Europe

[Mich the Tester]

I'd say the British people are essentially unhappy about mass immigration, and they associate it with the EU, which is a bit unfair IMO, as Enoch Powell would demonstrate.

I'd rather have 500K Poles in my country rather than 1K Islamoafricans. London is poised to be an Islamoafrican-majority city by 2030. The EU has nothing to do with it, but it gets all the blame (unfairly as I said).

The Brits are barking at the wrong tree, IMO.

Firstly, what does 'Islamoafrican city' mean?

Secondly, can you back this up with facts, statistics and so on?

[KaiserWilly]

Firstly, what does 'Islamoafrican city' mean?

Secondly, can you back this up with facts, statistics and so on?

Islamoafrican is someone from Middle-Eastern or African ethnic origin.

That Islamoafricans will be a majority in London in 2030 is my own projection.

From the 2001 to 2011 census:

As of the 2011 Census, the total Black population of London stood at 1,088,640.[3] This is a rise of 39% from the 2001 Census, when the population stood at 781,751.

As of the 2011 Census, the total Asian population of London stood at 1,511,546.[3] This is a rise of 60% from the 2001 Census, when the population stood at 947,425.

[Mich the Tester]

Islamoafrican is someone from Middle-Eastern or African ethnic origin.

That Islamoafricans will be a majority in London in 2030 is my own projection.

Pretty huge grouping, involving people as far apart as Cape Town and Lebanon and including, alongside Muslims, a lot of Christians, Hindus, Jews, Animists, Rastafarians, Pastafarians, atheists, agnostics and probably some followers of the Church of Elvis Presley. Involves Sudan negroes, Bantu negroes, Arabs, east Asians, south Asians, white people, in fact pretty much anybody.

Your statement is so broad as to be meaningless and you talk of 'Africa' as if it's some monoculture. It isn't; go and take a look some day.

[KaiserWilly]

Pretty huge grouping, involving people as far apart as Cape Town and Lebanon and including, alongside Muslims, a lot of Christians, Hindus, Jews, Animists, Rastafarians, Pastafarians, atheists, agnostics and probably some followers of the Church of Elvis Presley. Involves Sudan negroes, Bantu negroes, Arabs, east Asians, south Asians, white people, in fact pretty much anybody.

Your statement is so broad as to be meaningless and you talk of 'Africa' as if it's some monoculture. It isn't; go and take a look some day.

Islamoafrican is my own neologism, but it perfectly captures the kind of people we're talking about.

Conversely, the euphemism used in the UK for Muslims (Asians) is ridiculous. As if Bradford was packed full with Chinese and Koreans, LOL.

[Mich the Tester]

Islamoafrican is my own neologism, but it perfectly captures the kind of people we're talking about.

Erm, it doesn't; it's such an extremely broad generalisation that it gives me no idea of who you mean.

[The Spartan]

You're suggesting we leave everything that begins with the letter E?

Tell us again that you're not a nutter.

Lol just goes to show that most people don't know much about Europe including me

[Mich the Tester]

Lol just goes to show that most people don't know much about Europe including me

Yep, and that's part of the problem; people all over Europe don't actually know what the EU does, beyond the crap spouted by their favourite daily rag, so they can't judge whether it's doing the right things for them. Perhaps they can't be expected to know it either, and that in itself is a reason to cut the EU back to what people really need it to be about (free trade IMHO) and leave most things to national governments that people can oversee.

On the other hand, it could be a reason for people to actually read up on the subjects they like to spout about.

[DodgyAgent]

Yep, and that's part of the problem; people all over Europe don't actually know what the EU does, beyond the crap spouted by their favourite daily rag, so they can't judge whether it's doing the right things for them. Perhaps they can't be expected to know it either, and that in itself is a reason to cut the EU back to what people really need it to be about (free trade IMHO) and leave most things to national governments that people can oversee.

On the other hand, it could be a reason for people to actually read up on the subjects they like to spout about.

The fact that no one knows what it does raises the question of what is it for? As far as I can see it administers the CAP and fisheries. We can argue about its usefulness all day long, but the real question is where is it taking us? At the moment we can probably afford its corruption and inefficiencies in administering regional aid, CAP and fisheries policy but if you then give them control of finance then the whole ball game changes.
The thought of the EU controlling the finances of the member states without any democratic accountability is the beginning of an Orwellian nightmare, and it is this that frightens me.

[Mich the Tester]

The fact that no one knows what it does raises the question of what is it for?

That's exactly the question that I hope will be asked all over Europe as a result of Call-me-Dave's speech. I hope there'll be some sensible answers, but I doubt it given the immediate responses from French and German foreign ministers who seem to be stuck in a dream of 'ever closer union' from thirty or more years ago.

[doodab]

Erm, it doesn't; it's such an extremely broad generalisation that it gives me no idea of who you mean.

He means 'darkies' or perhaps 'gollywogs' but he doesn't want to say it.