The British Just Don't Want Any More Foreigners

First topic message reminder :

7th January 2014


Please discuss.



More than three quarters of people surveyed in a poll have said they want immigration to be cut, with 56% calling for major curbs.

Almost half of people asked, 47%, think immigration is bad for the economy.

Among the 31% of respondents who said immigration is good for the economy, half wanted to see it reduced anyway.

More details of the annual British Social Attitudes survey are to be revealed in a BBC Two documentary called The Truth About Immigration.

In the programme, BBC political editor Nick Robinson looked back to a civil service paper published in 2001 which examined the economic and the social impact of immigration.

The paper concluded that there was" little evidence that native workers are harmed by migration".

Its author, former Cabinet Office economist Jonathan Portes, said: "I think politicians do have to say to individuals who are negatively affected, and let's face it there will be some: 'Yes, we're doing this for the good of our country, and yes you may lose out, but ultimately we still have to do this.'

"Just as we said to the coal miners 30 years ago: 'Sorry we can get our coal a lot cheaper abroad. We can't afford to keep on propping you up.'"

Former Labour foreign secretary Jack Straw said the previous government had "got it wrong" on immigration, "and I deeply regret it".

He added: "I regret it because it undermines trust in government, if you're that wrong."

Labour MP and ex-home secretary David Blunkett added: "We didn't spell out in words of one syllable what was happening, partly because of a fear of racism."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25630036


2001???

BigAndy9 wrote:Come on Phil, even your positives are negatives for the British people:




Tower Hamlets has high numbers of immigration - are all the children immigrants or the children of immigrants?

I'd say probably 90%+

I did read a report that it is now white British children who are dropping off the scale in success results in school.

And that is just another reason the white British parents are saying enough is enough.

You see Phil, every single aspect of life is now being damaged by immigration. Every single aspect.




Back to top Go down



You will tell us next that 90%+ of immigrants are working.

That isn't a plus for the white Brits at the bottom Phil.

Ask the old lady from Rochdale.

You know the one - the one you and your friend Gordon would call a bigot.

I have shown you dear Andy your beliefs are very much wrong on many things, even Brits are in less employment than those from the EU and you are a fine example of someone who plays off fear and not common sense.

I do not support Labour, hence why you are so stupid at times Andy and the fact you are nothing more than a xenophobic bigot of which I have proved, meaning you and Gordon are two peas in the same pod.

You show very well how you play up to th fears that the Mail prints with some of the funniest things written above.

As soon as you stop debating and call me a bigot I know you're in too deep Phil.

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

I think just blaming the DM and its ilk for fear tactics and scare tactics is disingenuous.  

For too long too much of the media tried publishing reasoned balanced concerns that were being raised by their readership (the relationship between what a media source publishes and what its customers believe is far from a simple one way process)  and were slammed for doing so being accused of racism and bigotry for the simplest investigation.  As a result they felt unheard and ignored and did what most humans do when feeling unheard and ignored they got louder and more extreme.  Now it is finally being admitted that their original concerns had some validity they are staying loud and extreme because they fear if they get quieter and more reasonable again they will be ignored.

Combine this with the fact that ordinary people (both those that read the DM and those that dont) are getting more concerned and you get the situation where the extremes are less challenged.

No it is correct to blame those news media's that play off the fact of trying to incite anger based upon poor reporting of which the Mail has a history of doing, that is not disingenuous but a fact, the mail is nothing more than a gutter rag that tries to fuel anger and hate with the bullshit it posts. There is nothing balanced about the Mail sphinx that is utter bullshit and they play off the back of fear which only seeks to segregate society and even leads to hate on the streets between groups of people, that is neither intelligent and in fact is dangerous.
I suggest you read the comment sections at the bottom of articles to see my point is well proven on this matter.
They twist stories to make something which was not the case and give countless examples of this, which is why they are such a poor paper to say the least and how people defend them is nothing but short sighted and blind
 

Phil, stop blaming newspapers or i'll fetch Lord Edmund to give you another drumming.

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:

I think just blaming the DM and its ilk for fear tactics and scare tactics is disingenuous.  

For too long too much of the media tried publishing reasoned balanced concerns that were being raised by their readership (the relationship between what a media source publishes and what its customers believe is far from a simple one way process)  and were slammed for doing so being accused of racism and bigotry for the simplest investigation.  As a result they felt unheard and ignored and did what most humans do when feeling unheard and ignored they got louder and more extreme.  Now it is finally being admitted that their original concerns had some validity they are staying loud and extreme because they fear if they get quieter and more reasonable again they will be ignored.

Combine this with the fact that ordinary people (both those that read the DM and those that dont) are getting more concerned and you get the situation where the extremes are less challenged.

No it is correct to blame those news media's that play off the fact of trying to incite anger based upon poor reporting of which the Mail has a history of doing, that is not disingenuous but a fact, the mail is nothing more than a gutter rag that tries to fuel anger and hate with the bullshit it posts. There is nothing balanced about the Mail sphinx that is utter bullshit and they play off the back of fear which only seeks to segregate society and even leads to hate on the streets between groups of people, that is neither intelligent and in fact is dangerous.
I suggest you read the comment sections at the bottom of articles to see my point is well proven on this matter.
They twist stories to make something which was not the case and give countless examples of this, which is why they are such a poor paper to say the least and how people defend them is nothing but short sighted and blind
 

Again - why do newspapers publish what they do the way do? Are you saying without the DM there would be no fear and segregation? Are you saying the DM is the only one that does this and that every other paper is spot on accurate reporting?
Also have you actually ever read the comments at the bottom of DM stories arranging them in order from highest rated?

How silly again the point is the media are meant to be responsible but as clearly seen they are not responsible when reporting in fact as stated the Mail makes many errors and you never see a front page apology, just a side note correction. That is called being irresponsible as the damage is done from the first article that was wrong which seeks to incite people.

Again all the media do this but the Mail is the worst, so you are now excusing irresponsibility if some hold already hateful fuels and that the Mail is not wrong for fuelling them now?

Really, is that what you think

PhilDidge wrote:How silly again the point is the media are meant to be responsible but as clearly seen they are not responsible when reporting in fact as stated the Mail makes many errors and you never see a front page apology, just a side note correction. That is called being irresponsible as the damage is done from the first article that was wrong which seeks to incite people.  

Again all the media do this but the Mail is the worst, so you are now excusing irresponsibility if some hold already hateful fuels and that the Mail is not wrong for fuelling them now?

Really, is that what you think  

I am simply not as convinced as you are on cause and effect. I am also considering the probable implications of removal of the DM.

I am saying the Mail and others are not accountable when they post a view on a group, on an individual they can be sued for libel, but when a poor showing is made of a group nothing can be done and they are thus as stated not accountable.

Hate crimes have increased, do you think the media or the internet plays no part in the formation of hate spreading.

I am not saying the Mail should be removed I am saying it should be held accountable and it should post a huge apology outlining its errors as well as all papers when they manipulate and lie

I do not think the media and internet pay no part - I think the part they do pay is misunderstood and over rated.

That is why I asked if you had actually read the comments on DM stories by arranging them in order of ratings. I do. More often than not the highest rated comments are similar to the posts you yourself make - the DMs own readers spend a great deal of time castigating it for "being irresponsible" as you put it. The relationship between that paper and its audience is far more complex that you would expect.

sphinx wrote:I do not think the media and internet pay no part - I think the part they do pay is misunderstood and over rated.

That is why I asked if you had actually read the comments on DM stories by arranging them in order of ratings.  I do.  More often than not the highest rated comments are similar to the posts you yourself make - the DMs own readers spend a great deal of time castigating it for "being irresponsible" as you put it.  The relationship between that paper and its audience is far more complex that you would expect.

Oh please, that does not stop the fact many people read the article and are incensed. Seriously I can show an article wrong like on here and people will still form the wrong view as Andy does from them, the damage is then done, which you are clearly failing to grasp. The view has then lodged in that person's head.
That is influencing and manipulating people, if you think it does not then sorry Sphinx you clearly need to get out more and see how people react

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:I do not think the media and internet pay no part - I think the part they do pay is misunderstood and over rated.

That is why I asked if you had actually read the comments on DM stories by arranging them in order of ratings.  I do.  More often than not the highest rated comments are similar to the posts you yourself make - the DMs own readers spend a great deal of time castigating it for "being irresponsible" as you put it.  The relationship between that paper and its audience is far more complex that you would expect.

Oh please, that does not stop the fact many people read the article and are incensed. Seriously I can show an article wrong like on here and people will still form the wrong view as Andy does from them, the damage is then done, which you are clearly failing to grasp. The view has then lodged in that person's head.
That is influencing and manipulating people, if you think it does not then sorry Sphinx you clearly need to get out more and see how people react  

So you think Andy forms his views from what he reads in the media?

Where does Phil form his views then?

Why are they so different?

PhilDidge wrote:

sphinx wrote:I do not think the media and internet pay no part - I think the part they do pay is misunderstood and over rated.

That is why I asked if you had actually read the comments on DM stories by arranging them in order of ratings.  I do.  More often than not the highest rated comments are similar to the posts you yourself make - the DMs own readers spend a great deal of time castigating it for "being irresponsible" as you put it.  The relationship between that paper and its audience is far more complex that you would expect.

Oh please, that does not stop the fact many people read the article and are incensed. Seriously I can show an article wrong like on here and people will still form the wrong view as Andy does from them, the damage is then done, which you are clearly failing to grasp. The view has then lodged in that person's head.
That is influencing and manipulating people, if you think it does not then sorry Sphinx you clearly need to get out more and see how people react  

Or is the Daily Mail influenced by the millions of Britons who will be choosing which newspaper to read?

Come on Phil, do you know nothing about life at all?

sphinx wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Oh please, that does not stop the fact many people read the article and are incensed. Seriously I can show an article wrong like on here and people will still form the wrong view as Andy does from them, the damage is then done, which you are clearly failing to grasp. The view has then lodged in that person's head.
That is influencing and manipulating people, if you think it does not then sorry Sphinx you clearly need to get out more and see how people react  

So you think Andy forms his views from what he reads in the media?

Where does Phil form his views then?

Why are they so different?

Where do I form my views?

From research and common sense.

Andy sees an article and buys into it without researching.

He has done this on crime

On immigration

The list is endless

BigAndy9 wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Oh please, that does not stop the fact many people read the article and are incensed. Seriously I can show an article wrong like on here and people will still form the wrong view as Andy does from them, the damage is then done, which you are clearly failing to grasp. The view has then lodged in that person's head.
That is influencing and manipulating people, if you think it does not then sorry Sphinx you clearly need to get out more and see how people react  

Or is the Daily Mail influenced by the millions of Britons who will be choosing which newspaper to read?

Come on Phil, do you know nothing about life at all?

Der sturmer was a very popular paper, does that make it any good sweet Andy.

The problem is with yourself I have no respect as you do not see me as British, mainly as you are a prejudice wally and are fuelled by prejudice of which the Mail has in abundance

PhilDidge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Or is the Daily Mail influenced by the millions of Britons who will be choosing which newspaper to read?

Come on Phil, do you know nothing about life at all?

Der sturmer was a very popular paper, does that make it any good sweet Andy.

The problem is with yourself I have no respect as you do not see me as British, mainly as you are a prejudice wally and are fuelled by prejudice of which the Mail has in abundance

Phil, I see you as British.

Your parents and (i'm guessing here) much of your family are from abroad, therefore you support that and don't look at things from the point of view of millions of white Brits who have seen their country change completely in just 20 years.

By the way - I will be doing my best to give up the Daily Mail as of now.

BigAndy9 wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Der sturmer was a very popular paper, does that make it any good sweet Andy.

The problem is with yourself I have no respect as you do not see me as British, mainly as you are a prejudice wally and are fuelled by prejudice of which the Mail has in abundance

Phil, I see you as British.

Your parents and (i'm guessing here) much of your family are from abroad, therefore you support that and don't look at things from the point of view of millions of white Brits who have seen their country change completely in just 20 years.

yesterday you said i was not British

PhilDidge wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

Phil, I see you as British.

Your parents and (i'm guessing here) much of your family are from abroad, therefore you support that and don't look at things from the point of view of millions of white Brits who have seen their country change completely in just 20 years.

yesterday you said i was not British

I said you and BigFatMama were foreign - you corrected me and from then on I didn't call you foreign.

he Romanian and Bulgarian invasion - one week on
posted by: Guest blog by Elisabeth Pop | on: Wednesday, 8 January 2014, 13:56
[color][font]

Guest blog by Elisabeth Pop
It has been a week now since the Romanian and Bulgarian invasion was supposed to start. A week in which, according to Daily Express we should have seen at least 2,000 Romanian and Bulgarian migrants flooding the British Isles.
While we do not know how many Romanians and Bulgarians will eventually choose to employ their skills and pay their taxes to further British economy and enrich British culture, what we know is that, even if confronted with a trickle of invaders, the Daily Haters have not stopped, and show no sign of slowing down.
Headlines about unwelcomed mass immigration from the poorest countries of the European Union have been replaced with misleading headlines about the crime rates they will definitely bring with them, the benefits they are desperate to claim and the low skilled jobs they are suited for, from strippers to cleaners, not to mention the Roma problem they are dumping on British tax payers.
The graphs featured in this blog are just a preview of the mythbusting work that HOPE not hate will carry out in order to steer the conversation towards an informed, non-biased, fact-fuelled debate about the economic contribution of EU migrants living in the UK and the truth about the Romanian and Bulgarian community in UK.

[/font][/color][color][font]

 Posted: 8 Jan 2014 | There are 0 comments | make a comment/view comments[/font][/color]
[url=http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Thank you http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hopenothate.org.uk%2Fblog%2Fnick%2Farticle%2F3322%2Fthank-you @hopenothate][/url]
Thank you
posted by: Nick Lowles | on: Monday, 6 January 2014, 11:23
[color][font]

I would like to say a big thank you to all of our supporters who took action for us over the last week. Almost 15,000 have signed our letter to the Editor of the Daily Express complaining about their inaccurate anti-immigrant rhetoric. And then, over the weekend, an astonishing 729 people donated to our campaign to ensure Nick Griffin loses his Euro seat.
And then, on Friday, I tweeted a montage of anti-migrant newspaper front pages from the last few weeks. An incredible 894 people retweeted it and 187 marked it up as favourites.
HOPE not hate is gearing up for May's European and local elections. I will be outlining our campaign strategy, and how people can get involved, later this week.
[/font][/color]

Phil are you saying the Daily Mail is an intentional if unofficial mouthpiece for a political party in the UK?

Why did people choose Der Sturmer over other papers?

Why do people choose the Daily Mail over other newspapers?

Do you believe that what people read forms their beliefs or that peoples beliefs causes their reading choices?

Oh and when providing statistics on immigration can you at least admit that in work benefits are not taken into account.

No the Dail Mail has connections to the nazi's, and is a rancid vile view towards not only ethnic groups and religious groups, where it tries to manipulate its readers often with twisting a story or even lying.

Can you also admit when taken into account those in work those who are housewives are not claiming anything in many cases.

As to popularity always the scummiest papers are, I find the mirror on a par with the Mail to be honest, they both post bile.

Der Sturmer was very racist and full of hate, people play and feed off hate.

I think people read them to reassure their beliefs to be honest, that is the sad reality of the matter

There those not claiming anything but my issue is when the statistics to show whether immigrants are costing or making the country money they do not take into account figures for in work benefits yet alone things like health care (other countries have different health systems resulting in different patterns of use and cost).

If the scummiest papers are the most popular does that not suggest that successful newspapers content is more directed by their readers beliefs than their readers beliefs are directed by their content?

I mean lets say you launch a news paper that sticks absolutely to the truth and accurate context. Would it gain any readers?

Maybe not it may not get anywhere but that shows something is very wrong with some of our society how they feed off hate does it not. The fundamental fact here is that people do and allow themselves to be manipulated by what they read, take the case in point with Der Sturmer, it was nothing more than a propaganda paper of hate. The reality is something is very wrong with some people how they allow hate and prejudice views to cloud their judgement of which can lead to violence and often does.

Take the case in point of the killers of Lee Rigby, some of the papers poorly tried to make the point with a Mosque indoctrinating them of which there was no evidence, then this incited some people from reading this with them shouting for this to be fire bombed and what happened it was. So do you think that was sensible or that incited people printing this?

As to your other point yes there are stats:

http://fullfact.org/factchecks/migrants_foreign_nationals_benefits_claim_likely_UK-27395

PhilDidge wrote:

http://fullfact.org/factchecks/migrants_foreign_nationals_benefits_claim_likely_UK-27395

Thank you for just proving my point totally using one of the most fair accurate sources I know.

The statistics used to show cost/benefits of immigrants are based on DWP benefits only - they do not include working benefits from the Inland Revenue.

I am not saying that every immigrant claims them or that they are worse than those born here or anything like that I am simply observing that their non inclusion makes puts declared totals in error. When it is said that immigrants paid x amount in tax but only claimed y amount in benefits and thus are net contributors y is calculated without working benefits which means y is inaccurate. I have no idea what the accurate outcome is - and that is my point.

PhilDidge wrote:No the Dail Mail has connections to the nazi's, and is a rancid vile view towards not only ethnic groups and religious groups, where it tries to manipulate its readers often with twisting a story or even lying.

Can you also admit when taken into account those in work those who are housewives are not claiming anything in many cases.

As to popularity always the scummiest papers are, I find the mirror on a par with the Mail to be honest, they both post bile.

Der Sturmer was very racist and full of hate, people play and feed off hate.

I think people read them to reassure their beliefs to be honest, that is the sad reality of the matter

Quite right Didge and you tell 'em what that rag is like. And if you need a good example of their lies and misleading information then feel free to tell them about this one...

Daily Mail corrects misleading benefit statistics as DWP prepares for MPs' grilling

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/07/daily-mail-corrects-misleading-benefit-statistics-dwp-prepares-mps-grilling

PhilDidge wrote:Point 1) Not bothered with someone selling the Big issue who speaks little English, it does not affect my life in any way or anybody else for that matter, so why should it bother you? When on holiday do you speak like most English people or even when they move abroad speak the language of that nation? Hardly

yes i want controlled immigration but I I really am at odds with how the likes of the Mail and co play up to people's fears and make matters worse which can create problems and segregate society. The amount of poor articles on Romanians and Bulgarians is poor to say the least Sphinx      

Now you are extracting the urine - how the hell do you compare going on holiday and not speaking the language with someone moving here permanently and not knowing the language - in some cases after being here for 10 years?