It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Immigrants? Former Labour government sent search parties to bring imigrants to UK!!!!!!

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneManArmy
I have a trick when it comes to knowing what a politician means...its the exact opposite of what they are saying.
It doesnt matter, left or right, they are controlled by the same corporate interests, the results are always the same.
My definition of a "democratic" election is
1) The main parties tell us what we want to hear.
2) We vote them in.
3) They proceed to not do anything they promised us to get the votes.


I agree with most of what you're saying there mate.

That is representative democracy, what we need is direct democracy. Where we get to vote directly on all issues, instead of voting in someone to represent us in government. Representative democracy is just too easy to corrupt. It's how the Nazi Party were voted in, same for the Bolsheviks in Russia. Neither of then did what they promised when looking for votes, in fact both parties did the opposite, and created atrocities.

Who's fault was that, the voting public for not being more aware of what they were voting for? Either that or the votes were rigged, but I doubt it because both those parties were extremely popular before they gained power.

We really do have the power to change, but people have to know the truth, and that is not going to come from the state, the government, or the leader of capitalist industry. They are all institution of authority, and authority has no morality, it will do whatever is required to maintain authority. It is even more pronounced in systems, that it is in individuals.


edit on 5/15/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by CuriousAchilles
 


Thank you for your voice of reason.

If voting gave anyone any power, we wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Facism wears many masks, and after the toll britain paid for standing against facism half a century ago, I find it terrifying that anyone could even contemplate resurrecting it through the democratic process.

We need to remember that Hitler was elected, and that neither the Shoah nor WW2 were on his political program when he got voted in. What he did have up front was excessive nationalism and the stigmatization of a few minorities that he accused of stealing all the real german's money/jobs.

Sound familiar, UKIP voters ?



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by OneManArmy
I have a trick when it comes to knowing what a politician means...its the exact opposite of what they are saying.
It doesnt matter, left or right, they are controlled by the same corporate interests, the results are always the same.
My definition of a "democratic" election is
1) The main parties tell us what we want to hear.
2) We vote them in.
3) They proceed to not do anything they promised us to get the votes.


I agree with most of what you're saying there mate.

That is representative democracy, what we need is direct democracy. Where we get to vote directly on all issues, instead of voting in someone to represent us in government. Representative democracy is just too easy to corrupt. It's how the Nazi Party were voted in, same for the Bolsheviks in Russia. Neither of then did what they promised when looking for votes, in fact both parties did the opposite, and created atrocities.

Who's fault was that, the voting public for not being more aware of what they were voting for? Either that or the votes were rigged, but I doubt it because both those parties were extremely popular before they gained power.

We really do have the power to change, but people have to know the truth, and that is not going to come from the state, the government, or the leader of capitalist industry. They are all institution of authority, and authority has no morality, it will do whatever is required to maintain authority. It is even more pronounced in systems, that it is in individuals.


edit on 5/15/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)


I think the individuals are the problem.
It doesnt matter what ideology or power structure mankind creates, the narcissists and egomaniacs will always be drawn to positions of power and control. And by their very nature, these are the last human beings you want in control.
In the thousands of years we have been "civilised" the story is always the same, civilisations rise and fall due to the excesses of the "elites".
Normal people can get addicted to power and control, they can be easily bought and manipulated.
Morality is being taken out of our lives. At least religion brings some morality to mankind if nothing else, but that is under attack all the time.
We humans really have a dark side that with a few of the right incentives can be brought to the forefront.
So yes representative democracy is bad for that reason, but are you suggesting that everybody votes on everything? How would that be accomplished? How would society function if we were voting every other day? That could only be achieved via electronic voting, and whose to say the results wont be faked?
I think we lost the war for our freedom, we are already economic slaves, owned by the private banking cartel.
All thats changing right now is how in our face it is.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneManArmy
I think the individuals are the problem.


I agree.

If we had worker ownership, all producers owning the means to produce, in common, then wealth created would be more evenly distributed amongst the producers. With capitalism the small minority class of economic private property owners become far more wealthy than the workers. This gives the private owners an economic advantage over the workers, and thus more power to influence and manipulate politics in their favour.

So as long as the means to produce are monopolised by a minority class, government will always be primarily controlled by them.

Socialism would ensure that mass disparity in wealth wouldn't happen. We are never going to be completely equal, but the gap between wealth levels would be seriously diminished as the income of the workers would increase, and that of the economic private owner would go down. But that would increase the overall wealth of communities. Industry would also provide for your community, and jobs wouldn't be outsourced to cheaper labour markets.

But we do have to get back to thinking we are part of a community, and not just individuals. Believe or not we can be both.


edit on 5/15/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by OneManArmy
I think the individuals are the problem.


But we do have to get back to thinking we are part of a community, and not just individuals. Believe or not we can be both.


edit on 5/15/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)


I agree, I think a good balance between individualism vs collectivism is an ideal place. Neither can be too dominant over the other. Individualism promotes greed and selfishness, but provides work incentives to get ahead, collectivism promotes state dependence, mob rule, stifles innovation, also promotes fairness, restricts greed to an extent(although there will always be an elite), whosoever gains the control of the food supply gains power, gets corrupted, blah blah blah...... just like Animal Farm(Soviet Union).



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by OneManArmy
collectivism promotes state dependence, mob rule, stifles innovation, also promotes fairness, restricts greed to an extent(although there will always be an elite), whosoever gains the control of the food supply gains power, gets corrupted, blah blah blah...... just like Animal Farm(Soviet Union).


That I would disagree with.

In socialism collectivism just means cooperation, or coming together for a common goal, from the root 'collect' (to collect together), as apposed to competing with each other for profits. A collective can be good or bad, depends on the context of it.

Animal Farm was about the Bolsheviks and the Russian revolution, and the twisting of Marxism in order to take state power. Orwell was a socialist who joined the Spanish left-wing militia as a private, later as a provisional lieutenant, and fought against the fascists during the revolution/civil war. The Soviet Union was not a collective other than one of states, just like the United States is a collective of states.

He wrote a book about it called, "Homage to Catalonia".


Homage to Catalonia is political journalist and novelist George Orwell's personal account of his experiences and observations in the Spanish Civil War.


en.wikipedia.org...


edit on 5/15/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 



"Homage to Catalonia"


Did not know of Orwell's spanish experience, I'll have to look up that book. Thanks for the info.
Also, great signature you have going on there.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Ismail
 


Thanks mate.

Everyone knows Animal Farm and of course 1984, schools have incorrectly used them to teach against the "evils" of communism for decades.

The Bolsheviks were not communists. Orwell and other educated socialists new that.

Other Orwell books...

'Down and out in Paris and London' (about poverty in the two cities), 'The Road to Wigan Pier' (about poverty in Northern England, Yorkshire), 'Burmese Days' (about British colonialism in India, the dark side of the British Raj). All socialist commentary on the problems of capitalism and colonialism.

He wrote a fictional novel or two, 'Keep the Aspidistra Flying', about a man who sets out to "defy the God like worship of Money and status, and the dismal life that results" (his words, not mine).

"Coming up for Air", written in 1939 just before the outbreak of WWII, was set in a fictional English town. It was based in the premonition that world war would break out across Europe, as it did. It also speculated that commercialism and capitalism were killing the best of rural England, with everything being 'cemented over' as a catch-phrase.


edit on 5/15/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
So, what do you propose? When within a whole Town, not one person speaks English when you walk down the high street?


Er nothing?

What business is it of mine what language other people speak?


I don't know where you live but for me... I don't like it. I was at my Local earlier today shopping.... only other person who was English was a woman at the till! Walk along the street and you only have to look around you to see that you are the only Englishman walking in that street.


Well I used to live in England, Brighton was my home town before I left, but I was raised in the west Midlands.

I now live in California and there are neighbourhoods here where you will only hear Chinese, Japanese, Italian, Russian, butchered English lol, and more. I have no problem with it.

The building I live in is 90% Nepalese, Nepal South Asia. The only thing that bothers me is they are crammed sometimes 4 to a tiny room making the place overcrowded, but that is the landlords fault, and they leave their shoes outside their doors, so there are piles of shoes everywhere in the hallways lol. But I'll live, and get on with my life.


Yes but YOU moved out to California, they didn't move into your block in Brighton!

Thats different.... If I was to move to another Country, I could have no complaints as its my decision.

Besides, those people you mentioned aren't 'Fanatics' right?

I believe we are going backwards, not forwards and I believe Religion is the cause.... and Language!

Yes, I know its good to be different but not so different that you bring your own rules into a new Country and separate and divide using Religion & Language barriers!



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   
how about the ragged trousered philanthropists by Robert Tressell ,written when the real labour party was forming



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
Yes but YOU moved out to California, they didn't move into your block in Brighton!

Thats different.... If I was to move to another Country, I could have no complaints as its my decision.


I don't see it as any different, and you're wrong anyway.

I mean the apartment I live in was not full of Nepalese when I moved in, it was mostly single white people. So they moved into "my" neighbourhood. I have been here for 15 years, they started coming in about 4 years ago. The building has completely changed. My Landlord claims it's the only tenants he can find, which is a load of horse chit.
The problem is he can't rent to people who know their rights, because he is charging $700 for a 8x8 room with no kitchen, and shared showers and bathroom, and NO heat. My rent is dirt cheap because of rent control, and the fact I've threatened to sue his ass for lack of amenities. When you're low income in an extremely expensive housing market, you have extremely little choice. There are apartments in my neighborhood that go for up to half a million a month, and it's inner city. When Obama comes to town he stays at the International Hotel on the corner of my street, the other end of the block from me, which I always find interesting for some reason lol.



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 05:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ismail
reply to post by CuriousAchilles
 
We need to remember that Hitler was elected, and that neither the Shoah nor WW2 were on his political program when he got voted in. What he did have up front was excessive nationalism and the stigmatization of a few minorities that he accused of stealing all the real german's money/jobs.

Sound familiar, UKIP voters ?



Ah the usual liberal tactic of comparing anyone you don't like to Nazis.
At least be original, it's pathetic.



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Ok, I may have been wrong about who went where first but they aren't 'Fanatics' are they?

I'd be much more happier in London, if all these people coming here weren't 'Religious' folk hellbent on turning Normal Towns into 'Religious Towns' which mean they are turning all the Eateries into 'Halal' places and turning ordinary schools which were well mixed into 'Muslim' schools.

All this has done is cause division. As I said its going backwards not forwards.

I'd be so much happier if everyone was just 'Spiritual' with no specific 'Religion' attached.



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Well thanks to these clowns we are the laughing stock of the world, easy Britain as we are known amongst other titles.

Want a house, come to Britain..
Want benefits for the foreseeable future, come to Britain..
Want that operation you can't get in your country without paying, yes, come to Britain.
Want to have 10 kids and get the state to pay, yup, you know the score.

Of course our stock broker belt users will play the PC card and claim its not as serious as that, they like the judges and Politicians simply show just how out of touch they really are.

There have been some very good immigrants who came here to work and work hard they have , sadly the money gets sent home so its not as good as it could be for the UK. A great many of our health care staff and builders etc are all very hard working immigrants and fair play to them I say but the majority are here for the freebies and worse still, thanks to this farce of Labour and Tories we simply have no real clue as to how many or more worrying WHO is here.

Am I annoyed, yes you bet I am, I'm 52 this year and have been on the council list for 15yrs waiting for a house or flat for me, my wife and our daughter, 15 bloody years and I've watched brand new houses being built and non working immigrants installed into them before any people of any race creed or colour who have been waiting on the list for an age.

And why are these people getting the places, because of the number of kids they have.

Why oh why are we rewarding people for breeding without thought or care?

Not one of the families in these new houses works and to be honest I can't blame them,why try and work to feed 8 children when the tax payer will pay for them, I don't even think a man trying to work could actually afford to have 8 children.

Why are we allowing immigrants loop holes like the self employed by selling the big issue to instantly claim benefits, we know of the loop hole yet refuse to shut it down. We bring in the notion of measures to put off money migrants yet never strongly enough. Why not have a policy where you get NO benefits until you have paid in for 5 years, and yes make it for immigrants only, we need to be putting off these people, not enticing them.

And please, save me the human rights nonsense, immigration is a business, you attract people to your country who will put in and create wealth, why attract those that will put in zero and take a massive amount of money?

The EU ie us are giving 851 million to Mali (my figure could be wrong, its either 651 or 851), why?

France went into it,let them pay for the clean up.

Why are we still giving vast sums to corrupt governments, is it to stop them bleating our dirty little secrets?

And of course lastly, when are we going to crack down on the spread of radical Islam in this country?

We import hundreds of thousand of hard core Shariah loving people from places who are unskilled, uneducated and worse still, unwilling to live along side us and who more worryingly, wish to replace our culture.

All these are part of the monumental fail in our deliberately altered immigration policy that is dragging this country down as we fail to ignore European courts and remove criminals, we fail to manage the quality of immigrant and we fail to protect ourselves.

A few years back I heard "its only a few", "of course they will come to work", "its only a few lunatics", all these have been proved wrong, very wrong.

We HAVE to start treating this immigration thing as a business and not as a charity, weed out the rotten or uneducated ones, welcome the workers and investors without replacing British workers, remove those who come and commit crime, clamp down on religious hatred, make it a part of their immigration that they have learned the language BEFORE applying for immigration.

Lets unburden the NHS, benefits system and housing stock by only taking in a manageable number.

Britain was once known for its stiff upper lip, wonderful helping nature, our manners and decorum, but now Britain is known as a joke.

How about we force the government to to stop that, vote with your feet, demand that your MP and ministers listen, at least give it a go.

Oh lastly, make it a unalterable law that this law system remains the ONLY law system of this country, make it part of the constitution of the country that NO other law system can ever be implemented or co exist with it on a major scale.
edit on 16-5-2013 by Mclaneinc because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Anyone reading this report who isn't familiar with the source, should understand that the Daily Mail is essentially a rag with a very obvious right wing agenda. It thrives on sensationalism and is not very fond of fact checking. Personally I refuse to consider it a reliable source for anything.

I'm sure many of it's advocates will tell me I'm just Daily Mail bashing and following the status quo, but then I doubt they would have checked through the Daily Mail's vast back catalogue of incorrect reporting...

Now I am not saying that what they're reporting on here is inaccurate, but just be wary of the Daily Mail.

Oh and before I get called a crazy liberal, although my views are more left wing than right, I will happily admit that this country has been hurt badly due to unregulated immigration.

I think people should "deny ignorance" though as well, and consider how easy it is for the government the UK has at the moment to blame all it's problems on the previous one and their love of unregulated immigration, instead of trying to fix it without destroying the working class. Also consider the fact that the MPs running the UK are the biggest benefit cheats to ever live in the country. Illegal and legal immigrants do often come here to take advantage of our incredibly easy benefits system, that much is true (which if they're caught doing should be instantly considered for deportation IMO). But in no way shape or form are they scamming the country and the hard workers of the UK as much as the government and the banking elite have.

Take the expenses scandal for example. Tax payers money was used for the upper class MPs to simply improve their already glorious living conditions. That is a benefit scam. Who in their right mind needs expenses when they are living on the salaries of British MPs? It's not "expenses", it's benefit for the rich and ruling parties, courtesy of the proles.

There's a big problem in the UK. It doesn't start with immigration though, it starts with the upper class demonising the working class.

Ask yourself, is it fair that somebody raised in wealth, surrounded by money and spoon fed their whole lives by their rich parents, should be able to decide the amount of money given to somebody who can't even make ends meet with what they have to keep the electric on?

When more people in the UK start to understand the upper ruling class agenda, that is to manipulate the perception that their voting bracket have of the working class, so they can get more votes, stay in power and get fatter, things will only get worse.

I would like to add, I am not a Labour voter. They are as bad as the Conservatives. All the parties in the UK are worthless. UKIP, if you look into their other policies (instead of blindly dancing to the tune of their get-out-the-EU ideals) are very similar to BNP. And if you think the BNP are a reasonable party you should probably leave the UK in a time machine and make yourself comfortable in Nazi Germany.
edit on 16-5-2013 by Scope and a Beam because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 10:52 AM
link   
When are the Elections anyway?



posted on May, 16 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Oh the Daily Mail says so so it MUST be true



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthxIsxInxThexMist
 


Elections are set by the party in power at the time, I don't think the coalition has called one yet.



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Ok, I may have been wrong about who went where first but they aren't 'Fanatics' are they?


Now you're just moving the goal posts.

What do you think made them that way?

Let's say you had been invaded by Iran, and your neighbourhoods turned into a war zone. You are offered a new home in Iran, but when you get there you are met with hate from everybody, brutality from the police, the jobs promised not there, forced into poverty in a foreign land?

Your hate and anger are misdirected.



edit on 5/17/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join