'Avoid London, It's Full of Pakistanis,' Romanians Warn Fellow Migrants
by Greg Christison
ROMANIANS preparing to swamp Britain next year are insulting British towns and cities and making racist comments about fellow immigrants on the internet.
Many would-be settlers criticise Britain, targeting the likes of Scotland, London and Liverpool, while insisting they do not want to live near Indians, Arabs, Chinese or black people.
The slurs were made on a popular Romanian chat forum in a discussion about the pros and cons of relocating to Britain when border rules are relaxed on January 1 next year.
One poster on Romani Online, aptly named Skis, said he and his family were keen to move to Scotland for winter sports in the Highlands but his comments took a bitter racist twist: "We do not want that cosmopolitan crowd of Indians, Arabs, Chinese, etc. We want something more quiet."
Mutu, another user, described a “high concentration” of “pickaninny” (a derogatory term for black children) in Slough, Berkshire.
He added: “They already have their neighbourhoods. I see on the street, just like home, large laundry on the balcony, colourful skirts, gold teeth, begging gangs of gypsy boys stealing from shops and everything.”
ValiB said Leicester was “full of Indians” and Mickyroman was put off a move to north London because of the Asian population: “I learned it is full of Pakistanis and Indians and do not know what to expect from these nations.”
The comments infuriated Gerard Batten, UKIP’s home affairs spokesman. The MEP said: “It is ironic that when people in Britain voice concerns over mass immigration to the UK they often get tarnished with the accusation of being xenophobic.
“Britain prides itself on being a welcoming and tolerant society and it is only right that we demand people coming to live here adhere to those values.
"Yet here are people wanting to come to Britain clearly not wanting to integrate within our society, based upon their prejudices.
"This demonstrates why migration on a large scale flies in the face of integration.
“In the past the UK Government has moved people from community to community to forge separate groups to prevent social unrest between cultures.
"What you end up with are intolerant clusters of people who cannot live side by side, leading to segregation and the ghettoisation of society.”
Other members of the messageboard have embarked on a lively debate over the best areas to live, the state benefits on offer and their, at times warped, perception of British life.
When several users discussed moving to Scotland, Albea responded: “If you work in Scotland is perfectly OK. Is closer to Norway and Iceland, benefit from the same infrastructure as the rest of the UK and sometimes, if you’re more in the north, you can see the aurora borealis.”
He then went on to sneer: “To learn the language, I think it would be a problem. By the way, forgive my ignorance: Why would anyone want to emigrate to Scotland?”
Albea also told fellow posters not to reveal which football team they support, to remain indoors as much as possible and to make sure they do not react to homosexuals displaying affection in public.
He added: “For those who want to settle there and do not need to work, I strongly recommend the countryside. Every hamlet in England is more pleasant that the best resort in Romania. Do not try to make friends because English aren’t friendly.”
Andrada, who already lives here, urged others to join her in Eastbourne which she described as “God’s waiting room”, an apparent reference to its elderly population. She said it was the ideal area for employment in “nursing, the NHS and city tours”.
Another described the perks of the climate on the south coast but said employment was hard to come by and claimed his community in Hastings was riddled with drug addicts.
“South coast is the most ‘hot’,” he said. “It is normal to see palm trees and other Mediterranean trees in parks and people’s yards.
“For example, the city where I live is the city with the least rainfall in England, Hastings, but on the other hand is the city with the most drug addicts per head of population.”
Responding to a query about Liverpool, the poster added: “I’ve been there but I’ve not heard any good.”
Dorina M, who is considering moving to Salford or Manchester with her unemployed husband, inquired about where to send her 10-year-old to school. Others asked about benefits.
BulgaruBogdan said: “I’m going to get in the UK early next year and I will definitely be working legally but if at some point you have the legal right to receive benefit, of course, I will not refuse.”
- » WSJ: Bulgaria and Smugglers Escalate Their Migrant-Trafficking Battle
- » Seattle Times: Bulgaria Is 'Underappreciated and Ripe for a Visit'
- » Die Welt: Bulgarians Rescuing Schengen Area
- » Balkan Insight: Bulgaria's Impossible Balancing Act
- » DW Reveals How Migrants Are Smuggled out of Bulgaria
- » Sweden Studying Options to Ban Begging
PP, firstly congrats for finding some meaning in Shaman's habitual rambling - did you once work in Bletchley Park mayhap? ;)
I don't think I can agree with your perception of "the problem" however. I'd prefer to leave Colonial Guilt and "humanitarian immigration" out of the equation and that is because they're both imaginary. On the whole the Spoils of Empire didn't benefit the country at large and the humanitarianism was actually nothing more than opportunism and self-interest. Those who DID benefit from Empire were primarily the rich and powerful, and to a lesser extent the middle classes who trotted off into the sunset to carry The White Man's Burden in return for a chance to get to lick out the trough, while Immigration was a useful tool to keep the working class in their place through fear for their jobs. However generosity was certainly shown in abundance when the guilt and blame came to be apportioned!
Neither can I think of any of the world's institutions which are the better for being modelled on a British template - the "benefits" of Colonialism are more along the lines of the Partition of India, with a million dead and 15 million displaced, and the (still ongoing) chaos in Ceylon.
Nowadays the UK sorely needs immigration, mainly because the Welfare State has ballooned (along with the indigenous population's waist-lines) and too many people are "entitled" to sponge off the State, irresponsibly produce yet more spongers - and vote. Without incomers to both do the work and pay the taxes the country would have no visible means of support and its moral, political and financial bankruptcy would be only too evident. It's very strange that nowadays everyone in the UK is supposed to have the opportunity of gaining a plastic degree from a joke university but no-one has to demonstrate the slightest degree of education when voting or applying for a passport, or show they've ever done a stroke of work in their lives before becoming a State-sponsored Parasite....
Sa-Sha, seedy, you are both correct in what you say. All your comments, and mine are facets of the same problem, Britain over the years has opened its doors to too many. To start with it was to offer a "sop" to its old colonial nationals, a kind of "guilt" trip, Britain had enjoyed the spoils of one quarter of the world for hundreds of years and then needed to feel it was paying in some small way.( The spoils of course were not just one way in that many of the worlds institutions and those of member countries are derived from British administrations, a legacy Britain left in a similar way to those left by the Romans.) Then there were immigrants accepted in vast numbers for genuine humanitarian reasons. Then, over the past decade or so they were encouraged by government to fill a skills shortage for, as Seedy says, to do the jobs lazy Brits didn't want. What everyone forgot was that everything has a price and a payback period now the country creaks and groans to pay the price. I reiterate what I said, it is not about Romanians and Bulgarians they just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. If ANY large numbers of peoples from ANY poor country entered the UK to seek work (that is they had no job to go to) they would get the same reaction. If we were in times of plenty they would go unnoticed, as it is we are in times of hardship and jobs and services are under strain and, quite naturally, wanted by the indigenous population. As for rubbing shoulders with people not of white origin, that is inevitable as Britain is no longer a white country except in small rural pockets where there is little or no work. Work is here the people are, in the large towns and cities and they are populated by those who need to work, white, brown, black, yellow and every other shade. If that is not to your liking...tough.
" Brits are not complaining about Romanian and Bulgarian immigration par see but against ANY mass immigration from ANYWHERE"-may be, Peter, but: -UK media are focused just on Ro and BG, why? May be because "they are steered to say anything and everything against white immigrants, but if they had used the same language against non-white immigrants"...(Yane), may be because "British people who complained when mass immigration started were initially mocked, then criticized, then arrested for being racist" (madoods)......
I see the real problem of UK not in "rubbing shoulders" among immigrants and even not in "mass immigration" but in its "coloured" character with the obvious green, i.e. Muslim, colour' domination. And more and more it is not Islam merely, but Radical Islam ("Sharia Law for UK!"). Сollapse of Multiculturalism in "the most multicultural country in the world" (and all other European countries, btw) is the problem. Real and Big Problem............
Btw, UK is today-in strict conformity with Islamic dogma-"The Land
of War" [for the triumph of Islamic values, sure]. Congrats.
Radical Islam knows no words "mercy
Firstly, the kind of new immigrants which the Brits should be worried abut are precisely the ones who would stick out in a crowd of white faces. It's no accident that the "newspapers" which the majority of Brits read conflate pictures of Roma with reports of a 30 million-strong Slavic Invasion massing at Calais.
Secondly, as far as "the ordinary British people who have no voice apart from complaining in newspapers" are concerned - let them eat cake! Without immigrants who want to work and do the jobs the locals are too fat/lazy/hoity-toity to soil their delicate hands with, the whole country would be even deeper in the mire than it is.
All that Perfidious Albion produces these days are people with an inflated (and unwarranted) self-esteem, rights with no responsibilities, and "universities" which dole out plastic degrees to semi-literates. Nor should one forget the Bright Young Things to be seen vomiting and fighting in the streets of British cities - and Sunny Beach - every week-end.
The Welfare State and Yuman Rites have eroded the true British Spirit and no-one is convinced that doling out billions to scroungers and jobsworths at home, and despots and gangsters abroad, is a sensible way for deck-passengers on a submarine to be behaving....
It is true that there are not enough jobs for British people so that is one reason why the prospect of being 'swamped' by citizens of two more countries is causing such panic. Also, British people who complained when mass immigration started were initially mocked, then criticized, then arrested for being racist. The British culture has been totally destroyed by mass immigration - apart from a few tourist venues there is very little left. Their green belts are being built on to house influxes of more immigrants. Their old people are being denied treatment in hospitals and left to die because there are just too many people. I fully understand why they may be concerned and feel sorry for the ordinary British people who have no voice apart from complaining in newspapers
This is now fascicle, fact is if Romanians and any other migrants want work they will have to rub shoulders with Pakistanis, Indians, Africans, Caribbeans,, Chinese, and every other colour, dialect and racial type in the world. Britain is the most multicultural country in the world and most have arrived in Britain to find work. If Romanians (and others) want to go where there are only white skins they will find no work, simple as that, that is if they can even find such an area. Seems to me that Romanians are just as racist as they are accusing the Brits as being. Fact is that the Brits are not complaining about Romanian and Bulgarian immigration par see but against ANY mass immigration from ANYWHERE at this time when even their own citizens can't get jobs.
It may be wrong and it may be lies, but it sells newspapers.
The media in the UK is not representative of the UK as a whole. It's always been the case that British people can buy a newspaper which agrees with their own views, however misguided those views may be.
They don't as a rule make stuff up, they just twist reality to the point where it's unrecognisable, just to attract readers and boost sales of newspapers.
When politicians lie, their lips move, and when newspapers print lies, they generally use black ink.
by Greg Christison
ROMANIANS preparing to >>>swamp<<< Britain next year are insulting British towns and cities
“Britain prides itself on being a >>>welcoming and tolerant society<<< and it is only right that we demand people coming to live here adhere to those values.
I guess its not bigotry when you target white people such as the Romanians, then it's not chauvanism? They shoot themselves in the foot. Romanians and Bulgarians (and previously Polish people) are a way for Brits to vent their general feelings about immigration, they are steered to say anything and everything against white immigrants, but if they had used the same language against non-white immigrants?
And seriously, they handpick internet posters as the face of Romania, how low can you get? This is just a cheap stunt for Brits to say what they are doing is ok.