|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
NAVFC
Joined: 10 May 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 12:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Tiny minority etc etc bigot etc etc islamophobic etc etc.
Seems that the UK is waking up, however.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1053163/All-party-20-000-year-cap-migrants-arriving-UK.html
| Quote: |
All-party call for 20,000-a-year cap on migrants arriving in UK
An unprecedented coalition of public figures will today call for a limit on migrant numbers settling in the UK.
The group of MPs and peers, including a former Archbishop of Canterbury, want a policy of 'balanced migration'.
Only around 20,000 non-EU economic migrants would be allowed to stay permanently each year. The rest would have to go home after four years.
Immigrants queuing in Calais
Immigrants queuing in Calais. An all-party group is calling for an annual limit of 20,000
The campaigners, led by former Labour Minister Frank Field, say their system would produce a UK population of around 65million by 2050 - compared to projections of 78.6million under Government policies.
Net immigration is currently estimated at more than 190,000 a year, though not all will stay permanently.
An opinion poll last night showed a large majority of voters in favour of the all-party group's proposal - but Labour effectively ruled it out.
Immigration Minister Liam Byrne said the Government's new points-based system would be better than 'made up quotas' for bringing in migrants with the skills needed by our economy.
The aim of balanced migration is to keep the number of foreigners settling here permanently at around the same as the number of Britons who leave.
The group calling for it, headed jointly by Mr Field and Tory MP Nicholas Soames, also includes Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Ahmed, one of Labour's leading Muslim politicians.
Labour MP Frank Field is leading the cross-party parliamentary group on balanced migration
Mr Field said the recent wave of immigration had been unprecedented - 25 times higher than any for nearly 1,000 years. It had 'undoubtedly brought gains' to some sections of the community.
But the former welfare minister added: 'One group that has disproportionately borne the cost of such immigration, through pressure on wages, longer waiting lists for decent housing and increased demand for public services, has been lower-paid black and white Britons.
'This group has also often experienced a transformation of their neighbourhoods from settled working-class communities to societies they can barely recognise.'
The MPs and peers, who also include Lord Bill Jordan, former president of the Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union, Field Marshal Lord Inge and economic historian Lord Skidelsky, asked the campaign group Migrationwatch to prepare ' constructive' proposals for balancing migration.
Today, it publishes a 56-page report setting out a framework for controlling numbers without harming the economy.
The document suggests no limit or changes to the rights of genuine asylum seekers, who make up only three per cent of foreign migration. There would also be no major changes to marriage rules which confer settlement rights, or any attempt to limit free movement within the EU.
Instead, the proposals focus on economic migrants. They would still be allowed to obtain work permits, using the points-based system to ensure the economy is not left without vital skills.
But workers would be expected to return home after four years. Only a limited number of the best-paid or highest-skilled - around 20,000 each year - would be allowed settlement rights.
When this 20,000 is added to those granted settlement rights through marriage, asylum and other routes, the total number of foreigners allowed to remain permanently each year would be around 130,000. It would be balanced by the 125,000 British citizens who emigrate, giving a net increase of only 5,000.
Enlarge Numbers
The campaigners hope this would reduce some of the strains being experienced by communities across the UK.
They point out that, over the past decade, nearly 2.5million migrants have arrived while almost 750,000 British people have left - a 1.7million rise in the population. Schools, hospitals and housing have been placed under enormous pressure.
Migrationwatch also commissioned a YouGov opinion poll on behalf of the group.
It found that 81 per cent of Labour voters want a substantial reduction in immigration numbers - a position at odds with the Government. Some 89 per cent of Tories also want a sharp fall.
The poll showed that 33 per cent of the electorate would be more likely to vote Tory if David Cameron adopted 'balanced migration', while only five per cent would be less likely.
Among black and ethnic minority respondents, 75 per cent wanted much lower immigration. They were split almost evenly between supporting 'balanced migration' and wanting even tougher controls.
Migrationwatch chairman Sir Andrew Green said: 'This clearly shows that voters from across the board, including the ethnic minorities, strongly support a policy at least as firm as balanced migration. Concern about the present massive uncontrolled level of immigration is not a partisan issue.'
Former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, supports the '20,000-cap' policy
Former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, supports the '20,000-cap' policy
Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said: 'We have made our own proposals to set an annual limit on economic immigration, because we want to reduce the pressure on our public services caused by the uncontrolled immigration levels of recent years.
'We will look with great interest at the proposals of the new group, so that we can continue to develop an immigration policy which is fair, helpful to the British economy and reasonable for the public services.'
But Jill Rutter, of the IPPR think-tank, said: 'The proposal that migrant workers should leave the UK after a four-year period would mean employers could not retain the hard-working migrants they want to. We need to make migration work for Britain, rather than play to xenophobic sentiments.'
Immigration minister Liam Byrne said: 'Our tough new points system, plus our plans for newcomers to earn citizenship, will reduce numbers of economic migrants coming to Britain, and the number awarded permanent settlement.
'The points system means only those with the skills Britain needs can come. Unlike made-up quotas, this stops Government cutting business off from the skills it needs when it needs them.' |
Even the minorities want it.
But even with this, the UK will forever have to deal with the consequences of cultural relativism, islamo-naivete and cat-calls of racism from the nutty left.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1683635.ece
| Quote: |
A HATE fanatic has boasted that Muslims will one day conquer Britain � by having more BABIES.
Speaking at a rally marking 9/11, Anjem Choudary bragged that a birth explosion would let followers of Islam take control of the country.
Undercover Sun investigators secretly recorded Choudary telling a young and impressionable audience that they would eventually rule under strict Sharia law.
And our team listened in chilled silence as he predicted: �Islam is superior and will never be surpassed. The flag of Islam will rise over Downing Street.�
Lawyer Choudary also said it would be easy for vast numbers of Muslims to declare Jihad, or holy war, against Britain � and that every one of them could become �a time bomb waiting to go off�.
The Sun team watched vile Choudary, the right-hand man of exiled preacher of hate Omar Bakri, ranting to 100 young Muslims at a meeting in East London.
The mob bayed and cheered as he said: �About 500 people in Britain become Muslim every day.
�The Home Office say there are 1.5million Muslims but there were 1.5million ten years ago. Since then our brothers in Bethnal Green, Whitechapel and other places have had eight or nine children each. Eight children here, ten children, 15 children. There must be at least six million people.
�It may be by pure conversion that Britain will become an Islamic state. We may never need to conquer it from the outside.� |
I guess it wasn't only us islamo-realists who read Mark Steyn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blaseblasphemener
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thank-you cultural relativists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nateium
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can't understand why EU countries take most immigrants from muslim/islamic countries why millions would jump at the chance from North and South East Asia, and South and Central America.
Certainly those population group would meet the labor demand just as well, and integrate culturally much better.
Why not just cut off all immigration from the Arab world until Europopulations are multi ethnic/racial/cultural instead of supporting just one jaded religious minority? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Because that would be both discriminatory and intolerant. The multiculty types would rather die as a people than be seen as intolerant or discriminatory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Beeyee
Joined: 29 May 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm so glad I don't live in that hell hole of a country any more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nateium
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Because that would be both discriminatory and intolerant. The multiculty types would rather die as a people than be seen as intolerant or discriminatory. |
You'd have to be discriminatory to create a real multicultural society instead of a volatile bicultural one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fiveeagles
Joined: 19 May 2005
Location: Vancouver
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2008 10:00 pm Post subject: Re: Britain adopts Islamic law |
|
|
What has happened to England? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I can't understand why EU countries take most immigrants from muslim/islamic countries why millions would jump at the chance from North and South East Asia, and South and Central America.
Certainly those population group would meet the labor demand just as well, and integrate culturally much better.
|
I've asked it before on this site, but I don't think I got a straight answer, so I'll ask it again...
Is it the case that there are all these hundreds of thousands of potential non-Muslim immigrants just chomping at the bit to get into Europe, but that they are denied that privilege simply because Europe's elites think it would be the more p.c. thing to admit mostly Muslims?
I find that a little hard to believe, as I've said before. But if someone could provide evidence to that effect, I'd be happy to read it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
I can't understand why EU countries take most immigrants from muslim/islamic countries why millions would jump at the chance from North and South East Asia, and South and Central America.
Certainly those population group would meet the labor demand just as well, and integrate culturally much better.
|
I've asked it before on this site, but I don't think I got a straight answer, so I'll ask it again...
Is it the case that there are all these hundreds of thousands of potential non-Muslim immigrants just chomping at the bit to get into Europe, but that they are denied that privilege simply because Europe's elites think it would be the more p.c. thing to admit mostly Muslims?
I find that a little hard to believe, as I've said before. But if someone could provide evidence to that effect, I'd be happy to read it. |
Can you show me the skilled worker category for the EU? How many spots are available? They take who shows up on the Canary Islands etc.
The UK is different due to special arrangements with former colonial territories.
But it is almost over. Italy is just about to ban the new construction of mosques, Spain is literally ending all low-skilled immigration and paying them to go home. France is sponsoring an EU-wide bill that would "streamline" (make very difficult, say the FT) family sponsored migration. Looks like Europe woke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now, the common cry of multicultural defenders is that the Jews have their own courts so why not the muslims. Leaving aside the numerical and theological (let alone behavioral) differences between the two groups from moderates on down to radicals the best answer is that the Jews and Muslims both should not have special parallel legal systems based upon their silly little religions.
The next claim is that these courts will merely deal with private concerns. The law will still be the law. Not so fast:
| Quote: |
...Shari�a courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network�s headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire, with two more courts planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh. A visibly pleased Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, explains that he had taken advantage of a clause in the British Arbitration Act of 1996, which classifies sharia courts as �arbitration tribunals� whose rulings are binding in law once both parties in a dispute agree to accept its authority. It goes without saying that battered Muslim wives and disinherited Muslim daughters will �freely choose� the authority of shari�a courts rather than face various unpleasant and potentially fatal consequences of not conforming to the �community�s� rules and preferences.
What this means in practice was evident from a recent inheritance dispute in the Midlands, when the Nuneaton shari�a court divided the estate of a Muslim father between three daughters and two sons. The �judges� gave the sons twice as much as the daughters�perfectly in accordance with sharia, of course, but contrary to any regular British court, which would have given the daughters equal shares. In six cases of domestic violence quoted by Siddiqi, the �judges� ordered the husbands to take �anger management� classes and �mentoring from community elders� (such as imams and shari�a judges). In each case, the battered women subsequently withdrew the complaints and the police stopped their investigations. It should be noted that under normal British law those six cases could have been prosecuted as criminal, rather than �family� cases.... |
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=731
So, if you are not a muslim and you kick your wife's ass, you go to jail or are otherwise dealt with as a criminal. If you are a muslim, you get anger management with an imam.
To be more specific, if you are a non-muslim woman the state will protect you. If you are a muslim woman, the state will not protect you. This IS multiculturalism in all her disgusting glory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| What this means in practice was evident from a recent inheritance dispute in the Midlands, when the Nuneaton shari�a court divided the estate of a Muslim father between three daughters and two sons. The �judges� gave the sons twice as much as the daughters�perfectly in accordance with sharia, of course, but contrary to any regular British court, which would have given the daughters equal shares. |
But if the old man had done out his will properly before he died, there would have been nothing to prevent him from distributing the money in the same way that the sharia court did. Sure, a regular British court would have done it differently, but didn't all the man's children have to agree to the outside arbitration anyway? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nateium
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
I can't understand why EU countries take most immigrants from muslim/islamic countries why millions would jump at the chance from North and South East Asia, and South and Central America.
Certainly those population group would meet the labor demand just as well, and integrate culturally much better.
|
I've asked it before on this site, but I don't think I got a straight answer, so I'll ask it again...
Is it the case that there are all these hundreds of thousands of potential non-Muslim immigrants just chomping at the bit to get into Europe, but that they are denied that privilege simply because Europe's elites think it would be the more p.c. thing to admit mostly Muslims?
I find that a little hard to believe, as I've said before. But if someone could provide evidence to that effect, I'd be happy to read it. |
I don't actually have any evidence about non-muslim immigrants, just an impression that people in less developed countries look for opportunity in more developed ones. I wouldn't know how to even go about finding visa application statistics in the EU, or detailed immigration regulation data for various EU countries.
Why is it so hard to believe that non-muslim immigrants would want to live and work in the the EU?
The US for example has millions of Mexicans "chomping at the bit" to get in. Aside from geographic proximity, what makes Mexicans any different from muslims in terms of cheap unskilled labor that's in demand in both North American and Western Europe? What makes the Chinese or Indians any different? What makes you think those labor needs couldn't (or wouldn't) be met by immigrants from thouse countries?
The only difference is that these muslim immigrant population got some kind of foot in the door because those countries are relatively close. European elites have never controlled immigration in favor of muslims, they just never fully reacted against the influx, or attempted to stop it, possibly for fear of being labled racist. It's not a situation anyone engineered or planned, it's just one that got out of control; same (or worse) as with Mexicans in the US. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, Europe should adopt an immigration point system which would include age, education, the ability to speak one of the languages of Europe well. and they should have quotas from certain countries. The quotas should be based on equality. Basically, they could accept an equal percentage from each part of the world and accept people who fit that criteria.
Just an idea? That way they don't block out Muslims, but they have the groups all diluted by each other... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| What this means in practice was evident from a recent inheritance dispute in the Midlands, when the Nuneaton shari�a court divided the estate of a Muslim father between three daughters and two sons. The �judges� gave the sons twice as much as the daughters�perfectly in accordance with sharia, of course, but contrary to any regular British court, which would have given the daughters equal shares. |
But if the old man had done out his will properly before he died, there would have been nothing to prevent him from distributing the money in the same way that the sharia court did. Sure, a regular British court would have done it differently, but didn't all the man's children have to agree to the outside arbitration anyway? |
We're ignoring the battered woman thing. Fair enough.
Sure, if all old men did their will properly there would be no need for a court. If we all acted nice there would be no need for police.
muslim men will be given legal benefits over every other human in society. Non-muslim men will be treated as equal to women. That doesn't bother you? I though socialists like you were all about equality? Seriously dude. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
