Manchester Bombing *** Please remain respectful and refrain from antagonising posts ***

deuse said:
Why don't you search first or are you gunning for a argument?

"Whilst 45% of London's population is White British, the graph shows that it is by far the most common ethno-national group. A further 15% are from other white groups. The next largest ethnic groups in London are Indian and Black African each making up around 7% of the population"

http://www.londonspovertyprofile.or...y-population/londons-population-by-ethnicity/
Click to expand...


as i said white british.

not just "british" as you tried to claim

Only 45% of London are true brits now.
Click to expand...

or are you saying you have to be white to be "true british"?
 
deuse said:
All depends on what you call British. Only 45% of London are true brits now.
Click to expand...

Tefal said:
"white" British...

theres many more British than 45%
Click to expand...

deuse said:
Why don't you search first or are you gunning for a argument?

"Whilst 45% of London's population is White British, the graph shows that it is by far the most common ethno-national group. A further 15% are from other white groups. The next largest ethnic groups in London are Indian and Black African each making up around 7% of the population"

http://www.londonspovertyprofile.or...y-population/londons-population-by-ethnicity/
Click to expand...

lol
 
We all knew it is what he was thinking anyway :p

This is the point in the conversation where someone claims the British are all mostly non British descendants and others get offended by it.
 
deuse said:
Why don't you search first or are you gunning for a argument?

"Whilst 45% of London's population is White British, the graph shows that it is by far the most common ethno-national group. A further 15% are from other white groups. The next largest ethnic groups in London are Indian and Black African each making up around 7% of the population"

http://www.londonspovertyprofile.or...y-population/londons-population-by-ethnicity/
Click to expand...

So according to [census] data off that link about 64% in London are British, doesn't sound too bad for one of the top cosmopolitan cities in the world
 
Avenged7Fold said:
We all knew it is what he was thinking anyway :p
Click to expand...

Well, obviously. It is deuse after all. I think we're lucky the source he posted had any relevant data at all to the topic at hand :p

I just find it amusing how any 'evidence' clearly shows his statements are wrong yet he still tries to use them to back up his point.
 
I recently found out that I am 1/4 black (brother found marriage certificate of my dad's parents, who were both mixed raced and kept in racially based districts in SA back in the 1930s).

1/4 Latvian
1/4 Estonian
1/4 Dutch
1/4 Unknown African

Born in SA, am a British citizen, and still speak better English than half of the country :p
 
Avenged7Fold said:
We all knew it is what he was thinking anyway :p

This is the point in the conversation where someone claims the British are all mostly non British descendants and others get offended by it.
Click to expand...

Extract from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...couraging-mass-immigration.html#ixzz4i4xBKbm3


At this point in the argument, your standard liberal academic would typically interject to insist that Britain has always been a nation of immigrants. We all come from somewhere else anyway, they say, we are all mongrels, so how dare we close the gates to a few more?

But as Douglas Murray shows, this is a shameless rewriting of our past. For most of our history, we have never been a nation of immigrants. Even the most famous influx in our history, the Norman Conquest, involved a tiny population transfer, the equivalent of no more than 5 per cent or so.


He believes Europe’s intellectual and cultural elites, including those in Britain, have ‘lost faith in its beliefs, traditions and legitimacy’ (pictured, the Calais jungle)

As much as the BBC and other news organisations like to pretend that Britain has always been a beacon of diversity, the plain fact is that until the mid-20th century the massive, overwhelming majority of the people who lived here had been born here. Look at photo after photo from late Victorian London and the uniformly pale faces stare back at you.

The arrival of the French Huguenots in the 1680s, often cited by apostles of diversity, involved about 50,000 people, all of whom were white and Christian.

And although the Irish migrants who arrived in the 19th century faced more than their fair share of prejudice, our islands’ interlinked histories meant they were far from complete outsiders.

Liberal-minded types often find this embarrassing. Either they try to rewrite our history, relentlessly playing up the presence of tiny minorities of Africans and Asians, or they peddle a caricature of pre-Fifties Britain as a grey, boring place, which desperately needed an injection of immigrant colour.
 
krooton said:
I recently found out that I am 1/4 black (brother found marriage certificate of my dad's parents, who were both mixed raced and kept in racially based districts in SA back in the 1930s).

1/4 Latvian
1/4 Estonian
1/4 Dutch
1/4 Unknown African

Born in SA, am a British citizen, and still speak better English than half of the country :p
Click to expand...



:p
 
Chris Wilson said:
Extract from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...couraging-mass-immigration.html#ixzz4i4xBKbm3


At this point in the argument, your standard liberal academic would typically interject to insist that Britain has always been a nation of immigrants. We all come from somewhere else anyway, they say, we are all mongrels, so how dare we close the gates to a few more?

But as Douglas Murray shows, this is a shameless rewriting of our past. For most of our history, we have never been a nation of immigrants. Even the most famous influx in our history, the Norman Conquest, involved a tiny population transfer, the equivalent of no more than 5 per cent or so.


He believes Europe’s intellectual and cultural elites, including those in Britain, have ‘lost faith in its beliefs, traditions and legitimacy’ (pictured, the Calais jungle)

As much as the BBC and other news organisations like to pretend that Britain has always been a beacon of diversity, the plain fact is that until the mid-20th century the massive, overwhelming majority of the people who lived here had been born here. Look at photo after photo from late Victorian London and the uniformly pale faces stare back at you.

The arrival of the French Huguenots in the 1680s, often cited by apostles of diversity, involved about 50,000 people, all of whom were white and Christian.

And although the Irish migrants who arrived in the 19th century faced more than their fair share of prejudice, our islands’ interlinked histories meant they were far from complete outsiders.

Liberal-minded types often find this embarrassing. Either they try to rewrite our history, relentlessly playing up the presence of tiny minorities of Africans and Asians, or they peddle a caricature of pre-Fifties Britain as a grey, boring place, which desperately needed an injection of immigrant colour.
Click to expand...
Yep, nothing new there. Reminds me of a daytime TV programme I watched where an author was talking about his book on white slavery by barbary coast pirates in the 18th century. They devoted half the feature to one case about a British woman who was kidnapped by pirates, happened to be extraordinary beautiful and so became a powerful figure in the Sultan's hareem. Yeah not too bad a fate for her, but what about the poor guys who ended up chained to a galley pulling oars for the rest of their miserable lives?
 
I for one count being British as being brought up in and around British culture. It does not bother me all that much, I don't count myself British, do not have any British ethnicity, do not look British and my first spoken language was not English. That said, my accent is a Surrey one and and speak my second language better than most English people i meet.

I think people get far too hung up on where people are born, where they're from and what they look like rather than how they behave.
 
Last edited:
Avenged7Fold said:
I for one count being British as being brought up in and around British culture. It does not bother me all that much, I don't count myself British, do not have any British ethnicity, do not look British and my first spoken language was not English. That said, my accent is a Surrey one and and speak my second language better than most English people i meet.

I think people get far too hung up on where people are born, where their from and what they look like rather than how they behave.
Click to expand...

Adam and Eve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom