Accrington Web

Accrington Web (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Chat (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/)
-   -   confussed (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/confussed-36716.html)

Yolanda25 04-02-2008 10:17

confussed
 
can someone explain to me whats this article on about , i sort of undestand it but i just think is wrong, someone explain???:confused:

Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy | the Daily Mail

lancsdave 04-02-2008 10:29

Re: confussed
 
I'm afraid there are those on here who will only see that you posted the link from the Daily Mail. The fact several other papers have reported it will not be sufficient to claim that racial propoganda is not being printed :rolleyes:

I'm sure Blazey will tell us she knows loads of English people who have multiple spouses :D

Yolanda25 04-02-2008 10:31

Re: confussed
 
its not about being racist its about bein fair, blazey can say what she wants, its her opinion, just like every one else has one

jaysay 04-02-2008 10:33

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yolanda25 (Post 526519)
can someone explain to me whats this article on about , i sort of undestand it but i just think is wrong, someone explain???:confused:

Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy | the Daily Mail

Sorry I can't really comment on this as it could get me in bother with the mods.:mad: they really are taking the p***

Wynonie Harris 04-02-2008 10:42

Re: confussed
 
Another example of one group being above the law of the land, which can only sow the seeds of racial disharmony.

I wonder what Greg Pope and other Accyweb supporters of the present government have to say about this? Nothing, as usual, I would imagine.

Must say, though, I wouldn't want to be in the same position...the thought of four Mrs H's giving me grief when I roll in at midnight after going to watch the Stanley, fills me with dread! :eek:

MargaretR 04-02-2008 10:43

Re: confussed
 
Many years ago when I worked administering Income Support I did see some claims where a 2nd wife was being paid for as an 'Adult Dependant'.
So this provision is nothing new

grannyclaret 04-02-2008 10:57

Re: confussed
 
This country is "BARMEY.".....

jaysay 04-02-2008 11:10

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected] (Post 526528)
Many years ago when I worked administering Income Support I did see some claims where a 2nd wife was being paid for as an 'Adult Dependant'.
So this provision is nothing new

I acually think this country where this could happen Margaret. I once worked with a German, he was living over here with is second wife but was claiming for two children from his first marrage who were still living in Germany, insidentally he used to brag that he never sent the money home but spent in on his fags every week.

West Ender 04-02-2008 12:02

Re: confussed
 
Fifty years has made a huge difference. In 1960/61 immigration from the Asian/Indian countries really took off. Most of the immigrants were men and a lot of them had families back home. For the purposes of income tax allowances they could only claim for 1 wife, even if they had several, and they had to obtain an affidavit from a local magistrate in Pakistan or where ever to say this was their "first" wife. The wife usually made a thumb print on the affidavit as, usually, they couldn't read or write. This country didn't recognise polygamy at all and any other wives were considered illegal.

panther 04-02-2008 12:10

Re: confussed
 
absolute rubbish!!
yet again one rule for one and another for us, and they wonder why we dont intregrate.

cashman 04-02-2008 13:29

Re: confussed
 
seems they are saying they will recognise it if they wed in countries were polygamy is legal, FINE,then they should sod off back to the country they wed em in n support em there,:(

jaysay 04-02-2008 16:50

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 526591)
seems they are saying they will recognise it if they wed in countries were polygamy is legal, FINE,then they should sod off back to the country they wed em in n support em there,:(

Quite right cashy wht ever happened to when in Rome

jambutty 04-02-2008 17:58

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yolanda25 (Post 526519)
can someone explain to me whats this article on about , i sort of undestand it but i just think is wrong, someone explain???:confused:

Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy | the Daily Mail

**!!** &#*!*#4! !*!*!*&

I really do despair. Here we have a government of supposedly intelligent people and they come up with this “CRACKPOT” idea.

How many more times do we have to remind this government that this is a Christian country? Meaning that one man can only have one wife in this country. If he happens to be a Muslim and has three more wives in his Muslim country then that is his responsibility and nothing to do with the state here.

It’s almost the same as migrant workers receiving Child Benefit for their kids in their home country. IT’S LUDICROUS!

The next election cannot come soon enough.

AccyLass 04-02-2008 18:07

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy | the Daily Mail
Omg that is terrible!

Bonnyboy 04-02-2008 18:13

Re: confussed
 
It defies belief doesn’t it…speechless

banjoman 04-02-2008 18:48

Re: confussed
 
So what if Im American, does that mean I can carry a gun over here legally as its legal in my home country ? Not only are we getting our laws from Brussels we now have to recognise everybody elses ??? If it wasnt for all the mother in laws Id convert myself

Eric 04-02-2008 19:03

Re: confussed
 
At this distance it is hard to understand why your govt. would do this. Doesn't make sense. Nor does it make sense that they can get away with it without massive protests, and with the assurance that if they do s**t like this they will be tossed out in the next general election.

derekgas 04-02-2008 19:38

Re: confussed
 
I am surprised at the response to this, I would have thought most people knew, this has been going on for years in a different guise, in 1977 (I think), a lady from the benefits office in Rawtenstall complained that a person had been in on Tuesday, speaking english, claiming benefits of £230, part for people not in this country, he was back again Thursday with a different id, again claiming for people in another country and given an over the counter payment of more than the first one, the complaint was met with a retort from her manager of ' just pay him, it is much cheaper than going to his country and checking on him'. So yes it is a disgrace, but has been going on for years, the other concern is, this is another nail in the 'white christian' coffin!

Wynonie Harris 04-02-2008 21:25

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 526527)
I wonder what Greg Pope and other Accyweb supporters of the present government have to say about this? Nothing, as usual, I would imagine.

No comment then, Nu Labour supporters?

cashman 04-02-2008 22:29

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty (Post 526690)
**!!** &#*!*#4! !*!*!*&

I really do despair. Here we have a government of supposedly intelligent people and they come up with this “CRACKPOT” idea.

[COLOR=black][SIZE=3][FONT=Times New Roman]How many more times do we have to remind this government that this is a Christian country? Meaning that one man can only have one wife in this country. If he happens to be a Muslim and has three more wives in his Muslim country then that is his responsibility and nothing to do with the state here.

The next election cannot come soon enough.

do you honestly think it will be any differant if the other lot win?:confused:

WillowTheWhisp 04-02-2008 22:36

Re: confussed
 
Polygamy in this country is either illegal or it isn't.You can't have it illegal for some and legal for others. That is racial discrimination and racial discrimination is politically incorrect.

You live in this country you should live by the laws of this country.

yerself 04-02-2008 22:47

Re: confussed
 
I said in another thread that I agreed with Shakermaker when he expressed the opinion, 'The BNP are a bunch of misinformed racists'. This may well be so, but it is looking increasingly like a vote for the BNP is going to be the only way to give the other political parties in this country the kick up the arse they so obviously need.

Mancie 04-02-2008 22:56

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by yerself (Post 526910)
I said in another thread that I agreed with Shakermaker when he expressed the opinion, 'The BNP are a bunch of misinformed racists'. This may well be so, but it is looking increasingly like a vote for the BNP is going to be the only way to give the other political parties in this country the kick up the arse they so obviously need.

Hey.. here's a direct link to the BNP mission statement. call it a favor from me to all the true blooded perfect Viking members on the forum!

Mission Statement | The British National Party

garinda 04-02-2008 23:07

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 526527)

I wonder what Greg Pope and other Accyweb supporters of the present government have to say about this? Nothing, as usual, I would imagine.

As someone who has on more than one occasion said I support this government, by the very fact that I vote Labour, and as someone who isn't afraid to speak my mind, I'm quite happy to say that I this is wrong. Just as I also think we were wrong to go to war in Iraq, which again I've posted my disapproval about on this forum.

There's certainly no wall of silence, at least from this red under the bed.:D

garinda 04-02-2008 23:16

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp (Post 526906)
Polygamy in this country is either illegal or it isn't.You can't have it illegal for some and legal for others. That is racial discrimination and racial discrimination is politically incorrect.

You live in this country you should live by the laws of this country.

Is the stoning to death for adulterers to be allowed in the U.K., because that is practiced in some Muslim countries, and in not doing so we aren't allowing religious freedom here?

As other people have said, this liberal namby pambying just adds more fuel to those seeking disharmony, and drives moderate people to far right political parties.

Totally, totally unproductive, in that this nannying interferece leads to more divisions in society.

cashman 04-02-2008 23:20

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 526930)
Is the stoning to death for adulterers to be allowed in the U.K., because that is practiced in some Muslim countries, and in not doing so we aren't allowing religious freedom here

well ya could just have me changing me mind on this one.:D;)

Mancie 05-02-2008 05:47

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yolanda25 (Post 526519)
can someone explain to me whats this article on about , i sort of undestand it but i just think is wrong, someone explain???:confused:

Muslim husbands with more than one wife to get extra benefits as ministers recognise polygamy | the Daily Mail

Yolanda .. you have the intelligence to find this article,but then you claim not to understand.. you aint thick are you? ..so why do you ask for other people to explain?.:rolleyes:

Neil 05-02-2008 07:00

Re: confussed
 
Polygamy is illegal in this country. Anyone claiming to have more than one wife in this country should be arrested and if appropriate deported or taken through the legal process for polygamy.

Simple isn't it.

Wynonie Harris 05-02-2008 07:54

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 526915)
Hey.. here's a direct link to the BNP mission statement. call it a favor from me to all the true blooded perfect Viking members on the forum!

Mission Statement | The British National Party

OK, Mancie, I've read it and I totally disagree with it. As someone who is in a mixed marriage, I've got a particular reason to despise the principles of the BNP. But what exactly is your point? Do you think that it's racist to object to the story behind this thread? Because I happen to think that this sort of thing is the best recruiting sergeant the BNP and thier ilk could hope for. Perhaps you'd like to give us your views on this situation...or are you like so many of this government's supporters (Garinda excepted!)...terrified of speaking on subjects like this because you might be considered racist?

magpie 05-02-2008 10:46

Re: confussed
 
would be kicked off if I wrote what I am thinking.... when are we going to say: enough is enough:

Yolanda25 05-02-2008 10:47

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie (Post 526945)
Yolanda .. you have the intelligence to find this article,but then you claim not to understand.. you aint thick are you? ..so why do you ask for other people to explain?.:rolleyes:


Well my mum used to tell me that i was a cleaver girl, of course im not thick, is just a way to write a thread to make it interesting.
Anyway so, after all ur comments, is there anything it can be done to prevent this or we just have to let the goverment do it???

MargaretR 05-02-2008 12:39

Re: confussed
 
This is what 'cleaver' girls do- :D

Lizzie Borden took an axe and gave her mother 40 wacks
When she saw what she had done she gave her father 41

WillowTheWhisp 05-02-2008 12:44

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda (Post 526930)
Is the stoning to death for adulterers to be allowed in the U.K., because that is practiced in some Muslim countries, and in not doing so we aren't allowing religious freedom here?


Well they don't seem particularly keen on upsetting people who commit 'honour killings' either so who knows how soon we'll have hands chopped off for stealing and stonings for adultery.

Acrylic-bob 05-02-2008 15:12

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil (Post 526951)
Polygamy is illegal in this country. Anyone claiming to have more than one wife in this country should be arrested and if appropriate deported or taken through the legal process for polygamy.

Simple isn't it.

Pardon the pedantry but, actually, the criminal offence concerned is Bigamy.

MargaretR 05-02-2008 15:20

Re: confussed
 
These extra 'wives' are not legal wives under british law - only under Islamic law - so bigamy is not being committed.
When Income Support payments included them in the past, they were treated as Adult Dependants extra to the one Wife.
Adult depandants could be, for example, an elderly aunt or sister, who was not capable or eligible for any income/benefits in her own right.

Wynonie Harris 05-02-2008 15:34

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected] (Post 527211)
an elderly aunt or sister, who was not capable or eligible for any income/benefits in her own right.

An aunt or a sister is a relative. These women are not relatives and not "wives" under UK law, so the man should not be able to claim for them. If I had a couple of live-in girlfriends, apart from my wife, would I be able to claim benefit for them? I think not!

MargaretR 05-02-2008 15:35

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 527219)
An aunt or a sister is a relative. These women are not relatives and not "wives" under UK law, so the man should not be able to claim for them. If I had a couple of live-in girlfriends, apart from my wife, would I be able to claim benefit for them? I think not!

If I remember right, some men claimed for women who weren't relatives and were described as 'looking after the children'

PS such claims were RARE!

Wynonie Harris 05-02-2008 15:46

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected] (Post 527220)
If I remember right, some men claimed for women who weren't relatives and were described as 'looking after the children'

PS such claims were RARE!

I'm sure they're still relatively rare, but it's a question of principle. Incidentally, I see that Greg Pope hasn't appeared to defend his government's stance on this...but, then again, how can you defend the indefensible?

Yolanda25 05-02-2008 21:57

Re: confussed
 
for the person who left me negative feedback if u are gonna live feedback have the guts to sign your name, no need for negative u moron

Royboy39 05-02-2008 22:15

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yolanda25 (Post 527482)
for the person who left me negative feedback if u are gonna live feedback have the guts to sign your name, no need for negative u moron

No pasa nada chica..........You can communicate in English far better that the 'Nerd' who left you negative feedback.....Spanish would be lost on them and probably basic English. :mad:

Yolanda25 05-02-2008 22:24

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Royboy39 (Post 527499)
No pasa nada chica..........You can communicate in English far better that the 'Nerd' who left you negative feedback.....Spanish would be lost on them and probably basic English. :mad:


thanks for that, that has put a smile on my face:)

jaysay 06-02-2008 09:08

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 527227)
I'm sure they're still relatively rare, but it's a question of principle. Incidentally, I see that Greg Pope hasn't appeared to defend his government's stance on this...but, then again, how can you defend the indefensible?

Its not like me to defend Greg Pope, but I believe that is not the political parties at fault its actually the men in wigs where the problem is. We are still using laws which were made for the 19th century and to be quite honst its not the easiest thing in the world to change them. When anyone tries to change anything like this, the dogooding branch of British society comes out screaming the usual "HUMAN RITES" crap or its their culture init. Well I think its about time that the powers that be started looking to the rites of the indigenous population of this country, not continually pandering to those people who have come to our country to make a better life for themelves and their families. Enough is enough, I've had my rant now I'm going back to sleep:D

Wynonie Harris 06-02-2008 12:32

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 527569)
Its not like me to defend Greg Pope, but I believe that is not the political parties at fault its actually the men in wigs where the problem is. We are still using laws which were made for the 19th century and to be quite honst its not the easiest thing in the world to change them. When anyone tries to change anything like this, the dogooding branch of British society comes out screaming the usual "HUMAN RITES" crap or its their culture init. Well I think its about time that the powers that be started looking to the rites of the indigenous population of this country, not continually pandering to those people who have come to our country to make a better life for themelves and their families. Enough is enough, I've had my rant now I'm going back to sleep:D

This government passed the Human Rights Act in 1997, thereby opening the floodgates for all manner of spurious claims that would otherwise never have seen the light of day, so they have largely brought this situation on themselves. However, I still think that if the will was there, the goverment could end this anomaly if it wanted to - the problem is that it's so PC-obsessed, it daren't.

Must say though, I always get a little nervous when people start talking about "the rights of the indigenous population". Are you suggesting that people who have come from elsewhere should somehow have less rights? As far as I'm concerned, every citizen of this country, white, black or brown, British-born or born elsewhere, should have exactly the same rights...no more and no less!

jaysay 06-02-2008 17:15

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 527600)
This government passed the Human Rights Act in 1997, thereby opening the floodgates for all manner of spurious claims that would otherwise never have seen the light of day, so they have largely brought this situation on themselves. However, I still think that if the will was there, the goverment could end this anomaly if it wanted to - the problem is that it's so PC-obsessed, it daren't.

Must say though, I always get a little nervous when people start talking about "the rights of the indigenous population". Are you suggesting that people who have come from elsewhere should somehow have less rights? As far as I'm concerned, every citizen of this country, white, black or brown, British-born or born elsewhere, should have exactly the same rights...no more and no less!

Could not agree more with the second part of your post
Wynonie, but in reality it doesn't work like that, we livein a christian country but are made to feel outsiders and are put down for being christians, not by oher religions but by our own pc brigade, and this is only one instance. Is it any wonder that people who were born and bred in this country are leaving in droves. believe me If I were 20 again and things were like they are now, I'd have been out of here like a shot

Wynonie Harris 06-02-2008 19:25

Re: confussed
 
Right, Jaysay, I've decided to take the "If you can't beat 'em..." approach and I'll shortly be asking Mrs H if we can import two "female adult dependents" from Peru. I'm sure she'll see the wisdom of this...

jaysay 07-02-2008 08:55

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 527783)
Right, Jaysay, I've decided to take the "If you can't beat 'em..." approach and I'll shortly be asking Mrs H if we can import two "female adult dependents" from Peru. I'm sure she'll see the wisdom of this...

How come I never thought of that, sounds like a good idea to me:D

WillowTheWhisp 07-02-2008 09:03

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 527219)
An aunt or a sister is a relative. These women are not relatives and not "wives" under UK law, so the man should not be able to claim for them. If I had a couple of live-in girlfriends, apart from my wife, would I be able to claim benefit for them? I think not!

Well said Wynonie, and in English law these extra wives have no more status than any mistresses a man may decide to have living in his house along with his legal wife.

Let's go for total equality shall we and allow women to have a few 'men about the house' to do all the DIY etc and we can claim for them while we're at it. (if you'll pardon the pun)

jaysay 07-02-2008 10:00

Re: confussed
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp (Post 528030)
Well said Wynonie, and in English law these extra wives have no more status than any mistresses a man may decide to have living in his house along with his legal wife.

Let's go for total equality shall we and allow women to have a few 'men about the house' to do all the DIY etc and we can claim for them while we're at it. (if you'll pardon the pun)

Ya can't do that:D


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:57.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com