Wednesday, 22 September 2010

MULTI-RACIALISM IN BRITAIN TODAY



The crisis-hit Commonwealth Games has suffered a further blow to its credibility after three of England's highest profile athletes, Phillips Idowu, Christine Ohuruogu and Lisa Dobriskey, announced that they were withdrawing.

Studying those names, what does it tell you about the  racial make up of England today?

79 comments:

couch potato said...

All born in Britain. Two have degrees. One has a linuguistics degree. One can trace her English roots back to 1780. They've done more than some of the layabouts that I have to put up with around here.

banned said...

They tell us that Englands migrant population is 3-5-7% or whatever but a glance at any random picture of London, Manchester or Birmingham shows thast it is clearly 20-25% in reality.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, the one with the roots, fair enough. The other two, if an Alsatian dog is born in Peking from Alsatian parents, does that make it a Pekinese? Just posing the question. i.e. Are they English if they're born here, or does that happen in 200 years once they have integrated into the English culture? The layabouts are maybe a fucking nuisance, but you know what those Saxons were like.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Banned, I don't know. Obviously I don't live there and I certainly don't want Scotland becoming like some parts of England. They tell me that you are struggling to hear an English voice in London now, although I never could understand that cockney accent anyway!

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

DL's stolen my line but realistically if an Alsatian mates with another Alsatian and gives birth in a room full of rottweilers does that make it's offspring a rottweiler?

Black and British go together like positive and positive magnets. There will never be anyything British other than Caucasian I'm afraid to say. African = African. Asian = Asian. Asutralasian = Australasian etc.

Pull your head out of the multicultural brainwashing rampant within society. Nationality has FUCK all to do with birth. Are you saying to me that if me and my white wife give birth in China my offspring's Chinese? If you think so you're 6 cans short of a six pack! Now some poster like Stan will disagree with me because they're brainwashed Africans who think they automatically take the nationality, cultural and ancestral heritage because they're born in another land, yet fail to see that they're the alsations who think they're rottweilers.

There will never be Black or Asian British. It's nothing but NWO propaganda and the sooner people see this the better. If you really want to understand what British is then look up the word, that is look up the word BRITON and see that it's got fuck all to do with Africa, Asia or any other non European peoples (white that is).

And I hate to say it but they're ain't no black in the Union Jack and there's nothing racist about that term whatsoever. It's nothing but complete and utter common sense and nothing more when you think about it. That is if you can remove the 50 years of continued brainwashing that stated we're all the same.

cum oan get aff said...

If you are born in a stable does that make you a horse.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, fuck me you gave old couch potato a blast there. That was what I was trying to say, but you are much more eloquent than I am. Not that it's for me to comment on your comment, but it's probably better not to answer someone who doesn't have a Google ID with such a long comment, IMHO.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Getaffyanaff, no, that makes you the Messiah!

I am Stan said...

Nice to see some national pride,good luck to em?.....

couch potato said...

Descendants of Black Africans who arrived in America 200 years ago are treated as equal Americans as descendants of white Europeans who arrived in America 200 years ago. The blacks aren't seen as less American becuase of the colour of their skin.

Harbinger said...

DL,

I treat everyone with the respect they deserve. I wouldn't give less of an answer to anyone. I made a point that seriously needs to be made because the genocide of the whites and their culture is something not to be taken lightly especially by indigenous Britons and Europeans.

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

First off race is not defined by colour. Although colour is characteristics of races bone structure and physical makeup define races. For example Somalians although Africans are not Negros. They are in fact dark skinned Caucasian/Arab peoples. Look at many African Americans who are lighter than many Greeks or Italians for example?

Regarding America, it's a bad analogy to use to describe this topic. America was built on a multicultural principle. Although the white European laid down the laws and built what America is today, it wasn't their land in the first place and black Americans have been on that land as long as whites to form the culture there is today, albeit following a predominantly white European principle, which is rapidly changing.

Britain and Europe is a completely different story. It's the homelands of the white peoples as Africa is of blacks and Asia Asians. Our ancestry is very old, as is African and Asian but they are not shared or linked, other than human beings. It's the cultures, traditions and ancestry of a people that define them and ultimately their nation. Thus blacks and Asians will never be British for said, obvious reasons. Now on saying that there is no reason whatsoever that blacks and Asians can't grow up in the UK or the west under the white indigenous cultures, but sadly they will always be guests within the UK, as they do not, nor will they ever belong to our culture, ancestry and traditions as we likewise, will never belong to theirs.

This topic has nothing whatsoever to do with prejudice whatsoever just simply stating that blacks and Asians, by definition of the word British can never simply be. They can be citizens [living] in Briton by they cannot be citizens OF Britain or British citizens. Again it goes back to the Alsatian and Rottweiler analogy.

I am Stan said...

Oh nooooo couch potato,

According to Harby`s law,Americans are not Americans unless they are Red Indians,Aussies are not Aussies unless there Aborigionies,Scots are not Scots unless they have fiery red hair,New Zealanders are not New Zealanders ...well you get the picture...no one is no one unless you tick certain boxes..:).

couch potato said...

Stan ..yes it is a bit ambiguous.

Harbers

Your plan does come unstuck when you look at Oz and the US/ canada. They had indigenous populations for thousands of years before we came along and took their land and called the new white settlers Australians, Americans or Canadians.
By your theory the settlers had no right to declare themselves Australian etc. They had the wrong features/culture/ ancestry etc for this.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Stan, nice to hear from you again. where have you been?

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, that's America, which we spawned. They are a bastard race, but I think the point is here, trying to keep the Britons purer.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, yes I stand corrected and I know it is important to put the point across. What I meant was that you can't have an argument with someone who constantly changes their moniker. At least with, I am Stan, you know who, you are dealing with, presuming he bothers to sign in with his google ID.

Dark Lochnagar said...

I am Stan, ",Americans are not Americans unless they are Red Indians,Aussies are not Aussies unless there Aborigionies,Scots are not Scots unless they have fiery red hair"! What an extraordinary statement. Americans and Aussies have to be indigenous people, but indigenous Scots have to have red hair. Fuck off. You'll be telling me next that all Nazis were blond, all French should smell of Garlic, all Italins should have greasy hair and everbody living in Israel is a semenite Jew. I usually can see you point, but that is pish!

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, what you say is 100% correct. They may be 'Australian' nationally but they are not originally, genetic Australians. There would be some point however where the genetic race, ie the Aborigines were overwhelmed by these immigrants and what I don't want is for that to happen to the 'white Christian' native civilisation in Scotland, because that is what is planned for us. That is one of the reasons that I want independence for Scotland, because that frustrates their plans as would Britain leaving the EU.

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

I don't know what post Stan was reading but it most certainly wasn't mine.

What I say of white Americans and black Americans is that they're living in the land of the native American and together live in a multicultural society having both been there as long as one another, albeit that the USA is running of white European culture, although that is changing.

North Americans (USA, Canada) are living in the land of the Amerinidian. South America the blacks and the whites are living in the land of the Amerindian peoples. The same goes for central America also and the West Indies.

In Australia the whites who live there are still and always will be European settlers. The same for the whites in New Zealand. The indigenous Aborigines land is Australia as is the Maori of New Zealand.

Now although people will call white Australians Australians and New Zealand whites New Zealanders, the term British comes from the word Briton. A Briton was the indigenous peoples of the UK and Stan has a really hard time understanding this. He seems to believe that if you're born in a country you immediately inherit an ancestry, traditions and cultures that are not your to inherit. It's really that simple. Stan is and always will be a Black African born and living in the UK and nothing more than that.

I have written in previous posts that this is why I disagree with immigration. Firstly all non British inhabitants should be taught their own respective cultures as one cannot integrate into a culture that is not their to integrate into, due to obvious reasons. Secondly if you go by the aforementioned then teaching non indigenous their own cultures poses future problems when inherently you're promoting colonisation of that land by another people/culture.

I have and always will be vehemently against any form of colonisation or claiming of other lands by peoples not of that land. It's wrong and should not be done as it always leads to inevitable, future problems.

I am Stan said...

Keeping white white and (reducing/stopping/sending them home) immigration is are different issue`s to Britishness.

Fact is if you are a Bull Terrier and you join a pack of Poodles,your still a Bull Terrier and your still part of the pack.

Woof woof .....


DL said,
"Scots are not Scots unless they have fiery red hair"!What an extraordinary statement.

Not extraordinary at all.we all have our tick boxes according to Harby`s Law.

I will not consider a Scot a Scot unless he /she has fiery red hair.

Harbinger said...

I am Stan,

Do you really know anything about anything? I mean you've got an honours degree in speaking shite but really do you know anything about anything?
Do you know the ancestry of Scotland? Do you know why it's called Scotland?

The bottom line is a simple one - you're an African (black) who is born in England, most certainly not English or British, but because of fucked up, left wing brainwashing of society, you truly believe you are British??? The sad reality is you're living in limbo along with all other blacks born in the UK. You don't belong to our culture and history and because you're born here you never grew up in your own. Therefore you and all other blacks have been fucked over big time by the left who continually try to state that blacks are British because they're born here (and we go back to Alsatian and Rottweiler analogy).

And sure you may run with the pack but you're not of the pack. Big difference there.

It's got fuck all to do with tick boxes? Are you going to start telling me that word meanings in the dictionary are what they are because of tick box specification?

I tell you what let's just do away with definition shall we? In fact, let's all just start making up our own language or even better just grunt and point.....

couch potato said...

harbers / darkers....

" In Australia the whites who live there are still and always will be European settlers."

Maybe by your logic. But not if you're Australian. The new Australian PM was born in Wales ( 6 previous Oz PM's born outside Australia).
She has Australian citizenship and calls herself Australian yet she wasn't even born there.
She would take exception to being told she's not Australian.
If you step back and imagine you're looking at the earth from the other side of the galaxy can't you see that we're all just humans in a small planet amongst billions of other planets and skin colour etc are unimportant ?
We'll be gone in the blink of an eye and the human race won't be missed or it's existence ever remebered in the overall scheme of things.

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

It's not my logic whatsoever. It's fact. The people in Australia up until a couple or so years back were part of the Commonwealth who lived in Australia. They were white European descendents, the grew up under a British culture and obviously were loyal to the Queen and lived by our laws and regulations. Therefore they are white Europeans, living in Australia, the land of the Aborigines, nothing but long staying guests. This is the truth of the matter. I'm sure an Australian would be offended but regardless they're still what I've described at the end of debate regardless. A black man will be offended if I called him a nigger, yet a black man is a nigger from the word niger, Latin for black. And what's even more ironic is that a black man calls himself black (when he isn't), doesn't like being called a negro (Spanish for black but is in Spain) and our whole language (not his culture/ancestry) is based on Latin and yet we have to change it in order to not offend those who have no right to do so. LMAO!!!

couch potato said...

Harbers..

It's a complicated system you've set up right enough. By your logic there must be billions of people around the world who are just 'long staying guests'. Maybe each country should have a set of definitive charactersitics and culture that allows a person to be considered a 'native'.
But there would have to be a time scale set up aswell since saxons who mingled with angles are considered natives in Britain. I'd go for 1,000 years. That would stop Spaniards who colonised Peru etc from trying to claim to be Peruvians too early.

I've only come across this logic with 3 folk I can think of. Adolf, Idi Amin and Mugabe. Not good company to keep.

Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I am Stan said...

Couch potato,

I dont think it would be difficult to establish a time line to Harby`s law no logic is required thats the beauty of it,how about 1 bc? ;)

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

This really is not hard to understand. I'll say it again just so you might be able to understand it:

BRITISH AS IN BRITON.

Now is this too hard to understand? This is not about me creating any complicated system. This is about people claiming to be what they most certainly are not. It's a case of Goebbel's lie theory at play here - continue telling someone that they are something even though they're not and everyone will believe it.

It seems not only Stan but you also are unable to understand the situation.
Bottom line is that British means the people of the 4 kingdoms that make up Britain and that means indigenous peoples not non European immigrants I'm afraid to say. Then again I suppose in your dictionary up is down, left is right and in is out?

couch potato said...

harbers..

I understand exactly what you mean but I'm trying to point out that by your logic billions of people around the world are falsely claiming to be nationalities that they're not.
We colonised these islands and are now called Britons.
What is the time scale in your naturalisation process ?
Will the Spaniards who colonised Peru ever be Peruvians ? Will they have to wait until history forgets where they came from before they can claim to be locals ? 2,000 years into the future ?
What timeline are we talking here ?

I am Stan said...

Only you can understand Harby`s Law Harby,its obviously far too complex for the likes of me eh!

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

This is going around and around in circles, because you obviously don't understand what's being said.
Your logic dictates then that what's the point in having culture? What's the point in nationality? What's the point in noticing difference between race? What's the point in defining male between female?

It's really simple - Scottish people are Scottish because they are from the ancestry of Scottish people (Celts), not Black Zulus, or Asian Mongols.

Anonymous said...

If the principal is that you can only claim to be Scottish or British if you are white and that you're ancestors need to have been born here then the isles would be empty. These isles have been conquereu by, and in particular order - vikings, Romans, Normans. The original tribes from Scotland no longer exist given the interbreeding between the eg picts and Vikings. So perhaps all of you should fuck off back to Scandanavia, Italy, France etc. What a bunch of fascist half wits.

Stephen Hawking said...

There's a simple solution. Get everyone DNA tested to see where their genes originated. I net you won't find many in Scotland who have DNA which is solely from this country or these isles.

Harbinger said...

Anonymous et all,

I've explained the situation fully to which if you're still unable to understand you're simple a bunch of halfwits.
As to anonymous, your post proves your overwhelming ignorance - big difference between European and non European cultures. We all share common cultural traits with Europeans practically due to the fact that all were Caucasians and predominantly Celtic peoples. Your argument is that of someone who has nothing to add for the simple reason you know nothing and have obviously read what you have in some left wing rag. And look up the word fascist shit for brains. I'm not being fascist in the least.

Really if you're all still having problems understanding this, you really are jellyheaded fuckwits.

couch potato said...

harbers..

Calm down buddy. You're starting to lose it. Calling people 'jellyheaded fuckwits' and 'shit for brains' just makes you look silly.
We all understand what you're saying but we don't agree with you.
Your preference for racial purity has been done and has failed in the past. It only leads to the 'final solution'.
We'd all agree that immigration has got out of control but the answer is to stop all immigration not do a racial profile on people before they can settle here to make sure they are pure enough.

Dark Lochnagar said...

All, what you gentlemen and anonymous have to understand is that East is East and West is West. All the migration is coming from non-European settled parts of the World like Africa, the Indian Sub-Continent, large swathes of Asia and Arabic countries into the European run parts of the World like the US, Western Europe and the Antipodes. Now at some point in the future I'm sure that these immigrants will be able to call themselves British etc etc, but it will be well into the future. Even in simple civilisations, how long did it take for the Saxons to put up with the Normans. Robert de Brus was still using his French name 250 years after the battle of Hastings and he became the King of a United Scotland leading onto the Rule of the Stewarts. Did you know you can trace the Queen back to Robert the Bruce. Funny that! He became Scots 250 years after his family came here, so there may be hope for your offspring at some point, Stan. This whole argument is of course different from the one that asks, do we want more immigration? My answer to that would be no. Why do I say that? Well because most immigrants who would be coming to our country would be from parts of the World where their religious and culture would stop them adopting the host culture of Scotland. I think in particular, not of Stan's family but of people from the Indian sub-continent and in particular Pakistan, whose religious beliefs, unfortunately, tends to make them form ghettos in many cities and towns in England, mainly in the North rather than adopting the host culture. Selling us curry is not integrating, guys, I'm sorry. I don't honestly fear the Pakistani or Asian peoples, they are people just like ourselves. What I fear most is the hidden hand that is pushing for more immigration and the enlargement of the EU. Stanners and Couchers if you haven't done the research, do it. If you want any starting points, give me a shout and I'll be glad to steer you in the right direction.

Harbingers, you're being attacked over at the blogpost about the Kirking of the Session, BTW.

another anon said...

harbers..

" And look up the word fascist shit for brains. I'm not being fascist in the least."

Mussolini and Hitler were fascists who wanted a pure nation of white people. They eventually strted murdering just about anyone who didn't fit their ideal..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

couch potato said...

DL...

We're not arguing about immigration. We agree it's too high. We're arguing about harbers fascist policies.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, if we all agree that immigration has got out of control, that at least is a starting point. Mind you the fact that we are arguing about it at all is fucking stupid because it has all been decided for our Government by the EU and corrupt politicians. But ok, if we have to accept EU immigrants, there is nothing we can do on that score. From my point of view, that is acceptable because they are European and have no problem adapting to our culture as we have to theirs. I don't feel that we should however be accepting anyone from outside the EU, unless they can adapt to our culture and have special skills to ad to our society. Let me give you an example of what I mean. I had a stomach operation at the beginning of May. The surgeon a MR Majid Ali is Libyan. A really nice guy. Unfortunately he is also a Muslim. I don't have a problem with that, but he doesn't do operations during Ramadan. Now it just so happens, that at the start of Ramadan, my Father in Law was admitted to the same hospital with Pancreatic Cancer. Now he is the Cancer surgeon and he wasn't able to operate. I expect he was still drawing his salary as well. He wasn't too happy when he was discussing his Christmas arrangements and I asked him why he wasn't working over Christmas, if he was a Muslim. I got the usual mumbled reply.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers/Anon Why would you say he is being Fascist. IMO he is only stating the fact that an African is different from an Asian is different from an Arab, is different to a Western European, is different to an Eastern European etc, etc,.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Steven Hawkers, sorry I missed you there. It would be dependent on how far you want to go back. I mean I suppose we're all supposed to be descended from some African tribe or some such pish! I think though, that in Scotland, you would find that the 'race' is quite pure as we didn't tend to get ourselves fucked so many times from invaders as England did.

couch potato said...

DL . harbers is fascist because he agrees with fascist principles that only pure white people can be called British. He discriminates on skin colour. harbers said...

"Black and British go together like positive and positive magnets. There will never be anyything British other than Caucasian I'm afraid to say"

The most famous fascists in recent history were Mussolini, Hitler and Saddam Hussein.

Harbinger said...

couch potato,

"DL . harbers is fascist because he agrees with fascist principles that only pure white people can be called British. He discriminates on skin colour."

You really are stupid aren't you?
Do you not realise that before 1950 there were practically zero Asians and Blacks living in the UK? You seem to think that because of 50 years of people coming to a land they should be able to class themselves as British even though they have no connection whatsoever to our culture, ancestry and traditions, over those British who have been here for thousands of years?
What part of Caucasian don't you understand? The UK is a Caucasian land, the peoples of Europe are Caucasians. Their culture is Caucasian culture. The western civilisation is a Caucasian civilization?
And you have the fucking ignorance to call me a fascist because I state the obvious and the truth? Is the truth now fascist? Ironic that because I was having an argument on Zionism with someone and he called me exactly the same, along with a racist and anti semite because I was telling truths about the situation? This is the new attack for the non indigenous/indigenous left. They now attack the truth by calling the person slur names i.e If you disagree in immigration, it automatically means you hate other races and cultures therefore you're a racist and a fascist....

And I mean exactly what I say British, as of pertaining to the Britons, the Celtic peoples of this island and Europe are white peoples and thus I am making a perfectly valid and more importantly correct statement.

The problem is a simple one. The left took out people from their own cultural environments to create the scenario today. Because they are not growing up in their own lands and they feel sorry for them they automatically decided that they to could be British even though they had no connection whatsoever to the land. In one fell swoop it completely demeaned the white people of the UK who saw their culture be given away like a cheap toy in a corn flake's packet. And when they spoke out, with no malice to non whites out come the attacks. WTF?
And you are the classic example, pig ignorant and totally oblivious to the reality of Britain and definition.

You lost the argument as soon as you started writing, because it's clear you have a clue what's going on as well as being totally ignorant on race and culture.

Harbinger said...

DL,

What they're trying to do is say that at the end of the day we're all humans so culture, ancestry, nationality means fuck all. So in essence they are nothing more than globalists who are actually heralding in the NWO's one world people and culture, under a banking system.

Yet they seem to forget that the western civilisation that they are part of is a white civilisation. Once you read up in the attack against whites you begin to realise where they're coming from.
The problem that has been from time immemorial is that non whites have always been insanely jealous of white peoples because of what they've done. It is a hatred in fact, an inate prejudice that they have, that automatically creates this "fuck your love for your culture, I'm here in your land and I'll call myself whatever I want and if you don't like it fuck you.."

It's so ironic because I lived in London, dated black women most of my life there until I realised and saw the overwhelming hatred and prejudice of blacks to whites. It was huge. Here was me, stupid white boy, in company with non whites happily pulling down my culture and civilisation while they happily lived and benefited within. I woke up, smelled the coffee and saw the simple situation begin - the demolition of white culture, yet the continuing promotion of non white, minority culture over the majority and of course introdcution of race /religious hatred laws and hate speech - School of Frankfurt/Communist subversion tactics of society. So you see DL, non whites will never see the picture like white people because they're not only living in our society but attacking it from all sides, no more so by claiming affiliation to our culture and ancestry, when their family, non white has been here for 20-50 years.

It is pointless debating any longer with them because they are oblivious to reality. They do not understand culture and tradition and more importantly what creates a nation. Now they're probably ok people to have as friends, but I realised a while back that black people and Asian will never ever be British. Their ancestors may have been within a colony of the British Empire but that still gives them no affiliation to our culture. However, if they are mixed race and one parent is indigenous British then of course they will have connection, but any other way and they'll always be nothing but Africans and Asians, living in a foreign land, even if born here, because they have no connection whatsoever with the indigenous peoples.

It's really that simple. Subversion of society by forced multiculturalism and non white immigration. It's a wanting to belong to something without a care in the world of the people whom you want to belong to.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, I've got to agree with Harbinger. The Black man blames the whites for the slave trade, but it was the Blacks and the Arabs who started it. The only reason other non-European cultures want to come here is economic. I don't see a big rush of Whites going to live in Africa, Asia, the Middle East or Pakistan. I wonder why? I don't think with 8 million people economically inactive we need any more immigration, full stop, whether from the EU or not.

Harbinger said...

DL,

You've got a couple of my posts in the spam box. One I posted twice, you can delete one of them.

couch potato said...

DL. You seem to be muddying the waters again. Harbers argument isn't to do with immigration it's the fact that no one can be British unless they pass a certain number of cultural and ethnic tests. We all agree that there's too much immigration and that it should be stopped but under Harbers Law even if we only had one non white UK citizen he wouldn't really be a UK citizen. White settlers in OZ, the US etc will never be real citizens of that country but just settlers under Harbers Law.
Harbers default position in arguments seems to be to shout abuse and foul language at people when they don't agree with him. This usually translates to attitudes in the real world outside cyberspace.
Harbers denies being a fascist but if you looked at the link I gave you explaining fascism it is clear he is a fascist.
Fascists see the nation state as one ethnic race fighting against other 'inferior' groups and expelling or killing them to 'purify' their country. Fascists form alliances with other like minded groups ( Hitler / Mussolini etc ) to spread this hatred as far as they can until they are stopped.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, sorry I saw that and I thought I had deleted one and posted the other but I don't see it.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, you are wasting your time at least trying to convince me because I am in complete agreement with you. It's just a miracle of birth, that we happen to be born white Scots. We could have been Africans or Pakistanis and then of course I think we would be in their situation of wanting to mix with a more successful tribe. We've had this discussion before and no one yet has been able to tell me yet, apart from the Chinese inventing Gunpowder 2000 years ago, what have the non-Europeans ever done for civilisation? What has an African ever invented? What has a Pakistani leader ever done apart from fuck his own people and get richer. What have the Indians achieved since independence? Call centres filled with graduates? Despite the money we still pump into India, they can't even run a Commonwealth Games for fuck's sake!

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, if you are referring to the comment that was written by 'another anon' and if that was you, you are a very naughty boy for muddying the waters. Please just post under the one moniker please. I don't think that reading that Wikipedia entry, that it really applies to Harbinger or myself. I personally have no problem to being called a fascist, if it means that I don't want to see my culture destroyed. One part of the definition read, "Fascists reject and resist the autonomy of cultural or ethnic groups who are not considered part of the fascists' nation and who refuse to assimilate". I completely reject the immigration of Muslim people who do are not able to and have no desire to fit in with the host culture. There are swathes of the UK now, where there is no English spoken and Sharia law is paramount. I don't have anything against Muslims perse, they are people and families the same as us, but I don't want them over here. If that makes me a 'Fascist', then so be it. I would rather be a 'Fascist' that a Socialist who wants the assimilation of their own culture.

couch potato said...

DL..
I agree that we should protect our own seperate identity and culture. I agree that immigration should stop and repatriation should be provided to illegal immigrants and overstayers. But I don't agree that I'm a better person than someone else just because I was born white and not black. Both colours of people have good and bad people.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Couchers, I didn't say I was any better than a black person, just different and I want to maintain my difference. I think you're beginning to get it!

Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harbinger said...

couch potato,

I called you an ignorant idiot for reasons explained, but you continue to prove your idiocy:

"Harbers argument isn't to do with immigration it's the fact that no one can be British unless they pass a certain number of cultural and ethnic tests."

It's not about passing cultural or ethnic tests. You either are white caucasian, of the European cultures that make up the UK or you're not. You're problem is you are completely ignorant to definition.

Harbers Law even if we only had one non white UK citizen he wouldn't really be a UK citizen.

Correct. He would be a citizen within Britain but not a British citizen.

White settlers in OZ, the US etc will never be real citizens of that country but just settlers under Harbers Law.

Again, stupidity. You've either got a land that is because of indigenous culture or you have a land that is because of non indigenous culture. You can't have both. Autralians and New Zealanders will always be white European settlers regardless, for they colonised a land that was not theirs to colonise and do not uphold and live by the indigenous cultures that were there before.

Harbers denies being a fascist but if you looked at the link I gave you explaining fascism it is clear he is a fascist.
Fascists see the nation state as one ethnic race fighting against other 'inferior' groups and expelling or killing them to 'purify' their country.


You have called me fascist because I do not agree with your warped, post 50 definition of Britain. And you say I'm fighting? I'm fighting against no one and I certainly see no one else as inferior, that's your presumption, not I.
Now if fascist is the new slur word to attack anyone who disagrees vehemently on non European immigration due to obvious reasons of alien cultural growth due to higher demographics within aliens leading to subsequent removal of indigenous cultures, then call me a fascist. However if you believe that I choose to forcibly suppress opposition and criticism, believe in state control of a land and persecuting non indigenous then you're 100% wrong in your attack. What I speak of is way over your head for you to understand.

I'll continue seeing Britain as it was before the Communist subversion of our society post 1950's. You can look at it anyway you will.
The fact that you still can't see reality after umpteen posts explaining it to you proves you'll never see it. You have your belief, as wrong as it is (as I've explained), but to you it will always be the right one. You just do not see the bigger picture, which is understandable because of your ignorance and complete disrespect for the indigenous peoples and their ways of life.

Blacks will always be Africans, Asians will always be Asians and Whites will always be Europeans wherever they are in this world.

Harbinger said...

DL,

I wasn't trying to convince you as I know you understand the bigger picture. I was merely reminiscing.
You have hit the nail on the head when you say:

We could have been Africans or Pakistanis and then of course I think we would be in their situation of wanting to mix with a more successful tribe.

The reason why slur words such as fascist were created was to destroy just what you've said, even though it's 100% true. Let's look at this more closely;

1. The white civilisations are far superior to any other civilisation on this land.

2. The very fact that immigration is coming from Africa and Asia on a regular basis here proves that we have something that they want, in the fact that our economy, way of life, education systems, health systems, work prospects etc are far superior to what they have in their own lands. Do we see the same emigration of whites to their lands? No, we do not.

3. Every single major invention in this world has been created in the western civilisation, overwhelmingly by white people. Yet to say this people will call you a racist, for racist has come to mean showing pride in white success. It is exactly the same kind of liberal/left wing brainwashing that stopped children from celebrating success in sporting events, because it would upset those who were inferior i.e. not as good as they, hence why they never won.
This is the brainwashing of society and words were created in order to destroy our civilisation, culture and heap on white guilt that was never there in the first place.

To compare the uses of fascism and racism in today's society from what I've said, it would be like Linford Christie winning the 100 metres and the person who came second calling him a fascist and a racist for celebrating his victory. He has proven that he is a superior runner, therefore all those who came after him were inferior. Therefore immediately him thinking he is a superior athlete to the others will automatically make him a fascist and thus a racist (as the others who lost were predominantly white [racial superiority]).

Don't you see how these words have been used and created in order to enforce immigration and cultural destruction? I'm amazed that people can't see this [not saying you can't DL] but it's obvious. Lev Davodavitch Bronstein (Trotsky) penned the first usage of racist when he attacked the Slavic people for not accepting Communist takeover. When you understand this you understand racism.

It's all about Communist subversion of our society, that is Jewish Zionist subversion of our society and culture and it's working as you can see from the ignorant replied from couch potato.

Harbinger said...

DL,

In a nutshell, the attack on the west has been through the word the usage of slur words. How better for a society to accept open immigration and the forced integration (and segregation) within their lands by pulling on the heartstrings of the white peoples, who have given continued charity to those in the world far less fortunate than themselves?

It was a wicked and insidious act that the Communists have played on the west in order to take over and destroy it, by reaping imaginary guilt upon us, for crimes committed in our ancestral past, especially when the Bolshevik Jews were responsible for hideous attrocities within Russia during their reign within the USSR.

How better to enforce their New World Order and Communist state by turning the truth into racism and fascism? For example:

"I like to associate with people of my own culture and my own race, but will gladly go on holiday and experience other races and culture's hospitality as well as spend my money to help their economy"

The definition of the above would be that I was a racist because I chose not to associate with non whites, even though I had no hatred or dislike of other peoples and culture, just a natural affiliation of my own.

To see this reverse racism in action (another Communist subversion tactic) would be to view Black History month, Black Mobo awards, Black newspapers (The Voice), Black beauty competitions and the hundreds of Black and non white organisations all over the world in the white European lands.
It is perfectly acceptable for non whites to continue to respect their ethnic identity, but for us to do so would be 100% racist. Thus what we see here is the allowing of non white cultures and people to celebrate their cultural diversity, thereby showing automatic segregation, overwhelming proof they are not nor will ever be part of our culture/society but yet through media propaganda this is 100% acceptable even though it's showing clear racial segregation?

The worst thing about it is that people are 100% oblivious to this because of continued media propaganda, subverted by the left 50 years ago. Our culture is being destroyed. We are no longer allowed to celebrate white success because it's automatically deemed racist and to deny immigration and removal of illegals and people who should be her we are branded as fascists.

This is reality and it's Communist subversion - the automatic use of slur words to destroy the truth and impose cultural takeover of other lands non Communist in belief. And everyone's fallen for it.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, it certainly looks like they have fallen for it. I notice the 'what have the non-whites ever done for civilisation' question shuts them up, because then, they are forced to acknowledge the Elephant in the room, i.e that whites are superior in intellect to Blacks and also in most ways to Asians, with the exception of the Japanese and possibly in time to come, the Chinese. You can call me racist or fascist or whatever for saying that, but I don't give a fuck, because I am fed up couching my language in dishonest terms that I don't agree with.

Harbinger said...

DL,

Of course. I think what's happening today is people say "You're a racist" and they reply "And?"

I think when you're a brutally honest person (such as myself) you start seeing the bigger picture and decide enough's enough. I'm sick fucking, fed up of having to curtail to shitheads happy to benefit from my cultural advances in life, but continue to attack my culture and worse still, having a love for it.

It's ironic, but no problem if blacks say "I'm black and proud" or Asians, but if indigenous Britons/Europeans say they're proud of being white then they're attacked as racist. It's a simple case of people being bullied into hating their own culture and traditional beliefs by the use of continuing slur words aimed against them.

Like I said it's societal subversion, enforced guilt and bullying of the indigenous to accept non indigenous and anything they want via state indoctrination and media brainwashing.
It takes a little time for people to wake up but eventually they do. I hate no one. I hate no other cultures or races but I do see them for what they are and that is inferior in ways and superior in others. That's the difference between the races. People say it's racist to state that one race is superior over another but alas, immigration into our lands proves the complete opposite. I always stand by the truth and to call me a racist and a fascist because I uphold the truth then that makes you a liar doesn't it? More so, it show insidiousness on the part of the accuser, by creating words to attack the truth in order for them and others to benefit.

And to finish off, regarding Africans, they've invented nothing. Sure they'll wheel out the Music of Black Origin totally ethnocentric awards and state that Black music is black music and forget completely that it was the white Scottish landowners in America whom taught them Gospel music, to read and to write. It was western classical and folk music that was the roots to Black blues (from Irish and Scottish folk) and of course every black musicians flourished in the USA thanks to the white European culture within. Where were all the great African record industries of the time?

Now the above it truth and will instantly be shouted down as racist for the simple fact that black people utterly loathe the fact that they've succeeded in the west as part of the white culture they grew up in. This is something they will never accept. Their success has been 100% because of white education and existing within our societies. Were Africa such the great place it is, the cradle of civilisation, then they'd have created the western civilisation a long time ago. Sad to say there is no great negro civilisation in history to match the white/Asian ones that have been.

I am Stan said...

The pyramid`s........

Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harbinger said...

I am Stan,

The Egyptians who built the Pyramids were north African, not negro, a mixture of Caucasian and Arab peoples (semitic) who moved from around Greece and the Middle East. The Egyptians were not black. State it all you like if it makes you feel good but regardless, Negroes were not Egyptians, their slaves most certainly but not Egyptians.

I'm not saying that blacks haven't excelled in life but they only have in the western white cultures. There never were any black civilisations to match the other great ones (Egyptian, Roman, Greek, Mongolian, Macedonian, Chinese, Japanese English/British, French, Dutch etc etc ).

In a nutshell Stan, had there been no slave trade Africans would still be living no differently to the hidden Amerindian rainforest tribes in South America.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Stanners, FFS! Egypt is stuck on at the top right and is an Arabic country. And what he said, above.

I am Stan said...

*SIGH*

"Woe to the land of shadowing wings which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia; Go, you swift messengers, to a nation who will be plundered and unrooted...to a people who will be dishonoured and trodden down...".

Thus spoke the prophet Isaiah (Chap.18 - 1 sqq), referring to a people who left neighbouring nations dumbstruck, despite the fact that invaders of all kinds were almost part of everyday life.

Out of the confines of Africa, driven by an irresistible force, having traversed the thousands of miles bordering the Nile, a new power emerged in the Middle-Eastern arena towards 730 B.C.

These tall, proud, dark-skinned warriors with wide shoulders and of athletic gait had come to claim their share of the Kingdom of Egypt, promised to them by their infallible god, Amon of Napata.

Their distant land "beyond the rivers", according to the prophet, bears different names: to the ancient Egyptians, it was the Land of the Bow (ta-sety), most likely referring to their talents as bowmen for which they were appreciated by the pharaohs.

For the Hebrews, it was Kush. For the Greeks, and later the Romans, it was to be Ethiopia, a general term encompassing the whole of Black Africa.

We call it Nubia, from the Egyptian word nebou, designating the gold that was mined there.

Lying to the north of today's Sudan between the 2nd and the 6th cataracts on the Nile, the land of Nubia was first the scene of a particularly inventive neolithic period.

It was later to know three successive kingdoms, each with its own capital: the Kingdom of Kerma (2300 - 1500 B.C.), that of Napata (1000 - 300 B.C.) and finally that of Meroë (300 B.C. - 33 A.D.).

Now both of you go sit on the naughty step and repeat these words!

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."

Socrates

Dark Lochnagar said...

Stanners, that is all very interesting but what exactly does it prove. "These tall, proud, dark-skinned warriors with wide shoulders and of athletic gait had come to claim their share of the Kingdom of Egypt". So in other words Egypt was there before they got there and the Pharaohs used them as bowmen. What the fuck does that prove? Are you seriously telling me, that is your idea of what the Black African has brought to civilisation? Something 3000+ years ago? Stan, why I appreciate the trouble you took in writing the above comment, you can away and throw shite at yourself! :-)

I am Stan said...

It was later to know three successive kingdoms, each with its own capital: the Kingdom of Kerma (2300 - 1500 B.C.), that of Napata (1000 - 300 B.C.) and finally that of Meroë (300 B.C. - 33 A.D.).

This tells us that black civilization existed while Britons were pointing, grunting and eating their children.

Now go back to the naughty step and repeat.

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."

Socrates

Harbinger said...

Oh Stan....

"This tells us that black civilization existed while Britons were pointing, grunting and eating their children."

No Stan it tells us nothing for the simple fact that according to the definition in any dictionary translation of civilisation:

1. a human society that has highly developed material and spiritual resources and a complex cultural, political, and legal organization; an advanced state in social development...

we can clearly see that no Negro people have achieved anywhere near the above definition of the word civilisation. There have been many villages within the Africa's tribal societies, but never any civilisation has existed within West, East and South Africa, the domains of the Negroes.
We were continually told that Gospel was invented by blacks when that was clearly debunked. We were also told that Jesus was a Negro and that was debunked and throughout history we were told that Egypt was a Negro civilisation and that's been debunked on many occasions.
Like I said had it not been for the slave trade, East, West and South Africa would still be living as it had for thousands of years in a basic tribal system.

Tell me Stan, if Negroes had started off as well as you say then why on earth did they devolve into the tribal hell, that experienced by the colonists? If blacks had a civilisation where were all the advancements in medicine, technology, engineering, science, law and order and creating peace and stability? Bottom line, Negroes haven't ever invented anything, apart from those who have lived and grown up in white civilisations.

And as for cannibalism - Here be Cannibals

Now seeing as this is written evidence, tell me then that if your great black civilisation of Egypt (not!) existed 2300bc onwards did negroes all of a sudden get a taste for eating human flesh? The white Europeans never brought it over with them? Here's a simple fact for you Stan which blows your argument out of the water - civilisations evolve not devolve and cannibalism within any society shows devolving. Moreso, it's known that Cannibalism still continues in Africa, long after it ended in the west.

Stan I hate to say it but the white peoples have had numerous civlisations which proves beyond all shadow of a doubt that they were a much more highly advanced breed of the human race than the African negroes. African negroes have only slightly advanced since the white Europeans landed on their island in the latter middle ages and installed western establishments to drag them out of the stone age! This is not prejudice, this is merely stating fact and that there is a huge difference between blacks and whites and always has been. If as they say Africa was the cradle of human civilisation, why on earth isn't it they're not leading the way in life? And don't give me the shit about colonialism. Had you been superior, you'd have defeated the invaders, as did lands in Europe in the past.

Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harbinger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I am Stan said...

"If as they say Africa was the cradle of human civilisation, why on earth isn't it they're not leading the way in life?"


You would have to ask someone more informed on the subject than the two of us Harbs.

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."

Socrates

Harbinger said...

I'm afraid to say that Socrates' statement is a classic example of an oxymoron. Wisdom comes through knowledge and life experience, thus true wisdom is understanding. And here was me thinking that doublespeak evolved from Orwell's doublethink in 1984.....

Dark Lochnagar said...

Boys, Boys. Stanners, you are digging a hole. That's three times you have quoted the same Socrates quote, it's like telling a joke if no one laughs the first time, don't repeat it. It is patently obvious that there was some sort of civilisation 2500 BC in Africa. If it was advanced, how come they've gone back the way. Fuck me, 10 years ago in Rwanda they were hacking each other with machetes! So what happened to the African civilisation in 4500 years? You are desperately trying to stick up for your race and that is admirable, but stop digging Mate, you're dead in the water. How was that for a mixed metaphor!

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, here was me thinking it was only Jews that wanted their pound of flesh! That's horrific. I bet they still eat Human flesh even to this day in some parts of Africa. I liked particularly that bit about someone dying of natural causes and instead of burying the body, the relatives fucking ate him and less than 100 years ago. Fuck me, no wonder Human life is so cheap to the Negro.

I am Stan said...

Heh heh heh,what would Socrates know eh Harb`s ?



"A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

Alexander Pope (1688 - 1744) in An Essay on Criticism, 1709

Dark Lochnagar said...

Stanners, by Christ Stan, you like your quotes.

"A man what Quoteth, can nary think for himself"-Shakespeare 1597

Harbinger said...

DL,

Those Africans who have chosen to live under western cultural beliefs strive whether it be in the west or elsewhere. Those who choose to continue living under tribalism they ultimately fail. Human life is very cheap to the Negro in Africa and worse still they're coming to the west bringing their tribalism with them, which is causing huge unrest. Negroes in Africa, outwith western civilisation and Christianity live like animals on the vedlt. Life is cheap to them as you say. There is little compassion for human life and it goes all the way back to (and long before) when they'd sell their children and people to the Muslim slavers, who subsequently passed them onto the European slavers. Ironically they were Jews - LOL!!! Do some research into the American slave trade for starters.

Harbinger said...

I am Stan,

I'm not kicking Socrates, I never said he was ignorant but that quote is an oxymoron.

And your quote by Alexander Pope..hmmm....

A little learning is a dangerous thing

Dangerous to whom? The master most certainly, to the slave liberation and ultimate freedom.

drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

Again an obvious oxymoron. However understandably alcohol excess does remove our inhibitions, but having worked in the pub trade as a barman, a manager and door security for most of my life, from 18 onwards up until 4 years ago at the age of 35, I can safely say that I've never seen any intelligence within drunk men or women.

Dark Lochnagar said...

Harbingers, yes I've hard about the Jewish angle before in the slave trade. What about the quote I dug up after several hours work by Shakespeare?

Harbinger said...

Impressive quote DL, I must say.