Mark Easton, the BBC’s immigration cheerleader, has leapt upon some research about ‘Diversity’ and manages to put a classic BBC spin on it.
Unfortunately the ‘research’ tells us nothing that you couldn’t dream up yourself….i.e. that where communities are segregated, separated into different races and religions, things will fall apart as a ‘society’.
Conversely where there is no segregation and everyone mingles without adopting the identity politics so beloved of the likes of those employed in the BBC, people just get on with things and generally get on together.
Easton proclaims this as a break through revelation….and then adds his own spin…
What the new research calculates is that ethnic diversity helps improve community life…what this paper suggests is that where you have non-segregated and relatively prosperous communities, diversity is likely to improve community life, not damage it.
Diversity improves community life? And yet where’s his evidence? In what way exactly does community life become improved?
Maybe he is comparing ‘community life’ in a non-segregated and a segregated society….then there is an improvement…by comparison….but is he actually claiming diversity itself is beneficial and improves a society? That’s highly subjective. What is he saying is wrong with the original community?
Is he saying that an all white community is somehow bad, deficient, morally wrong, dysfunctional? Or an all black society…or a Japanese society?
A rather simplistic and naive, not to say insulting, assertion to say that a few black faces improves a society just because they’re black.
Even a completely white community is ‘diverse’….having a vast array of different ‘white’ people…not to mention body types, religions, political views, languages, accents, social groupings, fashions, music, football teams etc etc…and of course they may themselves not be ‘British’.
Ridiculous to lump all Whites together as one distinct and well defined group that needs to be leavened by a bit of colour to make them less racist…which they obviously are, being hideously white….and which is the real subtext to Easton’s comments about ‘improving’ a community.
Easton, with a complete lack of contrition, has finally come round to the realisation that Multi-culturalism is a disaster….because surely that is what this research is showing….the separation of communities into separate, well defined groups, is highly damaging to a society.
Shame the BBC has been pushing that narrative, of multi-culturalism, of identity politics, for years now.
Shame that the BBC has felt it is its job to push that narrative.
Once again the BBC’s interference in politics and society, trying to socially engineer that society in the BBC’s own image, has caused immense damage.
Shame that the BBC seems to be entirely unaccountable and shamelessly unprepared to take the blame for any of its dangerous actions.
Shame no one will take the BBC on and put a stop to their self imposed mission to ‘improve’ society.
Shame the BBC itself seems entirely confused about what its role is:
Mark Thompson proclaiming that:
The BBC is not a campaigning organisation and can’t be, and actually the truth is that sometimes our dispassionate flavour of broadcasting frustrates people who have got very, very strong views, because they want more red meat. Often that plays as bias.
The BBC is no longer just a broadcaster, the corporation was to be a social force in the land, he said. The corporation was an “important builder of social capital, seeking to increase social cohesion and tolerance”, which in future would try to “foster audience understanding of differences of ethnicity, faith, gender, sexuality, age and ability or disability”…
Surely it is a natural thing for ethnically similar communities to want to stick together. Communities build common cultures , share their heritage and nationhood.These things should not be thrown away lightly. In a civilised society a ‘few’ immigrants should be welcomed , a little diversity is a good thing, provided that it can be easily absorbed by the existing culture. But ‘few’ is important, too many and things don’t go well on either side.
In the modern age travel and hence migration are physically easier than ever before. We have millions of people on the move looking for a better life. Forced to leave their communities by circumstance. The BBC and the liberal left believe that the UK should encourage many of these people to come here, far exceeding the proportion that could be called ‘few’ . However, a very large section, perhaps a majority, of the British people don’t agree with mass immigration. But those of us who do disagree are, at best, ignored by the BBC, and at worst, demonised as racists.
The whole question of immigration to the UK over the past 40 years is one in which a small liberal left elite ,aided and abetted by the BBC, has consistently refused to have an open debate on the subject. Indeed the above piece is just another standard offering by the BBC to calm our fears, to smooth away our worries, so that they can get on with their mass immigration plan. They have consistently flouted the basic principles of democracy, that the people should be informed and then have their say. Instead they have taken it upon themselves to decide what is best for us.
The BBC is an enemy of democracy and is actively participating in the destruction of the Britain that we knew.
Mark Easton is right “ethnic diversity” has certainly come up trumps in Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, Indonesia, Burma, Kashmir, India, Egypt, Pakistan, Rwanda…(add any others I have missed). So many wanting to embrace each other, happy to live in that cosy BBC phrase “lively and diverse” communities. Oh I’m sure its a joy for them.
Mark, with his enthusiasm, really must go to each and every one of these places and explain to those who have suffered horrors beyond belief that they are silly and they really don’t understand the benefits of living in “lively and diverse” communities.
Mark Thompson (how are they all ‘Marks’?) says the BBC should be “seeking to increase social cohesion.” I want the BBC to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. Its not their job to effectively white-wash facts to make it okay so the BBC and their Metropolitan chums can maintain their idea of “cohesion” in this country as there is NO real cohesion. People need to know why there are Muslim Paedophile gangs, why there is female gentile mutilation, why there are no-go areas in East London, why some Pennine towns don’t speak a word of English, why the rise of the EDL, why have the BNP have done so well, why there are Muslim terrorists amongst us. Because Mr Thompson has essentially said that “If the facts don’t fit…”
It is a mistake to misunderstand what caused the problems in that list of trouble spots, a perception that a minority group was benefiting at the cost of the majority. Often a false perception such beliefs fester and all you need is a trigger for things to get ugly. Integration stops it not for everyone to accept diversity.
the BBC should be “seeking to increase social cohesion.”
So how does Radio 1 Extra and Asian Network help in that goal?
‘Mark, with his enthusiasm, really must go to each and every one of these places’
That already seldom needs much excuse for the air miles brigade.
Though observations from the hotel balcony before hitting the bar have on occasion lead to less than accurate ‘analysis’ in the past.
Maybe Chris Evans on a global mission to see how the ginger community has blossomed under the Arab Spring, now Mr. Brand has set a precedent for serious journalistic insight from the man-child sector?
“…(how are they all ‘Marks’?)…”
Well, that’s a fine question– and there I was, thinking they were “no-Marks.”
I thought they were all Marx?
Marksist (John) Lennonists.
Mark Easton wrote another article a few months back saying that open-door immigration is a success and is evidence of ‘hope’ for the country. His agenda is pretty obvious. Fortunately the article’s open for comments (which the BBC has been cutting back on lately since they hate the fact free-thinking minds use their site) and are summarily rejecting the unbelievably one-sided, badly sourced, statistically irrelevant drivel that Easton has produced.
How about we ensure that the homes around Mr Easton are used for Romanians who will flock over at the end of next month. I sure that after a few months of living next door to these poor maligned people he will continue to sing their praises.
We ought to begin placing the next wave of immigrants around the chipping norton set, and see how long their tolerance lasts.
When I was at 6th form at school one of the subjects I did was ‘A’ Level General Studies (You had to do GS if you were doing A levels) and one of the questions I received on the Exam paper was how would go about the integrating immigrants into the country. If I could answer that question as a 17 year old, I wonder why the so called political elites haven’t managed to do likewise. Silly me its racist to even look think about immigration at the bBC unless it is in the positive. which leads to thinking when are the luvies going to demand we deploy troops to the Sahara, in which to offer people who may die there, direct access to the Uk. I mean they may die crossing that vast expanse and we should do something to erase the stain of….’Slavery’.
Easton and his fellow affluent media types in London usually choose to live in communities segregated by wealth, and often send their children to private schools to prevent them being exposed to the benefits of 20 different languages in the classroom.
Diversity is like being green for high income ‘liberals’.
The ‘do as I say, not as I do’ approach is the way forward.
Yes, Mrs Marr’s “studiously impartial Mark Easton” is as politically biased as ever in his campaigning for mass immigration into Britain.
The reality of mass immigration into Europe and Britain is more accurately analysed in ‘liberal’ Christopher Caldwell’s book, “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam and the West”*
*’Look inside’ book for extracts here:-
Also:-
CHRISTOPHER CALDWELL:
(2009)-
” Immigration made America strong – but it threatens to ruin Europe”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1219460/CHRISTOPHER-CALDWELL-Immigration-America-strong–threatens-ruin-Europe.html
The only way a multi-cultural society can work is if one of those cultures is dominant. All other cultures effectively become a flavour of the main culture. Where the sub culture clashes with the the main culture the main culture wins every time.
That’s how England used to work and how we managed to build the greatest empire the world has ever seen.
Labours current multicultural mess is designed to fracture our society not build on it as The BBC often claims.
I think we are either heading for some authoritarian nightmare as in ‘The Horse At The Gates’ to force us to live as we are told or Balkanisation as in the former Yugoslavia whereby it gets nasty and we end up with enclaves. I fail to see how else it can go especially as more and more ‘diversity’ is foisted upon us every year. Hopefully I’m way of the mark.
grr off not of
And yet where’s his evidence?
He links to the report where the researchers come to those conclusions, with their explanations for their conclusions running into page.
And yet you dispute it, offering as usual no evidence whatsoever other than your own prejudice. Where’s your evidence?
Yes the priests say so it must be true
Even when they say this?
http://boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/
Scott, i bet you’re well looking forward to a true multi-cultural britain
Truly shocking image. Answers please hand wringing liberals.
Scott will not comment on this scene.
His eyes are closed to the barbarism shown here, perhaps because the moderates will prevail, in his idyllic future view.
I’m not blind to the barbarism inflicted around the world.
Nor am I blind to the sad little men, so desperate to feel superior, abuse such imagery in a pathetic attempt to try and paint their miserable little bigotry as anything but the grubby, despicable behaviour that it really is.
Never mind, boys. At least you get to feel important in the confines of Biased BBC. It must make up for your inability to be decent human beings out in the real world.
” decent human beings ”
Is that how you see your self Scott, a decent human being?
What grants access to this ,apparently , exclusive club?
Just asked the missus, and she has confirmed that my physique indeed does not quite manage Dwayne Johnson levels.
A burden I must now accept and bear.
However, in comparison to the images conjured of the laughing, joking hunks of humanity Flokkers who drop by hereabouts like clouds of mustard gas, I am unsure being a great big one is necessarily all they think it is cracked up to be.
Returning to the subject of BBC treatment of news, I will now pause to reflect on how they, so desperate to feel superior, abuse imagery in pathetic attempts to try and paint miserable bigotories as anything but the grubby, despicable behaviour that it really is (for just £145.50pa).
http://bbcwatch.org/2012/11/19/bbcs-jon-donnison-tweets-malicious-fauxtography/
Oddly, he was no long after promoted sideways to the other side of the planet.
One is sure the BBC felt that was a ‘decent’ enough distance.
When the argument descends into a string of adjectives, as seen here, sad, despicable, bigotry, etc you can see the blatant attempt to sidestep the real issues shown, and the causes that lay behind it.
Once again, no-one wants to debate what causes these barbaric savages to behave like this.
Or have I got that wrong? Are they behaving like savages?
How any sane person can compare discussing this barbarism with the act itself utterly confounds me.
Decent human beings?
Would you prefer we sweep such acts under the carpet?
What is your explanation for this savagery Scott?
Hey?
“sad little men…desperate to feel superior…in a pathetic attempt to try and paint their miserable little bigotry as anything but the grubby, despicable behaviour that it really is”
Scott you are projecting again.
Britain definitley needs that diversity that other cultures add to our own, in this case Somalia
Lets have a look at what happens in those cultures that Mark Easton so loves, when those nice diverse people find someone who embrace’s our culture, in this example, reading the Bible. Yeah man, gotta luv that cultural diversity
Cultural diversity, as promoted by Al Beeb, coming to a street near you SOON
If that happens in Hampstead to the libtards its not a bad thing.
fingers crossed
Do i hear the deafening silence of the drive-by merchants here? Or is there a cry of…….’ You lot are the barbarians because you engage in comparisons of who can display the most barbaric image?’
Well, guess who provides all the above savages…..answers on a postcard to…
Yeah right.
“He links to the report where the researchers come to those conclusions”
And there’s your problem right there. Wake up Scott, your posts are becoming more and more frivolous by the day.
“Diversity emerges as a positive predictor of social cohesion, the paper asserts, a finding that runs counter to the LARGE MAJORITY of published studies.”
I put the relevant words in capitals. These are words from Mark Easton in the article. Even he accepts the LARGE MAJORITY of published studies indicate the opposite, however he has waited for the ONE study which claims the opposite based on no real proof, the key quote is “paper suggests” as opposed to “the paper proves”.
When you can disprove his argument with his own article, you know there is something seriously rotten in the state of Denmark.
Some studies are more equal than others it seems
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10085715/BBC-biased-towards-pro-immigration-lobby-says-study.html
As with AGW the BBCs response to criticism of their bias is redouble their efforts.
Is this because they believe they are ‘nearly there’ and one last push will makes their objectives irreversibly inevitable?
Or are they simply exasperated that some still do not accept the received truth and feel that a more strident sermon is required to steady the flock?
Or do they think the game up and their time in the pulpit limited?
‘Some studies are more equal than others’
Certainly the BBC seldom seems to find room for any counter views that don’t fit the narrative.
As to evidence of this, it can also help to have an FoI exclusion ready should an explanation be sought if the answers may prove inconvenient.
The first two words of the second paragraph of his article says it all about the BBC… it doesn’t really matter which subject they venture upon, or which programme is used as the mouthpiece to spout the analysis the starting point is invariably a piece of academic research.
There is very rarely any input from practitioners in the field or people on the ground to support the case and the whole discussion becomes academic, and usually very circular.
Newsnight are especially bad at this, in that they start off with a bit of academic research and then invite a couple of academics or people with an academic background to argue over the merits of the piece.
What makes it worse is that the starting piece usually finds in favour of a perspective which the BBC agrees with from the start and then the invitees come on to debate, discuss, generate a load of hot air and then re-inforce.
Painful really.
An interesting study in liberal thought. The desire preceeds the thought. The thought becomes the “reality”
When the real world starts to make itself felt the liberal response is first denial then refusal to engage with reality since it does not fit the world view and so cannot be true. Pointing this out to a liberal is pointless. The entire premise of the liberal approach to society is based on a gnostic like belief in directly perceived wisdom.
Rage and abuse is all the reponse you will get if you go too far.
The best thing to do is tell them to go and read the “Odyssey”.
And if you are a liberal and reading this try to work that one out.
Which is why in the coming culture war for the West it is completely pointless discussing anything with the liberal.
… and then their heads explode.
multi-culturalism would be a great thing if only they knew liverpool was in england not wales
allahu akbar y’all
pic didnt work, worth looking at this tho
http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/SafariScreenSnapz003-620×213.jpg
Seems like my home town – Birmingham_ has also shifted west of Offa’s Dyke…
And Bradford is in the Lake District. It’s wet, but not that wet.
Can’t wait for Mohammed Wainwright to do a series of walks around the mosques. I hear the views from the minarets are spectacular.
Look hard enough toward the nearest football pitch you might see a victim of rape being beheaded.
Perhaps they will have a series starring Julia Bradbury, trekking from minaret to minaret?,
How will we know it is Julia under the burka?
what do they mean by enforced?
‘Telegraph’ (£):-
“Illegal immigrants cost taxpayer more than £4,000 a head each year”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“Every illegal immigrant in Britain costs the taxpayer up to £4,250 a year in costs for public services such as the NHS and education, according to a new official report.
It means the total cost to the public purse could be up to £3.7 billion a year, based on previous estimates which said there were as many as 860,000 illegal immigrants in the country.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10417222/Illegal-immigrants-cost-taxpayer-more-than-4000-a-head-each-year.html
What Easton is also doing in his propaganda is implying that:
‘I personally am rich enough to choose what I do about living near to, or far from particular ‘ethnic’ or ‘religious’ immigrant groups.’
Most people aren’t. And most British people want to LIMIT the number of immigrants coming into Britain. But Easton doesn’t. For an alleged statistician, Easton is curiously reluctant to talk about numbers and immigration. He is a ‘social engineer’ for mass immigration. His mind seems to operate like this:-
‘yes, we could have more immigrants in that part of London, and get more London-born indigenous people to move to that other part of London, to make it nicely diverse, and make everybody happy with things by giving them more money too.’
Away from Easton’s dystopia:-
“IMMIGRATION: CAN WE CONTROL IT?”
http://libertygb.org.uk/v1/index.php/news-libertygb/5737-immigration-can-we-control-it
George – please remember that you’re not “most people”. You’re just someone who reads a limited number of publications that reinforces your own bigotry, and blurts out links on here without ever stopping to think as to whether or not they’re true.
I realise that, when it comes to small-minded petty little bigots you find company here. But that doesn’t make the foul stench of your prejudice typical of the country as a whole. Thank goodness.
Now I am going to have to order more screen cleaning spray from Maplins.
Totally worth it though.
Haven’t had a laugh like that in a while.
I’m beginning to get seriously worried about Scott. He’s gone from being a thick bigoted lefty to increasingly just spouting bile-filled rants that make assertions readily identifiable as contrary to recognisable reality.
I had my own role in his meltdown; I once asked him the same question several times to prevent his usual drive-by tactics and he visibly lost it. It was LOL funny at the time but I now feel that I was actually cruel as he’s clearly got mental health problems.
Really Scott those expert/priests think otherwise
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-concern
Refer to my earlier post.The abuse comes easy and on cue.
Pointless to engage with the liberal mind.
His post is heavy on the use of bigotry and prejudice.
Gordon Brown fell foul of the bigoted lady as I well remember, look where it got him!
But at least scott is keeping his powder dry on the words: racism, islamophobia and hate.
They are kept in reserve for when he’s really pissed off with reality biting him on the arse.
Oh, hang on, does that make me prejudiced? Oh dear, how sad never mind.
Sky News suggests he represents “most people” more than you, Scott.
The UK population is already too large and the Government should take drastic
action now to reduce migration – 67%
But of course, that’s Murdoch and doesn’t count. Anyway, you said “small-minded petty little bigots” so you win the argument. In your world, anyway.
Oh look:
The current debate in the UK is being unfairly “shut down” by accusations of racism – 42%
The current debate in the UK about immigration is being driven by overblown and racist views – 21%
That went well then.
doris must be feeling relieved the heat’s off at the weeks’ end debrief on who stuffed up most.
Pressure seems to be getting to ’em all.
I blame the DQF cuts.
You and Easton are certainly not most people. Please remember that. And check out what most Britons think about mass immigration. It is not what you presume it is.
And there you go with your insults and prejudices: anyone who opposes mass immigration is a ‘bigot’ -close down debate, leave policy to the pro-mass immigration social engineers, such as Easton and his apologists such as you, Scott. No.
Scott:
To me there are two kinds of immigrants’. Those who like the host country, its people, its laws etc. and wish to settle down and ‘integrate’. If these same people bring skills to this country and help it in a positive way, then I am all for them coming, providing that is, we can accommodate them.
And then you have the ‘other’ kind of immigrants’. These are by-enlarge the opposite. They do not care for, or even like the people of the host country. They only believe in their way of life, laws and culture and wish to force it upon others. They, rather inadvertently, turn areas of their host nation into mini-s#!tholes of the places they have fled. This is being aided and abetted by those in power to satisfy their own guilt complex about being born in a nation such as ours. They in turn are being assisted by people like ‘you’ who, despite all that one can see, are turning a blind eye to what is going on.
It is not immigration that people are turning against. It is MASS-immigration. That is not bigoted, it is reasonable response given the levels we have seen over such a short period of time.
And as for those who come here, well I guess that makes you one of us then doesn’t it ? Either that or, you are a hypocrite and a bigot – you do know what bigot means don’t you, or is that still shorthand for racist.
I do not talk to Liberals’. They are like you ! Closed eyes and even more tightly closed minds. As mentioned by Dave above; “When the real world starts to make itself felt the liberal response is first denial then refusal to engage with reality since it does not fit the world view and so cannot be true.” This is where you are. And until this crap happens to you, you will not shake out of it.
Your post reflects the majority of opinion on here, Mark – there is nothing bigoted in expressing concerns about mass immigration and the segregationist mentality encouraged by multiculturalism.
Scott, on the other hand, believes these alien cultures are undisputably beyond criticism – especially Islam – despite the stark evidence that many of their everyday religious practices are taking our society backwards at an alarming rate.
Given the multicultural message we have been battered with for over 15 years that all cultures are equal, it is going to be interesting to see how any one of these ‘cultures’ – though I’m thinking of one in particular – fares in our free and democratic society once it becomes dominant e.g. in population terms. We’ve had a few inklings from the likes of Tower Hamlets and Newham (neither quite at a single cultural majority) – but I reckon there are be many more ‘surprises’ to come, none of them good. How long, for example, before gender segregation in council meetings becomes the norm in certain boroughs and cities.
‘once it becomes dominant e.g. in population terms. ‘
Not necessary. Muslims ruled Spain for hundreds of years, but they were never a majority.
They were a determined, cohesive group, willing to use extreme violence to achieve their aims. Thank God they’re no longer like that eh?
Nobody typifies the BBCs bias more than Easton, esp when immigration is concerned.
He was the bloke who 9 months ago called 600,000 white British fleeing London ‘a story of success’.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21511904
Hilariously if you read the comments that follow the above link all the “highest rated” disagree with Mark Easton and say how horrible mass immigration is, how it affected them detrimentally and wish it hadn’t happened at all.
Doesn’t it prove that Mark and the gang just don’t bloody care?
Yep, the first 20 highest totally disagree with both Eaton and Scott and that doesn’t included the ones removed by the commissars.
Here’s my favourite
92.DisgustedOfDeptford
20th February 2013 – 7:09
“…what emerges is a much more positive story…”
I’m sure that spin makes you feel better about the truth, Mr Easton.
Unfortunately, for the tens of thousands of people who have seen their communities changed beyond recognition, who have been pushed to move to the four corners of the nation to find a new home that resembles their country of origin, your spin is more than a tad nauseating.
Here’s the top one at over 400 positive ratings
ravenmorpheus2k
20th February 2013 – 5:29
Why have the white British left London?
—
They have left because they’ve been pushed out by migrants.
A few weeks ago we heard of some Islamic “men” castigating a man for not being Muslim, asking if he was gay, and telling him to “get out, this is a Muslim area”.
Their exact words were played on the radio so there was no doubt over it.
Time for the govt. to do something about such migrants
‘first 20 highest totally disagree with both Eaton and Scott and that doesn’t included the ones removed by the commissars’
Seems the BBC may have to invent a whole new category of modding beyond closing early and toasting those house rules can zap, or things really are going to screw the pooch when their own interactive pieces drop the narrative and deranged DOTIs in it with cited URLS and actual facts.
I was going to joke that ‘disappearing’ such things may next be an option, but they have done this for real, too.
So just done a page grab of the story and highest rated.
You never know.
The BBC does seem ‘careless’ a lot, and when it needs to be more often than not.
It all makes sense now. The Beeb’s move to Salford was part of the of the 600,000 “white flight”. See even they don’t want to live the multi- cultural dream.
Back to Mark Easton’s recent missive
As a result of my last conversation with CTC, I tracked down a copy of Jared Taylor’s sequel to ‘Race against time’, ‘white Identity’. Great read (thanks CTC) I recommend it, if you can find a copy
The first third of the book challenges the orthodoxy that ‘diversity is a strength’ He sites numerous scientific studies by established universities (in addition to Robert Putnam’s) ,all fully referenced, that either fail to support or contradict that premise
Why ,if the BBC has no agenda, is not biased, have they never ‘headlined’ one of these many studies?
I would be interested to have some context put on this particular question
The BBC have been shoving their views down our throats ever since Eastenders hit our screens in the mid-eighties (perhaps long before that too).
Has anyone noticed how they are including mini-documentaries in their main news programmes? The news is the news and shouldn’t be a place to concentrate on just one side of the issue. I know the poor people of Syria are suffering – I don’t need that fact drilling into my skull every time I want to catch up with the news. I can empathise with them without your help, thanks!
They had an article on London knife crime as part of the BBC news last Saturday. As they showed the faces of young men killed in assaults they, the Beeb, played sad music as the faces came up. As my partner said, who works in TV incidently, “what’s this entertainment now? The shouldn’t be playing music in the news” Quite.
Was it this sad music ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dutwdF1NJKg
i am just sick of the mark eastons of these worlds,it not only him,there is clique of well versed middle to upper types who work in the media and are involved in politics and all live in there nice little all white and english middle class villages and hamlets who bang on about celebrating multi cullturism and diversity but chose not to live in any of these rich diverse areas where 200 languages are been spoken and the white english little kiddie sits at the back of the class as if they was a outcaste in there own country,every other ethic group in this country is encourged to be proud of there cultural heritage and be proud of there ethnic roots except if your white ,english and working class,that sickens me,what sickens me even more is these hypocrites who never practise what they preach and live in the likes of tower hamlets,bradford or birmingham.get it mark easton.
Well put stewart.
And stuart as well.
Jared Taylor ” White Liberals love Third World immigrants so much, they do everything they possibly can to live as far away as possible from them.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-s-b5yKwcU
So, now the “studiously impartial Mark Easton” tells us that ‘Diversity emerges as a positive predictor of social cohesion, the paper asserts, a finding that runs counter to the large majority of published studies‘.
I guess he was too busy to tell us about any of these previous studies.
Sir Art – yes strange isn’t it. Global warming and the ‘consensus’ is agreed on and reported at length by the BBC. But on immigration… the consensus, or ‘large majority of published studies‘ are ignored, and as soon as a PC pro-multi-culti study is found, it’s reported at length.
Grrr… to add;
When it comes to the effects of immigration, the deniers are firmly in charge at the BBC.
Easton has just been publicly attacked as the typical face of BBC bias.
What happens ?
1 Someone unnamed at the BBC – obviously without any proper internal editorial review of this serious and specific complaint – says that Easton is the perfect “journalist”.
2 Lefties claim he is the epitome of balance.
3 Within days Easton comes out with an article that simply shows yet again his bias, his failure to properly present all types of research, his deliberate skewing of debate on issues which most British people have put at or near the top of the political agenda.
THAT is why the BBC needs to be closed down – or put on a subscription basis. The overt and endless bias is coupled with outright scorn and arrogance towards the masses who pay their wages. And total disregard of the Royal Charter.
John – it’s everything you say, but worse. The BBC has admitted their coverage of immigration is flawed… ‘slow to the debate’ is their euphemism for naked bias. But they have done NOTHING about it, in fact it gets worse. Its a giant two-fingers to the British public, and due to ‘the unique way its funded’ they kknow they can get away with it.
Poor Mrs. Marr must fair be suffrin’ a fit of the vapours by now.
“Using very detailed population data, what emerges is that London, despite its ethnic diversity, is among the least segregated parts of England. The one red slash across the yellow wash of the map looks to be where some of the poorest neighbourhoods in the East end rub up against the wealth of docklands and the city”
Erm, is he talking about newham? so he’s insinuating that newham is segregated due to wealth differentials? is he having a laugh?
Married for 20 years, 30 years together in all. Mrs B a different colour, but born here. We love our country. We run a business so wealth generators. Offsrping in army cadets. None of this fits BBC lefty profile.
It takes Al Jazeera to tell you some of the truth the Beeb never will. In a programme tonight (Friday)* dealing with Somalis living in Denmark, Holland and France from what was stated they are all intent on moving to England. The reason given upfront by a Somali in London was quite simply our policy of ‘multiculturalism’ – in other words we encourage the creation of many little Mogadishus in the UK.
As these individuals all have an EU nationality we have to expect perhaps a million more immigrants of this ethnic origin. This is simply a fact. Mark Easton who earns £200,000 a year will be ‘studiously neutral’ on the issue. He can afford to be.
“Citizen or Stranger? (2013) Ep 1. One Somali family strewn across six countries. Through their different experiences, this two-part series explores the issues of migration and multiculturalism.”
‘Diversity improves community life? And yet where’s his evidence?’
Did you read the research?
‘Is he saying that an all white community is somehow bad, deficient, morally wrong, dysfunctional?’
No, I don’t see that anywhere in the article. Reading and comprehension isn’t your strong point. It always surprises me that you can actually read and write. Maybe someone transcribes it for you?