How the Government has declared war on white English people

Post Reply New Topic

Theres also the fact that english taxpayers subsidise scots and welsh NHS trusts, who will provide certain tretaments for free that the english have to pay for. Same is in the offing for university fees. Oh, and scots politicians get to vote on english matters, but not vice versa.

Being english is starting to suck quite badly, and its ALL legislatory.

I couldn't make it through that wall of text by Fjordman, but the general idea seems to be to oppose immigration or something, right?
Anyway, I think Sweden is both good and bad.
The land is good, the nation plain sucks.

The culture we do have is just a mix of other cultures anyway, so I see no reason to oppose bringing in new, good, stuff.
And new, good, people.
Bring them all over! I love foreigners!
If they make me kebab, I'll take them for a hike in the forest or something.
Let's all have a good time!

I have about 50 odd neighbours, all of which are Swedes, except a Persian family.
Guess who is my favourite neighbours?
Not the narrow-minded, plotting, gossiping, down-their-nose looking swedes, at least.

But there's a difference between immigration and invasion.
If a person moves to another country, he can of course bring his culture, and if the citizens of the new country likes it they will adapt it.
But if a person moves into another country, expects them to change their ways, or start printing signs and documents in his language, commits crimes and brings over his feuds with other nations, and all other bad s**t to the new land, then it's no longer an immigration, but an invasion.

Immigration good!
Invasion bad!

Of course, we don't really have jobs for the people already living here, and we're also rapidly trying to think out new ways and systems to make less and less jobs, so immigrants don't really have much to look forward to on that horizon...

White heterosexual male writing, and yet I seem to have avoided the purges against my culture. Being a minority myself, I know that minorities can face a lot of very subtle problems, and in general, I approve of attempts to remove that obstacle (though specific cases may be objectionable).

It's a piece of trashy yellow journalism, riddled with weasel words, absurdly prejudical language, not-quite-racism, and carefully avoids statistics in favour of heartbreaking individual cases. The "ZOMG Communism!" invoking of Maoism is the icing on the cake, and the use of the "Left" as some nebulous conspiracy against decent people is the cherry.

Oh, and the reason we invite people from the third world, Mr Columnist, is because they do the crappy jobs that "real English" people don't want to. And overall, the country makes a profit from immigrants, because so many of them return to their own country before claiming a pension.

I like that being English is not something we shout about, and that we don't take our own institutions seriously. To me, these are strengths, not weaknesses.

A funny thing about all these anti-immigration screeds is that at any given time in history, the people in question seem to view the immigrations of the past as a good thing but the ones of the present as a dire threat to their way of life.

Cuts both ways. "So many" of immigrant workers leave before claiming a pension, true. But "so many" of them either fail to seek work and claim benefits, or work, but send large amounts of their earnings back "home" as well. (Sometimes they do both.)

Whats wrong with avoiding statistics? So many times these forums are full of quuoted stats that are proven to be barely representative of events. At least with some actual cases cited you can see that its actually occuring. Widespread or not, this sort of positive discrimination should not be happening AT ALL. Primary source evidence is a vital part of all research. Statistics are not primary sources.

As a general rule, immigration is not a bad thing. Skills and cultural exchange between countries is fine. What is bad is uncontrolled mass immigration. The keyword is "illegal".

lol - go into a pub in Glasgow and tell a Scotsman he is English

As a kid Australia in the 1970's, I knew a just 2 other kids that were not Anglo/Celtic. These (from Italian and Greek families) were the darkest coloured skin people I knew - lol.

Today I am friendly with Singaporeans, Indians, Sri Lankans, Vietnamese, all of whom are friendly and want to make a contribution to the wider community. My kids have a very ethnically diverse group of friends.

Muslims in Australia don't appear to want to become part of the wider Australian community. I get the impression they hate anything non-muslim. My kids report that the muslim kids at school (only a few so not a statistically significant sample) shun other kids and do not attempt to be friendly with any non-muslims.

You've never seen that figure before? It's everywhere....I hear it on the news a lot.

Hmm, it sounds like Oz is doing better than the United States. It's not absolute, but generally, almost every time...whites hang out with whites, blacks hang out with blacks, asians hang out with asians etc. etc. You seldom see any of the different racial groups mixing.

I'm European.

This notion of 'illegal immigration' seems to me a very bizarre concept Perhaps its because i have a british passport and can go pretty much wherever i want - yet someone born elsewhere would be harassed and even imprisoned for travelling about under statutory dictates?... i can see how this could lead to arrogance and supremacist leanings in less well-adjusted individuals.

Passport is the keyword. The concept of illegal immigration involves travel to another nation with zero paperwork, often by illegal and sometimes f*cking downright dangerous methods (stowing away in trucks and even disguised as a carseat once). These immigrants arrive with no proof of themselves at all. Many no doubt are well meaning folks wishing to start a new life etc etc, but they are just as easily organised crime (in the sense of international mafias) or criminally-minded (your standard rapists, murderers and thieves etc.. disorganised crime perhaps?), terrorists, benefit spongers, etc etc. If they are not exploiting the country they reach, then they are often exploited by people "helping" them to reach that country, or exploited once they reach here. The concept of seeking safety from religious oppression is overused and quite obviously fake in most cases (after all, there is the WHOLE of europe and a sea to negotiate before reaching the UK, most of it not particularly oppressive in a religious sense. Why only stop in the UK?)

A passport and other paperwork will not preclude this sort of activity per se, but it helps.

Glad to hear it, old chap. Unfortunately, many of us have experienced first hand the "joys" of multiculturalism, and the malicious way in which our government deals with those who choose to take a stand again against their plans to turn this country into a facsimile of some third-world dump. As for the article codarac quoted, it seemed to describe part of our unfortunate situation quite well.

And you mentioned statistics; why should we need them in this case? It was a bloody newspaper article, not from the Journal of the Royal Statistical society! And anyway, in the context of the cases of obvious discrimination against the white indigenous individuals described, the problem is that these things can occur, and they can do so directly as a result of government policy. The prevalence is irrelevant as the facts as presented speak for themselves: the British government actively discrimates against white British citizens.

If they are illegal immigrants 'hiding' from the system, they will be unable to claim state benefits. Your implication that an equivalent amount will be career criminals or violent rapists/terrorists etc is frankly a bit much for me to take seriously.



Having overviewed many asylum claims, i would like to see some evidence that they quite obviously fake in 'most' cases. From my knoledge of the system (which was quite extensive a few years back), i know how it is almost impossible to get a successful claim, no matter what your history. Many people with deserving causes (eg. sentenced to death for their sexuality) are refused, and its these deserving people that (once refused) enter into the statistics of 'fakes'.

There are very good reasons why someone would travel through europe without making a claim - every signatory to refugee conventions has a unique interpretation of what 'persecution' means so one person might be automatically refused in france (for example) on technical grounds whereas they could have a chance in the UK. There is also the case of planes which fly over those other countries.

I didnt say it was an equivalent amount. The point is that without some form of identification, records, or paperwork, an immigrant could just as likely be a criminal as a non criminal. At least with a paper trail their is an increased chance of locating those who are going to be an issue. Also, it is not always their own criminality that is the problem, but that they become the target for criminals themselves.

Its quite possible to enter the country in an illegal fashion, and then proceed to enter the system. There have been many cases of illegal immigrants entering in such a fashion, making an attempt to claim asylum, failing, then proceeding to disappear. Something like 70 000 illegal immigrants pass through Calais alone in a year, many of whom proceed to claim asylum.

I accede the use of the term "most" is incorrect. Nevertheless, fraudulent claims are made, and our "interpretation" of refugee conventions etc is apparently far too lenient. Consider that, say, Afghanistan is a world away from the UK.. but refugees from their seem to bypass every other country completely and shore up here. Yes, Afghanistan is a troubled country and I can see every reason why one might wish to leave it, but to suggest that not one other state between there and here is willing to allow asylum pushes the boundaries of credulity.

Of course this is only the refugees. Consider the huge influx of ostensibly legal economic migrants, from places such as Romania or Poland. Approx 650 a day arrive here, and despite Home Office claims that only 20 000 low-skilled workers a year would be permitted, ministers have since admitted that EU rules on free movement of labour make a mockery of this claim. This level of migration inwards is surely not healthy for the nations of origin. (some polish cities have become recordably smaller recently.) nor is it healthy for our economy, given that their is also an increase in OUR migration abroad.

Also, dont confuse this as some sort of knee-jerk racist reaction either. I know plenty of polish immigrants, and most of them are top chaps. My point is that immigration as it stands is a mess, and requires some serious rethinking so that the system is fair to ALL.

The figure is BS. How can they actually know how many illegals there are. Its not like they can do a census now, is it? Its just a guesstimate at best.

Dude I agree with your anti-pc fanatic post, the fanatical pc trend is getting to be a major problem, and it is nothing but inverted biggotry. The problem I have with your post is that, I read in another post of yours that your an extreme right winger. So you automatically assume that because sopho isn't behind "locking up those who disagree" with your biggotry, that she MUST be a biggot on the other side of the fence. So all people HAVE to be a right wing or a left wing biggot. I get this s**t all the time from uber libs and uber conservatives, libs call me conservatives and conservatives call me liberals. Do you not think that it's possible that some people could be open minded enough not to hide behind a label?
Until you get over yourself, get over your highschool clique, stop trashing decent people. It is apparent that no matter how much western society stigmatizes highschoolers for clique-ishness, these same idiots accusing them never grow out of it themselves.
I'm sorry but ignorance is ignorance, there is no right "side", it's just a back and forth cycle of "lets screw the other clique". I don't know too much about social life in Europe, but I'm guessing it isn't that different than it is here in the states. Biggots calling biggots on eachothers' biggotry and refusing to look at their own biggotry.

I've got your back on that one sopho