Originally posted by CJCrawley
And still you provide no evidence.
(It's still name-calling, by the way)
You don't understand. I don't need to provide evidence beyond pointing out what you've said yourself.
Where did I say it's a country for white people?
So it's not a country for white people? Then why did you make the point at all? What relevance does it have on a debate about who should live
Their ethnocultural group is Indian.
Just as Cliff Richard's ethnocultural group is white caucasian, even though he was born in India.
Again, you're just looking at where people were born and ignoring their ethnocultural groups.
Yes, oddly enough I am. And so is international visa law.
Is it your contention that "ethnocultural groups" shouldn't mix? Because your point appears not to be about immigration - you don't actually care
about nationality, which is what immigration concerns - but about race.
I don't understand that.
Where did I say that?
You pointed to a figure that included white, christian immigrants and suggested that it was undesirable, that their presence was undesirable. But they
are "ethnoculturally" almost identical to you. so presumably you don't mind them being here.
Which leads one to assume that you used the figure mendaciously, to exaggerate the level of immigration to which you do object.
Another insult. Thank you.
(You're good at this).
It's may be an insult. But it's factually correct.
You know very well what I'm saying.
For the benefit of people who just stumbled across this thread, this is what I actually said:
"When their population is as 'multicultural' as ours, I'll shut up.
Not because I agree, but at least mass immigration would be conducted on a more level playing field."
Not quite the same, is it?
So you want a more "level playing field" but you don't want a more level playing field? I literally have no idea what you mean. And as I've shown
you mass immigration has taken place in Delhi. You just think it's okay because it's by other brown people who you assume are all the same.
It's also likely that as a successful economy India will indeed experience greater immigration from the west, in fact it already is.
Somehow I doubt you actually will shut up though.
Not quite the same as Indian people coming to London, is it?
No, because Wales is in the same nation as England for a start. But why are Indian people less desirable than Welsh people. Are they more criminal?
Dishonest? Or do you just dislike the way they look or something?
If the majority of London's immigrants were from Wales, people like your good self would be squealing that it wasn't diverse
How could you know that? Or is it just a vague straw man?
So, 17.7% of UK immigrants are from the Indian subcontinent.
Only 5.8% from Poland.
But the top country is India.
If you count long-term immigrants coming in now, as opposed to absolute numbers, the largest group is indeed from India (although as a percentage it
has halved). But the majority are from Eastern Europe (which does not just include Poland, obviously).