If you had to change your name, what would it be?

[Empired]

I don't really know what else would suit me tbh. Taking suggestions x

problem solved everyone x

[-:Undertaker:-]

Yes because "In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man" sounds like the words of a man that wants to mix with nonwhites.

Replace "black man" in that speech with "Pakistani men" and add "Rotherham". He wasn't far off really, was he?

Maybe attempting to understand what the man was saying and advocating rather than recycling the favourite lines of Owen Jones when it comes to Enoch Powell would be a good start. That said, what's the point when in the past you've basically said that anybody who opposes open borders and integration is a nasty yewwwkip waycist?

[The Don]

Replace "black man" in that speech with Pakistani man and add 'Rotherham'. He wasn't far off really, was he?

So change the entire quote and he's not that wrong? Lmao

I'm sure you'll appreciate this danlogic @FlyingJesus;

Oh, Dan added more to his initial post to make it less idiotic.

Maybe attempting to understand what the man was saying and advocating rather than recycling the favourite lines of Owen Jones when it comes to Enoch Powell would be a good start. That said, what's the point when in the past you've basically said that anybody who opposes open borders and integration is a nasty yewwwkip waycist?

You clearly don't understand the speech of your 'idol' yourself if you think the contents of it is interchangeable with Pakistani Men in Rotherham. Even Farage admits that Enoch Powell was wrong because the amounts of immigration Powell opposed (30k-50k) was perfectly manageable. You use 'waycist' to attempt to solidify your point more than anybody you accuse actually does.

[Jssy]

Alexia

Sent from my XT1021 using Tapatalk

[dbgtz]

Rex Armstong

[j0rd]

Arnold Schwarzenegger

because why not

[-:Undertaker:-]

Edit: I was wrong on the top quote, apparently he was quoting someone when he said that

Well duh as I predicted you hadn't even tried to study the speech and instead decided to go by what you'd read Will Self, Owen Jones and Polly Toynbee write in the Guardian as the ultimate truth.

Study the speech, study the man and learn the logic before commenting on his legacy.

Even Farage admits that Enoch Powell was wrong because the amounts of immigration Powell opposed (30k-50k) was perfectly manageable.

It can be manageable depending on where the immigrants come from, how strong the host culture is, where they move and live to, who they interact with. But as our immigration policy has been anything but focused on controlled numbers and integration, Powell's logic stands the test of time.

You use 'waycist' to attempt to solidify your point more than anybody you accuse actually does.

On every debate where you can you bring race into it or accuse me of a phobia/bigotry. You just did it lmao.

So change the entire quote and he's not that wrong? Lmao

A conservative estimate of 1,400 children in Rotherham by the Jay Report and you still dispute the results of multiculturalism and mass immigration. Incredible. He [Powell] was right, and you are wrong. But don't just take it from me: here's what the 'Guardian-reading' former Labour MP for the area had to admit.....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ild-abuse.html

He told the BBC: "I think there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat if I may put it like that.”

Admitting he had been guilty of doing too little, he said he had been aware of the problem of cousin marriage and “the oppression of women within bits of the Muslim community in Britain” but: “Perhaps yes, as a true Guardian reader, and liberal leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.”

The whip hand over 1,400 English girls - children - and much worse, you're damn right.

[The Don]

A conservative estimate of 1,400 children in Rotherham by the Jay Report and you still dispute the results of multiculturalism and mass immigration. Icredible. He [Powell] was right, and you are wrong. But don't just take it from me: here's what the 'Guardian-reading' former Labour MP for the area had to admit.....

So talking about black immigration in the 60's is the same as Pakistani immigration in 2014? You're being incredibly dense

The whip hand over 1,400 English girls - children - and much worse, you're damn right.

Pakistani != Black

What you're arguing is like saying "Kevin said 2+2 = 5, replace 5 with 4 then he's not far off" it's just incredibly wrong.

[-:Undertaker:-]

So talking about black immigration in the 60's is the same as Pakistani immigration in 2014? You're being incredibly dense

Pakistani != Black

What you're arguing is like saying "Kevin said 2+2 = 5, replace 5 with 4 then he's not far off" it's just incredibly wrong.

I think you are confusing (purposely?) skin colour with culture. It is true that African culture and Pakistani culture are vastly different to one another, but it's also true they're vastly different to our own.

And that was the point Powell was making and why I say the prophecy is true in 2014 /w Rotherham.

[The Don]

I think you are confusing (purposely?) skin colour with culture. It is true that African culture and Pakistani culture are vastly different to one another, but it's also true they're vastly different to our own.

And that was the point Powell was making and why I say the prophecy is true in 2014 /w Rotherham.

You're using the point that Pakistani men abused children in Rotherham (which still only accounts for less than 1% of Pakistani immigrants but let's not argue facts because danlogic) to prove that Enoch Powell was right to argue against black immigration in the 60's. Pure idiocy.