Blair and Straw's Dishonest plan to make the UK Multi-cultural

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:18 am

'Dishonest' Blair and Straw accused over secret plan for multicultural UK | Mail Online

Awwww and we all believed that they really cared :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:37 am

If this is in fact true, its a bit like adding salt to food because it enhances taste. Then emptying the whole pack over your dinner.

Has the world gone mad ?

farmer giles · Post by **farmer giles** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:43 am

why would they do it ,i mean why would they want the uk as more multi racial ???

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 10:49 am

Bruv;1255999 wrote: If this is in fact true, its a bit like adding salt to food because it enhances taste. Then emptying the whole pack over your dinner.

Has the world gone mad ?
There was one line In the article that stood out for me:... The Labour electorate !!!

Some Tories have been long arguing that Labour encouraged mass Immigration merely for votes from ethnic Immigrants to keep them in Power.

Excellent analogy about the salt Bruv.

The claim from Labour that fiscal benifit from mass Immigration is fundamentally flawed. They have never taken Into account the future Offspring born In this country from Migrants who settle here. Nor do they take Into account that anyone coming to our country will one day retire and need state Pension while we accept even more as they grow old.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:14 am

I never did understand why mass immigration was "good for the economy" but we "couldnt afford" to let the Ghurkas stay. Did I miss something at school or am I just dumb ?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Oct 25, 2009 11:32 am

Snowfire;1256008 wrote: I never did understand why mass immigration was "good for the economy" but we "couldnt afford" to let the Ghurkas stay. Did I miss something at school or am I just dumb ? Well, I must have missed It also then. This country has a duty to the Ghurka's. They were shamefully under-paid by the British Army and the war Time Government. They promised 'Homes fit for hero's' and gave then 'Hero's fit for homes'. :-5

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:26 am

MELANIE PHILLIPS: The outrageous truth slips out: Labour cynically plotted to transform the entire make-up of Britain without telling us | Mail Online

Frightening.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:13 am

Immigration has been proven to be good for the economy, but only low level, and short term.

I have always wondered why we 'owe' something to the Gurkhas.

(WOW !!! Controversial or what ?)

I have nothing against them at all, everyone of them I have met have been nice guys, hard working, courteous, respectable and respectful.

But........we employed them as mercenaries, for a wage in excess of what they could hope for in their own country. If they don't get into the British Army they go for the Indian, so no great loyalty involved.

Our 'loyalty' to the individual soldiers that served in the forces, entails them bringing an extended family when they settle here.

Just another conundrum that puzzles me about BNP policy.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:25 am

Amazing how fast people forget history. remember this:

British Empire:

So it was OK for you to go there, but it is not so OK for them to return the favour.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Oct 26, 2009 12:11 pm

Did we ever 'go there' to Nepal ?

Who said it was alright for us to 'go there' ?

Because we did go there, does it give us the duty to have them ALL return the favour ?

The point is that the BNP make excuses for a small group who have served us over time for mutual benefit.