RE: Geography lesson for James G This conversation has gone off on a bit of a tangent, but take a look for yourself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe#Geographical The actual boundaries are still quite contentious, but I do know that Poland, Hungary, Slovakia etc do not consider themselves to be Eastern Europe - hence me clarifying the point. Also, I agree that Romanians and Bulgarians do have a 'legal' right to be here (although again, there was no referendum for us on EU expansion). My general point is that there are very many people here, who do not have such rights. How did we end up with all of them!?
So it's not the policies, it's the implementation Time and time again this is the underlying truth. The laws are there but they're not being followed. Same with the socialist argument. Absolutely nothing wrong with the principle, it's the implementation that allows the cheats to circumvent the system. Same with the loopholes for all the tax dodgers. We (well not me cos I've buggered off) has a whole need to wake up and take responsibility for making the country great again.
The Police... are at fault for not dealing with it and those reponsible should be punished. Ask SYP why they chose not to deal with it. There are ******* amongst all ethnicities. It does not mean all are.
FAO Redstar Your suggestion that my views have anything to do with colour or creed are offensive, and completely unfounded. Unfortunately, it is people like you that have led to the rise of the BNP. Whenever anyone sensible raises the debate about immigration, you play the racist card. Thanks for that...
I have not accused you... you chose to take the inference. Answer his question instead of throwing your hans up and claiming you are not racist. I've no idea if you are or if you are not. I've never met you.
So what should we do? If creed or coloyr is nowt to do with it? Do we close the borders now and accept everyone who is here as staying here?
Hang on.... Two minutes ago you said there are rules which all must follow or they will be punished. Now you;'ve acknowledged they don't have to obey the rules, because there are w@nkers in the police force....... We did ask SYP why they would not prosecute, and the answer was it would "raise tensions" So the immigrants "tensions" are more important than the indiginous populations "tensions" This Idealised world you live in mate does not exist. You have to deal with real peoples behaviours, i.e. the way people DO act not how they SHOULD. I dont' think it is unreasonable that we deal with British w@nkers and we leave other countries to deal with theirs. A simple rule that any foreign guest in our nation found guilty of an "arrestable offence" is shipped off tout suite doesn't seem unreasonable to me. It's a basic principle. You're a guest in my house. Don't **** in the living room or I will ask you to leave.
No, if someone is living here they should be dealt with to the full extent of the law enjoying the same legal rights and privledges as anyone else in those circumstances. There ARE rules and these SHOULD have been punished. I feel that SYP are just fecking lazy.
On that basis can we send our soldiers and oil companies to Iraq for our economic benefit? It's not the Iraqi's land, they just happen to be there... FFS
Not really The point redstar made was that since this land "does not belong to us" we have no basis to grumble about incoming foreigners who come here for economic reasons. Granted Iraq was invaded in a war and there's a big difference but if what Redstar said was right, the Iraqis would have no basis to grumble since their land does not belong to them anyway. No one would dream of telling a Maori or and Eskimo or a Native American that the place where they live and call home together with the rest of their community is "not their land anyway" - on what basis is it then ok to tell English people the same thing? Just wondering...
