Race realism grows - another Labour MP tells the truth
Robert Henderson
"There are more asylum seekers in Peterborough than the Government is
prepared to admit," she said. "It is hiding its head in the sand like
an ostrich and exposed its thinking parts." [Helen Clark, the Labour
MP for Peterborough]
'Beverley Hughes, the Home Office asylum minister, has refused to
visit Peterborough and has criticised Mrs Clark for "voicing alarmist
views about the extent to which Peterborough is accommodating asylum
seekers".' Sunday Telegraph 2 2 03
--
Robert Henderson
phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk
Blair Scandal web site at http://www.geocities.com/blairscandal/
Personal web site at http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk
Frank
"Robert Henderson" <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:J$7M1KAzY...@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
Why won't she visit Peterborough I wonder? What a disgusting and
treacherous crew they have turned out to be.
Jon°
nation of immigrants and they often quote French Huguenot and Jewish
immigrants to back this up. Well 100,000 French Huguenot's came to England
in the 17th. century and the Jews entering our society came to around
100,000 prior to the thirties and 70,000 just before WW2. This represented
1.5% of the population that the Huguenot's entered into and the two Jewish
figures came to 0.6%.
We have a quarter of a million asylum -seekers coming in every year now. The
ethnic population is around 12 % now. We have never had anything like this
happen to us in the last 1,000 years. Our country is being changed before
our very eyes by those who wish to destroy it. Unless we move very quickly
we shall soon find ourselves completely swamped and our children's children
(perhaps even our children) will be a minority in their own nation.
"Frank" <Fr...@flummoxed.com> wrote in message
news:b1jlio$9rf$1...@venus.btinternet.com...
Robert Henderson
<Fr...@flummoxed.com> writes
Because then she would be forced to deal with opposition face to face.
RH
> What a disgusting and
>treacherous crew they have turned out to be.
>
>
--
Baroness Edwina Frogbucket
"Jon°" <jon_j...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:YRd%9.2465$6s1.15...@news-text.cableinet.net...
> We have a quarter of a million asylum -seekers coming in every year now.
The
> ethnic population is around 12 % now. We have never had anything like this
> happen to us in the last 1,000 years. Our country is being changed before
> our very eyes by those who wish to destroy it. Unless we move very quickly
> we shall soon find ourselves completely swamped and our children's
children
> (perhaps even our children) will be a minority in their own nation.
Quite. Particularly as figures show that Brits are having less than the 2.4
children so often quoted, while immigrants often have much larger families.
--
Baroness Edwina Frogbucket
jackkincaid
> prepared to admit," she said. "It is hiding its head in the sand like
> an ostrich and exposed its thinking parts." [Helen Clark, the Labour
> MP for Peterborough]
What has this to do with race?
Robin Carmody
> "There are more asylum seekers in Peterborough than the Government is
> prepared to admit," she said. "It is hiding its head in the sand like
> an ostrich and exposed its thinking parts." [Helen Clark, the Labour
> MP for Peterborough]
>
> 'Beverley Hughes, the Home Office asylum minister, has refused to
> visit Peterborough and has criticised Mrs Clark for "voicing alarmist
> views about the extent to which Peterborough is accommodating asylum
> seekers".' Sunday Telegraph 2 2 03
Helen Clark is voicing legitimate concerns, but Peterborough is one of
many places whose character changed mainly because of resettlement
from within Britain - specifically the aftereffects of making it a new
town in 1968. While it is true that some of those who moved to
Peterborough after that were black and Asian people ***who had already
settled in this country and made it their home***, the majority were
white. They were the ones who eroded the old-fashioned provincial
atmosphere which I believe it had up to that time (although I was
neither there nor then - somebody on this ng was both).
RC
Robin Carmody
Quite. Most asylum seekers are white. There are obviously cultural
differences, but Henderson's great problem is that he thinks race trounces
culture in the final analysis, whereas all sane people think the opposite.
RC
Jon°
If you are speaking of that part of the Human-Race that uses thought and
reasoned argument in a polite way to discuss subjects. That certainly does
not include a loud-mouthed ignoramus who consistently condones violence as
you have shown yourself to be. When are you going to advocate that Nu
Labour's name is changed to the "Bovver-Boy-Gangster-Party". This will
surely suit your new image in a more satisfactory way.
"jackkincaid" <theov...@another.com> wrote in message
Jon°
The opposite to you and the rest of the socialist rubbish, one of whom you
reply too. One of the things that I find most amusing about left-wing
adherents is that they call any who do not believe in their corrupt and
failed ideals.......Insane.......In your case that really is the "Portland
Bill calling the copper black". Never mind Robin, don't get too upset
because national opinion is swinging against the insanity that you advocate.
"Robin Carmody" <ro...@elidor.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
Jon°
neither"
You should have ended above words with "here not there", you never are
Robin.
Though, I must say, that...... As a "quintessentially British
middle-class-member turned left-wing traitor" and also part of the
"Nu-Idiocy".....You are really quite amusing at times.
Robert Henderson
jackkincaid <theov...@another.com> writes
>Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<J$7M1KAzYT
>P+E...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>...
>> "There are more asylum seekers in Peterborough than the Government is
>> prepared to admit," she said. "It is hiding its head in the sand like
>> an ostrich and exposed its thinking parts." [Helen Clark, the Labour
>> MP for Peterborough]
>
>What has this to do with race?
Immigration. RH
Robin Carmody
> "although I was
> neither"
>
> You should have ended above words with "here not there", you never are
> Robin.
I am here (Portland, Dorset, 2003). I was not there (Peterborough before
1968). I have only ever passed through Peterborough on trains and I was not
born until 1980. I know for a fact however that somebody on this ng lived
in Peterborough before 1968. Ask him if you don't believe me.
RC
Robin Carmody
> In article <eb35fbed.03020...@posting.google.com>,
> jackkincaid <theov...@another.com> writes
> >Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<J$7M1KAzYT
> >P+E...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>...
> >> "There are more asylum seekers in Peterborough than the Government is
> >> prepared to admit," she said. "It is hiding its head in the sand like
> >> an ostrich and exposed its thinking parts." [Helen Clark, the Labour
> >> MP for Peterborough]
> >
> >What has this to do with race?
>
> Immigration. RH
But most of these immigrants are white.
RC
BlueSky
> 'Beverley Hughes ... has criticised Mrs Clark for "voicing alarmist
> views about ...'
"Alarmist" hey? Let's see. What are some uses of the word "alarmist"?
The occupants of the burning house spoke in an alarmist manner.
When my wife and I saw the known serial killer approach last night, we
expressed alarmist views of the situation to each other.
As the damn began to collapse, people in the town below started to
paricipate in alarmist conversation.
Let's be honest here. People like Hughs must have some kind of code
book with various word templates to apply to these kinds of
situations. These templates all have the same strange characteristic.
When you hear the sentence, you have the feeling that you are being
tricked through the clever use of words and concepts.
To be honest and dark. In your area and in the southwest US too, the
real purpose of so much immigration, and intense population explosion
of these particular immigrants, is to smash the traditional European
ethnic group from power, once and for all. And that is exactly what is
happening.
Jon°
facet of socialism to keep telling lies until they are accepted.
Even if they were, which I strongly doubt. there are plenty of white Muslims
in Eastern Europe who are likely to contain terrorists, just as the
Archbishop of Canterbury has just stated.
"Robin Carmody" <ro...@elidor.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b1l7f3$r72
Jon°
are not having read many of your completely mad posts. In case you do not
understand what "Being neither here nor there" means in English colloquial
parlance.......It means being slightly dotty and quite amusing with it.
Only 22/23 Eh! well such is the voice of some of modern "dotty" England.
Paul Hyett
>The Anti-British on Usenet and Nu Labour tell us that we have always been a
>nation of immigrants and they often quote French Huguenot and Jewish
>immigrants to back this up. Well 100,000 French Huguenot's came to England
>in the 17th. century and the Jews entering our society came to around
>100,000 prior to the thirties and 70,000 just before WW2. This represented
>1.5% of the population that the Huguenot's entered into and the two Jewish
>figures came to 0.6%.
>
>We have a quarter of a million asylum -seekers coming in every year now. The
>ethnic population is around 12 % now.
I suppose you have a source to back up that (IMO exaggerated) claim?
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham, England
Jon°
Stewart Steven by the way is recognised as a liberal journalist who is
definitely not a fire-brand of the right. These figures can also be traced
if you do a little personal homework on government statistics and historical
records.
"Paul Hyett" <pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
Robert Henderson
<jon_j...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>"all sane people think the opposite."
>...............................
>
>The opposite to you and the rest of the socialist rubbish, one of whom you
>reply too. One of the things that I find most amusing about left-wing
>adherents is that they call any who do not believe in their corrupt and
>failed ideals.......Insane.......In your case that really is the "Portland
>Bill calling the copper black". Never mind Robin, don't get too upset
>because national opinion is swinging against the insanity that you advocate.
It has always been against it. All that is happening now is politicians
are taking the problem seriously. RH
>"Robin Carmody" <ro...@elidor.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>
>
--
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
>In uk.politics.misc on Sun, 2 Feb 2003 at 18:56:56, Jon° wrote :
>>The Anti-British on Usenet and Nu Labour tell us that we have always been a
>>nation of immigrants and they often quote French Huguenot and Jewish
>>immigrants to back this up. Well 100,000 French Huguenot's came to England
>>in the 17th. century and the Jews entering our society came to around
>>100,000 prior to the thirties and 70,000 just before WW2. This represented
>>1.5% of the population that the Huguenot's entered into and the two Jewish
>>figures came to 0.6%.
>>
>>We have a quarter of a million asylum -seekers
The figure to concentrate on is not asylum seekers but immigrants of all
sorts. Migration Watch UK estimates 200,000 from outside the EU. The
Home Office accepts these figures. Immigration from within the EU runs
to several hundred thousands. RH
>coming in every year now. The
>>ethnic population is around 12 % now.
>
8% according to the 2001 census, hence higher because the figure rests
on voluntary reporting and illegals will not make a census return. RH
>I suppose you have a source to back up that (IMO exaggerated) claim?
--
Robert Henderson
<ro...@elidor.freeserve.co.uk> writes
difference. RH
>RC
S-X-B
jon_j...@yahoo.co.uk says...
> "all sane people think the opposite."
> ...............................
>
> The opposite to you and the rest of the socialist rubbish, one of whom you
> reply too. One of the things that I find most amusing about left-wing
> adherents is that they call any who do not believe in their corrupt and
> failed ideals.......Insane.......In your case that really is the "Portland
> Bill calling the copper black".
Oh no! He's done it again!!! Jon's devastating wit has just about
burst my side opens, I'm laughing so much!!!
--
S-X-B
Binky Dawkins
If there is one thing I have learned since inhabiting this newsgroup, it
is that every time a liberal claims that immigration or crime figures are
exaggerated, we find out fairly soon that they have been in fact, on the low
side.
Robert Henderson
<bdaw...@thedrones.net> writes
>
>> I suppose you have a source to back up that (IMO exaggerated) claim?
>
> If there is one thing I have learned since inhabiting this newsgroup, it
>is that every time a liberal claims that immigration or crime figures are
>exaggerated, we find out fairly soon that they have been in fact, on the low
>side.
Quite. There another trick is to ignore the real figure, go quiet for
while then behave as though they do not exist. And how especially
quiet they are at the moment. I can't help noticing that no liberal
bigot has said a a thing about asylum seekers not getting social housing
since I started the thread asylum seekers and "Social housing - Mr Glynn
please note". RH
RF
> jackkincaid wrote:
>
> > Robert Henderson <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:<J$7M1KAzY...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>...
> > > "There are more asylum seekers in Peterborough than the Government
is
> > > prepared to admit," she said. "It is hiding its head in the sand
like
> > > an ostrich and exposed its thinking parts." [Helen Clark, the
Labour
> > > MP for Peterborough]
> >
> > What has this to do with race?
>
> Quite. Most asylum seekers are white.
Oh are they? Only according to your blinkered thinking. Most are *not*. Like
over 75% are NOT.
RF
Robin Carmody
> The liberal bigot definition of race has expanded to include cultural
> difference. RH
But your problem is that you think race is more important than culture.
RC
Robin Carmody
> Why should I ask another poster whether you are "here or there". I know you
> are not having read many of your completely mad posts. In case you do not
> understand what "Being neither here nor there" means in English colloquial
> parlance.......It means being slightly dotty and quite amusing with it.
I know that well enough. I simply pointed out that I have never
really been *there* (Peterborough) and I was not *then* (before 1968).
I know for a fact that someone on uk.politics.misc lived in
Peterborough before 1968. Did *you* ever visit Peterborough before
1968, Jon? I know you are old enough ...
Jon°
since the 19th. century. Remember it was one of the main brick producing
areas in the country. Not a place that appealed to me, even then, It had
some nice architecture though ( in a small way) in particular the church.
Robin Carmody
> Visited it back in the late fifties.
Ah. Did you encounter a very young Cuban rebel in the making :) ?
It has never been completely rural
> since the 19th. century.
Quite. It was made into a prosperous regional centre by the East Coast Main
Line. If the municipal burghers of Stamford had accepted the ECML going
through their town, it might have been very different ...
Remember it was one of the main brick producing
> areas in the country. Not a place that appealed to me, even then, It had
> some nice architecture though ( in a small way) in particular the church.
You mean the cathedral, don't you?
RC
----
http://www.elidor.freeserve.co.uk - updated 3rd February 2003
Paul Hyett
wrote :
>
>>coming in every year now. The
>>>ethnic population is around 12 % now.
>>
>
>8% according to the 2001 census, hence higher because the figure rests
>on voluntary reporting and illegals will not make a census return. RH
But AIUI the census makes allowances for non-reporting?
Jon°
have got my L's mixed up. I was pissed though.
I did not realise it was a cathedral. There are more attractive fen towns
then Peterborough. Boston has a charm all of its own. It may not be
beautiful in the accepted sense but it definitely has a certain fascination.
It is where the puritans set sail from.
I am still waiting (and hope I live long enough to see) another Cromwell
riding from the fens to strike fear into the hearts of the crooks running
our besmirched parliament, both sides of the divide, neither your lot nor
mine, are worth tuppence.
"Robin Carmody" <ro...@elidor.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b1o7ub$p9v$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
Joseph Hutcheon
news:81O%9.217$rk3.2...@news-text.cableinet.net...
> I thought he owned a large oil corporation when I had a pint with him,
must
> have got my L's mixed up. I was pissed though.
>
> I did not realise it was a cathedral. There are more attractive fen towns
> then Peterborough. Boston has a charm all of its own. It may not be
> beautiful in the accepted sense but it definitely has a certain
fascination.
> It is where the puritans set sail from.
Many years ago a much younger me and Mrs H took a very enjoyable touring
holiday right up the East of England; taking in places like Norwich, Ely,
Cambridge, Lincoln, York, and Durham. I had a pint in Cambridge that was
possibly the best I've ever drunk (though a pint in mid-Wales a few years
later came a close second).
Jon°
whole surrounding countryside. Well worth the effort.
"Joseph Hutcheon" <j.hut...@jisc.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:b1oakb$151ke2$1@ID-
Joseph Hutcheon
> Pity you missed Boston, Kings Lynn and the road down to Sandringham and
the
> whole surrounding countryside. Well worth the effort.
We did see Boston, but only had a couple of weeks. We've often meant to go
back, but somehow always end up in Cornwall!
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
Nowhere near enough. they claimed to have adjusted for a mere million
missing at the last census and that was for all racial groups. RH
JNugent
|| There are more attractive fen
|| towns then Peterborough. Boston has a charm all of its own. It may
|| not be beautiful in the accepted sense but it definitely has a
|| certain fascination. It is where the puritans set sail from.
Very funny...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.445 / Virus Database: 250 - Release Date: 21/01/03
JNugent
|| "Jon°" <jon_j...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
||| Pity you missed Boston, Kings Lynn and the road down to Sandringham
||| and the whole surrounding countryside. Well worth the effort.
|| We did see Boston, but only had a couple of weeks. We've often
|| meant to go back, but somehow always end up in Cornwall!
Hmmm...
You *could* buy a road atlas... available for about Ł4 in a remainder
shop...
Joseph Hutcheon
news:b1oqas$sj$2...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
> "Joseph Hutcheon" <j.hut...@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> || "Jon°" <jon_j...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> ||| Pity you missed Boston, Kings Lynn and the road down to Sandringham
> ||| and the whole surrounding countryside. Well worth the effort.
>
> || We did see Boston, but only had a couple of weeks. We've often
> || meant to go back, but somehow always end up in Cornwall!
>
> Hmmm...
>
> shop...
There's also the fact that Cornwall's only 90 minutes or so away ;)
Steve Glynn
> In article <b1m60d$14f6mj$1...@ID-58803.news.dfncis.de>, Binky Dawkins
> <bdaw...@thedrones.net> writes
> >
> >> I suppose you have a source to back up that (IMO exaggerated) claim?
> >
> > If there is one thing I have learned since inhabiting this newsgroup,
it
> >is that every time a liberal claims that immigration or crime figures are
> >exaggerated, we find out fairly soon that they have been in fact, on the
low
> >side.
>
> Quite. There another trick is to ignore the real figure, go quiet for
> while then behave as though they do not exist. And how especially
> quiet they are at the moment. I can't help noticing that no liberal
> bigot has said a a thing about asylum seekers not getting social housing
> since I started the thread asylum seekers and "Social housing - Mr Glynn
> please note". RH
What's this? We were discussing the topic -- I was maintaining that
there's no way I know of that an asylum seeker can legally be offered social
housing under UK law -- but I haven't seen this thread. Just done a
search for it on OE, and I've found some replies to your post (Robin Carmody
and others talking about Peterborough for some reason), but can't find your
original. Most odd.
Want to repost it so I can put you straight on whatever you've got wrong
now?
Steve
Robert Henderson
<steve...@ntlworld.com> writes
>
>> Quite. There another trick is to ignore the real figure, go quiet for
>> while then behave as though they do not exist. And how especially
>> quiet they are at the moment. I can't help noticing that no liberal
>> bigot has said a a thing about asylum seekers not getting social housing
>> since I started the thread asylum seekers and "Social housing - Mr Glynn
>> please note". RH
>
>What's this? We were discussing the topic -- I was maintaining that
>there's no way I know of that an asylum seeker can legally be offered social
>housing under UK law -- but I haven't seen this thread. Just done a
>search for it on OE, and I've found some replies to your post (Robin Carmody
>and others talking about Peterborough for some reason), but can't find your
>original. Most odd.
>
>Want to repost it so I can put you straight on whatever you've got wrong
>now?
Look for the thread entitled "asylum seekers and social housing - Mr
Glynn please note". Here is the initial post:
Another piece which also gives the lie to the liberal bigot claim that
immigrants do
not get pushed to the head of the queue for social housing. RH
Sunday Telegraph London 2 2 03
'Bob Burke, the Peterborough councillor responsible for asylum seekers,
said that the influx was placing an unbearable strain on local
services. "Let's say London or Sidcup in Kent have too many or don't
want any asylum seekers, they put them on a train to here.
Peterborough then has the problem and not London or Sidcup," said Mr
Burke, a former mayor of Peterborough. "It means that an asylum seeker
family with four children will have priority over housing needs
compared with a local family and that causes problems."'
--
>
>Steve
Robin Carmody
> Boston has a charm all of its own.
Well, when it comes to right-wing cranks, Sir Richard Body was
certainly a lesser evil than you are, Jon ...
RC
GG
> "Robert Henderson" <Phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1GxTbUAbjqP+Ew$a...@anywhere.demon.co.uk...
>
> there's no way I know of that an asylum seeker can legally be offered
> social housing under UK law -- but I haven't seen this thread.
> Just done a search for it on OE, and I've found some replies to your
> post (Robin Carmody and others talking about Peterborough for some
> reason), but can't find your original. Most odd.
There are several ways that Asylum Seekers can be given social housing.
Under the dispersal rules, LAs HAVE to find accommodation for those that
land/are deposited on their doorstep. Outside London the pressure on Council
properties is not as great, and it is primarily an issue of moving around
which takes the time.
This does not apply to Asylum seekers. LAs under dispersal get a fair whack
of cash per week per AS (I cant remember what, it was a long time ago I
looked at the legislation).
But outside this, the asylum seekers would clearly be put under 'special
assistance'.
Social Landlords are obliged to house those that the LA pass to them. They
would be considered emergency.
Gaz
Steve Glynn
I tried looking for the thread using exactly the string you suggested, but
could only find some replies to your post rather than the thing itself.
But anyways, thanks for re-posting it. Now to business.
Quite simply, Councillor Burke clearly doesn't have the faintest idea what
he's talking about. London or Sidcup or wherever have nothing to do with
where asylum seekers are sent under the dispersal policy (which has been
going for about 5 years now). The National Asylum Support Service handle
that, and lease properties from (by and large) private landlords. Coventry
City Council, btw, are hopping mad about this, since there's one 'hard to
let' tower block that they've taken out of the council housing stock and are
planning to pull down when they can afford it. They were hoping that NASS
would give them the contract to house asylum seekers to they could use the
place and thus derive some income from it, but NASS didn't want to play.
If Councillor Burke knows how any council can tell NASS they do or don't
want asylum seekers housed in their area, he's the only man in the country
who knows how this is done. Nottingham City and Nottingham County
councils would be particularly interested to know how to work the trick,
since they're busy pleading with the Home Office not to convert the old RAF
Newton base into a hostel for asylum seekers and to house them in Nottingham
city itself (essentially, Newton is a tiny village in the middle of
nowhere, and dumping 750 anyones there is a recipe for trouble).
Furthermore, if Councillor Burke actually has any evidence that asylum
seekers are being given social housing, he should contact the police
immediately, since if it's council housing someone's certainly breaking the
law and if it's housing association property they're almost certainly acting
illegally (I can think of a way a housing association could in theory offer
properties to NASS, but the circumstances in which they could so do are so
utterly improbable that it's a non-starter).
IOW, Councillor Burke is talking through his hat. Councillors do that now
and again, you know.
Steve
Steve Glynn
> In article <uIpdW3H6...@activist.demon.co.uk>, Paul Hyett
> <pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
> >In uk.politics.misc on Mon, 3 Feb 2003 at 10:15:50, Robert Henderson
> >wrote :
> >>
> >>>coming in every year now. The
> >>>>ethnic population is around 12 % now.
> >>>
> >>>I suppose you have a source to back up that (IMO exaggerated) claim?
> >>
> >>8% according to the 2001 census, hence higher because the figure rests
> >>on voluntary reporting and illegals will not make a census return. RH
> >
> >But AIUI the census makes allowances for non-reporting?
>
> Nowhere near enough. they claimed to have adjusted for a mere million
> missing at the last census and that was for all racial groups. RH
>
Quite possibly, and quite possibly people didn't fill in their returns
because they were hoping to dodge Council Tax, too.
But I think what Paul's asking -- and if he isn't, I am -- is where you get
your figure of 12% from. Why not 10%? Why not 15%? I think you've
just picked it out of the air.
Steve
Robert Henderson
<steve...@ntlworld.com> writes
>
Turks. 10-12% is a reasonable estimate of the real figure. RH
>Steve
Robert Henderson
<steve...@ntlworld.com> writes
>>
>> 'Bob Burke, the Peterborough councillor responsible for asylum seekers,
>> said that the influx was placing an unbearable strain on local
>> services. "Let's say London or Sidcup in Kent have too many or don't
>> want any asylum seekers, they put them on a train to here.
>> Peterborough then has the problem and not London or Sidcup," said Mr
>> Burke, a former mayor of Peterborough. "It means that an asylum seeker
>> family with four children will have priority over housing needs
>> compared with a local family and that causes problems."'
>
>I tried looking for the thread using exactly the string you suggested, but
>could only find some replies to your post rather than the thing itself.
>But anyways, thanks for re-posting it. Now to business.
>
>Quite simply, Councillor Burke clearly doesn't have the faintest idea what
>he's talking about. London or Sidcup or wherever have nothing to do with
>where asylum seekers are sent under the dispersal policy (which has been
>going for about 5 years now). The National Asylum Support Service handle
>that, and lease properties from (by and large) private landlords. Coventry
>City Council, btw, are hopping mad about this, since there's one 'hard to
>let' tower block that they've taken out of the council housing stock and are
>planning to pull down when they can afford it. They were hoping that NASS
>would give them the contract to house asylum seekers to they could use the
>place and thus derive some income from it, but NASS didn't want to play.
"Days after the Home Secretary expressed fears that British society is a
'coiled spring', Adam Lusher tours Heath Town council estate in
Wolverhampton - home to an astonishing 700 asylum seekers and refugees
from all corners of the globe". DT 26 1 03
One of the most obnoxious lies of the liberal bigot tendency is that
immigrants (including asylum seekers - do not get pushed in front of
native Britons when it comes to social housing. It is a lie on an
increasingly monstrous scale as immigration increases by the day. The
housing of immigrants in council housing is the single greatest
generator of racial tension.
It is also true that asylum seekers are being given preferential
treatment when it comes to being provided with furniture and household
appliances. - they get them free: the British, if they can get at all,
have to get them with a loan from the social fund, a loan which has to
be repaid. RH
Paul Hyett
wrote :
>>>
>>>8% according to the 2001 census, hence higher because the figure rests
>>>on voluntary reporting and illegals will not make a census return. RH
>>
>>But AIUI the census makes allowances for non-reporting?
>
>Nowhere near enough. they claimed to have adjusted for a mere million
>missing at the last census and that was for all racial groups. RH
If *they* don't know how many people they've missed, how could *you*
possibly know?
Dr. Sunil
X-ray vision?
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
We know that several hundred thousand stay illegally each year - most
failed asylum seekers plus the entry illegals. RH
Paul Hyett
wrote :
>>>
>>>Nowhere near enough. they claimed to have adjusted for a mere million
>>>missing at the last census and that was for all racial groups. RH
>>
>>If *they* don't know how many people they've missed, how could *you*
>>possibly know?
>
>We know that several hundred thousand stay illegally each year
Does anyone know the real numbers, this figure seems to be wide open to
wild speculation.
> - most
>failed asylum seekers plus the entry illegals. RH
What I don't understand is why failed asylum seekers don't get their ass
booted onto the next boat out of here?
Paul Hyett
wrote :
>
>One of the most obnoxious lies of the liberal bigot tendency is that
>immigrants (including asylum seekers - do not get pushed in front of
>native Britons when it comes to social housing. It is a lie on an
>increasingly monstrous scale as immigration increases by the day. The
>housing of immigrants in council housing is the single greatest
>generator of racial tension.
>
>It is also true that asylum seekers are being given preferential
>treatment when it comes to being provided with furniture and household
>appliances. - they get them free: the British, if they can get at all,
>have to get them with a loan from the social fund, a loan which has to
>be repaid. RH
Surely the upsurge in BNP support offers proof that this lie is no
longer believed?
It might be interesting to see what a BNP-controlled council would do in
such matters - as long that council was far away from here...!
Robert Henderson
<pah...@activist.demon.co.uk> writes
>In uk.politics.misc on Wed, 5 Feb 2003 at 11:24:38, Robert Henderson
>wrote :
>>
>>One of the most obnoxious lies of the liberal bigot tendency is that
>>immigrants (including asylum seekers - do not get pushed in front of
>>native Britons when it comes to social housing. It is a lie on an
>>increasingly monstrous scale as immigration increases by the day. The
>>housing of immigrants in council housing is the single greatest
>>generator of racial tension.
>>
>>It is also true that asylum seekers are being given preferential
>>treatment when it comes to being provided with furniture and household
>>appliances. - they get them free: the British, if they can get at all,
>>have to get them with a loan from the social fund, a loan which has to
>>be repaid. RH
>
>Surely the upsurge in BNP support offers proof that this lie is no
>longer believed?
>
even now the truth is not being told fully or often enough by the media
and politicians. RH
>It might be interesting to see what a BNP-controlled council would do in
>such matters - as long that council was far away from here...!
--