The following was found on IanPJ Twitter.
Have a read of this article from Reuters.
Merkel says German multiculturalism has failed
(Reuters) - Germany's attempt to create a multicultural society has "utterly failed," Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday, adding fuel to a debate over immigration and Islam polarising her conservative camp.
Speaking to a meeting of young members of her Christian Democrats (CDU), Merkel said allowing people of different cultural backgrounds to live side by side without integrating had not worked in a country that is home to some four million Muslims.
"This (multicultural) approach has failed, utterly failed," Merkel told the meeting in Potsdam, south of Berlin.
Merkel faces pressure from within her CDU to take a tougher line on immigrants who don't show a willingness to adapt to German society and her comments appeared intended to pacify her critics.
She said too little had been required of immigrants in the past and repeated her usual line that they should learn German in order to get by in school and have opportunities on the labour market.
The debate over foreigners in Germany has shifted since former central banker Thilo Sarrazin published a book accusing Muslim immigrants of lowering the intelligence of German society.
Sarrazin was censured for his views and dismissed from the Bundesbank, but his book proved highly popular and polls showed a majority of Germans agreed with the thrust of his arguments.
Merkel has tried to accommodate both sides of the debate, talking tough on integration but also telling Germans that they must accept that mosques have become part of their landscape.
She said on Saturday that the education of unemployed Germans should take priority over recruiting workers from abroad, while noting Germany could not get by without skilled foreign workers.
In a weekend newspaper interview, her Labour Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) raised the possibility of lowering barriers to entry for some foreign workers in order to fight the lack of skilled workers in Europe's largest economy.
"For a few years, more people have been leaving our country than entering it," she told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung. "Wherever it is possible, we must lower the entry hurdles for those who bring the country forward."
The German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) says Germany lacks about 400,000 skilled workers.
Yet Horst Seehofer, chairman of the Christian Social Union (CSU), the CDU's sister party, has rejected any relaxation of immigration laws and said last week there was no room in Germany for more people from "alien cultures.
(Writing by Sarah Marsh; editing by Noah Barkin)
The German government sees what is happening when you have immigrants who don't adapt to the country's own culture, so why can't the British Government see the same?
The UK has had 13 years of uncontrolled immigration, and we have seen what happens; eg. Religious Extremism, human trafficking of women forced into prostitution.
Yes they are some of the worst cases, but it has increased in the last decade.
We do need controls, not just from outside the eu, but from inside the eu as well.
Showing posts with label Immigation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Immigation. Show all posts
Sunday, 17 October 2010
Saturday, 16 October 2010
The British Way of Life
The following is the headline to this article
Islamic face-veil part of 'British way of life'
The full Islamic face-veil is a part of the “British way of life” and should be celebrated along with religious symbols such as the crucifix, according to a report published today.
An extract;
Opponents of the veil claim it oppresses women and presents a barrier between those who wear traditional dress and the rest of society.
But in a new report from think-tank Civitas, Alveena Malik, a former faith adviser to the last Labour government, said the test of whether religious symbols are appropriate should be based on whether they are practical.
In a new report, Women, Islam and Western Liberalism, Mrs Malik said: “We in Britain need to take a different direction from others in Europe and to accept the veil as part of a modern British way of life.”
Sorry sweetheart, but the British Way of Life doesn't include that.
An example of the British way of life is;
The Queen, the changing of the Guard, Winston Churchill, Fish & Chips, Spotted Dick, a pint of real ale, Cucumber sandwiches, cricket, football (or soccer if your from the US), rugby, Wimbledon & queuing to name just a few.
No matter how muchuncontrolled immigration multicultural diversity we had under Labour,
Islamic face-veil part of 'British way of life'
The full Islamic face-veil is a part of the “British way of life” and should be celebrated along with religious symbols such as the crucifix, according to a report published today.
An extract;
Opponents of the veil claim it oppresses women and presents a barrier between those who wear traditional dress and the rest of society.
But in a new report from think-tank Civitas, Alveena Malik, a former faith adviser to the last Labour government, said the test of whether religious symbols are appropriate should be based on whether they are practical.
In a new report, Women, Islam and Western Liberalism, Mrs Malik said: “We in Britain need to take a different direction from others in Europe and to accept the veil as part of a modern British way of life.”
Sorry sweetheart, but the British Way of Life doesn't include that.
An example of the British way of life is;
The Queen, the changing of the Guard, Winston Churchill, Fish & Chips, Spotted Dick, a pint of real ale, Cucumber sandwiches, cricket, football (or soccer if your from the US), rugby, Wimbledon & queuing to name just a few.
No matter how much
THE BRITISH WAY OF LIFE WILL SURVIVE.
If you would like another opinion about this go to 'Ranting Penquin' blog and read his blog about the subject.
If you would like another opinion about this go to 'Ranting Penquin' blog and read his blog about the subject.
Thursday, 3 June 2010
This is Shocking News
Immigration soars 20% after Labour's 'crackdown'
I'm in total shock.
Labour lied to the public. This is shocking news.
Yeah right, did anyone believe them in the first place?
How many more lies and waste are going to come out?
I don't know how the new Government can bring this country back from the brink, when we see statistics and waste like this being found.
How many ways has 13 years of Labour rule screwed up this country.
Every time Labour comes out with something against the government, They should remind people of this type of thing.
There needs to be an audit of everything in government by a independent official, to show the public what mess this country is in.
I'm in total shock.
Labour lied to the public. This is shocking news.
Yeah right, did anyone believe them in the first place?
How many more lies and waste are going to come out?
I don't know how the new Government can bring this country back from the brink, when we see statistics and waste like this being found.
How many ways has 13 years of Labour rule screwed up this country.
Every time Labour comes out with something against the government, They should remind people of this type of thing.
There needs to be an audit of everything in government by a independent official, to show the public what mess this country is in.
Thursday, 29 April 2010
Gordon Brown can't Spin his way out of this.
Yesterday was very interesting.
See the video below;
To be fair to Gordon Brown, I thought he did handle Gillian Duffy's questions very well, and if it ended there a lot of people would of been very pleased in the way he handled it, but for whatever reason Gordon Brown thought it ended badly.
Gillian Duffy raised concerns, among other subjects, about the amount of immigration into the country, and Gordon Brown was respectful when he was talking to her, but as soon as he was in the 'safety' of his car Gordon Brown had a temper tantrum and called Gillian Duffy, a 66 year old pensioner, a bigoted woman.
It is common knowledge that Gordon Brown isn't very good with the general public, that is why he has mainly been with the party faithful throughout the election so far.
Is Gordon Brown afraid of the general public?
Is he afraid of criticism, and if he is criticised does he always throw a tantrum?
Does he look down at the general public and think, oh no I have to mix with the great unwashed?
There has been talk of Gordon Brown's ability to be the Prime Minister, and if Gordon Brown can't take some criticism from a pensioner then it does question his ability to take the stress and criticism of being Prime Minister.
The rumours have been said that he has bullied his staff and thrown mobile phones and punched the front seat in his car, which if you listen carefully I think he actually does in the video.
This is the first time the public has seen, what might be, Gordon Brown's real personality, and you have to ask yourself do you want someone like this running the country.
There are a lot of subjects that worry the UK population, and immigration is one of them, and if Gordon Brown thinks that you are a bigot if you want to talk about immigration then he is not the person to run this country.
Gordon Brown and the Labour party cannot spin their way out of this.
An intersting article about what might of happened if it wasn't election time.
If it hadn't been election time, Mrs Duffy would have been interviewed by the thought police
See the video below;
To be fair to Gordon Brown, I thought he did handle Gillian Duffy's questions very well, and if it ended there a lot of people would of been very pleased in the way he handled it, but for whatever reason Gordon Brown thought it ended badly.
Gillian Duffy raised concerns, among other subjects, about the amount of immigration into the country, and Gordon Brown was respectful when he was talking to her, but as soon as he was in the 'safety' of his car Gordon Brown had a temper tantrum and called Gillian Duffy, a 66 year old pensioner, a bigoted woman.
It is common knowledge that Gordon Brown isn't very good with the general public, that is why he has mainly been with the party faithful throughout the election so far.
Is Gordon Brown afraid of the general public?
Is he afraid of criticism, and if he is criticised does he always throw a tantrum?
Does he look down at the general public and think, oh no I have to mix with the great unwashed?
There has been talk of Gordon Brown's ability to be the Prime Minister, and if Gordon Brown can't take some criticism from a pensioner then it does question his ability to take the stress and criticism of being Prime Minister.
The rumours have been said that he has bullied his staff and thrown mobile phones and punched the front seat in his car, which if you listen carefully I think he actually does in the video.
This is the first time the public has seen, what might be, Gordon Brown's real personality, and you have to ask yourself do you want someone like this running the country.
There are a lot of subjects that worry the UK population, and immigration is one of them, and if Gordon Brown thinks that you are a bigot if you want to talk about immigration then he is not the person to run this country.
Gordon Brown and the Labour party cannot spin their way out of this.
An intersting article about what might of happened if it wasn't election time.
If it hadn't been election time, Mrs Duffy would have been interviewed by the thought police
Monday, 19 April 2010
The (In)Human Rights Act and Justice
Here's another classic example of how the (In) human rights act is a cause for good, if you are a criminal.
The headline to the Daily Mail article, found through http://uknewsnetwork.blogspot.com/
Paedophile who abducted underage girls for sex wins deportation appeal to stay in UK
An extract;
A Pakistani paedophile who abducted and sexually abused two young girls cannot be deported back to his native country because it would breach his human rights, it emerged today.
Zulfar Hussain, 48, was due to be sent home when he is released from prison halfway through his sentence for plying two vulnerable girls with drugs and alcohol before having sex with them.
But there was fury today when it was revealed that he had won an appeal against his deportation on the grounds that he has a wife and child here, meaning it would breach his right to enjoy respect for his family life.
Can someone please tell me has there been any real good to come out of the human rights act, or is it a criminals rights act only.
How many more stories like this one can we take before the powers that be take notice and either scrap it or change it so the criminals can't take advantage of it.
The headline to the Daily Mail article, found through http://uknewsnetwork.blogspot.com/
Paedophile who abducted underage girls for sex wins deportation appeal to stay in UK
An extract;
A Pakistani paedophile who abducted and sexually abused two young girls cannot be deported back to his native country because it would breach his human rights, it emerged today.
Zulfar Hussain, 48, was due to be sent home when he is released from prison halfway through his sentence for plying two vulnerable girls with drugs and alcohol before having sex with them.
But there was fury today when it was revealed that he had won an appeal against his deportation on the grounds that he has a wife and child here, meaning it would breach his right to enjoy respect for his family life.
Can someone please tell me has there been any real good to come out of the human rights act, or is it a criminals rights act only.
How many more stories like this one can we take before the powers that be take notice and either scrap it or change it so the criminals can't take advantage of it.
Friday, 16 April 2010
The (IN) Human Rights Act and Justice
Can the European Convention on Human Rights and the justice system ever run to the same tune.
I have blogged about the human rights act here, here and here.
Now we have another example.
Illegal immigrant rapist could stay in UK
An illegal immigrant who raped a woman but was not caught for 18 years could avoid deportation because of his human rights to a family life.
An extract;
Sukdarshan Singh, an Indian, arrived in Britain unlawfully in 1984 and raped a 59-year-old woman four years later.
He was only linked to the attack in 2006 after being arrested for drink driving and was jailed for four and a half years.
An immigration tribunal ruled he should be deported but the Court of Appeal yesterday overturned the decision because it had failed to take in to account his rights to family life as he now has a British wife and two teenage children.
If this guy entered the country illegally, how was he able to legally get married?
According to the appeal court, if you enter the country illegally, commit a serious crime, get away with it for 20 years, get jailed for a very short time, you can stay in the country.
An extract
Yesterday, he was appealing against the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) finding which upheld the decision of the Home Secretary to return him to India.
But Lord Justice Aikens said the "overall question" in the case was whether deportation would be a disproportionate interference with his private and family life protected by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Lord Justice Aikens says, 'deportation would be a disproportionate interference with his private and family life under the human rights act.'
Once again I say, what about the human rights of the victim. She was raped by this scum, but as usual the rights of the victim is second to the rights of the scum who raped her.
An extract;
He said the AIT should have balanced the threat of family breakdown, the effect on the children and feasibility of a move to India with the aim of deportation in protecting the public.
The effect on the children and feasibility of moving to India. What about the effect on the children finding out their father is a rapist.
Send the father back to India and let the kids stay in the UK.
Everyone has a human right to live and feel safe in their community and their home. If someone commits a crime they should lose certain rights.
If an illegal immigrant commits a crime then that person should be sent back to the country he came from, even if he has a family here.
People are not getting justice due to the (In) Human Rights Act.
I have blogged about the human rights act here, here and here.
Now we have another example.
Illegal immigrant rapist could stay in UK
An illegal immigrant who raped a woman but was not caught for 18 years could avoid deportation because of his human rights to a family life.
An extract;
Sukdarshan Singh, an Indian, arrived in Britain unlawfully in 1984 and raped a 59-year-old woman four years later.
He was only linked to the attack in 2006 after being arrested for drink driving and was jailed for four and a half years.
An immigration tribunal ruled he should be deported but the Court of Appeal yesterday overturned the decision because it had failed to take in to account his rights to family life as he now has a British wife and two teenage children.
If this guy entered the country illegally, how was he able to legally get married?
According to the appeal court, if you enter the country illegally, commit a serious crime, get away with it for 20 years, get jailed for a very short time, you can stay in the country.
An extract
Yesterday, he was appealing against the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) finding which upheld the decision of the Home Secretary to return him to India.
But Lord Justice Aikens said the "overall question" in the case was whether deportation would be a disproportionate interference with his private and family life protected by the European Convention on Human Rights.
Lord Justice Aikens says, 'deportation would be a disproportionate interference with his private and family life under the human rights act.'
Once again I say, what about the human rights of the victim. She was raped by this scum, but as usual the rights of the victim is second to the rights of the scum who raped her.
An extract;
He said the AIT should have balanced the threat of family breakdown, the effect on the children and feasibility of a move to India with the aim of deportation in protecting the public.
The effect on the children and feasibility of moving to India. What about the effect on the children finding out their father is a rapist.
Send the father back to India and let the kids stay in the UK.
Everyone has a human right to live and feel safe in their community and their home. If someone commits a crime they should lose certain rights.
If an illegal immigrant commits a crime then that person should be sent back to the country he came from, even if he has a family here.
People are not getting justice due to the (In) Human Rights Act.
Saturday, 10 April 2010
What Immigration has done to a community
If you want to know what happens when immigration runs out of control read this article and find out what happened in Cambridgeshire city of Peterborough
Read this article as well.
The headline.
Migrant city's cry for help: Anguished letter to Brown and Cameron reveals devastating toll of immigration on schools, housing and hospitals
An extract
The impact of uncontrolled mass immigration on the fabric of British life was driven home to the party leaders yesterday.
A letter to Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg reveals in graphic detail the struggle of one community to cope.
It says public services - from schooling to housing, health care to police protection - are overstretched because councils have not been given the support they need.
An extract;
Their letter - which they also sent to constituents - was passed to the Daily Mail by a local resident concerned that its urgent message was being ignored.
The councillors say: 'At our local primary school, Fulbridge, which has a roll of 675 pupils, 27 different languages are spoken with only 200 of the pupils having English as a first language.
'The first-year reception class has 90 pupils, of which only 17 are white British. Every day new arrivals are turned away.
'Registration at the local doctors' surgery has rocketed with more than 90 per cent of the new arrivals being from the EU. There has been a substantial increase in women who are pregnant.
'The Health Service and Primary Care Trust in the city has overspent by millions in the past year.'
A key issue is the Government's failure to support councils.
But Mr Swift and Mr Sharp make clear that the local authority cannot track all new arrivals - crucial information in assessing what they need.
They say there were only four EU citizens on the local electoral roll in 2004. Now there are 537 and 'we know there are substantially more here'.
The councillors also voiced the local fears that immigration is fuelling a rise in crime.
They write: 'We had four police houses in the ward years ago. Everyone knew and respected the local constable. Now we have muggings, robberies, burglaries and neighbour disputes. We have prostitutes, drug dealers and an ever-increasing number of people who drive without road tax or insurance.'
Read the whole article and find out how the town has been changed.
This is just one town, this is going on throughout the country.
I have never been opposed to immigration, but we are only a small island, compared to France or Germany.
This country cannot keep on taking in the amount of immigrants it is taking in now.
Labour's great plan on immigration has failed.
Labour must take the blame for causing untold damage to communities like Peterborough.
What will the party leaders say, and do, about immigration during the election campaign?
Read this article as well.
The headline.
Migrant city's cry for help: Anguished letter to Brown and Cameron reveals devastating toll of immigration on schools, housing and hospitals
An extract
The impact of uncontrolled mass immigration on the fabric of British life was driven home to the party leaders yesterday.
A letter to Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg reveals in graphic detail the struggle of one community to cope.
It says public services - from schooling to housing, health care to police protection - are overstretched because councils have not been given the support they need.
An extract;
Their letter - which they also sent to constituents - was passed to the Daily Mail by a local resident concerned that its urgent message was being ignored.
The councillors say: 'At our local primary school, Fulbridge, which has a roll of 675 pupils, 27 different languages are spoken with only 200 of the pupils having English as a first language.
'The first-year reception class has 90 pupils, of which only 17 are white British. Every day new arrivals are turned away.
'Registration at the local doctors' surgery has rocketed with more than 90 per cent of the new arrivals being from the EU. There has been a substantial increase in women who are pregnant.
'The Health Service and Primary Care Trust in the city has overspent by millions in the past year.'
A key issue is the Government's failure to support councils.
But Mr Swift and Mr Sharp make clear that the local authority cannot track all new arrivals - crucial information in assessing what they need.
They say there were only four EU citizens on the local electoral roll in 2004. Now there are 537 and 'we know there are substantially more here'.
The councillors also voiced the local fears that immigration is fuelling a rise in crime.
They write: 'We had four police houses in the ward years ago. Everyone knew and respected the local constable. Now we have muggings, robberies, burglaries and neighbour disputes. We have prostitutes, drug dealers and an ever-increasing number of people who drive without road tax or insurance.'
Read the whole article and find out how the town has been changed.
This is just one town, this is going on throughout the country.
I have never been opposed to immigration, but we are only a small island, compared to France or Germany.
This country cannot keep on taking in the amount of immigrants it is taking in now.
Labour's great plan on immigration has failed.
Labour must take the blame for causing untold damage to communities like Peterborough.
What will the party leaders say, and do, about immigration during the election campaign?
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Has Gordon Brown got the figures wrong again?
The following comes from http://blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/
Gordon Brown gave a speech on immigration today and 'Fact Check' checked it out.
An extract;
The claim
“Some people talk as if net inward migration is rising. In fact, it is falling – down from 237,000 in 2007, to 163,000 in 2008, to provisional figures of 147,000 last year.”
Gordon Brown, podcast on immigration, 26 March, 2010
The analysis
Brown said in a podcast today that net inward migration (the number of people coming to the UK minus the number of people leaving) had fallen. According to the PM, the figures fell from 237,000 in 2007 to 163,000 in 2008 to 147,000 last year.
But he was drawing his numbers from two different sets of statistics.
The first two figures are the confirmed long-term international migration figures for 2007 and 2008 (although incidentally, he appears to have slipped with the first number – the published National Statistics figure is actually 233,000). We don’t yet have a comparable figure for 2009.
So Brown instead took a figure from the International Passenger Survey (IPS). This is used to compile the long-term international migration figures – but it tends to be smaller because it excludes asylum seekers and people who overstay their original visas.
If the prime minister wanted to be accurate he should have compared the 2009 IPS figure to the 2007/8 IPS figures. They are 219,000 (year ended Dec 2007), 129,000 (year ended Dec 2008), 147,000 (year ended June 2009).
The sharp-eyed amongst you will see that there’s another reason to be cautious. The 2009 figure he quotes relates to the year up to June 2009. The 2007 and 2008 figures are for the year ending December.
Read the whole article and see what you think.
Doesn't Gordon Brown check what he is saying, or does he purposely manipulate the figures, or does he think the British public are stupid?
Gordon Brown gave a speech on immigration today and 'Fact Check' checked it out.
An extract;
The claim
“Some people talk as if net inward migration is rising. In fact, it is falling – down from 237,000 in 2007, to 163,000 in 2008, to provisional figures of 147,000 last year.”
Gordon Brown, podcast on immigration, 26 March, 2010
The analysis
Brown said in a podcast today that net inward migration (the number of people coming to the UK minus the number of people leaving) had fallen. According to the PM, the figures fell from 237,000 in 2007 to 163,000 in 2008 to 147,000 last year.
But he was drawing his numbers from two different sets of statistics.
The first two figures are the confirmed long-term international migration figures for 2007 and 2008 (although incidentally, he appears to have slipped with the first number – the published National Statistics figure is actually 233,000). We don’t yet have a comparable figure for 2009.
So Brown instead took a figure from the International Passenger Survey (IPS). This is used to compile the long-term international migration figures – but it tends to be smaller because it excludes asylum seekers and people who overstay their original visas.
If the prime minister wanted to be accurate he should have compared the 2009 IPS figure to the 2007/8 IPS figures. They are 219,000 (year ended Dec 2007), 129,000 (year ended Dec 2008), 147,000 (year ended June 2009).
The sharp-eyed amongst you will see that there’s another reason to be cautious. The 2009 figure he quotes relates to the year up to June 2009. The 2007 and 2008 figures are for the year ending December.
Read the whole article and see what you think.
Doesn't Gordon Brown check what he is saying, or does he purposely manipulate the figures, or does he think the British public are stupid?
Friday, 26 February 2010
Is Immigration out of control?
Well read this article and make your own mind up.
An extract from the article.
A total of 203,865 people were granted British citizenship last year – the equivalent of one every three minutes and a 58 per cent jump on the previous year.
It has been said in other blogs, and I will say it again here;
Has Labour let in so many immigrants, and given them British citizenship, so they will vote labour in the next election?
Going by the polls, there may be some truth to it.
Another point to think about.
Just taking the amount of immigrants let in last year, how many could be criminals or worse terrorists?
An extract from the article.
A total of 203,865 people were granted British citizenship last year – the equivalent of one every three minutes and a 58 per cent jump on the previous year.
It has been said in other blogs, and I will say it again here;
Has Labour let in so many immigrants, and given them British citizenship, so they will vote labour in the next election?
Going by the polls, there may be some truth to it.
Another point to think about.
Just taking the amount of immigrants let in last year, how many could be criminals or worse terrorists?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)