A population movement thread for Thal

[thalbergmad]

You can write to him if you so wish.

Here is my draft:

Dear Dr Al-Bar,

I was considering creating some Muslim free zones in jolly old England and i thought it wise to seek your advice because i understand you have met with some success in keeping the Bead Jugglers out of Mecca.

I am not sure of the best way to identify a Muslim, but i was thinking along the lines of using a packet of pork scratchings and a pint of Carlsberg. Would appreciate your feedback on this.

Would love to pay a visit if you could arrange the papers.

Yours respectfully,

Mohammed Thali

[ahinton]

It is my support for equality for homosexuals which leads me to be Islamophobic if anything.

The former is very good indeed to hear (although it would be even better if you could also address hardy-practice's response); however, I submit that the logic of that support leading directly to Islamophobia on your part is flawed, since the two are not actually synonymous, any more than is an anti-gay stance synonymous with support for Islam. Mere intolerance of homosexuality on the part of Muslims (deplorable though it is) does not suffice to support your position on this.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Here is my draft:

Dear Dr Al-Bar,

I was considering creating some Muslim free zones in jolly old England and i thought it wise to seek your advice because i understand you have met with some success in keeping the Bead Jugglers out of Mecca.

I am not sure of the best way to identify a Muslim, but i was thinking along the lines of using a packet of pork scratchings and a pint of Carlsberg. Would appreciate your feedback on this.

Would love to pay a visit if you could arrange the papers.

Yours respectfully,

Mohammed Thali

Never let anyone accuse of being anything less than screamingly funny when the mood takes you!

If I may, I would like to take your draft apart for a moment, as follows.

"I was considering creating some Muslim free zones in jolly old England".
What's either jolly or old about it and with what authority would you purport to persuade Dr Al-Bar that you might have there to create any such zones (the idea of which would surely be anathema to him in any case)? Moreover, why would you want merely to create such zones when your ideal would be not only to stop any more Muslims entering UK but to deport all those that are already there?

I thnk that Dr Al-Bar might also need some assistance in determining who "the Bead Jugglers" are, since it would not likely be obvious to him; after all, Mecca's hardly the place where you'd expect to find Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Sufis or Zoroastrians so, unless all of these groups make a habit of juggling beads (and I have never encountered evidence that they do), I cannot imagine what the mayor will make of this without considerable further clarification and explanation from you.

Whilst your admission of shortcomings in the ability to identify Muslims is at the very least honest, I fear that your suggestion of "a packet of pork scratchings and a pint of Carlsberg" might not quite ring Dr Al-Bar's bells (not that they have such things in mosques, of course) and so I imagine that it might not make the impact that you appear to desire; you might therefore be wise to reconsider how you could go about making this particular point in a rather more convincing way.

All of that notwithstanding, I hope that your entreaties will successfully result in your being invited to Mecca and am sure that we'll all be agog to hear about your experiences there following your return that we would all naturally hope will occur thereafter.

I wonder if you'd have a chance to do some therapeutic cycling while there, provided that whichever airline transports you to Saudi will be prepared to carry the Mohammed Thali velocipede and not be a spoilsport and confiscate it upon your arrival.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Well, Thal, have you sent off your letter to Dr Al-Bar yet?...

Can't wait for a constructive outcome which I will describe in advance as "when Ali met Thali" before anyone else has the idiocy to do so...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

No response as yet. Perhaps one of his camels are ill or something.

On a more positive note, I read somewhere that the Calais "Jungle" is going to be closed and the inhabitants dispersed amongst centers in France. Hopefully now, our lorry drivers can have safer journeys without being under consistent siege by these peace loving migrants and they can go and knife each other somewhere else.

Thal

[ahinton]

No response as yet. Perhaps one of his camels are ill or something.

Ah, so you have at least sent it off; great! Did you us the email address for the Malaysian Consulate in Jeddah or did you send it by pigeon post?

Anyway, if one of his camels has a problem, I'm pretty confident that he'll have a staff member to look after it and, in any case, it should be "one of his camels is ill", not one of his camels are ill"; Mecca whatta you canna of that and, in the meantime, consider the trouble caused (as reported in Luke ch. 18, vv.22-25) when Jesus declared that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God", a statement that must have gone down like a lead balloon with generations of oil-rich Saudis...

On a more positive note, I read somewhere that the Calais "Jungle" is going to be closed and the inhabitants dispersed amongst centers in France. Hopefully now, our lorry drivers can have safer journeys without being under consistent siege by these peace loving migrants and they can go and knife each other somewhere else.

It certainly needs to be closed just as much as does Guantánamo although, whilst the latter looks to be a far less likely candidate for closure, what might happen to the inmates of either following such closures is anyone's guess.

The fate of those currently in Calais, whatever it might turn out to be, will not stop ever increasing numbers from coming, however; one has only to look at the situation not only in Syria but also in Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen as well as African countries including but by no means limited to Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan and Libya to appreciate how and why those numbers will inevitably continue steadily to increase unless either all those from these countries and many others fail to survive their hazardous journeys or some miracles occur in each of those countries to bring to them sustainable and credible stability and absence of war, terrorism, famine, drought and corruption.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

The fate of those currently in Calais, whatever it might turn out to be, will not stop ever increasing numbers from coming

It will cut off a route to the UK, so it will not stop immigrants coming to the EU, but hopefully it will reduce the numbers coming here and will stop the almost suicidal attempts lately by dingy.

Thal

[ahinton]

It will cut off a route to the UK, so it will not stop immigrants coming to the EU, but hopefully it will reduce the numbers coming here and will stop the almost suicidal attempts lately by dingy.

There are other routes to UK besides via Calais which just happens to be the shortest; how anything can stop those being carted across the Med I have no idea.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Firstly, you can stop offering a ferry service to stricken vessels, then adopt the sensible approach by Poland and Hungary to close the borders to migrants. That should stem the flow.

Thal

[ahinton]

Firstly, you can stop offering a ferry service to stricken vessels

I can do no such thing.

then adopt the sensible approach by Poland and Hungary to close the borders to migrants.

If that means trying to close the door to all immigrants, those nations will come to regret their actions, as would the even more immigrant-dependent UK should it try to follow suit.

That should stem the flow

But to what extent and for how long? The most that it could do, even if relatively effective in and of itself, is encourage migrants of all kinds to use another route.

UK, whilst somewhat farther distant for many would-be immigrants than more eastern and southern European countries, has the most potentially vulnerable border of all, since it comprises not only the Channel Tunnel but also a coastline that, if islands are included, stretches to over 31,000km (dependening on whose statistic you rely on - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_of_the_United_Kingdom ); not even Kazakhstan, Europe's largest country and by comparison to which UK is minuscule), has a border anything like as long as that and it is in any case far easier to patrol land borders than sea ones. Such would-be immigrants to England alone will doubtless be helped upon arrival by the English coast path development which continues apace and is anticipated for completion in four years' time (see https://www.nationaltrail.co.uk/england-coast-path ); try billeting armed forces and other security officers around all of that on a 24/7 basis and see how much that would cost the UK taxpayer!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

But to what extent and for how long?

No idea, but it is better than doing nothing.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

try billeting armed forces and other security officers around all of that on a 24/7 basis and see how much that would cost the UK taxpayer!

Nothing compared to what hundreds of thousands of illegals cost this country.

Thal

[ahinton]

No idea, but it is better than doing nothing.

That depends on what actually is done, not least in terms of what might happen to the inmates once it's been demolished.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Nothing compared to what hundreds of thousands of illegals cost this country.

Given that statistics for most illegals in UK are unavailable for the very resaon of the secrecy and clandestine nature of their activities, it is impossible realistically to claim that their numbers extend to "hundreds of thousands" but, that apart, are you seriously trying to persuade readers here that the cost of secure and effective patrolling of 31,000+km of UK's coastline 24/7 would be less than that of dealing appropriately with those illegals that we do know about? How many staff might you suppose would be required to do this and what might you suppose that their salaries, pensions and expenses including weaponry, ammunition, searchlights and electronic detection equipment in addition to building, facilities and administrative requirements might cost in total? - and how much of a law of diminishing returns might such an operation come to illustrate in any case, given the numbers of people that would likely be caught thereby? Somehow, I don't see any UK government even contemplating such a programme, let alone taxpayers putting up with funding one!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Whilst there is indeed 31000KM of coastline, only a small fraction would be landable by the kind of craft that illegals use.

If you doubt me, try landing a dingy on Sandwood Bay.

Thal

[ahinton]

Whilst there is indeed 31000KM of coastline, only a small fraction would be landable by the kind of craft that illegals use.

If you doubt me, try landing a dingy on Sandwood Bay.

Whilst that is of course true, the landable border is disproportionately large compared to most other Western European nations and the fact that it a sea border rather than a land one would render its policing far more problematic and expensive. In the end, it will be a numbers game and possibly also a manned drones game; each country is that of whoever happens to be there, no more, no less - it ain't mine or yours or anyone else's just because we/they happen right now to live there.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

it ain't mine or yours or anyone else's just because we/they happen right now to live there.

Indeed, it is ours.

Thal

[ahinton]

Indeed, it is ours.

I do not see how; I don't own it or any part of it - I'm merely a citizen of it.

Attitudes of mind - especially when expressed - that seek to persuade others that those who have them believe that they own the country in which they reside and/or of which they are citizens are by their very nature potentially if not actually divisive and risk csarrying with them a sense of superiority; wars have infamously been declared and fought on less.

Being proud of the country in which one resides and/or of which one is a citizen is, in and of itself, a quite different phenomenon to that of a purported sense of superiority born of a misplaced belief in one's personal part-ownership of such a country; to take just one small example, might not those who have always voted in UK for the party that gained success in General Elections believe themselves to have more of a stake in, or be more a part of, that group of countries than those who have either voted for other parties or not voted at all?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I have an equal stake with all those that have a right to be here.

I do not feel superior to inhabitants of any other Country apart obviously from the Irish, as they are generally stupid.

Thal

[ahinton]

I have an equal stake with all those that have a right to be here.

But merely having, or beliving yourself to have, such a stake (which you are in any case not obliged to have merely by virtue of living in UK and being an UK citizen) is not and indeed cannot be synonymous with actually "owning" a part of UK. What of those who divide their time between two or more countries? - which of them could they describe as "their" country? "My country of residence" is OK except for the question as to which one some might describe thus if they live in more than one. "My country of citizenship" is equally unclear in respect of those who are citiszens of more than one country; what about Daniel Barenboim, for example, who is a citizen of no less than four?

I do not feel superior to inhabitants of any other Country

Well, that's good to hear, but does not prevent an impression being given that those who refer to "my country" believe that they have something that others who are either not its citizens or residents or both do not.

apart obviously from the Irish, as they are generally stupid.

...as some French and Dutch are wont to say of the Belgians and as some Germans say of the Poles, the Australians of the New Zealanders, the Swedes and Danes of the Norwegians and so on and so off (not forgetting that immortal line of Tom Lehrer "and everybody hates the Jews"). Anyone might think that you're bigoted in so saying! Some might also challenge your view on the grounds of accuracy in that, as with any other country, not all of Ireland's inhabitants are Irish and many Irish people live outside Ireland in any case; implicit in such a statement on your part might even be a belief that population movement as a whole is a bad thing and that, if no country had allowed immigrants in for any reason, it would at least be more possible be able to say such things about the inhabitants of any single country without fear of ignoring its immigrant population...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Well, that's good to hear, but does not prevent an impression being given that those who refer to "my country" believe that they have something that others who are either not its citizens or residents or both do not.

I believe that being born in England is a great start in life and I am thankful I was born here.

Therefore, I claim nothing but pride.

Thal

[ahinton]

I believe that being born in England is a great start in life and I am thankful I was born here.

Therefore, I claim nothing but pride.

Whilst it is said that pride cometh before a fall, it does not always do so and, as I mentioned earlier, there's nothing wrong with having a pride in your country as it is not the same thing as having a sense of proprietoriality over it.

I cannot speak for whether being born in England is in itself "a great start in life" as I was, as you know, born elsewhere and only live there; however, I have no problem in tgaking your word for it.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I am very patriotic. Something which I feel you will never understand.

Thal

[ahinton]

I am very patriotic. Something which I feel you will never understand.

If I didn't understand and recognise it I would hardly have commented as I have done.

That said, I wonder what you would feel about "your" country if you'd spent more than 85% of your life living in another one...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

I will always be proud to an Englishman and that would not change wherever I resided.

No intention of moving, but I hear Estonia has far more women than men. Could be interesting if they did not all have hairy legs.

Thal

[ahinton]

No intention of moving, but I hear Estonia has far more women than men. Could be interesting if they did not all have hairy legs.

All Irish are stupid. All Estonian women have hairy legs. What a simplistic (and non-factual) world you live in!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Scots are tight, the French smell of Garlic,  the Welsh like their sheep to much, Swiss collect cuckoo clocks and the Germans wear leather pants.

Bollocks.

Thal

[hardy_practice]

I am very patriotic.

Isn't that the last refuge of a scoundrel?

[thalbergmad]

Only to lefties.

Thal

[ahinton]

Scots are tight, the French smell of Garlic,  the Welsh like their sheep to much, Swiss collect cuckoo clocks and the Germans wear leather pants.

Yes, that's the kind of nonsense to which I was referring, although I'd heard it (where UK's concerned) as national myths, namely all Scots are mean, all (Northern) Irish are stupid, all Welsh can sing and all English believe in fair play.

Bollocks

Which nation's population likes or collects those? Just curious...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Only to lefties.

Whilst I'm not entirely sure how you would define "leftie", I assume that it includes supporters of the Labour Party; do you really believe that no such people are sufficiently proud of their country as to merit the descriptor "patriotic"?

Hardy_practice's reference, in case you were unaware, was to Samuel Johnson whose famous and much-quote pronouncement on the subject was made in 1775 - see https://www.samueljohnson.com/refuge.html . One might wonder if Shaw had this in the back of his mind when he wote "music is the brandy of the damned"...

Patriotism is undoubtedly a divisive issue where UK is concerned if it relates to only one of its four constituent nations; some people are proud to be British rather than English, Scots or Welsh and even the term British excludes Northern Irish as NI is part of UK and not Britain, the full title of UK being "the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". Those who, like you, describe themselves as patriotic by virtue of being proud to be English implicitly reject the rest of UK.

A similar divisiveness arises from pride in individual cities, as exemplified in the old music hall song a couple of lines from which are not quite
Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner
That I love Aberdeen.

Another issue here is that a substantiial number of immigrants to UK describe either it - or whichever one of its four constituent nations wherein they've settled - as "my country"; do you identify with them?

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

You are beginning to sound like that cretin Corbyn.

Thal

[ahinton]

You are beginning to sound like that cretin Corbyn.

Leaving aside that there are far worse people to sound like, I do not perceive what passes (or rather substitutes) for logic in your arrival at such a conclusion.

You are beginning to sound like Thal, what with youe omission to answer questions put to you!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Leaving aside that there are far worse people to sound like

Not many, the man is a prize twonk whos demented hard left visions will see his pathetic party out of power for a generation.

Would not surprise me if you were a fan.

Thal

[gep]

I am very patriotic. Something which I feel you will never understand.

Thal

I think it is very important to explain what you mean with ‘patriotic’ or ‘nationalistic’. There is a kind of person who will, with the hand on his heart and a tear in his eye, sing the national anthem at explosive volume to show his country is the best simply because it is his country; these are called ‘patriots’, and may serve as a cartoonesque example, but that is not the whole story. The is a kind of person who believes that his country is the best of the world in any and all aspects to the extent that nothing may ever change and anyone new is to be forced to be a clone of that person; anyone not adhering to that belief is either an enemy of the state or a foreigner or both.

I happen to believe that my country is among the best functioning in the world. Not because I happen to live there, but based on statistics such as basic equality of all inhabitants, a very good system of supporting those who need it, a comparatively well organised educational system which is fairly accessible to all, a guarantee to freedom of conscience and expression thereof, etc. The UN-list has it on the No. 5 position of ‘best countries to live in’. It is not perfect, far from, but as compared to the rest of the world, my country does end up fairly high in all charts. I’m happy it is, I’d like to see it prolonged, if possible and feasible bettered where possible. Am I proud that my country has reached this position? Well, yes, how could I not be? Does that make me a patriot? If you find so, go ahead. Do I oppose any such forces as want to diminish its position (be they from inside or outside)?. Well, yes, how could I not oppose such? If such negative influence (or attempt to influence) comes from people originating from outside the country but now living in it, or from people living outside the country, do I want such influence stopped? Well, yes, how could I not? Do I feel that deciding the future of this country should first and foremost be in the hands of those belonging there? Well, yes! Does that make me a nationalist? If so, so be it. Do note, however, that with ‘people belonging’, I do not necessarily mean people born here, or having one sort of colour, or background, or whatever. With ‘belonging’, I mean people who want to take part in what this country is, adhere to its laws and ways, wishing to enhance and better it in the ways it already is doing well, and help it diminishing that what it is doing less well. What I do not want is people either coming in who try and change backward that what has made this country among the best in the world. Neither do I want people from here, either from cowardice or ‘political correctness’, idly letting such backslides happen, let alone help them along.

When I see that universities allow a ‘guest speaker’ to rearrange a auditorium so that the women sit at the back and the men at the front, I start seething; we have fought a long time to get equality between men and women, now to allow people with medieval ideas to destroy this? When I see actual fights breaking out because some ‘occupational coloured’ people have decided a fully innocent children’s feats day is racist and ‘must’ be obliterated I start seething, especially when some brain washed white people start ‘seeing the point’. Too many people are trying to make all what my country has reached and made look bad, and want to change it into something backward, far worse. At that, far too many people coming here do so with the idea, if not demand, that we change our ways (if not laws) in such a way as they want, ‘because in my country we are [not] used to this or that’. The very fact you came to my country is exactly because your country is [not] used to this or that’. That you are used to treating women as secondary does not mean you can do so here. That you are used to persecuting gay people may be, but you will damn well be tolerant here (what you think thereof is your prerogative; the very fact you are free to think what you want is one of the assets of this country!). That you are not used to people changing their religion, or dropping it altogether may be, but here anyone and everyone is free to do so, and you will damn well accept that!. And if you do not like or agree, well, one of the free things here is the freedom to stay, or leave. But if you want to stay, you will accept that you no longer live in the country you came from, but this one, and that choosing to live here means accepting its laws and ways. They may not be perfect, but they are, by definition, better than the ones from the country you come from or else why did you come to this country?. Any habits, believes or suchlike as fit within our system of laws and ways you have you may freely keep and pursue; but if they do not fit, either loose, adjust or leave. If you want to adhere to that, and add to the further advance of this country, you are, as far as I am concerned, fully welcome. I do not care what shape or colour you have. What you wish to believe is yours to choose. I do not care whom you love. I do not care if your name is John, Ahmed, Chang or Abimbola. I just want you to accept you are in my country (yes, MY country; after all, I am paying for it!), which you are free to make your country, but based on the premises stated above.

Does this make me patriotic, or nationalistic? If you feel so, do so. If you think so, and believe such to be a bad thing, also freely do so. If you think I am a xenophobe, well, go ahead. For, hoping not to offend you but frankly not caring if I do, your opinion about my person does not really concern me….

(If anything, I consider myself a retardophobic, malignophobic and stultophobic. And, sadly, there are many places in this world from which people are coming here who inflict a rather allergic reaction within these phobias. All people are equal, but what people choose to do is very much not, and hence all cultures are not equal…).

All best,
gep

[thalbergmad]

I think within reasonable parameters we sing from the same songbook. We have acheived much in our Country through reasonable and sensible debate and whilst much work needs to be done, barbaric treatment of homosexuals for instance, lingers as just a nasty smell from the past.

As we head towards ever greater equality, i do object to my Country being under siege by thousands who happily accept the benefits (and i do mean monetary benefits as well) of living here, whilst despising our way of life, preaching hatred against us, having no intention whatsoever of integration and bringing with them their pathetic retarded superstitious religion which our government and other leaders often fawn to in fear of being labelled racist.

Those people should be shipped back to the festering shithole from whence they came.

Thal

[gep]

To a different tune, perhaps…

I do believe the greatest mistake governments have made when the influx of workforces from, roughly, non-Western countries started (the 1950’s) is that they did not expect these people to be able to adjust to our way of life, or indeed did not want them to adjust (they were, after all, ‘guest’workers). What the result has been, since these people did stay, is that a whole section of the population did not adjust (starting with learning the language badly or not at all) to the extend that they could, fully, participate. Through that, they ended up (with emphasis on ‘ended’) at the bottom of society, and their offspring have had much harder trouble getting up, starting with succeeding at school.

If you then introduce (or breed) a number of preachers that fill this ‘failed group’ with a notion that they are kept down, and are in fact are superior (due to having the only right ‘faith’ or similar), and not only not need to adapt and adjust, but actually should not adjust, but demand the country adjust to them.

That kind of poison should be stopped. No Muslim should feel he can’t be a Muslim here, but he or she should accept that the law of the land he or she lives in supersedes, always, all ‘private’ rules. You’re, based on your faith or convictions, free to feel or think or believe about gays, women, non-believers, whatever. You are NOT free to act upon those believes and such, your actions are restricted within the limits of the law of the land. In this country, your rights and obligations are the same as those for anyone else. Your freedom is no greater than that of anyone else. Your convictions have no higher ‘right’ than anyone else’s. Your faith has no more rights than anyone else’s.

I loathe to see how fairly few ‘righteous’ people pretty much have hijacked the debate, decrying any different view racist, fascist, or whatever. Among the natives usually ‘goodpeople’ who do not see they will be the first against the wall should the barbarians take over. To the damage of the many who do understand things, and want to contribute to and function within the country they live in. Many ‘Arabic’ people can’t get jobs because those few loudmouthed uselessnesses among them turn the general feeling against their kind. (Something these preachers exactly so want, of course: to create a rift they can occupy and stoke the fire of hate in).

What the powers that be should do is stop harking to these troublemakers, indeed if possible silence them (by ejecting them, for all I care), and make clear that those willing to live with us are perfectly welcome, and those wanting to live against us have no room here. That does necessitate control at the borders, and if those of the EU are not guarded properly, we should guard our own. It might need taking some unpleasant decisions, possibly adjusting some laws that, so far, have helped increase the development of the country, but may now become hijacked by troublemakers (and their lawyers, who’d sell their mothers for the right price). Freedom of speech is a sign of civilisation, but using that freedom to preach the destruction of that same freedom is not.

Politicians should lose their lack of backbone, and speak up clearly about this. The fact is that especially on the Left this is very much a no-go. Presumable because a large part of their electorate is exactly that part of the populace that has integrated very badly, and that because the Left has been the stick in the wheel when it was (and is) about integration. Not speaking up leads to the rise of rather nasty-minded people who preach hatred ‘from the other side’. Like for some Mullah’s nothing is good about the Western way of life, now you get some people who will say that there are no good Muslims. And people, fed up by politicians looking away while they see, in their daily life, the malicious effect of non-integration and the people who feed on that, will turn to home-bred real fascists, which will only be oil on the fires of the ‘hate the West’ fascists. There is a growing thorn in the flesh of our society, and it will need to be pulled out, or our society - consisting of well-meaning, productive people of all sorts of backgrounds, colours, shapes, faiths and whatever, whether they were born here or not, who want to add to the progress of the land - will fester and succumb. The first to suffer are those from the incoming groups who want to adjust, for they not only have the weight to pull of those who don't want to adjust, but must also swim upstream of a government here who would rather listen to the troublemakers than to the well-willing; the troublemakers making the most noise, which is what government usually equates with being right.

In short: do not feed the trolls!

All best,
gep

[thalbergmad]

Music to my ears to hear such good sense.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

Politicians should lose their lack of backbone, and speak up clearly about this. The fact is that especially on the Left this is very much a no-go.

The problem with the left and especially imbeciles like our Corbyn is that they fail to see a problem so are therefore incapable of dealing with it.

From what i have read, Gert Wilders seems to speak a lot of good sense to me and has the balls to do it, knowing he is risking his life.

Thal

[ahinton]

Not many, the man is a prize twonk whos demented hard left visions will see his pathetic party out of power for a generation.

Would not surprise me if you were a fan.

Insofar as perhaps nothing wold surprise you, maybe it wouldn't - but, apart from his evident disdain for adversarial politics and his desire to scrap Trident, I am not; I am also not and never have been a member of the party that he purportedly leads.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

I think within reasonable parameters we sing from the same songbook. We have acheived much in our Country through reasonable and sensible debate and whilst much work needs to be done, barbaric treatment of homosexuals for instance, lingers as just a nasty smell from the past.

As we head towards ever greater equality, i do object to my Country being under siege by thousands who happily accept the benefits (and i do mean monetary benefits as well) of living here, whilst despising our way of life, preaching hatred against us, having no intention whatsoever of integration and bringing with them their pathetic retarded superstitious religion which our government and other leaders often fawn to in fear of being labelled racist.

Those people should be shipped back to the festering shithole from whence they came.

With the possible exception of the notion of "my" country (and, OK, I'm a foreigner in the one where I live but that's not my reason for such exception) and the bit about bringing their religion to UK, I agree entirely with both you and gep; for the record, I no more want anyone who comes to UK to spoil anything that's good about it - or what's better than it is where they've come from - than I want anyone already in UK to do so.

I have never favoured unfettered immigration any more than I have overly restrictive immigration; as gep has rightly pointed out, people who come here from other countries must want to do so and therefore try to contribute something positive to our way of life - that is obviously in the interests both of those already living here and of the immigrants themselves.

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Music to my ears to hear such good sense.

And to mine; a very pragmatic and well balanced set of views indeed.

There are plenty of people from outside UK who have settled in UK, who conduct themselves as decent UK citizens, who speak good or reasonable English and who make due effort to integrate because they've chosen to do so and can perceive the wisdom of doing so; these have all contributed positively to UK society. There are also those who have not done some or any of those things, of whom a very small but nevertheless noisily vociferous and dangerous minority do indeed openly preach hatred; in asking oneself why such people choose to remain in a country that appears to be anathema to them, it would not seem unreasonable to conclude that they are by nature and/or wilful determination troublemakers and would be so wherever they decide to settle.

Much as I deplore the fact that some people enter and settle in UK illegally - and, after all, breaking the law is breaking the law (better than the now overtired and mercifully near moribund "Brexit means Brexit", for at least everyone knows what "breaking the law" means!) - I would sooner welcome illegals immigrant who make due effort to learn English (if not already conversant with it), who integrate into and make positive contributions to UK society and who conduct themselves at all times in a peaceable and lawful manner than I would legal immigrants who "hate the West" and determine to preach hatred and wreak havoc while at the same time trying to encourage others to do likewise (be that through some form of "radicalisation" or otherwise); by the same token, I would prefer such people to those who are already UK citizens who conduct themselves in a manner that's alien and antipathetic to UK society and its best interests as though they harbour contempt for that society.

It seems that gep, you and I are all singing from pretty much the same hymn sheet (except, perhaps, in the sense that none of us is a Christian!) on this subject. Let us hope also that the equally unwelcome and dangerous extreme right-wing nutters achieve no success in next year's elections in those European countries that will hold them - including, of course, gep's; such people are equally likely to wreak havoc in their countries as are that tiny minority of immigrants thereto, legal or otherwise, who come to their country of choice determined to foment hatred there.

Population movement is inherently a good thing; in fact, it usually is so, except when it isn't! But gep's said it all, really - and with remarkable and welcome eloquence and articulacy in a language that is not even his native one! A round of applause is well merited.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

You are such a boot licker sometimes

Thal

[ahinton]

You are such a boot licker sometimes

Never. Nor do I have need to be. I rarely even wear boots nd cannot imagine the taste of them to be especially pleasant. I just write what I think, even if on occasion it happense to agree with what someone else has written.

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

OK Jeremy.

Thal

[ahinton]

OK Jeremy

I'd not realised that Mr Clarkson (or indeed Mr Hunt if it be he - or even organists Mr Filsell or Mr Summerly, for that matter) patronises this forum and reads this thread; that just goes to show how much one might miss when not paying due attention!

Best,

Alistair