Turn on thread page Beta

the homeless watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LARA2005)
    On November the 9th 1923, 16 National Socialists were murdered in Munich, while peacefully marching for National Socialism. We choose to honour those fallen comrades by using the date of their murder as our party name, so that we, and every National Socialist, would be reminded of their sacrifice. However, the Electoral Commission declined the name November 9th Society but accepted the abbreviated N9S.
    How many votes did the N9S pick up? Where did they stand?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by technik)
    your take was wrong.

    lets move along.
    Yes lets shall we??!!!
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    How many votes did the N9S pick up? Where did they stand?
    i cant say i'd even heard of them before today. but im not an active national socialist
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LARA2005)
    On November the 9th 1923, 16 National Socialists were murdered in Munich, while peacefully marching for National Socialism. We choose to honour those fallen comrades by using the date of their murder as our party name, so that we, and every National Socialist, would be reminded of their sacrifice. However, the Electoral Commission declined the name November 9th Society but accepted the abbreviated N9S.
    Wasn't November 9th also the day the Holocaust started?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    How many votes did the N9S pick up? Where did they stand?
    We have only just been accepted by the electoral commision, we have not stood yet. The last National Socialist party (in Britain) was the BUF.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    Wasn't November 9th also the day the Holocaust started?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
    seems so.

    only 365 days in a year though
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by technik)
    seems so.

    only 365 days in a year though
    There was Hitler's first (failed) revolution too.

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

    And also on 9th November "John List, an accountant from Westfield, New Jersey murders his mother, wife and three children. He then hides under a new identity for 18 years.".

    It looks like a Halloween for all the freaks that were late.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LARA2005)
    On November the 9th 1923, 16 National Socialists were murdered in Munich, while peacefully marching for National Socialism. We choose to honour those fallen comrades by using the date of their murder as our party name, so that we, and every National Socialist, would be reminded of their sacrifice. However, the Electoral Commission declined the name November 9th Society but accepted the abbreviated N9S.
    I was under the impression that the Munich Putsch was a bungled attempt by the Nazi party to start a coup in Bavaria. I'm sure they had guns and everything and Hitler later wrote in Mein Kampf that it was an attempt at revolution.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    There was Hitler's first (failed) revolution too.

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

    And also on 9th November "John List, an accountant from Westfield, New Jersey murders his mother, wife and three children. He then hides under a new identity for 18 years.".

    It looks like a Halloween for all the freaks that were late.
    how exciting lol...

    my birthday is a bit more sedate. nero committed suicide and natalie portman was born. remarkable stuff...
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    i think its a waste to hand it out to these people who are nothing but a drain.
    Fact: Like other residents and visitors to the UK, asylum seekers are entitled to NHS services. But in no way do they drain resources to the detriment of UK citizens. In fact immigrants are the backbone of the NHS. According the Greater London Authority, 23% of doctors and 47% of nurses working within the NHS were born outside the UK.

    Migrants, including refugees, are far from being a burden on UK taxpayers. On the contrary, in 1999-2000, they made a net fiscal contribution of approximately £2.5 billion, worth 1p on income tax. Research carried out by Personnel Today in November 2001 found that nine out of ten employers want to take on refugees to meet skills shortages, but do not due to ignorance of the law and confusing Home Office paperwork.



    wonder why they are desperate to pass through all of europe to get to the UK...
    Myth: Britain is a 'soft touch' for asylum seekers

    Fact: The streets of Britain are not paved with gold for arriving refugees. Asylum seekers are not allowed to claim mainstream welfare benefits. If they are destitute, the only option for some is to apply for support with the National Asylum Support Service (NASS). NASS support is very basic. A single adult has to survive on £37.77 a week - 30% below the poverty line.

    A recent Home Office study found no evidence to suggest that asylum seekers had a detailed knowledge of the UK's asylum policies. The main reasons that people seek asylum in Britain are their country's historic or colonial links with the UK, the presence of family and friends and the fact that English is the prime global language (Home Office research study July 2002)

    Myth: Britain is the top destination for asylum seekers

    Fact: Even within the EU, the UK ranked 10th in 2001 in number of asylum applications compared to the country's population. The world's poorest countries both produce and bear responsibility for most refugees. During 1992-2001, 86% of the world's estimated 12 million refugees originated in developing countries, while such countries provided asylum to 72%. In comparison with countries like Canada, the UK is no 'soft touch'. In 2001, Canada granted protection to 97% of Afghan asylum applicants, while the UK granted only 19%. Somali applicants had a 92% success rate in Canada, while in the UK it was only 34%.

    An analysis by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees showed that the major reason for lodging applications in a particular country is the presence of an established community there. In January to June 2000, of all applications in Europe, 96% of people from Mali sought asylum in France, 60% of Albanians applied in Belgium, 48% of Nigerians applied in Ireland and 45% of Sri Lankans applied in the UK.


    My father came here in the 70's for education. When the revolution happened in Iran he went back and then joined a liberation movement. He was sentenced to death in his absence. Since then he has created 4 businesses, employing a score of people. He pays his tax and provides services to the community. Almost all his workers are refugees who's claims have been granted who also pay their way. I shall be going to university next year (first one on the maternal side of my family and neither parent went either) with very good prospects as will my brother. I ask you to go and meet asylum seekers (incidentely my father did not claim. He had his passport withdrawn by Britain for his own safety and was given indefinate leave to remain without asking for it) Many young immigrants want to work, build a family and become British citizens. Your ignorant and ill informed comments offend me and seem to come right of the pages of the Saily Mail.

    Why not go after the big business tax evaders who cost us more than asylum seekers ever could?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Northumbrian)
    Fact: Like other residents and visitors to the UK, asylum seekers are entitled to NHS services. But in no way do they drain resources to the detriment of UK citizens. In fact immigrants are the backbone of the NHS. According the Greater London Authority, 23% of doctors and 47% of nurses working within the NHS were born outside the UK.
    Confusion! Not all Immigrants are Asylum seekers! These figures have no significance.

    Migrants, including refugees, are far from being a burden on UK taxpayers. On the contrary, in 1999-2000, they made a net fiscal contribution of approximately £2.5 billion, worth 1p on income tax. Research carried out by Personnel Today in November 2001 found that nine out of ten employers want to take on refugees to meet skills shortages, but do not due to ignorance of the law and confusing Home Office paperwork.
    Irregularity! Costs of support are not included here mainly since the Home Office has not released the required information (Source: MigrationWatch)

    Myth: Britain is a 'soft touch' for asylum seekers

    Fact: The streets of Britain are not paved with gold for arriving refugees. Asylum seekers are not allowed to claim mainstream welfare benefits. If they are destitute, the only option for some is to apply for support with the National Asylum Support Service (NASS). NASS support is very basic. A single adult has to survive on £37.77 a week - 30% below the poverty line.
    When your housing, services, food, healthcare and car is free, £37.77 a week spending money can go a long way towards cigarettes, drink and anything else for that matter.

    Myth: Britain is the top destination for asylum seekers

    Fact: Even within the EU, the UK ranked 10th in 2001 in number of asylum applications compared to the country's population. The world's poorest countries both produce and bear responsibility for most refugees. During 1992-2001, 86% of the world's estimated 12 million refugees originated in developing countries, while such countries provided asylum to 72%. In comparison with countries like Canada, the UK is no 'soft touch'. In 2001, Canada granted protection to 97% of Afghan asylum applicants, while the UK granted only 19%. Somali applicants had a 92% success rate in Canada, while in the UK it was only 34%.
    Wrong! As you can see here Britain accepted the most assylum seekers in 2001 in total, more than Germany and the United States, which both have much larger populations than the UK.

    An analysis by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees showed that the major reason for lodging applications in a particular country is the presence of an established community there. In January to June 2000, of all applications in Europe, 96% of people from Mali sought asylum in France, 60% of Albanians applied in Belgium, 48% of Nigerians applied in Ireland and 45% of Sri Lankans applied in the UK.
    I'm not sure what this is supposed to be about, except that it hints that when asylum seekers say they are "Escaping persecution", they actually mean they want to meet up with family & friends - which I never would have guessed!

    Many young immigrants want to work, build a family and become British citizens.
    Well, bieng a British citizen is quite beneficial, but if "the major reason for lodging applications in a particular country is the presence of an established community there" is anything to go by, they simply wish to live in [insert 3rd world shithole] but only with the extra perks afforded by taxpayers money.

    Please don't post things as facts if they are not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by technik)
    canucks use of mental illness in the context of a benefits question was curious. trying to say it was advantageous to everyone else to hand out resources and cash to homeless people due to their supposed mental illness is a very interesting thought train.

    Twisting my words around I see. Well done clown.

    I was suggesting that the amount of homelessness could be reduced if social programs would be introduced to reduce the large amount of mentally ill people on the streets. The problem is, that many that are mentally ill refuse to enter such programs. Thus, it becomes a legal matter.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JonD)
    Confusion! Not all Immigrants are Asylum seekers! These figures have no significance.



    Irregularity! Costs of support are not included here mainly since the Home Office has not released the required information (Source: MigrationWatch)



    When your housing, services, food, healthcare and car is free, £37.77 a week spending money can go a long way towards cigarettes, drink and anything else for that matter.



    Wrong! As you can see here Britain accepted the most assylum seekers in 2001 in total, more than Germany and the United States, which both have much larger populations than the UK.



    I'm not sure what this is supposed to be about, except that it hints that when asylum seekers say they are "Escaping persecution", they actually mean they want to meet up with family & friends - which I never would have guessed!



    Well, bieng a British citizen is quite beneficial, but if "the major reason for lodging applications in a particular country is the presence of an established community there" is anything to go by, they simply wish to live in [insert 3rd world shithole] but only with the extra perks afforded by taxpayers money.

    Please don't post things as facts if they are not.
    You know, i would avoid receiving any information from facist sites. Try government sites, they at least have some credibility behind them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There's loads of menial tasks that need doing - pay the homeless to do them. Pick up litter, clean off graffitti, trim the shrubs on the edges of motorways.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by canuck)
    You know, i would avoid receiving any information from facist sites. Try government sites, they at least have some credibility behind them.
    Strange how you call any information that shows mass imigration for what it is as facist. The fact is Britains imigration has gone up 300% since 1997(and thats not including th illegal ones)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Confusion! Not all Immigrants are Asylum seekers! These figures have no significance.
    They do when you talk about putting limits on immigration and when you're talking to a nazi.

    MigrationWatch
    They have a conlusion before they investigate things.

    When your housing, services, food, healthcare and car
    Have you ever been to asylum seeker accomodation? And since when do they get issued free cars!?!

    Wrong! As you can see here Britain accepted the most assylum seekers in 2001 in total, more than Germany and the United States, which both have much larger populations than the UK
    Lies, damned lies and statistics.

    I'm not sure what this is supposed to be about, except that it hints that when asylum seekers say they are "Escaping persecution", they actually mean they want to meet up with family & friends - which I never would have guessed!
    If you're fleeing persecution then you'd naturally go toa country where you have connexions or can speak the language.

    [insert 3rd world shithole]
    How ignorant and stupid are you?! As I have proven with REAL stats asylum seekers and immigrants benefit our country (and always have) For you to describe other peoples' countries as **** holes when you have never even been is disgusting. Is it that abnormal for foreigners to want to practice their culture in the UK?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LARA2005)
    We have only just been accepted by the electoral commision, we have not stood yet. The last National Socialist party (in Britain) was the BUF.
    Yes. I know. My grandfather's brother was in Mosely's crowd in the 30's.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Geordie_in_HK)
    There's loads of menial tasks that need doing - pay the homeless to do them. Pick up litter, clean off graffitti, trim the shrubs on the edges of motorways.
    Why assume that's all they're capable of doing?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You know, i would avoid receiving any information from facist sites. Try government sites, they at least have some credibility behind them.
    While I'm not sure what a “facist” is, MigrationWatch is a very reputable think tank and their works are often quoted by members of parliament and journalists. The NationMaster statistic is from OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), an organization funded by 30 member countries (including Australia, US, UK, Japan and Turkey). Please explain to me why these organizations fit into the category of “facist”, and why that discredits them. If not, I must assume you're nothing more than an ignorant buffoon with no ability to add a meaningful addition to this subject.

    They do when you talk about putting limits on immigration and when you're talking to a nazi.
    Why am I a Nazi? Is it simply because I blew your ridiculous claims out of the water? If so, that's a pretty pathetic attempt to smear me. I'd like you to provide quotes from me that highlight I am: (A) A socialist and (B) A nationalist (C) wish to kill Jews, in order to back up your claim I am a Nazi. If not, I must assume you are simply bieng a pathetic loser. Actually, since you're in RESPECT (an organization that mixes communism, islamic nationalism and preaches the destruction of Israel) you're a more likely candidate than me. Also, you can't mix statistics relating to all immigration in order to come to a conclusion about asylum seekers. Your logic ammounts to “90% of people wear underwear, therefore all men wear leopardskin thongs”.

    Lies, damned lies and statistics.
    As mentioned above, those statistics are from OECD, which is a very, very reputable source. Since you've been discredited on numerous occasions, I'll take that word of professional opinion over yours any day. In that year, Britain accepted more asylum seekers than anyone else, including nations with much larger populations than it.

    They have a conlusion before they investigate things.
    Have you any definite proof of scientific misconduct from MigrationWatch? Again, since their statistics are used by dozens of MPs and journalists, I value them as a source more than the word of some flimsy pro-terror race warrior who can barely string a sentence together. It's interesting how you claim this organization is not trustworthy because they are opinionated, when you're guilty of the same thing. The difference being, they have offered opinion-changing facts, whereas you're just preaching lies dressed up as facts with the hope nobody will check them. As Churchill once said: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.". You're a fanatic, it's no wonder you feel at home with RESPECT and its cadre of Islamofascists and aged Stalinists.

    How ignorant and stupid are you?!
    I'm tempted to press the “Ignore this Stupid Cretin” button, but I don't think guilty of ignoring anything yet. I have professional certifications from Microsoft and Oracle, 4 a-levels, a bunch of GCSEs and am in the middle of a BSci, so if I'm stupid I must have had a lot of good luck thus far!

    As I have proven with REAL stats asylum seekers and immigrants benefit our country (and always have)
    Heh.
    For you to describe other peoples' countries as **** holes when you have never even been is disgusting.
    How do you know that? Your uninformed guesses show you are guilty of bieng a disgusting presumptuous bigot. Since you're obviously so fond of the 3rd world tyrannies, at the same time as claiming the crown and sceptre of King Immigrant Protector, when these immigrants are so happy to leave/flee from those 3rd world tyrannies, I think my assumption that you're a hypocrite on this matter is well founded.

    Conclusion to the above facts: You are a pathetic, illogical, lying, presumtuous, hypocritical, fanatical, bigoted cretin whose only real argument for immigration amounts to “I want more people like me here”. This isn't the first time I've told you this, but: Get a real cause.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Yes. I know. My grandfather's brother was in Mosely's crowd in the 30's.
    Cool was he a proper blackshirt I have only ever met a blackshirt once.
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.