Why was IMMMIGRATION ignored in the budget>?

jojo1964

tomterm8 wrote: »

From http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/niem.htm , I believe.

Why has a quote, which refers to the nazis, been introduced to a debate on whether, or not, the government are enforcing the law in regards to asylum seekers? Are we debating whether to send them to the gas chambers? experiment on them? no we are discussing whether the Government is dealing with asylum seekers effectively.

tomterm8

jojo1964 wrote: »

Why has a quote, which refers to the nazis, been introduced to a debate on whether, or not, the government are enforcing the law in regards to asylum seekers? Are we debating whether to send them to the gas chambers? experiment on them? no we are discussing whether the Government is dealing with asylum seekers effectively.

I think it doesn't relate to the immigration debate, it relates to a side discussion about a BNP member earlier in the thread.

hethmar

Fire_Fox wrote: »

"When the Nazis came for the communists
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me."

Gawd, it does so annoy me that this is trotted out every time anyone speaks the truth, that this tiny island is being overcrowded by legal and illegal immigrants.

Have you thought how this could also be used to refer to us, the ones whose fathers, grandfathers and ancestors fought and worked for this country and never expected or received anything like newcomers expect and get now?

This country will be bled dry and meanwhile the EU benefits go to building up the countries these people are "escaping" from. We will be a third world country, we are heading that way already.

"there was no one left to speak out for me."

jojo1964

tomterm8 wrote: »

I think it doesn't relate to the immigration debate, it relates to a side discussion about a BNP member earlier in the thread.

If the BNP ever get any sort of power base, blame will be laid firmly at the feet of the present government, who seem more intent on trying to discredit the BNP, instead of looking at the reasons why people are voting for the BNP.

ninky_2

dervish wrote: »

what unites British people? :

The English language for one (or it should) - there is no excuse for 2nd or 3rd generation Pakistani families not using English.

i don't think you'll find any 2nd or 3rd generation pakistani's who can't speak english as they clearly will have been educated in english speaking schools.

and what about the welsh language? there are some welsh people who speak welsh with their families and in a large part of their daily lives. plus you have to speak it in school. plus road signs etc that are in welsh even though most other briton's can't understand it. if you are going to go down the nick griffin route of aboriginal britons then you have understand that 6000 years ago there was not a unified british language.

tomterm8

I've got to disagree, if people disagree with the current government policies, they should remove the government via democracy. If no party has the right policies, you start a new one.

People who vote for the BNP are making a positive decision, presumably because they agree with the BNP policies. They are responsible for their actions.

As to the other argument, I retract. You have proven your case. A good reason to get another government, if you ask me. I don't retract that Asylumn seekers should be deported if they are not in danger - that is the law.

hethmar

As far as I know, the Welsh speak welsh in their own country, dont they? Fair enough.

ninky_2

tomterm8 wrote: »

I'm sorry, I don't understand. When I was volunteering for the citizens advice bureau, we were taught that the key test is the right to reside. Your OH is an EU national (as a british citizen). and has a right to reside in the UK. This right also gives you a parasitic right to reside in the UK, as a spouse. If you are habitually resident in the UK (I am sure you are), then I very much believe you are entitled to child benefit. I would highly recommend contacting the Citizens Advice Bureau. The law changes very rapidly in this area, so I could be wrong.

this is not true. spouses of non-brit eu residents actually have greater rights to reside here since they are covered by eu legislation whilst the uk home office decides the rights of a spouse of a brit to reside here. my OH was initially refused the right to reside in the uk even thought we were married (took them 18 months after we applied to decide this) on the grounds that it did not affect our human right (article 8) to family life since i could go and live in iran (never mind the fact i didn't speak persian and would have to convert to islam). they did eventually allow him here on a spouse visa but only after he returned to iran (without me) and reapplied.

stressful times as we didn't know how the iranian govt would react or if and when he would get a visa to return to uk.

some brit spouses of refused asylum seekers have actually decided to move to ireland (assuming they can get their OH in) since there spouse has more rights there as an eu citizen.

tomterm8

From wikipedia:

The UK government has ratified the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages in respect of:

• Cornish (in Cornwall)
• Irish and Ulster Scots (in Northern Ireland)
• Scots and Scottish Gaelic (in Scotland)
• Welsh (in Wales)

Under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (which is not legally enforceable, but which requires states to adopt appropriate legal provision for the use of regional and minority languages) the UK government has committed itself to the recognition of certain regional languages and the promotion of certain linguistic traditions. The UK has ratified[5] for the higher level of protection (Section III) provided for by the Charter in respect of Welsh, Scottish Gaelic and Irish. Cornish, Scots in Scotland and Northern Ireland (in the latter territory officially known as Ulster Scots or Ullans, but in the speech of users simply as Scotch or Scots) are protected by the lower level only (Section II). The UK government has also recognised British Sign Language as a language in its own right[6] of the United Kingdom.

ninky_2

tomterm8 wrote: »

I stand by my opinion that it is the law that asylumn seekers should return home when it is safe to do so. And that very large numbers of them are deported every quarter.

sorry not true. a successful asylum claim will generally lead to refugee status which grants you a british passport. which is for life. if your claim is successful you will also get benefits backdated to the date you entered the country.

i hate to say this because i know it feeds into the xenophobic attitudes of some here but i know many asylumseekers who having claimed their life is in danger if returning home on getting their british passport immediately head back to their own country for a visit. and do so on a regular basis from there on.