In today’s News of the World, columnist Ian Kirby claims that the most recent ICM poll for the paper has issued “a shock wake-up call to politicians – with a majority declaring they share the BNP view that Britain has too many immigrants.” Does it really come as “a shock” to him that a majority of the British population know that there are “too many immigrants”? Where has this man been for the past twenty years?
Although only 54% of those sampled concurred with the reality of the UK possessing too many immigrants, we must of course remember that there are now so many immigrants or people of recent immigrant decent resident in the country, that this figure will almost certainly have underreported the proportion of indigenous Britons unhappy with the ever-growing size of the immigrant population.
Where Kirby inverts the natural order of things is in his interpretation of the poll’s findings on the attitude of the mainstream political parties towards the indigenous working class:
“But it is clear the BNP message IS getting through, with 44 per cent saying the white working class has been abandoned by the mainstream parties.”
What he should have written is “But it is clear that the 44 per cent who say the white working class has been abandoned by the mainstream parties recognise that the BNP is responding to this situation.”
Strangely, Kirby makes no mention of Andrew Neather’s revelations in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph, where he reveals that Labour under Blair deliberately planned to “open up the UK to mass immigration” with the express goal of undermining our national identity and cohesion. The report recommending this policy was written in 2000, of which the Telegraph reports him saying:
"Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural. I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."
Why is Kirby mute about this scandalous revelation, yet shocked by ICM’s findings that 54% of those polled thought that our immigrant population is too high? After all, Labour continues in making the case for unrestricted and unlimited mass immigration, as do the Liberal Democrats. Nor do the Tories have any real plans to concretely address this issue. They may well be willing to raise the question of immigration, but they will not provide any actual policies to deal with it. Only the BNP has policies that sensibly address the question of mass immigration in a moderate and humane manner.
References: “Voters issue a wake-up call to politicians”, Ian Kirby, The News of the World 24 October 2009, http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/566088/Shock-poll-shows-majority-share-BNP-views-on-immigrants.html
“Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser”, Tom Whitehead, The Daily Telegraph, 23 October 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html
Sunday, 25 October 2009
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
BBC blithely contemplates a UK Population of 71.6 million
Following today’s release of ONS projections suggesting that current trends will lead to a total UK population of 71.6 million by 2033, the BBC has run one of its regular television news items emphasising how we “need” mass immigration to support an ageing population. The News at Ten predictably showed footage of East European immigrants, which it almost invariably does when any potentially “sensitive” facts emerge about this issue, rather than the more representative sample of Pakistanis, Somalis, Afghans and sundry other undesirables from Africa and the Middle East who somehow manage to make it to our shores.
Cue an appearance by Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, a man who had he been living in Troy during the Trojan War would not have inconvenienced the besieging Greeks by keeping the gates shut, but would instead have invited them in to sack the city. He told the usual lies about the new governmental policy of a “points-based immigration system”, which is, as we all know, completely toothless, for not only does it have no impact upon the right to asylum granted to charlatans from way beyond our shores (if Geert Wilders ever needed asylum he would be genuine as he’s from a neighbouring country, unlike all of those who claim asylum today), but it also does nothing to constrain the flow of illegal immigrants that is facilitated by our lax border regime. Furthermore, Woolas himself and most of our political and media class (with a few notable exceptions such as Frank Field) wish to increase our population, for they can see no further than a parliament or two into the future and guaranteeing their own incomes and positions. They therefore adopt the pyramid scheme logic of importing workers to increase the size of the economy so that the elderly can be supported.
Immigrants and their descendants in turn grow old and need care. Are we then supposed to import ever more people to support them in turn? How, when we have a chronic housing shortage, our power generation, transport and other infrastructures are overloaded, are we supposed to accommodate such an influx? We are supposed to be pursuing a reduction of 80% in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, whilst simultaneously greatly increasing the population. How? Do these powerful fools who sit in Whitehall and the editorial suites of the mass media not understand, or, more likely, do they simply not care, as it won’t be their problem?
Two years ago food inflation displayed a notable spike, as a number of poor harvests in different parts of the world conjoined with a burgeoning population to cause a bottleneck in supply. The world is overpopulated, and the UK (England in particular) more so than most countries. Despite using current energy-intensive agricultural technologies and systems, we are still unable to feed ourselves. Our economic productivity is declining, and our power on many levels is declining compared to that of many other more populous nations. What then will we use to purchase food in the future, as our relative decline continues and the populations of other states continue to spiral? From where will we obtain sufficient foodstuffs?
We urgently need to adopt a policy of zero net immigration, and to ensure that the immigration that does take place, is genuinely beneficial to the UK, and thus consists of individuals and families from peoples who share our traditional indigenous British values. Cultural compatibility must be paramount, which means that Muslim immigration should be choked off completely, and for good. I would sooner work until I dropped, than have my country concreted over and occupied by hostile foreign colonists.
For the BBC's online take on this story visit http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8318010.stm
Cue an appearance by Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, a man who had he been living in Troy during the Trojan War would not have inconvenienced the besieging Greeks by keeping the gates shut, but would instead have invited them in to sack the city. He told the usual lies about the new governmental policy of a “points-based immigration system”, which is, as we all know, completely toothless, for not only does it have no impact upon the right to asylum granted to charlatans from way beyond our shores (if Geert Wilders ever needed asylum he would be genuine as he’s from a neighbouring country, unlike all of those who claim asylum today), but it also does nothing to constrain the flow of illegal immigrants that is facilitated by our lax border regime. Furthermore, Woolas himself and most of our political and media class (with a few notable exceptions such as Frank Field) wish to increase our population, for they can see no further than a parliament or two into the future and guaranteeing their own incomes and positions. They therefore adopt the pyramid scheme logic of importing workers to increase the size of the economy so that the elderly can be supported.
Immigrants and their descendants in turn grow old and need care. Are we then supposed to import ever more people to support them in turn? How, when we have a chronic housing shortage, our power generation, transport and other infrastructures are overloaded, are we supposed to accommodate such an influx? We are supposed to be pursuing a reduction of 80% in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, whilst simultaneously greatly increasing the population. How? Do these powerful fools who sit in Whitehall and the editorial suites of the mass media not understand, or, more likely, do they simply not care, as it won’t be their problem?
Two years ago food inflation displayed a notable spike, as a number of poor harvests in different parts of the world conjoined with a burgeoning population to cause a bottleneck in supply. The world is overpopulated, and the UK (England in particular) more so than most countries. Despite using current energy-intensive agricultural technologies and systems, we are still unable to feed ourselves. Our economic productivity is declining, and our power on many levels is declining compared to that of many other more populous nations. What then will we use to purchase food in the future, as our relative decline continues and the populations of other states continue to spiral? From where will we obtain sufficient foodstuffs?
We urgently need to adopt a policy of zero net immigration, and to ensure that the immigration that does take place, is genuinely beneficial to the UK, and thus consists of individuals and families from peoples who share our traditional indigenous British values. Cultural compatibility must be paramount, which means that Muslim immigration should be choked off completely, and for good. I would sooner work until I dropped, than have my country concreted over and occupied by hostile foreign colonists.
For the BBC's online take on this story visit http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8318010.stm
Thursday, 15 October 2009
Islam4UK March: Muslims Prove Yourselves!
So, the kufr-hating Anjem-Choudery and his acolytes wish to stage a march in London, a “Halloween spectacular” if you will, demanding that all we non-Muslims submit to Shariah within our shores? Not so much “trick or treat” as “submit or die”. Will he turn up with a tiny band of vocal fanatics, or backed by considerable numbers of Muslim youths with a “grievance”? Whether they are few in number or many, one would think that this offers a spectacularly golden opportunity for those who claim to be ‘moderate’ Muslims to turn up and counter-demonstrate.
I hereby issue a challenge to you self-declared ‘moderate’ Muslims: if you truly are ‘moderate’, I expect to see you turn up in your thousands with “not in our name” banners and clearly stating your opposition to Shariah as a barbarous dark-age law code. I want to see you denounce stoning, decapitation, amputation and crucifixion, and to speak out for the rights of apostates, atheists and homosexuals, and pledge your allegiance to secular English Common Law. I want to see and hear you state that your aim is to trash Shariah because it is a backward social evil that has no place in civilised 21st-century society.
Can’t you see what an incredible opportunity this presents to you?! If you turn out in your thousands condemning Choudery and Shariah, we will know that you are truly moderate, and not fifth columnists practising taqiyya and kitman. Prove to me that your intentions are good, and that like Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists you are peaceable people with love in your hearts for your fellow citizens of other faiths and none.
If, as seems likely, you do nothing but mouth a few platitudes about Islam being “a religion of peace” (sic) and condemn Choudery and his ilk as being “unrepresentative of Muslims in the UK”, I and everyone else will know you for what you are: liars. Liars biding your time until your demographic weight is sufficient enough to challenge us for political dominance in our own homeland. Choudery has presented you with a rare opportunity to prove that you harbour no ill will for we native Britons and those who abide amongst us peaceably. Will you rise to that challenge, or will you cleave to the message of hatred that the Qur’an demands you follow?
I hereby issue a challenge to you self-declared ‘moderate’ Muslims: if you truly are ‘moderate’, I expect to see you turn up in your thousands with “not in our name” banners and clearly stating your opposition to Shariah as a barbarous dark-age law code. I want to see you denounce stoning, decapitation, amputation and crucifixion, and to speak out for the rights of apostates, atheists and homosexuals, and pledge your allegiance to secular English Common Law. I want to see and hear you state that your aim is to trash Shariah because it is a backward social evil that has no place in civilised 21st-century society.
Can’t you see what an incredible opportunity this presents to you?! If you turn out in your thousands condemning Choudery and Shariah, we will know that you are truly moderate, and not fifth columnists practising taqiyya and kitman. Prove to me that your intentions are good, and that like Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists you are peaceable people with love in your hearts for your fellow citizens of other faiths and none.
If, as seems likely, you do nothing but mouth a few platitudes about Islam being “a religion of peace” (sic) and condemn Choudery and his ilk as being “unrepresentative of Muslims in the UK”, I and everyone else will know you for what you are: liars. Liars biding your time until your demographic weight is sufficient enough to challenge us for political dominance in our own homeland. Choudery has presented you with a rare opportunity to prove that you harbour no ill will for we native Britons and those who abide amongst us peaceably. Will you rise to that challenge, or will you cleave to the message of hatred that the Qur’an demands you follow?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)