[roberto]

[quote=roberto;126760]

Enoch Powell: the Great Lie survives
By Simon Heffer

Channel 4 - News - Dispatches - Immigration: The Inconvenient Truth

Award-winning journalist Rageh Omaar investigates how immigration has affected Britain in a landmark three-part current affairs series.


Using Enoch Powell's explosive Rivers of Blood speech as a starting point, Rageh explores whether the apocalyptic visions of 40 years ago have any basis in today's reality.

Omaar navigates the rocky terrain of Britain's current immigration landscape, traveling around the country, talking to ordinary people and unearthing some startling and uncomfortable truths. He poses the uncomfortable questions Powell raised in his speech - questions which are often sidestepped in political debate.

Heck do we have more racist in Trevor Phillips and David Leppard ; is the TV channel 4 programme on immigration racist?

Well to those who fear discussion any comment on immigration not seen as an open door policy is of course racist and bigoted etc. Yep don’t lets read any such material, just attack it.

[Bluestar]

So that's why racists wore the badge "Enoch was right" after reading his speech and used it when attacking non white people? Because of course his speech was not racist at all, it' was merely ethnocentric. That's not racism, that's like believing that white people are more supreme and civilised than others and obviously all the non white people need to be exiled from England because white people can't even get hospital beds, can't send their children to school and that's terrible. So obviously, instead of improving the medical sphere (god no!) we should blame it on the non white people and immigration! We imagined they'd do our dirty work but we didn't think about what happens when they're ill or they have children

This is what you agree with? You don't admit it's racist because it represents your thoughts completely. Isn't that scary?

Heath sacked Powell after his Rivers of Blood speech, he said it was not needed at a time when race relations were so volatile.

[roberto]

[quote=Bluestar;128738]

So that's why racists wore the badge "Enoch was right" after reading his speech and used it when attacking non white people?

Hem rather like those who high jack Islam to bomb people

Because of course his speech was not racist at all, it' was merely ethnocentric. That's not racism, that's like believing that white people are more supreme and civilised than others and obviously all the non white people need to be exiled from England because white people can't even get hospital beds, can't send their children to school and that's terrible.

Well actually shortages in services due to overload effects all, as to sending back if you’re still relating to Powell if I recall correctly he merely wanted controlled immigration

So obviously, instead of improving the medical sphere (god no!) we should blame it on the non white people and immigration!

A silly comment

We imagined they'd do our dirty work but we didn't think about what happens when they're ill or they have children

Well precisely that’s what Powell was on about the lack of planning

This is what you agree with? You don't admit it's racist because it represents your thoughts completely. Isn't that scary?

In respect of this particular speech of Powell whilst OTT much of the fears expressed by him have regrettably materialise, which is why belatedly there is now debate.

I guess that disappoints you since you really want to label me as a racist, it them means you don’t have to think about anything I write or post, you can just dismiss it as racist, rather the attribute of a closed mind

Heath sacked Powell after his Rivers of Blood speech, he said it was not needed at a time when race relations were so volatile

Powell held Heath in utter contempt and new the risk to his political career he was taking

[Bluestar]

He encouraged immigration, he spent two years in India, if he was so conscious about cultural differences he would have been better prepared for the outcomes and not turned on the immigrants as soon as he found out he was wrong. He was against Sikh people wearing turbans and said they should assimilate into the British culture. Again, "the immigrants need to be civilised" attitude. I don't see why calling for better healthcare instead of blaming it on the brown and black people is a silly comment.

Anyway, i'm prepared to accept he's not racist, i accept i don't know what his intentions and innermost thoughts were. From what i can see, they look very sketchy. And no, i don't want to label you a racist, i'd like to think the opposite! You seem very ethnocentric though and that's probably why you admire him so much.

[roberto]

[quote=Bluestar;128865]

He encouraged immigration, he spent two years in India, if he was so conscious about cultural differences he would have been better prepared for the outcomes and not turned on the immigrants as soon as he found out he was wrong.

Define "turn on" with reference to his speech please

He was against Sikh people wearing turbans and said they should assimilate into the British culture.

This is his comment 'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'

There was a problem with turbans when head gear for motor cycles became compulsory in the end they were allowed to be exceptions

Again, "the immigrants need to be civilised" attitude.

These are your words not his

I don't see why calling for better healthcare instead of blaming it on the brown and black people is a silly comment.

Because he did not blame coloured people per se

Anyway, i'm prepared to accept he's not racist, i accept i don't know what his intentions and innermost thoughts were. From what i can see, they look very sketchy. And no, i don't want to label you a racist, i'd like to think the opposite! You seem very ethnocentric though and that's probably why you admire him so much

I suggest you make up your mind.


As a general comment why don't you take what he wrote as it is, rather than putting your anti White spin on it. ?

I have been on many forums , but I have never found such concern with skin colour as on this one, I find it appalling

[LEGALEAGLE]

Originally Posted by Bluestar

So that's why racists wore the badge "Enoch was right" after reading his speech and used it when attacking non white people? Because of course his speech was not racist at all, it' was merely ethnocentric. That's not racism, that's like believing that white people are more supreme and civilised than others and obviously all the non white people need to be exiled from England because white people can't even get hospital beds, can't send their children to school and that's terrible. So obviously, instead of improving the medical sphere (god no!) we should blame it on the non white people and immigration! We imagined they'd do our dirty work but we didn't think about what happens when they're ill or they have children

This is what you agree with? You don't admit it's racist because it represents your thoughts completely. Isn't that scary?

Heath sacked Powell after his Rivers of Blood speech, he said it was not needed at a time when race relations were so volatile.

WORD

Whats been covered up by the BBC is how the government, estate agents and councils were instrumental in ensuring that immigrants only lived in certain ghetto's.

It was impossible for an immigrant to live in any middle class white area because the realtors simply would not sell to them.

Originally Posted by Bluestar

He encouraged immigration, he spent two years in India, if he was so conscious about cultural differences he would have been better prepared for the outcomes and not turned on the immigrants as soon as he found out he was wrong. He was against Sikh people wearing turbans and said they should assimilate into the British culture. Again, "the immigrants need to be civilised" attitude. I don't see why calling for better healthcare instead of blaming it on the brown and black people is a silly comment.

Anyway, i'm prepared to accept he's not racist, i accept i don't know what his intentions and innermost thoughts were. From what i can see, they look very sketchy. And no, i don't want to label you a racist, i'd like to think the opposite! You seem very ethnocentric though and that's probably why you admire him so much.

I have no problems doing that.

Anybody who supports Enoch Powell is a racist. PERIOD.

[Jamroll]

Also, maybe it's a lost-in-translation kinda thing, but one thing everyone should know is that in this day and age, you cannot call Black and Asian people "coloured" without coming off as racist:

Originally Posted by roberto

Because he did not blame coloured people per se

The correct term is to call them "ethnic minorities", or to call them "black". Yes, as strange as it may seem to some, it is acceptable to call Asians and blacks, "black" when referring to them as a group, but definitely not "coloured".

[roberto]

Originally Posted by Jamroll

Also, maybe it's a lost-in-translation kinda thing, but one thing everyone should know is that in this day and age, you cannot call Black and Asian people "coloured" without coming off as racist:



The correct term is to call them "ethnic minorities", or to call them "black". Yes, as strange as it may seem to some, it is acceptable to call Asians and blacks, "black" when referring to them as a group, but definitely not "coloured".

I responded in kind.

Originally Posted by Bluestar
He encouraged immigration, he spent two years in India, if he was so conscious about cultural differences he would have been better prepared for the outcomes and not turned on the immigrants as soon as he found out he was wrong. He was against Sikh people wearing turbans and said they should assimilate into the British culture. Again, "the immigrants need to be civilised" attitude. I don't see why calling for better healthcare instead of blaming it on the brown and black people is a silly comment.

As a general comment I consider these PC taboos cause racism, what the hell is wrong with brown, it's just a colour as is white and black.

[roberto]

[quote=LEGALEAGLE;129591]:

Whats been covered up by the BBC is how the government, estate agents and councils were instrumental in ensuring that immigrants only lived in certain ghetto's.

It was impossible for an immigrant to live in any middle class white area because the realtors simply would not sell to them.

Substantiate

[Bluestar]

Originally Posted by roberto

Define "turn on" with reference to his speech please

It means to support immigration when it was for the good of the economy and supporting the wealthy (who were white people) and then realising that white people didn't actually like the fact that black/brown/purple people were in their country and instead finding solace in being a hypocite.

This is his comment 'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'

Yes i know, he was wrong. This is exactly what i'm saying, if he went to India and became so wonderfully integrated in their culture, why did he deny them the right to express their beliefs in public? It's wrong and crap. The fact that he and you can't look past your own values is disgusting and wanting to impose it on everyone else is what is racist. These people don't need to be civilised into western beliefs. People like Enoch couldn't see that. What is the difference between that and what saudi arabia does? Forceful integration only leads to resentment and further isolation.

To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society

It wasn't funny then and it's not funny now

These are your words not his

Oh please, you protest against the propaganda of extreme Islamic clerics but you can't see it when it exists in your own culture?

Because he did not blame coloured people per se

really?

But while to the immigrant entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country. They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker

It doesn't require more than basic comprehension, because of the influx of immigrants, the rest of society couldn't obtain beds for childirth, couldn't get places in school for kids, communities changed, their poor plans and prospects obliterated (all from seeing a non-white person ) and even the employers favoured them.

I suggest you make up your mind.

I suggest you don't tell me how to think. I'm not proud enough to assert my views as if they're set in stone. Like i said, if his values and intentions were innocent and I was wrong then he still seems sketchy in what he says.

As a general comment why don't you take what he wrote as it is, rather than putting your anti White spin on it. ?

That's petty, I have no care for what colour of skin a person might be. Anyone who knows me, knows that.

I have been on many forums , but I have never found such concern with skin colour as on this one, I find it appalling

Really? Look to the Rivers of Blood speech, you'll find plenty there.

and yes he did support sending them back. He called for re-emigration. It's in the speech. He was scared that people like me, those born in 1985, would take over England. I'm still at it of course, that's what i devote my spare time to

[roberto]

[quote=Bluestar;130828]

It means to support immigration when it was for the good of the economy and supporting the wealthy (who were white people) and then realising that white people didn't actually like the fact that black/brown/purple people were in their country and instead finding solace in being a hypocite.

Thanks for the definition it’s a pity that as usual you have not identified support for such

Yes i know, he was wrong. This is exactly what i'm saying, if he went to India and became so wonderfully integrated in their culture, why did he deny them the right to express their beliefs in public?

He didn’t .

“The fact that he and you can't look past your own values is disgusting and wanting to impose it on everyone else is what is racist.”

Unfounded insults demonstrate the weakness and bias of your position

It wasn't funny then and it's not funny now

Then you were still 15 years from you birth

Oh please, you protest against the propaganda of extreme Islamic clerics but you can't see it when it exists in your own culture?

Again you make wild rhetoric statement, with out any substantiation

really?

Is that then best you can do in answer to “Because he did not blame coloured people per se”

It doesn't require more than basic comprehension, because of the influx of immigrants, the rest of society couldn't obtain beds for childirth, couldn't get places in school for kids, communities changed, their poor plans and prospects obliterated (all from seeing a non-white person ) and even the employers favoured them.

The shortages applied to all, immigrants have the same rights for services,

I suggest you don't tell me how to think. I'm not proud enough to assert my views as if they're set in stone. Like i said, if his values and intentions were innocent and I was wrong then he still seems sketchy in what he says.

Your unsolicited opinion of me was contradictory

That's petty, I have no care for what colour of skin a person might be. Anyone who knows me, knows that.

Then be more careful in what you write, because I don't know you beyond that which you write

Really? Look to the Rivers of Blood speech, you'll find plenty there.

Well that’s what you keep saying but you don’t identify the pertinent comments

and yes he did support sending them back. He called for re-emigration.

But not forced re-immergration this is what he said:

Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent

It's in the speech. He was scared that people like me, those born in 1985, would take over England. I'm still at it of course, that's what i devote my spare time to

Sure he was terrified :His speach was made in 1968 , rather a long time befor you were born or do you claim that people of that age thought the same as you

[Variable]

I didn't read any of the posts in this thread, but I keep reading the title as 'Eunuch Powell'.

[Pushpa]

[quote=roberto;130246]

Originally Posted by LEGALEAGLE

:

Substantiate

Just my two-pence worth... Black and Irish people in the 50s and 60s found it very difficult to live anywhere where there was a middle-class white community and this is substantiated by first-hand accounts. My grandfather and many others of his generation - and not only blacks and Asians either - found it difficult to find anyone who was even willing to rent to them, as many landlords/ladies specified "No Irish, blacks or dogs." A lot of Irish ended up living with Asians and West Indian immigrants because they could not get housing anywhere else.
If that was the situation simply with regards to renting, imagine how it must have been when it came to buying a property. Most immigrants at that time did not own their own homes for precisely this reason.
While I don't agree with everything Enoch Powell said, I think it's unfair to hold him solely responsible for ghettoes and limited housing opportunities. You have to remember that these were views also held by ordinary people - it was part of the social and political climate and we can't expect everybody to be able to detach themselves from their social context, along with all the preconceptions and ideas that come with that context. Remember, the Race Relations Act and other anti-discrimination legislation didn't even come into being until the '70s.

In conclusion, it seems there are 2 separate topics brought up in this thread;
one is the rights of immigrants to have equal access to public services, health and housing.
The other is the question of cultural diversity vs conformity, in other words the pros and cons of multiculturalism.
Let's not conflate the two.