Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 9:31 pm

Exile 1976 wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 8:20 pm

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 8:17 pm

Exile 1976 wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 7:23 pm

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 7:16 pm

Exile 1976 wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:45 pm They’re all on benefits, they’re all working illegally and they’re all criminals… yes
Take your Klan outfit off for one moment. It doesn’t matter, they arrive here illegally so you want them sent back to France, they got to, and left, France, they’re no longer France’s problem, they’re the UK’s. Simple as that. It’s up to us to see if they’re genuine or not, if they’re not then yes, they should be sent back to their country of origin

Are you trying to say that I'm being racist, By saying send them back to France or there own Country?
Are you for real?
As it happens "yes" they are on benefits, and "yes" again a lot of them are criminals.

Sorry to have to ask what does the following mean they got to, and left, France, I didn't quite understand what you were trying to say.

Yes I’m for real.
Well, they got to France but have left there, not their problem then. Not difficult to understand.
No European country deports more foreigners than France, which suggests they are doing something about it.

Well in my opinion I don't think you know what you are talking about.
You need to try a little bit better in putting a sentence together. I should imagine that is what your teacher used to say "you must try hard ".

The sentence is fine, you’re just too stupid, blind with rage at foreigners, to understand….and in my opinion you are a complete and utter dopey, right wing c u n t

Stick to your copy and pasting & putting sentences in bold

Is there any need for that type of language? Your family must be really proud to have a son/daughter like you. Mr. Angry ().

I quite like putting my sentences in Bold, it makes them stand more, don't you think?

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:58 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 10:10 pm Well I know if they were Norman, or Roman they didn't queue in passport control after leaving their small boat. A bit of illegal immigration was happening......

Newport is a port, like all ports sailors sometimes stayed, and like most cities in the UK the population is multicultural not indigenous. Go back to the 18th Century and the total population of Newport would have been half the number that attended Thursday's meeting. Work, particularly work with housing, encouraged people through the ports to mining jobs. But it was the export of steam coal that made those ports rich. Note that it was the immigrants that made the wealth, not the indigenous population............

I'm not going through everything that you have written, as I'm sure you will try to come up some rubbish.

I will say this you are wrong about the population. In fact most things you write about is usually wrong, but we won't there today. Let's just stick to the population, here goes.

I'm sure you will come up with some explanation why you where right.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 9:44 am I'm with Exile 1976 on this one.

Trying to make out that immigrants, legal or not, are benefit scrougers and criminals is simply racist.
Some are. Some white people are. Some black people are. Some Jewish people are. Some Muslims are. Some Irish people are. I could go on but I think you'll all get the point.

And I get that we shouldn't resort to swearing at people. But when confronted with such mindless stupidity it's difficult not to lose your temper.

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 11:49 am

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:58 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 10:10 pm Well I know if they were Norman, or Roman they didn't queue in passport control after leaving their small boat. A bit of illegal immigration was happening......

Newport is a port, like all ports sailors sometimes stayed, and like most cities in the UK the population is multicultural not indigenous. Go back to the 18th Century and the total population of Newport would have been half the number that attended Thursday's meeting. Work, particularly work with housing, encouraged people through the ports to mining jobs. But it was the export of steam coal that made those ports rich. Note that it was the immigrants that made the wealth, not the indigenous population............

I'm not going through everything that you have written, as I'm sure you will try to come up some rubbish.

I will say this you are wrong about the population. In fact most things you write about is usually wrong, but we won't there today. Let's just stick to the population, here goes.

I'm sure you will come up with some explanation why you where right.

It's a very simple explanation, you haven't gone back to the 18th century. Come back with a figure for 1700.

Torquay Exile wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 12:12 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 11:49 am

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:58 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 10:10 pm Well I know if they were Norman, or Roman they didn't queue in passport control after leaving their small boat. A bit of illegal immigration was happening......

Newport is a port, like all ports sailors sometimes stayed, and like most cities in the UK the population is multicultural not indigenous. Go back to the 18th Century and the total population of Newport would have been half the number that attended Thursday's meeting. Work, particularly work with housing, encouraged people through the ports to mining jobs. But it was the export of steam coal that made those ports rich. Note that it was the immigrants that made the wealth, not the indigenous population............

I'm not going through everything that you have written, as I'm sure you will try to come up some rubbish.

I will say this you are wrong about the population. In fact most things you write about is usually wrong, but we won't there today. Let's just stick to the population, here goes.

I'm sure you will come up with some explanation why you where right.

It's a very simple explanation, you haven't gone back to the 18th century. Come back with a figure for 1700.

In the 18th century (1700), Newport had a population of around about 1,000.

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 2:22 pm

Torquay Exile wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 12:12 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 11:49 am

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:58 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 10:10 pm Well I know if they were Norman, or Roman they didn't queue in passport control after leaving their small boat. A bit of illegal immigration was happening......

Newport is a port, like all ports sailors sometimes stayed, and like most cities in the UK the population is multicultural not indigenous. Go back to the 18th Century and the total population of Newport would have been half the number that attended Thursday's meeting. Work, particularly work with housing, encouraged people through the ports to mining jobs. But it was the export of steam coal that made those ports rich. Note that it was the immigrants that made the wealth, not the indigenous population............

I'm not going through everything that you have written, as I'm sure you will try to come up some rubbish.

I will say this you are wrong about the population. In fact most things you write about is usually wrong, but we won't there today. Let's just stick to the population, here goes.

I'm sure you will come up with some explanation why you where right.

It's a very simple explanation, you haven't gone back to the 18th century. Come back with a figure for 1700.

In the 18th century (1700), Newport had a population of around about 1,000.

Exactly, less than the trust membership, and at that time people travelled by boat. So if that is how they arrived, what was the indigenous population of Newport?

That is a figure that doesn't include the boat people that walked along the river gate of Newport Castle, (passport control run by Henry Tudor) that you hate so much...........

Chepstow'sFine wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 12:09 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 9:44 am I'm with Exile 1976 on this one.

Trying to make out that immigrants, legal or not, are benefit scrougers and criminals is simply racist.
Some are. Some white people are. Some black people are. Some Jewish people are. Some Muslims are. Some Irish people are. I could go on but I think you'll all get the point.

And I get that we shouldn't resort to swearing at people. But when confronted with such mindless stupidity it's difficult not to lose your temper.

You could argue that legal migrants en masse have had detrimental effects to this country but I think there's a net benefit.

Illegal migrants are dependant on benefits because they're not allowed to work. The benefits they receive in terms of housing (hotels) and food etc etc cost the tax payer billions. We don't know if they're criminals as they're all undocumented by design.

People who care about illegal immigration are not instantly Nazi's/Right Wingers/Tories etc etc but the bottom line is we can't accommodate the third world. There's over a billion people in Sub-Saharan Africa who'd like to come here. We need to make a stand like the Poles are doing at the moment.

UPTHEPORT wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 2:01 pm

These pesky immigrants

Chepstow'sFine wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 12:09 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 9:44 am I'm with Exile 1976 on this one.

Trying to make out that immigrants, legal or not, are benefit scrougers and criminals is simply racist.
Some are. Some white people are. Some black people are. Some Jewish people are. Some Muslims are. Some Irish people are. I could go on but I think you'll all get the point.

And I get that we shouldn't resort to swearing at people. But when confronted with such mindless stupidity it's difficult not to lose your temper.

You could argue that legal migrants en masse have had detrimental effects to this country but I think there's a net benefit.

Illegal migrants are dependant on benefits because they're not allowed to work. The benefits they receive in terms of housing (hotels) and food etc etc cost the tax payer billions. We don't know if they're criminals as they're all undocumented by design.

People who care about illegal immigration are not instantly Nazi's/Right Wingers/Tories etc etc but the bottom line is we can't accommodate the third world. There's over a billion people in Sub-Saharan Africa who'd like to come here. We need to make a stand like the Poles are doing at the moment.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 5:28 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 12:09 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 9:44 am I'm with Exile 1976 on this one.

Trying to make out that immigrants, legal or not, are benefit scrougers and criminals is simply racist.
Some are. Some white people are. Some black people are. Some Jewish people are. Some Muslims are. Some Irish people are. I could go on but I think you'll all get the point.

And I get that we shouldn't resort to swearing at people. But when confronted with such mindless stupidity it's difficult not to lose your temper.

You could argue that legal migrants en masse have had detrimental effects to this country but I think there's a net benefit.

Illegal migrants are dependant on benefits because they're not allowed to work. The benefits they receive in terms of housing (hotels) and food etc etc cost the tax payer billions. We don't know if they're criminals as they're all undocumented by design.

People who care about illegal immigration are not instantly Nazi's/Right Wingers/Tories etc etc but the bottom line is we can't accommodate the third world. There's over a billion people in Sub-Saharan Africa who'd like to come here. We need to make a stand like the Poles are doing at the moment.

I didn't say that people who care about illegal immigration, or legal immigration are Nazis, or any othe pejorative term.

What I said was that people who equate immigrants with crime are inherently stupid at best.

Immigration is wrong because the UK is full is a view I disagree with but is not a bigoted view.

Immigrants are rapists, murderers and thieves is a bigoted view and needs to be called out.

Torquay Exile wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 11:51 pm



You do not even live in the United Kingdom. So why do you care so much about what happens in the United Kingdom?

Stan A. Einstein wrote: October 4th, 2023, 12:35 am

Torquay Exile wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 11:51 pm



You do not even live in the United Kingdom. So why do you care so much about what happens in the United Kingdom?

You must be very lonely.

Torquay Exile wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 4:56 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 2:22 pm

Torquay Exile wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 12:12 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 3rd, 2023, 11:49 am

Torquay Exile wrote: October 2nd, 2023, 6:58 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: October 1st, 2023, 10:10 pm Well I know if they were Norman, or Roman they didn't queue in passport control after leaving their small boat. A bit of illegal immigration was happening......

Newport is a port, like all ports sailors sometimes stayed, and like most cities in the UK the population is multicultural not indigenous. Go back to the 18th Century and the total population of Newport would have been half the number that attended Thursday's meeting. Work, particularly work with housing, encouraged people through the ports to mining jobs. But it was the export of steam coal that made those ports rich. Note that it was the immigrants that made the wealth, not the indigenous population............

I'm not going through everything that you have written, as I'm sure you will try to come up some rubbish.

I will say this you are wrong about the population. In fact most things you write about is usually wrong, but we won't there today. Let's just stick to the population, here goes.

I'm sure you will come up with some explanation why you where right.

It's a very simple explanation, you haven't gone back to the 18th century. Come back with a figure for 1700.

In the 18th century (1700), Newport had a population of around about 1,000.

Exactly, less than the trust membership, and at that time people travelled by boat. So if that is how they arrived, what was the indigenous population of Newport?

That is a figure that doesn't include the boat people that walked along the river gate of Newport Castle, (passport control run by Henry Tudor) that you hate so much...........

You are such a Plonker, with a capital P


So the original port was at Caerleon built by the Romans, and Caerleon had a much bigger population than those that farmed in Newport. As all goods arrived and left by sea/river towns only grew in population due to incoming traders. The traders needed fortified Town walls to protect the goods from the baddies. For centuries after the Romans left Caerleon was the center of population in the area.
Newport grew very slowly as it was a farming community with little to barter for goods, and inland very sparsely populated. That really didn't change much until the industrial revolution drove the nead for a new port to be constructed.

So assuming you were from Newport, what were your ancestors more likely to be, Roman, farmers or traders? Because everyone in Newport who don't have ancestry directly from farming, came from elsewhere........