Friday, June 22, 2012

Sorry, but ‘sorry’ isn’t good enough

Ed Miliband is apologising today for Labour’s open, generous and unlimited immigration policy, which saw millions of foreign nationals flood into the country ostensibly to meet the needs of the economy. Forget how many billions it cost the taxpayer in housing, welfare benefits and translation services. Forget how many schools have been forced to employ dozens of ‘support staff’ in order to deal with half a million children who do not speak English as their first language. Forget how many indigenous Britons were bypassed for council housing in favour of ‘higher priority’ immigrants with greater needs (ie more children). Forget the impact on hospital waiting lists, or to getting an appointment with a GP or dentist. And forget how much irreversible damage all this has had on community cohesion.

When Ed Miliband apologises for Labour’s immigration policy, he has statistics in his head, political posturing in his heart, and absolutely nothing in his soul. This is no sincere or meaningful apology, because there is no attitude of regret and not a shred of insight or analysis into the culture of equality and interminable political correctness which produced the policy.

Remember Gordon Brown calling Gillian Duffy a ‘bigot’ merely for expressing concern about immigration? Her response was natural, human, compassionate and concerned about her community and way of life. To Labour, she was simply a ‘bigot’. Gordon Brown grovelled and squirmed, but his apology was hollow, for we all knew what he really thought and believed in his heart.

Labour’s immigration policy has not been merely a matter of money: it has destroyed trust. Immigration has been on such a scale for so long that entire ghetto communities have imported their customs and cultures and refused to integrate, forcing Britons not out of their homes but out of their country. Among the ethnic restaurants and foreign corner shops there is fear, a lack of understanding, an absence of compatriotism, unity, cohesion.

And there is an increase in fundamentalist religion, of the sort which has no time or tolerance of the mores and traditions of liberal democracy. For some of these immigrants – the undoubted minority but very vocal – there is an aggressive assertion of divine law, an intolerance of apostasy and religious freedom, and a total rejection of the foundational principles of the Enlightenment.

Labour’s immigration policy was not about economic charts, employment figures or equality tables: it destroyed lives, killed trust, harmed communities, and challenged our very sense of what it means to be British.

True sorrow means repentance, which necessitates profound change way beyond the rhetorical flourish of political posturing. If Labour were truly sorry, they would need to bring forward policy proposals to regain sovereign control of our borders. And that would mean not only reconfiguring welfare and benefits to deter bogus claims for asylum; it would involve fundamental reconsideration of the unconditional ‘free movement of people’ within the EU. And that would set us on the path to withdrawal.

Sorry, Ed, but unless you’re prepared to go there: your apology is worthless.


Blogger Flossie said...

Will they be saying the same thing in 20 years' time about 'homophobic bigots' once they realise what damage gay marriage has inflicted on society?

Because we will hold Nick Clegg, David Cameron, Lynne Featherstone and Theresa May personally responsible.

22 June 2012 at 09:27  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Never truer words spoken on the matter Cranny applause

Give it a rest Dear and pour yourself another Gin.

22 June 2012 at 09:49  
Blogger Anoneumouse said...

No not wearing it Ed, It's like infecting somebody with AID,s and apologising to them on their death bed.

22 June 2012 at 10:24  
Blogger John M Ward said...

Yes, Your Grace, you sussed this out exactly the same way I saw it as soon as I read the news. The "political posturing" aspect is almost certainly the single biggest reason for this happening.

I used to work in the Immigration Dept and so did my father, for years. We have seen similar trends (though not on such a vast scale) under previous Labour governments..

I was at a social event with Damian Green a couple of years ago, and as he told me then (and I fully appreciated from my insider knowledge) it would take several years for the work being done then (and since) to have a strongly noticeable effect.

Thus when Ed-M or any other Labour/Lefty-in-general spouts off about currently increasing immigration, it will still be their fault. The coalition set-up if far from ideal for many Home Office subjects including this one, but the tide should start to turn visibly before too much longer.

22 June 2012 at 10:34  
Blogger bluedog said...

His Grace gives a succinct outline of the consequences of the Neathergate conspiracy without mentioning the word.

What's going on?

Well, given the appearance of the word Neathergate in the Breivik case in Norway as a motivating factor, reticence is understandable! But what is Neathergate? Communicants may remember this article:

Quite simply, Labour planned to flood the country with third world migrants who would vote Labour in perpetuity out of gratitude. It was a plan that was successfully executed.

Perhaps Neathergate is one of those sleeper issues that the political class tiptoes around to avoid accusations of racism.

One thing seems certain, if Andrew Neather's accusations are true, former Home Secretary Jack Straw is an arch-slime ball who makes Ted Heath look like a patriotic hero.

It is of course within David Cameron's power to order a judicial inquiry into Neathergate. However it's a racing certainty that he won't for fear of setting a precedent that may rebound on him, potentially re-opening the Hackgate wound.

In addition, Dave would possibly not wish to embarrass his new best friend, Tony Blair, with an appearance in which Blair may have to tell the truth.

22 June 2012 at 10:40  
Blogger Muggins said...

Yes. Yvette Cooper was in the Times yesterday saying "we didn't listen to the public enough on immigration"

In other words "give us you votes pleeease. We're NICE! and responsible too"

Social cohesion is a worry. But are the Poles and Czechs so much of a problem here? There's a rather thorny question as to where many of our problems with crime and culture are coming from - with unpleasant answers that nobody is going to like very much. I mean I don't like them.

22 June 2012 at 10:47  
Blogger Muggins said...

"I mean I don't like them"

The answers that is. Got to be careful and try and wake up before posting

22 June 2012 at 10:49  
Blogger E.xtra S.ensory Blofeld + Tiddles said...

Ernst's favourite multicoloured hound woofed

"It is of course within David Cameron's power to order a judicial inquiry into Neathergate. However it's a racing certainty that he won't for fear of setting a precedent that may rebound on him, potentially re-opening the Hackgate which Blair may have to tell the truth."

This would not be a problem for them, for as the Leveson circus has shown, they are all consumate liars!

and Flossie said...

Will they be saying the same thing in 20 years' time about 'homophobic bigots' once they realise what damage gay marriage has inflicted on society?

I can't turn the telly on or read the papers without being confronted with the queerising of non fiction and fiction so that characters in books are now homosexual whereas once they were heterosexual such as Peter Guillam in Tinker tailor, Green Lantern comic book hero etc. If the percentage of gays in society is reflected by this why is there not the same reflection of Christians etc X 3 in the media or arts and drama?? Utter hypocritical bigotry!!!

Needed a sickbag to have to hear Aung San Suu Kyi's praise of 'DEMOCRACY' in our wonderful country and the nodding heads of the deaf traitors of Parliament. Sickening!!!


22 June 2012 at 11:07  
Blogger Flossie said...

Dreadnaught, happy to take you up on the offer of another gin (with tonic, slice but no ice, thank you), as for giving it a rest - not while there is breath in my body!

The whole race thing succeeded so well because people were intimidated by the 'bigot' accusations. Well, we must not be intimidated again.

I suppose you have not heard of the new state-sponsored register in Quebec (where gay marriage was legalised in 2005) of people guilty of 'homophobic hate crimes'(which can be reported anonymously) which they specify as 'any negative word or act toward a homosexual or homosexuality in general: physical abuse, verbal abuse, intimidation, harassment, offensive graffiti, abuse, injurious mockery, inappropriate media coverage and discrimination'. No doubt this is all with a view to punishing those found guilty.

Michael Gove had better recall all those bibles sent to schools with their Leviticus content before this happens here.

22 June 2012 at 11:40  
Blogger Philip said...

Yes, Labour's open immigration policy was for the purpose of social engineering to increase the multicultural nature of society to "stuff then Right" - a senior Labour figure (can't remember who) close to Blair admitted this when they were in power.

But that is not to say Labour hasn't voiced concerns about immigration before. I think I recall a previous occasion a while back when some Labour figures voiced concern about immigration from Eastern Europe. It was speculated that the reason for the concern was that E Europeans are from societies likely to hold more traditional Christian values than the society Labour wanted to engineer. This time round the concern seems to be the same: immigration from nations such as Poland.

I also recall that Labour, relatively early on in the Blair years, Labour sought to restrict immigration from the Caribbean, while not from Muslim nations. Caribbean’s are from a more Christian background.

The aim of lib-left elite’s immigration policy seems to be to create a multicultural society, yes, but with the particular aim of destroying our Christian heritage.

22 June 2012 at 11:46  
Blogger Corrigan1 said...

Hey, Dreadnaught, I thought you were in favour of foreigners marching in and overrunning other people's countries?

22 June 2012 at 12:00  
Blogger graham wood said...

Flossie. You are right to quote the appalling nature of the totalitarian nature of the government in Quebec with its strictures on all criticim of homosexuality.
This was quoted extensively by Bill Muehlenberg on his excellent website and with his usual vigour and clarity.
I am sure that you will understand that the ultimate aim of the "Gaystapo" is to eliminate ALL criticism from the public square, and particularly that by Christians in any shape or form -
Quebec forcefully exhibits this submission to the demands of the 'gay' communities.
You mentioned 'intimidation' in the immigration debate. But it could be equally applied to those who have tghe temerity to legitimately criticise homosexuality. It is almost de rigeur in western societies to accept the bogus slur of so called "homophobia", otherwise known as "hate crime" to denigrate or remove the any expression of dissent.
There is of course such a thing as 'hate' (You that love the Lord hate evil), and obviously, 'crime', but to conflate the two is entirely bogus. There is no such thing as a "hate crime" and is, as far as I'm aware unknown as an indictable offence under British law.
But the concept is repeated ad nauseam in order to intimidate and suppress ANY expression of legitimate comment on the subject of homosexuality.

22 June 2012 at 12:01  
Blogger Ken said...

labour lost votes to the BNP at the last election and many traditional labour voters are frustrated with labour's current policyless position and are looking to UKIP as a supporter of the aspirational working classes in this country. They are the only party which support the aspirational working and middle classes.

This so-called apology, dripping with insincere malice, is nothing but empty, cynical politicking and will convince nobody.

IF Ed really means it, he should NOW be campaigning to withdraw from the EU altogether, so that we could actually DO something about immigration.

He doesn't mean it at all and is lying to us all.

22 June 2012 at 12:53  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

Rejection of the principles of the Enlightenment: Man’s reason, in isolation from God’s revelation, can solve any problem.

We’re all in trouble.

22 June 2012 at 12:56  
Blogger D. Singh said...

'British jobs for British workers.'

Gordon Brown

EU: There are no British, French, German jobs. There are only EU jobs for EU workers.

The EU is the problem as immigration is not a British competence.

Britain's borders strecth from Dubli in the west to Bucharest in the east; and from Helsinki in the north to Athens in the south.

Now that the southern countries are about to collapse 'some' of the EU unemployed will migrate to Britain.

22 June 2012 at 13:02  
Blogger Nilk said...

Milliband is a Fabian which should be all anyone needs to know.

He will never have the wellbeing of the general population at heart - he's got a bigger agenda.

Just like our own Fabian PM Julia Gillard.

22 June 2012 at 13:12  
Blogger Man in a Shed said...

Its also worth remembering what Labour insider said on the subject.

22 June 2012 at 13:59  
Blogger Jim McLean said...

It is indeed a terrible situation when - in 2012 - the United Kingdom has to pass legislation making it a crime to force someone into marriage. Of course we all know why this law has to be passed and which communities it is targeting. However, we are not allowed to say. Instead we pass a law for all Britons, as if this were a British problem.

22 June 2012 at 14:39  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Jim: "However, we are not allowed to say."


It's for some of the families originally from certain rural parts of Pakistan and Bangladesh, and perhaps for more recent African immigrants from places like Somalia too. Of course, it used to be a UK problem too in the past, only it wasn't really seen as a problem back then. It was traditional marriage.

22 June 2012 at 15:16  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

DanJ0 said ...
" ... it (forced marriage) used to be a UK problem too in the past, only it wasn't really seen as a problem back then. It was traditional marriage."

How's that?

Traditional marriage, between a man and a woman, was based on compulsion, was it? Before the discovery and advent of 'romantic love' in the West and before the acceptance of individual choice, different approaches to marriage were certainly adopted.

Don't try to undermine 'traditional marriage' by presenting a distorted picture of it because you're peddling another agenda.

22 June 2012 at 15:41  
Blogger DanJ0 said...

Dodo: "Don't try to undermine 'traditional marriage' by presenting a distorted picture of it because you're peddling another agenda."

Actually, I'll do what I want especially when I have a solid argument to hand. I'm hardly going to be told what to do or what not to do by someone like you who appears to lack any sort of internal moral compass. Jeez, the bloody cheek of it. :O

22 June 2012 at 16:01  
Blogger Galant said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

22 June 2012 at 16:25  
Blogger Youthpasta said...

So, to return this to the actual topic that His Grace started:

So Blair and New Labour wanted to stop the Conservatives from ever being in power again through social engineering on an insane scale and they had the temerity to claim that the Conservatives are doing the same with schools?

It is a truly sad, if unsurprising, revelation to read. It shows that politicians will do anything to stay in power.
And before anyone shouts out "But we knew that already!", just stop and think for a moment. Labour were wanting to dilute the Anglo-Saxon population to a point where it gained a constant grip over the polls. That's not so much social engineering for capital with the voters, it's almost ethnic cleansing!
That may seem a bit over the top, but when you are being made to be insignificant in relation to another nationality or race (or in this case the plural of both) it comes very close indeed!
And if politicians will do that for votes, the question hanging in my head now is "What WON'T they do?", which is really chilling!

22 June 2012 at 17:33  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Corrigan1 said...
Hey, Dreadnaught, I thought you were in favour of foreigners marching in and overrunning other people's countries?

Now what gave you that impression?

22 June 2012 at 17:54  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. Communicants may not be aware that mass immigration was first planned in 1946 by the post war Labour government. What brought the idea to the fore was none other than a strike by London Transport. When the war time volunteers who kept the service running during the war years were disbanded, there was a staff shortage. Substantial numbers of previous staff who were called up by the armed forces never came back, having been killed or severely injured .The unions knew there was a premium in their members’ labour and struck for higher pay.

Two years later the Empire Windrush arrived in Britain. And what a floating Pandora’s box that was, as we continue to experience today. One rather believes the impact was far worse than the fall of Singapore. Incredulously, 4 years ago, the 60th anniversary of that tragic event (Windrush, not Singapore) was celebrated by the BBC as if it had been a splendid occurrence. Inspector sat there open mouthed as the descendants of the settlers were described as ‘vital’ to the economic and cultural activities of the country. Eventually he toppled off his chair having been so stunned, he forgot to breath…

There is something in the human psyche which registers ‘wrongness’ when surrounded by streets of foreign people. You see, until recently, that would have been the result of an unwanted invasion, military or otherwise. They arrived, they took the housing meant for our children, the services we paid into, our extremely generous welfare benefits, and now in comparison with their former lives, they live like princes. They won’t assimilate even if they could, in the same way as the British in Spain are, well, British. And who can blame them, because there is nothing in the small print saying they must…

We this in mind, we must restrict immigration to those who have the skills we need. We can’t use anyone else. They would be a drain on society, and we have enough of those types here already.

22 June 2012 at 18:00  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...

Your Grace

The problem of immigration has been compounded by multiculturalism.

A policy of integration and encouraging immigrants to become "British" (Morel like the US) would have helped

As it is we have communities within our communities.


22 June 2012 at 18:00  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

Saying sorry may be more then Gordon Brown has ever done for wrecking our economy in so many ways it defies adequate description, but what we want to see is effective punishment.

The sort of punishment that would put the fear of God into any future traitor from repeating these kinds of evil doings.

May I suggest a slow televised execution in parliament square, possibly involving the resultant body parts being distributed to the four corners of the country and put on public display to act as a proper deterrent?

The sort of punishment that I would only reserve for these kind of not so common criminals. While we are at it why stop with our politicians, for the biggest traitor of all is most evidently Her Gracious Majesty.

This will not happen of course, which is why we are buggered way beyond redemption.

22 June 2012 at 18:04  
Blogger Oswin said...

First-off, the Labour Party didn't want the Grammar Schools to turn-out more Tories; and then, they didn't want the indigenous population to do the same either!

All once aided and abetted by the external influence of Marxist thought
(backed by Marxist money, resources and intrigue) to destroy our country from within. (See Mao's 'Little Red Book' for details.)

The 'Cold War' has long since gone, but the consquences were never addressed; rather, they were re-packaged for more-of-the-same, by another cartload of clowns...

22 June 2012 at 18:05  
Blogger non mouse said...

We all know that Miliband is himself an immigrant-come-lately. His ancestry is not British in any substantial way; and even stylistically he is foreign. He is a 'pretend' Briton who looks and speaks like an extra in some Dracula film.

All of which explains why none of his policy (Marxism) addresses the needs and concerns of the British. Though it's odd that, on this occasion, he bucks the concerns of his non- Celtic/Anglo-Saxon/Norse constituents.

Does the end-game approach... for such useful idiots? Are they supposed to be weakened and fragmented in the crises instigated by their settlement?

22 June 2012 at 18:42  
Blogger non mouse said...

Gosh, Oswin! You have Mao's Little Red Book? I bought mine in Hong Kong years ago, for about HK$1.00 (circa 2/6); but it was quite rare in the West then ... illegal, even, in the US.

22 June 2012 at 18:47  
Blogger Shacklefree said...

Your Grace sad"For some of these immigrants – the undoubted minority but very vocal – there is an aggressive assertion of divine law, an intolerance of apostasy and religious freedom, and a total rejection of the foundational principles of the Enlightenment".

The Enlightenment as I recall was at least responsible for the power of darkness descending over France in the French Revolution. It was after all a secular movement which have always been the most bloody, excepting of course the various genocides perpetrated by Islam in Armenia, East Timor, Sudan and various other places prior and since.

22 June 2012 at 19:05  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Rather hope he remains as Leader of the Labour party, as befits a descendant of a Marxist Jew. For those who are not in the know, it’s quite a fascinating subject, how secular Jews embraced Marxism. The primary drive was the new religion didn’t include anti Semitism, no doubt a welcome break for Jews in Eastern Europe, with a history of pogroms happening at the drop of a hat. It has even been suggested that the Soviet Union would have collapsed within twenty years without them. Stalin was particularly wary, and it is said he was planning to rid them from professional life, NAZI style, when he died in 1953.

22 June 2012 at 19:17  
Blogger Marcus Foxall said...


What I find fascinating is that Marx made anti-semitic comments!

His brother Groucho was much nicer.
And made a bigger contribution to humanity , too.

22 June 2012 at 19:32  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Marcus Foxall

The Inspector still buys their shirts you know. Used to be traded under the name ‘St Bruno’

22 June 2012 at 19:39  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

I have warmed very strongly to Peter Hitchens in the last year.

22 June 2012 at 20:35  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Well said Your Grace and what I find a real abomination is the fact that we, a once more civilised nation than we are now, had to bend over backwards and elevate these backward religions, cultures and whims above our own whilst loosing our own gentile Britishness. And all Ed and the Liebore party can mutter is a hollow “Oh! Sorry folks”

Europe might well be sinking in a sea of third world immigration and debt, I don't see why we should too. I think in the name of survival of the fittest we have to stop immigration into Britain. All those who stay here have to be loyal British subjects or go back to where they came from.

I was watching a really good documentary on King George V, in 1917 he refused his favourite first cousin Tsar Nicholas II of Russia and his family asylum here to flee from the Russian revolution. The whole family were later killed in 1918 by the Bolsheviks.
I think that was very admirable and a real test of his loyalty to his country and the House of Windsor.

22 June 2012 at 21:15  
Blogger Atlas Shrugged said...

I was watching a really good documentary on King George V, in 1917 he refused his favourite first cousin Tsar Nicholas II of Russia and his family asylum here to flee from the Russian revolution. The whole family were later killed in 1918 by the Bolsheviks.
I think that was very admirable and a real test of his loyalty to his country and the House of Windsor.

22 June 2012 21:15

Oh, you think that sort of thing shows loyalty do you?

How strange.

I would have thought it shows the kind of inhuman, uncaring, ultra competitive barbarism, which so distinguishes royal families in general and our own in particular from much of the rest or normal humanity.

Not that they had a lot of choice in the matter, for their own bankers where by then calling all of the important shots, including financing the firing of all of the more real ones, at the time.

22 June 2012 at 22:04  
Blogger bluedog said...

Marie @ 21.15, this communicant tends to agree with Shruggers on this issue. However, the rationale for denying sanctuary to the Tsar and his family as nothing to do with bankers or even Jesuits.

It was the fear that the Tsar would become a focus for Bolshevik supporters within the Labour movement leading potentially to the fall of the House of Windsor. If one were to be unkind, one could say that George V had the Tsar's blood on his hands.

And one would be right.

22 June 2012 at 22:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Shrugged. Nobody expected the Russian royal family to be murdered, least of all Lenin, who had hoped to cash in on their captivity. So furious was he, that everyone involved in the crime were eventually killed themselves soon afterwards. There were NO exceptions...

22 June 2012 at 22:33  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

I'm sure George V was acting on government advice and that he regretted the decision.

22 June 2012 at 23:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

On a more serious note, will our Prime Minister be attending the Euro quarter final to support the English team?

I see the little fat lady was there tonight jumping for glee as the Greeks suffered at the hands of the Germans.

22 June 2012 at 23:10  
Blogger Marie1797 said...

Bluedog:”It was the fear that the Tsar would become a focus for Bolshevik supporters within the Labour movement leading potentially to the fall of the House of Windsor.”

Exactly Bluedog, they would have then become a great threat to not only the House of Windsor but to the country too. One does what one has to do to survive.

Atlas:”Oh, you think that sort of thing shows loyalty do you?
How strange.
I would have thought it shows the kind of inhuman, uncaring, ultra competitive barbarism, which so distinguishes royal families in general and our own in particular from much of the rest or normal humanity.”

Yes I do and great courage, and why should they or the government regret their decision.
The Bolsheviks were a wicked lot and you wouldn't want to be swamped by them, same as the Islamists but of course the communist touchy feely New Labour lot trading on the lovey dovey we must be nice to everyone did with mass immigration what they had to try and keep them in power for a very long time. Red Ed now “apologising” is a ploy to try and win votes at the next election. Don't fall for his clap trap.

22 June 2012 at 23:26  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Marie said ...
"One does what one has to do to survive."

Surely one does the morally right thing trusting that this results in the desired outcome?

23 June 2012 at 02:11  
Blogger Oswin said...

non mouse @ 18:47 : yes, my old copy is currently employed as a 'draught excluder' wedged into a hole in the wall of my airing-cupboard.

For my sins, I once studied Sino/Russian Marxist philosophy and politics. Yes, it was as boring as it sounds; there weren't many laughs... :o(

23 June 2012 at 04:14  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

The morally right thing rarely has the desired outcome, Dodo.

Expediency rules the day, even with Christians, or as the terribly cruel Cressida, devourer of the phoney innocent (recently graduated from the Goldie Horn School of Breathlessness and Eye Fluttering) would say..... especially with Christians.

23 June 2012 at 05:32  
Blogger Huldah said...

Back to apologies for immigration. Milliband is late with his.

I attended a Debate at the ICA back in 2007 (see risible account here from arch-Guardianista Tessa Mayes)

Peter Horrocks, then Editor of Newsnight, now Director of World Service, admitted that the BBC had got the tone of reporting immigration (and the EU) badly wrong, because they had dismissed the concerns of their audience as worthless or worse. He confessed that they only reluctantly invited people like Sir Andrew Green to appear on programmes, but said he now recognised that the BBC had been wrong.

Shame it took Mr Bean so long to do the same.

23 June 2012 at 08:17  
Blogger Nowhere man said...

Faced with the potential loss of Scottish MP's from Westminster, fairness in the disposition of constituencies and the white working class, at last, waking up to Labour treachery on this issue they have now turned full circle.

Or have they?

Labour has consistently lied before.

They are doing so again.

23 June 2012 at 09:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Nowhere man

Where have you been of late? Nowhere?

23 June 2012 at 11:02  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


There's a difference between expediency and attempting to avoid 'collateral damage' to those put forward as a shield for others to hide behind.

23 June 2012 at 12:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Of course, Labour will still continue to champion mass immigration. That’s how international socialism works. You bring in people who have no right to be here and who don’t belong, hundreds or thousands of miles away and you have their electoral support for generations. It also helps if some of these people can’t read or write in their own language. So much easier then for the postal vote abuse scheme to work. An abuse Labour did nothing about, then, now or in the future.

But then we have what happened in Bradford. Too many of those types and you have disaster, they put their own man in. Rather obvious really, and this is what Milliband’s message is really directed to. He’s addressing inner city party types up and down the country. Fall in line. It was us who let you in, and it’s us to whom you owe allegiance.

So, any thoughts of a revaluing of the indigenous working class is not justified. They will continue to turn up and vote Labour and expect nothing back. Why should they. Labour have actually taken away not given to them. They are also sufficiently dense as to not question where there vote is going and why, bless them. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it...

23 June 2012 at 12:53  
Blogger Jim Nasium said...

Hi everyone. I immigrated to England from South Africa 10 years ago, I consider myself a Conservative and am very concerned about the policies of the left in this country.

The reason I am posting, and I know this is a strange place to ask this and quite off topic, is I need recommendations on books on English history.

I am interested on a high level in the past 1000 years, but especially the 20th century and the 70's and 80's in particular.

Any suggestions?

23 June 2012 at 12:58  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Hi Jim

I would recommend Simon Schama's three book series A History of Britain.

Book I isbn -0563-48714-3 starts around 3000BC until the Elizabethan period 1603. Then Book2 0-563-48716 inc English Civil War and Book 3 1776 - 2000, sub-entitled 'The Fate of Empire' isbn 0-563-48719-4.

Produced by the BBC in far more detail from which the series of programmes of the same name is also recommended if you just to grab the condensed cd version if you only want a quick but informative scan.

Welcome to the blog and the UK.

23 June 2012 at 14:06  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Or there is also A History of Modern Britain by Andrew Marr (BBC pub) - also on cd for more analysis of the periods you mention.

23 June 2012 at 14:09  
Blogger Naomi King said...

No Flossie don't give it a rest ! Absolutely right !

Flossie said...
Will they be saying the same thing in 20 years' time about 'homophobic bigots' once they realise what damage gay marriage has inflicted on society?

Because we will hold Nick Clegg, David Cameron, Lynne Featherstone and Theresa May personally responsible.

23 June 2012 at 15:11  
Blogger Naomi King said...

May I recommend on Faith Fertility and the World's Future the book by David Goldman entitled How Civilisations Die

It is mostly because faithless secularists stop having and rearing children.

23 June 2012 at 15:20  
Blogger Dreadnaught said...

Naomi King

'secularists stop having and rearing children'

Whassup Mrs K - Bit of bile come up has it? So you can't find some cut and paste blather to soothe it anywhere else and have resorted to creating an unsubstantiated lie to lever in your own secularist/gay(one and the same to you) bashing agenda with that of Flossie on a thread topic which is clearly on the subject of UK immigration?

What a grossly disingenuous person you really are - Goldman actually said was:-
'I contend that faith and fertility are inseparable.' wich is resoundly spurious, as how else would the human race continue without fertility but inseparable from 'faith' - faith in what?. He goes forth to explain himself by saying '...But modernity and Islam appear incompatible. As soon as Muslims (and especially Muslim women) become literate, fertility drops below replacement, as in Iran, Turkey, Algeria and Tunisia.

Then he says:-
'a nation that has faith in its future will bring new generations into the world, while a nation that has lost faith in itself will not trouble to do so'

Not quite as you suggest is it?

23 June 2012 at 16:52  
Blogger Jim Nasium said...

Thanks Dreadnaught, sounds like just the thing I am looking for.

23 June 2012 at 21:14  
Blogger Durotrigan said...

I absolutely agree with you that Ed's 'apology' was nothing of the sort. If you read his speech in full (painful, I realise, but it allows you to strip out the media spin), you'll note that what he actually does is manage to deliver a speech advocating Labour's continuing advocacy of a de facto open-borders policy, whilst dressing it up as 'concern' for our apprehensions about mass immigration.

Moreover, a highly noteworthy characteristic of Miliband's speech is his target when it comes to his 'apology': white Europeans from the EU accession states. No mention, strangely, of the far higher and more culturally and economically problematic flood of immigrants from Asia (mainly Pakistan and Bangladesh) and Africa (e.g. Somalia and Nigeria). Why is this? Miliband's speech actually dovetailed quite neatly with what Peter Sutherland advocated this week: the destruction of the homogeneity of European nations. All very worrying:

23 June 2012 at 22:02  
Blogger non mouse said...

Durotrigan @ 22:02 Thank you for both the link to the text, and for your able analysis of it.

I notice you made the connection for us between this speech and the one on English identity. Interesting stuff - EM is clearly sensitive to the fact that he is the alien fruit of an alien tree. What he doesn't seem to grasp is the extent of his presumption: in claiming to define who we are, and then in requiring that we should accept a course of action to change that!

And this is our potential 'ruler'?!?

Would that someone can rid us of ...

23 June 2012 at 22:48  
Blogger bluedog said...

Absolutely correct< Naomi King @ 15.20.

David Goldman who writes as Spengler at Asia has long been one of this communicant's favourite bloggers. He is an original and usually, but not always, accurate commentator and forecaster. Well worth reading.

23 June 2012 at 22:56  
Blogger Tony B said...

Good to see a recognition from Milliband that Labour ignores the working class, oops,those people it was actually created to represent.

25 June 2012 at 10:30  
Blogger DP111 said...

Multiculturalism was an absolute necessity once hordes of unassimalable immigrants were allowed in to the country.

It is the main agent of the destruction of Britain - a policy to destroy the historic link between land and people. It does so, knowing that once this is achieved, there will be no unified and organised opposition to the dictat of a supranational governing elite. This is the EU's main objective, and the open borders policy of the EU is its vehicle.

Multiculturalism is in reality a policy that divides a nation along tribal lines. We are now seeing the effect of this as people vote along ethnic and religious lines, just as they do in Africa. In the future we will see the same ethnic and religious warfare in Britain, as we now see in Africa.

And as for all those moderate Muslims. I hope the outcome of the Arab Spring has disillusioned them. The lesson is that sharia will always be voted for regardless of the number of moderate Muslims. Thus the distinction between moderate and radical Muslims is irrelevant.

There must be a special hell for those people who not just destroy people but an entire nation.

25 June 2012 at 16:10  
Blogger Phil Roberts said...


The evidence appears to be not quite as you quote.

nations that appear secure with lowish crime and reasonable healthcare have smaller numbers of children per (I was going to say family but I not sure about this statement anymore) reproductive arrangement

Faith in the future seems to lend itself to less chidren being born not more.

I do wonder though if we it is not the ususal quote reasons healthcare, literacy etc or something quite different like TV in these more "developed" nations that lends itslf to a lower bithrate


25 June 2012 at 20:02  
Blogger DP111 said...

This is what Labour has bestowed on Britain for eternity – millions of primitive people from Africa, thugee Somalis, and Jihadi pakis and Afghans, and what not, on a civil and peaceful population.

25 June 2012 at 20:22  
Blogger John said...

There are two reasons for mass migration into the UK. The first is that it pushes up the value of land and property. It really pushes it up. Without immigration the population and property prices would be declining. The second reason for the epic scale of migration since 1997 is that Labour has been deliberately replacing the population with people who it believes are more tractable for their internationalist agenda. Yes, at almost 600,000 immigrants a year it has been replacing the population. See The Benefits of Immigration to the UK Economy

4 September 2012 at 15:57  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older