Geert Wilders' victory in Netherlands election spooks Europe

[thaibeachlovers]

3 minutes ago, Capt Rob said:

Whilst admiring and supporting the forthrightness of most contributors - i believe a great many issues in 'our' world are due to folk being led away from reality.

Have been encouraged of late by the collective work of "ARC" organisation.

This altruistic themed group are attempting a world reset to reality.

Not sure that this will be popular with all but, a marked improvement for most. It is not nation centric.

Seems like a good way to develop a better culture, but the forces of darkness will never allow it to flourish, IMO.

Seems to me that the bad people are winning. I fear for the future, and hope not to be around to see the end.

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, Wrwest said:

There is the current issue … of course no one wants to deal with the underlying cause of the immigration influx … it takes far too much effort (thought and action).

Just follow the money if one wants to know why countries on a certain continent are a disaster. Look at who has got most of it.

[youreavinalaff]

19 hours ago, RayC said:

 

And which part of my previous (admittedly sarcastic) post leads you to conclude that I don't know the difference between EU and non-EU migrants?

 

Actually forget that last paragraph. I admit that I don't know the difference. Anything to avoid disappearing into another of your 'Alice in Wonderland' type rabbit holes where everything is deniable by use of pedantic semantics. 

The word " scrounging" is the simple answer.

 

No wonderland. Just incorrect posting by you.

[RayC]

1 hour ago, youreavinalaff said:

The word " scrounging" is the simple answer.

 

No wonderland. Just incorrect posting by you.

 

I won't go to Wonderland so you bring your alter ego, the Hatter, to see me. How kind!

 

I have no idea how that answers my question but please🙏 don't bother trying to explain. Thanks.

 

As I mentioned previously, l agree with you: I can't tell the difference between legal and illegal immigration.

[youreavinalaff]

4 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I won't go to Wonderland so you bring your alter ego, the Hatter, to see me. How kind!

 

I have no idea how that answers my question but please🙏 don't bother trying to explain. Thanks.

 

As I mentioned previously, l agree with you: I can't tell the difference between legal and illegal immigration.

I don't recall mentioning illegal immigration. In fact, I made a point of saying those "being legally in Britain".

 

No alter egos. Just saying things how they are. 

 

Good, attempted wriggle by you though. 

 

 

[tonbridgebrit]

What on earth are we seeing ?  The Dutch have voted for their new government, and there's speculation that Holland might do it's own version of Brexit. I really can't see Holland leaving the EU.

And if Holland does do a Brexit, I reckon the people there should look at Britain.
Britain did Brexit, something that I didn't support. One of the sensible reasons for voting for Brexit was, was that Britain did not want be part of a new, single European nation. People in Britain don't want to be governed by a building in Brussels, Belgium.

But what was the biggest real reason for cheering on Brexit ? Simple, it was about reducing immigration. And in particular, reducing the number of coloureds entering Britain. So, what's actually happened ?


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67506641

The above is from the BBC. In 2022, a record high number of immigrants went into Britain. Brexit has basically reduced the number of EU people (as in Eastern Europeans, Eastern Europeans are white) entering into Britain, and. And it has increased the number of non-EU people entering Britain. Non-EU people, that's non-Eiropeans, that means coloureds from places like Africa, Middle East and Far East. And throw in Latin Americans, we're talking Brazil here.

Yes, Britain has a housing crisis. Not enough new homes are being built. But Brexit has not helped the situation. Brexit has replaced a load of white Eastern Europeans with a bigger number of coloureds.  

 

[tonbridgebrit]

The Dutch should be carefull, just because you voted for whatever stuff, that don't mean to say it's going to happen. Look at Britain. And whatever anybody says, Holland's not leaving the EU. And there isn't going to be a reduction of immigrants entering Holland.

Let's all smirk, "did you really reckon that democracy is actually there, did you really reckon, whether your views are good or bad, did you reckon you'ill get things your way, even if you do make up a considerable percentage of the population ? "  .

[Bday Prang]

On 11/24/2023 at 12:53 AM, sirineou said:

Either have more children or replace your population with immigrants.

That's fine as long as we manage it properly.  Firstly we need to  stop immigration by  people who may  despise us and our culture, or even  wish to kill us. better safe than sorry,  so why not an all out ban on Muslim immigrants everywhere ?   that would be a good start,. and as they say , "if it saves even just one life it will have been  worth it"

 

 

[sirineou]

4 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

That's fine as long as we manage it properly.  Firstly we need to  stop immigration by  people who may  despise us and our culture, or even  wish to kill us. better safe than sorry,  so why not an all out ban on Muslim immigrants everywhere ?   that would be a good start,. and as they say , "if it saves even just one life it will have been  worth it"

 

 

Of course manage. 

The problem is that different people have different ideas how to manage. 

   First we need to understand that immigrants will come from places that need to migrate to our country. No one wants to leave their country and culture, their family, friends they grew up with , and language to come to your country where they don't understand our culture, our language, have no friends,unless they have to. So you will not get Belgians and Swedes, you will  get people from exotic places with which you have little in common. 

   Second .  When asked why he robbed banks, Sutton simply replied, “Because that's where the money is. A bit of the same with immigration, We will get people from where the people are . or where conditions are bad enough that people are willing to put up with coming to our country.  That would more often than not , be from muslim countries. Why? because Muslims have a higher birth rate.and conditions there are bad. 

"so why not an all out ban on Muslim immigrants everywhere  " partly , as I explained above. " "That's where you will find conditions and birth rated conducive to producing people willing to migrate"

Also because  like every other human population, not all Muslims are the same, for the most part Muslims are decent , hard working , and many of them very well educated. 

And there is a  vocal minority that hates us.  Will we throw the baby out with the bath water?

   Did you ever stop and think why they hate us? Do you think it's because they are genetically predisposed to hate us? or do you think we do things that cause them to hate us?  Perhaps we might want to think about doing a bit less of the thinks that makes them hate us.  

[Bday Prang]

35 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Of course manage. 

The problem is that different people have different ideas how to manage. 

   First we need to understand that immigrants will come from places that need to migrate to our country. No one wants to leave their country and culture, their family, friends they grew up with , and language to come to your country where they don't understand our culture, our language, have no friends,unless they have to. So you will not get Belgians and Swedes, you will  get people from exotic places with which you have little in common. 

   Second .  When asked why he robbed banks, Sutton simply replied, “Because that's where the money is. A bit of the same with immigration, We will get people from where the people are . or where conditions are bad enough that people are willing to put up with coming to our country.  That would more often than not , be from muslim countries. Why? because Muslims have a higher birth rate.and conditions there are bad. 

"so why not an all out ban on Muslim immigrants everywhere  " partly , as I explained above. " "That's where you will find conditions and birth rated conducive to producing people willing to migrate"

Also because  like every other human population, not all Muslims are the same, for the most part Muslims are decent , hard working , and many of them very well educated. 

And there is a  vocal minority that hates us.  Will we throw the baby out with the bath water?

   Did you ever stop and think why they hate us? Do you think it's because they are genetically predisposed to hate us? or do you think we do things that cause them to hate us?  Perhaps we might want to think about doing a bit less of the thinks that makes them hate us.  

Nobody "needs" to migrate to a specific country, especially those claiming to be refugees/ asylum seekers. Only illegals have a preferred target destination

The UK for example would not be overrun with them if they were not able to abuse the benefit system there, Anyway there are plenty of miserable impoverished countries that are not muslim. Catholics are not big on birth control either and are far less volatile, I'm sure South America alone could meet the needs of most of Europe 

 Many people are only too happy to leave the poverty and desperation of their own countries,  I could not wait to leave the UK lol

I have given some thought as to why they might hate "us" and have come to the conclusion it is not for anything that the average "man in the street" in the west  has done to them, but rather  that it is a result of the actions of various western governments.

So as neither I nor any other person  has much direct  influence over the actions of government, and  we are the ones targeted  for retribution by  these savages, the best thing for the west would be  to avoid importing any of  them to western countries. No need to worry about a bit of bath water, The last thing we need is "highly educated" potential terrorists that follow a barbaric medieval religion with aspirations of world domination at large in society. Don't forget they hate you just as much as they hate me, they hate the lefties just as much as the right wingers too.

The fact is that nobody really wants them if the truth be known, and anybody saying otherwise is either lying or virtue signalling

Edited November 27, 2023 by Bday Prang

[Neeranam]

On 11/24/2023 at 8:42 AM, JonnyF said:

The solution is not to import young, unskilled men with often questionable ideologies and spending taxpayers money to house them and give them benefits while pandering to their often anti-semitic, sexist views. The solution is to control our borders and get the 1.4 million unemployed into jobs to fill the vacant positions and spend taxpayers money to help those genuinely in need (the elderly, the disabled, the sick etc

How about get the unemployed to patrol the borders and keep those boatloads of illegals out? 

It's not rocket science, do what Thailand does to illegal immigrants. 

[sirineou]

4 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

 Many people are only too happy to leave the poverty and desperation of their own countries I could not wait to leave the UK lol

 

This whole concept went way over your head.

Of course they would want to come to the UK, and ofcourse they would want to stay .

They would not if conditions were better at their own countries. Do you think  they  wants to leave their family , country , and friends , to come to the UK for the wonderful, climate, wood and people.?

I am sure you will agree that if conditions were better at their country of origin ,  they would rather stay with their family country and friends. 

So consequently, the places you will get immigrants would be from distressed locations. This is a universally accepted concept among sociologists.  

   So the hispanic countries of the Americas then? 

Problem is, it is too far for UK immigration. Not easy for them to get to the UK as African and Middle Eastern  locations. Immigrants lacking in recourses will take the path of least resistance. 

Where it is easier, such as going to the US, they do. You don't think people in the US are having problems with immigration from south and central America? 

15 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

The Uk for example would not be overun with them if they were not able to abuse the benefit system there,

Do they " "Abuse it" ? or do they "Use" it ? Obviously immigrants by definition would would be poor, with our social safety nets ,and as such would require assistance. Obviously the benefit they provide , would be greater than the cost , otherwise immigration would not be desirable. 

21 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

I have given some thought as to why they might hate "us" and have come to the conclusion it is not for anything that the average "man in the street" in the west  has done to them but rather  that it is a result of the actions of various western governments.

Nonsense, 

It is our goverment. and such actions are supported by our taxes.

We paid for it. 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

First we need to understand that immigrants will come from places that need to migrate to our country. No one wants to leave their country and culture, their family, friends they grew up with , and language to come to your country where they don't understand our culture, our language, have no friends,unless they have to.

That's no reason to allow undocumented immigrants to stay. If they had qualifications actually needed, they could come by legal means.

 

The real problem is that countries don't force the lazy to work and don't pay enough to get those that want to work to do the jobs that are given to illegals.

 

Anyway, in the not too distant future robots will do those jobs and millions of culturally different will end up existing on a pittance as not legally in the country. A recipe for chaos.

[thaibeachlovers]

40 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Nonsense, 

It is our goverment. and such actions are supported by our taxes.

We paid for it. 

LOL. Almost everything the government does I disagree with, but I have no way to make them stop wasting my tax money.

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That's no reason to allow undocumented immigrants to stay. If they had qualifications actually needed, they could come by legal means.

 

The real problem is that countries don't force the lazy to work and don't pay enough to get those that want to work to do the jobs that are given to illegals.

 

Anyway, in the not too distant future robots will do those jobs and millions of culturally different will end up existing on a pittance as not legally in the country. A recipe for chaos.

"don't pay enough to get those that want to work to do the jobs that are given to illegals."

This bit I agree with. Let's look at Texas, USA. Rich people want cheap labour. A simplified picture is this. A man wants somebody to cut the grass in his back garden. He can get somebody who is born in America to cut this grass, or, a migrant worker, or illegal immigrant. He wants the cheapest option. Hence, the real reason why America is not carrying out a mass-deportation of illegals is because, the illegals are cheap labour.

Forcing the lazy to work ?  Well, I'm not in favour of cutting and reducing state benefits. But yes, reducing such benefits will force people into jobs.

If the cheaper migrant labour was to disappear, well, it would force companies to pay higher wages. But that's not going to happen. Rich people and big companies have far greater power over government than poor or average workers. And yes, what's happening in Britain is a diluted version of what's happening in Texas, America.

[JonnyF]

16 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

But what was the biggest real reason for cheering on Brexit ? Simple, it was about reducing immigration. And in particular, reducing the number of coloureds entering Britain. So, what's actually happened ?

 

Not sure where to start with this one. 

 

Let's start with "Coloureds"? Are you serious? I haven't heard that term since the 70's. 

 

Brexit was nothing to do with reducing the number of "Coloureds" as you so beautifully describe them. It was about removing ourselves from the failing federalist corrupt project that is the EU. It was about being led by people that we elect, not people appointed by a convoluted/fake version of Democracy in Brussels. It was about our tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries. It was about taking back our sovereignty from a German/Franco led technocracy.

 

"Coloureds" have been accepted in Britain for a long time. They are our politicians, our footballers, our comedians, our friends and relatives. Your view of Brexit is so wide of the mark it's not even funny. I take that back, it is actually pretty funny. 

[EastBayRay]

Wilders is only saying what many folks are thinking.

 

that’s why he won.

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Not sure where to start with this one. 

 

Let's start with "Coloureds"? Are you serious? I haven't heard that term since the 70's. 

 

Brexit was nothing to do with reducing the number of "Coloureds" as you so beautifully describe them. It was about removing ourselves from the failing federalist corrupt project that is the EU. It was about being led by people that we elect, not people appointed by a convoluted/fake version of Democracy in Brussels. It was about our tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries. It was about taking back our sovereignty from a German/Franco led technocracy.

 

"Coloureds" have been accepted in Britain for a long time. They are our politicians, our footballers, our comedians, our friends and relatives. Your view of Brexit is so wide of the mark it's not even funny. I take that back, it is actually pretty funny. 

I did actually write on my post about the sensible reason that some people had, for voting for Brexit. 
Yes, the EU is the creation of a new nation, with a capital in Brussels. EU citizens vote, and put a government into Brussels. It is this government, that controls the EU.  Most British people prefer British voters voting for a government that will be based in London, and that it will be this British government that controls Britain.

You mentioned about "tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries".  Well yes, there was people really thinking that British tax payers money was being used to subsidise EU countries that were poor. In my opinion, that's not a sensible reason for, for voting for Brexit. The idea that richer EU nations subsidise the poorer ones has been exaggerated greatly. Britain's far better off economically, being in the EU, than being out. Rich EU nations that are giving tiny subsidies to poorer ones, well, the richer nations benefit far more by staying in the EU.

This thing about using the word "coloureds".  If you've been back home in England, or if you drink in bars in Pattaya, you will notice people using terms far more offensive that "coloureds".  People make comments like "back home in Britain, a place full of P_k_s ".
Some people on this forum have a problem with the word "coloureds", why's that ?  Sometimes, because of this. A man is in Thailand, hasn't got a problem with Thai people, and thinks about taking his Thai girlfriend back home to Britain. He then realises that his Thai girfriend (or Philippines) is regarded as a coloured person. Yes, in the same way that West Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, etc, are also coloureds, when in Britain.
Yes, we know about the hilarious story about the Australian bloke, he supported "Keep Australia White". But he had his Thai wife in Australia.  


Finally, Brexit and stopping coloureds entering Britain. Brexit was something that was not going to stop coloureds entering Britain. And indeed, as I said, it hasn't stopped coloureds entering Britain. But, it is the case that the guys behind Brexit used this issue to get people to vote for Brexit. Yes, tell people that Brexit will do this if it's voted for, but after it had been voted for, well, coloureds weren't stopped from entering Britain. Below is the picture used, just days prior to the vote back in 2016.

Edited November 27, 2023 by tonbridgebrit

[JonnyF]

37 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

I did actually write on my post about the sensible reason that some people had, for voting for Brexit. 
Yes, the EU is the creation of a new nation, with a capital in Brussels. EU citizens vote, and put a government into Brussels. It is this government, that controls the EU.  Most British people prefer British voters voting for a government that will be based in London, and that it will be this British government that controls Britain.

You mentioned about "tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries".  Well yes, there was people really thinking that British tax payers money was being used to subsidise EU countries that were poor. In my opinion, that's not a sensible reason for, for voting for Brexit. The idea that richer EU nations subsidise the poorer ones has been exaggerated greatly. Britain's far better off economically, being in the EU, than being out. Rich EU nations that are giving tiny subsidies to poorer ones, well, the richer nations benefit far more by staying in the EU.

This thing about using the word "coloureds".  If you've been back home in England, or if you drink in bars in Pattaya, you will notice people using terms far more offensive that "coloureds".  People make comments like "back home in Britain, a place full of P_k_s ".
Some people on this forum have a problem with the word "coloureds", why's that ?  Sometimes, because of this. A man is in Thailand, hasn't got a problem with Thai people, and thinks about taking his Thai girlfriend back home to Britain. He then realises that his Thai girfriend (or Philippines) is regarded as a coloured person. Yes, in the same way that West Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, etc, are also coloureds, when in Britain.
Yes, we know about the hilarious story about the Australian bloke, he supported "Keep Australia White". But he had his Thai wife in Australia.  


Finally, Brexit and stopping coloureds entering Britain. Brexit was something that was not going to stop coloureds entering Britain. And indeed, as I said, it hasn't stopped coloureds entering Britain. But, it is the case that the guys behind Brexit used this issue to get people to vote for Brexit. Yes, tell people that Brexit will do this if it's voted for, but after it had been voted for, well, coloureds weren't stopped from entering Britain. Below is the picture used, just days prior to the vote back in 2016.

 

The fact that Pro Leave used that poster does not reflect on the views of voters, it reflects on some people running the pro Leave campaign.

 

And let's face it, does it really look that much different than London in 2023? The main difference I can see is that the Vote Leave poster portrays the people as being quite peaceful and shows no signs of anti-semitism. 

 

The "real" pictures are shown below.

 

 

 

 

[sirineou]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. Almost everything the government does I disagree with, but I have no way to make them stop wasting my tax money.

It all starts with one. 

I realise that in every country there is a significant number of people that disagree with it's policy and do the best they can to oppose it . On both ends of the political spectrum.

But IMO it is  cop out to say it's not us . it is our goverment! .  

For all the good things we proudly declare , It is my country , but for the bad things "It is not us it is our goverment" ! do you see the discrepancy? 

No one is innocent, it is only that some are more innocent than others. 

[Neeranam]

"To reduce hotel use, asylum seekers will routinely share rooms with at least one person where appropriate. This will minimise the impact on communities while we stand up alternative sites.”

 

Shocking these people have to share a room in a nice hotel.

 

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen-aberdeenshire/6071275/aberdeen-asylum-seeker-hotel-doubling-up/

[sirineou]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That's no reason to allow undocumented immigrants to stay. If they had qualifications actually needed, they could come by legal means.

I agree with you. Immigration need to be managed so that each country addresses its own needs.

If illegal immigration is allowed, not only does the system falls apart. but it encourages more illegal immigration. But I am afraid that some people confuse immigrants with refugees. 

I am sure many "refugees are realy economic immigrants" but there are situations where people are real refugees and their lives are really in danger. 

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The real problem is that countries don't force the lazy to work and don't pay enough to get those that want to work to do the jobs that are given to illegals.

Forcing people to work is a slippery slope, but incentives could be provided to induce people to work. 

Putting aside the labor shortages, The excuse is always Americans do not want to pick produce in the farms. Nooooo, Americans don't want to pick produce  for $5 and hour, Pay them $15 an hour and you will see how many Americans will want to do it.  

But , but, it will make produce more expensive! Sure it will   but that's the price you have to pay. Otherwise you need to bring in seasonal labor . foreigner  comes in, picks the produce. makes some money  and then goes back home. 

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyway, in the not too distant future robots will do those jobs and millions of culturally different will end up existing on a pittance as not legally in the country. A recipe for chaos.

Indeed that a solution. But before it happens there will be significant , domestic, and international  dislocation.

When they talk about Universal income , many start screaming socialism. 

There will be resistance. and the players will use those who scream socialism  for their own political ambitions.  It will only happen after the pain is so intense that "Socialism" would be the only viable solution.But until then there will be a lot of pain. 

Remember, Production is only one part of the economics equation. Without consumers production is useless. 

I am afraid we are heading for very interesting times.

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

I did actually write on my post about the sensible reason that some people had, for voting for Brexit. 
Yes, the EU is the creation of a new nation, with a capital in Brussels. EU citizens vote, and put a government into Brussels. It is this government, that controls the EU.  Most British people prefer British voters voting for a government that will be based in London, and that it will be this British government that controls Britain.

You mentioned about "tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries".  Well yes, there was people really thinking that British tax payers money was being used to subsidise EU countries that were poor. In my opinion, that's not a sensible reason for, for voting for Brexit. The idea that richer EU nations subsidise the poorer ones has been exaggerated greatly. Britain's far better off economically, being in the EU, than being out. Rich EU nations that are giving tiny subsidies to poorer ones, well, the richer nations benefit far more by staying in the EU.

This thing about using the word "coloureds".  If you've been back home in England, or if you drink in bars in Pattaya, you will notice people using terms far more offensive that "coloureds".  People make comments like "back home in Britain, a place full of P_k_s ".
Some people on this forum have a problem with the word "coloureds", why's that ?  Sometimes, because of this. A man is in Thailand, hasn't got a problem with Thai people, and thinks about taking his Thai girlfriend back home to Britain. He then realises that his Thai girfriend (or Philippines) is regarded as a coloured person. Yes, in the same way that West Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, etc, are also coloureds, when in Britain.
Yes, we know about the hilarious story about the Australian bloke, he supported "Keep Australia White". But he had his Thai wife in Australia.  


Finally, Brexit and stopping coloureds entering Britain. Brexit was something that was not going to stop coloureds entering Britain. And indeed, as I said, it hasn't stopped coloureds entering Britain. But, it is the case that the guys behind Brexit used this issue to get people to vote for Brexit. Yes, tell people that Brexit will do this if it's voted for, but after it had been voted for, well, coloureds weren't stopped from entering Britain. Below is the picture used, just days prior to the vote back in 2016.

 

A varied menu but all tasting of the same sheet.

[candide]

8 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

I did actually write on my post about the sensible reason that some people had, for voting for Brexit. 
Yes, the EU is the creation of a new nation, with a capital in Brussels. EU citizens vote, and put a government into Brussels. It is this government, that controls the EU.  Most British people prefer British voters voting for a government that will be based in London, and that it will be this British government that controls Britain.

You mentioned about "tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries".  Well yes, there was people really thinking that British tax payers money was being used to subsidise EU countries that were poor. In my opinion, that's not a sensible reason for, for voting for Brexit. The idea that richer EU nations subsidise the poorer ones has been exaggerated greatly. Britain's far better off economically, being in the EU, than being out. Rich EU nations that are giving tiny subsidies to poorer ones, well, the richer nations benefit far more by staying in the EU.

This thing about using the word "coloureds".  If you've been back home in England, or if you drink in bars in Pattaya, you will notice people using terms far more offensive that "coloureds".  People make comments like "back home in Britain, a place full of P_k_s ".
Some people on this forum have a problem with the word "coloureds", why's that ?  Sometimes, because of this. A man is in Thailand, hasn't got a problem with Thai people, and thinks about taking his Thai girlfriend back home to Britain. He then realises that his Thai girfriend (or Philippines) is regarded as a coloured person. Yes, in the same way that West Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, etc, are also coloureds, when in Britain.
Yes, we know about the hilarious story about the Australian bloke, he supported "Keep Australia White". But he had his Thai wife in Australia.  


Finally, Brexit and stopping coloureds entering Britain. Brexit was something that was not going to stop coloureds entering Britain. And indeed, as I said, it hasn't stopped coloureds entering Britain. But, it is the case that the guys behind Brexit used this issue to get people to vote for Brexit. Yes, tell people that Brexit will do this if it's voted for, but after it had been voted for, well, coloureds weren't stopped from entering Britain. Below is the picture used, just days prior to the vote back in 2016.

Not to mention the fact that most of these "coloured" people did not immigrate to UK because of the EU, but because of the former British Empire (or the current Commonwealth, if one prefers).

[JonnyF]

11 hours ago, candide said:

Not to mention the fact that most of these "coloured" people did not immigrate to UK because of the EU, but because of the former British Empire (or the current Commonwealth, if one prefers).

 

Many of the immigrants from the 50's and 60's came from the Carribean (particularly Jamaica) and they generally assimilated very well. They came legally, they worked, they spoke English, they shared our values, they played sports (cricket in particular but later football) and became part of the community. A real success story.

 

Totally different to the last twenty years where many immigrants are illegal, do not speak English, do not wish to assimilate, do not share our values and in some cases are anti semitic and want to introduce Sharia law in their communities.  

 

Different demographic. Different circumstances. Different results. 

 

[candide]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Many of the immigrants from the 50's and 60's came from the Carribean (particularly Jamaica) and they generally assimilated very well. They came legally, they worked, they spoke English, they shared our values, they played sports (cricket in particular but later football) and became part of the community. A real success story.

 

Totally different to the last twenty years where many immigrants are illegal, do not speak English, do not wish to assimilate, do not share our values and in some cases are anti semitic and want to introduce Sharia law in their communities.  

 

Different demographic. Different circumstances. Different results. 

 

I replied to a post mentioning "This thing about using the word "coloureds".  If you've been back home in England, or if you drink in bars in Pattaya, you will notice people using terms far more offensive that "coloureds".  People make comments like "back home in Britain, a place full of P_k_s"

I doubt they came to UK because of the EU.....

[nauseus]

14 hours ago, candide said:

Not to mention the fact that most of these "coloured" people did not immigrate to UK because of the EU, but because of the former British Empire (or the current Commonwealth, if one prefers).

 

It was actually more because of Germany. 

[youreavinalaff]

On 11/27/2023 at 5:39 AM, tonbridgebrit said:

I did actually write on my post about the sensible reason that some people had, for voting for Brexit. 
Yes, the EU is the creation of a new nation, with a capital in Brussels. EU citizens vote, and put a government into Brussels. It is this government, that controls the EU.  Most British people prefer British voters voting for a government that will be based in London, and that it will be this British government that controls Britain.

You mentioned about "tax payers money being spent on Britain rather than other failing EU countries".  Well yes, there was people really thinking that British tax payers money was being used to subsidise EU countries that were poor. In my opinion, that's not a sensible reason for, for voting for Brexit. The idea that richer EU nations subsidise the poorer ones has been exaggerated greatly. Britain's far better off economically, being in the EU, than being out. Rich EU nations that are giving tiny subsidies to poorer ones, well, the richer nations benefit far more by staying in the EU.

This thing about using the word "coloureds".  If you've been back home in England, or if you drink in bars in Pattaya, you will notice people using terms far more offensive that "coloureds".  People make comments like "back home in Britain, a place full of P_k_s ".
Some people on this forum have a problem with the word "coloureds", why's that ?  Sometimes, because of this. A man is in Thailand, hasn't got a problem with Thai people, and thinks about taking his Thai girlfriend back home to Britain. He then realises that his Thai girfriend (or Philippines) is regarded as a coloured person. Yes, in the same way that West Indians, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, etc, are also coloureds, when in Britain.
Yes, we know about the hilarious story about the Australian bloke, he supported "Keep Australia White". But he had his Thai wife in Australia.  


Finally, Brexit and stopping coloureds entering Britain. Brexit was something that was not going to stop coloureds entering Britain. And indeed, as I said, it hasn't stopped coloureds entering Britain. But, it is the case that the guys behind Brexit used this issue to get people to vote for Brexit. Yes, tell people that Brexit will do this if it's voted for, but after it had been voted for, well, coloureds weren't stopped from entering Britain. Below is the picture used, just days prior to the vote back in 2016.

I've had absolutely no problems taking my wife into bars, pubs or other social places in UK.

 

I have never heard anyone give the reason for voting leave as "the coloureds"

 

I'm sure there are a small minority out there that don't like " coloureds" but it's not as widespread as you like to make out.

 

You are suggesting racism. Not liking immigration from EU is not being racist.It's certainly not a reason why most people voted leave. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 11/27/2023 at 4:51 PM, tonbridgebrit said:

Forcing the lazy to work ?  Well, I'm not in favour of cutting and reducing state benefits. But yes, reducing such benefits will force people into jobs.

I'm also not in favour of reducing benefits as that affects people that actually need them. However, cut all benefits for the able bodied that are able to work, but choose to live on benefits instead. Benefits are supposed to be for those that need them, not to allow the lazy to have a lifestyle they choose.

[condo62]

Maybe the start of taking back Europe....🤔