Daily Mail readers show their true colours

[Mick Mac]

Maybe "ontheedge" should rename himself "onthefence". TLS has at least put forward a point that provokes debate.

[Sherwick]

so all you people who sympathise with "the Working-Class peole have voted BNP", what's your solution to this 'problem'?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Sherwick, I had the good manners and civility to give lengthy answers to every single point you made.

Would you kindly extend the same courtesy and address my questions to you now, please.

Dialogue is a 2 way affair, I'm sure you know.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Actually Sherwick allow me to ask some more, namely:

1/ How have you, personally, adversely been affected by mass immigration to this Country over the last 40 years?

2/ Have your career prospects or environment or Culture sufferred?

3/ East Diulwich is not a comparitively diverse area, culturally, so roughly is your own area of residence diverse or are you, personally, a resident of the relatively non-diverse East Dulwich?

4/ If you are an East Dulwich resident why do you choose to live in a relatively non-diverse area of Inner London?

Over to you, Mon Ami.

[Sherwick]

I guess your question is 'So why has "White Flight" taken place in London and Birmingham then, Sherwick? ?

It's an interesting question because I honestly have never heard the term "white flight" used in the UK. I heard it used in the USA a lot when I lived over there for 6 years. I find this very interesting...

Anyway, I don't actually believe that it HAS taken place (which is also why I've never heard it used in the UK). I think people move out of the centre of towns, either to the suburbs or further out to the countryside, because there's more space. Also, importantly, you get more bang for your buck.

It may well be true that some whites have moved out because of number 2. However, I've known several white families that have moved out, and all did so to get larger houses in tranquil/countryside settings.

You still haven't told me what the solution to this problem is - I assume that you see it as a problem and not just supposed BNP supporters who you are speaking on behalf of?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Sherwick Wrote:

It's an interesting question because I honestly have never heard the term "white flight" used in the UK. I heard it used in the USA a lot when I lived over there for 6 years. I find this very interesting...

Anyway, I don't actually believe that it HAS taken place (which is also why I've never heard it used in the UK). I think people move out of the centre of towns, either to the suburbs or further out to the countryside, because there's more space. Also, importantly, you get more bang for your buck. It may well be true that some whites have moved out because of number 2. However, I've known several white families that have moved out, and all did so to get larger houses in

tranquil/countryside settings. You still haven't told me what the solution to this problem is - I assume that you see it as a problem and not just supposed BNP supporters who you are speaking on behalf of?

Thank you for your reply.

Its not often called White Flight here. I was born near Camberwell/Peckham in te 1950's and believe me I vividly remember people pointing out Black people in the street in the 1960's. It was that rare.

One never saw an Asiatic person at all. Almost everyone, everywhere in every social setting was White and you must see by travelling around London, away from the work environments of The West End and The City that that seems ridiculous now, given the contrast circa 2009.

Look at any London or indeed English Documentary frm The 1950's/1960's about any Subject and almost every face you see in every programme was White/British, almost without exception. Every ordinary street scene etc

Where do you think the following Generations of those people have gone to? Most Londoners are/were Working-Class so did not have privare travel. Believe me most did NOT move for "1" no matter how attractive !1! is.

Whether you or I like it is "2" that was the clincher.

Solving the problem? How can you stop immigration when Brits can float off into the sunset? I would have rigorous Border controls and only allow in genuine Asylum Seekers and the Guys passing a Means Test. I would deport all illegal immigrants, provided their original Countries accepted them back.

Allow the rest of us that remain to build Britain so it becomes a respected Country again.

[Sherwick]

Thanks for your scientific evidence proving that 2 is the clincher. Much appreciated. (This is a joke by the way).

If it's not often called "white flight" here, where did YOU get this term from?

And I'm confused, is it you who are concerned about the lack of pure white neighbourhoods, or the BNP who are concerned, or both?

As regards your (final?) solution to this terrible problem, the overwhelming vast majority of immigrants who are living here permanently are here legally and most people with funny brown skin were born here, so your 'deporting all illegals' won't work.

In fact, illegals are already being deported.

[SeanMacGabhann]

What is this pie in the sky you speak of Tony? When was this country respected and by who? One of it's finest hours was fighting against the very ethos you espouse.

What would make the country respected again, once you have closed the doors? (Presumably you would stop people leaving as well?)

I left a country of people like you specifically to live in a more racially diverse country. TO go one further I left a country BECAUSE of people like you

To answer the 4 questions you asked someone else

1/ How have you, personally, adversely been affected by mass immigration to this Country over the last 40 years?

Loaded question, why do I have to answer only about adverse aspects and not the many positive ones? So whilst my diet is enriched, my outlook and horizons expanded, I can't think of any adversitys cause by immigration

2/ Have your career prospects or environment or Culture sufferred?

My career and prospects have several times been thwarted. Sometimes by people from this country, sometimes from my own country and sometimes from others. Is there a difference and what is it? As for culture, what does that mean? Are you John Major talking about maidens and warm beer again. It never applied to most of this country, ever.

3/ East Diulwich is not a comparitively diverse area, culturally, so roughly is your own area of residence diverse or are you, personally, a resident of the relatively non-diverse East Dulwich?

Comparative to where? LL itself is homogenising but compared to most places I have lived it is diverse.

4/ If you are an East Dulwich resident why do you choose to live in a relatively non-diverse area of Inner London?

Notwithstanding the above, it's a combination of many things - primarily proximity to town, green spaces, and enough space to be able to afford a decent place to live. Also worth noting is that comparative to other areas (and you can choose black Brixton or you can choose White Dagenham) it is also less crime-ridden

[Ted Max]

Tony, the contradiction in your argument is this: you say that you personally have no issue with living alongside, with and amongst people of different races and cultures. Yet, you posit, many other people do - and this leads to problems of polarisation, and votes for groups like the BNP.

But your solution to this (close borders - deportation of "illegals") stems not from your own, creditable tolerance, but panders to the baser instincts of the very people with whom you disagree.

Finally, you have argued that the poor are more affected - being less mobile and economically flexible. How then, was your working class Walworth community able to decamp en masse to the Eden that is Foots Cray, Bexley and environs?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Ted Max Wrote:

Tony... But your solution to this (close borders - deportation of "illegals") stems not from your own, creditable tolerance, but panders to the baser instincts of the very people with whom you disagree.

Ted Max: As I said earlier, I believe we should still always allow genuine Asylum Seekers and have a Means-Based System, now, and in the future.

I also said that it would be difficult closing borders unless this was reciprocated, while Brits can still float off to the sunset.

I don't agree that removing all people who have arrived here or stayed here illegally since, is pandering to any baser instincts but common sense and correct. If I arrived and stayed in your abode illegally, surely you would want me removed Ted?

Ted Max: Finally, you have argued that the poor are more affected - being less mobile and economically flexible. How then, was your working class Walworth community able to decamp en masse to the Eden that is Foots Cray, Bexley and environs?

Houses were much cheaper in those areas that you mentioned, compared with Inner London. They were cheaper still if you ventured to Milton Keynes/Crawley/The Medway Towns in Kent and the average price during the main period where people left Inner London was The 1970's/1980's where even in 1983 a 3-Bedroom House, like mine, could be bought for ?27,500.

In addition to that there was the period where many were able to sell their Council places after The Thatcher era so they had the cash to buy a cheaper part in or near The Garden of Eden, I mean England, which is Kent, of course...

[woofmarkthedog]

> 1/ Where a Dress.

there is a Black/Asian equivalent so mixed

> marriages have additional problems, I'm agraid.

Be very agraid..................

[Tony.London Suburbs]

woofmarkthedog Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

1/ Where a Dress. there is a Black/Asian equivalent so mixed marriages have additional problems, I'm agraid. Be very agraid

Thought of you last night while watching ESPN Classic Channel. While talking on the phome I saw Doctor Crane emerge on the screen for 10 seconds during an England/Switzerland Match.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Sherwick Wrote:

Thanks for your scientific evidence proving that 2 is the clincher. Much appreciated. (This is a joke by the way).

If it's not often called "white flight" here, where did YOU get this term from? And I'm confused, is it you who are concerned about the lack of pure white neighbourhoods, or the BNP who are concerned, or both? As regards your (final?) solution to this terrible problem, the overwhelming vast majority of immigrants who are living here permanently are

here legally and most people with funny brown skin were born here, so your 'deporting all illegals' won't work.

In fact, illegals are already being deported.

I'll address all these points later ( by the way, you, unlike Sean, have not answered my 4 short questions, addressed to yourself).

Quick initial comment though. Why is deporting all illegal immigrants anything whatsoever connected to the fact that :

"the overwhelming vast majority of immigrants who are living here permanently are here legally and most people with funny brown skin were born here" ??

As the comment only refers to the "illegal" immigrants and I have CLEARLY stated that I have no problem with "legal" immigrants whether they have "funny brown skin or not" and being born here, who are, by definition, as entitled to live here as you or I ( which I, also, already have said).) why have you brought them up Sherwick?

[Ted Max]

Cheers TLS. The thing is - your suggested answers are not too far off the status quo. It's tough enough, say, getting a first class cricketer a visa to come and play in this country, never mind rocking up at some UK embassy in Africa with a hopeful expression. And if we can find them (EDIT: Horrible icon retracted), we deport plenty of people.

Which is to say, your suggested policy is clearly not the answer to changing people's minds about the "adverse" affects of having people that look different to them move in next door.

Governments already talk tough on immigration, and it reinforces the perception that immigration is a bad thing. You welcome immigration, and accept we have a moral duty as a country with our specific past to accept it. And yet you bemoan its affects.

Could we not apportion some of the responsibility on those of us who live in this country to accept immigration as a fact of life at worst, a duty at best, and welcome and live with it, as you appear to have done.

[Sherwick]

Tony, you quite clearly have a problem with the LEGAL immigrants because you keep bringing up the fact that most of London (and elsewhere) is non-white these days, unlike the marvelous past - and , as I pointed out, the overwhelming majority of these non-white people are here legally and were born here.

Later you propose a solution for dealing with ILLEGAL immigrants, and I pointed out that this doesn't solve your problem of the non-white areas.

Anyway, what four questions are you talking about?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Ted Max Wrote:

You welcome immigration, and accept we have a moral duty as a country with our specific past to accept it. And yet you bemoan its affects.

TLS:

Not trying to split hairs Ted but I neither "Welcome" or "Unwelcome" it hence there is no contradiction as to the reat of your sentence above. We DID have a moral duty etc and it can and has adversely affected the lifestyle choice of many Working-Class indigenous people in that they feel strangers and isolated in what used to be Communities where the Majority of people shared their Culture and now they don't.

There is a Gallery of Walworth slideshots on the internet. They have been tken over the last 2 years by a Swiss Lady, almost every view or image of the Whites that are featured show them as old and appearring to be poor. Sad images for me to see.

Ted Max:

Could we not apportion some of the responsibility on those of us who live in this country to accept immigration as a fact of life at worst, a duty at best, and welcome and live with it, as you appear to have done.

The ability and desire to do that would depend on each individuals circumstances, its easy for me to be a pleasant normal tolerant Brit like most on here arre, undoubtedly..

Its entirely one thing for someone to be all-encompassing and embrace all peoples of the World when their are not really any detrimental affects to their lifestyle attributable to "mass" immigration.

Its another thing entirely when, as in Newham, their new soon-to-be majority Muslim neighbours don't want to play Bingo with Maude and Ada and Jesse and don't want a pint with Harry and Fred and Charlie and don't want to go the match with their Sons or take their daughters to Indie and Rock Concerts. Don't want or need Fish and Chips shops that then disappear to cater for the new arrivals when they become the majority. ( Exactly what any Business would/should do) You can not cater for a clientele that has left the area so the remaining White Working-Class lose out. Their pubs are more likely to close down as the new arrivals don't want to go there etc. Their betting shops are more likely to shop as there is no demand from the new residents.

So The Bingo and some of the Pubs and Betting Shops and English traditional Food Stores close down, accordingly Ted.

I recall a Documentary asking why the Pie and Mash Shops are disappearring from The Old Kent Road and the remaining Owner said "They have all gone and moved to Welling!" so there is no longer sufficient demand to cater for those that remain.

I'll let you ask them to welcome and live with it M8.:))

Please do not misunderstand. The Muslim lifestyle ( to continue this illustration) might well be MORE admirable and no-one should criticise ANY Muslim for their choices of lifestyle. Their lifestyle suits them and is equally honourable to any other lifestyle and their shops and neighbourhood will reflect that but thats no consolation to the remaining Guys from the previous majority Culture. Not when they now become the new minority in what "used to be" an area that reflected their tastes and needs and now does not to anywhere near the same extent, if at all.

So great theory but in practice...

I'm sure you are capable, like me, of understanding it from their viewpoint.

Its their neighbourhoods that are fast becoming unrecognisable and unfamiliar to them.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

TLS: 01:38AM

"Actually Sherwick allow me to ask .....

1/ How have you, personally, adversely been affected by mass immigration to this Country over the last 40 years?

2/ Have your career prospects or environment or Culture sufferred?

3/ East Diulwich is not a comparitively diverse area, culturally, so roughly is your own area of residence diverse or are you, personally, a resident of the relatively non-diverse East Dulwich?

4/ If you are an East Dulwich resident why do you choose to live in a relatively non-diverse area of Inner London?

[Ms T]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Dear sweet baby Jesus

>

> Sometimes people get so worked up about getting

> the requisite amount of buzzwords into an argument

> that they lose sight of the reality

>

> Immigration as an issue has NOT been ignored by

> anyone. If for many people, including 2nd

> generation immigrants it IS an issue, then the

> question is with them to answer. "WHAT exactly is

> your problem???" - what's that? some foreign

> people are working with you? Because the people I

> hear complain MOST are the people who have jobs

> already. And something else... it's not something

> that escapes the (uh oh buzzword alert)

> "metropolitan middle class" because as well as the

> increasing number of people from abroad working in

> those professions as well, a LOT more of those

> jobs are leaving the country

>

> But to go back to the "normal" people who, poor

> mites, aren't being listened to. Well, it was them

> that went to European building sites in the early

> 80s. It was irish versions of them who came to

> England later. It has always gone on and wil

> lcontinue to go on. Just because the music has

> stopped and the party is over does NOT give

> anyone, no matter how @#$%& poor the right to turn

> on the less familiar faces in the room.

>

> Here is a newsflash. Maybe the people in power

> aren't completely wrong. Maybe too many "normal"

> people have double-standards, sit on their ass,

> use prejudice as a catch-all get out and basically

> need a reality check. We are all on this planet

> together and any "us" and "them" is backward.

>:D<

[Sherwick]

1/ How have you, personally, adversely been affected by mass immigration to this Country over the last 40 years? Like a very few others, I enjoy the diversity. That's not to say that there aren't some bad apples in the immigrant population, just as there are in the non-immigrant population. To answer your specific question, I have not been adversely affected in any way whatsoever.

2/ Have your career prospects or environment or Culture sufferred? I think my career prospects improved actually. More opportunities, more ideas, a greater and diverse range of customers. Environment - London seems to be a much better place to me than it was in the 1970s - it certainly doesn't feel any more crowded to me. Culture - well I'm a Christian born and bred have always supported England in all sport/loved going to places like Bath and the Lake District as a child, and my culture hasn't suffered at all - I still love doing the things I loved doing as a child (only I fortunately have a bit more money now!). I cannot think of a single way how my culture has suffered.

3/ East Diulwich is not a comparitively diverse area, culturally, so roughly is your own area of residence diverse or are you, personally, a resident of the relatively non-diverse East Dulwich? My own area of residence isn't very diverse, and I do live in East Dulwich.

4/ If you are an East Dulwich resident why do you choose to live in a relatively non-diverse area of Inner London? Interestingly my first choice was Kew because I love Kew Gardens and living near the River. However, I could afford a place twice the size here - another very green place for London. I choose to live in a nice green area. I actually grew up in Brent, where my mother still lives.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Sherwick Wrote:

Tony, you quite clearly have a problem with the LEGAL immigrants because you keep bringing up the fact that most of London (and elsewhere) is non-white these days, unlike the marvelous past - and , as I pointed out, the overwhelming majority

of these non-white people are here legally and were born here.

Later you propose a solution for dealing with ILLEGAL immigrants, and I pointed out that this doesn't solve your problem of the non-white areas.

I do not have a problem with Non-White Areas but I note the fact that a large number of White Working-Class people do.

It does not affect me or my Family, personally.

It is not "my" problem with Non-White Areas and I do not see a solution at all.

If you want my opinion I'm 100% certain that areas that have become more and more Non-White will expand further exactly as I have witnessed over the last 40 years or so since my early teens.

Why do I say that?

Take Inner South-East London, your Area. The only Non-Whites were in Brixton, initially in the 1950's. Almost none in the surrounding areas. Then Non-Whites moved to Stockwell and Kennington and Peckham in the 1960's and as they did some Whites moved out. That process accelerated as Non-White people, "generally", much prefer to live and socialise with other Non-White people so the process continued into Camberwell and Nunhead and Walworth and Streatham and Clapham and parts of Dulwich. Then that process continued to Thornton Heath, Croydon etc.

So in my lifetime I have seen area after area in this part of South-East London change from 99% All-White to a substantially lower figure in many areas.

Exactly the same process in West London with Notting Hill as its original nucleus.

Exactly the same process in North London with Tottenham/Harlesden/Acton in the Heart of their Community.

Exactly the same process in East London starting with Hackney and latterly Newham/Tower Hamlets.

The more "immigrants" moved in the more many Whites moved out.

Not saying they were right but they wanted to remain in White Communities ( apart from the ones who suddenly discovered mobility and fresh air :) so they moved to The Home Counties and beyond.

I've said b4 on here Sherwick that I traced 645 from my Grammar School (1965-71 for me) and only SIX said they still live in Inner London. More lived in Sydney, Oz than the whole of Inner London where our school was located!

So the reality whether you or I like it is that Communities, generally, prefer to be amongst their own and London will become more and more polarised.

Doesn't mean we should not be equally respectful and friendly to people though and treat everyone equally, though.

[david_carnell]

This is a bitter pill to swallow, but I think I know, partially, what Tony is getting at and to some extent I have sympathy with his position or the position of those he refers to. Let me explain.

There is, I believe, very large segments of people within our society who sense that they are threatened by massive immigration and by the growing minorities within their borders that hail from different cultures, follow different practices, and have separate institutions and loyalties.

But street violence, verbal outbursts of hate, and growing support for various extremist parties are unwholesome reactions. People feel threatened that their sense of identity, self-determination, and culture, which come on top of concerns evoked by globalization, new communications technologies, and a gradual loss of national sovereignty are being eroded. To throw the feelings of many millions of people in their faces, calling them ?discriminatory,? ?exclusionary,? ?hypocritical,? and worse, is an easy politics, but is not truly committed to resolving the problem. People?s anxieties and concerns should not be dismissed out of hand, nor can they be effectively treated by labelling them racist or xenophobic. Furthermore, telling people that they ?need? immigrants because of economic reasons or demographic shortfalls makes a valid and useful argument, but does not address their profoundest misgivings.

The challenge is to find ways to constructively address these concerns. At the same time, we should ensure that these sentiments do not find antisocial, hateful, let alone violent expressions.

Two approaches are to be avoided: promoting assimilation and unbounded multiculturalism. Assimilation ? which entails requiring minorities to abandon all of their distinct institutions, cultures, values, habits, and connections to other societies in order to fully mesh into the prevailing culture (see France to an extent) ? is sociologically difficult to achieve. It is morally unjustified because of our respect for some normative differences, such as to which gods we pray.

Unbounded multiculturalism ? which entails giving up the concept of shared values, loyalties, and identity in order to privilege ethnic and religious differences, presuming that nations can be replaced by a large number of diverse minorities ? is also unwelcome. It is likely to evoke undemocratic backlashes, ranging from support for extremist, rightwing

parties and populist leaders (see the furore surrounding the BNP) to anti-minority policies. It is unjustified because it fails to recognize the values and institutions held dear by the society at large, such as those that protect women?s and gay rights.

The basic approach I favour is Diversity Within Unity (from which I have plagiarised this post). It presumes that all members of a given society will fully respect and adhere to those basic values and institutions that are considered part of the basic shared framework of the society. At the same time, every group in society is free to maintain its distinct subculture ? those policies, habits, and institutions that do not conflict with the shared core ? and a strong measure of loyalty to its country of origin, as long as this does not trump loyalty to the society in which it lives if these loyalties come into conflict. Respect for the whole and respect for all is at the essence of the position.

The problem comes in trying to define what those shared values and frameworks are.....

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Sherwick Wrote:

I have not been adversely affected in any way whatsoever.

I think my career prospects improved actually. More opportunities, more ideas,

> a greater and diverse range of customers. Environment - London seems to be a much better place to me than it was in the 1970s... I cannot think of a single way how my culture has suffered.

My own area of residence isn't very diverse, and I do live in East Dulwich.

However, I could afford a place twice the size here - another very green place for London. I

choose to live in a nice green area. I actually grew up in Brent, where my mother still lives.

Thats a fair synopsis of your replies. Thanks.

You do see that your own lifestyle is not adversely affected by living in an area with mass immigration like Brent, so how does your Mum feel if she has lived there most of her life?

As you are open-minded and civil and tolerant, I assume you acquired some of these qualities from her so how does she feel about Brent, which has changed dramatically, as I experienced visiting Wembley Park only 2/3 weeks ago?

[Sherwick]

Tony.London Suburbs Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sherwick Wrote:

>

> Tony, you quite clearly have a problem with the

> LEGAL immigrants because you keep bringing up the

> fact that most of London (and elsewhere) is

> non-white these days, unlike the marvelous past -

> and , as I pointed out, the overwhelming majority

> of these non-white people are here legally and

> were born here.

> Later you propose a solution for dealing with

> ILLEGAL immigrants, and I pointed out that this

> doesn't solve your problem of the non-white

> areas.

>

> I do not have a problem with Non-White Areas but I

> note the fact that a large number of White

> Working-Class people do.

> It does not affect me or my Family, personally.

>

> It is not "my" problem with Non-White Areas and I

> do not see a solution at all.

>

> If you want my opinion I'm 100% certain that areas

> that have become more and more Non-White will

> expand further exactly as I have witnessed over

> the last 40 years or so since my early teens.

>

> Why do I say that?

>

> Take Inner South-East London, your Area. The only

> Non-Whites were in Brixton, initially in the

> 1950's. Almost none in the surrounding areas. Then

> Non-Whites moved to Stockwell and Kennington and

> Peckham in the 1960's and as they did some Whites

> moved out. That process accelerated as Non-White

> people, "generally", much prefer to live and

> socialise with other Non-White people so the

> process continued into Camberwell and Nunhead and

> Walworth and Streatham and Clapham and parts of

> Dulwich. Then that process continued to Thornton

> Heath, Croydon etc.

>

> So in my lifetime I have seen area after area in

> this part of South-East London change from 99%

> All-White to a substantially lower figure in many

> areas.

>

> Exactly the same process in West London with

> Notting Hill as its original nucleus.

> Exactly the same process in North London with

> Tottenham/Harlesden/Acton in the Heart of their

> Community.

> Exactly the same process in East London starting

> with Hackney and latterly Newham/Tower Hamlets.

>

> The more "immigrants" moved in the more many

> Whites moved out.

>

> Not saying they were right but they wanted to

> remain in White Communities ( apart from the ones

> who suddenly discovered mobility and fresh air :)

> so they moved to The Home Counties and beyond.

>

> I've said b4 on here Sherwick that I traced 645

> from my Grammar School (1965-71 for me) and only

> SIX said they still live in Inner London. More

> lived in Sydney, Oz than the whole of Inner London

> where our school was located!

>

> So the reality whether you or I like it is that

> Communities, generally, prefer to be amongst their

> own and London will become more and more

> polarised.

>

> Doesn't mean we should not be equally respectful

> and friendly to people though and treat everyone

> equally, though.

I think you're wrong. What's happened in the past 40 years may not happen in the next 40 years.

I say this because I think we are heading towards all being tanned, i.e. mixed, eventually. Initially, immigrants tend to congregate together when they come to a country, but eventually they do integrate with the indigenous population (it's a theory, but there may be evidence for this). Added to that, many white Europeans have been coming here recently. By the way, this white flight that you speak of may well be 'WEALTH flight' - think about it.

[Sherwick]

DC, I mostly agree with you, though I do think that immigrants that choose to come here should, ideally, follow the culture of the UK as much as possible. Therefore, I think assimilation is what's required to some extent. What's wrong with wanting that?

[Tony.London Suburbs]

David whether you plagiarised that post or not, that was extremely cogent, very much addressing the points.

At this stage I have only read your comments but will take time later to read "Diversity Within Unity".

It will be a most fascinating read.