all the rhetoric, vitriol and taboos. We like to go on about issues like "British pride" or similar issues as if we are the only nation who experience them, and the only nation who have such a broad spectrum of views on the issue, but in reality the UK is no different to any other nation- with the possible exception of the attitudes of our fringe press to controversial topics.

 

 

Maybe other members may have stepped too far over the lne, but from the start I have mentioned that I am not racist in any shape or form, but sick of seeing people enter this country and make a mockery of it. Living in Bradford has seen me work with plenty of ethnics, and I had no problem having a black boss, not any problem whatsoever.

I understand and respect the point you are making- and to some extent I agree with it. I've had no gripe with the way you've presented your arguments in this topic, and whilst I may not agree in some cases, I can see where you are coming from and what is personal opinion versus what you present as facts. But the problem I have with statements like this is that it's no true that it's people entering this country who "make a mockery of it" as you put it. Out of the 1100 or so people detained under the framework provided by the CONTEST counter-terrorism strategy, only a small proportion are foreign nationals. Even amongst the 35% or so who are suspected Islamic radicals, only about a quarter- no more than a few dozen people- are actually foreign nationals living in the UK. Look at the profiles of terrorists, their supporters, and those who conduct public denouncements of the British government's policy on Armistice day- the vast majority are either 2nd or 3rd generation British citizens from South Asian backgrounds, well educated (40% of terrorists convicted since 2005 possess at least an undergraduate degree from a British university) and who have become more radical or fundamental over the last 10 years; or they are white or Caribbean-origin British citizens who have converted to Islam and been radicalised- often in the prison system. These people aren't entering the country to make a mockery of it, they're as British as you are I.

 

 

I have also stated that I believe a Multi-cultured Nation is possible. What I stated though was that the Government are so scared of being branded racist, that it seems any English pride is frowned upon.

I don't think it's the central government who fears being accused of racism- it's local authorities and councils, particularly in areas with particularly levels of ethnic diversity. In order to be a politician in this country, you must display a decent grasp of local and national issues and be able to drum up enough support to get oneself elected; the same is not true on a council level. Sure, councillors are elected, but their staff aren't, and they seldom have any knowledge of the political landscape or even public opinion. This is the problem- those who formulate and enact policy at a local level are just as reactionary as Islamists and right-wing extremists, most of the time. If you look at most of there articles that crop up about "political correctness gone mad" et cetera, they're almost exclusively about local, council-level decision making. For instance, it's not the government who've stopped using "Christmas" as a word, it's the local councils in some areas of the country. I agree completely that multiculturalism can work, but where it doesn't I don't think it's fair to lay the blame solely on one ethnic minority or social sub-group. Usually, it's tensions between two groups. Look at the Bradford riots in 2001, for instance. The violence towards police and property was conducted almost solely by white, British nationals, not by ethnic subcultures. Oldham, again in 2001? Similar story, but in that case, both sides engaged in violence against each other. The more recent riots elsewhere in the UK (I've forgotten exactly when and where, but they were between Pakistani and Turkish second and third generation immigrants and were sparked by allegations of a rape of a teenage girl committed by one group against the other) follow a similar pattern. Put simply, it takes two groups to cause civil unrest or decline.

 

 

If I am racist, then why do I think this woman is the most ignorant piece of sh*t I've seen in years:

I've never said you are racist, nor will I. I may have misgivings about the factual accuracy of some of the things you've said, but I don't believe that you are either a racist or a bigot. In fact, I would gladly say that your argument is quite a reasonable one- even if I do dispute some aspects of it.

 

 

you are on some roll aren't you? I don't know where you learnt to misinterpret words but your bloody good at it. If you re-read you'll notice I told him maybe he should not discuss it as he was accusing members of racism and bigotry without any actual understnading of whats happening in the UK at this moment in time.

Right, lets look at what you actually said then-

 

 

@Irviding- no offence but mayeb you should stay out of this seeing as you seem to not really be aware of the situation in the uk, nothing in here has been racist, no-one here has said "The english race is superior to the polish, they should be slain down and have they're heads smashed in with a malett with the union jack printed on it. Hail our Queen"

I would argue that the misunderstanding comes from your part. I know what post you are referring to

 

 

I'm sure no one in this topic is a racist or a xenophobe, but rhetoric about national identity and immigration always invites the accusation.

I'd question that. I've not yet heard what a "real British person" is from those members making that statement.

You seem to fail to understand that racism doesn't have to be overt. The very fact that you are making such an issue of this is a demonstration of a bias that could be convincingly argued as bigoted, though not overtly racist. The vast majority of intelligent people know that these instances involve extremely small numbers of people, and that the best way to avoid these views being propagated is quite literally just to ignore the issue (as they thrive on attention and popularity, whether negative or positive), yet you seem to completely ignore this and launch into diatribes that portray entire swathes of the population, both immigrant and nationalised citizen, as marauders trying to bring down the British system. That's the falsehood, and that is what I would argue has been driven by bigotry.

 

I've talked with Ivirding via PM about these issues at some length, so to argue that he's got no understanding of the issues at play isn't at all true. Even if we hadn't discussed these issues at all, do you not think that the same principals apply elsewhere in the world?

 

 

political radicals, anarchists, f*cking hell I don't like labelling people and I don't really care, most of them haven't got any solid goal or target, they're just using the current strike to bolster any mayhem or controversy that is born out of they're own movement. I don't know whether or not they are actual anarchists, I don't really care either.

Then, quite simply, don't use terms your don't understand. Because, if they're not factually correct- as in this case- it damages the rest of your argument.

 

 

What I'm trying to say is when your reading certain things, don't try and use your mind to guess what I'm saying, the racism is in your head, and if it's in your head I could accuse you of racism too. I hate that aspect of modern society wheb people actively ENJOY accusing others of racism, similar to what Butters said when it actually gets people off being so "un-ignorant".

I'm not. If I am, where? I'm only going on the basis of the argument you've presented- that is to say, that these issues are significant, dangerous and need to be dealt with aggressively and immediately. Whilst I do understand where some of your objections come from, many of the things you have said about the subject have no basis in fact; in fact, your sardonic (and if I may say so, rather amusing) rant aimed at me at the top of page 2 of this thread basically brought to a head all of these issues. I hear you complaining about members of the Muslim community, and parts of the ambivalent or apathetic middle classes, being a threat to this country, but you handily ignore things like far-right and far-left extremism, Irish Republicanism, organised crime and the suchlike which are not only significantly more prevalent in society, but are also far more socially caustic and harmful to Britain as a country. So, please explain to my, why the obsession with Islam, rather than what are more common and theoretically significantly more dangerous issues?

 

 

Broadsheets are better than tabloids for one thing- using as a carpet for your house when your training your dog not to take lumpy sh*ts all over the house. As journalistic enlightenment I find most of it on tv, coming from BBC News. I don't listen to everything in the papers unless it has proof and I know hasn't got an agenda either way.

Then I don't quite understand where these ideas are coming from. I watch and read the BBC News programmes religiously, yet I've not been exposed to these vitriolic and socially harmful ideas that you present. Perhaps that's because I've studied radicalisation at length and know a good deal about, or because I've developed the capacity to tune it out. Who knows- what I do know is that I've never been exposed to these ideas in anything other than an ironic way in press that's regulated by the laws of impartiality (as the BBC is).

 

 

Seeing as you've been busting my balls over proof, please find a suitable source for your stats on terrorist attacks on the UK as many of them are involving people of islamic faith, again please don't mis-interprate what I'm saying, I'm not saying all muslims are terrorists, neither am I saying I'd choke a baby to death if I knew it was born by parents of islamic faith.

Okay, here are some important statistics. This is the government's report on the arrests, searches and other actions carried out under the Terrorism Act 2000. If you look at the statistics, you will notice a marked decrease in terrorist offences, charges and convictions over the last couple of years. Interestingly, this coincides at a time when arrests for violent Republicanism have increased dramatically due to increased terrorism in Northern Ireland. Take a look at these statistics, obtained directly from the home office here.

 

Here's a screenshot of the Home Office's Excel spreadsheet showing the ethnicity of people arrested under Stop and Search regulations related to the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000-

user posted image

As you can see, white British individuals outnumber other ethnicities by almost 2:1, and less than one quarter of those arrested under stop and search terrorism prevention actions are of Asian descent. There are 1.8 million Muslims in the UK, according to the Muslim Council of Britain; of these, around 70% are Asian in descent.

 

 

1.5 million Muslims: Pakistani origin 610,000; Bangladeshi 200,000; Indian 160,000; Arab and African 350,000; others 180,000

 

 

When I said Britain lays down the red carpet for immigrants I meant that it in the sense that it provides them with everything they need, and asks nothing in return.

If that's the case, then why are deportations at an all-time high? Why do immigrant citizens have roughly the same employment ratio as British citizens? You're suggesting that immigrants get some kind of preferential treatment, but the statistics just don't support that argument.

 

 

And I think its strange how you jumped on me for generalising Guardian readers yet when Robinski does the same for Daily Mail its his "personal preference" or whatever.

Perhaps it's because his statements was, and I quote quote, "Anybody who unironically reads the Daily Mail needs to just get the f*ck out of this section. They've already proved an inability to think critically." That's an observation based on the content of the newspaper, as well as commonly held views about the kind of readership the paper enjoys. You in essence claimed that Guardian readers wanted to bring down the British state. That's not an observation of anything, it's a stupid and derogatory remark with no basis in fact or reality.

 

 

My personal preference is to live in a Britain where everyone is equal, there are no benefit cheats that live off the state, people who disprespect war memorials and attack britain will be given long sentences in prison, and displaying your own flag outside your house doesn't equate to BNP membership and people can have a joke about a stupid peice of discriminative legislation without being aligned with the nazi party.

Good for you. I can agree with some of those things, but reality seldom has much of a bearing on "personal preferences". It's some people's personal preference that Europe becomes an Islamic Caliphate; personal preferences are basically meaningless expressions of emotion or subjective opinion. I don't really understand what point you are trying to make here? What makes your personal preference any "better" than anyone else's?

 

As an aside, this may be worth a read.

Edited by sivispacem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A J

What a terrible woman that was in that video, no person should swear that much in front of children.

 

I keep thinking about this idea " of feeling like a foreigner in my own country", I realise the topic isn't just about that, but it's got me wondering have I ever felt that way.

 

In essense no, simply because where I live, everyone is white, the only dark skinned people work and live in the Indian restaurant, in the village 6 miles away. However I lived in London for nearly 12 months, around 3 years ago. And I loved it and hated it, I enjoyed speaking to all the foreigners, but couldn't help but feel very strange when I was the only white guy walking down a street in Southhall or the only white guy person on a bus, I was just never used to it I guess. I always found the foreigners kind, especially the Polish people, I never did like the black people though, they seemed too in your face.

 

I think people got to respect one another, and look past their differences in everyway. I hope laws are made that if a foreigner comes to live here, that they must respect our customs, as we would be expected to respect theirs in their country. I know its difficult to define respect, within law, but there is a line, and if that line is crossed, punishment should be carried out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KilnerLUFC

 

Without any form of media, since that's getting attacked now, how does irviding have any clue as to what we are on about? Even if has happened to have visited this country, it's still not enough to be adding his comments to this topic. I don't mind it if he was adding some form of comment that added to the topic in some way, but just adding a one-lined sentence that's only there to further an argument is not contributing to a topic in any way.

A fair point, but not all media in this country- or worldwide for that matter- is so ridiculously partisan as to render the information that they present as unreliable. Some source- the BBC, for instance- are legally bound to maintain a degree of political impartiality and to present little in the way of "opinion" pieces. There are also other sources of information- books and scholarly articles (though these also have a bias, they also explore the issues much more deeply), and perhaps more importantly government policy- which is usually published and available worldwide. The statistics I've presented in my arguments have almost exclusively been from the ONS or other independent organisations, and good arguments can be made from the statistics. Also, do you think that issues such of these are isolated to the UK alone? These attitudes exist in just about every country, and the US is no exception. Sometimes an outside perspective on topics like this is helpful to "get away" from all the rhetoric, vitriol and taboos. We like to go on about issues like "British pride" or similar issues as if we are the only nation who experience them, and the only nation who have such a broad spectrum of views on the issue, but in reality the UK is no different to any other nation- with the possible exception of the attitudes of our fringe press to controversial topics.

 

Is it ever possible to find a source of information on an area without some type of bias? The only way to ever know 100% of how an area 'runs' is to actually be some part of that community, in whatever way possible, either by living there or having some business that's dedicated to the community in some way. I'm not saying that having an opinion from an outside source is a bad idea, in fact I always welcome it, to see how an area comes across to the 'outsiders', but what I was getting at was that he was merely trying to pick some form of argument by picking up on some off-hand comment, in this case my mention of 'The Real British person'. Had he actually bothered to read the post in a way that he knew he was going to add some input, he would have understood what my comment actually meant, and not try and brand me racist. My meaning of what I said was of people who wish to give something back to the country for providing them a place to live. I have absolutely no problem with the ethnic groups who are either born into this country, or from another country, and come here with that hard-working attitude. If I was to wish to emigrate to another country, one of the main things on the list would be how I would find and get a job, not at what benefits that country has available.

 

 

I have also stated that I believe a Multi-cultured Nation is possible. What I stated though was that the Government are so scared of being branded racist, that it seems any English pride is frowned upon.

Usually, it's tensions between two groups. Look at the Bradford riots in 2001, for instance. The violence towards police and property was conducted almost solely by white, British nationals, not by ethnic subcultures.

 

Perfect example of how the media can get stories wrong, and why they shouldn't be believed. The damage to property, and the violence towards the police, was mainly done by the ethnic groups living in Bradford and surrounding areas, especially Leeds. It was rumoured that the NF were to march through the city, so both white & Asian people flocked into the city to kick them out. The march was banned, but certain members had entered the city, and started trouble in various parts of the city. Asian youths started flocking into the city, but were pushed back up the main 'black' area of Bradford, an area known as Manningham, a so-called 'no-go area' for white people. Police blocked the main routes into the city, so the rioters literally burnt down their own neighbourhood. This actually became notorious for white people mocking them for trashing their own neighbourhood, and burning down their own business, with any help from the white people. Yes, a few white people were involved in this riot, but they were mainly people who were 'known' within the ethnic population.

 

 

 

From my years living there, tension has always existed between the Asians and Whites. It's not literally that bad where something happens everyday, but one little thing could kick that city off again. You always have mixed views within the city, from both sides of the spectrum. You get those who 'hate' the other race, then you get ones who are best mates with the other race. Bradford Riots, and the riots that followed in other cities, proves that this country has a problem that desperately needs tackling, whether it be by the Government as a whole, or of the various councils operating around the country. The problem clearly exists, yet it seems we like to brus it all under the carpet, and then watch the Government get 'shocked and disgraced' by the resulting trouble.

 

 

If I am racist, then why do I think this woman is the most ignorant piece of sh*t I've seen in years:

I've never said you are racist, nor will I. I may have misgivings about the factual accuracy of some of the things you've said, but I don't believe that you are either a racist or a bigot. In fact, I would gladly say that your argument is quite a reasonable one- even if I do dispute some aspects of it.

 

Wasn't really aiming my 'racist' comment at you. I keep mentioning it due to the nature of the subject. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vercetti27

 

You in essence claimed that Guardian readers wanted to bring down the British state

 

dozingoff.gif oh.my.god

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typhus
I'm sure no one in this topic is a racist or a xenophobe, but rhetoric about national identity and immigration always invites the accusation.

I find it more interesting to delve into the minds of those who make such accusations in the first place. Usually they simply disagree in ideological grounds and want to slander anyone who does or says anything even remotely patriotic.

Why, look at French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Branded a Nazi simply because he wants to limit the ammount of immigrants entering his country. And it is other Frenchmen who make such accusations.

 

Can you truly deny that the left wing is utterly riddled with people who want nothing less than the complete liquidation of all culture, national identity and border control? How can anyone deny that when even the slightest attempt to question immigration policies are met with the worst, most infantile kind of slander?

 

My posistion on immigration has always been simple: We must allow immigrants only from nations with similar philosophical bents as our own. Meaning, secular Islamic nations such as Iraq, modern European democracies like Germany and other countries with a firm belief in liberalism, tolerance and law. When we let in Somalians, for example, I believe we are asking for trouble. As they come from a nation which, save for the short-lived Union of Islamic Courts, has been shifted from one state of anarchy to the next.

 

We must accept that some people are civilised and some are savage. Why on Earth would you ever allow people to come here and settle down when they don't even grasp the concept of extending tolerance and equal rights towards women? And that's not even taking into account their disgusting views on homosexuality.

 

Tolerance should not mean submission. We are the representatives of civilisation, progression and dignity. We should never forget that or downplay that simply to make a bunch of misogynistic, homophobic fascists feel welcome.

It is utter lunacy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sivispacem

 

dozingoff.gif oh.my.god

Well...

 

Uh..yes actually, there are plenty of people that identify themselves with the radical muslim population that attend university here in england. usually long haired, rich liberal types that detest any possible form of capitalism and distance themselves from being english or don't identify themselves as such.

Seen as you've spent your entire time in this topic playing the stereotype game, is that not basically a personification of the stereotyped "guardian reader".

 

And I notice you have nothing to say about all the statistics I posted that basically invalidated your entire argument, then?

Edited by sivispacem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typhus
Seen as you've spent your entire time in this topic playing the stereotype game, is that not basically a personification of the stereotyped "guardian reader".

I was unaware The Guardian had such a poor reputation. Along with The Times it is just about the only English paper worth a damn.

I have gotten some slack for reading the Times myself, people say it's an old mans paper.

 

Honestly, the student/douchebag posse probably eschews traditional media in favour of online blogs, twitter and YouTube videos. Considering they are disgusting enough to urinate on a statue commemorating the people who died defeating the Nazis, I think they're probably self-righteous enough to believe that all the media is somehow a tool of the establishment.

 

Because, obviously, we are the ones with the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.