Simple question if you own a house, paid for with your own hard earned cash, why should you be made to hand it over to an immigrant, refugee, asylum seeker etc etc. Even if it is your home in the country thatyou onlyuse once in a while.

Imagine your at home, a knock on the door it's a copper with one of the above in tow, right sir you have two cars out front, this immigrant doesn't have one, so he's having your wifes car that she hardley uses.

FCUK RIGHT OFF OUT OF IT.

Whilst it may be a human need, it is not (rightly or wrongly) a god given right.

If you own your property you can do with it what you wish. Should you wish to rent it out to Mr and Mrs Eastern European, that’s your choice, you shouldn’t be pressurised, coerced, or be offered incentives to do so, as to offer incentives to landlords to house immigrants over our own homeless is positive discrimination is it not ?

I do though concede that getting on the property ladder in England is almost impossible for young people these days, and I do find that disgraceful.

Edited by dannyh (10 Aug 2015 11.37am)

The ideology and the rhetoric. Cuba, for example, and for whatever view you may personally have of it in terms of freedom, places a very significant emphasis on the provision of its people, as opposed to the nation state (standards of health provision and education in Cuba massively exceed that of most similar third world countries).

Cuba, spent most of its existence as part of the Soviet satellite state, and engages in internationalism which isn't typically a fascist trait - Nationalism isn't that much of a tennet in Soviet or Cuban politics.

Communism and fascism (and especially National Socialism) have a lot of shared ideology (as fascism originated as a response to the appeal of communism), what tends to differ is the organization of the state and itsbody politic, the political rhetoric and probably most notably how those bodies of state function, rather than its actions. Both Fascism and Socialism place great emphasis on the power of unions as a means of protecting the working class, the difference is that in socialism, those organizations are formed and directed for the working class, where as in fascism they serve the state directly.

Whilst it can seem that's the same thing, its worth remembering that in Poland the rise of Solidarity stems from the Unions against the Polish communist state - similarly Union and state factions in both Hungary and Chechslovakia were instrumental in the both famous uprisings.

In Zimbabwe, there was the movement of reclaiming land, not for the state, but for the black farmers from private ownership (a disaster).

In the way that the term fascism gets used in general life, somewhat ignorantly, it could be applied to both Soviet style communism, Chinese State communism, Spanish Falangism, Pan Arabic Baathism or Argentinian Juntas; but there are very significant differences (notably in the internal politics and power structure). Also, traditionally both Communism and Fascism are 'opposed forces'.

Similarly one could look a Capitalist Democracies and label them the same, but when you look internally you see a big difference in terms of structure and organization, as well as orientation, whilst obstentially championing many of the same causes and ideals.

I think you are lookin at things through your red glasses and your obvious admiration for 'benevolent' Cuba is at odds with the reality of the regimes treatment of the 'people'.

The fact is that the 'people's regime' is just a glossy veneer which hides the fact that the tolatarian regime suppressed and murdered at will yet dressed it up as a Workers Paradise to give it credibility with and receive sympathy from those around the World who swallow this.

This is just the same glossy veneer the Nazi's sold to elements of the European aristocracy in the 1930's.

To me they are two sides of he same coin and no sane person would support or defend either murderous regime, regardless of the rhetorical or ideological spin either was dressed up as.

Edited by matt_himself (10 Aug 2015 2.26pm)

Oh the irony.A lecture on tolerance from FUE.

You have proposed booby trapping a home occupied by migrants (and likely their kids) and to send the SAS over (I think with you joining them)to mow down all the would-be migrants (all necessarily including kids) in Calais.These struck me as fascistic-like sentiments.

Your partner in tolerance LS (as Derben his red-carded predecessor) suggested he'd move away on principle if people of a different religion,race or ethnicity to him moved in near him (regardless of what they were like as people).The very essence of tolerance, ho hum.

Somewhat different to simply disagreeing with anyone with a different view to me about immigration controls,the EU,the 1951 Convention or migration,no?

How ridiculous of me to be so intolerant by not exhibiting due tolerance towards such sentiments (and,heaven forbid, even viewing them as exhibiting fascistic-like sentiments)and in so doing not realise my views themselves constitute the essence of fascism.

But ,if FUE said so ,it must be true and I'll happily withdraw it.

Instead,such sentiments as FUE's and LS' strike me as the obnoxious mutterings of extreme neanderthals.

Is that ok corkery or does it still make me a horseshoe?

This is exactly the garbage that I talk about. Absolute poppycock.

The rubbish you come out with strikes me as the mutterings of a Liberal fool who hates his country and it's past. Such self loathing results in this outpouring of drivel.

Nice to hear the Tories finally saying what the sensible majority of us think about 'these marauding African immigrants' who are an absolute menace, who take jobs away from our own and who drive wages down. Maybe now we can see some action.

Edited by legaleagle (09 Aug 2015 11.15pm)

No one should be in any doubt the sheer murderous nature of the 'revolutionary' regime in Cuba. There is much evidence on the net for this regime.

Meet the new boss.....He's actually worse for you than the old boss.

The Castro revolution was a disaster for most Cubans.

[Link]