|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 10:26:27 GMT
No. But my position here doesn't change the logic. Far from being lunatic, it is patently obvious that having a large Muslim population in your territory affords more opportunity for your people to be attacked by Muslims As does having a large Catholic population increase the chances of being attacked by Catholics Sure. So, you essentially agree with me. If significant political strands of Catholicism, saw themselves as essentially at war with us and we were treated to sporadic machete attacks and beheading involving Catholics shouting "in the name of our lady", then, by importing more Catholics, you are increasing the likelihood of such attacks
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on Aug 11, 2024 10:28:39 GMT
As does having a large Catholic population increase the chances of being attacked by Catholics Sure. So, you essentially agree with me. If significant political strands of Catholicism, saw themselves as essentially at war with us and we were treated to sporadic machete attacks and beheading involving Catholics shouting "in the name of our lady", then, by importing more Catholics, you are increasing the likelihood of such attacks Bombing pubs and shopping centres is more the Catholic style but yes, let's ban all religions.
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 10:31:27 GMT
Sure. So, you essentially agree with me. If significant political strands of Catholicism, saw themselves as essentially at war with us and we were treated to sporadic machete attacks and beheading involving Catholics shouting "in the name of our lady", then, by importing more Catholics, you are increasing the likelihood of such attacks Bombing pubs and shopping centres is more the Catholic style but yes, let's ban all religions. No need to ban religion, just stop importing hostile groups and using them as proxies to undermine and attack the native population. If you find that notion / principle disagreeable, i have to wonder what your motives might be. This isn't limited to religion
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on Aug 11, 2024 11:15:30 GMT
Bombing pubs and shopping centres is more the Catholic style but yes, let's ban all religions. No need to ban religion, just stop importing hostile groups and using them as proxies to undermine and attack the native population. If you find that notion / principle disagreeable, i have to wonder what your motives might be. This isn't limited to religion ''stop importing hostile groups and using them as proxies to undermine and attack the native population.'' Are you suggesting this is a deliberate policy?
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 11:30:42 GMT
No need to ban religion, just stop importing hostile groups and using them as proxies to undermine and attack the native population. If you find that notion / principle disagreeable, i have to wonder what your motives might be. This isn't limited to religion ''stop importing hostile groups and using them as proxies to undermine and attack the native population.'' Are you suggesting this is a deliberate policy? Yes - that's my opinion. A government doesn't pursue an unpopular policy for decades across multiple parties by accident
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,600
|
Post by Steve on Aug 11, 2024 11:30:46 GMT
As does having a large Catholic population increase the chances of being attacked by Catholics Sure. So, you essentially agree with me. If significant political strands of Catholicism, saw themselves as essentially at war with us and we were treated to sporadic machete attacks and beheading involving Catholics shouting "in the name of our lady", then, by importing more Catholics, you are increasing the likelihood of such attacks More mindless hate speech Tommee will be so proud of you
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 12:04:48 GMT
I hear that a full fifth of council houses are presently occupied by foreigners - that is, people who have a nationality other than British.
Can anyone explain why a government would allow such a peculiarity to arise - other than as a part of a foreign interested criminal operation or an attempt to attack the people of the UK?
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Aug 11, 2024 12:04:52 GMT
Blimey Zany. That’s a conspiracy theory worthy of Rackham. If you are looking for a large crowd of people in Vienna to commit a dreadful act, a Taylor Swift concert seems a good opportunity. There is as far as I know no reason to believe that the Southport attack was in any way Islamist. I suspect a major contributor to that awful incident will turn out to be the appalling state of our mental health services. Well I'm not after it being Muslim extremist, (and I would still not think the rioting was a just reaction even if it was) But fact is to date we have NO information on why this guy attacked a children's dance class. You might argue that if that information had been released quickly the rumour mongers could not have stirred up so much hatred. Anyway, I digress. I like facts where possible, (No matter how uncomfortable) so my start point was a Taylor Swift connection, as I said its probably nothing, just wondered if there was. Children were among 22 people killed in a suicide attack after an Ariana Grande concert at Britain's Manchester Arena. I’ve not seen any suggested specific antipathy between the artist and Muslim terrorists. My thought is that speculation and Farage-style ‘asking questions’ on open social media could help spread dis & mis information. Sometimes it’s been judged to have been in danger of influencing court proceedings…
|
|
|
Post by montegriffo on Aug 11, 2024 12:14:19 GMT
''stop importing hostile groups and using them as proxies to undermine and attack the native population.'' Are you suggesting this is a deliberate policy? Yes - that's my opinion. A government doesn't pursue an unpopular policy for decades across multiple parties by accident What possible motivation could a government have for undermining and attacking the 'native' population?
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 12:34:18 GMT
Yes - that's my opinion. A government doesn't pursue an unpopular policy for decades across multiple parties by accident What possible motivation could a government have for undermining and attacking the 'native' population? To weaken a population's aggregate resistance to tyranny The damage to social cohesion is of course important and, if the newly introduced population is broadly tyranny-positive or simply unfamiliar with, or hostile to, democratic society, that's a bonus.- If you want to do x and a population wants to do Y, introducing the correct foreign client groups can make X more feasible.and Y less feasible
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,600
|
Post by Steve on Aug 11, 2024 13:52:18 GMT
I hear that a full fifth of council houses are presently occupied by foreigners - that is, people who have a nationality other than British. Can anyone explain why a government would allow such a peculiarity to arise - other than as a part of a foreign interested criminal operation or an attempt to attack the people of the UK? Surely it's bleeding obvious. Immigrants especially EU sourced (and we're talking 2021 data here) tend to take lower pay jobs than equivalent qualified Brits and have less local resources so will tend to be higher users of social housing. And remember 'foreign born' includes people like Boris Johnson. Most, maybe nearly all of that 19.2% will be British citizens. www.pimlicojournal.co.uk/p/the-social-housing-phenomenon
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 13:57:49 GMT
I hear that a full fifth of council houses are presently occupied by foreigners - that is, people who have a nationality other than British. Can anyone explain why a government would allow such a peculiarity to arise - other than as a part of a foreign interested criminal operation or an attempt to attack the people of the UK? Surely it's bleeding obvious. Immigrants especially EU sourced (and we're talking 2021 data here) tend to take lower pay jobs than equivalent qualified Brits and have less local resources so will tend to be higher users of social housing. And remember 'foreign born' includes people like Boris Johnson. Most, maybe nearly all of that 19.2% will be British citizens. Not 'foreign born', foreign born with non-UK citizenship 20%
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,600
|
Post by Steve on Aug 11, 2024 14:08:15 GMT
Not what the data says
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 11, 2024 17:02:31 GMT
because your table doesn't contain that data and it is out of date.We are talking at cross purposes but we can talk about it as a hypothetical. Hypothetically, would you consider such a situation concerning?
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Aug 11, 2024 18:00:48 GMT
No, you have accused me of "carefully omitting key words for false effect." Not the BBC of "carefully omitting key words for false effect." The meaning of those two statements is completely different and would illicit very different answers. Because you continued to omit them after being told what the true words were - that was a deliberate act by you. The BBC could plead incompetence. You did not make it clear at all that you referring to the BBC, until just today. Further I referenced the BBC and the Manifesto in the same post showing the same text. Anyway enough crappy word games, its all you have and like everyone else here I had enough.. Everyone bar you knows the Tories have repeatedly claimed they would curb immigration and never have.
|
|