Fascists
 

Ahhhhh finally they got 'em bang to rights! A very brave journalist went under cover for 6 months infiltrated the far right fascist party BNP and used a secret camera and mike to catch many of them, including several councillors and indeed their leader Nick Griffen espousing race hate and anti Islamic propoganda. One of them gave a speech to a group of sympathetic racists in which he referred to "coloured" asylum seekers as cockroaches. Their leader Nick Griffen claimed that Islam was taking over the world primarily by raping white women.......and then the piece de la resistance, one of them, who had been questioned regarding racial violence in the riots two years ago but gotten away because his victim wasnt sure which one of the crowd had kicked him unconcious, bragged about his role in the attack, exclaiming how he felt "fucking fantastic" as he looked down and saw his shoes were covered in blood.

Brave guy to spend 6 months being their new member. At one point a particularly vicious BNP member almost caught him in a pub toilet, changing the tape in his recorder......" what ye' doin?" he asked through the toilet door....." you CIA? eh? FBI? heheheh I'm watchin you!".........

Perhaps evenmore brave than the journalist was the guy who helped him infiltrate. A fella called Andy. He'd read all the press hype about the UK being swamped with bogus asylum seekers and in a desire to do something about it, had joined the BNP..... Whilst a member he saw how they worked. He became painfully aware of the levels of deciet and subterfuge they used. The tactics they employed. He realised he had been lied to and that the stuff he'd read in the papers was the result of lies and propoganda and was dismayed .......The BNP were not a democratic party. They do not believe in the democratic process they make that quite clear in the film. They engage in guerilla tactics during election campaigns, such as putting out leaflets full of lies but not bearing any BNP insignia which could get them prosecuted or disqualified......They engaged in violent intimidation of their opponents and those who campaigned for them. In short Andy's eyes were opened.......This is where he showed his true colours. For many such an eyeopener would lead them to leave the party and close the door on that chapter of their life.....But not this guy. Instead he kept quiet, worked at his position and progressed up the chain until he was in a position to affect the party's choices on who stood for election in the various council elections. ...All the while he was acting as a mole. He had contacted the Trade Unions Council , and passed information to them as and when he was able to.....He filtered the candidates in such a way that the one's most likely to get a seat did not get selected and those most likely to right royally fuck it up did......Eventually Searchlight put the undercover journalist in touch with Andy and he assisted him in the making of the film. Given the extreme violence these people routinely engage in I think this guy deserves a damned medal. What a risk he took in order to bring to the attention of the Brtish public the nature of the sheepskin clad wolf in their midst.

Well done guys:) Hopefully the police will be able to make this stuff stick. Three of them face a possible 7 year sentence ( including the party leader, a man who had already been prosecuted for inciting racial violence and also been engaged in violent attacks himself )and one of them, the one who admitted on camera to the savage beating of an Asian man faces a potential 15 year sentence for grievous bodily harm with intent.


Undercover

This programme was shown last week. Apparently several key members of the BNP have been questioned regarding their involvement and released on bail

I thought the one going 'but I just wanna kill some fucking pakis' was the icing on the cake. I'm glad someone did it beofre they gain even a sliver of credability. You can put the thug in in a suit but he's still a thug.

Do you think it will actually make a difference to BNP supporters though? Won't they just be even more incensed and determined? The documentary has broken down the barriers of secrecy and made people like us all the more outraged, but do you think it will actually instigate change within the party and its supporters?

There are many people who have accepted the BNP change of face over the last few years. A combination of their "respectable" face and the attitude of the press and the labour party has left a lot of people believing they can be angry about immigration without it marking them as a racist. If such a thing was not enormously beneficial to the BNP in making them electable they would not have gone to such enormous trouble in making themseles appear to be non racist. They put a lot of matderial out which claims not to be racist and claims to "tell the truth" and a lot of people swallowed this. Enough people swallowed it for them to get elected to many council seats ......But many of the people who voted for them did so because they belieevd the volte face the party had done on certain issues. Many of those same people who felt comfortable vioting Nick Griffen's little bunch in would not have been comfortable voting for a 70's style NF....How do we know this? Because if they had felt comfortable voting for outright fascism thenthe BNP would not have beenn subject to massive internal division over the issue. Nick Griffen and his cadre are the modernising force within the party, they have had to fight to get their way. The party was split almost down the middle over whether to continue the fight in their usual manner or to make themselves more electable to the public by changing their face. Nick Griffen won that battle but not without a tough fight and lot's of losses. Many of the BNP did not want to put out the line that Indians are ok......many of them dont like the line that BNP is not racist. Many of them would be quite happy( as that programme showed) to return to the old days of paki bashing and zero electoral success.

Many would be happy, but that attitude was very nearly the deathknell of their movement during the 80's and Nick Griffen knows it. As long as they can pretend they are merely one more political party who happens to be tough on immigration they will gain seats in elections. The electorate however has always proved reluctant to vote in violent anti democratic revolutionary fascists. Many people who recently voted for the BNP to protect their "britishness" were also deeply opposed to Hitler and the nazi creed. You really only have to draw that connection forcefully and many of their supporters would jump ship. Certainly the proportion of their votes which came from disollusioned tory voters would be horrified by out and out fascism.

They might see this film as Britain's Fahrenheit 9/11 and discount it as propaganda. It's all in how it's edited.

Which can only be a good thing. But how can those with an anti-asylum bias be so astoundingly stupid not to realise that this issue merely touches the surface of what the BNP stands for? I don't think people are that ignorant, and BNP's PR suggesting they are not racist simply allows the supporters to appear issue-voters and cloak their inherent racism. Polarising the BNP may help it lose 'mainstream' support, but only because the underlying fascism has been revealed, not because it exists.

The thing is Cat, the BNP put out leaflets and so forth which are out and out lies. A lot of people believe these lies. I know this because I have had some people repeat back to me as fact lies which they cold only have gotten from BNP propoganda or the right wing press. Lies such as "Asylum seekers get everything. They get a house, they get a free mobile phone, more money than a native brit and a 4 grand car!"

Many of the people who are so afraid and angry about the asylum issues are afraid and agry because theyve been lied to. Those people would not necessarily feel moved to support a fascist party if they had not been fed that crock first. Andy , the fellow who acted as a mole for 2 years discovered the extent of their deception and also their violence. He wasmoved to do something about it. This was a man who was so angered and fearful over asylum issues that he joined the party. If he can have his eyes opened and withdraw support for theiur views why not others? Others less involved, people who felt that the BNP were merely a very right wing party who werent afraid to tell the truth......Many people who voted BNP only did so because of their new respectabole, electable face. We know this because we know how unsuccessful the old outright fascist party did in the past. You can measure the success of the BNP alongside the reforms Griffen instituted.

Yes. I have heard many such things repeated back to me. Think we all need to be educated about asylum seekers. It is ignorance that breeds fear, and it is this fear the BNP plays on. A brave and vital job by the journalists.

And in the same week, we see footage of asylum seekers rioting in a - UK-taxpayer-funded - facility in England, while awaiting the processing of their application. They attack UK police, and destroy UK property (property which I, as a taxpayer, have helped purchase) on UK soil. And still we'll process their applications and accept some of them.

I can't help but feel that half the anti-asylum sentiment in the UK would evaporate if a little more visible justice was done. In the case of people like this, why do we not simply send them back to whatever oppressive state they came from and let them take their chances. Clearly they're not interested in living by the laws of this country, and they're not interested in being "good citizens" - so why do we seemingly turn a blind eye to the fact that we've got more than enough undesirable criminal elements already, and send them packing?

If we made the process more transparent, perhaps people wouldn't feel so badly done by and the BNP's support would be significantly less strong.

But British tourists do just that on holiday in every country in the world! Should you be refused an Australian visa because your mates got a bit drunk and rowdy one night in Sydney? UK citizens do more damage to their own country than any battered asylum seeker.

I agree that any action needs to be transparent - people are so ill-informed. Of course they could make the effort to find out for themselves. but there is no engagement with any political aspect in this country, so it's no surprise political opinion is constructed by soundbite threats and images.

No, but equally after that incident should my mates be entitled to the protection of the Australian government if they think the UK govt is persecuting them?

Depends on the severity. If they were at risk of torture in this country for expressing anti-government sentiment and their destructive behaviour abroad was merely a reaction to their frustration, then of course they should be offered protection. It is only the 'bogus' seekers that should be sent back, but I think the actual quantity of such refugees is largely overplayed. Britain can (contrary to popular opinion) and should sustain the reintroduction of persecuted individuals into civilised society. And yes we can afford them. Britain is the highest paid country in the world.

And the ones who demonstrate a strong probability of spending the next 15 years of their life in and out of jail at the UK taxpayer's expense.

These guys are waiting for their asylum applications to be approved. They ought to be on their very best behaviour, EVER. If rioting is that, then I don't see why we want them... why not spend the time and resources we'd invest in them into people who behave appropriately instead?

From today's Independent:

(quoting Nick Griffin) "The programme has given us a terrific boost. We've had thousands of calls from people and we've had loads of new members as a result."

I would just point out that the treatment of Asylum Seekers who have reached the end of their appeal process and are due to be repatriated is appalling. The security personnel are unsympathetic bordering on abusive. The conditions within the ariport based centres are shabby, there is no natural sunlight, no windows, people are oftne inthere for many months, those that have been there a shorter span are often shunted from centre to centre across the country and contacting them ( a necezssity for their legal representatives etc) is made deliberately difficult. On top of that the vast majority of the people held in those centres are not in fact bogus asylum seekers who are beiung sent back but other people who should be helped and welcmoed who are instead just dragged off into custody.

My mother works with refugees and asylum seekers. Due to an administration cockup involving a case of mistaken identity one of her colleagues , who happens to be an asylum seeker himself and who was awaiting the results of his appeal having done everything that was asked of him, along with his sister who had just been given permission to seek employment ( asylum seekers have no right to work for a long time) were both arrested. Five in n nthe morning the police arrived at their house and arrested them both, slapped em in cuffs and then held them for several days in a police cell. Having tried to explain that he has every right to be in the country and having provided paper work and testimonial evidence to back him up they then proceeded to shunt him around to 6 different centres. They held him for 21 days and his sister for 15. Despite the fact that there were people in touch with the Home Office from week one it still took three weeks to get him out....Now that he is out he has to report to a police station 20 miles away twice weekly with a sign on time of 9 am, which for someone relying on public transport takes hours.

In the three weeks they held him he was subjected to humiliating medical procedures and checks, was cuffed evey time he was moved, and lost about 2 stone in weight. He had stopped shaving and showering because the showers were so filthy and only had cold water, and besides he had sunk into a deep depression. This was a lad who had been srupulously clean prior to this.

This is the story of a lad and a girl who both have excellent English, friends amongst various useful organisations and the money to hire a half decent solicitors firm to act on his behalf. What chance the majority of the inmates many of whom speak no english and have no idea how to access legal aid. The people in those centres are usually the most tragic and bedraggled of the lot. The people most in need of our help and they are instead treated like criminals and thrown into a prisonlike environment with no windows and helicopters overhead 24 hours a day. Given the oppression some of them have fled this cannot be a kind thing to do.

Whilst in custody Imran sank into a depression and the advice he was given by those in whose care he languished was "if you have a problem, talk to the walls, they might listen"

So.....a desperate group of people get thrown togeter iinto a desperate situation, having escaped God knows what they are treated like the scum of the earth , persona non grata.....Poor bastards I dont blame em one bit. Maybe if the people taking care of them had thought to treat them as people instead of a contagion to be cured we wouldnt have such a response.

When he tried to complain about the cuffs he was told, "what do you expect? you're illegal"

He was freed a few days ago very quietly. Just one day someone came in and said "right you can go". Thats it.No redress. No apology for having made such a mess of things and holding for no good reason someone who had every right to be where he was.

It's interesting to see your equivalent of our illegal alien discussions ... funny, though, that in Britain (and other parts of europe) you give these lawbreakers (semantically, anyway) automatic justification because they are seeking asylum from some (presumably) oppressive system or somethingoranother.

i live in arizona so i get to deal with the ramifications of the illegal alien debate all day long. i'm not sure if the UK's asylum seeker is the same thing as an illegal alien, but if it is, damn... maybe we should ship our illegals over to the UK if you welcome them. because we sure as hell don't want them here. (that is not a racial statement. i don't want the illegal canadians, etc here anymore than i want the illegal mexicans.)

I think you should be allowed to set up at the border and pick 'em off as they try to cross. And yes, the brits are welcome to ours ... problem is that if they got our kinds of numbers of illegals (from all over the world, incidentally) the British Isles would become the new Atlantis from the weight of the population suddenly added (please note, previous statment is hyperbole. I know that GB would not sink into the sea under these circumstances, much as she may want to).

you know, some ranchers did post "no trespassing" signs and said they were going to pick them off, but i haven't heard too much since then. i know some activist group is attempting to sue because they were banned from placing water aid stations in the desert for the border crossers.

and in further news another group representing the families of 14 aliens who died in the desert from heat exhaustion a few years ago is suing the state for $47million because we didn't have water aid stations in place, our border agents made crossing difficult so the dead folks were "forced" to cross in a very dangerous area. if that isn't a load of shit i don't know what is.

on top of that - mexico's new border control guy, supports eliminating the border.

I think maybe you'd get along with the BNP , they want to shoot pakis you want to take potshots at the poorest most hopeless people who straggle across your borders in the hope of a better life. What a grotesque parody of humanity.

no i don't want to shoot poor hopeless people. i want to stay in their own country and work from within to reform it. if they are unwilling or unable to do so, i want them to stand in line and try to gain entrance legally. what i do not want is for them to cross the border, have children who are instant citizens, have access to my tax dollars in the form of foodstamps, medical care, etc... then because they are illegal they take jobs at a lower rate of pay than required by law, driving down everyone's wages, not to mention that they send, on average 40% of that money south of the border, which doesn't help our economy. then lets remember the cost of dealing with the drug trade running back and forth, along with the coyotes who scam their money, then dump them in my community...
so dana - until you see the actual consequences of large scale illegal immigration - take your judegment and bugger off.

You think the UK hasn't seen the impact of large scale immigration?
Get a clue.

NumbersUSA

Investors Business Daily, Feb 4th, 2004

and really, the numbers don't matter. they are Illegal aliens. they entered illegally, they broke the law so pardon me if i don't endorse the behavior

I'm really amazed at the number of apparent native americans, and native British people posting here.

Because obviously you all didn't immigrate into the countries you currently live in...right?

Right?

i've heard the argument before.
we're not talking about closing borders so no one else can get in. most of our ancestors did come here under whatever legal system was in place at the time. the US that existed 2,3 or more generations ago could sustain larger numbers of immigrants with the type of work that was available. farming was still an extremely labor intensive endeavor, factories were abundant, land was plentiful and cheap.

What are you saying, labourers per unit area is greater with farming than it is with, say, the IT industry?

Or did I miss your point?

Because somehow I think that working 12 people on 200 acres of land is a little less efficient than, say, a modern internet firm with 100 employees and almost no overhead.

I love your argument, that the USA was more "ripe for immigration" than it is now.

Shows me the type of fact-checking I can expect from you.

no, but thanks for ignoring the biggest fact. we are not talking about stopping immigration. we are talking about ILLEGAL immigration.

but just to answer quickly - how many illegal aliens show up and are prepared to go to work in an IT dept.? or anywhere in the business world for that matter? no - even proponents of throwing open the borders state that the vast majority of illegals will work in low income, labor intensive positions. of course, i can check those facts by taking a brief stroll through the area here.

I did see a fairly well respected study that pointed out that immigrant workers, legal and illegal were responsable for an average 2.5% wage retardation in the US over the last 20 years.

How many are allowed to work those jobs?

Didn't Dana just state a few posts ago that it takes forever before they're ALLOWED to seek work?

And you wonder why they take low income jobs at less than minimum wage. It's the only way they can eat, man.

And for a country that can produce edible panties, The Simple Life, a microwave with the Internet, an SUV culture, and Wal-Mart, I think it's our duty to take on a few of the "illegal aliens" from countries we've been fucking over with dirt cheap labour and such for the past bunch of decades.

Americans are a culture that loves to bitch when their precious way of life is tampered with.

Explain to me exactly how illegal aliens have made your life hell, moron. Explain why you are suffering as a human being, due to them.

edit: that was pretty harsh. I'll be more rational now, but I stand by my opinions, i'm just having a shitty day.

Found the source for that:
Here
I've read a few by this guy, seems to produce some of the better recent work on the labour market.

Didn't Dana just state a few posts ago that it takes forever before they're ALLOWED to seek work?

Dana lives in England. Totally different situation over there.

And you wonder why they take low income jobs at less than minimum wage. It's the only way they can eat, man.

Here's the problem--they don't pay any taxes on that low-income job. So their "take home" pay is comparable to a citizen making higher wages. There are plenty of LEGAL immigrants who pay taxes and work to become US citizens and don't attempt to get free healthcare, foodstamps, and welfare. The ones who are a drain are the ones who willfully avoid detection, can make $8 an hour (the going rate at the day laborer site here in my city)--UNTAXED, which comes out to more like the take-home of a $10/hour job--then take their wife to the hospital to have their baby for free, who then attends public school for free.

jag - i haven't seen any specific number that i'm willing to place much credibility into just because of the difficulty in figuring something like that out. i think it is fairly obvious that if you have large numbers of people working for $3-5/hour cash under the table that would have a negative impact on wages as you move up the scale.

more important that the wage degradation though is the amount of money spent on illegals once they are here. if they are caught there are legal costs. if they are ill they are treated with tax payer money, if they have a child, the child is a citizen and can qualify for food stamps, etc...

don't misunderstand, i don't think these are bad people who are worthy of death. but if they can't get here legally, then they shouldn't be here.

It is difficult to work out, there is full methadology and all the gory details in the PDF.
Beyond that i'm staying out of this one.

The one internet company I saw firsthand was about 50% illegal aliens being paid in consumer electronics and housing.

Probably not a representative sample, though.

well, right until then, this was just a discussion. so fuck you, bitch.

how does it affect my life? well as i said, i live in a state that sees a large volume of alien trafficking. we've had shootouts on our roads in rush hour. an average of one "safe house" busted/ week containing from 50-254 illegals in bad health from living in unsanitary conditions - who then need medical treatment, LE screening to check for records, a place to stay, then eventually they are released back at the border not to be seen until the next time they cross. then you look at the fact that they can go to the hospital get treatment, and who pays for it? taxpayers, that is who. they get welfare benefits for their kids, etc. and they send a large amount (some studies say 40%) of their income south of the border. our government offices are required to have spanish speaking employees. it is not uncommon to see in the news that an illegal was involved in a traffic accident and then they just run, because they have no auto insurance... those are a few ways that illegals impact my life.

ps. if you will lay off the name calling, so will i.

So what you are saying is that they have affected your life by being so poor and unhappy as to require your society's help. What villains. I think you should just sit on the borders and take em out one by one.

......Or you could make it easier for them to find legal channels into the country, allow them the rights which come with that (including the right to a driving licence and the insurance which that opens up) and see how many of them add to your economy in a positive way. I am willing to wager the vast majority , if given a leg up would enrich your country not impoverish it. They come oftne from the poorest regions of their own country, seeking to improve their lives and their childrens'......I cannot see that as a crime. The fact that it is criminal, to me points to an overly restrictive immigration policy. The law should be altered to make it easier for people who are in that situation to enter legally. These are precisely the people a society should want. These are people who truly understand the poverty trap and who would likely work their fingers to the knucklebones to build a better life......In reality many of them are already working hard and long to scrape by in squalor with no tax paid......If they were able to gain legal status they'd be less vulnerable to abuse at the hands of unscrupulous employers and would be contributors to the economy through their paid tax and consumer spending.

dana - i don't feel the need to take care of everyone in the world. my family is my responsibility and i will try to help the person to the right and left of me as much as i can.
if they would quit abandoning their own country and work to reform from within they could go far, instead they choose to take the easy way out and go someplace where generations have worked hard to achieve the standard of living that we have. we have our own problems, we don't need to import more.

Not everyone is resourced or able to work for a country's reform. How much affect do you think you could have on the White house? on local government even? What if the region you lived in was so dirt poor that there was no local economy to engage in? How do you ever get past the daily struggle of subsistence living and find time to engage in the powerplays needed to make significant changes in a country?

How far to the left or right do you look before you say these people are nothing to me, I will not give them succour?

"instead they choose to take the easy way out"

oh man. entering the USA as an illegal alien and trying to survive is the easy way out.

Dude, tell me you don't actually believe that.

where do you live CB? is it in a border state? how much interaction do you have with illegals? how much time have you spent in mexico?

i'm in arizona, it is a border state, i have a lot of interaction with illegals, and i have spent a lot of time in mexico...

just curious if you want to keep pulling your ideas out of books and hearsay or do you actually have first hand experience in the area?

because, yes, coming to the states is the easy way out. it is pathetically easy to get over here, get a fake id, get a job, and even living on minimum wage, live a better life than they left. if they stayed it wouldn't be nearly so easy - they would have to fight the forces that be to create a better country to pass onto their kids.

*Sighs*
It never ceases to amaze me. People who can walk in with little difficulty are welcomed with open arms, but the ones who have risked all that they are and all that they have and fought tooth and nail to get into a country often with the sole intention of being successful are treated like pondlife. How many stories are there in the American psyche of immigrants arriving in the States with a dollar in their pocket and then turning that dollar into a business empire across 30 years?....These are the ones who have fought to get there, who will be most loyal and most grateful and will contribute more thna they ever take if only they are given a welcome instead of being blocked from legal channels and then driven out when they still fought to get in

Maybe you find it easier to see these people as some sort of infestation because you have reduced them to mere "illegals"

And y'know, people say they dont want illegal immigrants coming from Canad either, but then.......a canadian citizen aiming to gain access to teh states and a work permit is way less likely to be refused than is a mexican

Nor I think would an illegal immigrant from Canada ( as long as he wasnt dark skinned in any way) be treated with the same disdain by the authorities whne they are caught.

It's racism. You just feel safe with it because it's seemingly based purely on legality of status but in reality is based on a gut instinct response to people you see as alien to yourself.

and again - i hope you get to stay in your fairy tale world. it just isn't that way. i hold no malice to the people. if they can get here legally, then they are welcomed with open arms.

here is one that i bet you won't understand. the mexican immigrants who did get here legally hate the illegals more than i can describe. the ones with the greatest loyalty to the country are the ones who followed the laws and gained there place here lawfully. the others have jumped the system and are breaking the law. end of story. they are breaking the law.

have you ever met me? don't even begin to tread on this ground without knowing me or my family, there may be a few surprises for you, honey.

how much experience do you have here? as far as i can tell all of your info is based on heresay or out of a book. this is life here. i don't know what the situation is with your asylum seekers, so i don't pretend to pass some sort of judgement. i know this situation here intimately and i will stand on what i have said. so take your race card and shove it, you have no right to play it here.

No you're right, I know nothing about you and i know little about your country other than the little i have gleaned from living in an American led world and all that that implies.

Your words however bear an enormous resemblance to the words of my own anti immigrant countrymen. Scratch the surface of what seems like anti illegality and I usually find a great ugly blob of racism. If I had changed a few locations in your post and changed 2illegals" to "bogus asylum seekers" it could have come form the mouth of a British racist , so do excuse my error. Maybe if I re read your words with an American accent it will sound less bigotted

or if you stepped outside of yourself to view your own arrogant attitude. either one, maybe.

hell of a way to answer when i asked what your experience with the situation was though...
normally it should go something like 1) Q: 2) A: , your method of 1) Q: 2) Insult:
works pretty well too i suppose.

*nods* ok...maybe I overreacted. I have a lot of contact with asylum seekers in the UK, most of whom are categorised unfairly as bogus ....and many of whom who are genuine yet are still returned home often to deadly situations despite that supposedly being illegal.....There are also a lot of people who use the asylum system because it is sooooo hard to get a work permit for britain unless you happen to come from a desirable country ( like America, or Australia) ....Mostly they wold come in legally if they had been able to. Thats my experience of people who are attempting to emigrate to a better life. To seetheir struggles and to know how hard their lives often are and then see them abused and shunned is something which makes me very very angry and upset.

I understand you would have nothing against them if they found a legal channel in. Perhaps then you arent racist . But the system which makes it so difficult for Mexicans to get in legaly and yet so easy for say....me.....has a racist agenda imo. The trouble is by closing all the legal doors in their faces the system has not stifled their need or desire to escape their grinding poverty trap which allows them no rookm for manouvre in anything let alone changing their country.....These are desperate people usually and so having been denied legal access they still try their chances....If the door had not been slammed in their face you would not be disdainful of them.

Man, that was a tough read, Jag. :eek: I'm more concerned with the impact on social services and crime, than the labor market. Especially youth (gang) crime. :yelsick:

here is the thing Dana. it isn't easy for you to get here on a permanent basis either. i've got 2 canadian friends that ahve been trying to get green cards for 4 years. they would be just as wrong to illegally enter and stay as a mexican would.

it is not racist to say that someone who has a needed work skill gains access before someone with skills that are in less demand. those are the facts of life. the US is not just a big charity, if a person is not adding something substantive to the society, why should we import them. we have enough unemployed and even more underemployed americans.

but this discussion was not about legal imm. it is about those that choose to break the law and cross the border with no right to do so. Bruce said he isn't as concerned about the labor market as he is the social services and criminal aspects. they are all one in the same. they are here illegally so they don't have the ability to demand higher wages or benefits. when push comes to shove, they break other laws (theft, drugs, etc...) or they tap into the welfare system.

"it is not racist to say that someone who has a needed work skill gains access before someone with skills that are in less demand. those are the facts of life"

It may not seem racist, it may indeed not be racist ....However it is very much slewed in favour of economies which are able to provide enough opportunities for their citizens as to make them easily employable.....Since the countries which are most likely to provide immigrants with suitable working skills are generally the affluent nations, most of which are predominatly white .....Consequently there is a racist effect if not a racist intent to that system.

Dana. as of midnight tonight you are the sole ruler of Danatown, Inc. it is your town to do with as you wish, but there will be no outside source of support. you start with 50 people in your town and you can let 5 new people in every month. on the first month as the applicants for entry show up you review their resume (you don't meet them face to face, because race should play no part of your decision.)

on your list you see:

11 computer programmers
2 architects
3 lawyers
2 doctors
1 banker
7 teachers
3 athletes
14 landscapers
3 roadworkers
16 construction workers
1 interior designer
4 farmers
6 auto mechanics
3 scientists
1 lumberjim
x
x
x
x
x

you are allowed to pick 5 for the month. next month you will be handed another list. who will you choose to enter this month?

An interesting proposition however, America is not operating at her limits on immigration. America could if it chose to support all it's citizens with social security safety nets and free medical treatment and still afford to do the same for the number of immigrants which pass across it's borders, illegally or legally.

Having said that ....Looking at that list? I would choose 3 or 4 who were well skilled becuse they'll be able to slot right in and be useful from the start and then 1 or 2 who werent, because if they are trained and supported by Danaland whilst they are getting on their feet there's a strong possibility that they will be dedicated citizens whose children will do me proud :P

i said nothing of being at your limits. i am talking about responsible growth. or if you prefer a quota system.

please just answer the question.

and by the way - no we can't support everyone with ss nets and free med treatment. do you have any idea what the average person pays in taxes already???

I suspect that the poor pay too much and the wealthy too little. You could increase your country's revenues and resources by taxing the wealthy to the same proportion of their incomes that the workingclass pay. As it stands the wealthy I suspect pay a much smaller per centage of their overal income in tax.

exactly, and that is what america does right now. not everyone who is granted access through legal channels is highly skilled. it's nice to see that you acknowledge that you must be choosy and welcome in more individuals who have something to offer immediately.

America could if it chose to support all it's citizens with social security safety nets and free medical treatment and still afford to do the same for the number of immigrants which pass across it's borders, illegally or legally

Sounds like you've got a budget all worked out. How, pray tell, could America do that? Oh right, you're a socialist. You work in theory, not in practice.

I dont agree that being choosy is a necessity . It is a necessity in the setup you just gave me.....But that isnt how it is in reality. The idea that America cannot afford or sustain that level of immigration is I think disengenuous. It's a huge country and the wealthiest on planet earth

"Sounds like you've got a budget all worked out. How, pray tell, could America do that? Oh right, you're a socialist. You work in theory, not in practice."
It's easy , you justhave to make the leap and decide that you will tailor your tax policy to suit your country's needs and not the pockets of your elite

I suspect that the poor pay too much and the wealthy too little. You could increase your country's revenues and resources by taxing the wealthy to the same proportion of their incomes that the workingclass pay. As it stands the wealthy I suspect pay a much smaller per centage of their overal income in tax.

You're wrong. The lowest income brackets pay zero taxes. As you move up the ladder, you start to pay a higher percentage of your income. The standard argument goes that the actual DOLLAR AMOUNTS are more important to the lower-income people--because the percentages are staggered. At least you admit you only suspect how it works over here before you start telling us how to fix it.

What is your highest tax bracket? That is to say, what percentage of their income do they pay in tax?

As an aside, the tax burden on the poor is not just the income tax. In most countries ( including Britain) the poor get hit by flat taxes to a greater extent than the wealthy, that is it represents a greater proportion of their income than it does for the wealthy

Also.....if a country makes proper provsion for it's unemployed or disadvantaged ( paid for by a small raise in the top levels of tax ) it usually pays dividends later. If people are afforded a small income to assist them they spend that income in shops rather than them surviving on a combination of food stamps and crime and disappearing off into the grey economy which is beyond the taxation system and therefore leads to a net loss for the economy. If people are given adequate assistance they are less likely to drift into debilitating depressions and/or dig themselves a hole they cant get out of and are therefore more likely to become fully contributing members of society at a later stage, thereby more than covering the costs incurred in assiting them. They are less likely to fail and therefore more likely to be able to raise their children in such a way that their children may take full advantage of the many opportunities their country can offer them, thereby contributing to their society to such a level as to offset the costs of their earlier care.

I do think it makes very little economic sense to allow large numbers of the populace drift into extreme poverty and crime and then spend a small fortune housing them in prisons and further alienating them from the society to which they could have been contributing, had they been given enough support during the lean times to allow them to get on their feet rather than falling into criminality out of poverty and a lack of hope or inclusion