London is turning into Los Angeles...

[David Johnson]

"The clue as to who I am replying to is that I use your name. You seem to get it, so what is the problem?"

The problem is that not everyone is as supportive and easy going as myself in terms of reading every single one of your posts on the off-chance that it might be a reply to a specific poster's comments. If you can't understand that, what can you understand?

"As to the UAE, which of course you brought up, my point is that it uses foreign nationals as guest workers for its own advantage, and according to its own rules."

I wonder why Asian and African workers are risking their lives by sitting on the back axles of lorries going on to cross channel ferries in order to get into the UK. According to you, they should just walk through immigration and be met with open arms.

"The UAE does not intend to offer citizenship to any of the foreign nationals who work there to the benefit of the UAE and its people."

I have already explained that to you. Give you a clue - it is to do with the proportion of expat workers and the UAE born nationals. 80+% of the UAE population are not UAE born. IN the UK it is about 10% of the UK population are foreign born. Bit of a difference - know what I mean?

"For the record, I am far from angry with you. Sorry for you, maybe"

I couldn't care less what you think of me. What I do think though is that your arguments whether it is on gun control, double indemnity and in this thread are largely clueless.

[Robches]

David Johnson wrote:

> "The clue as to who I am replying to is that I use your name.
> You seem to get it, so what is the problem?"
>
> The problem is that not everyone is as supportive and easy
> going as myself in terms of reading every single one of your
> posts on the off-chance that it might be a reply to a specific
> poster's comments. If you can't understand that, what can you
> understand?
>
> "As to the UAE, which of course you brought up, my point is
> that it uses foreign nationals as guest workers for its own
> advantage, and according to its own rules."
>
> I wonder why Asian and African workers are risking their lives
> by sitting on the back axles of lorries going on to cross
> channel ferries in order to get into the UK. According to you,
> they should just walk through immigration and be met with open
> arms.
>
> "The UAE does not intend to offer citizenship to any of the
> foreign nationals who work there to the benefit of the UAE and
> its people."
>
> I have already explained that to you. Give you a clue - it is
> to do with the proportion of expat workers and the UAE born
> nationals. 80+% of the UAE population are not UAE born. IN
> the UK it is about 10% of the UK population are foreign born.
> Bit of a difference - know what I mean?
>
> "For the record, I am far from angry with you. Sorry for you,
> maybe"
>
> I couldn't care less what you think of me. What I do think
> though is that your arguments whether it is on gun control,
> double indemnity and in this thread are largely clueless.


David:

You do not seem your usual chilled self this morning, I do hope you are well.

The point I am making, and I think it is a fair one, is that mass immigration changes societies, and I do not see how anyone could deny that.

In the case of the UAE, that society has changed massively since the 1960s, due to oil and gas wealth. However, the government there has not decided to reward guest workers with citizenship. They are there purely for the benefit the local people derive from their work.

In the case of Los Angeles itself, even LA is no longer LA. Fifty years ago it was mostly a white city, with a black minority. Now, the Hispanic population has exploded, with huge immigration from Mexico and Central America. With this, LA has changed utterly. This also means crime levels have changed, being more akin to those found in the more violent parts of Latin America, and organised Hispanic criminal gangs such as MS13 flourish.

It is no different in London. In fifty years it has gone, like LA, from a white city with a black minority, to a city with a majority BME population. Turkish gangs now dominate the heroin trade, to give one example. It's a long way from Ronnie and Reggie, and getting a shirt from Charlie.

So unless your proposition is that mass immigration does not change societies, I do not really see the point you are trying to make.

Have a nice day.

[David Johnson]

First, congratulations that you seem to have got to grips with how threads work - however, briefly.

Secondly, according to your good self "The point I am making, and I think it is a fair one, is that mass immigration changes societies, and I do not see how anyone could deny that"

TO be more precise, since I can sense you hedging, you argue that it makes the receiving country much more like the culture and beliefs of the countries from which the immigrants come. So in the case of Britain you argue it has become much more like Pakistan, the West Indies and Somalia.

Unfortunately you disagree with yourself don't you? The UAE is a country which has huge immigration which makes Britain's look like dribs and drabs. The economy of the UAE has been transformed, but has the country's culture, religion, laws, attitude to crime etc. etc. been transformed? Obviously not.

With amusement, I have watched you trying to explain this away by stating that the UAE does not allow the expats become nationals. Does becoming a national of a country change the expats religion, attitudes, beliefs etc and their impact on crome etc.? I do not think so.

I will leave you to argue with yourself. Let me know who wins.

[David Johnson]

" It is no different in London (meaning like LA in the way it has changed to being a much more violent place due to immigration) . In fifty years it has gone, like LA, from a white city with a black minority, to a city with a majority BME population. Turkish gangs now dominate the heroin trade, to give one example. It's a long way from Ronnie and Reggie, and getting a shirt from Charlie."

Well according to that left wing rag, the Evening Standard, the murder rate in London is the lowest for 42 years.



I feel sure Robches that you will join me in a hope that the immigration from Somalia, Pakistan and the West Indies will increase over years to come to ensure this decline in the murder rate continues.

!wink!

[Essex Lad]

Yes because the police would NEVER fiddle the crime figures, would they?

Judge Richard Bray, said on his retirement last week: ?The figures have been massaged. Robbery is now classified as theft from a person. Burglary is downgraded to criminal damage. Cautions and reprimands are used to save police time. But you ask the people who walk about the towns and cities at night if crime has gone down.?

[David Johnson]

Since my post is about murder rates, how do they downgrade murder then?

Don't tell me...........grievous bodily harm, perhaps?

[Essex Lad]

I believe Robches was referring to crime rates in London not just murder.

[David Johnson]

Ah right so, given Max's original post was about a massive haul of guns, we can set aside the inconvenient truth that the murder rate in London is its lowest for 42 years according to the Standard and instead concentrate on discrediting the drop in some other types of crime by stating that the figures are being fiddled.

Much easier to play that game than trying to discredit the murder figures, I guess.

[Essex Lad]

I don't believe the murder figures for one second... I have no idea why you are so ready to swallow official figures.

[Robches]

David Johnson wrote:

> First, congratulations that you seem to have got to grips with
> how threads work - however, briefly.
>
> Secondly, according to your good self "The point I am making,
> and I think it is a fair one, is that mass immigration changes
> societies, and I do not see how anyone could deny that"
>
> TO be more precise, since I can sense you hedging, you argue
> that it makes the receiving country much more like the culture
> and beliefs of the countries from which the immigrants come.
> So in the case of Britain you argue it has become much more
> like Pakistan, the West Indies and Somalia.
>
> Unfortunately you disagree with yourself don't you? The UAE is
> a country which has huge immigration which makes Britain's look
> like dribs and drabs. The economy of the UAE has been
> transformed, but has the country's culture, religion, laws,
> attitude to crime etc. etc. been transformed? Obviously not.
>
> With amusement, I have watched you trying to explain this away
> by stating that the UAE does not allow the expats become
> nationals. Does becoming a national of a country change the
> expats religion, attitudes, beliefs etc and their impact on
> crome etc.? I do not think so.
>
> I will leave you to argue with yourself. Let me know who wins.


David:

Yes, the UAE has been transformed economically, but the government has made sure that it has been for the benefit of the local people. Guest workers do not qualify for citizenship, and the laws are not made for their benefit.

Britain has accepted millions of immigrants since the 1960s, who have become citizens of the country. They have enriched our society in many ways, from suicide bombing, to forced marriage, female genital mutilation, honour killing and paedophile rape gangs. Something tells me that expats in the UAE do not behave in such ways. They are there to work, and then leave.