By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - BNP would offer non-white Britons £50,000 to leave UK, says Nick Griffin

highwaystar101 on 01 May 2010
Carl2291 said:
highwaystar101 said:

So who's telling you? Bradford council or it's residents?

If it was the council you have the right to be outraged, if you are being told by the residents then they have no right to tell you that you can't. Even if it means you get beaten up, you are still allowed to celebrate St. Georges day, and if you do get beaten up then those who did it will be arrested for breaking the law.

Well, the pubs weren't allowed to open on the day due to risk of "upsetting certain groups".

So i'm guessing it was the council.

So? I'm an Aston Villa fan, when we play Birmingham City most pubs that attract football fans in Birmingham are closed to decrease the risk of violence, they are not telling us that we can't celebrate a victory.

It's a sensible pre-caution and it's the same deal with this case. No-one has said you can't celebrate. Is one pub closed? Then go to one that's open. You are given every right to celebrate St. Georges, the council have not said that you as an individual can't.



Around the Network
highwaystar101 on 01 May 2010
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:
Khuutra said:
Carl2291 said:

I guess we just have differing opinions on what is "racist" then.

Fair enough.

So you contend that the phrase "Britain would be better off if it were only composed of ethnic Britons" is not racist?

Nope.

But then again, he never said that... So yaknow.

You are retreating behind semantics that do not hold up under any level of scrutiny. The man is willing to spend 9,000,000,000 a year to get people who are not ethnic Britons to leave the country. He couldn't be saying it any louder if he tatoo'd it on his forehead.

I'm not retreating behind anything... Unless facts can be retreated behind? If something IS happening, i would say it is you just assuming things.

He never said what you are saying he said. You are just assuming that he implies it.

And he is willing to spend 9,000,000,000 a year to give people a chance to help a country they were decended from.

So a doctor with German lineage will be paid to help Germany? The German health service don't need our help.

He doesn't want them to help their country*, he just wants them to leave. It's blindingly obvious.

...

Also, why on Earth is it their responsibility to help the country that they are descended from? A British person with Portuguese lineage is not Portuguese, they are British. what is the difference between me going to Portugal to work and them. Why am I not offered £50,000 and they are, even though we are equally British?



alekth on 01 May 2010

Germany tried something way more oriented to foreign workers, who were also jobless on top of that, in the 80s. And very few used it. Can't see this being very different, especially when it also concerns just some lineage that nobody cares about.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_in_Germany

November 28, 1983 A new law for the Promotion of Readiness to Return (Das Gesetz zur Förderung der Rückkehrbereitschaft) offers jobless Guest workers 10,500 DM to return to their country of origin. Only 13,000 individuals make use of this option.



Kantor on 01 May 2010

So,

a) He's not forcing anybody to leave, he's PAYING them to leave

b) He didn't actually say the words "white British" because that would be racist and illegal. He said non-indigenous British.

Honestly, I think people hate the BNP just for the sake of having somebody to hate. Yes, they have no idea how to run the country, they'll never win, they can't finance this, and they're CLEARLY racist, but it's not like they're going to "hang all of the black people" (as a friend of mine once told me).



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

FootballFan on 01 May 2010
highwaystar101 said:
FootballFan said:
highwaystar101 said:
FootballFan said:


So under your definition(s) Brown saying he wants "British Jobs for British people" was inciting racial hatred? There is nothing wrong with being nationalistic and being proud of your nation. It's a shame that my generation has being brought up by seeing patriotism as been a negative trait...

Wait a minute for me to laugh at that straw man argument... Haha.

Don't accuse me of holding a position that I don't actually hold.

There's nothing wrong with supporting your own people and even favouring them. Brown didn't say that foreign workers would not be allowed, or anything like that. It's perfectly fine to support your own population and still allow foreign workers to gun for any job they want.

The BNP used the analogy of the Japanese Physicist, now that I don't agree with. That's just unfair because the immigrant is outright being told when and where they can work. That's not the same as what Brown proposed at all, he would allow immigrants to do any job they could get. Nick griffin would bring in an immigrant and tell them what job to do and not let them have the opportunity to do anything else.

And I bet Nick Griffin would seldom import labour, even if the country was falling apart at the seem because we've ran out of scientists and skilled labourers.

From my interpretation, British jobs for British worker meant that if, two people of the same ability went for a job the British person would get priority. If it was the case that he was putting the case forward that British people could go for any job in Britain and they would ahve an equal oppotunity of getting it as a foreign national then why even mention anything?

To your last point, if there wasn't such a underfunding of the school system there wouldn't be a need to get foreign scienstist and people in the first place. For way to long we have been having a worse education success rate than many european countries.

Favouring a British worker with the same ability is fine, but the fact is a foreign national can apply for any job they like and if they're significantly better then they'll get the job.

British jobs for British workers would mostly affect the unskilled, so if two people went for an interview as a shelf stacker, the British person would be more likely to get hired. However, if they went for an interview at a nuclear power station and the British applicant held an a-level in physics and the German applicant held a PhD in nuclear Physics, then the German would get the job.

That system is not racist, it's just supporting your own people a little bit. Whereas just letting British people get jobs over the foreign worker regardless of experience, or even just outright instructing the foreign worker on what the job they have to do is, is not acceptable.

...

As for schooling, yes the system isn't perfect, but what is the solution? You can't just fund the schools indefinitely to produce more scientists, the well acknowledged fact that their is no correlation between states education funding and states average grades in the USA is evidence of this.

The problem lies much deeper. The schools system isn't underfunded, it's under performing.

 

My solution would be to hit the root cause of why certain children neglect their oppotunities. Firstly, if they didn't have such a luxurious life for doing nothing then it would encourage them to have a work based life contributing to society and to the economy. I could actually fund it, take the illegal attack on Islam in the middle east. The Iraq war costing billions could be pumped over time into the schools system. Why should we be spending billions in order to sort out a mess caused by others? Charity starts at home and we have no right to go to other countries and try to tell them and enforce western ideas on their country.

It's underperforming because we aren't taking on the best of individuals. Teaching is something that has an oversaturation and we should pick from the best....in order to produce the best.



Around the Network
Khuutra on 01 May 2010
Kantor said:
So,

a) He's not forcing anybody to leave, he's PAYING them to leave

b) He didn't actually say the words "white British" because that would be racist and illegal. He said non-indigenous British.

Honestly, I think people hate the BNP just for the sake of having somebody to hate. Yes, they have no idea how to run the country, they'll never win, they can't finance this, and they're CLEARLY racist, but it's not like they're going to "hang all of the black people" (as a friend of mine once told me).

But you do not contend that the policy isn't racist, I should hope.



Kantor on 01 May 2010
Khuutra said:
Kantor said:
So,

a) He's not forcing anybody to leave, he's PAYING them to leave

b) He didn't actually say the words "white British" because that would be racist and illegal. He said non-indigenous British.

Honestly, I think people hate the BNP just for the sake of having somebody to hate. Yes, they have no idea how to run the country, they'll never win, they can't finance this, and they're CLEARLY racist, but it's not like they're going to "hang all of the black people" (as a friend of mine once told me).

But you do not contend that the policy isn't racist, I should hope.

The party is racist; that, nobody can doubt. I fail to see, however, how that policy could be constituted as racist. If anything, it's racist against white people. If they want to leave the country, they don't get anything.

It's fuelled by racism, but it's not racist itself. There's a difference.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

highwaystar101 on 01 May 2010
Kantor said:
So,

a) He's not forcing anybody to leave, he's PAYING them to leave

b) He didn't actually say the words "white British" because that would be racist and illegal. He said non-indigenous British.

Honestly, I think people hate the BNP just for the sake of having somebody to hate. Yes, they have no idea how to run the country, they'll never win, they can't finance this, and they're CLEARLY racist, but it's not like they're going to "hang all of the black people" (as a friend of mine once told me).

a) It's not any better to offer to pay British people who are descended from immigrants to leave than to outright kick them out. It's still clearly motivated towards trying to produce a white nation. I will fight the notion that someone should be picked out and asked to leave because of their race to the death, it's just plain wrong in so many ways.

b) He said "non-white", not "white British". He did use the the words "non-white" in effect, even though he didn't directly say them. The conversation he had with the woman about the statistics he used shows that he meant white British. the conversation about paying these people to leave was a further development from this. I explained it further in an earlier post.

...

As for your last point, I don't like to invoke Godwin's law, but people thought Hitler wouldn't try and kill all the Jews.

I hate them for good reason, as do many people, even reading their policies makes me angry at them. It's stunts like this they try to pull that makes people hate them.



Khuutra on 01 May 2010
Kantor said:
Khuutra said:
Kantor said:
So,

a) He's not forcing anybody to leave, he's PAYING them to leave

b) He didn't actually say the words "white British" because that would be racist and illegal. He said non-indigenous British.

Honestly, I think people hate the BNP just for the sake of having somebody to hate. Yes, they have no idea how to run the country, they'll never win, they can't finance this, and they're CLEARLY racist, but it's not like they're going to "hang all of the black people" (as a friend of mine once told me).

But you do not contend that the policy isn't racist, I should hope.

The party is racist; that, nobody can doubt. I fail to see, however, how that policy could be constituted as racist. If anything, it's racist against white people. If they want to leave the country, they don't get anything.

It's fuelled by racism, but it's not racist itself. There's a difference.

If you see it as racist against white people, that is still racist.

And no, there really is not a difference. It's a clear message that this policy is in place to get non-ethnic-Britons to leave the country, in order to futher solidify th nationalist state of Britain. It's pretty racist!



Kantor on 01 May 2010
highwaystar101 said:
Kantor said:
So,

a) He's not forcing anybody to leave, he's PAYING them to leave

b) He didn't actually say the words "white British" because that would be racist and illegal. He said non-indigenous British.

Honestly, I think people hate the BNP just for the sake of having somebody to hate. Yes, they have no idea how to run the country, they'll never win, they can't finance this, and they're CLEARLY racist, but it's not like they're going to "hang all of the black people" (as a friend of mine once told me).

a) It's not any better to offer to pay British people who are descended from immigrants to leave than to outright kick them out. It's still clearly motivated towards trying to produce a white nation. I will fight the notion that someone should be picked out and asked to leave because of their race to the death, it's just plain wrong in so many ways.

b) He said "non-white", not "white British". He did use the the words "non-white" in effect, even though he didn't directly say them. The conversation he had with the woman about the statistics he used shows that he meant white British. the conversation about paying these people to leave was a further development from this. I explained it further in an earlier post.

...

As for your last point, I don't like to invoke Godwin's law, but people thought Hitler wouldn't try and kill all the Jews.

I hate them for good reason, as do many people, even reading their policies makes me angry at them. It's stunts like this they try to pull that makes people hate them.

a) As I said in a previous post, it's fuelled by racism, and it's the racism that angers me. This policy, however, isn't racist.

b) Didn't he say that colour was irrelevant back on Question Time? They'd be back in court if they mentioned skin colour- are you sure he said that?

And the Hitler point would be a good one, except that Britain isn't crushed by a peace treaty, the UN isn't the League of Nations, the recession wasn't the Great Depression, and we don't use proportional representation.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective