Britain Asked to take many more Asylum seekers By Brussels

[leviathan13]

No, they may not now because things have become blurred over the centuries due to other influences creeping in. Only a couple of hundred years ago our culture and traditions around food, for example, would have been so much different to somewhere like, say, Whitby - even though we are in the same county.

 

In the 80's, the London culture of money and greed would have been different to up here initially as, as far as I always understood it, the north voted for Labour and what they stood for, and the south voted for the Tories and what they stood for. But that's all changed now and what was once a southern trait has now spread throughout the country.

 

Has there ever been true Englishness? After all, the English are a mongrel race who will have originally taken their influences from the countries who created them.[/QUOTE]

 

There is an 'Englishness' now.

The English are culturaly 'mongrel' due to the different countries that created us, but they were white races, so the indigenous English are certainly not racialy mongrel.

 

And this should bother me how?

[Aim4]

 

And this should bother me how?

 

What do you mean?

[Smithster]

I can't believe I have just wasted the last 15 minutes of my life trawling through this thread to see if anybody had made any interesting, informed or articulate comments on the subject of the OP.

 

I guess I ought to know better with Sheffield Forum by now.

 

Back to the main subject though, it may interest Mr Benn and others to read some facts on the matter here

 

Here are a couple of interesting facts you will find on that website...

 

Britain does not take more refugees than other countries

Pakistan and Iran alone host almost one-third of the world’s 12 million refugees. Poor countries such as Tanzania, Guinea and Armenia each take more refugees than Britain. Within the EU, Britain comes tenth in terms of asylum applications per head of population.

 

In contrast to hysterical claims of “waves” of asylum seekers which New Labour has encouraged, Britain only takes 0.05% of the world’s refugees. It is New Labour’s backing of IMF/World Bank policies, US imperialism and repressive regimes around the world which is helping to fuel the massive increase in the world’s population of asylum seekers.

[shims]

Back to the main subject though, it may interest Mr Benn and others to read some facts on the matter here

 

Here are a couple of interesting facts you will find on that website...

 

Britain does not take more refugees than other countries

I suspect many of the immigration opponents are already aware of this but choose to ignore, hoping no one will mention it. (Not wanting reality to get in the way of their bilious little rants. )

[sTaGeWaLkEr]

I can't believe I have just wasted the last 15 minutes of my life trawling through this thread to see if anybody had made any interesting, informed or articulate comments on the subject of the OP.

 

I guess I ought to know better with Sheffield Forum by now.

 

 

Ya live and learn mate.

 

I generally avoid race related threads on SF like the plague - because I know exactly how they'll turn out.

[Aim4]

I can't believe I have just wasted the last 15 minutes of my life trawling through this thread to see if anybody had made any interesting, informed or articulate comments on the subject of the OP.

 

I guess I ought to know better with Sheffield Forum by now.

 

Back to the main subject though, it may interest Mr Benn and others to read some facts on the matter here

 

Here are a couple of interesting facts you will find on that website...

 

Its not genuine asylum seekers i object to, its the definite 'waves' of unneeded, unwanted, unskilled people coming over to settle here permanently.

[Halibut]

Its not genuine asylum seekers i object to, its the definite 'waves' of unneeded, unwanted, unskilled people coming over to settle here permanently.

 

Which waves are you refering to and why does it bother you so much if people want to settle here permanently?

[zongamin]

Its not genuine asylum seekers i object to, its the definite 'waves' of unneeded, unwanted, unskilled people coming over to settle here permanently.

 

Those 'waves' do not exist, other than in the pages of the Daily Mail.

[Wildcat]

That is well put.

 

It is also worth considering that the British are renowned for their understatement (like in Korea where the US completely misunderstood that 'a bit sticky' meant fighting a battle outnumbered 100 to 1).

 

If anything those in a flap over immigration are doing more to erode our culture than anyone.

Well perhaps you can describe our culture, there seem to be a few who don't know what it is, no googling.

Also can you describe what it was like when you fought in Korea.

Honesty, tolerance, fairness, understatement, level headedness and more.

 

What is the relevance of the question? Are you trying to say that you discount anyone's views on a topic if they were not direct witnesses? If so then you really shouldn't bother with internet forums because you won't find much of interest.

 

It wasn't a question, it was an attempt to put words in my mouth, as I have made no reference to the level of immigration it is irrelevant.

 

As you can see the discussion you were contributing to was about changing Culture due to immigration. Do try to keep up.

[retep]

Which waves are you refering to and why does it bother you so much if people want to settle here permanently?

 

You don't seem to know much fishy, always a question, didn't you get an education.