No more immigrants.

Page 13 of 85 < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >

legaleagle 04 Aug 15 9.42pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.36pm Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm That's not racist.Things like that can sometimes crop up where some of the reasons stimulating someone calling for restrictions on immigration are,for example, being averse per se to and demonising "economic migrants" and "asylum seekers", and seeing the preservation of what they think of as "British culture"as something under deep threat per se from having economic migrants and granting people asylum who qualify. Other than re EU nationals (and pros and cons of free movement of goods,services and people is a whole other thread in itself,including outward migration),your proposal's basically the situation now. We have have a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants including a "points-like test" and the numbers granted asylum are not large.People may raise the question of illegal entrants and over stayers,but that doesn't relate to immigration policy itself,but rather to enforcement. I agree that the less the knee jerk hyperbole comes into it,the better the chance for an informed rational discussion. Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.35pm) LOL Rather than display an ignorance of the facts (as opposed to hyperbolic prejudice),read the following. [Link] Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.44pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

04 Aug 15 9.42pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.36pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm

That's not racist.Things like that can sometimes crop up where some of the reasons stimulating someone calling for restrictions on immigration are,for example, being averse per se to and demonising "economic migrants" and "asylum seekers", and seeing the preservation of what they think of as "British culture"as something under deep threat per se from having economic migrants and granting people asylum who qualify.

Other than re EU nationals (and pros and cons of free movement of goods,services and people is a whole other thread in itself,including outward migration),your proposal's basically the situation now.

We have have a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants including a "points-like test" and the numbers granted asylum are not large.People may raise the question of illegal entrants and over stayers,but that doesn't relate to immigration policy itself,but rather to enforcement.

I agree that the less the knee jerk hyperbole comes into it,the better the chance for an informed rational discussion.

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.35pm)

LOL

Rather than display an ignorance of the facts (as opposed to hyperbolic prejudice),read the following.

[Link]

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.44pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle Croydon 04 Aug 15 9.51pm
Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.42pm Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.36pm Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm That's not racist.Things like that can sometimes crop up where some of the reasons stimulating someone calling for restrictions on immigration are,for example, being averse per se to and demonising "economic migrants" and "asylum seekers", and seeing the preservation of what they think of as "British culture"as something under deep threat per se from having economic migrants and granting people asylum who qualify. Other than re EU nationals (and pros and cons of free movement of goods,services and people is a whole other thread in itself,including outward migration),your proposal's basically the situation now. We have have a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants including a "points-like test" and the numbers granted asylum are not large.People may raise the question of illegal entrants and over stayers,but that doesn't relate to immigration policy itself,but rather to enforcement. I agree that the less the knee jerk hyperbole comes into it,the better the chance for an informed rational discussion. Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.35pm) LOL Rather than display an ignorance of the facts (as opposed to hyperbolic prejudice),read the following. [Link] Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.44pm) Do you agree that we need what you believe to be "a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants" and. if so, why do we need it? mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler
Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle

Croydon 04 Aug 15 9.51pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.42pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.36pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm

Other than re EU nationals (and pros and cons of free movement of goods,services and people is a whole other thread in itself,including outward migration),your proposal's basically the situation now.

I agree that the less the knee jerk hyperbole comes into it,the better the chance for an informed rational discussion.

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.35pm)

LOL

Rather than display an ignorance of the facts (as opposed to hyperbolic prejudice),read the following.

[Link]

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.44pm)

Do you agree that we need what you believe to be "a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants" and. if so, why do we need it?

mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 04 Aug 15 9.51pm
Quote -TUX- at 04 Aug 2015 9.42pm Stirling appears to be immune to yellow cards despite many of his comments. The first to complain but seems to be made of Teflon for some reason when answered. Old Boys Network? To be fair to Stirling, he was red carded twice in the past couple of years.To also be fair,a number of those who then called for his red cards to be rescinded were amongst those frequently referred to on here as "lefties".
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

04 Aug 15 9.51pm

Quote -TUX- at 04 Aug 2015 9.42pm

Stirling appears to be immune to yellow cards despite many of his comments. The first to complain but seems to be made of Teflon for some reason when answered. Old Boys Network?

To be fair to Stirling, he was red carded twice in the past couple of years.To also be fair,a number of those who then called for his red cards to be rescinded were amongst those frequently referred to on here as "lefties".

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 04 Aug 15 9.55pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.36pm Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm That's not racist.Things like that can sometimes crop up where some of the reasons stimulating someone calling for restrictions on immigration are,for example, being averse per se to and demonising "economic migrants" and "asylum seekers", and seeing the preservation of what they think of as "British culture"as something under deep threat per se from having economic migrants and granting people asylum who qualify. Other than re EU nationals (and pros and cons of free movement of goods,services and people is a whole other thread in itself,including outward migration),your proposal's basically the situation now. We have have a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants including a "points-like test" and the numbers granted asylum are not large.People may raise the question of illegal entrants and over stayers,but that doesn't relate to immigration policy itself,but rather to enforcement. I agree that the less the knee jerk hyperbole comes into it,the better the chance for an informed rational discussion. Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.35pm) LOL Rather than display an ignorance of the facts (as opposed to hyperbolic prejudice),read the following. [Link] Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.44pm) Do you agree that we need what you believe to be "a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants" and. if so, why do we need it? .................................................... That's impressive.You read and digested the whole actual government policy so quickly? I said we had a pretty strict policy,which is pertinent to the poster who called for what we already have (other than re EU nationals).I also called for a rational discussion based on lack of hyperbole,which would plainly be assisted by knowledge of what the facts are,as opposed to simple prejudice. Do I personally think immigration rules should be stricter than the current rules (see link to my last post),no? Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 10.02pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

04 Aug 15 9.55pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.36pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm

Other than re EU nationals (and pros and cons of free movement of goods,services and people is a whole other thread in itself,including outward migration),your proposal's basically the situation now.

I agree that the less the knee jerk hyperbole comes into it,the better the chance for an informed rational discussion.

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.35pm)

LOL

Rather than display an ignorance of the facts (as opposed to hyperbolic prejudice),read the following.

[Link]

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.44pm)

Do you agree that we need what you believe to be "a pretty strict policy re non EU economic migrants" and. if so, why do we need it?

....................................................
That's impressive.You read and digested the whole actual government policy so quickly?

I said we had a pretty strict policy,which is pertinent to the poster who called for what we already have (other than re EU nationals).I also called for a rational discussion based on lack of hyperbole,which would plainly be assisted by knowledge of what the facts are,as opposed to simple prejudice.

Do I personally think immigration rules should be stricter than the current rules (see link to my last post),no?

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 10.02pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

-TUX- Alphabettispaghetti 04 Aug 15 10.02pm
Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.51pm Quote -TUX- at 04 Aug 2015 9.42pm Stirling appears to be immune to yellow cards despite many of his comments. The first to complain but seems to be made of Teflon for some reason when answered. Old Boys Network? To be fair to Stirling, he was red carded twice in the past couple of years.To also be fair,a number of those who then called for his red cards to be rescinded were amongst those frequently referred to on here as "lefties". He called me the most deluded person on the planet(!) so i called him a prick. I then get carded due to the prick having a hizzy fit? Thanks for the info. Time to move forward together.
Alert a moderator to this post

-TUX-

Alphabettispaghetti 04 Aug 15 10.02pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.51pm

Quote -TUX- at 04 Aug 2015 9.42pm

Stirling appears to be immune to yellow cards despite many of his comments. The first to complain but seems to be made of Teflon for some reason when answered. Old Boys Network?

He called me the most deluded person on the planet(!) so i called him a prick. I then get carded due to the prick having a hizzy fit?
Thanks for the info.

Time to move forward together.

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 04 Aug 15 10.03pm
I wasn't commenting on that and I take your point.Rather,just on whether he ever got a card and the illusion (IMO) that getting a card is based on someone being right wing as opposed to left wing or vice versa.. Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 10.04pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

04 Aug 15 10.03pm

I wasn't commenting on that and I take your point.Rather,just on whether he ever got a card and the illusion (IMO) that getting a card is based on someone being right wing as opposed to left wing or vice versa..

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 10.04pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle Croydon 04 Aug 15 10.03pm
Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.55pm Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.51pm Thats impressive.You read and digested the whole actual government policy so quickly? I said we had a pretty strict policy,which is pertinent to the poster who called for what we already have (other than re EU nationals).I also called for a rational discussion based on lack of hyperbole,which would plainly be assisted by knowledge of what the facts are,as opposed to simple prejudice. Do I personally think immigration rules should be stricter than the current rules (see link to my last post),no? Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.58pm) Is it compulsory on here that I have to read whatever you tell me to then? As usual, you and your ilk, avoid answering these questions. Why do you think we need immigration controls of any kind? You won't answer of course, we will just get more evasion and folly - like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. Edited by leggedstruggle (04 Aug 2015 10.04pm) mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler
Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle

Croydon 04 Aug 15 10.03pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 9.55pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 9.51pm

Thats impressive.You read and digested the whole actual government policy so quickly?

Do I personally think immigration rules should be stricter than the current rules (see link to my last post),no?

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 9.58pm)

Is it compulsory on here that I have to read whatever you tell me to then?

As usual, you and your ilk, avoid answering these questions. Why do you think we need immigration controls of any kind? You won't answer of course, we will just get more evasion and folly - like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

Edited by leggedstruggle (04 Aug 2015 10.04pm)

mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 04 Aug 15 10.05pm
Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 8.42pm Kermy only speaks for a minority of people....like the rest of the open door immigration supporters on here. 75 percent in England want reduced immigration....Hell even in Scotland.....It's 58 percent.....That's even with their far left nationalists in charge dibbling out their anti Ukip waffle. They don't even represent the real views of the Scottish on the issue......God forbid what the numbers would be if more foreigners actually wanted to live in Scotland. [Link] I would be very interested if you could find a line on here from my hand that supports that assertion. We have open door immigration in relation to the EU. So are you now saying you're against 'freedom of movement'? Because that is open door and that's what I'm referring to. Ah, I see. You have qualified it. Now. Yes, you are right. I see no reason for the 2million British living in other EU countries to have restrictions placed on their movement which would rightly come into line with the restrictions you would have placed on those coming to the UK from France, Spain and the rest. Or is it a one-way street you want? Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 04 Aug 15 10.05pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm

Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 8.42pm

Kermy only speaks for a minority of people....like the rest of the open door immigration supporters on here.

75 percent in England want reduced immigration....Hell even in Scotland.....It's 58 percent.....That's even with their far left nationalists in charge dibbling out their anti Ukip waffle.

They don't even represent the real views of the Scottish on the issue......God forbid what the numbers would be if more foreigners actually wanted to live in Scotland.

[Link]

I would be very interested if you could find a line on here from my hand that supports that assertion.

We have open door immigration in relation to the EU. So are you now saying you're against 'freedom of movement'?

Because that is open door and that's what I'm referring to.

Ah, I see. You have qualified it. Now.

Yes, you are right. I see no reason for the 2million British living in other EU countries to have restrictions placed on their movement which would rightly come into line with the restrictions you would have placed on those coming to the UK from France, Spain and the rest.

Or is it a one-way street you want?

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online 04 Aug 15 10.07pm
Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 10.05pm Ah, I see. You have qualified it. Now. Yes, you are right. I see no reason for the 2million British living in other EU countries to have restrictions placed on their movement which would rightly come into line with the restrictions you would have placed on those coming to the UK from France, Spain and the rest. Or is it a one-way street you want? No, I'm totally happy for a two way street. There should be no open door immigration that exists between different countries. All it ultimately does is weaken the working class within the stronger economic states.....You see Kermy....On this topic...I'm more old Labour than you are. As for qualifying it Kermy, I'd have thought....considering the current status of our differing immigration rules concerning non and EU citizens that my point was obvious. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Aug 2015 10.16pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays Online

04 Aug 15 10.07pm

Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 10.05pm

Ah, I see. You have qualified it. Now.

Or is it a one-way street you want?

No, I'm totally happy for a two way street.

There should be no open door immigration that exists between different countries.

All it ultimately does is weaken the working class within the stronger economic states.....You see Kermy....On this topic...I'm more old Labour than you are.

As for qualifying it Kermy, I'd have thought....considering the current status of our differing immigration rules concerning non and EU citizens that my point was obvious.

Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Aug 2015 10.16pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle Croydon 04 Aug 15 10.08pm
Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 10.05pm Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 8.45pm Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 8.42pm Kermy only speaks for a minority of people....like the rest of the open door immigration supporters on here. 75 percent in England want reduced immigration....Hell even in Scotland.....It's 58 percent.....That's even with their far left nationalists in charge dibbling out their anti Ukip waffle. They don't even represent the real views of the Scottish on the issue......God forbid what the numbers would be if more foreigners actually wanted to live in Scotland. [Link] I would be very interested if you could find a line on here from my hand that supports that assertion. We have open door immigration in relation to the EU. So are you now saying you're against 'freedom of movement'? Because that is open door and that's what I'm referring to. Ah, I see. You have qualified it. Now. Yes, you are right. I see no reason for the 2million British living in other EU countries to have restrictions placed on their movement which would rightly come into line with the restrictions you would have placed on those coming to the UK from France, Spain and the rest. Or is it a one-way street you want? What is your immigration policy then Kermit? Why do we need any sort of immigration controls? mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler
Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle

Croydon 04 Aug 15 10.08pm

Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 10.05pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 9.32pm

Quote Kermit8 at 04 Aug 2015 8.45pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 04 Aug 2015 8.42pm

Kermy only speaks for a minority of people....like the rest of the open door immigration supporters on here.

75 percent in England want reduced immigration....Hell even in Scotland.....It's 58 percent.....That's even with their far left nationalists in charge dibbling out their anti Ukip waffle.

They don't even represent the real views of the Scottish on the issue......God forbid what the numbers would be if more foreigners actually wanted to live in Scotland.

[Link]

I would be very interested if you could find a line on here from my hand that supports that assertion.

We have open door immigration in relation to the EU. So are you now saying you're against 'freedom of movement'?

Because that is open door and that's what I'm referring to.

Ah, I see. You have qualified it. Now.

Or is it a one-way street you want?

What is your immigration policy then Kermit? Why do we need any sort of immigration controls?

mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 04 Aug 15 10.09pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 10.03pm Is it compulsory on here that I have to read whatever you tell me to then? As usual, you and your ilk, avoid answering these questions. Why do you think we need immigration controls of any kind? You won't answer of course, we will just get more evasion and folly - like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. ................................................... Its not compulsory and if you'd rather remain unaware of actual facts as opposed to pure hyperbole relating to points you post about,that's a matter for you entirely. Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 10.11pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

04 Aug 15 10.09pm

Quote leggedstruggle at 04 Aug 2015 10.03pm

Is it compulsory on here that I have to read whatever you tell me to then?

...................................................

Its not compulsory and if you'd rather remain unaware of actual facts as opposed to pure hyperbole relating to points you post about,that's a matter for you entirely.

Edited by legaleagle (04 Aug 2015 10.11pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle Croydon 04 Aug 15 10.11pm
Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 10.09pm Its not compulsory and if you'd rather remain unaware of actual facts relating to points you post about,that's a matter for you entirely. Yet again, no answer to the questions. We will just have to draw our own conclusions. Perhaps you can plead silence on the grounds that it might incriminate yourself? mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler
Alert a moderator to this post

leggedstruggle

Croydon 04 Aug 15 10.11pm

Quote legaleagle at 04 Aug 2015 10.09pm

Its not compulsory and if you'd rather remain unaware of actual facts relating to points you post about,that's a matter for you entirely.

Yet again, no answer to the questions. We will just have to draw our own conclusions. Perhaps you can plead silence on the grounds that it might incriminate yourself?

mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 13 of 85 < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

No more immigrants.

Site Map

Sponsors