The BBC sees immigration as an unequivocal and unmitigated good thing and a Biased BBC reader picks up on an item on Today @ 7,52am
“The Today Prog was at it again his morning. This time the bias was that old favourite – pro immigration. I couldn’t believe one contributor said that immigration was a good thing because it brought in people of working age to support our pensions. Do we really need more workers when we have 3 million unemployed ? What about the fact that most are low-skilled ? What about their elderly and younger relatives ? And the demand they bring on resources – NHS: education: etc.. and they themselves will bring later as they reach old age. ? It was stated that the birth-rate in the UK is much higher than that in Germany and elsewhere without mentioning that this was due to the high number of births in the ethnic minorities. None of these negative points were mentioned by the pc presenter. (Surprise ?) As to the destruction of our traditional civil society and English culture – well they never ever mention that, do they?”
…and who is going to pay their pensions when the time comes?
Oh…what, more immigrants?
Isn’t that a PONSI scheme? Ponsi BTW was an immigrant.
Did not hear the programme, but the Lords released an update to an old report of there’s and it kept it’s conclusion that we obtained no advantage economically by having immigrants.
That’s probably why the Lib-Dems want to get rid of the Lords.
Interesting that – do you have a link please? can’t find it.
‘Migrationwatch’ has this:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/235
They ain’t called ‘the loony left’ for nothing!
Did you see the reaction on 6pm TV BBC news yesterday to the rise in population revealed by the census? Unmitigated joy and smiles by the presenter yes so many new under 5s…so many more over 90s…he was almost singing it out he was smiling and bouncing around so much. Immigration did get a mention and so did new born numbers…nothing more…move along please…nothing to see here.
Oh yes, so many more under 5s in Bradford! And where were the two greatest increases in population in England? Tower Hamlets and Newham. Now let’s see, any guesses as to what all these three locations have in common and why it wasn’t mentioned? http://durotrigan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/census-indicates-surge-in-muslim-html
have you posted that yet Durotrigan? page doesn’t exist and home page shows the Sympathy for the Devil post (good though!)
The leftie oaf from Oxbridge got both the first and final word…can`t imagine her sinecure provides for cheaper and more knowledgeable immigrants from Wroclaw or Vilnius though to turf her into the real world anytime soon.
And as for the counter voice…no Andrew Green or anybody who`d know…just another business Sheila in search of more Norland nannies for the grandkids.
THIS is what the BBC has come to-about time we swept out the BBCs barn with some bright hungry students from Eastern Europe-and sent these superannuated old fools off to push trolleys round Lidl.
Their pensions could be used to feed the real poor, and not their guilt trip crims that they seem obsessed with.
When will we rid ourselves of the fat leech that is the BBC and all who fellow travel with it?…
“just another business Sheila”
I suppose that’s one way of describing Ruth Lea!
The loony left should all be sectioned for live.
life.
BBC director-general Mark Thomson has admitted on several occasions that their coverage of immigration was poor.
But nothing happens. If they do touch on the subject it is always portrayed as a wonderful thing. They have never mentioned any of the negatives.
Two standard responses to complaints about the BBC; either “we got it about right (so go away)”, or “yes we did make a mistake (but nothing is going to change and there’s nothing you can do about it).
Yup, even when they admit what they are doing is wrong they refuse to change – they simply carry on doing it. Nothing ever changes.
It’s the same propaganda crap that all of the Left-wing media are currently trying to spout; the Independent (of reality) came out with a similar Marxist nonsensical line proposing that in order to cut the deficit and boost economic recovery we need millions more immigrants; basically unfettered immigration and open borders. Their spurious and highly irresponsible article based this pack of lies on a paper by the Office for Budget Responsibility, which briefly mentions, among its many pages, that within certain parameters, controlled and highly skilled immigration can be a good thing, but highly contingent upon many factors at that time. The Independent and the Guardian, however, have basically distorted this sentence by saying that all immigration no matter how much, is a good thing; they’ve basically manipulated this line of thought through Marxist Left-wing propaganda. Disgraceful!
The socialists in Belgium are up to their old cultural Marxist tricks again by labeling anyone against the notion of Muslims being asked to integrate as bigots and racists; these socialists are scum of the highest order and must, I REPEAT MUST not be allowed to ever gain power.
I thought that pyramid schemes were against the law. More and more incomers to provide for the few at the top is a pyramid scheme is it not?
I think technically it’s a Ponzi scheme, as a pyramid scheme involves members bringing in new recruits as opposed to a single central con-artist.
Of course, this all depends on how many immigrants are encouraged to move by their families.
The figures are frightening but would be more frightening if they actually told us how many were coming and how many are going. Net immigration figures tell us absolutely nothing and is only the difference between the numbers leaving and arriving. . If 60 million brits left in one year and 60 million Chinese arrived then net immigration would be zero but the country would no longer be the same.
The Left/Cultural Marxists want as much immigration as possible to destroy this countries culture. They hope when they do this they will get their Marxist Utopia state with them ruling it.
Net immigration figures are always used by those in favour of mass immigration to disguise the real number of newcomers per year. They wish to deliberately obscure the whole picture.
Are your noses well and truly rubbed?
‘Yvette Cooper recently admitted that:
“We did get things wrong on immigration… We should have had the transitional controls on migration from Eastern Europe. We should have introduced the points-based system much earlier.”
Note whenever Labour fess up to ‘getting it wrong’ on immigration they only ever talk about Eastern Europeans. In actual fact, the bulk of immigrants each year come from Africa and the Indian sub-continent – the ones whose cultures provide the biggest threat to social cohesion. (And remember it was the Labour government which introduced legislation to allow dependent relatives to come and join the party.)
In other words it’s Labour playing its usual sly, deceitful game in order to realise its ambition for Britain to become the world’s first internationalist hell-hole – sorry, Utopia.
So true – Labour will only admit a mistake with respect to Eastern European (ie white) immigrants – they daren’t talk about non-white immigration for the fear of being accused of the very bigotry they accuse others of. They know very well how THEIR game is played.
How can Roma or Somali immigrants help out with our pensioners when they stay within their own communities and don’t speak English. No Beeboid would consider that.
Which raises the question of their wider contribution to society i.e. helping their fellow citizens. I read a few years ago that whilst ethnic minorities made up 10% of the population they only comprised 2% of blood donors. It may have changed since, I don’t know. But it would also be interesting to see what proportion do voluntary work.
Actually loads of them do voluntary work, not only because it entitles them if unemplyed to apply for council housing, but it can speed up citizenship, or if they are asylum seekers can help their chances of being granted permanent leave to remain. The charity shops round my way all seem to have immigrants, which makes it bloody boring for the old ladies who traditionally work in them and who do so mainly to meet other old ladies for a chat, especially when the immigrant can barely speak English!
Anyone for a little BBC hypocrisy?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2174268/148-BBC-stars-avoiding-tax-MPs-attack-immoral-tactics-presenters-paid-books.html
There is of course the argument that the tax and NI contributions of the working immigrants goes to help support the idle native doleys who hang around many of our “social housing estates”. Difficult to fit that into the BBCs “narrative” though!
incidently am I the only one who finds himself waiting for Sir Andrew Green, Chairman of Migration Watch UK, to forget himself and point out that most of those immigrants he is so concerned about are brown?
Really? Does he? Evidence?
Or have you just run out of real arguments?
I am a home-owner.
I have no intention of inviting other people to live in my house, free of charge and in addition pay them an allowance to cover their other living expenses.
It makes no difference what their age is, or their gender, or their sexual preference, or their religion, or even the colour of their skin.
It is possible that some will think me an uncharitable, ageist, homophobic, racist.
So be it, at least I’m not completely focking mad.
Putting to one side for a moment whether it’s a good thing or not, were we ever actually asked about it before allowing immigrants in at such a rate?
NO.
Give the BBC long enough and they’ll drip-feed a version of Blair’s 1997 election manifesto into our sub-conscious which goes something like: ‘And we will create a British Rainbow Nation where hard-working people of every race, colour and sexual orientation from every corner of the globe come to share and enrich our tolerant and generous culture – in their tens of thousands, but possibly millions’.
OK let`s take the premise that immigration is a Good Thing for a country and solves all its ills .
In that case the BBC and liberal/left should insist that African countries have to accept large scale immigration .
David Vance’s “reader” says:
“I couldn’t believe one contributor said that immigration was a good thing because it brought in people of working age to support our pensions.”
Perhaps you couldn’t believe it because – no one said any such thing.
Perhaps Biased-BBC would have slightly more credibility if it didn’t resort to lies on such a regular basis.
“It was stated that the birth-rate in the UK is much higher than that in Germany and elsewhere without mentioning that this was due to the high number of births in the ethnic minorities.”
Yet immigration is higher in Germany than it is in the UK.
“As to the destruction of our traditional civil society and English culture – well they never ever mention that, do they?”
Well no; possibly because it’s figment of your diseased imagination.
But I’m open to persuasion; please give examples of how immigration has destroyed English culture…
So, Dez, do you think there’s any limit to the number of immigrants the country can take?
Are you one of those lefties who campaigned against the building of more roads because the country had run out of room? (You know the argument: ‘You only need to look at a map of Britain to see it’s already covered in roads’ heard endlessly on the likes of Jeremy Vine.)
As for the decimation of the British culture – you lefties have proved more than capable of that on your own, though you do tend to use ‘might offend other cultures’ as one of your tactics. And do you think is London English anymore?
‘London is English’ – beginning to talk da patois meself now.
The BBC interviewee (or Beeboid) said without fear of contradiction, as you repeat here, “Yet immigration is higher in Germany than it is in the UK”.
Der Spiegel reported the German 2009 figures – picked off the internet in a few seconds –
“the Federal Statistics Office released figures showing that 13,000 more people had left Germany in 2009 than had arrived.
In total 734,000 people opted to leave the country last year, while only 721,000 immigrated. Although the immigration total showed an increase of 39,000 over 2008, at the beginning of the decade over 800,000 people were choosing to make Germany their home each year.
Most of those who chose to leave were foreigners returning home, with the prime destinations being Poland (123,000), Romania (44,000) and Turkey (40,000).”
No Dez, immigration is NOT higher to Germany than to Britain. Germany does have quitea lot of immigrants it is true, but visibly far less than britain. However more to the point, Germany counts and monitors its citizens very carefully, everyone having to register every time they move, while our Government simply hasnt a clue how many people are here, never mind how many immigrants. Last years census even, was a shambles, one and a half million FEWER forms were returned than expected!
Yet immigration is higher in Germany than it is in the UK.
Is it possible that the type of immigrant we get as opposed to Germany( Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Nigerian,Somalian etc), breed at a higher rate?
Freedom of speach for one Dez , we must be careful about discussing immigrants , immigration and religion .
Dez, for a start, immigration has destroyed the chance of many people ever owning a house. First time buyers in 97 were avg 24 years old. Now its 39.
Lofty leftists such as Evil Izzard use immigration as a rhetorical tool to destroy our identity and culture by branding us mongrels.
Demographic impositions of the left have changed towns up and down the country well within the lifetimes of the pre-marxist-utopian population.
And the outlandishness of the immigrant communities (if not always individual immigrants) is far from invisible, and is an affront to the English culture and the English people, Dez.
BBC-NUJ, when it mentions mass immigration into UK and Europe, invariably avoids reference to:-
1.) any upper limit to immigration, in terms of numbers;
2.) any recognition that the argument for ZERO immigration is, a priori, as valid as BBC-NUJ presumption for unlimited open door, mass immigration;
3.) the social costs to British people of mass immigration in terms of immigrants’ impact on housing, education, health, employment, transport, environment, religious, and security demands.
4.) there being nothing deleterious in UK being colonised by decades of mass immigration from millions of people from countries such as Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Afghanistan Somalia, Nigeria, etc.
5.) and, by implication, there are no cultural principles in present day British society which cannot, and should not be subsumed by those of e.g. Islam.