Kibkom North Cyprus Forum

Link from the BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-39355505

Turkey's Erdogan warns Europeans 'will not walk safely on the streets' if diplomatic row continues. Reported earlier today .

One Lady has died at least 10 in hospital some with catastrophic injuries, Policeman stabbed, the man shot by police taken to hospital.

Latest news 2 dead.

A Police officer has died, some of the injured are at least 3 French Students on a tour to London. The attack being treated as terrorist at present.

Reyntj wrote:Turkey's Erdogan warns Europeans 'will not walk safely on the streets' if diplomatic row continues. Reported earlier today .

Is this a suggestion that the two items are connected?

jofra wrote:

Reyntj wrote:Turkey's Erdogan warns Europeans 'will not walk safely on the streets' if diplomatic row continues. Reported earlier today .

Is this a suggestion that the two items are connected?

Personally I think it's coincidence.....it's a rant from someone who thinks the World revolves around him.


http://theglobepost.com/2017/03/22/erdo ... n-streets/

So do I, and as these sorts of comments have been made by so many demagogues of different politics, faiths and persuasions, I wondered whether there was specific cause or information to highlight just one particular source.....

It's just been announced by Channel 4 news that the attacker has been named as Abu Izzadeen also known as Trevor Brooks a radical preacher known to police. He was associated with Abu Hamza and Anjem Choudary.

Now saying it may not be him.........

Stupid Khan the mayor says if you live in the big city must expect this. Bloody hell lived in London from 194O until mid seventies, and no we didn't have this behaviour. Do t know whether he was born and bred there, but no people living there do not have to accept this. God bless the police officer whose life was lost along with the others the sick "ooops" killed in cold blood.

Invite snakes into your back yard, and they are going to bite. A sure result of lefty retard immigration policy, quietly being hushed up by the media as not to offend minority groups that are hell bent on the destruction of western values.
Wake up or before our country is destroyed.

rocking wrote:Stupid Khan the mayor says if you live in the big city must expect this.

What Sadiq Khan was actually reported to have said back in September 2016
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 22846.html

and a report on Donald Trump Jnr quoting of this 6 month statement by Mr Khan in response to the attack in London yesterday.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... sadiq-khan

rocking wrote:Bloody hell lived in London from 194O until mid seventies, and no we didn't have this behaviour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... .80.931979

Makum wrote:....hell bent on the destruction of western values. Wake up or before our country is destroyed.

Destroyed like say Afghanistan or Iraq is or Syria has been or is being destroyed, or any number of other countries where we have and continue to use our armed forces under the guiding principles of our 'Western values' ?

Re message 11 Good morning Rocking.
I am also from London born & breed have you forgotten the IRA? Like everyone else I am also outraged at this latest attack but in this instance I have to a agree with lefty Khan all Capital cities will always be targets for terrorist groups they always want the spectacular incident, I don’t think this situation will ever change.
Re message 14 Erol
I hope I am wrong but are you suggesting this attack was justified because of the UK’s foreign policies? We should never have got involved in gulf 2 or afghan but you imply our forces have caused the Syrian war?

Addresses across London, Birmingham and othe parts of the Country have been raided and 7 people have been arrested of various nationalities.

lilnrob wrote:I hope I am wrong but are you suggesting this attack was justified because of the UK’s foreign policies?

You do misunderstand me if you think I am saying or suggesting this act was justified by the UK's actions around the world. I am not saying this. However acts like this (and we do not yet have the full details of the motivation for this specific attack) are often explained and understood within the context of the UK's actions around the world. This is NOT the same thing as saying they are justified by such things. To pretend that acts such as these are entirely divorced from and unconnected to how we as a country have acted around the world is in my personal view naive and self delusional.

lilnrob wrote:We should never have got involved in gulf 2 or afghan but you imply our forces have caused the Syrian war?

My post was in response to two 'phrases' by Makum. That of 'western values' and that of 'Countries being destroyed'. I am a product of 'Western values' and 'Western values' have many laudable elements to them, not least those that allow me to openly challenge elements of such values without fear for censure or punishment or reprisal for doing so. However it is also plain to me at least that 'Western Values' also contain within them, implicitly and explicitly, historically and today, notions of colonialism, imperialism and the projection of 'Western' power and influence around the world and beyond the boarders of 'Western' countries, for the supposed benefit of those 'Western' powers and at the expense of other countries and the people within them. In my view 'Western values' as far as they include this notion of the 'right' of western powers to project their power around the world beyond their own boarders have played their part in the 'destruction' of many countries around the world, historically and currently, to a degree far far far in excess of that to which this attack yesterday represents the 'destruction' or attempted 'destruction' of the UK.

I suppose if I say , once again as I did a few days ago , ( Re. Romanian Crime School). That we do not want this no good scum in our country or if I mention that their skin was a darker colour, making it apparent that they are imports. Then I will no doubt once again be branded a Racist.

The Millions of opinions on F.B are get these criminals and terrorists out of our country. Strange how I never read or see on the news that British C. of E. or Methodists , or any other of our religious sectors are travelling around the world causing mayhem.

However I think for the first time ever, that I do agree partly with Erol. We (as in Tony Blair) have created this problem. We along with the Americans have gone into other countries and committed atrocious acts. We have murdered thousands and thousands of innocent people.

Johnny Lee wrote:That we do not want this no good scum in our country.....

If by 'no good scum' you mean people willing to use illegal violence and force against others, then who would possibly disagree with the idea that such people are 'not wanted' ? The problem I have with some of your posts JL is that you appear, intentionally or not, to define who the 'scum we do not want' are not by the actions of these people but by their race, nationality or skin colour. For example in the earlier thread re Jewellery thieves, you do not talk or appear to talk of wanting to be 'rid of jewellery thieves' but instead appear to talk of wanting to be rid of Romanians, as if the two things are synonymous. Not all jewellery thieves are Romanian, not all Romanians are Jewellery thieves.

As a proud BRIT I am fed up with being blamed for all of the wrongs in this world, and what angers me even more is when the details about this scumbag come out he will probably be ‘a home grown skin’ enjoying all the rights and benefits of western values such as education, health care, housing benefits & dole payments.
Yes maybe the UK should stop playing the world’s policeman and at the same time stop paying the 10 BN+ in foreign aid, but regardless of this London as one of the greatest cities in the world will unfortunately always be a target for scumbag terrorists.

Johnny Lee wrote: Strange how I never read or see on the news that British C. of E. or Methodists , or any other of our religious sectors are travelling around the world causing mayhem.

Perhaps a historical perspective might help:
http://web.archive.org/web/20080415222023/www.burningcross.net/crusades/christian-missionary-atrocities.html
Polemical, it's true, but containing not a small grain of truth in it.

lilnrob wrote: ‘a home grown skin’

Home grown skin ? Do you mean 2nd or more generation immigrant into the UK ?

If so here are just a few more (if indeed the perpetrator of this crime was such) 'Home Grown Skins' for you - just a small random selction

Prince Charles (Greek father)
Saatchi Brothers (Iraqi father)
Helen Mirren (Russian parents)
Ed and David Milliband (Polish mother, Belgium father)
Samuel and Thomas Farage (Irish mother)
Victoria and Isabelle Farage (German mother)
Me (Cypriot father)

and the list goes on and on and on, and these are just the 'home grown' 'skins' (immigrants ?) If you start talking about 1st generation immigrants then you have such bastions of British culture ranging from Lew Grade to the 'Marks' in Marks and Spencer and Alec Issigonis the designer of the classic Mini car.

So yes 'skins' and 'home grown' ones can be 'bad' people but let's keep this in proportion. Not all 'skins' (home grown or not) are bad people. Not all bad people are 'skins' (home grown or not).

News just coming of a - fortunately thwarted - attack in Antwerp, similar to yesterday's in London; high-speed car, knives, gun, single perpetrator...

Erol, "Not all 'skins' (home grown or not) are bad people. Not all bad people are 'skins' (home grown or not)." a thing that many people choose to forget when looking for a good reason to cast blame.

Also a thing that all of us should remember, as we are all of us of mixed race - you only have to go back far enough to find out how mixed. For instance: Trump is originally from a German background and Erdogan is from a Georgian background - not Turkish at all and he said so himself in 2003 but has since told everyone that he is Turkish!

We are all just bit's and bob's of culture from all over the World, changing our nationalities, religions and even in some cases skin color over the years - why can't we just all live together? Soon, in the history of mankind that is, we will all be the same color anyway and if the fanatics have their say, which they have tried for countless generations, we will all be the same religion - then who will we blame for everything??

The left handed people are to blame for round plates, invented so they did not feel left out when meals were served on a square board! The right hand people are to blame for which side of the road you drive on! The ambidextrous people are to blame for not picking the right side to support! The British are to blame for not being able to speak a foreign language, the foreigners are to blame for not speaking English - the list of stupid "Blames" just goes on and on. Get behind it and stop pointing fingers in generality!!!

And they all contributed to British society unlike this scumbag ‘home grown skins’ was a term extensively used by the British media at the time of the London bus and tube bombing by other scumbag terrorists, please don’t turn this discussion into a racial debate I despise all terrorists regardless of race color or creed, perhaps you would not be so understand of this scumbag if god forbid he had killed or injured one of your loved ones.
Just listening to the BBC world news, yes he was British born and known to our security forces but because of our so liberal laws as laid down by the overpaid Muppet's in Brussels no action was taken.

lilnrob wrote: ‘home grown skins’ was a term extensively used by the British media at the time of the London bus and tube bombing

OK I understand you more clearly now. 'Clean Skin' was and is a term used to mean someone who commits a terrorist act and and who was previously unknown to the police or Security service. 'Home grown' means born in the UK. Two separate things. I did initially think by 'home grown skins' you maybe meant UK born but of immigrant background and it would appear that I was mistaken in this and for that I apologise for misunderstanding you this way and thank you for clarifying this. In terms of the perpetrator of the crimes yesterday in London it would appear that he was 'home grown' (born in the uk) and not a 'clean skin' (that is he was previously known to the police / security services).

lilnrob wrote: please don’t turn this discussion into a racial debate

See above, this was down to my misunderstanding of your use of the term 'skin' (as in 'clean skin') and again I apologise for that misunderstanding.

lilnrob wrote: I despise all terrorists regardless of race color or creed,

You think I do not ? I can assure you I despise terrorism, even accepting that one person's terrorist can be another person freedom fighter. I am of the philosophy that there are causes I (people) should be willing to die for but none that I (people) should be willing to kill for.

lilnrob wrote: perhaps you would not be so understand of this scumbag if god forbid he had killed or injured one of your loved ones.

I am some what mystified as to why you think I am understanding of the person who committed these acts ? Certainly I do seek to understand what could lead someone to behave in such a way but that is not the same as being understanding of the person themselves, at least as far as I see things.

lilnrob wrote: Just listening to the BBC world news, yes he was British born and known to our security forces but because of our so liberal laws as laid down by the overpaid Muppet's in Brussels no action was taken.

Well that is a whole other can of worms but I personally seriously doubt that the reason why the police / security services did not take action against this person before he was able to do the things he did yesterday, despite prior knowledge of him as a risk, is down to laws passed by muppets in Brussels.

Does Katie Hopkins have a point ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v1b-u3Y6tg

Yes she does, but we're not allowed to talk about it

turtle wrote:Does Katie Hopkins have a point ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v1b-u3Y6tg

Not in my opinion.

I think the idea and ideal of tolerance is a fundamental aspect of modern British cultural values and as such I see the kind of views as espoused by Ms Hopkins as a greater threat to British cultural values than those posed by individuals like the one responsible for the atrocities in Westminster or the multicultural nature of Britain today.

Does Nesrine Malik have a point ?

http://google.com/newsstand/s/CBIwhs7h0zQ

Dalartokat wrote:Yes she does, but we're not allowed to talk about it

Who is stopping you from talking about it ?

The changes thrust upon humanity in just the last two decades via developments, in communication , information technology, industrial capitalism and weaponry combined with religious and cultural intolerance is leading to an increasing risk of humanitarian breakdown. The Human race faces immense challenges to overcome an inherent threat to its survival. A survival that in my opinion is not threatened by the demise of the planet and environment but by the hate, intolerance and stupidity of the human species as it hurtles towards self destruction.

We should consider with care the demise of previous occupiers of planet earth. In finite terms consider life of earth as a 1 hour clock. Humanity has been the current tenant for less than a minute. There is no long term lease or tenancy agreement.

Erol, nothing is stopping "me" from talking about it, but in general in the UK when it comes to debate regarding what people really think about issues, such as Multiculturalism, Immigration, Muslims etc. we never get (in the UK) plain straight talking on what people really think. What Katie Hopkins has said, in my opinion, is, in general, what people are thinking but will not talk about it because people are then shouted down and called racist etc. I am not a complete fan of all her views but what she has said in the video I agree.

You have labelled her as a person that is likely to do damage to cultural values. It's jumping on the bandwagon of not what she is saying but who she is, an outspoken person. We've had the same with Nigel Farage.

In the UK, we have for many many years, been very tolerant; any person from abroad that has come to the UK has had the same opportunities as anyone else if they so desire, it is their choice to aspire to those opportunities and accept the way we live and most do, but the rest should not come to change us and the way we live.

I was born In South East London, worked in London. My son lives and works in London as does his partner. They live in what is called the Oval Quarter, in between Kennington and Brixton. They have lived also at the Elephant & Castle. I will be leaving for London on Friday for the weekend. When I arrive I will witness people going about their business, being very polite towards one another, but not mixing. I will witness Somalians in their own groups, people from Ghana in their own groups, South Americans in their own groups, Jamaicans not talking to Nigerians. Chinese just not talking to anyone. Turks...doing what they do best, making good food,,,,, and it goes on etc. etc. Are they mixing, no they are not and the tension is there.

Lambeth and Southwark Councils spend enormous amounts of money keeping the peace in their parts of London otherwise they would be at one another's throats.

Sadiq Khan....the son of a bus driver (Mr Armani) not a well liked man...... broken promises for social housing for those living in London about to lose their homes due to regeneration. Read the 35% Campaign.

I like living in the UK and what has happened on Wednesday is tragic but my tolerance levels are wearing thin. I have to accept, due to the fact that I don't have many years left on this planet, that the UK is what it is but I believe people are deluded in thinking that this wonderful melting pot dream will make everyone integrate when it cannot whilst the main ingredient has a distinctive flavour.

I think I rest my case with the above poster who cleverly includes insults masquerading as debate.

Humanitarian = "concerned with or seeking to promote human welfare."
By definition, this can apply to national/international communities/populations, or small local groups/clans/tribes - so as long as one individual has concern for another, humanitarianism continues.
Breakdown of the current level of human "civilization" and/or "society" is more what may occur - and this has happened many times over the full, vast expanse of history - consider the destruction "by barbarians" through the ages of various cultures and civilizations.
The only difference today is that the true dangers are not so much conventional weaponry, but rather "pestilence and/or famine" - pestilence being either natural diseases (eg Ebola) or man-made (accidental or deliberate bio/chemical release), and famine - read the current news! Thomas Malthus had opinions on this....
If "disaster" does come about, the human species will probably survive in groups of varying sizes, and will then descend to inter-grouping warfare, followed by gradual amalgamation, followed by..... just read history!
This possible (probable?) future has been analyzed and predicted over many years by experts - scientists, philosophers, doctors, politicians -and especially those science-fiction authors who are also qualified in many associated fields and doctrines....
Consider - there are many "Survivalist" groups and cults who are prepared for this "breakdown of civilization" - if it happens, they will hopefully ensure that the human race survives.......
(whether that's a good thing, I don't know.... )

Thank you Joffra,
Survival of the human species on a planet that is being slowly and yet more quickly rapped of its resources and ability to offer a sustainable quality of life is not an aspirational goal.
I believe it is commonly understood that mankind will eventually exhaust this planets resources and need to re locate to another possible artificial habitat.
A quality of life that supports contentment, tolerance and an aspirational common goal would certainly promote a mutually advantageous desire to seek perpetuation of the species.
Unfortunately the modern human being by enlarge, is , either not interested or able to consider the long term future but remains focussed on self centered betterment at the cost of others. Modern society is increasingly intolerant of others that have differing cultures, nationalities, religions. The only common goal is the pursuit of wealth and power.

Survival in the form of an existence would not be my choice. To halt the current tide of intolerance, hatred and destruction and to build a new world order of fairness and mutual respect and tolerance would be my choice. How does one do that? Is it indeed possible or are we too far gone. Time will only tell.

Dalorkat wrote:
"...In the UK, we have for many many years, been very tolerant..."

ahh really? when was that?
before, during or after the UK did (sub)invade, squeezed out, terrorised and killing millions, half the planet to their own advantage ?
https://www.quora.com/Which-countries-h ... nvaded-yet
Is this "the way we live"(d)?
or is it your opinion that all over the sudden all british became "humitarians" in a short time, say, 50 years?

and on top nature lovers, as waz wrote:
"....Survival of the human species on a planet that is being slowly and yet more quickly rapped of its resources and ability to offer a sustainable quality of life is not an aspirational goal. I believe it is commonly understood that mankind will eventually exhaust this planets resources ...."

who started and caused that, until today?
the for centuries enslaved african people, who until today have (per person) a CO2 footprint as low we only can dream of and could feed a 20 billion on this planet?
no, the europeans and the americans (of european origin) are the "guilty ones".

no no.. times did not change a lot... or did the british - european "mixed" with the natives of India, Africa or wherever, in the past or today?
pls note: sex tourism in thailand is not "mixing with the locals".
also the fact that someone likes lahmacun, turkish coffee or curry does not mean "mixing".

many feel that they are (at least) "something better" and this, basically, did not change a lot until today.
the descriptions of eg, "clean skin" or "home grown", again only wants to differ "us" and "them".

so, to be a bit teasing:
as waz wrote: "The only common goal is the pursuit of wealth and power", a good part of all immigrants, home grown or not, clean skin or not, appear to be "very british"...

and when it comes to "where is my old girne (or whole of cyprus) gone?".. i only can say: well, you made to happen as well.. no matter you came and may settled here in the 70ties, 90ties or 2011.

meanwhile we can search the net whether "XY cheap air" offers a CO2 footprint neutral flight to LCA for an "average dinner out'" and hope that
- we can take our tablet into the cabin
- the pilot has no "whatsoever sickness" and brings us down in one piece, because he only gets payed when he is on duty, as he is selfemployed in his own one man company, based in wherever, which he was forced to found from the airline and gets no sick pay.
(german prosecuters sued more then 800 pilots, some aviation companies and Ryan air managers for tax fraud, not paying social insurance and so on)

On other threads, and other media, a lot of concern has been expressed (understandably ) on the impact that immigration has had/is having on the Welfare State and NHS and their resources.

I have not seen anything about the effects on and by the British Education System. The time when immigration started to be large enough to draw comment was, unfortunately, a period what State Education (which was only introduced in the 20th Century) had hit a bad patch, with overcrowded classrooms, insufficiently and inadequately trained teachers and the "bog standard" secondary modern schools were a jungle where discipline could not be maintained. It is hardly surprisingly that with the additional pressure of extra pupils speaking different languages and from a different cultures placed a strain on the system which has resulted in two generations now of native Brits and second and third generation alike being inadequately educated and indeed in some cases barely literate. The exceptionally gifted got through of course, as did most of the above average others (particularly those who had friends and family to encourage them, or indeed pay for private education), but for the under average and borderline entered adulthood with little prospect of employment and no resources to cope with unforced but pecunious leisure : particularly in our materialist and consumerist society with the advantages of the more fortunate thrust in their faces! In the native Brit this has largely resulted in a lack of tolerance and fixed opinions, based on ignorance as so often demonstrated in discussions on the topic. But nature abhors a vacuum ( and the Devil makes work for idle hands - and minds Is is really surprising that second generation Brits (particularly those of a different religion and moral standpoint) should be so very vulnerable to the Preachers of hate, Like Erol, there is no way I can endorse any form of terrorism , but I do I hope just about have sufficient charity (if I dare use the word) to understand the pressures they are under.

I recall that in an earlier thread Erol said that the benefits that "new blood" bring to an aging population outweigh the disadvantages of the pressure on resources. I take his point, but am not entirely convinced that as things stand at the moment the balance is right.

Ragged Robin wrote:On other threads, and other media, a lot of concern has been expressed (understandably ) on the impact that immigration has had/is having on the Welfare State and NHS and their resources.

I have not seen anything about the effects on and by the British Education System. The time when immigration started to be large enough to draw comment was, unfortunately, a period what State Education (which was only introduced in the 20th Century) had hit a bad patch, with overcrowded classrooms, insufficiently and inadequately trained teachers and the "bog standard" secondary modern schools were a jungle where discipline could not be maintained. It is hardly surprisingly that with the additional pressure of extra pupils speaking different languages and from a different cultures placed a strain on the system which has resulted in two generations now of native Brits and second and third generation alike being inadequately educated and indeed in some cases barely literate. The exceptionally gifted got through of course, as did most of the above average others (particularly those who had friends and family to encourage them, or indeed pay for private education), but for the under average and borderline entered adulthood with little prospect of employment and no resources to cope with unforced but pecunious leisure : particularly in our materialist and consumerist society with the advantages of the more fortunate thrust in their faces! In the native Brit this has largely resulted in a lack of tolerance and fixed opinions, based on ignorance as so often demonstrated in discussions on the topic. But nature abhors a vacuum ( and the Devil makes work for idle hands - and minds Is is really surprising that second generation Brits (particularly those of a different religion and moral standpoint) should be so very vulnerable to the Preachers of hate, Like Erol, there is no way I can endorse any form of terrorism , but I do I hope just about have sufficient charity (if I dare use the word) to understand the pressures they are under.

I recall that in an earlier thread Erol said that the benefits that "new blood" bring to an aging population outweigh the disadvantages of the pressure on resources. I take his point, but am not entirely convinced that as things stand at the moment the balance is right.

The alleged additional pressure on the UK welfare system is in my view another unqualified myth fuelled by the discontent that many have been fed by right wing BREXIT campaigners.
Let us be clear. The education system within the UK is financed and paid for by tax payers. A person that is putting value into the UK economy and paying taxes and National insurance should take benefit from the education and health services that they are indeed paying for. Is that not fair?
To suggest that immigrants might be excluded so that UK persons of lesser ability can secure a better education and a better chance is plain stupid.
The reservoir of talent, skill and competition within the whole social system drives standards up and provides a superior level of educated people ,irrespective of nationality who then enter the economic landscape and participate in the expansion and betterment of the same economy.
To exclude on the basis of too much competition or failure of government to allocate funds to accommodate a demand is poor judgment and will lead to the decline of a competitive economy
If immigrants currently within the UK economy were to be forced out or indeed chose to leave because of the increasing antagonism against them. The UK economy would decline and fall like a stone. Then the education and welfare system would be under threat because it cannot be economically maintained.

The reservoir of talent, skill and competition within the whole social system drives standards up and provides a superior level of educated people ,irrespective of nationality who then enter the economic landscape and participate in the expansion and betterment of the same economy.

What like these you mean

Or these perhaps....

Have these pictures been selected for a particular reason?
Who are these people and what do you know of the source and context ?

This scene could be almost anywhere, in any city across the world.
It is most certainly not an exclusively British scene.

What is your proposal ? Are you suggesting closing UK borders is a solution?

Clearly little understanding of the benefits and positives of immigration. I am certain images of working and progressive immigrant images are readily available on the internet too as are millions of images of less fortunate people living rough.

These images offer little support to an argument against immigration.

Waz, are you for real...... a big red London bus and a few British bobbies might give you a clue ?

My point is
The scene you carefully selected could just have easily been in any city around the world.

Street dwellers are in every city in the World!! It is not a British phenomenon.

What, please, is the point that you are attempting to make?

Waz
Tell me how many Brits do you see sleeping in the streets of Barcelona or Athens, how many do you see jumping out of back of lorries in Miami or Monaco do I have to spell it out to you how damaging this is to the UK or any other EU city for that matter.

You seem to accept that street living is is ok and is an accepted part of EU life well it may be ok for you but I don't want it and whats more it should not be allowed.

So my point Waz it is NOT ACCEPTABLE in 2017 for this widespread activity (created by themselves) to be commonplace anywhere in such a civilised go getting filthy rich multicultural EU that you so adore.

Did I make my point ?

Waz: Please stop misquoting me. I never said, suggested nor implied that immigrants should be denied education in favour of native Brits of lesser ability. Quite the reverse my view is that both native and "adopted" Brits deserve and need a better standard of education and that the failure to provide this was largely responsible for the behaviour of some immigrants... I implied that the reason fo the poor standard of education was because of too much pressure on existing resources, and that had been exacerbated by the influx of immigrants.

I did not follow this through because the conclusion was obvious: more resources should be devoted to providing a proper education for all, but that begs the queston of where the monetary resources are to come from; and the obvious answer is that if Britain did not indulge in foreign wars , and consequently cut its defence and security budgets there would be ample for Education andHealth - but that starts a vicious circle ||:(a(

It has nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit:

Ragged Robin wrote:Waz: Please stop misquoting me. I never said, suggested nor implied that immigrants should be denied education in favour of native Brits of lesser ability. Quite the reverse my view is that both native and "adopted" Brits deserve and need a better standard of education and that the failure to provide this was largely responsible for the behaviour of some immigrants... I implied that the reason fo the poor standard of education was because of too much pressure on existing resources, and that had been exacerbated by the influx of immigrants.

I did not follow this through because the conclusion was obvious: more resources should be devoted to providing a proper education for all, but that begs the queston of where the monetary resources are to come from; and the obvious answer is that if Britain did not indulge in foreign wars , and consequently cut its defence and security budgets there would be ample for Education andHealth - but that starts a vicious circle ||:(a(

It has nothing whatsoever to do with Brexit:

Your point is accepted RR

My point is the almost continual barrage of immigrant slander fails to acknowledge the advantages and positives of the movement of people and labour. The UK economy has in recent years been buoyant, progressive and strong. Now it is under threat once again.
Certainly HMRC are in receipt of hundreds of millions of £ that immigrants have paid into government coffers plus the positive benefit to the Uk economy are very apparent. Immigrants have often been branded by the less well informed as scroungers and vagabonds.

The above has certainly influenced the BREXIT outcome. BREXIT has offered no alternative or solution. The less informed, in my opinion, have acted irresponsibly to the dribble fed to them by the BREXIT leaders who have now completely and utterly disappeared.

The Brexit leaders have disappeared ?

Waz ...I think you may need some help pal

turtle wrote:The Brexit leaders have disappeared ?

Waz ...I think you may need some help pal

Help me. Please do. Where are the noble leaders that led you into BREXIT ?
Certainly not leading the country or even a government or even an opposition!!
Total failures in my book!!

turtle wrote:You seem to accept that street living is is ok and is an accepted part of EU life well it may be ok for you but I don't want it and whats more it should not be allowed.

So my point Waz it is NOT ACCEPTABLE in 2017 for this widespread activity (created by themselves) to be commonplace anywhere in such a civilised go getting filthy rich multicultural EU that you so adore.

Did I make my point ?

Even ignoring that this thread was about the terrorist attack in Westminster and then moved on to the suggestion that 'immigration' and 'multiculturalism' were to blame for this incident being able to happen in the UK and your images are of 'Roma' people that have moved from places like Romania and Bulgaria to the UK and are 'sleeping rough' and other 'offences' and there is no evidence what so ever that the presence of these Roma people or the 'tolerance' of them represents either a 'fifth column' of terrorist in the UK or that they create 'ghettos' within the UK where extremism that leads to radicalisation of 'home grown terrorist' can happen, there is still much wrong (in my opinion) of your analysis of this different and separate 'problem' that you have decided to shift the discussion to.

The Roma people (not to be confused with Romanian people) migrated to Europe, probably from North India, over a thousand years ago, There have been Roma communities in Europe, including the UK, from the middle ages (long before the EU). In that 1000+ year history of 'Roma migrants' in Europe, including England, 'Europe' has tried many methods of dealing with this 'problem' of Roma immigrants. To list just a tiny fraction of such historic attempts, from the prohibition of the transportation of Gypsies into England by Henry VIII in 1530 and the imposition of the death penalty for Gypsies not leaving England in 1544 to attempts at forced assimilation in Spain in 1619 to the prohibition of fortune-telling in England in 1743 to the removal of Romani children from their parents in Norway in 1896 to the mass exterminations of 100's of thousand, if not millions, of Romani people in Nazi Germany and its conquered 'partnered' states to the efforts in Communist eastern Europe at forced assimilation and forced sterilisation in Czech republic even into the 1990's and possibly beyond. Yet the Roma people still exist and remain throughout Europe and what is now the UK and have done for a thousand years or more.

So this idea that this 'problem' of Roma people within the UK or indeed Europe in general is some kind of recent phenomena caused by 'left wing liberals' and 'tolerant attitudes' or 'multiculturalism' and could be and will be solved by Brexit and the UK 'taking back control of its boarders' is to my mind nothing more than patent nonsense and bunkum and pure rhetoric. Free movement of people within the EU has played a part in this latest 'migration' of Roma people from places like Romania and Bulgaria, just as events like Ottoman conquest of the Balkans in 1500's or the collapse of communism in eastern European states in the late 1989-91 did so before but to make out that this is a new thing is ridiculous. Even if dealing only with this latest 'wave' of Roma migration within Europe the fact is that the UK has under EU law the right to deport such people, despite their rights to free movement within the EU, and has done so and continues to do so. That a significant number of those so deported in the last 15 years or so have simply returned is a failure entirely of the UK own boarder controls , entirely under it's own control and absolutely nothing to do with EU laws preventing the UK from being allowed to stop these people returning. The UK has failed to control its boarders in this regard whilst in the EU and no doubt will continue to do so once outside the EU.

There were migrant Roma people coming to the UK (before the UK even existed as the UK) in 1500,1600,1700,1800,1900 and they continue to come in 2000 as well. Blame the EU for this and make out that Brexit will succeed in stopping this, when hundreds of years of immigration bans, forced assimilation attempts, forced sterilisation and mass ethnic cleansing across Europe has not managed to achieve this if you like but do not expect me to believe such patent nonsense.

Once again this issue of Roma people in the UK has nothing to do with 'terrorism' and how, allegedly, 'multiculturalism' has led to the creation of an environment in the UK where 'home grown' terrorist like the one that perpetrated the crimes in Westminster are able to be 'created', which was what this thread was originally about.

Boris Johnson...In government
Liam Fox .....in government
David Davis .....in government
Tereasa May ex remain now Brexit in government.....and now PM

I could ask where are the remainers but they are too busy abandoning their posts and lining their pockets ?

erol wrote:

turtle wrote:You seem to accept that street living is is ok and is an accepted part of EU life well it may be ok for you but I don't want it and whats more it should not be allowed.

So my point Waz it is NOT ACCEPTABLE in 2017 for this widespread activity (created by themselves) to be commonplace anywhere in such a civilised go getting filthy rich multicultural EU that you so adore.

Did I make my point ?

Even ignoring that this thread was about the terrorist attack in Westminster and then moved on to the suggestion that 'immigration' and 'multiculturalism' were to blame for this incident being able to happen in the UK and your images are of 'Roma' people that have moved from places like Romania and Bulgaria to the UK and are 'sleeping rough' and other 'offences' and there is no evidence what so ever that the presence of these Roma people or the 'tolerance' of them represents either a 'fifth column' of terrorist in the UK or that they create 'ghettos' within the UK where extremism that leads to radicalisation of 'home grown terrorist' can happen, there is still much wrong (in my opinion) of your analysis of this different and separate 'problem' that you have decided to shift the discussion to.

The Roma people (not to be confused with Romanian people) migrated to Europe, probably from North India, over a thousand years ago, There have been Roma communities in Europe, including the UK, from the middle ages (long before the EU). In that 1000+ year history of 'Roma migrants' in Europe, including England, 'Europe' has tried many methods of dealing with this 'problem' of Roma immigrants. To list just a tiny fraction of such historic attempts, from the prohibition of the transportation of Gypsies into England by Henry VIII in 1530 and the imposition of the death penalty for Gypsies not leaving England in 1544 to attempts at forced assimilation in Spain in 1619 to the prohibition of fortune-telling in England in 1743 to the removal of Romani children from their parents in Norway in 1896 to the mass exterminations of 100's of thousand, if not millions, of Romani people in Nazi Germany and its conquered 'partnered' states to the efforts in Communist eastern Europe at forced assimilation and forced sterilisation in Czech republic even into the 1990's and possibly beyond. Yet the Roma people still exist and remain throughout Europe and what is now the UK and have done for a thousand years or more.

So this idea that this 'problem' of Roma people within the UK or indeed Europe in general is some kind of recent phenomena caused by 'left wing liberals' and 'tolerant attitudes' or 'multiculturalism' and could be and will be solved by Brexit and the UK 'taking back control of its boarders' is to my mind nothing more than patent nonsense and bunkum and pure rhetoric. Free movement of people within the EU has played a part in this latest 'migration' of Roma people from places like Romania and Bulgaria, just as events like Ottoman conquest of the Balkans in 1500's or the collapse of communism in eastern European states in the late 1989-91 did so before but to make out that this is a new thing is ridiculous. Even if dealing only with this latest 'wave' of Roma migration within Europe the fact is that the UK has under EU law the right to deport such people, despite their rights to free movement within the EU, and has done so and continues to do so. That a significant number of those so deported in the last 15 years or so have simply returned is a failure entirely of the UK own boarder controls , entirely under it's own control and absolutely nothing to do with EU laws preventing the UK from being allowed to stop these people returning. The UK has failed to control its boarders in this regard whilst in the EU and no doubt will continue to do so once outside the EU.

There were migrant Roma people coming to the UK (before the UK even existed as the UK) in 1500,1600,1700,1800,1900 and they continue to come in 2000 as well. Blame the EU for this and make out that Brexit will succeed in stopping this, when hundreds of years of immigration bans, forced assimilation attempts, forced sterilisation and mass ethnic cleansing across Europe has not managed to achieve this if you like but do not expect me to believe such patent nonsense.

Once again this issue of Roma people in the UK has nothing to do with 'terrorism' and how, allegedly, 'multiculturalism' has led to the creation of an environment in the UK where 'home grown' terrorist like the one that perpetrated the crimes in Westminster are able to be 'created', which was what this thread was originally about.

I started to read your post Erol then i gave up the will to live...
At what point in this discussion did i mention Roma ?