According to the theory of linguistic relativity, language influences thought - the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
The sole argument used by the Council of Europe - the European Commission of Human Rights (13 May 1982) and the European Court of Human Rights (end May 1985) - to enable foreign men to live in the UK through marriage was that preventing them from doing so was "discrimination against women".
In English as soon as the word "discrimination" is mentioned there's an automatic feeling of wrong-doing.
In Japanese there are two words for "discrimination": "sabetsu" means "unfair treatment"; while "kubetsu" means "distinguishing right from wrong/good from bad".
Judges discriminate. If they can't, they shouldn't be there.
The Queen's Christmas message in 2004 was all about Asians and Africans living in Britain. "Discrimination still exists," said the Queen disapprovingly.
Discrimination ought to exist. The more discrimination the better. It's a normative prerequisite for justice.
I'm afraid I'm old enough to remember Englishmen's complaint in the 1940s: "The Americans are over-paid, over-sexed and over here." To which the Americans' reply was: "The British are under-paid, under-sexed and under Eisenhower!"
If some countries are rich and peaceful, while others are poor and war-torn, then it is obvious who wants to live in which country. Women living in a rich and peaceful country have nothing about which to complain.
British women may be regarded as lucky to live in these islands, but they may also have the privilege in being able to live abroad through marriage. There is nothing in the European Convention on Human Rights about privileging people.
Wednesday 24 November 2010
Tuesday 23 November 2010
Fairness - a Good Idea
The Church of England General Synod opens today in London. It'll be opened by the Head of the Church. The Queen. Who sparked modern feminism in Britain with her Christmas message of 1967.
Top of the Synod's agenda is having women bishops.
The Government's solution to curbing immigration to the UK is a cap on Work Visas.
That cap has been announced (BBC Radio 4 Today) as 43,000 (but with exceptions).
Since Work Visas have a time limit the cap is pointless. It is also criminal. (Though, technically, that's up to a judge/jury to say.) Because David Cameron deceived the electorate during the run-up to the May General Election by stressing it was the solution to the problem of migration to the UK.
Every day 1,000 people enter the UK on Student Visas. As with most other visas there is a time constraint.
The reality is that to control immigration effectively, foreigners have to be prevented from taking up permanent residence.
A major solution would be to end the concession to foreign men who currently can obtain permanent residence through marriage.
This was promised by Mrs. Thatcher in 1979.
Britain now has another female in charge - Mrs. May is Home Secretary.
She, too, is letting down the electorate.
The European Court of Human Rights is also partly to blame.
It's pointless having elections.
Today also revealed that any asylum seeker who fails in his claim can appeal to the European Court. Under Rule 39 he cannot be deported.
At the end of May 1985 the European Court ruled in favor of three women whose foreign husbands wanted to live in the UK. That was unfair, because there was nothing to prevent them living together in their husband's country.(Malawi, Egypt and the Philippines.) I can't. And I doubt if many readers can.
The current "buzzword" amongst all British politicians these days is "fairness".
It would be fair if native Britons could make use of the European Court to prevent the occupation of "their" country. But they can't. I tried (10 June 1977).
When Mahatma Ghandi was asked what he thought of Western civilisation he famously replied that he thought it would be a "good idea".
Fairness for native Britons would be a good idea.
Top of the Synod's agenda is having women bishops.
The Government's solution to curbing immigration to the UK is a cap on Work Visas.
That cap has been announced (BBC Radio 4 Today) as 43,000 (but with exceptions).
Since Work Visas have a time limit the cap is pointless. It is also criminal. (Though, technically, that's up to a judge/jury to say.) Because David Cameron deceived the electorate during the run-up to the May General Election by stressing it was the solution to the problem of migration to the UK.
Every day 1,000 people enter the UK on Student Visas. As with most other visas there is a time constraint.
The reality is that to control immigration effectively, foreigners have to be prevented from taking up permanent residence.
A major solution would be to end the concession to foreign men who currently can obtain permanent residence through marriage.
This was promised by Mrs. Thatcher in 1979.
Britain now has another female in charge - Mrs. May is Home Secretary.
She, too, is letting down the electorate.
The European Court of Human Rights is also partly to blame.
It's pointless having elections.
Today also revealed that any asylum seeker who fails in his claim can appeal to the European Court. Under Rule 39 he cannot be deported.
At the end of May 1985 the European Court ruled in favor of three women whose foreign husbands wanted to live in the UK. That was unfair, because there was nothing to prevent them living together in their husband's country.(Malawi, Egypt and the Philippines.) I can't. And I doubt if many readers can.
The current "buzzword" amongst all British politicians these days is "fairness".
It would be fair if native Britons could make use of the European Court to prevent the occupation of "their" country. But they can't. I tried (10 June 1977).
When Mahatma Ghandi was asked what he thought of Western civilisation he famously replied that he thought it would be a "good idea".
Fairness for native Britons would be a good idea.
Wednesday 17 November 2010
Unequal Britain
37% of immigration cases brought before a Tribunal are successful. (BBC Radio 4 Today , today.)
This was used to argue that Immigration officials should be more efficient and not make mistakes.
If they do make mistakes, then equally many foreigners are in the UK when - by rights - they shouldn't be. But they do not complain to Immigration Tribunals!
In other words, there should not be any such Tribunals.
Native Britons have no recourse to Tribunals to correct those mistakes.
Similarly, the legal profession is deeply involved in immigration cases - as reference to the Law Reports in The Times reveal. But it is only those who want to live here who can avail themselves of the law.
If Britons go to other countries and their visa runs out - that's it, they have to leave.
This was used to argue that Immigration officials should be more efficient and not make mistakes.
If they do make mistakes, then equally many foreigners are in the UK when - by rights - they shouldn't be. But they do not complain to Immigration Tribunals!
In other words, there should not be any such Tribunals.
Native Britons have no recourse to Tribunals to correct those mistakes.
Similarly, the legal profession is deeply involved in immigration cases - as reference to the Law Reports in The Times reveal. But it is only those who want to live here who can avail themselves of the law.
If Britons go to other countries and their visa runs out - that's it, they have to leave.
Tuesday 16 November 2010
Warning: Ongoing Deception
Phil Woolas, until recently Britain's Immigration Minister, has been stripped of his parliamentary seat by two High Court judges. (London's Evening Standard, page 1.)
Page 8 of the same paper states that Mrs. Theresa May, Britain's Home Secretary, and Minister for Women and Equality, "promised stricter rules to make it more difficult for temporary migrants to stay in Britain permanently."
The Commons Home Affairs Committee warned that this would be impossible "unless new curbs on student arrivals and the ability of migrants to bring family members with them were introduced."
If foreigners are "migrants" then they already have the right to permanent residence. It's no wonder the Government cannot get a grip on this issue if the very words they use are misleading.
Page 8 of the same paper states that Mrs. Theresa May, Britain's Home Secretary, and Minister for Women and Equality, "promised stricter rules to make it more difficult for temporary migrants to stay in Britain permanently."
The Commons Home Affairs Committee warned that this would be impossible "unless new curbs on student arrivals and the ability of migrants to bring family members with them were introduced."
If foreigners are "migrants" then they already have the right to permanent residence. It's no wonder the Government cannot get a grip on this issue if the very words they use are misleading.
Warning Undertones
The Daily Telegraph of 3 November, page 8: "The Government's planned immigration cap will make 'little difference' and allow more than 400,000 migrants to move to Britain every year, MPs warn today."
The article below states:
"A taxi driver has been ordered to remove the slogan "British by birth, English by the grace of God" from his cab.
Council officials told the Gulf war veteran that two passengers had been offended by the sign's 'racist overtunes'."
The article below states:
"A taxi driver has been ordered to remove the slogan "British by birth, English by the grace of God" from his cab.
Council officials told the Gulf war veteran that two passengers had been offended by the sign's 'racist overtunes'."
Tuesday 9 November 2010
"Rights" Result in Rural Wrongs
Today's Daily Telegraph, page 11, tells of "the mainly Nigerian grooms paying up to £10,000 to marry eastern European women legally living here.
"Clergy have become more vigilant after a series of sham marriages at St Peter's Church in Accrington."
Country vicars are being targeted as being ignorant as to what is happening.
Scope for this "immigration fraud" was provided by the European Court of Human Rights which (wrongly, I believe) ruled in favour of foreign men being allowed to live and work in the UK (end May 1985).
"Clergy have become more vigilant after a series of sham marriages at St Peter's Church in Accrington."
Country vicars are being targeted as being ignorant as to what is happening.
Scope for this "immigration fraud" was provided by the European Court of Human Rights which (wrongly, I believe) ruled in favour of foreign men being allowed to live and work in the UK (end May 1985).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
