Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Do humans have needed kno...
Today at 07:25 AM

New Britain
Today at 12:05 AM

Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 09:56 PM

عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 04:01 PM

Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:06 PM

What's happened to the fo...
April 11, 2024, 01:00 AM

Lights on the way
by akay
February 01, 2024, 12:10 PM

Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM

Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM

Pakistan: The Nation.....
January 28, 2024, 02:12 PM

Gaza assault
January 27, 2024, 01:08 PM

Nawal El Saadawi: Egypt's...
January 27, 2024, 12:24 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Anti-immigration

 (Read 14620 times)
  • 12 3 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Anti-immigration
     OP - April 26, 2017, 10:43 PM

    It's hard not to feel deeply dispirited with regards to the strong sentiments towards immigration that has gripped Britain, as a child of immigrants myself. As someone who frequents online forums of a varied kind every day, you come to know quickly that immigration is everyone's favourite topic which reflects statistics for the wider country where people don't want further immigration. And it's cited as the biggest reason to leave the European Union. But the conversations are often dispiriting because often the crux of the argument is this, 'we the British people never asked for mass immigration and we're pissed off as it's destroyed community cohesion, nationalistic solidarity, jobs have been taken away from the working class etc'. One could say we're looked at with a deep regret, as I am indeed a product of what is called mass immigration.

    On the other hand it's hard not to agree with those who make the point that integration isn't working as it should. I see elements myself being part of the much criticised Pakistani Muslim diaspora. But at the same time one is often viewed as an outsider, a product of something that in a lot of people's minds should never have happened and has ripped apart their idea of Britain. I'm so often caught between a rock and a hard place on these issues. I'm rambling now but basically it's hard not to feel sad when you're subtly told you're not really part of what is 'real Britain', despite the fact that maybe I might be a successful socially integrated immigrant. Even online with the benefits of internet anonymity, it's hard to get involved in political debates over things like tax, the health service, the economy etc. Because Immigration trumps all of these and you're told you belong to that issue.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #1 - April 27, 2017, 12:08 PM

    As a white British born ex-pat who has lived in the US for more than 30 years I have agonized over the question of national identity of my country of birth.   The US is first and foremost an immigrant society.   Brooklyn where I live (and NYC as a whole) is multi-ethnic and thriving.   But the US has never bought into the multi-cultural concept to the extent tried in Europe.   A US citizen simply has to believe in and support the US constitution.   GB has echoes of the US but can never really replicate the US model - because of the strong British ethnic identity (and Welsh, Scottish ... etc) that is still very present in life there.  There is tension in America about defense of  the constitution, Christian identity vs new immigrants who may believe in something incompatible.

    David Hitchens has opined that the one thing that is definitely dead and without any future in this world is strong 'tribal' identity.  That inevitably the world is headed in a trans-national direction.   Part of me loves that idea, part of me regrets the loss of strong British culture (which I didn't care for in many ways and left!).

    But the Islamic global civilizational aspiration is probably the main barrier to that transnational reality.  It claims to be the basis for it, but in the view of just about everyone on this board and elsewhere - is not equipped to play that role.   That'll take a while!

    Sorry Ward End for a rambling response, and thanks for a very honest post about your situation and feelings.


  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #2 - April 27, 2017, 12:16 PM

    Foreign Uber Driver and American Passenger

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83oTL-XBlFc

    Great ..lots of freedom........., AmeriKa  Freedom

    well ..... Life of an immigrant uber driver  and a Passenger with lots of freedom ,..... off  course fucking cops of USA.

    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #3 - April 27, 2017, 01:41 PM

       As for “we the British people never asked for mass immigration”
       Mass immigration is an intrinsic part of any thriving civilization, something to boast about, even before modernity, before people understood ‘all men are equal’, even in countries that do not have a tradition of multiculturalism like China. It is true that it has hardly been conducted at such a scale, but Britain is one of the strongest empires in the last 2 centuries, and a country at the edge of the continent surrounded by seas, if she didn’t ask for immigration, no one could have made her done anything. You are not responsible or guilty of anything.

       You are having those ‘I don’t belong here’ ‘I shouldn’t be here’ thoughts again. May I boldly speculate that immigration may not be the only thing you are not comfortable with?
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #4 - April 28, 2017, 09:20 PM

    As a white British born ex-pat who has lived in the US for more than 30 years I have agonized over the question of national identity of my country of birth.   The US is first and foremost an immigrant society.   Brooklyn where I live (and NYC as a whole) is multi-ethnic and thriving.   But the US has never bought into the multi-cultural concept to the extent tried in Europe.   A US citizen simply has to believe in and support the US constitution.   GB has echoes of the US but can never really replicate the US model - because of the strong British ethnic identity (and Welsh, Scottish ... etc) that is still very present in life there.  There is tension in America about defense of  the constitution, Christian identity vs new immigrants who may believe in something incompatible.

    David Hitchens has opined that the one thing that is definitely dead and without any future in this world is strong 'tribal' identity.  That inevitably the world is headed in a trans-national direction.   Part of me loves that idea, part of me regrets the loss of strong British culture (which I didn't care for in many ways and left!).

    But the Islamic global civilizational aspiration is probably the main barrier to that transnational reality.  It claims to be the basis for it, but in the view of just about everyone on this board and elsewhere - is not equipped to play that role.   That'll take a while!

    Sorry Ward End for a rambling response, and thanks for a very honest post about your situation and feelings.




    Well, there is no properly codified constitution like the Americans have. Though the US is unique for what they have and should be the envy of the world. We try and hang on to the Magna Carta I guess. But when your own Prime Minister (David Cameron) goes onto an American chat show and can't even say what it stands for, then that's a problem when those proud natives sneer at immigrants not knowing the history of the country or its 'values' which to me are whatever the government of the day wants them to be. Tribalism is a bankrupt concept which I agree. But even here in Europe we have echoes of it. Like you say, here in Britain people would much rather see themselves as one of the sub-nationalities or religion as it is with Muslim immigrants. In fact a lot of people would rather identify with their football teams (and woe be tied if you support any club that isn't your local one) than as British. How ironic then that those who have arrived here identify with the United Kingdom more than the natives.

    Though yes, the aspiration for a global caliphate is problematic for obvious reasons and also for Muslims themselves. I don't know how many Muslims in this country desire it though except for the obvious characters like Anjem Choudary and his ilk who openly declared support for the so called Islamic State in the ME.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #5 - April 28, 2017, 09:31 PM

    Foreign Uber Driver and American Passenger

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83oTL-XBlFc

    Great ..lots of freedom........., AmeriKa  Freedom

    well ..... Life of an immigrant uber driver  and a Passenger with lots of freedom ,..... off  course fucking cops of USA.


     Bloody hell wacko
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #6 - April 28, 2017, 09:40 PM

       As for “we the British people never asked for mass immigration”
       Mass immigration is an intrinsic part of any thriving civilization, something to boast about, even before modernity, before people understood ‘all men are equal’, even in countries that do not have a tradition of multiculturalism like China. It is true that it has hardly been conducted at such a scale, but Britain is one of the strongest empires in the last 2 centuries, and a country at the edge of the continent surrounded by seas, if she didn’t ask for immigration, no one could have made her done anything. You are not responsible or guilty of anything.

       You are having those ‘I don’t belong here’ ‘I shouldn’t be here’ thoughts again. May I boldly speculate that immigration may not be the only thing you are not comfortable with?


    Though some people insist upon some sort of referendum for immigrants. A point I've often seen come up is just that, immigrants arrived under the insistence upon the British government and companies needing labour. 'The British people themselves' never wanted it. Anyway yes, I am insecure amongst other things. I've been told in the 'nicest' way possible that I'm a bastard child of immigration. 'Hey, we never asked for you but at least you have rights in this country unlike the shithole that you come from so shut your whining' is the gist.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #7 - April 28, 2017, 09:44 PM

    You shouldn't let people make you feel bad simply due to them misplacing their anger upon immigrants. Most the arguments they use are horrible and reflect a very simple mind. All I see are the sense of entitlement based upon the arguments you referenced. The class argument itself so bad it is laughable.

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #8 - April 28, 2017, 09:47 PM

    Though some people insist upon some sort of referendum for immigrants. A point I've often seen come up is just that, immigrants arrived under the insistence upon the British government and companies needing labour. 'The British people themselves' never wanted it. Anyway yes, I am insecure amongst other things  wacko


    The UK is not a pure democracy. It doesn't matter what they want. If they want change elect a party in order to accomplish it. Since this has not happened this so-called claim is merely representative of a minority pretending they are a majority. Which means they are delusional.

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #9 - April 28, 2017, 09:55 PM

    You shouldn't let people make you feel bad simply due to them misplacing their anger upon immigrants. Most the arguments they use are horrible and reflect a very simple mind. All I see are the sense of entitlement based upon the arguments you referenced. The class argument itself so bad it is laughable.




    I know I shouldn't but I am sometimes tempted to stand up and say 'Hey, I'm a good immigrant though'. Then I realise how desperate I sound.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #10 - April 28, 2017, 10:03 PM

    The UK is not a pure democracy. It doesn't matter what they want. If they want change elect a party in order to accomplish it. Since this has not happened this so-called claim is merely representative of a minority pretending they are a majority. Which means they are delusional.




    Well, referendums are the hot topics these days. To some people Britain should've had a referendum on mass immigration. But yeah, it's probably a loud minority. I don't know. I've even come across liberal minded folk who say immigrants have ripped the heart of solidarity and tolerance out of Britain by importing people from the 'Muslim world' which is backward and people there don't share our list of values.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #11 - April 28, 2017, 11:43 PM

    Dude, the opinion of anti-immigrant tossers is the last thing you should be getting yourself concerned about.

    how fuck works without shit??


    Let's Play Chess!

    harakaat, friend, RIP
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #12 - April 29, 2017, 01:46 AM

    It is so weird to me that people in Britain think they are the first nation there. Britain has been overrun multiple times, I am sure most British Citizens, even if white, are descended from a wave of immigration or a mix of native and immigrant. Like, how many centuries or generations qualify one as native? I can't wrap my mind around anyone not First Nation thinking they have a claim.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #13 - April 29, 2017, 11:32 PM

    I know I shouldn't but I am sometimes tempted to stand up and say 'Hey, I'm a good immigrant though'. Then I realise how desperate I sound.


    lol, you just need to stop visiting forums like that. i'm pretty sure they're mostly old grumpy men. maybe they're even being paid to post.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #14 - April 30, 2017, 12:10 AM

    Some of them are oldies, yes. They're incredibly articulate though and not of yobbish EDL ilk. Some people make the case from a secular/liberal/humanist perspective to criticise immigration. That Britain (or pick any Western country if you like) should never have imported immigrants from extremely religious third world countries. As someone who is an 'ex-Muslim', it's hard not to feel like I'm between a rock and a hard place. And yes, I'm glad I live here but I also acknowledge I'm an immigrant.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #15 - April 30, 2017, 12:17 AM

    It is so weird to me that people in Britain think they are the first nation there. Britain has been overrun multiple times, I am sure most British Citizens, even if white, are descended from a wave of immigration or a mix of native and immigrant. Like, how many centuries or generations qualify one as native? I can't wrap my mind around anyone not First Nation thinking they have a claim.



    I guess so. A lot of people who tend to be against immigration also had grandparents who fought in the two World Wars and make the point 'they would be turning in the graves if they knew what became of the country they fought for'. Which I guess is a funny point given that they were too pre-occupied trying to defend the physical existence of the UK at that specific time rather than worry beyond it.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #16 - April 30, 2017, 11:25 AM

    It is so weird to me that people in Britain think they are the first nation there. Britain has been overrun multiple times, I am sure most British Citizens, even if white, are descended from a wave of immigration or a mix of native and immigrant. Like, how many centuries or generations qualify one as native? I can't wrap my mind around anyone not First Nation thinking they have a claim.



    Please at least take the time to read some English history.  There have been only two successful and lasting invasions in the last 2,000 years: Roman and Norman.  Lasting in the sense that the invasion led to a significant influx of people.   The Normans (1,000 years ago) committed virtual genocide after the native Britons rebelled.   Roughly a third of the native population killed and replaced by Norman immigrants.   The traces of those tribal lines can still sometimes be observed today in our politics (though you wouldn't be aware of that) - but we've had a 1,000 years to work it out.   The only waves of immigration after that were much smaller that Norman or 21st century waves - notably the Huguenots (late 16th century) and the Jews (mostly 19th century).

    The British Isles as we entered the 20th century were amongst the most settled and homogenous populations of all the nations of the earth.  Our political institutions, religious beliefs, legal system, education system, social values and sense of shared history were settled matters.  The challenge today is that many new arrivals, or their sons and daughters decide they don't belong or don't like the people they've settled amongst.   Aside from the brutal Norman military conquest no other wave of immigrants has publicly boasted of imposing their religion and occasionally indulged in killing us.   And this is combined with those alienated newcomers having a significantly higher birth rate.  Not a heartwarming prospect.

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #17 - April 30, 2017, 11:41 AM

    Aside from the brutal Norman military conquest no other wave of immigrants has publicly boasted of imposing their religion and occasionally indulged in killing us.   And this is combined with those alienated newcomers having a significantly higher birth rate.  Not a heartwarming prospect.


    Ah, it's that wave of undifferentiated immigrants that's to blame, as it always is. Also, dear reader, note the use of "us" by one who forfeited the ability to use that word in any meaningful sense by leaving the UK decades ago; also something of a classic of the genre, as I'm sure you'll agree.

    Here's a genuinely heartwarming prospect, Unifier: your leaving, never to darken our doors again.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #18 - April 30, 2017, 02:51 PM

    Please at least take the time to read some English history.  There have been only two successful and lasting invasions in the last 2,000 years: Roman and Norman.  Lasting in the sense that the invasion led to a significant influx of people.   The Normans (1,000 years ago) committed virtual genocide after the native Britons rebelled.   Roughly a third of the native population killed and replaced by Norman immigrants.   The traces of those tribal lines can still sometimes be observed today in our politics (though you wouldn't be aware of that) - but we've had a 1,000 years to work it out.   The only waves of immigration after that were much smaller that Norman or 21st century waves - notably the Huguenots (late 16th century) and the Jews (mostly 19th century).

    The British Isles as we entered the 20th century were amongst the most settled and homogenous populations of all the nations of the earth.  Our political institutions, religious beliefs, legal system, education system, social values and sense of shared history were settled matters.  The challenge today is that many new arrivals, or their sons and daughters decide they don't belong or don't like the people they've settled amongst.   Aside from the brutal Norman military conquest no other wave of immigrants has publicly boasted of imposing their religion and occasionally indulged in killing us.   And this is combined with those alienated newcomers having a significantly higher birth rate.  Not a heartwarming prospect.


    Yes exactly my point. Y'all are just descendants of Norman conquerors, who stole the land and imposed their culture over the remaining natives. If y'all are facing hordes of hostile immigrants then surely your news is not reporting it, if history be repeating itself. Perhaps you are already overrun and your media is compromised.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #19 - April 30, 2017, 05:41 PM

    It is so weird to me that people in Britain think they are the first nation there. Britain has been overrun multiple times, I am sure most British Citizens, even if white, are descended from a wave of immigration or a mix of native and immigrant. Like, how many centuries or generations qualify one as native? I can't wrap my mind around anyone not First Nation thinking they have a claim.



    They create an arbitrary line in the sand typically built on a pop-culture reference to "British"
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #20 - April 30, 2017, 05:50 PM

    Please at least take the time to read some English history.  There have been only two successful and lasting invasions in the last 2,000 years: Roman and Norman.  Lasting in the sense that the invasion led to a significant influx of people.   The Normans (1,000 years ago) committed virtual genocide after the native Britons rebelled.   Roughly a third of the native population killed and replaced by Norman immigrants.   The traces of those tribal lines can still sometimes be observed today in our politics (though you wouldn't be aware of that) - but we've had a 1,000 years to work it out.   The only waves of immigration after that were much smaller that Norman or 21st century waves - notably the Huguenots (late 16th century) and the Jews (mostly 19th century).




    You forgot Saxon which was a key cultural shift between Roman and Norman invasions. This invasion included a series of migrations fair greater in scope than the Norman invasion. Numbers are estimated between 2-4 million.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #21 - April 30, 2017, 08:16 PM

    Big omission ... the Saxons.  Duly acknowledged and thanks.   I did a quick Wikipedia on that wave of conquest and learn that there is debate about the scale of it.  Some historians teach that the 'Romano-British' population was wiped out and replaced by the German Saxons ... while others claim the invasions were small in scale but that the Saxons formed an elite (more advanced in weaponry, farming and other useful talents of the time).   So I may be able to claim that doesn't qualify as a major immigration ... but I wont!

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #22 - April 30, 2017, 08:26 PM

    Ah, it's that wave of undifferentiated immigrants that's to blame, as it always is. Also, dear reader, note the use of "us" by one who forfeited the ability to use that word in any meaningful sense by leaving the UK decades ago; also something of a classic of the genre, as I'm sure you'll agree.

    Here's a genuinely heartwarming prospect, Unifier: your leaving, never to darken our doors again.


    Toor .. you are listed as a moderator so you are free to censor me by blocking my access if you find my comments so offensive.   I hope you don't because I have learned a great deal reading the posts on this site and would miss it.

    Bit mean of you to use a freely given confession about my emigre status in a prior post against me.  I still hold a British passport, and have brother, sisters, nieces and nephews in the UK to think about.   Its also a fact in my experience that the older one gets the more one is drawn back to one's roots ... and perhaps in a sentimentalized or romanticized form.

    Your accusation is unfounded and unwarranted and frankly says more about you than me.  I can and do differentiate between immigrants.  What I am trying to probe is the skepticism and sometimes overt hostility often expressed on this site to the admittedly somewhat mongrel inhabitants of the land you or your immediate ancestors came to when they express concern about the impact of unrestricted immigration.   Do you think we should eliminate border controls everywhere in the world and let the people flow where they may?   Or is it reasonable for a host population to decide and control who and how many they can reasonably absorb in any given period?

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #23 - April 30, 2017, 11:46 PM

    Please at least take the time to read some English history.  There have been only two successful and lasting invasions in the last 2,000 years: Roman and Norman.  Lasting in the sense that the invasion led to a significant influx of people.   The Normans (1,000 years ago) committed virtual genocide after the native Britons rebelled.   Roughly a third of the native population killed and replaced by Norman immigrants.   The traces of those tribal lines can still sometimes be observed today in our politics (though you wouldn't be aware of that) - but we've had a 1,000 years to work it out.   The only waves of immigration after that were much smaller that Norman or 21st century waves - notably the Huguenots (late 16th century) and the Jews (mostly 19th century).

    The British Isles as we entered the 20th century were amongst the most settled and homogenous populations of all the nations of the earth.  Our political institutions, religious beliefs, legal system, education system, social values and sense of shared history were settled matters.  The challenge today is that many new arrivals, or their sons and daughters decide they don't belong or don't like the people they've settled amongst.   Aside from the brutal Norman military conquest no other wave of immigrants has publicly boasted of imposing their religion and occasionally indulged in killing us.   And this is combined with those alienated newcomers having a significantly higher birth rate.  Not a heartwarming prospect.


    Could you be more specific by what you mean by this wave of immigration boasting about imposing a religion upon the country they've arrived in? That's a generalisation. Muslims have time and time again denounced terrorist activities as well as Islamist loudmouths such as Anjem Choudary. Whatever challenges they or we face (and I am that product of what some people regard as 'Muslim immigration' even if I regard myself as a former Muslim), that has to be recognised. The sympathetic elements of Sharia are still a minority. Immigrants, yes Muslim immigrants (even my complicated parents) too came for primarily economic reasons, for employment.   
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #24 - May 01, 2017, 12:31 AM

    Quote
    Could you be more specific by what you mean by this wave of immigration boasting about imposing a religion upon the country they've arrived in? That's a generalisation. Muslims have time and time again denounced terrorist activities as well as Islamist loudmouths such as Anjem Choudary. Whatever challenges they or we face (and I am that product of what some people regard as 'Muslim immigration' even if I regard myself as a former Muslim), that has to be recognised. The sympathetic elements of Sharia are still a minority. Immigrants, yes Muslim immigrants (even my complicated parents) too came for primarily economic reasons, for employment.   


    Boasting about imposing religion upon the country they've arrived in =/= terrorist activities. terrorists are not the only ones who impose religions.

    I don't know about your heritage, but I've seen so many best-selling books in Indonesia with titles like "Light on European Sky" and many similar things. Fiction novels about how Europe and US would mass convert to Islam, since Islam had always been the default stance, how the American constitution have always been heavily Islamic to begin with, people are just misguided by Christianity or atheism... Islam will come and save the day, then everything would be perfect.

    Even the most moderate muslims still think that Islam should dominate others. That if everybody just submit and obey, if these non-muslims just shut up and let muslims roll the carpet and rule the world, surely there will be no crime, no more suicide, no more drugs problems, justice for everyone, etc. This is not from terrorists. I've read these articles, comments, TV shows... Islamic soap operas, Imams speech, dawah, I mean shit everyone is far more radical nowadays. The privilege of living in Islamic country, Islam in your face 24/7.

    Just fucking ew.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #25 - May 01, 2017, 12:48 AM

    Speaking from personal experience the dawah types I've come across vary in type. Some will talk of 'virtues' of belief (not a uniquely Islamic thing I know) and will happily take up challenging questions and others are more blind in their faith and the dogmas of the religion (of course this being dangerous). I'm from Pakistan by the way, I guess Indonesia would look like the most brilliantly relaxed Muslim nation in comparison.

    Which I guess is the worry about importing people from such countries. I don't know what to think in this regard.
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #26 - May 01, 2017, 10:16 AM

    Your accusation is unfounded and unwarranted and frankly says more about you than me.  I can and do differentiate between immigrants.  What I am trying to probe is the skepticism and sometimes overt hostility often expressed on this site to the admittedly somewhat mongrel inhabitants of the land you or your immediate ancestors came to when they express concern about the impact of unrestricted immigration.   Do you think we should eliminate border controls everywhere in the world and let the people flow where they may?   Or is it reasonable for a host population to decide and control who and how many they can reasonably absorb in any given period?


    Spare me. Your loyalty is to notions of a white Britain, your sudden invocation of "mongrel inhabitants" notwithstanding. I see you and through you, and stand by my last post.

    Oh, and by the way: a nation with Britain's history of aggressive imperialism has no business invoking the rights of "host populations",  and certainly little or no right to protest about the following (the reader will make the relevant grammatical corrections):

    Quote
    publicly boasted of imposing their religion and occasionally indulged in killing us

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #27 - May 01, 2017, 07:24 PM

    Wow ... you're psychic then.  You have enhanced powers to go with your tolerant outlook.

    And your reference to Britain's history of 'aggressive' imperialism suggests you see the arrival of large numbers of former colonials in Britain
    with innate resentment or even hostility to GB and its inhabitants as totally justified pay back for past sins.   I'd love to see you argue that position publicly.

    I assume you support the right of any colonized people to independence and to freedom from the shackles and indignities of subservient status.  Just not the
    residents of the British Isles.   Of course I exaggerate.  The British people are not colonized yet in the way the peoples of the British Empire were.   Though those colonized peoples were able to use the culture, religious beliefs, government institutions and legal code of their colonizers to de-colonize and achieve freedom.
    What has happened in Britain so far is small scale cultural hegemony and attempted takeover at the neighborhood level.   Tower Hamlets (attempted election fraud), Sparkbrook (attempted Islamization of parts of the education system),  Rochdale (rape of 1400 girls by Pakistani rape gangs), parts of Luton and elsewhere suggest that such transformations do not indicate a happier state of existence for non Muslim residents.

    Ex Muslims on this site frequently mention their gratitude for being in Europe or America where the penalties for leaving Islam are less likely to be experienced.  That 'back home' in Pakistan, Somalia or Saudi Arabia the risks are greater and punishment more severe.   Surely you of all people want a strong culture of freedom, stoutly defended by police and politicians?    And to be unambiguously clear I support your right to free expression, freedom of religion and association and every other sweet freedom available.    That freedom is already being nibbled away at due to officially expressed Muslim sensitivities and objections.
    A British Euro MP was imprisoned simply for reading this passage from that vicious British Champion of Empire Winston Churchill's classic 1899 account of the re-conquest of the Sudan 'The River War':

    How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.

    A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
    Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #28 - May 01, 2017, 09:32 PM

    Quote
    Rochdale (rape of 1400 girls by Pakistani rape gangs)

    Where on earth do you get this figure from?
  • Anti-immigration
     Reply #29 - May 01, 2017, 09:39 PM

    A lot of what you say makes sense, but not in the way you might hope.

    Wow ... you're psychic then.  You have enhanced powers to go with your tolerant outlook.

    Nope, just seen your type here too many times before. It's an occupational hazard.

    And your reference to Britain's history of 'aggressive' imperialism suggests you see the arrival of large numbers of former colonials in Britain
    with innate resentment or even hostility to GB and its inhabitants as totally justified pay back for past sins.   I'd love to see you argue that position publicly.

    Your reading abilities, as ever, do not disappoint.

    Lots of former colonial subjects came to Britain because it needed foreign labour and was in a position to exploit the networks of exploitation that empire built. Not that your grievances about Britain becoming non-white - incidentally, another side effect of the politics of empire, not that you appear to question why this might be - ever seem to seriously look into the history of migration. Nope, to you, it's just those Muslim immigrants and their wombs that are to blame, and that's that.

    You came here to advocate for ex-Muslims falling behind the definitely-not-racist Tommy Robinson, lest anyone forget.

    Though those colonized peoples were able to use the culture, religious beliefs, government institutions and legal code of their colonizers to de-colonize and achieve freedom.

    Those deep dives into Wikipedia are really working out for you, aren't they?  

    What has happened in Britain so far is small scale cultural hegemony and attempted takeover at the neighborhood level.   Tower Hamlets (attempted election fraud), Sparkbrook (attempted Islamization of parts of the education system),  Rochdale (rape of 1400 girls by Pakistani rape gangs), parts of Luton and elsewhere suggest that such transformations do not indicate a happier state of existence for non Muslim residents.

    It should surprise nobody that your focus is 'those perfidious Muslims'.

    Ex Muslims on this site frequently mention their gratitude for being in Europe or America where the penalties for leaving Islam are less likely to be experienced.  That 'back home' in Pakistan, Somalia or Saudi Arabia the risks are greater and punishment more severe.   Surely you of all people want a strong culture of freedom, stoutly defended by police and politicians?    And to be unambiguously clear I support your right to free expression, freedom of religion and association and every other sweet freedom available.    That freedom is already being nibbled away at due to officially expressed Muslim sensitivities and objections.

    Ah, yes, those precious gifts of whiteness that were so readily and freely given to us poor benighted heathens. Thank you ever so much.

    A British Euro MP was imprisoned simply for reading this passage from that vicious British Champion of Empire Winston Churchill's classic 1899 account of the re-conquest of the Sudan 'The River War':

    Oh goody, a fan of Winston "Don't call it the Bengal Famine" Churchill. This Greatest of Britons, the paragon who also said:

    "I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

    Sounds like a nice fella. I suppose you won't object to what he said there.

    Incidentally, the "British Euro MP" to whom you refer is Paul Weston, and you're either catastrophically misinformed or a liar. For one thing, he wasn't imprisoned for this little stunt; for another, he is also not, as you allege, an 'Euro MP', but a leader of a charming far-right party called Liberty GB, and also the successor of one Tommy Robinson at the helm of the fabulously, famously non-racist membership of Pegida UK. That you think you can come here and brazenly shill for Robinson, Weston, and the like makes you either particularly dim or just.. well, not clever, but brave for trying. If bringing a few brown faces into a misbegotten movement that will use them as tokens and their families as target practice is what does it for you, then you're looking in the wrong place to be tolerated for that sort of thing.

    For the avoidance of any further doubt: this site has no welcome whatsoever for any of white nationalist politics. Given your evident sympathies, this includes you.



    ETA: I forgot an obvious detail. Corrected.
  • 12 3 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »