Immigrants !

I mentioned this a week or so ago in another thread (but do you think I can remember which one or how to find it?? Nooooo....has to be an age thing....ick....) -- the London riots and what the hell was going on in Tottenham (I wrote it as Tottingham at the time...my bad!).

Have been following the news about all that a bit since and how the riots have spread to other centres and how the general view is that the mayhem has absolutely nothing to to do with a black man being shot and killed by police (and anyway, it has been reported he was a criminal/gang member anyway) and everything to do with plain out-and-out looting and general yob-ism.

I don't understand how anyone could participate in destroying their own neighbourhood...really speaks to the lack of brain power such individuals possess, don't you think?

A few commentators here have suggested the army should be, or should have been, sent in with orders to shoot looters on sight. Not sure how that would have gone over but I can bet it would have soon put an end to the looting, fires, and killings. Of course, if a soldier did shoot and kill a looter screams of 'racism' would have erupted all over the place!!! Hmmmm...so why is it almost all these assholes are young men of colour? There is a culture here, and we see it here too, of arrogance and swagger and violence amongst this population, the affecting of gang clothing and attitude, vulgar jewelry ('bling'), disrespect for everybody and everything but an absolute demand they don't be "disrespected" (or 'dissed')....oh, piss on that!!!!

Somewhere along the line, a generation has come up that seems to believe it is perfectly acceptable, and are shocked when confronted on this, to be rude and obnoxious to anyone they choose to be rude and obnoxious to and if you refuse to allow it, it's YOU who is being rude or, my favourite!!!, you are accused of being 'racist'. Usually as in "Yo! You's a racist!!"

You's???? It's 'You're', you ignorant dolt!!!! They drive me halfway to distraction (I can usually walk the rest of the way LOL).

I certainly get the same grief off some of the white kids, don't get me wrong. But I find it interesting that the white kids I get this guff off of A) hang around with the kids of colour and B) have affected the same baggy clothes and cap worn askew American innercity gangbangers wear and the style of talking ("Hey, Yo...dude! Wassup??"). And yes, I know, every "older generation" thinks the "younger generation" is ridiculous and going to hell in a handbasket -- I still remember my teen years, after all!!! But we were never like this! (oh gawd, I'm channeling my mother!!).

The current riots in UK certainly appear to be perpetuated by 2nd and even 3rd generation immigrants. But, regardless, the little sh*** need to be prosecuted severely. That their images are now being broadcast all over the Net is excellent. Authorities did the same thing following the recent post-Cup riots in Vancouver and managed to nab a few of these scum.

And they ARE scum. No one wakes up one morning and suddenly turns into a rioter and looter. Doing these things speaks to a certain mindset, a certain way of being. Sociopaths is what most of them are!

Out of bad always come good! The good thing about all this civil disobedience is that it is a wake up call to the Government and the Police, it is now time for the decent members of this Country to reclaim the streets. It's over to Mr Cameron to now get his priorities sorted and to do this he must start at the very top of our Establishment who should be leading by example.

i wish people would stop picking on those disadvantaged people from Africa/ Jamaca and other equally disadvantaged countries,dont you you relise all they want is a mansion to live in rent free,of course,a wedge of mony every week,[ next they will want weed on priscription,] as has already been said now the little white boys are trying emulate the blacks. please dont get me wrong i am not a racist, i hate all immigrants regardless of colour. the trouble with this country to-day is the do-gooders and i am all right jack brigade.
PS could rant for longer but i will wait for the flack to die down on this one first.

From what I observed on the news, the majority of non-whites who took part in the riots last week are not Immigrants, but people who have been born and educated in the United Kingdom,and speak with a London or regional accent. I too am not a racist!!!

Quote :

i hate all immigrants regardless

Thats a bit harsh is it not..?and your whole post sounds rather racist to me...
There are a number of immigrants in my area ,both white and coloured,and all in gainful employment

Gordon. wrote:

Quote :

i hate all immigrants regardless

Thats a bit harsh is it not..?and your whole post sounds rather racist to me...
There are a number of immigrants in my area ,both white and coloured,and all in gainful employment

whilst the immigrants are gainfully employed the british are willingley cultivating the culture of living on benefits, [ i have a family of them next door to me,white British 2 kids no jobs.] the money for thier life style comes from the pot you, i, and thousands like us who paid into that pot, stop the benefit system and stop immigration and make the british work.this country has been sending money to africa since the mid 60s at least [ biafra ],and guess what the do gooders still want more,let them fend for themselves, and if that makes me racist so be it.

Quote :

[ biafra ],

No longer exists.Was East Nigeria (the best part IMO) untill General Gowan crushed it in the civil war.

Quote :

the british are willingley cultivating the culture of living on benefits,

I thought that`s what Cameron and his cohorts were trying to stop, and making an utter arse of it.

just like that ad for the british army in the 70s join the army see the world and meet interesting people the british govt should advertise britain.

"WELCOME TO THE UK THE LAND OF OPPORTUNITY A LAND FOR THE FREE TO COME INTO
DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU HAVE A JOB COME TO THE UK LAND OF THE FREE
FREE HOUSING
FREE MONEY
FREE HEALTH CARE (INC DENTAL)
IN FACT EVERY THING FREE FOR THE DISCERNING IMMIGRANT THE UK WELCOMES YOU ONE
AND ALL WE HOPE YOUR LIFE IN BRITAIN IS WHAT YOU WANT IT TO BE . IF YOU ARE OF BRITISH ORIGIN AND WORK HARD THE RULES DO NOT APPLY TO YOU
HAVE A NICE STAY IN YOUR NEW COUNTRY"

Immigrant Interview
"welcome to England"
"yes"
"how long do you intend to stay"?
"yes"
"do you have some where to live"?
"no"
"do you have a job " ?
"no"
"have you got any money"?
"no"
"are you a tit"?
"yes"
"do you know the benefit system"?
"yes"
"do you want a house, money , health care and anything else we can offer you"?
"yes"
"do you speak English"?
"no"
"are you a criminal"
"yes"
"dickhead"
"yes "
"welcome to Britain"
"yes"

john boy, the only part of your post i would question is your statement " welcome to britain " i think that has been changed recently to " welcome to treasure island "

gallahad wrote:

From what I observed on the news, the majority of non-whites who took part in the riots last week are not Immigrants, but people who have been born and educated in the United Kingdom,and speak with a London or regional accent. I too am not a racist!!!

This is the thing....the young, mostly men, of colour who rioted WERE born, raised and educated in UK. While I understand some areas of the country, and London itself, are economically depressed and sordid places with little to no opportunity for the current generation, and that in turn is bound to breed a certain degree of frustration and disenfranchisement and re-inforce a "Us and Them" mentality. And I know there is a level of racism, often quite overt, when it comes to getting jobs that mean anything (apart from "all work is honourable"....mind-numbing and soul destroying, but "honourable") and there's enough...hmmmm...blame, for lack of a better word, to go around on all sides.

I also understand it is comparatively easy for me as a white, somewhat middleclass, middle-aged male to sit back and say "make your own opportunity! You had the same education as everyone else, etc etc etc". While true, it doesn't take into account the crushing disadvantage of having a certain accent, for instance, or coming from the East End instead of a nice town in Sussex or Kent or Suffolk. Then of course there is the obvious and unavoidable issue of someone walking in for an interview and being clearly black, Asian, South Asian or whatever; shot out of the running right from the get go!

So, maybe this is my white liberal brain talking (although not as liberal as I once was!), but I can't help but think instead of affecting 'gangsta' style and ways of behaving, aim for something better. There is this whole mindset, and has been for generations, that for a person of colour to aim to better themselves means they take on airs, "act white", are "Oreos" (black on the outside and white in the inside), don't know their place, etc. Such rot.

But it's not just people of colour who go through that. Anglo British with broad working-class accents who try and move up into the middle class, get some post-secondary education, etc. are often hampered by class issues....and those class issues play a role in this situation as well as colour/race. If they try and alter the accent from "Aye oo" to "Rahther" they get accused of going all "posh" and putting on airs. What's that British comedy about the suburban housewife who came from nothing and is now a middleclass snob who insists her married name be pronouned "Boof-ay" not "Buffet" when it damn bloody well is "Buffet". Quite a funny show but also hits a note and reflects a very specific reality.

I'm probably preaching to the choir on that!!

I also understand it is comparatively easy for me as a white, somewhat middleclass, middle-aged male to sit back and say "make your own opportunity! You had the same education as everyone else, etc etc etc". While true, it doesn't take into account the crushing disadvantage of having a certain accent, for instance, or coming from the East End instead of a nice town in Sussex or Kent or Suffolk. Then of course there is the obvious and unavoidable issue of someone walking in for an interview and being clearly black, Asian, South Asian or whatever; shot out of the running right from the get go!

So, maybe this is my white liberal brain talking (although not as liberal as I once was!), but I can't help but think instead of affecting 'gangsta' style and ways of behaving, aim for something better. There is this whole mindset, and has been for generations, that for a person of colour to aim to better themselves means they take on airs, "act white", are "Oreos" (black on the outside and white in the inside), don't know their place, etc. Such rot.

But it's not just people of colour who go through that. Anglo British with broad working-class accents who try and move up into the middle class, get some post-secondary education, etc. are often hampered by class issues....and those class issues play a role in this situation as well as colour/race. If they try and alter the accent from "Aye oo" to "Rahther" they get accused of going all "posh" and putting on airs. What's that British comedy about the suburban housewife who came from nothing and is now a middleclass snob who insists her married name be pronouned "Boof-ay" not "Buffet" when it damn bloody well is "Buffet". Quite a funny show but also hits a note and reflects a very specific reality.

I'm probably preaching to the choir on that!!



[/quote]

Well that seems to sort our country out then Stephen !

I daresay I'll eventually find out what an "Oreo" is.

The comedy show ? That'll be "Bouquet" instead of "Bucket" I think.

its all clement attlees fault, he started immigration in 48.ginger

brum an oreo is a bisuit,me and my working class accent.

Don't tell me, I bet they're Yank !

brum wrote:

The comedy show ? That'll be "Bouquet" instead of "Bucket" I think.

Correct Brum.

Some thing sent onto me by an old Royal Sigs bud. Makes for interesting reading.


British rioters the spawn of a bankrupt ruling elite
Theodore Dalrymple
From: The Australian
August 11, 2011 12:00AM

THE riots in London and elsewhere in Britain are a backhanded tribute to the
long-term intellectual torpor, moral cowardice, incompetence and careerist
opportunism of the British political and intellectual class.
They have somehow managed not to notice what has long been apparent to
anyone who has taken a short walk with his eyes open down any frequented
British street: that a considerable proportion of the country's young
population (a proportion that is declining) is ugly, aggressive, vicious,
badly educated, uncouth and criminally inclined.
Unfortunately, while it is totally lacking in self-respect, it is full of
self-esteem: that is to say, it believes itself entitled to a high standard
of living, and other things, without any effort on its own part.
Consider for a moment the following: although youth unemployment in Britain
is very high, that is to say about 20 per cent of those aged under 25, the
country has had to import young foreign labour for a long time, even for
unskilled work in the service sector.
The reasons for this seeming paradox are obvious to anyone who knows young
Britons as I do.
No sensible employer in a service industry would choose a young Briton if he
could have a young Pole; the young Pole is not only likely to have a good
work ethic and refined manners, he is likely to be able to add up and --
most humiliating of all -- to speak better English than the Briton, at least
if by that we mean the standard variety of the language. He may not be more
fluent but his English will be more correct and his accent easier to
understand.
This is not an exaggeration. After compulsory education (or perhaps I should
say intermittent attendance at school) up to the age of 16 costing $80,000 a
head, about one-quarter of British children cannot read with facility or do
simple arithmetic. It makes you proud to be a British taxpayer.
I think I can say with a fair degree of certainty, from my experience as a
doctor in one of the areas in which a police station has just been burned
down, that half of those rioting would reply to the question, "Can you do
arithmetic?" by answering, "What is arithmetic?"
British youth leads the Western world in almost all aspects of social
pathology, from teenage pregnancy to drug taking, from drunkenness to
violent criminality. There is no form of bad behaviour that our version of
the welfare state has not sought out and subsidised.
British children are much likelier to have a television in their bedroom
than a father living at home. One-third of them never eat a meal at a table
with another member of their household -- family is not the word for the
social arrangements of the people in the areas from which the rioters mainly
come. They are therefore radically unsocialised and deeply egotistical,
viewing relations with other human beings in the same way as Lenin: Who
whom, who does what to whom. By the time they grow up, they are destined not
only for unemployment but unemployability.
For young women in much of Britain, dependence does not mean dependence on
the government: that, for them, is independence. Dependence means any kind
of reliance on the men who have impregnated them who, of course, regard
their own subventions from the state as pocket money, to be supplemented by
a little light trafficking. (According to his brother, Mark Duggan, the man
whose death at the hands of the probably incompetent police allegedly
sparked the riots, "was involved in things", which things being delicately
left to the imagination of his interlocutor.)
Relatively poor as the rioting sector of society is, it nevertheless
possesses all the electronic equipment necessary for the prosecution of the
main business of life; that is to say, entertainment by popular culture. And
what a culture British popular culture is!
Perhaps Amy Winehouse was its finest flower and its truest representative in
her militant and ideological vulgarity, her stupid taste, her vile personal
conduct and preposterous self-pity.
Her sordid life was a long bath in vomitus, literal and metaphorical, for
which the exercise of her very minor talent was no excuse or explanation.
Yet not a peep of dissent from our intelllectual class was heard after her
near canonisation after her death, that class having long had the backbone
of a mollusc.
Criminality is scarcely repressed any more in Britain. The last lord chief
justice but two thought that burglary was a minor offence, not worthy of
imprisonment, and the next chief justice agreed with him.
By the age of 12, an ordinary slum-dweller has learned he has nothing to
fear from the law and the only people to fear are those who are stronger or
more ruthless than he.
Punishments are derisory; the police are simultaneously bullying but
ineffectual and incompetent, increasingly dressed in paraphernalia that
makes them look more like the occupiers of Afghanistan than the force
imagined by Robert Peel. The people who most fear our police are the
innocent.
Of course, none of this reduces the personal responsibility of the rioters.
But the riots are a manifestation of a society in full decomposition, of a
people with neither leaders nor followers but composed only of egotists.

Someone finally takes control of the UK riots .

Quote :

British rioters the spawn of a bankrupt ruling elite
Theodore Dalrymple
From: The Australian
August 11, 2011 12:00AM

THE riots in London and elsewhere in Britain are a backhanded tribute to the
long-term intellectual torpor, moral cowardice, incompetence and careerist
opportunism of the British political and intellectual class.
They have somehow managed not to notice what has long been apparent to
anyone who has taken a short walk with his eyes open down any frequented
British street: that a considerable proportion of the country's young
population (a proportion that is declining) is ugly, aggressive, vicious,
badly educated, uncouth and criminally inclined.
Unfortunately, while it is totally lacking in self-respect, it is full of
self-esteem: that is to say, it believes itself entitled to a high standard
of living, and other things, without any effort on its own part.
Consider for a moment the following: although youth unemployment in Britain
is very high, that is to say about 20 per cent of those aged under 25, the
country has had to import young foreign labour for a long time, even for
unskilled work in the service sector.
The reasons for this seeming paradox are obvious to anyone who knows young
Britons as I do.
No sensible employer in a service industry would choose a young Briton if he
could have a young Pole; the young Pole is not only likely to have a good
work ethic and refined manners, he is likely to be able to add up and --
most humiliating of all -- to speak better English than the Briton, at least
if by that we mean the standard variety of the language. He may not be more
fluent but his English will be more correct and his accent easier to
understand.
This is not an exaggeration. After compulsory education (or perhaps I should
say intermittent attendance at school) up to the age of 16 costing $80,000 a
head, about one-quarter of British children cannot read with facility or do
simple arithmetic. It makes you proud to be a British taxpayer.
I think I can say with a fair degree of certainty, from my experience as a
doctor in one of the areas in which a police station has just been burned
down, that half of those rioting would reply to the question, "Can you do
arithmetic?" by answering, "What is arithmetic?"
British youth leads the Western world in almost all aspects of social
pathology, from teenage pregnancy to drug taking, from drunkenness to
violent criminality. There is no form of bad behaviour that our version of
the welfare state has not sought out and subsidised.
British children are much likelier to have a television in their bedroom
than a father living at home. One-third of them never eat a meal at a table
with another member of their household -- family is not the word for the
social arrangements of the people in the areas from which the rioters mainly
come. They are therefore radically unsocialised and deeply egotistical,
viewing relations with other human beings in the same way as Lenin: Who
whom, who does what to whom. By the time they grow up, they are destined not
only for unemployment but unemployability.
For young women in much of Britain, dependence does not mean dependence on
the government: that, for them, is independence. Dependence means any kind
of reliance on the men who have impregnated them who, of course, regard
their own subventions from the state as pocket money, to be supplemented by
a little light trafficking. (According to his brother, Mark Duggan, the man
whose death at the hands of the probably incompetent police allegedly
sparked the riots, "was involved in things", which things being delicately
left to the imagination of his interlocutor.)
Relatively poor as the rioting sector of society is, it nevertheless
possesses all the electronic equipment necessary for the prosecution of the
main business of life; that is to say, entertainment by popular culture. And
what a culture British popular culture is!
Perhaps Amy Winehouse was its finest flower and its truest representative in
her militant and ideological vulgarity, her stupid taste, her vile personal
conduct and preposterous self-pity.
Her sordid life was a long bath in vomitus, literal and metaphorical, for
which the exercise of her very minor talent was no excuse or explanation.
Yet not a peep of dissent from our intelllectual class was heard after her
near canonisation after her death, that class having long had the backbone
of a mollusc.
Criminality is scarcely repressed any more in Britain. The last lord chief
justice but two thought that burglary was a minor offence, not worthy of
imprisonment, and the next chief justice agreed with him.
By the age of 12, an ordinary slum-dweller has learned he has nothing to
fear from the law and the only people to fear are those who are stronger or
more ruthless than he.
Punishments are derisory; the police are simultaneously bullying but
ineffectual and incompetent, increasingly dressed in paraphernalia that
makes them look more like the occupiers of Afghanistan than the force
imagined by Robert Peel. The people who most fear our police are the
innocent.
Of course, none of this reduces the personal responsibility of the rioters.
But the riots are a manifestation of a society in full decomposition, of a
people with neither leaders nor followers but composed only of egotists.

There`s a lot of truth in there.

Gordon. wrote:

Quote :

British rioters the spawn of a bankrupt ruling elite
Theodore Dalrymple
From: The Australian
August 11, 2011 12:00AM

THE riots in London and elsewhere in Britain are a backhanded tribute to the
long-term intellectual torpor, moral cowardice, incompetence and careerist
opportunism of the British political and intellectual class.
They have somehow managed not to notice what has long been apparent to
anyone who has taken a short walk with his eyes open down any frequented
British street: that a considerable proportion of the country's young
population (a proportion that is declining) is ugly, aggressive, vicious,
badly educated, uncouth and criminally inclined.
Unfortunately, while it is totally lacking in self-respect, it is full of
self-esteem: that is to say, it believes itself entitled to a high standard
of living, and other things, without any effort on its own part.
Consider for a moment the following: although youth unemployment in Britain
is very high, that is to say about 20 per cent of those aged under 25, the
country has had to import young foreign labour for a long time, even for
unskilled work in the service sector.
The reasons for this seeming paradox are obvious to anyone who knows young
Britons as I do.
No sensible employer in a service industry would choose a young Briton if he
could have a young Pole; the young Pole is not only likely to have a good
work ethic and refined manners, he is likely to be able to add up and --
most humiliating of all -- to speak better English than the Briton, at least
if by that we mean the standard variety of the language. He may not be more
fluent but his English will be more correct and his accent easier to
understand.
This is not an exaggeration. After compulsory education (or perhaps I should
say intermittent attendance at school) up to the age of 16 costing $80,000 a
head, about one-quarter of British children cannot read with facility or do
simple arithmetic. It makes you proud to be a British taxpayer.
I think I can say with a fair degree of certainty, from my experience as a
doctor in one of the areas in which a police station has just been burned
down, that half of those rioting would reply to the question, "Can you do
arithmetic?" by answering, "What is arithmetic?"
British youth leads the Western world in almost all aspects of social
pathology, from teenage pregnancy to drug taking, from drunkenness to
violent criminality. There is no form of bad behaviour that our version of
the welfare state has not sought out and subsidised.
British children are much likelier to have a television in their bedroom
than a father living at home. One-third of them never eat a meal at a table
with another member of their household -- family is not the word for the
social arrangements of the people in the areas from which the rioters mainly
come. They are therefore radically unsocialised and deeply egotistical,
viewing relations with other human beings in the same way as Lenin: Who
whom, who does what to whom. By the time they grow up, they are destined not
only for unemployment but unemployability.
For young women in much of Britain, dependence does not mean dependence on
the government: that, for them, is independence. Dependence means any kind
of reliance on the men who have impregnated them who, of course, regard
their own subventions from the state as pocket money, to be supplemented by
a little light trafficking. (According to his brother, Mark Duggan, the man
whose death at the hands of the probably incompetent police allegedly
sparked the riots, "was involved in things", which things being delicately
left to the imagination of his interlocutor.)
Relatively poor as the rioting sector of society is, it nevertheless
possesses all the electronic equipment necessary for the prosecution of the
main business of life; that is to say, entertainment by popular culture. And
what a culture British popular culture is!
Perhaps Amy Winehouse was its finest flower and its truest representative in
her militant and ideological vulgarity, her stupid taste, her vile personal
conduct and preposterous self-pity.
Her sordid life was a long bath in vomitus, literal and metaphorical, for
which the exercise of her very minor talent was no excuse or explanation.
Yet not a peep of dissent from our intelllectual class was heard after her
near canonisation after her death, that class having long had the backbone
of a mollusc.
Criminality is scarcely repressed any more in Britain. The last lord chief
justice but two thought that burglary was a minor offence, not worthy of
imprisonment, and the next chief justice agreed with him.
By the age of 12, an ordinary slum-dweller has learned he has nothing to
fear from the law and the only people to fear are those who are stronger or
more ruthless than he.
Punishments are derisory; the police are simultaneously bullying but
ineffectual and incompetent, increasingly dressed in paraphernalia that
makes them look more like the occupiers of Afghanistan than the force
imagined by Robert Peel. The people who most fear our police are the
innocent.
Of course, none of this reduces the personal responsibility of the rioters.
But the riots are a manifestation of a society in full decomposition, of a
people with neither leaders nor followers but composed only of egotists.

There`s a lot of truth in there.

yes there is a lot of truth in that statement,BUT comming from an austrailian i find it hard to swallow,[ deported criminals who stole a country from the natives ] my oppinion may not co-incide with others on this site but it is my oppinion,i believe the problems started with do-gooders wanting the way we as britsh live our lives,some posable solutions,
1 stop immigration.
2 deport all immigrants.
3 stop all benefits.
4 make the british work.

i have just googled [ theodore dalrymple ] who is in fact anthony m davis.the british born son of two immigrants, father russian,mother german [ jewess ]. i appologise to anyone i have upset by assuming and not checking facts.this kind of man embodies the worst kind of immigrant that this country now has to accept because of do-gooders,i still maintain my views on immigrants.

Quote :

.this kind of man embodies the worst kind of immigrant that this country now has to accept because of do-gooders,

How can that be?

Quote :

Anthony (A.M.) Daniels (born 11 October 1949), who generally uses the pen name Theodore Dalrymple, is a British writer and retired prison doctor and psychiatrist. He worked in places including a number of Sub-Saharan African countries and the east end of London. Before his retirement in 2005, he worked in City Hospital, Birmingham[1] and Winson Green Prison in inner-city Birmingham, England.

He looks like the sort of person we want here'and he is british.

Just think ,if Enoch Powell`s Rivers of blood speach had been heeded,you might have had what you want.

Oh, F F S !

You are swearing Brum

Gordon. wrote:

Quote :

.this kind of man embodies the worst kind of immigrant that this country now has to accept because of do-gooders,

How can that be?

Quote :

Anthony (A.M.) Daniels (born 11 October 1949), who generally uses the pen name Theodore Dalrymple, is a British writer and retired prison doctor and psychiatrist. He worked in places including a number of Sub-Saharan African countries and the east end of London. Before his retirement in 2005, he worked in City Hospital, Birmingham[1] and Winson Green Prison in inner-city Birmingham, England.

He looks like the sort of person we want here'and he is british.

Just think ,if Enoch Powell`s Rivers of blood speach had been heeded,you might have had what you want.

you of course mean :THE BIRMINGHAM SPEACH: