No English, no stamp: Update: He's been sacked

[andy2007]

So because 1 member imposed a time frame and other members have ignored it and continued a good discussion he is right and they are wrong.

It may be a "good discussion" but it wasn't the rhetorical question I posed continuing on from a point by Andy 2007 re immigrants and immigration. Many replies about the makeup of the British nation going back to prehistoric times none of which had SFA to do with the original point, so yes, TBT old fruit, they most certainly are wrong in thier replies.. ....

That said, I shall take more of an interest in political debating programmes such as Question Time from now on, and look for the inevitable questions re immigration. I wonder if an audience member who pipes up with the "and what about those Huguenots taking all our jobs eh?" or "those Jutes taking over the school curriculum" will be a postie from RMC.. ?

It's worrying that people who need to read English to do thier jobs can have such a poor grasp of comprehension, though.
Maybe the old joke about letters or packets marked "photos, please do not bend" really does mean "bend me in half" to some...?

Now you do have a good point about the language barrier. But that's a different issue entirely.

There is far too much Positive Discrimination (now there's a contradiction if ever I saw one!) going on. If someone doesn't have the skills required to perform a job. They shouldn't get it! Using "The Race Card" is deplorable, and should be stamped out. BUT if someone DOES have the right skills, then their Ethnic background, Religion, Sex, etc., SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, AND USED AS A BARRIER TO THEM GETTING THAT JOB!!!!!

[Tman]

Again, I pose the same question: What exactly is your problem, with adding more Cultures to the fabric of British Culture?

Who said I do "have a problem"? "Rhetorical" indicates that it's up for debate rather than a personal viewpoint.

I've explained and expanded on this more than once now; apparently no-one has any remotely relevant suggestions to put forward, so best to let it go quietly.

[Tman]

I wouldn't know, Links.
Who were you thinking of when you penned that desperate polemic? Seems like it could fit several posters..

[Thorby Bislam]

"Thorby Bislam"]I realise this doesn't fit into your narrow time-frame, but then, your time-frame is so narrow as to render it meaningless

.

Yeah, 60+ years, now that's what you call a "narrow time-frame"....? Read the premise again....

Certainly. The others have been pointing out that immigration/migration (call it what you will) has been going on for thousands of years. From before the beginning of recorded history, as someone said. 60+ years is a narrow time-frame in comparison. For you to ignore everything else and arbitrarily decide on the period 1945 to the present day, makes no sense.

You're bothered what the BNP and their ilk argue about immigration ? Dont be. They dont do debate. Anybody with a modicum of intelligence can blow their arguements out of the water. They know that and they dont care. they're not interested in intelligent discussion of the issues, instead they make an emotionally loaded appeal to the baser aspects of our nature. It works well enough for their purposes.

[johnsouthwales]

if someone asked me what they wanted, i would have attempted to see what they wanted. and if i was stuck and it got busy, i would have motioned for them to wait a minute or two. then gone back to them to try and resolve.. lack of communication causes problems, and you dont have to speak to communicate.
frustrating as it can be, at least attempt to resolve something.. anyway, dont like agencies, they scam people for cash, dont pay decent holidays and dont pay proper overtime rates lol

[NWpostie]

What is clear is that Immigration do need to be controlled for practical and pragmatic reasons, this Island is small and has finite space along with limited resources, it cannot suddenly accomodate a large jump in Population immigrating in from outside the UK without the resultant tension and competition for services and resources, between the incomers and the resident population.

It is quite clear we have to be ruthless and brutal in our selection process for suitable applicants to stay here, they must have skills we want and not be a drain on public finances at the same time weed out then deport undesirables, criminals (convicted here or abroad) and spongers along with those that would do us harm and despise our Culture, if they refuse to say where they come from they can be sent to France if caught from there or Somalia as a default destination put them in a boat and cast them off, they will soon tell us their Country of Origin soon enough, like I said ruthless and brutal for the need to be pragmatic and effective.

Our Country is seen as a soft touch, sometimes I feel we are slitting our own throat, Australia had detention centres to weed out undesirables, illegal immigration soon dropped off sharply, 'nuff said.

[johnsouthwales]

nobody lived in australia at one time. only the aborigines.. britain sent convicts from here over to there as a penal colony lol

[Tman]

Certainly. The others have been pointing out that immigration/migration (call it what you will) has been going on for thousands of years. From before the beginning of recorded history, as someone said. 60+ years is a narrow time-frame in comparison. For you to ignore everything else and arbitrarily decide on the period 1945 to the present day, makes no sense.

It does to me, but then I've nevered noticed anyone complaining about the immigrants in the 14th 15th etc etc centuries. Have you?

[NWpostie]

nobody lived in australia at one time. only the aborigines.. britain sent convicts from here over to there as a penal colony lol

The Aussies were the original POMs, which came from Prisoner Of His Majaesty, the abreviation was pronouced POHMs later spelled as POMs

Now the Aussies are cutting Immigration Visa quotas down, its a lot harder to get in if you want to emigrate there, I have been to be honest New Zealand is far better but they are also cutting back as well.

I have been to both Countries and find that I much prefered England, UK.

[johnsouthwales]

think they sent brits over to oz for trivial offences.. like if your hungry and stolen a couple of potatoes... drastic or what?

[BELIAL]

Miners wife in Kent got six months custodial in the 80's for nicking 1 bottle of milk, Magistrate went on about enemy of the state

[johnsouthwales]

1980's?

[johnsouthwales]

about 2 oz dollars to the pound.. oz postage No larger than 130mm x 240mm No thicker than 5mm Maximum weight 250g. $0.55 dollars (26 pence) australia post..

large letter No larger than 260mm x 360mm No thicker than 20mm Does not weigh more than 500g. ($1.10) (52pence).. not sure if its a misprint, 500grammes for a large letter is a bit heavy like lol.. main website..

[Tman]

LOL. I would never think YOU have a problem with anything little brother! wernt even thinking of you! in fact i nothing you! LOL. Your thoughts mean NOTHING to me lol. I use the cap locks or what ever you call em cause i dont care but you seem to little brother! Still like the rest of us it dont matter, still if the cap fits? Still lolling over life but see you aint! LOL.

The old allusional post followed by the "if the cap fits" ploy?

Might still be LOL to you, but most (even Leigh Parkers ) grew out of that at school.

Keep LOL ing Links if it's your sick sense of humour...

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Certainly. The others have been pointing out that immigration/migration (call it what you will) has been going on for thousands of years. From before the beginning of recorded history, as someone said. 60+ years is a narrow time-frame in comparison. For you to ignore everything else and arbitrarily decide on the period 1945 to the present day, makes no sense.

It does to me, but then I've nevered noticed anyone complaining about the immigrants in the 14th 15th etc etc centuries. Have you?

http://www.opendemocracy.net/people-mig ... e_1178.jsp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In 1255, the chronicler Matthew Paris observed that London was ‘overflowing’ with Poitevins, Provencals, Italians and Spaniards. In 1850, Wordsworth, thinking back on an earlier visit, recalled:

‘Every character of form and face:
The Swede, the Russian; from the genial
South, The Frenchman and the Spaniard; from remote
America, the Hunter-Indian; Moors,
Malays, Lascards, the Tartar and Chinese
And Negro Ladies in white muslin gowns.’

Wordsworth’s verse suggests random arrivals, the drift of travellers in search of fortune. The truth was more systematic. Among the earliest immigrants to settle in London’s East End were the French-speaking refugees from The Netherlands in the mid 1550s, though it was not until Louis XIV rescinded the Edict of Nantes – which had allowed the Protestants a measure of tolerance – that they began to flee to England in any number. In the following years, some 50,000 Huguenots settled in various parts of the country, at least half of them in and around the city of London. They found lodgings and work outside the city walls, in Soho and Westminster and particularly in Spitalfields, where by 1700 the Huguenot community was said to number 23,000, worshipping in nine Huguenot churches. In the streets, it became more usual to hear French spoken than English.

Most of the Huguenots were weavers, poor people forced to leave everything behind them. They went to work for more prosperous master weavers, also Huguenots, who built themselves fine houses along Spitalfields’ narrow streets – such as the one which today houses the Museum of Immigration at 19 Princelet Street, off Brick Lane – where they planted dahlias and tulips in their gardens and kept pigeons and songbirds. At the height of its prosperity, Spitalfields, by now one of the greatest weaving centres of Europe, had 12,000 looms, its weavers working in attic rooms, lit by especially enlarged long windows.

I have a feeling there were plenty of English people complaining about the Huguenots in the 16th or 17th Century.