What a nightmare, coming to an Anglo-Centric Western country near you...The death of the Western White European is nigh...
Decade that changed the face of the UK: 4million migrants settle here - and in London less than half of the population is white British
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2Er1qiE8j
There's No England Now:
There's no England Now...
-
Mr S
- Veteran Poster
- Posts: 2409
- Joined: September 1st, 2007, 3:57 am
- Location: Physical Earth, 3rd Dimensional Plane
There's no England Now...
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor and stoic philosopher, 121-180 A.D.
Meet Loads of Foreign Women in Person! Join Our Happier Abroad ROMANCE TOURS to Many Overseas Countries!
Meet Foreign Women Now! Post your FREE profile on Happier Abroad Personals and start receiving messages from gorgeous Foreign Women today!
My understanding is that they hate themselves so much that they will grovel before their colonial subjects- Indians, Pakistanis, Africans while treating Slovaks and Serbs who want to live there with scorn and disdain.
Anyway, no pity for Brits. They made their soup, let them wallow in it.
Let us not forget that they have created all types of "new" Britains- Oz, Canada, US, NZ, etc.
They even named an island- New Britain on the other side of the world. ha ha ha!
I am not sure they were welcome by the locals when they occupied one 4th of the world and conveniently became new nationalities.
Chickens do have an uncanny quality of coming home to roost, you know.
Say good bye to London, Tommy. It is now called New Karachi!
Anyway, no pity for Brits. They made their soup, let them wallow in it.
Let us not forget that they have created all types of "new" Britains- Oz, Canada, US, NZ, etc.
They even named an island- New Britain on the other side of the world. ha ha ha!
I am not sure they were welcome by the locals when they occupied one 4th of the world and conveniently became new nationalities.
Chickens do have an uncanny quality of coming home to roost, you know.
Say good bye to London, Tommy. It is now called New Karachi!
A brain is a terrible thing to wash!
-
abcdavid01
- Experienced Poster
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: November 17th, 2012, 10:52 pm
- Location: On the run
england has practically been a big ghetto for centuries (even back when it was 'all white') due to irish (and scottish) immigration, equally or much more so a result of karma (one might say) than this current situation. all ethnic groups within the british isles pretty much share identicle genetics (and now cultures, very unfortunately) so their old immigration problems were never noticed or uproared about as much as this more recent one, even though they were of a similar magnitude. this is simply because of the overt racial and cultural dissimularities between the newly arriving immigrants and the already asimulated brits, leaving the new arrivals unable to assimilate.
it looks a messy situation for sure, but dont get the impression its another usa though. its a far more race friendly place, due to there not being nearly as many deeply ingraned complexes in the populous, and of course due to how racism is literally illegal there (when whites do it).
it looks a messy situation for sure, but dont get the impression its another usa though. its a far more race friendly place, due to there not being nearly as many deeply ingraned complexes in the populous, and of course due to how racism is literally illegal there (when whites do it).
Last edited by lavezzi on December 12th, 2012, 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
The point everyone is missing is that the third world is being allowed to immigrate into first world countries, not only England, but the US, Sweden, Germany, and most of Europe. It is obviously a uniform policy that has been adopted by the elites worldwide. So to suggest that it is some kind of comeuppance when, in fact, it is quite intentional, is hilarious.
It is a comeuppance but now they don't want to pay for it alone so they are dragging other countries into it who never had anything to do with it. They infected them with their guilt and liberalism.MrPeabody wrote:The point everyone is missing is that the third world is being allowed to immigrate into first world countries, not only England, but the US, Sweden, Germany, and most of Europe. It is obviously a uniform policy that has been adopted by the elites worldwide. So to suggest that it is some kind of comeuppance when, in fact, it is quite intentional, is hilarious.
Plus they kill other birds with those stones- the elite wants cheap labor, and they are nor procreating and they will have someone to blame when the shtf. Working class locals hate these immigrants and they attack them all the time and the elite just sits and laughs. And counts its money.
A brain is a terrible thing to wash!
-
abcdavid01
- Experienced Poster
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: November 17th, 2012, 10:52 pm
- Location: On the run
Rivers of Blood Speech by MP Enoch Powell, 1968
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643 ... peech.html
The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.
One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."
Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.
A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.
After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: "If I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country." I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn't last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: "I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan't be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man."
I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?
The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.
I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.
...
The Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendent should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.
...
Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.
But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.
They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.
In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.
...
The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.
Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.
But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.
...
Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
XXX
Researching him now as an American, he seems pretty great. Like a British Ron Paul.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3643 ... peech.html
The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.
One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."
Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.
A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.
After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: "If I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country." I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn't last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: "I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan't be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man."
I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?
The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.
I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.
...
The Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendent should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.
...
Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.
But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.
They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.
In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.
...
The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.
Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.
But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.
...
Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
XXX
Researching him now as an American, he seems pretty great. Like a British Ron Paul.
The great late Cecil Rhodes planned the following for Britain:
..."the extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom, and of colonisation by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the Islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the Islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire, the inauguration of a system of Colonial representation in the Imperial Parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed members of the Empire and, finally, the foundation of so great a Power as to render wars impossible, and promote the best interests of humanity."
Here is some more:
"I contend that we are the first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race."
Well, it's not happening!
..."the extension of British rule throughout the world, the perfecting of a system of emigration from the United Kingdom, and of colonisation by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour and enterprise, and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the Islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the Islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire, the inauguration of a system of Colonial representation in the Imperial Parliament which may tend to weld together the disjointed members of the Empire and, finally, the foundation of so great a Power as to render wars impossible, and promote the best interests of humanity."
Here is some more:
"I contend that we are the first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race."
Well, it's not happening!
Last edited by ladislav on December 13th, 2012, 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A brain is a terrible thing to wash!
-
abcdavid01
- Experienced Poster
- Posts: 1579
- Joined: November 17th, 2012, 10:52 pm
- Location: On the run
Something funny to think about: International relations exist in a state of anarchy. There is no one world government (unless you believe in conspiracies, but I digress). So people think of anarchy as mob violence, but anarchy just means no government, which exists on an international scale. Individuals cannot enter a state of anarchy (unless they go off the grid) because they will always be within the boundaries of some national government. But entire nations exist in a state of anarchy with other nations.
-
lone_yakuza
- Freshman Poster
- Posts: 454
- Joined: November 3rd, 2012, 8:48 am
-
lone_yakuza
- Freshman Poster
- Posts: 454
- Joined: November 3rd, 2012, 8:48 am
LA,
While your anger is understandable, you still lack two things- travel and more knowledge. All of your indignation is valid, however, are you telling me that the horrible rape of Nanjing and throwing babies on bayonets and raping 20,000 women is because the Japanese were influenced by the Anglo Saxons? If that is true, couldn't they just say to themselves- "oh, lets not do it, we are not barbarians!"
Ghengis Khan did the same in E. Europe- horrible rapes and killings for fun and pillage. Did he also learn from the Anglo Saxons? You mean he sent someone to England to learn from them? He was a brutal murderer who killed totally innocent people. And as Asian as they come.
Another thing is that there is an in group- out group dynamics among people. It is wired in. It is tribal instinct. You only encountered one expression of it- Anglo male vs Asian male in America. But there are so many more hierarchies and opposing groups and groups within groups.
As you travel, you will see them more and more.
And social racism in the USA is insurmountable, so one needs to move. I am surprised you are not living in Hawaii or LA. I met Japanese Americans from there and they are very happy.
One more thing- in most of Western Europe ( maybe with the exception of England)a Japanese person should be treated very well.
While your anger is understandable, you still lack two things- travel and more knowledge. All of your indignation is valid, however, are you telling me that the horrible rape of Nanjing and throwing babies on bayonets and raping 20,000 women is because the Japanese were influenced by the Anglo Saxons? If that is true, couldn't they just say to themselves- "oh, lets not do it, we are not barbarians!"
Ghengis Khan did the same in E. Europe- horrible rapes and killings for fun and pillage. Did he also learn from the Anglo Saxons? You mean he sent someone to England to learn from them? He was a brutal murderer who killed totally innocent people. And as Asian as they come.
Another thing is that there is an in group- out group dynamics among people. It is wired in. It is tribal instinct. You only encountered one expression of it- Anglo male vs Asian male in America. But there are so many more hierarchies and opposing groups and groups within groups.
As you travel, you will see them more and more.
And social racism in the USA is insurmountable, so one needs to move. I am surprised you are not living in Hawaii or LA. I met Japanese Americans from there and they are very happy.
One more thing- in most of Western Europe ( maybe with the exception of England)a Japanese person should be treated very well.
A brain is a terrible thing to wash!
-
lone_yakuza
- Freshman Poster
- Posts: 454
- Joined: November 3rd, 2012, 8:48 am
Isaan in Thailand has been run over by Ghengis Khan?
They have flat wide round faces, big nose and mouth
Anyway, this is award winning movie that talks about decline of western world
http://www.decadencedocumentary.com/
Low birth rates, ageing populations, debt-laden economies and immigration – the West consumes without consequence, loves without longevity and lives without meaning. Peak oil, climate change, the GFC is the world without.Decadence, a lush essay-style documentary filmed in ten countries, is about the world within, about us. About what we have gained and lost. About a new renaissance or a final dark age?
They have flat wide round faces, big nose and mouth
Anyway, this is award winning movie that talks about decline of western world
http://www.decadencedocumentary.com/
Low birth rates, ageing populations, debt-laden economies and immigration – the West consumes without consequence, loves without longevity and lives without meaning. Peak oil, climate change, the GFC is the world without.Decadence, a lush essay-style documentary filmed in ten countries, is about the world within, about us. About what we have gained and lost. About a new renaissance or a final dark age?
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 9 Replies
- 4227 Views
-
Last post by BellaRuth
-
- 5 Replies
- 3078 Views
-
Last post by DarkMinxMish
-
- 12 Replies
- 2442 Views
-
Last post by Wolfeye
-
- 12 Replies
- 9058 Views
-
Last post by xiongmao
-
- 0 Replies
- 2928 Views
-
Last post by Cornfed