sac wrote:meats, Wanderer:
you both appear fairly rational, even if you love to grind certain axes; you both make mostly valid points, though frankly i think there's a bit of a blame-it-on-the-outsider persecution complex at work; and i'm sure you are well-informed about various media-hyped instances where immigration truth is stranger and no doubt more irritating than fiction, though in the same breath, i must wonder why you both seem to spend so much time on these forums mostly ticking people off.
however: the OP most definitely does not tick off any of these boxes, and i protest your hijacking of his semi-coherent rant (about, let me remind you, wanting to be entitled to live here because he has a european great-grandparent - and rapidly segueing into some utter tosh about the non-white defilers of these fair and hitherto unsullied, virtuous european lands) and trying to legitimise it through your own quasi-related bugbears.
what the OP has said is deluded bullsh*t, clueless to the ways of the world, and worse, thinly-veiled beloved. i would suggest he get off his pathetic little behind and find a way to qualify for the immigration schemes available, rather than whinge about how he deserves automatic rights more than the non-white others who've worked for it, on the basis of his 'heritage' (which on the ground means nothing more than surname and skin colour, because, face it - what else does he have from his great-grandpop's life? oh, maybe his values, if the old gent had some 'darkie' manservants to polish his boots and pour his pink gin?)
you two are most welcome to start your own rational, well-argued, evidence-based threads. but to lend credence to such sewage as the OP has posted is distasteful in the least. for the sake of intelligence and self-respect, there needs to be a difference between chips on shoulders and such bitter venom. and like someone has already mentioned, this is not the place for it. you may want to try Stormfront.org.
thanks.
The OPs view point may well be on the extreme side but his point is still a valid one. The OP will obviously have to become qualified in a skill that is needed in order to qualify for a visa to the UK, just like i would should i wished to live and work in Australia. However there are lots of people who abuse the UK's immigration system, of all race and religion and nationality. The student visa is the easiest one to exploit, and you see people giving 'advice' on here telling them how to exploit it and that that is the easiest way into the UK.
Studying should be to enhance one's knowledge in something that they want to study. It should not be used as a way of gaining entry to another country. All non-EU students who come here should only be allowed to study at bona-fide universities here and not colleges. This benefits all parties, the universities get extra funding that they need, the students get a proper education and their home country benefits too when they go back to put it into practice. Oh wait, a lot of them don't go back to put it into practice which is what the student visa is there for.
You have immigrants' families back home accepting what is effectively bribes in order to marry their son or daughter so that they can come to the UK. Do you find that acceptable? Yet genuine people are screwed over by the laws. You only need to read this forum to see that.
"though frankly i think there's a bit of a blame-it-on-the-outsider persecution complex at work"
This is partly the PC brigade at work and bands of immigrants too. Some immigrants apparently find the St. George's flag offensive and according to one policeman at least it might offend local Poles...
http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/news/2 ... be_dearly beloved/
You then read about councils banning the flying of the St. George's flag on St. George's day because of 'health and safety'
http://www.clickliverpool.com/news/loca ... flags.html and because of the threat of violence against scouts and cubs
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/ ... arade_axed
You've also got a Labour run council cancel St George's day because they fear that it might've attracted the far right, yet a Tory run one didn't attract the far right or any violence at all. I'm baffled?
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/local ... uncil.html
You've got a hospital that banned handing out hot crossed buns at Easter because it might be offensive to non-Christians. Now, the UK was built on Christian principles as can be seen in the laws of this country, it is predominantly a Christian country, yet it is bending over backwards to try and ruin itself.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... tians.html
I'll end this with a comment from an article on The Times website:
"Whilst I neither support the BNP nor agree with its manifesto, I do understand why it is gaining support. It is simply that this government, as well as the opposition, have persistently failed to recognise the legitimate concerns of the electorate. They have forgotten the deal, which was, that we agree to be governed, provided you do so in accordance with our wishes. Instead we have had 12 years of frontal assault on our rights and freedoms; the imposition of a sureveillance society; the entrenchement of a state benefits system whereby it is easier to claim social support rather than to work; a steady diminution of our education system - the list is almost endless. We have armies of jobsworths and unnacountable QUANGOs, of which ISA is merely the most recent in a seemingly endless line. I do not recall ever being consulted or asked if this was wanted, and now we end up with a monumental debt and a broken society. Faced with this level of resentment and anger, my only wonder is that the BNP have not managed to gain majority support."
