BREXIT racism ? violent attacks up, in aeroplane rage figures.

I see Pineapple head is still waging her war against sweeping generalisations by  making sweeping generalisations about those she is in disagreement with.

Hysterical hypocrisy by these lefty-liberal-regressives.

Yes, good post Roger.

which bit do you disagree with lfc?

Zen with his "you must be one of them" schtick. Now with added sexism. Great stuff. And never ever boring. Never.

Referring to you as "her" is sexist Pineapple head?

How many timeshare you been sexist by referring to a follow forumite as "he"?

More hysterical hypocrisy from a lefty-liberal-regressive.

Let's put it this way p&p, I suggest you read Rogers post, read it a few times it is subtle and interesting , read it and try and understand it

omg, you're truly thick. I mean new-level thick. Good day, sir.

How many times *have* you been sexist by referring to a follow forumite as "he"?

Pineapple head tut tut..

Losing control and being abusive to lfc is not going to win you any arguments is it dear?

lfc - I've read it. I agree with a lot of it, until he dragged my name into it and called me outdated. Wouldn't call it subtle though. Subtle would be me calling zen among the top 5 most intelligent posters on this thread this morning. Pretty clear language frankly, reckon my little girl could understand that easily enough to be honest. (Not a criticism of your writing rodge, if anything the opposite). If you read my post lfc I essentially state the same (need for a proper debate, but point out there's a difference between racial abuse and a grown up discussion about immigration).

So again, which bits in my post do you disagree with?

zen, I was calling you thick. (sad face at having to point that out). Now, back to the grown ups.

For the love of God!

rogerthebutler  • September 29, 2016 11:33 AM BST 


If there has been a spike in Hate Crimes and if it has been as a result of Brexit (and because something happens subsequently it doesn't happen consequently) then thankfully we have laws and punishment to deal with that sort of thing.

Anyone found guilty of perpetrating hate crime - genuine hate crime that hurts, intimidates or threatens individuals based on race, colour, gender, sexuality etc - should be dealt with by these laws which are the result of us living in an advanced and civilised society and I have no problem with that.

People hiding behind pretend outrage and pseudo-fear, using these laws to shut down freedom of expression can go fk themselves.

and

rogerthebutler  • September 29, 2016 3:44 PM BST 


So the reason for the spike is that people have suddenly cottoned on that being called p@ki etc or told to f*ck off back home is now a crime. Before June, they all just thought it was perfectly normal and wished their abuser good day did they?

No

There are several reasons I can think of:

1.  Using some fkd logic, boneheads think that Brexit has legitimised their poisonous racism leading to a rise in what I would term 'true' hate crimes / attacks. It would appear this is the category you are attributing all the reported increase into.

2.  'Remainder' bodies, with a vested interest in decrying all things Brexit, have set up groups encouraging the reporting of hate crimes, with hate crimes being vaguely defined. Clearly, being called 'P@ki' or told to 'fk off back home' would genrally (though context is everything) be reported, quite correctly. However, feeling vaguely uneasy about someone questioning why you are sending money back home instead of spending it in the community that is supporting you is a legitimate question, not a hate crime.

3.  Some people like to be victims and now, with the Police having to record the reporting of  perception of a hate crime as a legitimate hate crime, are more than prepared to do so.

Questions.....possible explanations for the spike other than going 'Ha! Brexit...{hic...drool} and anyone who disagrees is a racist!'....nuances and context, or in otherwords, a contribution to a grown up debate about the relationship between Brexit (a good thing), attacks on ethnic mnoroties (a reprehensible thing for which we have laws which should be invoked and harshly too) and manufactured outrage ( a pathetic, insidious and ultimately counter-productive thing).

I really can't add anything further to this thread, now, so for that reason - I'm out.

UK stance on Brexit ‘threatens free travel area’
   
Ireland’s leading expert on Brexit said Britain’s new hardline stance on exiting the EU is the worst possible outcome for Ireland which calls into question the future of the Common Travel Area between the two countries.
Edgar Morgenroth, associate research professor at the Economic and Social Research Institute and an adviser to the Government on Brexit, said prime minister Theresa May’s weekend declaration favouring a so-called hard Brexit has realised his worst fears over the potential hard Irish border in trade and people between the North and the south. “My worst fears have been realised. It is somewhat staggering what they are doing in the UK,” he told the Irish Examiner.

“This hard Brexit line by London potentially imperils the Common Travel Area. The British can decide to allow Irish people to travel to the UK. They can do what they want. But we can’t reciprocate under the EU rules. On the key issues, there are no bilaterals here. It is always the 27 EU countries and the UK. In public opinion, I hear people saying that they will see sense. I am not so sure. They have made up their minds,” he said.
The expert’s comments come as Taoiseach Enda Kenny prepares to present a briefing paper on the implications to Cabinet today.

However, Mr Morgenroth believes a soft border between north and south “is a bit out of reach now” because he believes it is incompatible with prime minister May’s plans. “There is a lot of deviousness happening in their public statements from the British side, saying that we want to maintain a soft border and then doing the opposite. It is not consistent. They are trying to portray the situation in a different way than it really is,” he said. Mr Morgenroth said London is trying to pretend it’s the EU’s fault even though the British side is creating problems. “That is what they have been playing at in preparing the field to blame the EU for their actions.”

Separately, Chartered Accountants Ireland has called on policy-makers to secure tariff-free trading, free movement of people, and a free agri-food trade agreement between the two countries. Sterling yesterday fell sharply, sharpening the pain for Irish firms selling across the Irish Sea. Meanwhile, the erection of a more visible border between the North and South is a strong possibility once Britain’s divorce from the EU is complete, Foreign Affairs Minister Charlie Flanagan has said. Education Minister Richard Bruton has also warned that there can be no place for “bad politics” or “nationalist policies” in debate around Brexit.

We're not though are we. Not judged by any sane rationale or judged against many other countries in the world and their immigration policies and then the toleration of racial and ethnic minorities who settle in those countries.

It's just a handy, cumbersome stick to beat anyone who questions mass, unfettered immigration and to silence any debate on this issue. Or at least it used to be. Perhaps Brexit has finally signalled the UK's ability to have a grown up discussion about immigration and P&P's thoughts on this are just the predictable outdated response to anyone who dares question the old orthodoxy on this issue.

germany before world war 2...all over again.

maybe we arent going to try to take over the world but with relaxing laws on war crimes we are heading int he wrong direction as a country...and yes we are turning into an intolerant country..defo down the fascist route.

It's a really tricky subject.

Thta's correct pp and absolutely why we should be able to have grown up debates abut the impact of mass immigration without being accused of racism to stifle comment. The great and the good should also appreciate that the population at large is composed of a wide range of intellectual levels and even the old and poorest within society are entitled to a voice without being ridiculed to shut them up because the "gramatical fashion" has changed.

in a way i agree treetop.

but people must have to understand all angles to be able to have a sensible debate.

treetop, I agree. Trust me, I don't just bandy the word racist about. But if you read back, ron was and consistently has posted pretty chuffing racist stuff on this site. Simple as that. And if he does that, then I'll call him out on it. I can sit and discuss cogent points and can argue against them, but sometimes when someone is just so ignorant and stupid you just have to cut to the chase and move on to more decent people.

the word racist has been thrown around so easily in this country for the past 30 years that many people don't give a flying f any more, anyone is free to call me a racist it is water off a duck's back now.

You've called me racist a few times tbf pp. I don't think wanting to stop unlimited immigration from Europe-or anywhere else- nor the fact that I think Islam is dangerous and dislikable makes me one, but still you use it. We differ in opinion, but only one of us behaves a bit like a facist sometimes and it aint me.

Apologies if I have saddo. I'll use stupid or ignorant in future. (does that make me a fascist?)

I think imposing your minority  views on all is rather facistic, yes. I'm happy to go along with what most people want.

After searching through my posts on this thread i've not come across one racist thing i've put!
Its either a personal opinion or a fact,

who made you judge & jury anyway PP to decide what classes as racist!

i might sometimes put things up as a joke that some might take as racist , but as i said its mostly
just banter.......As Sir Bernard used to say, he told jokes about everyone & everything.  all different races.

I haven't looked in the OED to see if they have changed the definition of racist, but it seems to mean whatever you like these days, especially to those need it to cover up their lack of reasonable argument on immigration or Islamic matters.

aah, banter

You're a ****ing idiot you numb nut **** , about your going to call me out on it (LOL)

Just because you married a foreigner you think it gives you some licence to accuse
people of being racist over the slightest thing.

Why should we change our ways, there's always been comedy, the way it's going they'll
be no joking which sounds like Islam to me!

Best start saying to people if you can't take a bit of banter don't go to Britain,

absolutely pathetic, as i grew up the only people you'd dare not take the p1ss out was
disabled , imo all others should think themselves lucky their able bodied human beings
& just get on with life whether your black brown white or blue

especially to those need it to cover up their lack of reasonable argument on immigration or Islamic matters.

and reading the arguments against immigration on here you think they are well balanced?


they are not ..they are one way.

whipped up by a fascist nut job.
they are extremist views...one way without taking into account the "flip" side of any argument.

brexit has given the sleeping fascists in this country a green light and their ugly heads have surfaced.

we fought these extremists during world war 2.

Rather dramatic. Too many people came to this Island in too short a period and the government were unprepared for the logistics of it. They and their successors have done nothing to expand the infrastructure and have just crammed more and more into the same space. It appears to me that forcing change too quickly on a population is not a good idea.

Good point saddo, & they are still coming relentless.

6,000 migrants saved from boats off Libyan coast in ONE DAY

.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3821395/6-000-migrants-saved-boats-Libyan-coast-ONE-DAY.html?ito=social-twitter_mailonline

Why wouldn't they come Ron, as they all say, they were invited by Merkel.

Just seen the headline from today's Times: "Firms must list foreign workers".

I've not agreed with using it before but by god that's pretty damn fascist if it comes to pass and f*cking scary. What the hell are we doing to our country?

That's the spirit PP!

one big mess

Theresa May walks into a Brexit trap

The UK prime minister announces she will trigger an exit from the EU before getting any guarantees

Gideon Rachman

Theresa May has one great advantage as a politician. She looks serious and responsible. But appearances can be deceptive. If you examine how the UK prime minister is handling Brexit, a different sort of politician emerges.

By announcing that she will start the formal negotiations for Britain to leave the EU by March 2017, the prime minister has walked into a trap. She has given away what little leverage Britain has in the negotiations — without receiving any of the assurances that she needs to achieve a successful outcome.
The announcement of the decision about when the UK will trigger Article 50 — the process by which Britain gives formal notice that it intends to leave the EU — was made in a statesmanlike fashion. But the actual content of the decision is reckless and driven by politics, rather than Britain’s national interest.
Once Mrs May triggers Article 50, she has precisely two years to negotiate a new deal with the EU. Senior civil servants have told the prime minister that it is highly unlikely that the UK will be able to negotiate both the terms of its divorce and a new trade deal with the EU within the two-year deadline. As a result, they warned the prime minister that she must have assurances on what an interim trade agreement with the EU would look like in the long period between the UK leaving the bloc and a definitive new deal being put into place.
Mrs May has chosen to ignore this advice. In doing so, she has knowingly placed Britain at a massive disadvantage in the forthcoming negotiations.
As soon as Britain triggers Article 50, the EU can simply run the clock down — knowing that the UK will be in an increasingly difficult situation, the longer the negotiations drag on without agreement. At the end of two years, Britain will be out of the EU — and would face tariffs on manufactured goods and the loss of “passporting” rights that allow financial services firms based in the City to do business across the bloc. The economic damage from this kind of “hard Brexit” would be severe, blowing a hole in the government finances as tax revenues from the City shrink, ushering in a new period of austerity.
The most ardent Brexiters claim that this is all scaremongering. Why, they ask, would the EU contemplate the restoration of tariffs when this could be damaging to its own economic interests? The Leavers can answer that question by looking in the mirror. It is clear that the main motivation of the pro-Brexit camp in Britain is political, not economic. And the same will be true of the EU side in the negotiations.
In the British case, the political goal is to restore parliamentary sovereignty and to regain control of immigration. On the EU side, the goal will be to make sure that Brexit does not lead to the unravelling of a European project that has been built up over 60 years. That will mean making sure that the UK pays a clear and heavy price for leaving the EU. As a result, both sides will accept some economic damage rather than sacrifice their political goals.
The difficulty for the UK is that the economic damage the EU will sustain is likely to be smaller and more manageable than that borne by the British side. The fact is that the EU represents a far larger market for Britain than Britain represents for the rest of Europe. Britain sends 44 per cent of its exports to the EU, while the UK takes only about 16 per cent of EU exports.
The negotiation process itself is also likely to be stacked against the UK. While the British will need a quick deal to minimise uncertainty for investors, the EU can afford to spin things out. Even if this is not a deliberate strategy on the European side, the realities of trying to secure a common position among 27 nations — and then secure ratification in all 27 countries, plus regional legislatures and the European Parliament — will be long and laborious.
Some in Britain speak blithely of relying on the rules of the World Trade Organisation after Britain has left the EU. They ignore the fact that Britain is a member of the WTO under the auspices of the EU. Creating an entirely separate British WTO membership requires another set of complex negotiations.
That is a much bigger problem for Britain than the EU, since the longer the process is dragged out, the longer Britain is likely to be suspended in a legal limbo that will discourage long-term investment. For that reason it was absolutely vital that Mrs May should get some clarity on what happens after two years of negotiations — if and when the EU and the UK have failed to reach a definitive new deal. The obvious solution would have been for Britain to remain inside the EU’s single market, but outside the EU until such time as a new deal was struck. By failing to get that assurance, the British government has severely weakened its position — even before negotiations start.
So why has Mrs May been so reckless? The short answer is politics. If the prime minister had delayed triggering Article 50 any longer she might have faced a revolt from Conservative MPs, who would have feared that she was backsliding on Brexit. By making her announcement just before the Tory party conference, she has also guaranteed herself some favourable headlines and applause in the conference hall. She may have bought herself another couple of years in 10 Downing Street. But she has also significantly increased the chances that Brexit will cause severe damage to the British economy.

Announcing "I'm offended" is basically telling the world you can't control your own emotions, so everyone else should do it for you.

apparently this ones hate crime at the very top level!

Men pelt worshippers at a mosque with BACON just before evening prayers

Piotr Czak-Zukowski, 28, and Mateusz Pawlikowski, 21, also threw rashers at the shoe rack of the Al-Rahman Mosque in Camden

.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/men-pelt-worshippers-mosque-bacon-8984499

now id put that in the banter category

Outrage will clearly be felt by many people present at that time and place.

"It is a genuine concern that, were they to be released, they would become the subject attacks or reprisals.

"For their own safety and protection, I invite this court to commit both of them to the Crown Court for sentence."

#ReligionofPeace

Muslims attacked by immigrants, a difficult one for the Guardianistas.

germany before world war 2...all over again.

maybe we arent going to try to take over the world but with relaxing laws on war crimes we are heading int he wrong direction as a country...and yes we are turning into an intolerant country..defo down the fascist route.

Do you really believe this? The UK must be one of the most multi cultural, tolerant countries in the world.

If you want to keep the UK as the UK then we don't want anymore foreigners.  But it is too late anyway

Racist

PP this guy tried debating immigration as you say your quite happy to
do...but it still didn't work out?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYsL2RbmbIQ

Pineapple head will ignore two Polish white supremacists ( only 98% of Polish are white supremacists ) who cause hate crime crime against Muslims.

Pineapple head feels sympathy for the Polish white supremacists. She is a hypocrite.

She would rather vent her spleen at those Brexiteers who just want their government to control the NUMBERS a bit better.
She will screen "RACIST" until her tits drop off.

Oct 5, 2016 -- 2:40PM, Shrewd_dude wrote:

germany before world war 2...all over again.maybe we arent going to try to take over the world but with relaxing laws on war crimes we are heading int he wrong direction as a country...and yes we are turning into an intolerant country..defo down the fascist route. Do you really believe this? The UK must be one of the most multi cultural, tolerant countries in the world.

My campaign for a Betfair 'like' button grows ever stronger!

The Political Right and outfits like Britain First are an absolute shower, consistently rejected at the ballot box and tolerated when their stupid marches come to town.

Most of us are civic nationalists, prepared to give every faith, culture, race, gender a fair crack of the whip if they are prepared to work hard, obey the law, pay their taxes and show some allegiance to the country that is providing the firmament for them to do this. Most folk still want this, abide by this idea and get on with it.

Don't be swayed by gobby minorities on either side who say different

^ I disagree with this, and don`t believe that all cultures are equal. The Western European and US culture with its ideas on freedom and democracy and reason over superstition stretching back to ancient Greece is the most important gift given to us by our forbears.

A country cannot prosper if it treats all cultures as equal, only through a form of cultural imperialism can there be progress.

Tricky one and I see where you are coming from.

It's the old 'At what point do we stop tolerance of intolerance - and become intolerant?'

I suggest that most citizens settling in the UK understand and abide by the idea that the UK is, primarily, a secular democracy, where a wide spectrum of views (religious, political, social) will be tolerated because all cultures bring something to our country i.e multi-culturalism.

I guess it's at this point we disagree in that I believe multi-culturalism (true multiculturalism) is a good thing, providing of course all citizens adhere to the belief in secular democracy trumps all.

It's when (and I still believe it is vociferous minorities) some groups don't buy into this latter point that issues arise.

Because with secular democracy comes associated belief in hard work, toleration of all, abiding by the rule of law tested over time, democracy, the will of the people, paying of taxes and at least a nod to the indiginous culture, (not in the asinine Norman Tebbit cricket test, but in an attempt to learn the native language and adopt our basic cultural idioms. When this is sidelined then the gobby extremists, aided by easy access to the Internet and therefore a mass audience, start to gain traction.

The luvvies will never admit they could be wrong with their forced integration policy. It's taken just over a year for Merkel to (partially) admit her mistake. Blair still insists he was right when he waived our right to transitional migration when the Eastern Europeans joined the EU. He is the main reason we got too many people too quickly, saying "they would have come anyway". They would indeed, but much more slowly, and we could have ensured our infrastructure grew at the same rate.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3824396/How-dare-Eurocrats-call-Britain-racist-Far-Right-s-marching-backyard-writes-DANIEL-HANNAN.html

How dare these Eurocrats call Britain racist while the Far Right's marching in their own backyard, writes DANIEL HANNAN

In France and Belgium, Jewish schools and synagogues require armed guards
Racist violence across much of Europe is now becoming almost routine
The European Commission on Racism and Intolerance says it is alarmed at the ‘intolerant political discourse in the UK'
By DANIEL HANNAN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 01:45, 6 October 2016 | UPDATED: 07:55, 6 October 2016

Across parts of Germany, running battles between immigrants and neo-Nazis are becoming so frequent that they no longer lead the news.

In France and Belgium, Jewish schools and synagogues require armed guards. In Toulouse, a mosque has been burned to the ground. In Sweden, neo-Nazi thugs warned of a ‘year of violence’ against immigrants.

Racist violence across much of Europe is now becoming almost routine.


The European Commission on Racism and Intolerance says it is alarmed at the ‘intolerant political discourse in the UK, particularly focusing on immigration’

So which country has the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe decided to accuse of ‘anti-foreigner sentiment’? You guessed it. The European Commission on Racism and Intolerance, which reports to the Council, says it is alarmed at the ‘intolerant political discourse in the UK, particularly focusing on immigration’.

Seriously? Political discourse in the UK? Let’s compare how politicians talk here with what passes unremarked in other EU states. Czech prime minister Bohuslav Sobotka says: ‘To be honest, we don’t want a large Muslim population here.’ His Slovak counterpart, Robert Fico, is just as blunt: ‘Islam has no place in Slovakia.’

In France, Nicolas Sarkozy calls Islamic dress ‘a provocation’, and promises laws against it. (And, of course, a ban on the wearing of burkas on French beaches sparked huge rows over the summer.)


In Britain, by contrast, Theresa May was cheered by her party members yesterday when she said: ‘I want us to be a country where it doesn’t matter where you were born.’

By what measure is ours an intolerant country? To be sure, we have our bigots, as every nation does. But against whom are we being so harshly judged?

Look at the strength of authoritarian, anti-immigrant parties across Europe.


In Austria, the Far-Right candidate got half the vote at the last presidential election, which is now being re-run after irregularities in the poll. In France, Marine Le Pen’s Front National leads in some national polls. In Greece, an unashamedly neo-Nazi party came third at the last election.

Nativist parties — that is, ones that argue for the rights of established inhabitants of a nation over immigrants — are polling solidly in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Sweden and many post-Communist states. Here, though, the British National Party barely registers. It has never come close to winning an MP, and currently has just two councillors.

We keep being told, usually by Remainers, that our EU referendum was ‘all about immigration’. In fact, the polls showed throughout that the top issue for Leave voters was democracy and the supremacy of the British Parliament.

If you want a referendum that really was ‘all about immigration’, look at Hungary, where 98 per cent of those who went to the polls have just voted against an EU plan to settle 1,200 refugees on their territory. The prime minister, Viktor Orban, said migrants were ‘over-running’ Hungary. In Britain, 1,200 immigrants enter the country every 30 hours!





Of course, to say that other places have a worse record than ours is hardly a knockout defence. Any racial abuse is shameful, and Britain has its share of dunderheads, just like anywhere else.

Still, be honest: does the Council of Europe’s report match your experience? Do you, in your daily life, see evidence of what the BBC has taken to calling an ‘epidemic’ of racism?

If you’re old enough to remember the Seventies or Eighties, you must have noticed the improvement in race relations.

You can measure it in any way you like: the decline in violence, the increased approval of mixed-race marriages, the rising number of multi-ethnic neighbourhoods, the success of ethnic minorities in our professions.

Ours is a tolerant, comfortable, multi-racial society, which is one of many reasons that migrants prefer to come here.

A minority of Remain supporters spent the campaign dismissing all anti-EU sentiment as ‘racist’
A minority of Remain supporters spent the campaign dismissing all anti-EU sentiment as ‘racist’

What is it based on, this idea that we are in the grip of some new xenophobia unleashed by the referendum? Much of it comes from people’s determination to see what they want. A minority of Remain supporters spent the campaign dismissing all anti-EU sentiment as ‘racist’.

By the end, they had convinced themselves, and were determined to pounce on any news item as evidence of what they took to calling on social media ‘#PostRefRacism’. Three incidents were widely reported straight after the vote as evidence of an ugly new mood: an attack on a tapas bar in South London; a demonstration in Newcastle calling for foreigners to be repatriated; and graffiti outside a Polish community centre.

It emerged that the attack on the tapas bar had, in fact, been a burglary, and that the idiots in Newcastle had been holding the same demonstration every weekend since long before the vote. As for the graffiti, no one yet knows whether it had anything to do with the referendum.

That, though, hasn’t stopped some irreconcilables from continuing to use all three episodes as evidence of what they want to believe. They are thrown at me several times a day by pro-EU campaigners who accuse me of complicity in violence for playing a leading role in the Leave campaign.

It’s nothing new. Two years ago, an Italian constituent of mine, a waiter, was horribly murdered in Kent. Immediately, his death was blamed on Eurosceptics. The leader of the Socialist MEPs’ group said that he was a victim of David Cameron’s anti-EU rhetoric. Not long afterwards, it emerged that the killers were a Lithuanian gang.


Some of the ‘reports’ of hate crime after the Brexit vote appear to have been people letting off steam after the vote, including some complaining about Nigel Farage (above)
Some of the ‘reports’ of hate crime after the Brexit vote appear to have been people letting off steam after the vote, including some complaining about Nigel Farage (above)

Did the Socialist leader apologise to David Cameron? Did he admit that, now he had the full facts, he could see that the incident made a case for stronger controls on who entered the country from the EU, rather than blaming racist Britons?

Of course not. People are very good at fitting facts into their existing prejudices.

One such ‘fact’, endlessly quoted, is that hate crimes have ‘risen by 57 per cent’ since the referendum. A moment’s reflection tells us that this figure is implausible and, sure enough, it turns out to be ludicrously misleading.

The police have a website that encourages people to report hate crimes. In the first four days after the vote, 85 people logged such incidents, up from 54 people in the corresponding period the previous month. The numbers had been rising for some time, because the website was more widely advertised. As yet, there has been no increase in the number of incidents that have triggered prosecutions.

Some of the ‘reports’ appear to have been people letting off steam after the vote, including some complaining about Nigel Farage. Yet, under police guidelines, all such reports have to be recorded as ‘hate crime’ incidents.

The police press release from which the 57 per cent figure was taken was, in fairness, quite clear about what it meant: ‘This should not be read as a national increase in hate crime of 57 per cent but an increase in reporting through one mechanism.’

People of every background campaigned on both sides in the referendum, but many seen determined to tell us that we are a narrow, nasty, prejudiced nation
People of every background campaigned on both sides in the referendum, but many seen determined to tell us that we are a narrow, nasty, prejudiced nation

In other words, an extra 31 people during the 96 hours after the vote complained to police, triggering no extra prosecutions. And yet that 57 per cent figure has assumed almost canonical force among Remoaners. Simply to question it is taken as evidence that you are a racist yourself.

People of every background campaigned on both sides in the referendum. There were several Leave organisations run by Brits of Commonwealth background: Bangladeshis for Britain, Africans for Britain, Sikhs for Britain and so on. We also had support from people of Continental European origins who had come to see the EU as a racket.

Such people don’t fit the anti-Brexit, pro-Brussels narrative. Many broadcasters, in particular, are determined to tell us that we are a narrow, nasty, prejudiced nation — and won’t be distracted by inconvenient facts.

Here, though, is the most inconvenient fact of all. The rise of actual bigotry in Europe is being exacerbated by two EU policies: the euro, which has caused needless poverty and unemployment, especially among southern European nations who have found themselves growing ever closer to the breadline; and the Schengen agreement on open borders, which has left countries unable to regulate migratory flows.

This has meant that the hundreds of thousands arriving in Europe from Africa and the Middle East have to a large degree been able to travel northwards and westwards unhindered.

So, far from soothing national antagonisms, it is Brussels that is stoking them. When we leave, we shall be a more global, more outward-looking and, yes, more tolerant country.

Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP. His book What Next will be published next month by Head of Zeus.

You'll not get the liberals to read all that, they deal in soundbites, not detailed reasoning.

Having more and more foreigners into the country will invite more problems. There is one particular cult already deeply embedded into the system that is going to cause the most amazing strife.  They have already started.

German Police Tell Women 'Wear Sneakers' to Outrun Migrant Rapists


.
https://www.informationliberation.com/?id=55471

Here, though, is the most inconvenient fact of all. The rise of actual bigotry in Europe is being exacerbated by two EU policies: the euro, which has caused needless poverty and unemployment, especially among southern European nations who have found themselves growing ever closer to the breadline; and the Schengen agreement on open borders, which has left countries unable to regulate migratory flows.

not true

spain and portugal have immigrants...loads of eastern europeans....russians....brits...north africans..chinese....they have more romanians than we do.

they dont get the same problems we do.

italy and greece may get problems but they get the bulk of refugees from syria.
its a problem because they are the first port of call.

if we were in their position we would ask for other countries to take more.

there is a discussion about brexit on sky news now  - the two female experts are foreigners  it tells you everything about the propaganda and bias of Sky

Has no one told the foreigners their opinions and insight aren't valid any more?

As you like to do to British people?

I'll judge a person's insight on its merits not by what passport it's owner holds.

Walos, you judge and hurl insults at anyone and everyone who doesn't think exactly as you do. You've married a foreigner so ALL foreigners must be good, and ALL people who want a stop immigration are bad. Objectivity is lost on you.

y'see, it's easy to judge your level of insight...

While always refusing to answer any direct question about the merits or otherwise of unlimited immigration. Easier to simply call names isn't it.

I don't think anyone's ever asked me a direct question on that. Feel free to check.

Don't need to check ta. I asked you if you thought the Archbishop of York was racist for saying economic migrants should cease coming here. You can tell me now if you like.

He actually said this, didn't he

“I think it should be that, wherever the asylum seekers arrive in that particular place, you have a responsibility for their care, their love,” the Daily Mail reported him saying.

“Schengen countries have not done that with the ‘Jungle’ and I, for one – as much as I am sympathetic and I feel sorry for the number of people genuinely seeking asylum – I think really the issue lies with the Schengen countries and they cannot see Britain as a soft touch.”

Sentamu, who fled Idi Amin’s regime in Uganda in 1973 for the UK, visited the Calais camp in June.

He said the UK could not be held responsible for the camp because it had never been part of the visa-free zone.

“They have gone from nation to nation which signed up in Europe,” Sentamu told the festival audience. “Those Schengen countries ought to resolve the problem that belongs there because they have entered Europe because of free movement.

“Every nation is shunting them and shunting them and shunting them in the hope that they will end up in the UK.”



If so, I think it's short-sighted. Is he saying everyone who lands on Lampedusa should stay on Lampedusa. How's that going to work exactly? Also the idea that they're all being shunted towards the UK is obviously silly and not based in reality. Wouldn't remotely call it racist though.

Do you feel unlimited immigration is good for everyone Pineapple?

Regarding the hate crime situation.
I was chatting to my Polish friend last night at the casino. He has married an English lass and they have a child. They recently visited Poland to see his family.
He was astounded by the propaganda coming from the Polish media, on the lines of
"Be very careful if you are a visiting the UK, do not openly speak Polish as you could be attacked"

He told his family in Poland that it was rubbish.

He does believe however that Polish people will think twice before  coming, and many of those here will believe it would be better back in Poland and that there will be more jobs for UK workers.

Everyone? No zen, I don't. Easy that to be fair.

Wouldn't remotely call it racist though.



He is saying if they are not refugees ( the majority) they shouldn't get near to these shores, you would if I said it.

It's not good for the women thats for sure!

Saddo, if you managed to explain your point as well as he did and showed an ounce of the man's compassion then I wouldn't be able to speak as my jaw would have hit the floor.

Fine words don't solve practical problems PP. Admitting there is a problem is the beginning to finding a solution. They have already brought the public to the point of exasperation by refusing them the right to speak, as you try to do. That's why brexit came about.

Having read that again I agree with myself, people like you made people vote out, thank you.

Ok, Pineapple

Who do you believe is negatively effected by unlimited immigration?

Well said

zen, don't know. Probably lots of people from different races, sexes, cities, ages, "classes". If you're looking for a simplistic answer wrapped in a bow you're in the wrong game.

what country did you say your wife had come from PP?

I didn't ron.

bringing in lots of outsiders will cause problems

christ, the brains trust is now complete.

After timer^

Sorry pp, I meant mobo.

I like that saddo  - very good.

Pineapple shows all the dishonesty of the metropolitan elite.

When asked about who has been negatively effected by unlimited immigration she reply's by saying 'don't know' and then throws in the melting pot answer.

When will you admit that the British working class have been negatively affected?

Come on, be honest with yourself Pineapple head.

Me as a representative of "them"

Sexism

Terrible grammar

Massive generalisations




It can only be a zen post.

There she goes, if it's not the racism card it's the sexism card.

She is probably sleeping with her boss. The dishonest mare.

A man died just hours after he was brutally beaten and threatened with being set alight by his neighbour, who was angry with him for having voted for Brexit, a court has heard.
Duncan Keating, 58, was hit with a parasol, repeatedly punched, doused with fertiliser and threatened with being burned alive during an attack by neighbour Graham Dunn, 62, in the communal gardens of the retirement apartment complex in Manchester where both men lived.

Keating was found dead in his apartment six hours later, kneeling by his bed.

Keating had been planting seedlings when he struck up a conversation with Dunn, asking him how he had voted in the referendum a few days previously.

Both men had been drinking that day, and when Dunn found out that Mr Keating had voted to leave he flew into a rage, the Manchester Evening News has reported.

Prosecutor Maria Brannan told court: “The defendant became aggressive, asking if he had children, saying ‘****g think about their generation, not yours’.”

He added: “I’m going to have you, let’s ****g sort this out.”

CCTV footage showed Dunn launching a 15-minute-long sustained attack against Keating, repeatedly pushing and thumping him despite being met with no resistance. At one point Keating fell heavily against a stone ornament in the centre of the garden after being pushed a distance of a few feet.

One witness described seeing Dunn douse Keating with fertiliser while shouting “I’m going to burn you.”

Police attended the scene but left after the men told them there was no problem.

In the hours after the attack Keating was seen with a tennis ball sized swelling to the left side of his jaw and with a swelling on his arm, but dismissed it as “handbags”.

Dunn was seen going to Keating’s flat three times in the hours between the attack and Keating’s death at 7.25pm; he later complained that the victim had broken his nose.

The coroner found that Keating had been drinking and taking drugs on the day of his death, ruling that his death was caused by positional asphyxia and intoxication through consumption of alcohol, methadone and cannabis.

Hearing the case at Manchester Crown Court, Judge Martin Rudland said of Keating’s death: “Grave consideration has been given between this event, and that tragic death, and the consultant pathologist has concluded his death was due to matters unrelated to the assault.”

Dunn admitted assault occasioning actual bodily harm against Keating, for which he was sentenced to four years and five months’ jail time.

Sending him down, the judge told Dunn: “We see from the glaring CCTV footage of the event that you picked on him and you bullied him and you wouldn’t let up.

“You began by using a parasol, then we watch you punch him while he’s lying backwards in a wooden chair in the garden, and you then pursue him round the garden, shouting at him, berating him.

“He is doing nothing but backing away from you at all times, but you goad him, you harass him, you follow him, you try and out-step him and out-manoeuvre him, and when you get close to him you punch him, not once, not twice but three times.

“It was an unpleasant, brazen, bullying event. There is no way you would have behaved as you did to someone who was of your size and strength, and that’s quite apparent from the way in which you teased and goaded him.”

No doubt this will be all over the bbc news website.

Remainiac's can be a very nasty type

We need to kick these drug taking, nasty, elderly British out imo. Replace them with someone young, clean and non-violent and this country will be a better place.

where will you get the young, clean and non-violent from?

We need to kick these drug taking, nasty, elderly British out imo. Replace them with someone young, clean and non-violent and this country will be a better place.

You are an absolute scumbag. My wife is a drug taking, nasty, elderly British person and reports such as this support my anecdotal evidence how how she has been mistreated and been subject to abuse since Brexit. My friends have also experienced similar encounters which never happened before Brexit.

If you can reply please do otherwise I will presume your mouth is full of sand.

a mealy mouthed reply shrewdie.

Though I can understand how you'd be considered something of a catch for the nasty, drug taking pensioners of this land.

and don't say anything negative about calais or you will be confirmed as a Nazi by a well informed pop singer

looking forward to the guardian's view and coverage of this one
and other hate crimes against brexiteers.

a mealy mouthed reply shrewdie.

Exactly. A parody of your replies and you describe it as mealy mouthed. Then you present yourself as a hate filled, spiteful, bitter person that likes to generalise and stereotype people. Very ironic.

Jesus, you really think I didn't see your 4/10 attempt at a parody and so replied accordingly? Is there space for an humourless, dewy eyed window licker on the boat shipping out those nasty, drug taking pensioners.

Look just calm down. I appreciate the fact that you have managed to reign in the hatred and spite in your previous posts but I don't think it's appropriate that you suggest that I'm a retard and therefore should be shipped out to places unknown at the nearest opportunity.

The Remainers seem to have come up with a way of shipping out those drug taking pensioners,beat them to death.

Jesus shrewdie, I'm having a giggle. It's saturday night, lighten up.




Now, please don't take this as me apologising for the actions of that knobhead in the article, but I feel I should point out what is written for all those who've read the first line and then their eyes went all blurry.

The coroner found that Keating had been drinking and taking drugs on the day of his death, ruling that his death was caused by positional asphyxia and intoxication through consumption of alcohol, methadone and cannabis.


ie he took some drugs and drink, passed out in an awkward position and that's what killed him. So all those who want to glory in the "beaten to death" line need to read things through. Granted, the article takes its sweet time in mentioning that the attack had no bearing on his death and we can all draw our own conclusions as to why that is so, but I'm here to help regardless. One less nasty bully boy off the streets though so there'll be no tears shed here.

One less nasty bully boy off the streets though so there'll be no tears shed here.

Germany in 1934.

s there space for an humourless, dewy eyed window licker on the boat shipping out those nasty, drug taking pensioners.

Germany 1939.

Im pretty sure he was attacked by a remainer.

Attacked - yes. Beaten to death - no. Or so it says in that article at least.

Im not sure it says that either.

Well I believe it says the coroner says cause of death was positional asphyxia and intoxication.

Brexit really is an eye opener for what people are really like.

People like Sarah Beeny call it BrexSH1T.

These lily allen types make you sick don't they - what gene ever created that
breed....it needs culling

Britain's most senior police officer has alluded to a spike in "hate crime" over the summer of 2016 because of the UK's decision to leave the European Union after the 23 June referendum. Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, said the majority of those targeted were Eastern Europeans.

According to figures gathered by the mayor's office, there were 2,300 race hate-related incidents in the London in the 38 days following EU Referendum. In the 38 days beforehand, there had been 1,400 incidents. The figures showed that in the 12 months to August 2016, there had been a 16% rise in reported hate crimes.

Speaking at London's City Hall, Hogan-Howe said: "We saw this horrible spike after Brexit. We couldn't say it was absolutely down to Brexit, although there was obviously a spike after it."

Hogan-Howe said it appeared at least some of the hate crime incidents were linked to the EU referendum because alleged assailants referred to the vote.

He added that many of those attacked were of eastern European nationality, with more attacks on Polish people than on all other nationalities put together.

The death of Polish national Arkadiusz Jóźwik on 29 August, two days after being attacked in Harlow, has been widely condemned and is being treated by Essex Police as a hate crime.

Two Polish men were attacked in the town hours after a vigil for the dead man in the town on 3 September. Six people are on bail in connection with the killing and two Polish police officers went to patrol in the town with local police in an effort to reassure the local Polish community.

District commander Chief Inspector Alan Ray said the two Polish officers had "been well received by all members of the community. They are helping us engage in particular with members of the Polish community who do not speak English as their first language."

Since the referendum, there have also been attacks on a Polish community centre in London, while anti-Polish flyers were distributed in Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire. Prime Minister Theresa May told her Polish counterpart Beata Szydlo that "hate crime has no place in UK society." The Home Office is putting in place a new Hate Crime Action Plan to tackle the problem.


Now, you'd have thought the most senior police officer in the country confirming what everyone knows - that racial hate crimes have risen since the referendum - would make the news in some way. Don't worry, I've checked for you. I've looked on the websites of the Telegraph, the Mail and the Express and guess what...not a sausage. Breitbart - bless their racist cotton socks - managed to have an article on their site yesterday still claiming there were no spikes at all.

As an aside, the express does have an article today (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/715612/refugees-hate-crime-africa-race-mig... about stickers in Cambridge telling immigrants to go back to Africa.


Thanks for reading, now you can all go back and dig another little hole in the sand just big enough for your heads.

These are examples of how the statistics of how your 'hate related incidents' are recorded and what they actually mean.

Example A
Jon reports circumstances which amount to an offence under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986.
He was sworn at and threatened that he would be punched in the face by an attacker who moved
toward him in an aggressive manner. Nothing was said about his sexual orientation but he perceives
that he was targeted as he is openly gay and there was no other reason why he was chosen. He
reports this to the police who should correctly record this as a hate crime based on sexual orientation.

Example B
The circumstances in Example B are the same as in Example A, but this time the incident happens at
a party in a private residence. The public order offence is not applicable as the incident took place
in a dwelling. Despite Jon’s belief that this is a hate crime, it should be recorded as a hate incident.The reasons for this should be explained to Jon. His perception relates to the motive and not the
interpretation of the law. When choosing this method of recording, it is important to make the right
decision and advice should be sought from a crime registrar if necessary.