1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Who should we let in - Ian Hislop BBC2

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Faustus, Jun 22, 2017.

  1. Gravitas

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 5, 2017

    Posts: 93

    And another thing - remember the mass immigration advocates making a big deal about those who warned of the numbers of Romanian and Bulgarian immigration to be expected would be considerable and they tried to make out they were wrong and made a joke of their view? This included all the mass immigration loving Left-wing comedians on TV and Radio 4. Well the most tuned in of you will be aware now of the truth of the matter: (see for further details)

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4972094/The-Mail-got-right-Romanian-Bulgarian-migration.html
     
  2. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    The amount of weasel words in the article is ridiculous. Nothing of any substance in there whatsoever.
     
  3. Freakbro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 29, 2010

    Posts: 13,712

    Location: Lincs

    You mean when Farage claimed 29 million would come and Brexiteers believed him?

    Yea, they were mocked, justifiably
     
  4. RaohNS

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Apr 23, 2004

    Posts: 8,039

    Location: In the Gym

    Fact check: Total LIE...

    He said 29million HAVE THE RIGHT TO. And he was correct in that assertion. He has stated this multiple times to correct the record. Have the good grace now to retract (I know you wont as it will admit you are openly lying ot will deliberately obfuscate)
     
  5. Freakbro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 29, 2010

    Posts: 13,712

    Location: Lincs

    Ohh, caps again, that's me totally convinced

    I know exactly what he said and I also know how the message played out to the believers, so if you want to deny the subtext he was playing on (backed up with his completely non-provocative poster) then crack on praising the false prophet, you're a lost cause.
     
  6. RaohNS

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Apr 23, 2004

    Posts: 8,039

    Location: In the Gym

    FB... You have just openly lied. He said they have the right to. Another lie proven that is readily available to be proven false but its not in keeping with the narrative. I'm still waiting for evidence of you saying he said what you claim. I'll be waiting....
     
  7. Freakbro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 29, 2010

    Posts: 13,712

    Location: Lincs

    Slight comprehension fail on your part as i'm agreeing with you, I know what he said...that they have the right to, I also know how that message played out in the typical screaming red top rags and Brexiteer narratives (aka Russian bots), for you to deny that the peddling of fear that this country was going to be flooded with millions of Romanians and Bulgarians (don't forget the Turks!!!??! - they are going to be joining the EU imminently) is just you being dishonest, but we're used to that so it doesn't matter.
     
  8. RaohNS

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Apr 23, 2004

    Posts: 8,039

    Location: In the Gym

    No you didn't:

    You made the comment and are now back peddling. How is it in any way a comprehension fail:

    You say he said 29m would come, I say he didn't (one of us is correct in their assertion. It ain't you).

    Russian bots lol. Any evidence of that? Putin is on record saying when asked about what he thought of UK Brexit"Anything I say will be manipulated. We will work with them in the EU and work with them out of EU".

    Lets not forget the Turks who are essential flooding us with the Middle East. As I said previously in another thread, this refugee crisis is an engineered one - planned by our politicians. What I lack is the means to prove it
     
  9. Freakbro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 29, 2010

    Posts: 13,712

    Location: Lincs

    I'm not back peddling anything, i'm talking about the message of project fear that was being peddled directly to Brexiteers, and you are now just dismissing all subtext of Farages campaign, he knew exactly how what he said would be talen by the brokebrains.

    In the same way when David Cameron did his speech, you had what he literally said 'The EU has helped to anchor peace and stability across the European continent by binding the continent together. The European Union has helped reconcile countries which were once at each others’ throats for decades. Britain has a fundamental national interest in maintaining common purpose in Europe to avoid future conflict between European countries" and then you had the message that was peddled by the right wing media as project fear to the Brexiteers "Voting Leave will cause WW3"

    Which message do you think was spouted?

    And you lol about Russian twitter bots? Where have you been living?
     
  10. Gravitas

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 5, 2017

    Posts: 93

    Still, in denial, eh?
     
  11. Gravitas

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 5, 2017

    Posts: 93

    Indeed. The dishonesty of the mass immigration advocates is shameful.
     
  12. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    Still can't find an article able to actually cite any real evidence?
     
  13. MatteH Oxford

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010

    Posts: 1,498

    Location: Wiltshire

    The Polish builders on site are moaning that the Romanians are undercutting them and 'taking their jobs'. Bloody racists.
     
  14. RaohNS

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Apr 23, 2004

    Posts: 8,039

    Location: In the Gym

    Thanks. *tips hat*.

    Reminds me of CRAZYs posts running up to the election. While I am not against immigration per se it cannot be in the millions. It must be in the thousands and only essential or those who are conclusively at risk eg Christians in the ME
     
  15. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 3,628

    Immigration has never been in the millions, so congratulations - you've got what you want right now.
     
  16. Gravitas

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 5, 2017

    Posts: 93

    Immigration has been running at around half a million a year for some time.
     
  17. Gravitas

    Associate

    Joined: Oct 5, 2017

    Posts: 93

  18. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    Which is a number conspicuously not in the millions.
     
  19. Vonhelmet

    Caporegime

    Joined: Jun 28, 2005

    Posts: 48,116

    Location: On the hoods

    Go on then, show me what's going on. And no, criminals committing crimes over there and then coming here, while a cunning loophole and doubtless a problem, doesn't count. Show me evidence of migrants being a net problem for this country.
     
  20. Caracus2k

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 27, 2009

    Posts: 3,672

    If it was 'in the millions' (annually) we would be like Germany in 2015.... not exactly a model to follow

    To put the actual numbers into context in 2016 there was just under 700 thousand births in England and Wales which constitute the bulk of the UK population (around 90%)... 'official' net immigration 'fell' that year to just under 250 thousand in the UK... of course quite a high percentage of those children born, over a quarter (for England and Wales), are now being born to a foreign mother....

    So nice try at downplaying net migration and its demographic effects on the UK... we are now in a situation where well over 50% of the 'new' population growth, per annum, is either migrants or the children of a migrant....

    (I base this figure on the following calcs using some rounded and extrapolated figures... note I have underestimated the amount of children born to a foreign mother which is actually 2.5 percentage points above 25% for England and Wales which after all account for around 90% of the population so I think this should more than account for any rounding the other way - 700k births for England and Wales = about 778K for the whole of the UK and N.Ireland if the birth rate is around the same...... 250k net migration in a period where was a reduction on previous years + a quarter of live births (using the percentage figure for England and Wales for the whole UK and N.Ireland) is circa 445 thousand!

    and to make matters even more stark I'm using net migration not just the inward flow which is well over 500k even by the official figures.... A fair few of those leaving the UK will be those with long ancestries in these islands heading to countries abroad...

    It really isn't some crackpot conspiracy theory that the population of these islands who have ancestry stretching back before the 1940's will soon be in the distinct minority on these islands...

    So my question to anyone who thinks that this is a good idea is...... can you name a country of anything like a similar size to the UK where a relatively long standing population received a net benefit from a demographic change where in the time period of no longer then a single human life...

    (say circa 70 years... and lets no kid ourselves most of the 50%+ changes I cite above is actually due to the actions of the last 20 years not 70)

    ....the demographics changed so that more than 50% of the 'new' population growth per year was from migrants or their children....


    Trying to be smart by citing something like the UAE countries, where a considerable proportion of the resident population (if not actually people with a generally unqualified right to remain) at any one time are foreigners, won't work because they (foreigners in the UAE) have pretty much no right to remain in the UAE countries and are mostly (around 85%) poorly paid transient workers mostly from South Asia, often without their families, who will almost universally return to their countries of birth... some of the immigrants in the UK may return to the countries of birth or another country but generally the UK authorities have no power to force this like the UAE countries can and would if they so desired...

    In a similar fashion using 'City' states like Hong Kong, Singapore etc isn't going to be very convincing as they are hardly comparable to a relatively geographically sizable, long standing nation like the UK (or its constituent countries) which had sizeable populations of people almost universally with ancestry dating back many hundreds if not thousands of years prior to the 1950's

    ....'physician heal thyself?' Perhaps you would care to critique the actual article rather than just solely relying on vacuously attacking the messenger without taking on the message?

    Well I suppose you can rather stupidly show that (EU) migrants pay more in taxes then they receive in welfare and benefits payments from the government (which seems to rather ignore the point that the rest of their taxes isn't just banked by the country but like the rest of us has to fund infrastructure, schools, pensions for the elderly - which immigrants will themselves largely become one day, the NHS, etc)***... and I suppose you can get aboard the GDP Ponzi scheme whereby importing migrants is a useful tool for inflating net GDP if not necessarily GDP per capita .....

    But how do you weight the downsides like increased inability to domestically feed the population, increased environmental degradation, overcrowding, shortages of housing stock, increased racial, religious and cultural tensions, strain on existing infrastructure/ services and depressed wages especially at the low/unskilled end of the market? (not an exhaustive list)


    *** - please note that the government is now and has been for some time spending more money than it receives in tax receipts
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2017