The very first line in the article
“Department for Education figures follow predictions that white Britons will be a minority in the next 40 years”
Follow predictions Predictions made in a previous Telegraph piece based on a Goodwin report using a stupid definition of who is and isn’t “white British” . The article is linked further down, and the stupid Goodwin piece linked from there.
I don’t know nor care whether or not Goodwin is on salary at the Torygraph, his article is linked and quoted.
who gives a flying monkeys backside what they follow or precede. the discussion was about schools/ biased on figures released yesterday. Now read that over and over till it penetrates.
although i am glad you have learnt what the word prediction means. now all you have to do is learn what the word now means.
dont worry there will still be plenty of kids for your mates to blow up and gang ■■■■.
more two tier from starmer… he brings a law in in a few days so people can be sent to jail for 2 years or more for hurty words.
martyns law however… he has passed it but needs 2 years before it comes into effect.
For those that dont know a martyns law is to help secure british public and public buildings from terrorism.
Obviously the Telegraph does. It does so in the very first line of the article you linked to.
It seeks to conflate the Goodwin piece with the Dept of Ed figures and suggests that the official figures (strange that you now seem to accept official figures when normally you accuse them of being crap?) back up Goodwin’s predictions.
That is in the link you posted.
i always except official figures that are clearly not incorrect its you that doesnt. In the past i even admitted to accepting figures from cooper with out checking them and when i did check found they were completely wrong.
as i said though you dont need to worry about this. there are still plenty left in schools for your mates.
I don’t give a flying ■■■■ what Goodwin and The Telegraph said…it wasn’t even me who posted the 'kin thing.
It was YOU who mentioned MY kids in a derogatory way to use as an example, if I had posted it you had every right to reply to ME…I did not, I was NOT involved.
Yeah because the '‘messenger’ is a beligerant offensive prick, and to resort to my pub analogy, (or my own criteria for what I say to people on here,) if you had said sonething like that to me in …yeah ‘‘The Fox and Grapes’’ if ya like , you would have found yourself suddenlly on your back…without fear of contradicion.
A REAL man even if not intending to insult my family would at least apologise for in your view a misunderstanding…but I will not hold my breath.
Seems fair. The important word being British. A child born to two black British parents or even a mixed race British couple is still British. The colour matters not one iota. It’s the British angle that’s important. If someone wants to describe a child as white British that’s as fair and equally as relevant as describing another child as black British. I personally don’t see a problem with that, do you?
the issue of the “white british” is to stop those that have no interest in british culture or way of life or even history unless they can get some freebies out of it… saying they are british.
no one here would go to live in iraq drink sleep around thieve etc and call themselves an arabian (not saying thats how people behave its the only things i can think of off the top of my head that are against arab cultrure). Most sensible people even if they assimilated themselves into the arab culture wouldnt call themselves arabian.
I have not wittingly said anything derogatory about any of your family.
Where have I said anything against your kids or other family members?
Point out to me where I have inadvertently done so and I will apologise.
Not sure what the situation is now but a few years ago a child born in the uk to a British father but a non British mother if the parents were married the child could take Brit Citizen status, via the father. if parents were not married the child had to take the mothers nationality.
If the parents were married the child could also take dual citizenship. Complications arose if the child was born on an aeroplane in mid flight.
As I said…it did NOT mention me…YOU did !!
YOU made derogatory remarks about MY kids.
Why you would single me out I do not know.
If you had to single anybody out at all, the o/p who posted it would have been arguably appropriate.
Even if you were big enough and man enough…you aint btw, the moment has gone, and I would not accept it anyway.
So shove it up your hole mate, all you have done is confirm what I already know…you are an utter ####.
Now do one before you annoy me anymore.
It does not matter where the parents were born, it used to be down to the respective parents nationalities and their marriage status at the time the child was born. That was the situation in the UK. Different countries have their own Nationality laws and procedures.
It does not matter where the parents were born.
It is however Goodwin and the Telegraph who for their own political benefit say that both parents should be born in the UK for the children to be “white British”.
Goodwin says that a child with (for example) a French father, living and settled in the UK, married to an English mother, whose child is born in the UK, will not be counted as “white English” because both parents are not born in the UK.
That is the strange sort of thinking that Goodwin uses and is reported without criticism in the Telegraph.
Does @maoster agree with that stance?
Is that what his doggie analogy is about?
If you think the article was only to push an agenda…why tf are you so concerned about it?
Are you trying to do some damage linitation to try and regain some credibility after making a spectacle/fool of yourself (again) or what?
Meanwhile the US has warned Starmer’s clown crew about alowing a Chinese embassy building close to Sensitive UK infrastructure in fear of potential espionage activities…the Tories cautiously binned the idea previously it was reported
Previously the US also showed ‘concern’ for the UK on the gradual erosion of free speech, after people are in prison for gobbing off on FB due to Starmer and his 2 tier policies.
Some may interpret it as Trump sticking his nose in, I for one am all for it, at least somebody has our interests at heart, whatever the motives may or may not be.
On the other hand I seem to remember Starmer’s crew sticking their fat snouts in the US elections to scupper Trump’s plans…that went well eh?
, you would have found yourself suddenlly on your back…without fear of contradicion.