By Sarah: Maid of AlbionAndrew Bron is, of course, entirely correct when he states that Dame Kelly Holmes can not be viewed as “entirely British”. Under the current law she is certainly a British citizen, however, part of her heritage passed on to her by her father, is Jamaican, of African origin, and I am sure that it is a part of her heritage of which she is immensely and equally proud.
To claim otherwise is to deny an vital part of her, which is surely far more offensive than the silly Telegraph article is pretending to find MEP Mr. Bron's statement.
It stands to reason, you can not make something other than what it is merely for the sake of political ideology. If I was born in China that fact alone would not make me Chinese, however, much I might, for whatever reason, wish to be Chinese. Even if my English father had married a Chinese woman rather than my English mother, I would still remain half English, as Kelly remains, no doubt proudly, half Jamaican.
The media always attempt to stress the “Britishness” of athletes and celebrities of immigrant origin, as if desperately trying to impose their new reality upon us, rather as the old soviets would stress the “gloriousness” of their crumbling republics.
It is a form of subliminal brainwashing, and it is amazing to see how widely the brain washing has taken effect. I think many of us must have been shocked at the basic ignorance of leading Political blogger Ian Dale, when he insisted to Simon Darby that second generation immigrants were “indigenous”. Clearly Mr Dale believes that, were he to import a Texan cactus, and then replant a cutting in his back garden, cactus would become indigenous to Sussex.
By Ian Dale's definition, Rudyard Kipling was probably an Indian. If someone in his position is so ignorant, why should we be surprised when ordinary people in the street parrot the same arrant nonsense?.
However, whatever the rights and wrongs of the argument over who is, or is not, fully British, we should not ignore the trick which the Telegraph is attempting to play, when they produce Kelly Holmes, and later various “Black British” footballers, as examples of what they are subliminally implying to he the “wonderful and valuable 'Britons' whom the 'nasty' BNP reject”.
This is the same trick which other Bronco substitutes, such as the Sun and Mirror have been playing for weeks, when they produce individual immigrants who are either attractive or who have made some individual contribution, as proof of the “wrongness” of the BNP position on immigration.
Like every other trick the media plays in this area, this is deeply dishonest, overwhelmingly, the British people do not (yet) have issues with individual immigrants, most of us, including the majority BNP supporters would agree that some have made a contribution to the country, however, this does not change the fact that the negative impact of mass immigration far outweighs any contribution made by the few individuals whom the media parade before us.
The contribution, and relative attractiveness, or otherwise of individual immigrants is not the issue, and the media is being shamefully disingenuous when they suggest it is. Nobody objects to immigrants, just because they are immigrants, and few would be concerned if immigration had been kept to moderate or reasonable levels. Even the numbers had only reached those which Enoch Powell had warned of in 1968 (a warning for which he was ridiculed and vilified) we would not be facing the crisis which we are. However, the numbers have so far exceeded Enoch's , by comparison, rater modest predictions, that have reached the point where our nation is set to be overwhelmed within the next two generations, this is the issue which has brought us to where we are, not how nice individual runners, pop singers and footballers might be.
What the media is doing with Kelly Holmes and their randomly selected black footballers is the same as if they produced a sweet, cuddly, bunny rabbit and announcing “Isn't it cute? isn't it sweet? harmless and cuddly? how could anyone who is not really bad and really evil object to such a sweet cuddly bunny?!!”
Of course nobody would object to an individual cuddly bunny rabbit, because there is no problem with an individual cuddly bunny rabbit. Its when there are ten million cuddly bunnies, now that's when they become a problem.
________________________
To claim otherwise is to deny an vital part of her, which is surely far more offensive than the silly Telegraph article is pretending to find MEP Mr. Bron's statement.
It stands to reason, you can not make something other than what it is merely for the sake of political ideology. If I was born in China that fact alone would not make me Chinese, however, much I might, for whatever reason, wish to be Chinese. Even if my English father had married a Chinese woman rather than my English mother, I would still remain half English, as Kelly remains, no doubt proudly, half Jamaican.
The media always attempt to stress the “Britishness” of athletes and celebrities of immigrant origin, as if desperately trying to impose their new reality upon us, rather as the old soviets would stress the “gloriousness” of their crumbling republics.
It is a form of subliminal brainwashing, and it is amazing to see how widely the brain washing has taken effect. I think many of us must have been shocked at the basic ignorance of leading Political blogger Ian Dale, when he insisted to Simon Darby that second generation immigrants were “indigenous”. Clearly Mr Dale believes that, were he to import a Texan cactus, and then replant a cutting in his back garden, cactus would become indigenous to Sussex.
By Ian Dale's definition, Rudyard Kipling was probably an Indian. If someone in his position is so ignorant, why should we be surprised when ordinary people in the street parrot the same arrant nonsense?.
However, whatever the rights and wrongs of the argument over who is, or is not, fully British, we should not ignore the trick which the Telegraph is attempting to play, when they produce Kelly Holmes, and later various “Black British” footballers, as examples of what they are subliminally implying to he the “wonderful and valuable 'Britons' whom the 'nasty' BNP reject”.
This is the same trick which other Bronco substitutes, such as the Sun and Mirror have been playing for weeks, when they produce individual immigrants who are either attractive or who have made some individual contribution, as proof of the “wrongness” of the BNP position on immigration.
Like every other trick the media plays in this area, this is deeply dishonest, overwhelmingly, the British people do not (yet) have issues with individual immigrants, most of us, including the majority BNP supporters would agree that some have made a contribution to the country, however, this does not change the fact that the negative impact of mass immigration far outweighs any contribution made by the few individuals whom the media parade before us.
The contribution, and relative attractiveness, or otherwise of individual immigrants is not the issue, and the media is being shamefully disingenuous when they suggest it is. Nobody objects to immigrants, just because they are immigrants, and few would be concerned if immigration had been kept to moderate or reasonable levels. Even the numbers had only reached those which Enoch Powell had warned of in 1968 (a warning for which he was ridiculed and vilified) we would not be facing the crisis which we are. However, the numbers have so far exceeded Enoch's , by comparison, rater modest predictions, that have reached the point where our nation is set to be overwhelmed within the next two generations, this is the issue which has brought us to where we are, not how nice individual runners, pop singers and footballers might be.
What the media is doing with Kelly Holmes and their randomly selected black footballers is the same as if they produced a sweet, cuddly, bunny rabbit and announcing “Isn't it cute? isn't it sweet? harmless and cuddly? how could anyone who is not really bad and really evil object to such a sweet cuddly bunny?!!”
Of course nobody would object to an individual cuddly bunny rabbit, because there is no problem with an individual cuddly bunny rabbit. Its when there are ten million cuddly bunnies, now that's when they become a problem.
________________________