Sandy Rentool... I imagine the cities that may be targeted would be in the countries that attacked us..just saying
So if ISIL attack us, do we destroy Damascus, Baghdad, or both? Or just stick with Moscow, as that is where they have been pointing for the past 30 years?
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
One of the problems of the moment is that there is an extension of these rights from our own citizens to those of the EU. Anecdotally, from friends who act in immigration cases, love is positively blooming between eastern Europeans and would be immigrants such as those here on student visas. The romance of it all touches my ENFP soul but the consequences for immigration are severe.
What's more, I think he'll try to outflank the resistance movement by getting an explicit endorsement of his unilateralist (or at least opposition to Trident renewal) stance from party members.
This is just as Corbyn speaks up for mass immigration in an interview. How does he square this with his alleged antipathy to the EU? There's a suspicion with Corbyn that he is in favour of the very type of mass immigration that most of the public favour least. Mass immigration of Syrian migrants
TSE: There's a long term polling study coming out in the next few months about what White British people think about immigration, so we'll have a definitive answer either way.
Oh come on you're better than that. Are these white British people doctors and architects in Tunbridge Wells or living in Moss Side? You talk about them as if they're some sort of persecuted minority.
It covers all regions/demographics/education level/income etc
Is quite a chunky sample size of 8,000 I think.
Its a poll that will prove nothing for reasons I've pointed out. White British (still the majority last time I looked) will be split in the same way they are with political parties, they're not a body of people who think the same way about virtually anything. Its a ridiculous, prejudiced, loaded poll, I'm interested to know who commissioned it.
I love how you write off polls before they've even been published.
I would have thought you would have learned after your dissing of the constituency polls showing UKIP weren't going to take Dover, but apparently not.
I've written nothing off, I just know we'll never get a poll showing what black people think, quite rightly, if you're British your colour is irrelevant.
From 2011
"Huge numbers of Britons would support an anti-immigration English nationalist party if it was not associated with violence and fascist imagery, according to the largest survey into identity and extremism conducted in the UK.
A Populus poll found that 48% of the population would consider supporting a new anti-immigration party committed to challenging Islamist extremism, and would support policies to make it statutory for all public buildings to fly the flag of St George or the union flag.
According to the survey, 39% of Asian Britons, 34% of white Britons and 21% of black Britons wanted all immigration into the UK to be stopped permanently, or at least until the economy improved. And 43% of Asian Britons, 63% of white Britons and 17% of black Britons agreed with the statement that "immigration into Britain has been a bad thing for the country". Just over half of respondents – 52% – agreed with the proposition that "Muslims create problems in the UK".
''There will also be concerns about groups of immigrants forming ghettos in places like Rotherham and Tower Hamlets, bringing less savory elements of their home culture to the UK but seemingly tolerated by authorities here, complaints being dismissed out of hand or condemned as racist. ''
The fact that dare not speak its name is that the immigrants people are really concerned about are muslims from the Indian sub continent, Middle East and Africa.
The EU??? bovered. Asia??? No problem. South America?? Don;t care
Is the Prime Minister going to clarify which cities he would be prepared to obliterate using Trident? I see from a BBC graphic that North Korea is out of range if the subs are in the Atlantic.
If ours are out of range, you can be damn sure his are as well. In fact, i doubt South Korea are in his range.
Supposedly some of the missiles on a Vanguard sub carry a single warhead, which as well as giving flexibility (and the yield can be varied too) means they also have a much greater range. Which theoretically at least puts cities in East Asia within range from the North Atlantic. That said real missile performance data is closely guarded. You can find wildly varying guesstimates for most ballistic missiles.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
@tombradby: So to recap; Mr Corbyn opposes Trident, but will 'live with it' and spend the £100 billion if he can't convince party. But he won't use it.
I live in upminster, a place with v few immigrants and a large majority of white brits. Safe tory area with a high ukip vote
The next station is barking, v high immigration level and ever decreasing number of white brits. Safe labour area
The people in upminster travel to London via barking.. They see that it's an absolute khazi were no one seems to speak English
There are people more concerned about immigration in Upminster than there are in barking, although probably the level of frustration of those concerned is higher in barking as they are poor and trapped
We all knew you were a little bit beyond barking ;-)
''Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters. ''
Then why isn't UKIP benefiting? Farage sure is a shower of sh8t.
Can we put this to bed please, Ukip is benefitting to the tune of 4m votes albeit distributed in such a way that wasn't reflected in seats.
Your point about Farage is another altogether, he may well be what you describe but Ukip have grown and will continue to.
That is remarkably complacent. I think anyone who assumes their party will continue to grow is showing remarkable hubris.
UKIP as a protest party gained half of the votes the ex protest party that had become a party of government (ie the Lib Dems) had lost, at an election in which both major parties increased their share of the vote.
There is a very limited pool of protest voters to continue to fish from if the two party shares continue to increase. Don't be arrogant and assume that they'll continue to grow.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
I live in upminster, a place with v few immigrants and a large majority of white brits. Safe tory area with a high ukip vote
The next station is barking, v high immigration level and ever decreasing number of white brits. Safe labour area
The people in upminster travel to London via barking.. They see that it's an absolute khazi were no one seems to speak English
There are people more concerned about immigration in Upminster than there are in barking, although probably the level of frustration of those concerned is higher in barking as they are poor and trapped
We all knew you were a little bit beyond barking ;-)
TSE: There's a long term polling study coming out in the next few months about what White British people think about immigration, so we'll have a definitive answer either way.
Oh come on you're better than that. Are these white British people doctors and architects in Tunbridge Wells or living in Moss Side? You talk about them as if they're some sort of persecuted minority.
It covers all regions/demographics/education level/income etc
Is quite a chunky sample size of 8,000 I think.
Its a poll that will prove nothing for reasons I've pointed out. White British (still the majority last time I looked) will be split in the same way they are with political parties, they're not a body of people who think the same way about virtually anything. Its a ridiculous, prejudiced, loaded poll, I'm interested to know who commissioned it.
Attitudes to immigration have been extensively questioned in two recent waves of long running social research studies that I know of. I'd imagine the results of one of them are due for publication very soon as the fieldwork - across Europe - took place last autumn.
Is the Prime Minister going to clarify which cities he would be prepared to obliterate using Trident? I see from a BBC graphic that North Korea is out of range if the subs are in the Atlantic.
Isam, you should conduct a survey with TSE, approach British people and ask them for an opinion. If a 4th generation black man offers a view be sure to say:
Sorry mate, whites only, you're not really British.
Its a divisive, offensive and loaded poll the results will be meaningless.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
TSE: There's a long term polling study coming out in the next few months about what White British people think about immigration, so we'll have a definitive answer either way.
Oh come on you're better than that. Are these white British people doctors and architects in Tunbridge Wells or living in Moss Side? You talk about them as if they're some sort of persecuted minority.
It covers all regions/demographics/education level/income etc
Is quite a chunky sample size of 8,000 I think.
Its a poll that will prove nothing for reasons I've pointed out. White British (still the majority last time I looked) will be split in the same way they are with political parties, they're not a body of people who think the same way about virtually anything. Its a ridiculous, prejudiced, loaded poll, I'm interested to know who commissioned it.
Attitudes to immigration have been extensively questioned in two recent waves of long running social research studies that I know of. I'd imagine the results of one of them are due for publication very soon as the fieldwork - across Europe - took place last autumn.
I'd imagine it's a bit out of date seeing what happened by this autumn
A politician doing the honourable thing is an alien concept to these zoomers.
She was "stepped down" by the party machine. They forgot to tell her about it until later...
There's nothing confusing about what happened. She resigned the whip, probably with prompting which is fair enough, and that automatically suspended her as an SNP member under SNP rules.
She may have been aware of this effect when she resigned the whip but that is the effect none the less. Resigning the whip was the right thing to do, allowing a proper investigation to take place.
It is a very good contrast to Alistair Carmichael who continues to cling to his position and embarrass his party.
Dair - can you explain where the National got this nugget from ?
"It is understood the initial police investigations will not involve Thomson herself."
The BBC said that this morning I think.
Not here they don't - she looks forward to being cleared...
Analysis by Glenn Campbell, BBC Scotland political correspondent
Yet just one minute earlier, at 18:21, a statement issued by Michelle Thomson's personal media adviser made no mention of her stepping down from SNP duties.
It reads:
"I am aware of the police investigation and will cooperate fully if asked to do so. I have always acted within the law and look forward to being cleared of any suggestion of wrongdoing. I will be making no further comment on this matter."
Makes you wonder whether she really did jump or was she pushed?"
Just so we're clear, as I heard it on the 8 o'clock news, the police investigation, the BBC said, would not begin by looking at Ms Thomson's affairs.
The implication being that she may later become involved.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
That is not what many opinion polls show and which is why politics by opinion polls is a pathetic idea and anyone who suggests it is barking mad.
Poor Dair - hasn't quite got the hang of things. I am sure coming months will give him plenty more opportunities to be a vocal apologist for the failings of the SNP.
Unless the first published that material in the last few hours it was a story about an SNP MP.
It's dated today, the whip was relinquished yesterday.
Any implication that Michelle Thomson is an SNP MP is a lie. She is an Independent MP.
The firms material is dated today or the news story is? The question is when did the firm publish its material, if it did so when she was an SNP MP then it was a firm owned by an SNP MP at the time of publication.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
Isam, you should conduct a survey with TSE, approach British people and ask them for an opinion. If a 4th generation black man offers a view be sure to say:
Sorry mate, whites only, you're not really British.
Its a divisive, offensive and loaded poll the results will be meaningless.
Quota is used in all opinion polling and market research, thats how you ensure you dont just get huge numbers of women with children under 11.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
Net immigration was essentially zero between 1979 and 1997.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
I'd wonder why anyone would want bright, young, educated graduates who have completed a degree in the country to go home. Its funny how often people bark on about how the immigrants are all uneducated poor ones but then it seems many tens of thousands are exactly the kind we'd want to encourage except they're already here. Bargain.
It's gone from being an elephant in the room to a whole herd stampeding around.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
That is not what many opinion polls show and which is why politics by opinion polls is a pathetic idea and anyone who suggests it is barking mad.
I haven't suggested politics by opinion poll, as you well know, I'm simply pointing out that those who encourage immigration are in a minority, obfuscate all you wish.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
A lot of people want higher taxes for people who are just richer than them.
A politician doing the honourable thing is an alien concept to these zoomers.
She was "stepped down" by the party machine. They forgot to tell her about it until later...
There's nothing confusing about what happened. She resigned the whip, probably with prompting which is fair enough, and that automatically suspended her as an SNP member under SNP rules.
She may have been aware of this effect when she resigned the whip but that is the effect none the less. Resigning the whip was the right thing to do, allowing a proper investigation to take place.
It is a very good contrast to Alistair Carmichael who continues to cling to his position and embarrass his party.
Dair - can you explain where the National got this nugget from ?
"It is understood the initial police investigations will not involve Thomson herself."
The BBC said that this morning I think.
Not here they don't - she looks forward to being cleared...
Analysis by Glenn Campbell, BBC Scotland political correspondent
Yet just one minute earlier, at 18:21, a statement issued by Michelle Thomson's personal media adviser made no mention of her stepping down from SNP duties.
It reads:
"I am aware of the police investigation and will cooperate fully if asked to do so. I have always acted within the law and look forward to being cleared of any suggestion of wrongdoing. I will be making no further comment on this matter."
Makes you wonder whether she really did jump or was she pushed?"
Dair may be a big strong 300lb marlin but he's still one that's twisting and writhing to avoid being landed despite a very big barbed hook in his mouth. He has just joined the ranks of the discredited Palmers.
I'd imagine it's a bit out of date seeing what happened by this autumn
Views may well have hardened, but the fieldwork was done at the time when the IS stuff was first coming up on the TV, the Rotherham child abuse thing was in the news and Carswell and Reckless moved.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
That is not what many opinion polls show and which is why politics by opinion polls is a pathetic idea and anyone who suggests it is barking mad.
I haven't suggested politics by opinion poll, as you well know, I'm simply pointing out that those who encourage immigration are in a minority, obfuscate all you wish.
Nobody disputes that its a minority, doesn't stop the minority from being right. As they often are, eg on taxes.
Ask the right question and you'll find a majority in favour of increasing taxes on the right, a majority in favour of increased spending etc, etc - and many PB Tories would oppose all that quite rightly.
It's gone from being an elephant in the room to a whole herd stampeding around.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
It's gone from being an elephant in the room to a whole herd stampeding around.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
It's not wrong but can only happen with limited numbers. The other way has been tried and we are where we are - record number of people say immigration is their biggest concern.
If only people could admit they were wrong, it might get sorted
It's gone from being an elephant in the room to a whole herd stampeding around.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
Because it leads to some very uncomfortable conclusions. Some groups of people are industrious and some arent. Devising a policy based on that would unveil some truths that people just do not want to face.
It's gone from being an elephant in the room to a whole herd stampeding around.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
It's not wrong but can only happen with limited numbers. The other way has been tried and we are where we are - record number of people say immigration is their biggest concern.
If only people could admit they were wrong, it might get sorted
The problem is that everyone wants the other lot to admit they were wrong. You want me to say I'm wrong, I want you to say you're wrong.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
One of the problems of the moment is that there is an extension of these rights from our own citizens to those of the EU. Anecdotally, from friends who act in immigration cases, love is positively blooming between eastern Europeans and would be immigrants such as those here on student visas. The romance of it all touches my ENFP soul but the consequences for immigration are severe.
There's lots of issues intertwined (pun intended) with the marriage route.
As an example, I recently married a Ukranian lady having met a couple of years ago whilst we were both working in Dubai. I am British.
Under UK rules I would have to meet the 24k test and interviews etc. to get her leave to remain in the UK should I move back. To get her a work permit would be another bureaucratic exercise, she is a teacher and translator of Russian, would easily find a well paying job in the UK.
If I were Romanian, the Romanian govt would give her a passport on marriage and she would be allowed to settle and work in the UK as an EU citizen, no questions asked.
Anecdotal evidence from acquaintances suggests that the authorities in recently joined EU countries are not as upstanding as those in Western Europe, and that eg a Romanian passport office official earning $5,000 a year could easily find a spare passport with my wife's photo for a similar amount of money.
In summary, the UK are making people jump through hoops, whereas most people are not playing by the rules. Romanians ladies marrying Nigerian students (for money) is an obvious one, there are many more similar scams out there - before we talk about arranged marriages from Pakistan.
I'd imagine it's a bit out of date seeing what happened by this autumn
Views may well have hardened, but the fieldwork was done at the time when the IS stuff was first coming up on the TV, the Rotherham child abuse thing was in the news and Carswell and Reckless moved.
But wasn't it europe wide? Two of those things things are only concerned with england.
Not to mention Charlie Hebdo, Tunisian hotels and Belgian train bombers
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
This can only be said to drive family migration, which is only a fraction of the UK's immigration. But frankly I don't think the right response is to say "well, we'll just have to accept that we have immigrant communities who will constantly marry from their home countries, and these immigrant ghettos will get larger and larger".
We really have to ask why, people whose parents or grandparents came from Country X are marrying people from Country X at such a high rate. If these second and third generation immigrants are truly integrated, they shouldn't be marrying from Country X at a much higher rate than other British nationals.
I suspect the answer is mostly down to arranged marriages, and that is something that should absolutely be looked at. There are enough British Pakistanis, British Indians and British Bangladeshis that there's a wealth of brides and grooms available here, even if they refuse to marry someone outside their ethnic group. Unless you want a nice submissive wife from some rural backwater, of course.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
That is not what many opinion polls show and which is why politics by opinion polls is a pathetic idea and anyone who suggests it is barking mad.
I haven't suggested politics by opinion poll, as you well know, I'm simply pointing out that those who encourage immigration are in a minority, obfuscate all you wish.
Nobody disputes that its a minority, doesn't stop the minority from being right. As they often are, eg on taxes.
Ask the right question and you'll find a majority in favour of increasing taxes on the right, a majority in favour of increased spending etc, etc - and many PB Tories would oppose all that quite rightly.
Thank you for pointing out that I'm wrong, I'm very grateful. I'm hopeful that in future you can point me in the right direction when the opinion of the majority of people is wrong.
Perhaps you can start by showing that the MAJORITY want higher taxes, the GE somewhat contradicts your esteemed opinion.
O/T Tennis- Johanna Konta (new British number 1) knocks out top seed and World Number 2, Simona Halep, 2 sets to 1, coming back to win 7-5 from 1-5 down in third. Stretches her recent results to 21 wins out of last 22 matches.
Now in quarter final of this major event (Wuhan) as a qualifier.
This was one bet I had given up on at 1-5 but now very happy as tennis remains my favourite sport (I even still play! )
It's gone from being an elephant in the room to a whole herd stampeding around.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
It's not wrong but can only happen with limited numbers. The other way has been tried and we are where we are - record number of people say immigration is their biggest concern.
If only people could admit they were wrong, it might get sorted
The problem is that everyone wants the other lot to admit they were wrong. You want me to say I'm wrong, I want you to say you're wrong.
Who should admit it?
The politicians that experimented with multiculturalism
Well the original ones, Roy Jenkins, Lord lester, even Trevor Phillips, already have admitted they were wrong... It's just that the current lot can't while they're still in office and craving power
Is the Prime Minister going to clarify which cities he would be prepared to obliterate using Trident? I see from a BBC graphic that North Korea is out of range if the subs are in the Atlantic.
If ours are out of range, you can be damn sure his are as well. In fact, i doubt South Korea are in his range.
A nuclear programme, whether for civilian energy or military defence needs perpetual dollops of cash only an affluent stable country can give it.
I'm aghast with horror at the thought that countries in Africa are looking to nuclear power. Anyone who has ever visited Africa will understand the endemic corruption throughout any large project, and the complete lack of any kind of maintenance after construction.
Try driving down a highway... Any highway in africa.. With the exception of South Africa.
I'm not at all worried about any country in Africa having a nuclear power program. Given the incompetence, corruption and endemic inability to control security:
The program will fail because: -all the money for it is stolen. -the equipment won't work as the suppliers stole the money. - the equipment works but there are no staff as their salaries are stolen and they strike - everything works but nothing happens as the expensive nuclear isotopes are stolen. - nothing is stolen but the security staff are asleep when terrorists bomb the place. - the nuclear isotopes are lost and dumped in a lake used to provide drinking water for millions.
I'd imagine it's a bit out of date seeing what happened by this autumn
Views may well have hardened, but the fieldwork was done at the time when the IS stuff was first coming up on the TV, the Rotherham child abuse thing was in the news and Carswell and Reckless moved.
But wasn't it europe wide? Two of those things things are only concerned with england.
Not to mention Charlie Hebdo, Tunisian hotels and Belgian train bombers
Yes, it was Europe wide, but there should, I imagine, be a UK specific result included.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
I'd wonder why anyone would want bright, young, educated graduates who have completed a degree in the country to go home. Its funny how often people bark on about how the immigrants are all uneducated poor ones but then it seems many tens of thousands are exactly the kind we'd want to encourage except they're already here. Bargain.
Many courses of study are not very challenging. It can still be a ticket for UK residence in practice.
Jeremy Corbyn is ruthlessly using the tools at his disposal to take Labour party policy in the direction he wishes.
Those who naively think that he's only going to act as a stopgap leader should start examining the evidence to the contrary.
I expect him to be here in 2020 and to hand over to another leader. Labour have handed over the party to people who know how to retain power. Aided by a few useful idiots like Weathercock Burnham...he who swivels to follow the prevailing wind.
@bbclaurak: Now HIlary Benn, Falconer, and Eagle all disputing Corbyn's ruling out of nuclear
How can they dispute it? Surely it is the PMs right to decide on issues like that. The cabinet can vote on renewing Trident but they can't vote to force the PM to press the button.
lt would make a good film though. How would they get the codes out of him? Probably been done in a US context.
Who'd have believed it, concern over immigration at an all time high yet still some pbers tell the majority they're wrong.
Ah but I know a lovely Polish family, ah but our corner shop owner is lovely, ah but the NHS would collapse etc etc.
Mr JEO says below that the majority of tories have concerns, so do the majority of labour voters.
Since when have we had or supported government by opinion polling?
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
You make my point well, the majority support lower taxes but the vocal minority scream about fairness and distribution. With immigration the majority express concerns but the vocal minority know best.
It depends upon the question asked, the majority typically support higher taxes on other people but the minority know that's a bad idea. That is the same as migration.
Eh? The majority want lower taxes for everybody, a minority simply want to soak the rich.
That is not what many opinion polls show and which is why politics by opinion polls is a pathetic idea and anyone who suggests it is barking mad.
I haven't suggested politics by opinion poll, as you well know, I'm simply pointing out that those who encourage immigration are in a minority, obfuscate all you wish.
Nobody disputes that its a minority, doesn't stop the minority from being right. As they often are, eg on taxes.
Ask the right question and you'll find a majority in favour of increasing taxes on the right, a majority in favour of increased spending etc, etc - and many PB Tories would oppose all that quite rightly.
Thank you for pointing out that I'm wrong, I'm very grateful. I'm hopeful that in future you can point me in the right direction when the opinion of the majority of people is wrong.
Perhaps you can start by showing that the MAJORITY want higher taxes, the GE somewhat contradicts your esteemed opinion.
As you said the party that proposed increasing the top rate of tax to 50p recently lost the election despite YouGov finding 61% in support of it. Oops kind of blows a hole in the argument that opinion polls are flawless (as if the election hadn't done that already). I'll happily accept your apology whenever you're ready.
It has become increasingly clear to me that EU membership means we have to accept that other governments, many of which are either much softer, or much more corrupt, than we are, can hand out passports to live in the UK permanently.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
I'd wonder why anyone would want bright, young, educated graduates who have completed a degree in the country to go home. Its funny how often people bark on about how the immigrants are all uneducated poor ones but then it seems many tens of thousands are exactly the kind we'd want to encourage except they're already here. Bargain.
Many courses of study are not very challenging. It can still be a ticket for UK residence in practice.
That should be addressed if its an issue for the sake of our own young far more than migrants. A degree costs around £30k at least in fees and taxes so why would we be encouraging worthless degrees for our own students to flourish?
@JGForsyth: No respectful silence this time, Corbyn belting out the Red Flag
Why won't he just play by the rules eh?
Basic honesty would be a reasonable start.
If you want to cancel an interview - fine do it. But don't lie and say it is because of a health issue and then appear in full health a couple of hours later.
That is fundamentally dishonest - nothing more, nothing less.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
I'd wonder why anyone would want bright, young, educated graduates who have completed a degree in the country to go home. Its funny how often people bark on about how the immigrants are all uneducated poor ones but then it seems many tens of thousands are exactly the kind we'd want to encourage except they're already here. Bargain.
Because many of the universities we are talking about offer a very poor quality education and know full well their offer is not a quality certification but a route into the UK. If these are skilled people, they should be able to qualify as a skilled migrant.
As I have said before on here when we already have immigrant communities of several million with strong family, religious and cultural links back to their countries of origin the idea that we will have less than 100K net immigration a year is frankly absurd.
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
I think this is spot on. When you add in the 50 000 students each year that do not go home and 30 000 Tier 4 visas there is not much scope to realistically cut immigration to the historical levels prevailing in the Seventies. Apart from elect a Seventies style socialist who would cause mass emigration!
I'd wonder why anyone would want bright, young, educated graduates who have completed a degree in the country to go home. Its funny how often people bark on about how the immigrants are all uneducated poor ones but then it seems many tens of thousands are exactly the kind we'd want to encourage except they're already here. Bargain.
Because many of the universities we are talking about offer a very poor quality education and know full well their offer is not a quality certification but a route into the UK. If these are skilled people, they should be able to qualify as a skilled migrant.
Already responded but yes there should be a minimum standard for university education for the sake of both our own young and migration. Fake colleges are (rightly) being tackled already.
Be careful Mr TSE. It wouldn't surprise me at all if things turned nasty. The Rentamob seems very energised by Corbyn's victory.
I'll cope, remember I was the only Liverpool fan in Manchester when Manchester United and their fans decided to have a parade right past my doorstep. Must have been 200,000 then.
Comments
This would only be possible if the right of UK citizens to marry who they like and then have their spouse come and live with them in the UK was taken away. The right is already restricted by an income level of £24k and some fairly intrusive tests to establish whether or not it is a sham marriage. I don't think we can do much more except at the margins.
In short, the pass was sold when these communities were allowed to establish themselves and then positively encouraged to retain those links by the deluded policies of multi-culturalism. Any politician that tries to tell you otherwise without indicating that what have been considered fairly inalienable rights are going to be taken away is just lying.
One of the problems of the moment is that there is an extension of these rights from our own citizens to those of the EU. Anecdotally, from friends who act in immigration cases, love is positively blooming between eastern Europeans and would be immigrants such as those here on student visas. The romance of it all touches my ENFP soul but the consequences for immigration are severe.
There's a suspicion with Corbyn that he is in favour of the very type of mass immigration that most of the public favour least. Mass immigration of Syrian migrants
If the majority support higher taxes does that mean that every single PBer should believe in higher taxes?
Morris dancing *is* reasonable behaviour.
"Huge numbers of Britons would support an anti-immigration English nationalist party if it was not associated with violence and fascist imagery, according to the largest survey into identity and extremism conducted in the UK.
A Populus poll found that 48% of the population would consider supporting a new anti-immigration party committed to challenging Islamist extremism, and would support policies to make it statutory for all public buildings to fly the flag of St George or the union flag.
According to the survey, 39% of Asian Britons, 34% of white Britons and 21% of black Britons wanted all immigration into the UK to be stopped permanently, or at least until the economy improved. And 43% of Asian Britons, 63% of white Britons and 17% of black Britons agreed with the statement that "immigration into Britain has been a bad thing for the country". Just over half of respondents – 52% – agreed with the proposition that "Muslims create problems in the UK".
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/27/support-poll-support-far-right
The fact that dare not speak its name is that the immigrants people are really concerned about are muslims from the Indian sub continent, Middle East and Africa.
The EU??? bovered. Asia??? No problem. South America?? Don;t care
UKIP as a protest party gained half of the votes the ex protest party that had become a party of government (ie the Lib Dems) had lost, at an election in which both major parties increased their share of the vote.
There is a very limited pool of protest voters to continue to fish from if the two party shares continue to increase. Don't be arrogant and assume that they'll continue to grow.
As usual, you prefer to lie than tell the truth.
Again - why does the National think she isn't part of the investigation - and if she isn't - why was she leant on ?
Sorry mate, whites only, you're not really British.
Its a divisive, offensive and loaded poll the results will be meaningless.
"up to no good", the pair of them.
Any implication that Michelle Thomson is an SNP MP is a lie. She is an Independent MP.
Poor Dair - hasn't quite got the hang of things. I am sure coming months will give him plenty more opportunities to be a vocal apologist for the failings of the SNP.
Or is it guilty until proven innocent in the Brave New World of the SNP?
Those who naively think that he's only going to act as a stopgap leader should start examining the evidence to the contrary.
The view seems to be ...."it needs sorting out." but no one wants to say that it probably won't be.
I suspect that the majority are concerned with quality as much as quantity (although numbers are important). But we seem reluctant to grasp that nettle as it may be thought to be racist when it's actually quality-ist.
I don't care what colour they are as long they want to integrate, learn the language, and be productive. Why is that view wrong?
Jump back and forth
And feel like you were there yourself;
Work it out.
Never did no harm.
He has just joined the ranks of the discredited Palmers.
Ask the right question and you'll find a majority in favour of increasing taxes on the right, a majority in favour of increased spending etc, etc - and many PB Tories would oppose all that quite rightly.
@kevverage: So presumably she must have knowingly withheld this information? https://t.co/J3pye2ol2e
If only people could admit they were wrong, it might get sorted
Who should admit it?
As an example, I recently married a Ukranian lady having met a couple of years ago whilst we were both working in Dubai. I am British.
Under UK rules I would have to meet the 24k test and interviews etc. to get her leave to remain in the UK should I move back. To get her a work permit would be another bureaucratic exercise, she is a teacher and translator of Russian, would easily find a well paying job in the UK.
If I were Romanian, the Romanian govt would give her a passport on marriage and she would be allowed to settle and work in the UK as an EU citizen, no questions asked.
Anecdotal evidence from acquaintances suggests that the authorities in recently joined EU countries are not as upstanding as those in Western Europe, and that eg a Romanian passport office official earning $5,000 a year could easily find a spare passport with my wife's photo for a similar amount of money.
In summary, the UK are making people jump through hoops, whereas most people are not playing by the rules. Romanians ladies marrying Nigerian students (for money) is an obvious one, there are many more similar scams out there - before we talk about arranged marriages from Pakistan.
Not to mention Charlie Hebdo, Tunisian hotels and Belgian train bombers
We really have to ask why, people whose parents or grandparents came from Country X are marrying people from Country X at such a high rate. If these second and third generation immigrants are truly integrated, they shouldn't be marrying from Country X at a much higher rate than other British nationals.
I suspect the answer is mostly down to arranged marriages, and that is something that should absolutely be looked at. There are enough British Pakistanis, British Indians and British Bangladeshis that there's a wealth of brides and grooms available here, even if they refuse to marry someone outside their ethnic group. Unless you want a nice submissive wife from some rural backwater, of course.
Perhaps you can start by showing that the MAJORITY want higher taxes, the GE somewhat contradicts your esteemed opinion.
Now in quarter final of this major event (Wuhan) as a qualifier.
This was one bet I had given up on at 1-5 but now very happy as tennis remains my favourite sport (I even still play! )
Well the original ones, Roy Jenkins, Lord lester, even Trevor Phillips, already have admitted they were wrong... It's just that the current lot can't while they're still in office and craving power
A kinder brand of politics.
Yeh right
Given the incompetence, corruption and endemic inability to control security:
The program will fail because:
-all the money for it is stolen.
-the equipment won't work as the suppliers stole the money.
- the equipment works but there are no staff as their salaries are stolen and they strike
- everything works but nothing happens as the expensive nuclear isotopes are stolen.
- nothing is stolen but the security staff are asleep when terrorists bomb the place.
- the nuclear isotopes are lost and dumped in a lake used to provide drinking water for millions.
and so on.
I might wear my morning suit and top hat though and spray champagne at them.
What on earth is the business model !
61% support an increased top rate of tax to 50p: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/28/majority-support-50p-tax/
As you said the party that proposed increasing the top rate of tax to 50p recently lost the election despite YouGov finding 61% in support of it. Oops kind of blows a hole in the argument that opinion polls are flawless (as if the election hadn't done that already). I'll happily accept your apology whenever you're ready.
It has become increasingly clear to me that EU membership means we have to accept that other governments, many of which are either much softer, or much more corrupt, than we are, can hand out passports to live in the UK permanently.
It seems like a fatal flaw in the system.
Happy with the comment.
No time for a Malc Mud Wrestle today.
If you want to cancel an interview - fine do it. But don't lie and say it is because of a health issue and then appear in full health a couple of hours later.
That is fundamentally dishonest - nothing more, nothing less.
I think I understand why Labour elected Corbyn now - to make the rest of them look competent.
It's their detoxifying strategy.
Be careful Mr TSE. It wouldn't surprise me at all if things turned nasty. The Rentamob seems very energised by Corbyn's victory.
It's awkward living/working in two different places at once.
"Nothing to do with us ... whistle whistle whistle".
Expelled from membership 2 days later iirc.
I can cope with 100,000 soap dodging lefties.