Why the UKIP will never work....

[CamMoreRon]

XJ Flyer said:

CamMoreRon said:

Why is a segregated society with black people / black police and white people / white police the option you choose, rather than.. I dunno.. getting some of the apalling racists out of the police force?

There's a good documentary on Netflix called The House I Live In. You should watch it.

I don't generally believe in all the socialist inspired integrationist propaganda and that would be part of it.

The way I see it it is the black community that is making all the issues about it being a colour motivated shooting.The kid was pointing a replica gun at people and not surprisingly,considering the society,got shot.What difference does colour make in that case.Assuming the 'black' community has 'issues' in that regard then black policing of black segretated areas is the obvious answer and sooner or later will inevitably have to be the chosen method used to deal with it.

You mean you aren't prepared to listen to something that could change the way you think.

You're wrong. You really need to start looking in to some of the heavy-handed / excessive / targeted policing that goes on in black communities over in the 'States. You're making the standard mistake of seeing high crime in "black areas" as the cause and heavy-handed policing as the result, but the problem is massively more complex than that. Some "socialist" "propaganda" videos would do you good.

(BTW you still don't know what "socialist" means)

[Scuffers]

Problem is no matter how you shake it, 80%+ of violent crime there is perpetrated by black youths.

It's extremely hard to be ethically blind when the facts on the ground are not.

[vonuber]

don4l said:

I was under the impression that you were a hydrologist... and that you contributed to the flooding in the Somerset Levels.

You are completely wrong then. I am a civil engineer specialising in flooding and drainage. I have nothing to do with anything in Somerset apart from trying to add some informed opinion to the debate, which often seems to be a complete waste of time on pistonheads.

[vonuber]

sidicks said:

Not true

Yes it is and I clearly explained why.

As for the rest of your post, of course you will get bad apples among the bunch. However overall, historically immigration has been a massive benefit to the UK and has contributed to British culture in innumerable ways.
To argue otherwise is to be deliberately blind to history.

[BGARK]

vonuber said:

blind to history.

Over the last 1000 years, or over the last 10.

[sidicks]

vonuber said:

Yes it is and I clearly explained why.

I disagree.

vonuber said:

As for the rest of your post, of course you will get bad apples among the bunch.

This has nothing to do with 'bad apples' - the fact that you don't understand that explains a lot.

vonuber said:

However overall, historically immigration has been a massive benefit to the UK and has contributed to British culture in innumerable ways.

Some has, some hasn't. Not quite sure why you are still struggling with this basic fact.

vonuber said:

To argue otherwise is to be deliberately blind to history.

I think you:
A) need to understand history in more detail
B) need to understand that what has worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future - things are different
C) need to understand the difference between controlled and uncontrolled immigration

[King Cnut]

Scuffers said:

Problem is no matter how you shake it, 80%+ of violent crime there is perpetrated by black youths.

It's extremely hard to be ethically blind when the facts on the ground are not.

Statistics show that the vast majority of sexual crimes are committed by males against females. According to these statistics you represent a constant risk to the 30 million females living in the UK as long as you remain male. The facts on the ground suggest you require gender reassignment surgery in order to mitigate any further risk.

[vonuber]

sidicks said:

I disagree.

Well that's your prerogative.

sidicks said:

This has nothing to do with 'bad apples' - the fact that you don't understand that explains a lot.

sidicks said:

Some has, some hasn't. Not quite sure why you are still struggling with this basic fact.

I am not struggling with anything. I am perfectly aware of the impacts of immigration, I suggest that on the whole it has been a benefit for the UK.

sidicks said:

I think you:
A) need to understand history in more detail
B) need to understand that what has worked in the past won't necessarily work in the future - things are different
C) need to understand the difference between controlled and uncontrolled immigration

You do realise that your posting comes across as unnecessarily condescending and antagonistic? It's like you are deliberately trying to get people annoyed and rise to your bait.
I understand perfectly all these things - I can't see the benefit in allowing certain sections of the Pakistani community to come here bringing their frankly horrendous customs and practices to this country. However, this is obviously not all Pakistanis.
However, as I have stated - under UKIP policies some of my grandparents would not have been allowed to settle - despite their subsequent future benefit to this country.

As an aside, even worse in Mr Tebbit's view, one of them fought for the Germans..

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/28/lor...

[WinstonWolf]

King said:

Scuffers said:

Problem is no matter how you shake it, 80%+ of violent crime there is perpetrated by black youths.

It's extremely hard to be ethically blind when the facts on the ground are not.

Statistics show that the vast majority of sexual crimes are committed by males against females. According to these statistics you represent a constant risk to the 30 million females living in the UK as long as you remain male. The facts on the ground suggest you require gender reassignment surgery in order to mitigate any further risk.

I didn't realise brain transplant donors could survive the procedure...

[BGARK]

King said:

Statistics show that the vast majority of sexual crimes are committed by males against females. According to these statistics you represent a constant risk to the 30 million females living in the UK as long as you remain male. The facts on the ground suggest you require gender reassignment surgery in order to mitigate any further risk.

Have you looked at the USA statistics for who (as a percentile of population) is responsible for most rapes and violent crime. the trend hasn't changed much in 50 years.

[Yazar]

vonuber said:

But here's the thing - they all went on to have jobs, pay their taxes and work hard - to my eventual benefit having been able to go to university and become a civil engineer to contribute to the improvement of this country.
If UKIP had their way such a thing would not be possible.
People moan about what immigrants contribute to this country - I am an example of what they can and do contribute.

And UKIP's polices get such contempt because they are contemptible.

Is that really your argument? Is this a serious post or are you having a laugh.

[Randy Winkman]

Scuffers said:

Problem is no matter how you shake it, 80%+ of violent crime there is perpetrated by black youths.

It's extremely hard to be ethically blind when the facts on the ground are not.

What are the "facts" about why they end up committing that amount of crime?

[NicD]

Randy Winkman said:

What are the "facts" about why they end up committing that amount of crime?

how could the 'why' ever be a 'fact'?

[XJ Flyer]

wc98 said:

CamMoreRon said:

XJ Flyer said:

CamMoreRon said:

Who are these socialists you're referring to? .

The idea of the world living as one without borders or nation states and anyone who believes in an ethnic integrationist agenda with an immigration policy to match is usually a good sign.I should know because I was one for a ( very ) short time before reality and intelligence kicked in.

So basically, intelligence tells you that everyone should be segregated, culturally and perhaps physically?

You know we are all one species living on a thinly crusted ball of molten rock, hurtling through a near-perfect and infinite vacuum with as good as zero control and other places to go.. right? So why is the idea of trying to shape society so that all cultures / traditions / beliefs are able to live amongst each other without major conflict such a bad one?

You're also confused about what socialism is.

Socialism said:

Socialism is a social and economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy, as well as a political theory and movement that aims at the establishment of such a system.

recently you have been posting a fair bit of stuff i agree with, i would also agree with this if it actually happened in real life. what we currently see is large enclaves of people that have no interest in living in a "multi cultural " society,what they do is create areas that are a home from home with very little interaction with the indigenous population.
this appears to be more prevalent in recent years ,in the past with lower levels people had no choice but to mix and interact with the locals in whichever area they lived in.

The type of interaction which you've described in your latter example is just one small specific type of immigration which long ago ceased to be the case here.

What we've got is ( understandably ) something very similar to the situation in parts of America before the 1924 Immigration act was implemented which reflects the former IE enclaves and localised foreign societies.Which is fine and actually better for all concerned than the former especially when immigration reaches numbers where such enclaves become viable.

'But' obviously having said that ther is a point where those enclaves become too large and a destabilising influence on the cohesion and national interests of the host nation.Especially 'if' any of those enclaves and localised majorities turn hostile.

In which case something along the lines of the US 1924 Immigration act there and keeping all options open regarding repatriation is the way to fix that.

As for 'Multi' Cultural 'Society' no that is a contadiction.'Culture' 'also' means 'Society' so when we talk about 'multi' cultural that by definition 'also' means 'multi' 'societal' hence those enclaves.The question then being how many enclaves are we willing to accept and how large are we willing for those enclaves to become before we have to call a halt and reverse the situation.

[XJ Flyer]

CamMoreRon said:

XJ Flyer said:

CamMoreRon said:

Why is a segregated society with black people / black police and white people / white police the option you choose, rather than.. I dunno.. getting some of the apalling racists out of the police force?

There's a good documentary on Netflix called The House I Live In. You should watch it.

I don't generally believe in all the socialist inspired integrationist propaganda and that would be part of it.

The way I see it it is the black community that is making all the issues about it being a colour motivated shooting.The kid was pointing a replica gun at people and not surprisingly,considering the society,got shot.What difference does colour make in that case.Assuming the 'black' community has 'issues' in that regard then black policing of black segretated areas is the obvious answer and sooner or later will inevitably have to be the chosen method used to deal with it.

You mean you aren't prepared to listen to something that could change the way you think.

You're wrong. You really need to start looking in to some of the heavy-handed / excessive / targeted policing that goes on in black communities over in the 'States. You're making the standard mistake of seeing high crime in "black areas" as the cause and heavy-handed policing as the result, but the problem is massively more complex than that. Some "socialist" "propaganda" videos would do you good.

(BTW you still don't know what "socialist" means)

Just like the similar issues we've had here 'targeted' in this case means 'police',regardless of their colour,targeting 'criminals' who just happen to be black.It is obviously the so called black communities who then want to turn that into a colour issue to suit their own agenda.Which in this case is the contradictory idea that they want to 'integrate' with the so called 'white' community but they still live in enclaves and they don't want to be policed by 'white' coppers who I'm sure given the choice don't want to police the black community and are quite happy with the idea of enclaves which reflect the two different cultures too.In which case the answer is obvious.Integration doesn't work segregation does which just then leaves the question of black policing of black areas to keep everyone happy.Just as the fact that there is a historically large Irish police representation in certain parts of America where there were/are large Irish enclaves is no coincidence.

As for me I know exactly what socialist ideology means in terms of its ethnic integrationist agenda because I was one before I knew better.

Edited by XJ Flyer on Saturday 29th November 15:37

Edited by XJ Flyer on Saturday 29th November 15:43

[Yazar]

XJ Flyer said:

integration doesn't work segregation does

Aside from the volumes question, are not all other immigration issues caused by the lack of integration?

If, for example, you bring in thousands of poor, uneducated villagers from another country, like we have, and stick them all together, how can they learn to raise their standards to the 1st world and learn from us? Segregation is exactly why many migrants survive fine in the UK without ever speaking English and stick to the ways they know.

To address your current topic for example- In Africa there are a high number of single parents, this culture still remains in the western world black communities generations on.

[don4l]

vonuber said:

don4l said:

I was under the impression that you were a hydrologist... and that you contributed to the flooding in the Somerset Levels.

You are completely wrong then. I am a civil engineer specialising in flooding and drainage. I have nothing to do with anything in Somerset apart from trying to add some informed opinion to the debate, which often seems to be a complete waste of time on pistonheads.

Fair enough!

At the risk of being wrong again, I presume that you have a degree.


May I ask what subject you studied, and which university you attended?

I'll be completely open about the reasons for my question. I have a strong suspicion that EU regulations are influencing university courses.

[FiF]

don4l said:

vonuber said:

don4l said:

I was under the impression that you were a hydrologist... and that you contributed to the flooding in the Somerset Levels.

You are completely wrong then. I am a civil engineer specialising in flooding and drainage. I have nothing to do with anything in Somerset apart from trying to add some informed opinion to the debate, which often seems to be a complete waste of time on pistonheads.

Fair enough!

At the risk of being wrong again, I presume that you have a degree.


May I ask what subject you studied, and which university you attended?

I'll be completely open about the reasons for my question. I have a strong suspicion that EU regulations are influencing university courses.

To be fair Don the guy made some pretty good contributions to the Somerset flooding thread and did not seem to me to have any slant to his postings other than cutting through the histrionics from both sides.

Also just to add he kept his temper when confronted with ill mannered abuse like we see on these threads.

Edited by FiF on Saturday 29th November 20:39

[Scuffers]

Randy Winkman said:

Scuffers said:

Problem is no matter how you shake it, 80%+ of violent crime there is perpetrated by black youths.

It's extremely hard to be ethically blind when the facts on the ground are not.

What are the "facts" about why they end up committing that amount of crime?

I have no idea, i'm not a cultural psychologist.

I'm sure there a million theories as to why, and i am also sure that most of them are complete crap

[JustAnotherLogin]

Scuffers said:

Problem is no matter how you shake it, 80%+ of violent crime there is perpetrated by black youths.

It's extremely hard to be ethically blind when the facts on the ground are not.

Where?

Not in the UK I don't think

Are you talking about somewhere else or is your lack of colour-blindness bling you to the truth?

It is of course well above the figure you would expect for the proportion of population, just not 80%+ unless you can show me different statistics from the ones I have seen. But then the victims of such crime are also black, by a similar proportion.

And the perpetrators of white collar crime (fraud, bribery, corruption) are predominantly white. So instead of assuming that one ethnic group is more prone to violence, perhaps it would be worth considering that criminals in each group use the best means at their disposal.