Given that Farage has lied in the past about immigration levels (Romanians and Bulgarians), I wouldn't be in a hurry to believe him.
And the sweet irony of Farage being descended from Hugenot asylum seekers (sorry, REFUGEES) is not lost on many people either...I wonder if his ancestors ate swans or 'refused to integrate', 'only shopped in Hugenot shops' and 'arrogantly spoke French on the street'
In a debate, you have to agree terms. In the real world we have this wonderful thing called the Dictionary, which standardises the language that we use. When you use a different meaning other than what is intended, you are being misleading.
So don't try and spin your way out of this by implying that a fixation with rigour and truth is somehow an inferior debating style. You have been cornered and shown to be someone who relies on soundbites and phrases that you do not understand. You cannot be taken seriously and, in any reasonable arena of debate, you would not be.
When I get time I will check it. I read once that if the Huguenots emigrated to Britain today, it would take them 27 days instead of several centuries.
I can find nothing to support it - it sounds like another lie from Farage. What I do know is how notoriously incomplete (in many cases non-existant) records are from the early modern period (to say nothing of mediaeval times). To make such a bold statement with no details as to the comings and goings of people (as well as accurate records of those killed in wars, those considered migrants to England from Scotland and Ireland when the countries were independent, mercenaries from abroad and those who fled (and returned or were replaced) due to the Reformation and the tumultuous religious climate which existed for hundreds of years, strikes me as patently ludicrous. Farage (and his party) have a track record of lying on the issue - why should we imagine he suddenly has access to such staggering information (yet provides no proof) when he can't even correctly google the populations of Bulgaria and Romania?
My suspicion is that he is basing his outrageous claim on population levels alone - without in any way taking historical relativity into account, nor the fact that rising population levels are the norm nearly all over the world, and not due to immigration.
And the sweet irony of Farage being descended from Hugenot asylum seekers (sorry, REFUGEES) is not lost on many people either...I wonder if his ancestors ate swans or 'refused to integrate', 'only shopped in Hugenot shops' and 'arrogantly spoke French on the street'
And since when has Farage said he's against all immigration?
Of course not. An immigrant is someone who chooses to live permanently in a difference place to which they were born. There is no other implication of analogy, so don't try to pretend that there is
I'm sorry but if we lost WWII and the Nazis goose stepped up Whitehall, are you seriously trying to say they are merely immigrants who have chosen to live permanently in a difference place to which they were born?
I'm sorry but if we lost WWII and the Nazis goose stepped up Whitehall, are you seriously trying to say they are merely immigrants who have chosen to live permanently in a difference place to which they were born?
It doesn't matter how they entered but the fact they were from somewhere else and then chose to stay.
Nice job trying to appeal to emotional / incredulous with a reference to the Nazis, though
So White British may be a minority by then. Whoopie doo, I really could not give a monkeys. In fifty years time many of those who have grown up in this country will consider themselves British and that is what counts, not their origin prior to that.
Like the millennium disaster where technology was doomed to fail
Like the end of the world in other predictions
Just more nonsense and that it comes from that scummy rag is no surprise
I'm sure that he has not. But his language is incredibly anti-immigrant, while ignoring all of the potential benefits that immigrant can bring
Is he not against all immigration for five years? Ie. he's against it for the length of a parliament? That's the last I heard, although when I looked up their policy on the issue, it was 'under review'...
In a debate, you have to agree terms. In the real world we have this wonderful thing called the Dictionary, which standardises the language that we use. When you use a different meaning other than what is intended, you are being misleading.
So don't try and spin your way out of this by implying that a fixation with rigour and truth is somehow an inferior debating style. You have been cornered and shown to be someone who relies on soundbites and phrases that you do not understand. You cannot be taken seriously and, in any reasonable arena of debate, you would not be.
Excellent points
It's a shame that so many don't let facts and dictionaries get in their way
And since when has Farage said he's against all immigration?
He said the other day that it was the right thing to do to rescue the Ugandan Asians as they were only 27,000. Compare that to say NET migration of nearly a quarter of a million in 2010 and about 230,000 settlements or ILR and its plainly about numbers and the pace of change. Why does it always have to be all or nothing. What's wrong with low level, slow, sensible, managed immigration that actually benefits individuals in this country?
Everyone is seems to be missing the point. Many people like myself do not have a problem with immigrants or immigration however do have an issue with a lack of integration.
By failing to learn to the language and not mixing with other sections of society, immigrants are often marginalised. This not helped a lack of basic religious tolerance i.e hate preaching.
Immigration is in my opinion is not the problem here but integration..
As an Anglo-Saxon I may not be native to Britain, but I am native to England - a country dying on it's arse for so many reasons, multiculturalism being one of them.
I'm sure that he has not. But his language is incredibly anti-immigrant, while ignoring all of the potential benefits that immigrant can bring
Immigrants are not all the same, some are beneficial many are not. Immigration is like a medicinal drug, a small dose now and again makes you better, taking too much all at once makes you ill. The immigration proponents don't want to accept that numbers are way too high, so instead they lump all migrants together and claim we have been enriched by their diversity and they are essential to boost our economy etc.
We could be just as economically well off with selective immigration, with much lower numbers and the predictions of 2066 would never happen.
As an Anglo-Saxon I may not be native to Britain, but I am native to England - a country dying on it's arse for so many reasons, multiculturalism being one of them.
And the sweet irony of Farage being descended from Hugenot asylum seekers (sorry, REFUGEES) is not lost on many people either...I wonder if his ancestors ate swans or 'refused to integrate', 'only shopped in Hugenot shops' and 'arrogantly spoke French on the street'
what's his ancestry got to do with anything? he isn't racist nor is he claiming he is pure 'english blood'. if you think he is racist, post a link to back up your claim.
Comments
You're funny:D It's like debating with a fog
No argument, not even an attempt at an argument. Educate yourself, you will appreciate the benefits
I can find nothing to support it - it sounds like another lie from Farage. What I do know is how notoriously incomplete (in many cases non-existant) records are from the early modern period (to say nothing of mediaeval times). To make such a bold statement with no details as to the comings and goings of people (as well as accurate records of those killed in wars, those considered migrants to England from Scotland and Ireland when the countries were independent, mercenaries from abroad and those who fled (and returned or were replaced) due to the Reformation and the tumultuous religious climate which existed for hundreds of years, strikes me as patently ludicrous. Farage (and his party) have a track record of lying on the issue - why should we imagine he suddenly has access to such staggering information (yet provides no proof) when he can't even correctly google the populations of Bulgaria and Romania?
My suspicion is that he is basing his outrageous claim on population levels alone - without in any way taking historical relativity into account, nor the fact that rising population levels are the norm nearly all over the world, and not due to immigration.
And since when has Farage said he's against all immigration?
I'm sorry but if we lost WWII and the Nazis goose stepped up Whitehall, are you seriously trying to say they are merely immigrants who have chosen to live permanently in a difference place to which they were born?
I'm sure that he has not. But his language is incredibly anti-immigrant, while ignoring all of the potential benefits that immigrant can bring
It doesn't matter how they entered but the fact they were from somewhere else and then chose to stay.
Nice job trying to appeal to emotional / incredulous with a reference to the Nazis, though
Like the end of the world in other predictions
Just more nonsense and that it comes from that scummy rag is no surprise
Is he not against all immigration for five years? Ie. he's against it for the length of a parliament? That's the last I heard, although when I looked up their policy on the issue, it was 'under review'...
Oooo the old I'm educated and you're not line. It's understanable when you've been bested.
Excellent points
It's a shame that so many don't let facts and dictionaries get in their way
He said the other day that it was the right thing to do to rescue the Ugandan Asians as they were only 27,000. Compare that to say NET migration of nearly a quarter of a million in 2010 and about 230,000 settlements or ILR and its plainly about numbers and the pace of change. Why does it always have to be all or nothing. What's wrong with low level, slow, sensible, managed immigration that actually benefits individuals in this country?
HAH! First time that I have laughed all day
So much ad hominem.
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/immigration-population-and-ethnicity-uk-international-perspective
And while you might not have said the British are mongrels it's usually how this sort of topic ends up, it already has if you haven't noticed.
..like cheap labour that undercuts others wages
I can believe that
Well the previous invaders had already been used, it could have been the Soviet union as well.
No, this is a legitimate drawback which must be countered by policy. I said that the benefits were being ignored. A balanced list be can found here
I have no idea what you mean by that
By failing to learn to the language and not mixing with other sections of society, immigrants are often marginalised. This not helped a lack of basic religious tolerance i.e hate preaching.
Immigration is in my opinion is not the problem here but integration..
Immigrants are not all the same, some are beneficial many are not. Immigration is like a medicinal drug, a small dose now and again makes you better, taking too much all at once makes you ill. The immigration proponents don't want to accept that numbers are way too high, so instead they lump all migrants together and claim we have been enriched by their diversity and they are essential to boost our economy etc.
We could be just as economically well off with selective immigration, with much lower numbers and the predictions of 2066 would never happen.
ahhh, yes, but who did they conquer?
i think you need to re-read Liams post. it's quoted above for you.
what's his ancestry got to do with anything? he isn't racist nor is he claiming he is pure 'english blood'. if you think he is racist, post a link to back up your claim.
he doesn't want to stop all immigration.still that doesn't stop the smear campaign being ramped up by the toreis and labour.
such as? (and try to ensure your reply doesn't mention food).