For anyone who thinks this is not also the case in the US, try getting into the ‘Green Card Lottery’ if you are a white Canadian. The rules for a shot at living in the US may shock and surprise you, and go back a long time before Obama.

Daily Mail, 24 February 2010

Of all the issues of concern to the public, immigration is possibly the most explosive — and the one about which the most lies are continuing to be told.

During the period that Labour has been in office, mass immigration has simply changed the face of Britain. The total number of immigrants since 1997 is pushing three million.

Ministers claim that immigration policy has been driven principally to help the economy. They have always denied that they actually set out deliberately to change the ethnic composition of the country.

Well, now we know for a certainty that this is not true. The Government embarked on a policy of mass immigration to change Britain into a multicultural society — and they kept this momentous aim secret from the people whose votes they sought.

Worse still, they did this knowing that it ran directly counter to the wishes of those voters, whose concerns about immigration they dismissed as racist; and they further concealed official warnings that large-scale immigration would bring about significant increases in crime.

The truth about this scandal was first blurted out last October by Andrew Neather, a former Labour Party speechwriter.

He wrote that until the new points-based system limiting foreign workers was introduced in 2008 — in response to increasing public uproar — government policy for the previous eight years had been aimed at promoting mass immigration.

The ‘driving political purpose’ of this policy, wrote Neather, was ‘to make the UK truly multicultural’ — and one subsidiary motivation was ‘to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.

Misters, however, went to great lengths to keep their real intentions secret from the public — with, said Neather, a ‘paranoia’ that these would reach the media — since they knew their core white working-class voters would react very badly.

Accordingly, a report about immigration by a government advisory unit, which formed the core of a landmark speech in 2000 announcing the loosening of border controls, went through several drafts before it was finally published — and the Government’s true intentions about changing Britain into a multicultural society were removed from the final version.

After revealing all this, Neather subsequently tried to backtrack, saying that his views had been twisted out of all recognition by the media. They hadn’t been.

Nevertheless, Jack Straw, who was Home Secretary at the time the immigration policy was changed, said he had read press reports of Neather’s remarks with incredulity since they were ‘the reverse of the truth’.

Now we know, however, that they were indeed the truth. We know this only because details of the advisory unit’s report which were excised from the final published version — just as Neather said — have been emerging into the public domain through Freedom of Information requests.

Please read the rest of this important article at the source here:

And when you are done reading that you may enjoy reading an article from the Daily Express which explains how the Labour party of the U.K. has made it quite clear that if you oppose mass immigration into England  your all racists and you need formal reeducation.

Eeyore

LABOUR SAY WE ARE ALL RACISTS

Public opinion about migrants could be changed through education, the document said

Tuesday February 23,2010

By Macer Hall

LABOUR dismissed the British public’s widespread opposition to mass immigration as “racism”, a Government document revealed yesterday.

Officials made it clear that public opinion was strongly against relaxing border controls.

But ministers were urged to ignore voters’ “racist” views and press ahead with a secret policy to encourage migrants to flood into Britain. Whitehall experts even proposed a major propaganda campaign to soften up voters in preparation for the mass influx of newcomers.

The details were laid bare in the original draft of a policy document released for the first time under the Freedom of Information Act.

Last night critics accused the Government of snubbing the concerns of British citizens in their deliberate pursuit of a multicultural society.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the population think-tank Migrationwatch UK, said: “This report confirms that ministers deliberately rode roughshod over public opinion in adopting a policy of mass immigration.

“They concealed their real intentions in the hope they would benefit from the immigrant vote without losing their working-class supporters. They are now paying the price.”

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: “The Government has simply not been telling the truth about its policies on immigration. More and more evidence is now emerging to show that they deliberately planned a big jump in immigration for their own political purposes.”

“Now they are trying to rewrite history to pretend those decisions never happened. Their conduct over all of this has been a complete disgrace.”

Written by staff at the Home Office and Cabinet Office in 2000 in the run-up to the expansion of the European Union into eastern Europe, the report made it clear that voters wanted tougher rather than looser border ­controls.

“It is correct that public opinion favours relatively restrictive policies on immigration,” the document said. But demonstrating thinly disguised contempt for much of the British public, the document said that this opposition was linked to racist ­attitudes.

It said: “Recent research shows that anti-immigrant sentiment is closely correlated with racism rather than economic motives. The most negative attitudes are found among those who have relatively little direct contact with migrants but see them as a threat.”

Ministers also ignored warnings that immigration would lead to an explosion in organised crime including trafficking in drugs, illegal migrants and prostitutes. “Migration has opened up new opportunities for organised crime,” the report insisted.

The document, titled Going With The Flow: Managing Migration in the 21st Century, went on to urge the Government to manipulate public opinion on the issue.

“A new approach to migration policy would need to be not only accompanied by, but underpinned by, a clear strategy for public opinion and public debate,” the report argued.

“Government has tended to assume that negative public opinion on migration is a given that is beyond its control. In fact, research (and common sense) suggests that past governments have had a significant influence on public opinion.”

It added: “On other issues, government has been strategic and proactive in addressing public opinion, it could do so on migration.” The document even suggested the more migrants that moved to the UK, the more the British people would come to accept them.

It said: “Education and people’s personal exposure to migrants make them less likely to be anti-migrant.” The document went on to be heavily edited before being officially published in 2001, with all references to public opposition stripped out.

References to migration opening up “new opportunities” for organised crime were also expunged from the final version. The row over Labour’s secret immigration policy erupted last year when former ministerial adviser Andrew Neather admitted the Government had a “driving political purpose” to spread multiculturalism in Britain.

He said ministers had deliberately set out to use immigration to undermine Labour’s opponents and “rub the Right’s noses in diversity”. Border and Immigration Minister Phil Woolas last night rejected the criticism. He said: “This report confirms there was no open-door policy on migration.

“It makes quite clear that migration is not a substitute for Government policies on skills, education and training of British citizens, which the Government has invested in over the past decade. The Home Secretary at the time was also criticised for changes to the immigration policy being too tough.”

“We have tightened them still further. Our new flexible points-based system gives us greater control of those coming to work or study from outside Europe, ensuring that only those that Britain need can come. Britain’s borders are stronger than ever before.”