Will there always be an England?
Will there? Will we forget what these men done as we forget their songs?The British National Party Regional News, as posted a depressing article that it picked up from the Charlotte Observer, asking If there will always be an England? The question really should have been, will there always be a Great Britain? Because without England, there is no Wales, there is no Scotland and there is no Ireland (North or South). Without each other we cannot survive. It is only our Union that has made our combined nations great and prosperous.
Looking at the election results from yesterdays by-election in Heworth Without one sometimes feels like the lookout onboard the Titanic on spotting coming danger, shouting down to the partying passengers and being ignored as they dance their way to their doom.
- Liberal Democrat - 914 votes
- Green Party - 58 votes
- British National Party - 63 3.2%
- Conservative Party Candidate - 703
- Labour Party Candidate - 219 votes
But returning to the Charlotte Observer, one wonders if there will be enough time to warn the people and avert complete disaster. I am beginning to doubt it and really do see rivers of blood for the future of our children. Read on or check out their link.
Perhaps there will not always be an England. An exodus unprecedented in modern times, coupled with a record influx of foreigners, is threatening to erode the character of the land of William Shakespeare and overpowering monarchs, a land that served as the cradle for much of American thought, law and culture.Freedom is like a precious plant. And sadly, it must sometimes be watered with blood in order to continue to exist. I just hope that our politicians have not brought us to the point where we overfeed it.
The figures, making headlines in London newspapers, tell only part of the story. Between June 2005 and June 2006 nearly 200,000 British citizens chose to leave the country for a new life elsewhere. During the same period, at least 574,000 immigrants came to Britain. This number does not include the people who broke the law to get there.
Britain's Office of National Statistics reports that middle-class Britons are beginning to move out of towns in southern England that have become home to large numbers of immigrants, thereby altering the character of neighborhoods that have remained unchanged for generations.
They fear lawlessness
Britons give many reasons for leaving, but their stories share one commonality: life in Britain has become unbearable for them. They fear lawlessness and the threat of more terrorism from a growing Muslim population and the loss of a sense of Britishness, exacerbated by the growing refusal of public schools to teach the history and culture of the nation to the next generation. What it means to be British has been watered down in a plague of political correctness that has swept the country faster than hoof-and-mouth disease. Officials say they do not wish to "offend" others.Hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers are about to be granted "amnesty" to stay in Britain. The government's approach is similar to that pursued by President Bush, who failed to win congressional approval for his amnesty plan. In Britain it appears likely to succeed. Migrants will be granted immediate access to many benefits, including top priority for council housing. Taxpayers will foot the bill.
The Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, called the policy a "stealth amnesty." Again, in a comment reminiscent of the debate in America, Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, said: "This is yet another example of the Alice in Wonderland world of human rights. If you break British law for long enough, you acquire rights not penalties."
British media have carried stories about an Italian immigrant who murdered a schoolteacher and was sentenced to life in prison. He is about to be released after serving just 12 years. The government wants to deport him to Italy, but a combination of British human rights legislation and European Union law are making it impossible to do so. This does not bode well for deporting Islamic terrorists who call for the overthrow of the government and incite young people to acts of violence.
Assimilation not encouraged
Abraham Lincoln said no nation can exist half slave and half free. Neither can a nation be sustained if it allows conditions that result in mass emigration, while importing huge numbers of foreigners who come from backgrounds that do not practice assimilation or tolerance of other beliefs. When one factors in the high number of abortions (one in five pregnancies are aborted in England and Wales), the high birth rates of immigrants (15 times those of white Britons), it doesn't take a population expert to predict that the days of the England we have known may be numbered.
The problem for Britain and the United States isn't just the change in demographics. It is the reluctance of both countries to inculcate the beliefs, history and, yes, religious ideals, which made our nations so successful that others wanted to come and be a part of them. The difference between many of the current immigrants and those of the past is that the previous ones wanted to become fully American or fully British. The current ones, in too many cases, would destroy what makes our countries unique. And the "leaders" of Britain and America refuse to stop it.
The greater tragedy is that the people of Britain have little say in any of this, so they are taking the road of last resort. They are leaving.
Tags:
8 comments:
A simple article that says it all. But our people refuse to listen and simply drift along.The picture at the head of this item shows MEN in the age when we had our backs to the wall and faced the very real threat of an end to our way of life. Fortunately, there were MEN in Britain in those days, not the posing, preening,weeping, vomiting fools we breed today and so we were able to come through it, a crises brought about largely by our politicians short sightedness. And as soon as we came through it we went back to sleep and our politicians set about manufacturing a new crises.They have worked at it for sixty long years and once again we have our backs against the wall. But this time we do not realise it, we fail to see the very real threat,and, crucially, the character of the people is no longer strong, we are fatally weakened by our modern way of life which produces, not serious minded,politically aware, patriotis MEN but selfish,stupid,lawless "child men" controlled by a grasping media and political class. And on top of this we sluice unborn children into oblivion and watch our maternity wards fill with people not of our kind, not of our background, not of our race. In this crises we do not have the armies of Russia and the United States of America and our own kin of the Commonwealth to save us. We have only ourselves. And we no longer appear able to rise to the terrible challenge.History repeats itself. As Rome fell to massive, hostile,immigrating hordes, so does modern Britain and young people of today, within their lifetimes, will come to curse the wasted years when they ignored the warnings and frittered away their lives engrossed only in their own pleasure.
Depressing stuff Celtic. What can we do? Keep fighting. It is not in our nature to quit and we are not alone even though it seems that way.
Take care old friend
"I hope that if evil days should come upon our country, and the last army which a collapsing Empire could interpose between London and the invader was dissolving in rout and ruin, that there would be some-even in these modern days-who would not care to accustom themselves to the new order of things and tamely survive the disaster." Where did that quote come from? Not from a polical leader of today, you can be sure of that for the present lib/lab/leftie/con breed care nothing for their country or their people. A young Winston Churchill wrote that in "The River War" in 1899 when he was twenty five years of age.Evil days have come upon us many times since then but in the past we were fortunate enough to fight our way out of it, people and politicans,all in it together.In the modern emergency there will certainly be SOME "who would not care to accustom themselves to the new order of things and tamely survive the disaster." The question is, will there be enough? And will their example be able to inspire their blood brothers to turn it all about?
by whity lol
from todays express
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/18605/-New-politics-could-draw-activists ,
It is my firm conviction that the direction this country has going for a few decades has been directed by fabianism. Every labour leader and top level elete have been members of this organisation.
Before the Russian Revolution, the Communist Party had two wings: Bolshevik and Menshevik. The Bolsheviks believed in the immediate establishment of socialism through violence. The Mensheviks (who also called themselves social democrats) argued for a gradual, non-revolutionary path to the same goal. Liberty and property were to be abolished by majority vote.
The Bolsheviks won, but after committing unimaginable crimes, they have pretty much disappeared. The Mensheviks, however, are taking over America.
At a recent town meeting in Hyde Park, New York, Bill Clinton was asked about a national sales tax (also called a value-added tax or VAT). Clinton – who is happily imposing income, corporate, energy, inheritance, and other taxes – said he could not include a VAT "right now." There is "only so much change a country can accommodate at the same time."
Our local Menshevism has its roots not in Lenin's Russia, but in the London of 1883, when a group of go-slow socialists founded the Fabian Society. Headed by the appropriately named Herbert Bland, its most famous members were playwright George Bernard Shaw, authors Sidney and Beatrice Webb, and artist William Morris.
The Fabians took their name from Quintus Fabius Maximus, the Roman general who defeated Hannibal in the Second Punic War by refusing to fight large set-piece battles (which the Romans had lost against Hannibal), but only engaging in small actions he knew he could win, no matter how long he had to wait.
Founded the year of Marx's death to promote his ideas through gradualism, the Fabian Society sought to "honeycomb" society, as Fabian Margaret Cole put it, with disguised socialist measures. By glossing over its goals, the Fabian Society hoped to avoid galvanizing the enemies of socialism.
Unlike revolutionary Marxists, the Fabian socialists also knew the workings of British public policy. As the original policy wonks," they did much research, drew up plans, wrote pamphlets and books, and made legislative proposals, drawing on their allies in universities, churches, and newspapers for help. They also trained speakers, writers, and politicians, and Sidney Webb founded the London School of Economics in 1895 as headquarters for this work.
Although the Fabian Society never had more than 4,000 members, they originated, promoted, and steered through parliament most of British social policy in the last 80 years. The result was a wrecked economy and society, until Margaret Thatcher began to defabianize England.
The Fabians succeeded in their goal of establishing the "provider state," a welfare state that would care not just for the poor, but also for the middle class, from cradle to grave.
Whether it was workmen's compensation, old-age pensions, unemployment benefits, or socialized medicine, the Fabians always stressed "social reform," noted John T. Flynn. They "saw early the immense value of social reform for accustoming the citizens to looking to the state for the correction of all their ills. They saw that welfare agitation could be made the vehicle for importing socialist ideas into the minds of the common man."
Another Fabian innovation: social reform invariably involved some sort of "insurance". People were induced to accept socialism through the model of the insurance company.
Real insurance companies, relying on a random distribution of accidents, pool money to make the world less uncertain for all of us. Pool everyone's wealth in the state – the Fabian argued – and we could be happy, healthy, and wise.
Aneurin Bevan, the Fabian cabinet minister in the post-war Labor government who imposed the National Health Service, actually argued that it would drastically increase everyone's life span, eventually warding off death indefinitely.
The real Fabian vision of the state had been shown, however, in Sidney and Beatrice Webb's Soviet Communism: A New Civilization? published in 1935 (the question mark was removed from the title after the first edition). The book praised Stalin's U.S.S.R. as a virtual Heaven on earth.
As fellow Marxists, if of a different stripe, the Webbs were bound to approve of Stalinism – the end if not the means. "The Fabians were in a sense better Marxists than Marx was himself," said Joseph Schumpeter. "To concentrate on the problems that are within practical politics, to move in step with the evolution of things social, and to let the ultimate goal take care of itself is really more in accord with Marx's fundamental doctrine than the revolutionary ideology he himself grafted upon it."
Bill Clinton was trained by modern Fabians during his Rhodes scholarship at Oxford. Carroll Quigley, his mentor at Georgetown, was also a sort of Fabian. Perhaps this is why Clinton calls higher taxes "contributions," government spending "investment," blind obedience to him "patriotism," and private property owners "special interests."
Clearly socialism is what Clinton means by "change." As E. J. Dionne has said, "President Clinton's economic plan is a blueprint for recasting" our society into a "social democracy."
For example, just as trade unions were about to die a merciful death in American economic life, Clinton signed several executive orders to ensure their prospering at the expense of property owners.
In his first budget, Clinton called on us to sacrifice ourselves to the government. The Fabians said the same, advocating, in the words of Beatrice Webb, the "transference" of "the emotion of self-sacrificing service" from God to the state.
Like other social democrats, Clinton lies to the public. He says that taxing the rich will have no effect on middle class wealth. But concentration of private capital at the top of the social hierarchy is good. It makes everyone better off. Plundering that wealth may lead to more equality, but it's an equality of poverty.
Clinton has already shown his disdain for the market economy by berating drug companies for their prices and threatening controls on them (while expanding the welfare programs that drive these prices higher).
As to Hillary's health and medical commission, we will get something more socialist than our present system, but short of the total state. More controls will come later.
The Fabian stained glass window, now installed at Beatrice Webb House in Surrey, England, shows George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb reshaping the world on an anvil, with the Fabian coat of arms in the background: a wolf in sheep's clothing. That wolf is now at our door.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/archives/fm/4-93.html
I have said before that the motivating force behind the destruction of our country lies in the aqenda of this lot.
WOLF IN SHEEPS CLOTHING
Liberty Australia
The Fabian Society
The Fabian Society was founded in 1884 by Edward Pease, Frank Podmore and Hubert Bland.
The name comes from the Roman general Quintus Fabius Maximus Cunctater which means "the delayer".
Fabians seek to change society and government to their Socialist ideals by delaying their goals and using the stealth of "gradualism" just as General Fabius did against Hannibal.
By exploiting the natural tendency of all Politicians to concentrate power, the Fabians have worked at supporting legislation to empower bureaucracy, thereby undermining Parliament and thus destroying the rights of individuals.
The Fabian Coat of Arms was originally the WOLF IN SHEEPS CLOTHING, that may have been a tad too telling as it has now been replaced with the TORTOISE which portrays slow and steady, the motto of their tortoise is "When I strike, I strike hard".
The Fabius Maximus of Australia is Gough Whitlam, the list of Politicians who are are members of the Fabians is horrifically large, such key politicians as Paul Keating, Bob Hawke, Barry Jones, John Button, John Dawkins, Gareth Evans and Bill Hayden just to name a very small sample.
Then there are the Fabian infiltraitors within our bureaucracies and other areas of influence such as Race Mathews, Laurie Carmichael, Bill Kelty, Phil Ruthven, John Halfpenny, Rev Peter Hollingworth,etc...Lionel Murphy and Arthur Calwell were also members.
The list of Fabian policies, publications and conferences is awesome and leaves absolutely no doubt as to their political intent!!!
The Fabian Society is a KEY COMPONENT of the global mechanism that is transferring control and ownership of Australia to the forces of GLOBALISATION.
Using the tactics of Fabius Maximus, the Fabians are clearly succeeding in their restructuring of the Australian ECONOMY, it has been carried out so well that the populace of Australia are completely UNAWARE that it has happened.
Background
1999 The War of the Words
1999 The Two Souls of Socialism
6. THE FABIAN MODEL
1999 The Fabian Socialists
1999 Fabian Society
A Backgrounding
1999 Coefficients Club:
- Window on the High Cabal?
Critiques
1999 John Maynard Keynes, who eventually became the economic architect of English socialism
1999 God Works in the Individual,
Not through Organization
1999 THE FABIAN SOCIETY (1883 to 1996) By: Rebekah Sutherland
1999 UPDATE OF THE POLITICAL ECONOMIC New Age New World Order
Membership
1999 List of Australian Fabian Socialists
Home Pages
1999 Britain
1999 Australian Fabian Society
Fabian Articles
1999 Race Mathews:
Many of Australia's first Fabians are known as legislators, priests, jurists, men and women of letters, diplomats, feminists and educators, yet few are recognized as Fabians.
Links OK May 2006
http://www.netbay.com.au/~noelozzy/wolves.htm
Defender. Good information. I have been thinking about doing a bit of research on the Fabians for a long time. But time is tight at the moment and your post saves a lot of work.
Good Luck
Post a Comment