It's a shame Great Britain ( or are we now Region 8 since the traitor Brown signed away another chunk of our right to self rule?) doesn't have a Prime minister like this, we might not get dragged into so many problems. If anybody has Gordon Browns email, please feel free to pass it on. I know the speech is a bit out of date, but is inspirational none the less. Gordon Brown or John Howard.......Gordon Brown or John Howard..........
The Free British People needs a leader like this!!
Prime Minister John Howard - Australia
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.
A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown. Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. 'If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you', he said on National Television ....
'I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia : one the Australian law and another Islamic law that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option', Costello said.
Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should clear off. 'Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off', he said.
Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'
'However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia . However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle.
This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.
We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!
Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.
We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.
If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like 'A Fair Go', then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others.
This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom,'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.
If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU chose.'
Maybe if we had a leader with a backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths we would not be in the situation we are currently in, being whinged at at the drop of a burka by some snivelling moslem, being bombed by people who have been educated, sheltered and welcomed by our politicians (but not the MAN on the street) and generally having a rare old time at our expense (and i do mean expense).
Friday, 14 December 2007
Thursday, 13 December 2007
Treason!
Gordon Brown and his band of marxists have today put another nail in the coffin of Great Britain. Without having the guts to go and put his own "X" on the "revised" EU Treaty, he sent one of his running dogs to put his paw print on instead. This man promised the Free British People a referendum on this constitution and he has reneged on this solemn oath. Brown is a man of no integrity, a traitor to his own people and how he has the audacity to continue to masquerade as a man for the people is beyond me. We have an opportunity in next years London elections to give this treasonous party a bloody nose. Vote for the BNP and start to reclaim your heritage. Not until we have a Nationalist government will we have the will to withdraw from the EU superstate, control our own borders and give priority to our own people.
Brown - You should hang your head in shame for this foul deed.
Brown - You should hang your head in shame for this foul deed.
Monday, 10 December 2007
Are We A Mongrel race - HELL NO!
I make no apologies for "re blogging" this article from last years blog. It should strike chords in all of us. Never forget our proud heritage - its what we leave for our children and our childrens childern. It is said we are a difficult people. To me this shows the true meaning of diversity - not the dressed up multicultural claptrap we are assailed with on a daily basis, but the REAL diversity of a people who are aware of their heritage, their culture and their roots.People who can still function as thinking individuals, and not the product of some marxist school of non-thought. Particularly at this time.
It has been said that the British are a mongrel race, that has neither the right nor the racial heritage needed to proclaim itself the land of a distinct people and that we have always had mass immigration throughout our history .
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Why is it important to establish the argument for a distinct people in the case of Britain and its history? It is important because without knowledge of our cultural and racial origins we are at risk of being demoralised when we are told that our people have no historical, cultural or racial core. It is true that Europe and Britain were settled long ago by Caucasian European tribes. It is true that as with all ancient formations of nations, the settling of lands, warfare and border disputes were indeed the norm. One cannot imagine that, as those Caucasian tribes struggled to settle and claim Britain , anything less than sporadic warfare and land disputes could have taken place. Such are the birth pains of any new nation in the ancient days when the un-tilled lands first felt the feet of the early British tribes. BUT – these tribes were all of common racial stock! So, why are we continually being told we are a "mongrel" nation made up of every hue and colour and creed under the sun? Because as I said a country and people with no sense of history, culture and self are divided and therefore easy pickings for the greedy politicians and their lickspittle sycophants that we have in power in Britain todayIt is said that the early British who settled this land were a disparate bunch of peoples who had nothing in common. The conclusions drawn from this argument will be that as Britain was settled by a variety of peoples (having nothing in common) that the peoples surely have no right to claim a natural racial ownership over the land or even to lay claim to the title," The British People".If you cannot lay claim to the right of being a people then you cannot defend the collective self from the argument that any and all foreign races should be allowed to cross the borders and subsequently to lay claim to the land even to the point of eradicating the culture of the British race. After all if a people are not recognised as a people, but only as a rag tag group of individuals with no common collective core, no rights to being known as a people then how can they insist that they have a unique culture to preserve and to protect? So we see the insidious nature of the argument which states that Britain is predominantly populated not by a people (the descendants of our forefathers who settled the land in ancient days), but by a myriad of races, having no common, ancient racial origin, which simply happened to have formed, in that which is now known as Britain.
COMMON BLOODLINES.
Actually the forefathers of the British race had everything in common as far as a common racial origin. Now some may argue against these conclusions, however those who would argue would most likely be the same individuals who would argue that the Swedes, the Norwegians and the Danes are very different in racial origin. This argument would be wrong and it would be to ignore the fact that these current nations were simply different parts of the same, huge Viking entity which once roamed the area as a whole tribe, but then split into nations over border warfare and disputes. It will amaze you when you realise just how much of a common racial bloodline the people who formed the British 'race' actually had. Let us look at the racial pattern we have set down for ourselves in history and you will see that we were once great Caucasian tribes. Britain was formed by the Caucasian race.It only takes a knowledge of history, (an untwisted account of history, one that is not tainted or twisted in word in order to present a false impression with which to demoralise a people), in order to quickly see that the facts of history lay out a very clear road map as to the common racial roots of those who formed Britain.Early settlersSo, who were the people who settled and created that which is now known as Britain and what did they have in common? What brought them together as a people? First off, the Celts were a tribe from the North of Europe. They were a northern tribe of Caucasians.Now let us look at the Normans. They were Vikings by race which means that they originated from a Northern European area thus they were a Northern tribe of Caucasians in origin. It is true that they mixed with the French in bloodline, but to argue that the French are not a distinct people just because the Vikings are a part of the French is as absurd as it is to argue that the British race does not exist just because we have had an influxes of settlers over the last two millenia. Let us look at the Danes. They were Vikings by race and thus a Northern European tribe. Let us look at the Picts. They were they were a Viking race (yes that does mean that they were at one time a Northern European tribe in origin) which intermarried with and were absorbed by the Scots who were speakers of the Irish (Gaelic) language.Let us look at the Saxons, the Jutes, the Angles, all people of northern or Germanic origin. Are you seeing the pattern? The Celtic peoples such as the Gaels, the Britons and the Belgae were much noted for being tall, blonde or red haired and blue eyed or light of eye. They were known for their tattooing. Picts or 'painted men' were known for their ferociousness in battle!Of course some British forefathers were shorter and some were taller and some were fair while some were pale and some a snowy white. Some had brunette hair and some white blonde or golden hues. We speak in general terms of the physical descriptions of the Viking races. Remember that Denmark and Sweden and Norway are all simply Viking tribes which broke apart as warfare and disputes broke out amongst them. They do not look identical and neither do you or i.Now, what pattern do we see in the forefathers of the British? We see that the people who settled Britain had a great deal in common when it comes to racial bloodlinesYes the Romans were in Britain just as they were once in France . It was in 55 and 54 BC, after Rome had conquered Gaul or as we call it now France that Gaius Julius Caesar decided that he needed to deploy troops to Britain to crush the British resistance. Is France not French because Rome was there? Is Britain not British because Rome was there? Of course this argument is ludicrous.Caesar was driven back from Britain when he met with fierce resistance from the free British peoples.After coming up against the fierce inhabitants of Britain a disgruntled Caesar decided it was best to return his troops to Gaul. Between 54BC and AD 43 trade links developed between Britain and Rome , but then Rome just had to try again and in AD 43 the Roman Emperor Claudius invaded Britain. He was met with a ferocious resistance by the indigenous British and could only conquer lowland England.The British were such a fierce people, such a proud people that even the might and glory of ancient Rome knew itself to be in serious peril when up against the British people. In AD 60 the Roman Suetonius Paulinus was campaigning in North Wales against the Druids, when a major anti Roman uprising was started by Boudicca who openly rebelled when her daughters were raped by roman occupiers.The major Roman settlements were destroyed in Britain before the uprising was defeated. Rome was now more certain than ever that Britons could be a terribly proud and fierce people when stirred, and if truth be told Rome never could conquer all of Britain. Highland scotland was never conquered by Rome and the areas of Britain which were conquered never would stay conquered. The British never did accept defeat. They simply would not stay down. In AD 409 the Imperial occupation of Britain came to an end.
Let us look at what the British took for themselves culturally from the days of the Roman occupation and we shall see how ancient Greece became an important part of the British people's culture. Whilst Roman empirical forces occupied warlike Britain , or shall we say "attempted" to occupy it? Remember that even the forces of the Roman Empire could never occupy or hold of all Britain . Many of the British incorporated much of the philosophical and educational ideology of Rome into their own lives.Now let us remember that much of Roman civilisation, culture, literature and art came almost entirely from ancient Greece. For example, no Roman of good family could have called himself truly cultured unless he was able to speak fluently in the Greek language and had a good knowledge of all Greek literature.The Celts likewise had made a strong impact in the collective Roman mind.We have already established the racial bloodline from where the British originated and all of this talk about the Romans and the Greeks is in regards to CULTURAL influences on the ancient British, not racial. It is also important to remember that the British ALREADY had their own arts and ideologies in place.They simply added, via ancient Rome, some of the best that ancient Greece had to offer by way of literature and philosophy, to their own vast Northern European, Celtic and Germanic based storehouse of knowledge.The Church became a major influence in Rome which became predominantly Christian by the year AD 200, and this added to the influence of the church as a major force in Britain.It was not until Elizabeth the First promoted and created the Church of England that the hold of Rome was lessened in matters of the Church in a permanent way in Britain. So we see that the racial heritage of Britain was culturally influenced by the old ways, by the philosophy and art of ancient Greece, by way of the Roman occupation which ended in Rome leaving Britain, but most of all by the legends and lore and culture of the ancient Northern European Caucasians from where the blood of the ancient British sprang.So yes – we have had waves of immigration over the centuries but in relatively small numbers, most who were assimilated into our culture and ALL were from the same racial stock. What we have had since 1948 with the arrival of the SS Windrush is an open door policy allowing people of any colour and culture to settle irrespective of numbers or culture or beliefs – nobody knows how many immigrants, illegal or otherwise are currently in our land. However the effects of this can be seen daily on our streets and in our schools and in our communities with race ghettos springing up and spates of anti-white attacks on our people –on our sons, and on our daughters, on our neighbours and on our friends. Taxes have increased to tyrannical levels and our freedom of speech is under direct threat from a government too cowardly to attack the problems but quite happy to betray their own people for the price of a vote. But we are the descendants of these proud and ancient British people, they never rolled over – we shouldnt either!
It has been said that the British are a mongrel race, that has neither the right nor the racial heritage needed to proclaim itself the land of a distinct people and that we have always had mass immigration throughout our history .
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Why is it important to establish the argument for a distinct people in the case of Britain and its history? It is important because without knowledge of our cultural and racial origins we are at risk of being demoralised when we are told that our people have no historical, cultural or racial core. It is true that Europe and Britain were settled long ago by Caucasian European tribes. It is true that as with all ancient formations of nations, the settling of lands, warfare and border disputes were indeed the norm. One cannot imagine that, as those Caucasian tribes struggled to settle and claim Britain , anything less than sporadic warfare and land disputes could have taken place. Such are the birth pains of any new nation in the ancient days when the un-tilled lands first felt the feet of the early British tribes. BUT – these tribes were all of common racial stock! So, why are we continually being told we are a "mongrel" nation made up of every hue and colour and creed under the sun? Because as I said a country and people with no sense of history, culture and self are divided and therefore easy pickings for the greedy politicians and their lickspittle sycophants that we have in power in Britain todayIt is said that the early British who settled this land were a disparate bunch of peoples who had nothing in common. The conclusions drawn from this argument will be that as Britain was settled by a variety of peoples (having nothing in common) that the peoples surely have no right to claim a natural racial ownership over the land or even to lay claim to the title," The British People".If you cannot lay claim to the right of being a people then you cannot defend the collective self from the argument that any and all foreign races should be allowed to cross the borders and subsequently to lay claim to the land even to the point of eradicating the culture of the British race. After all if a people are not recognised as a people, but only as a rag tag group of individuals with no common collective core, no rights to being known as a people then how can they insist that they have a unique culture to preserve and to protect? So we see the insidious nature of the argument which states that Britain is predominantly populated not by a people (the descendants of our forefathers who settled the land in ancient days), but by a myriad of races, having no common, ancient racial origin, which simply happened to have formed, in that which is now known as Britain.
COMMON BLOODLINES.
Actually the forefathers of the British race had everything in common as far as a common racial origin. Now some may argue against these conclusions, however those who would argue would most likely be the same individuals who would argue that the Swedes, the Norwegians and the Danes are very different in racial origin. This argument would be wrong and it would be to ignore the fact that these current nations were simply different parts of the same, huge Viking entity which once roamed the area as a whole tribe, but then split into nations over border warfare and disputes. It will amaze you when you realise just how much of a common racial bloodline the people who formed the British 'race' actually had. Let us look at the racial pattern we have set down for ourselves in history and you will see that we were once great Caucasian tribes. Britain was formed by the Caucasian race.It only takes a knowledge of history, (an untwisted account of history, one that is not tainted or twisted in word in order to present a false impression with which to demoralise a people), in order to quickly see that the facts of history lay out a very clear road map as to the common racial roots of those who formed Britain.Early settlersSo, who were the people who settled and created that which is now known as Britain and what did they have in common? What brought them together as a people? First off, the Celts were a tribe from the North of Europe. They were a northern tribe of Caucasians.Now let us look at the Normans. They were Vikings by race which means that they originated from a Northern European area thus they were a Northern tribe of Caucasians in origin. It is true that they mixed with the French in bloodline, but to argue that the French are not a distinct people just because the Vikings are a part of the French is as absurd as it is to argue that the British race does not exist just because we have had an influxes of settlers over the last two millenia. Let us look at the Danes. They were Vikings by race and thus a Northern European tribe. Let us look at the Picts. They were they were a Viking race (yes that does mean that they were at one time a Northern European tribe in origin) which intermarried with and were absorbed by the Scots who were speakers of the Irish (Gaelic) language.Let us look at the Saxons, the Jutes, the Angles, all people of northern or Germanic origin. Are you seeing the pattern? The Celtic peoples such as the Gaels, the Britons and the Belgae were much noted for being tall, blonde or red haired and blue eyed or light of eye. They were known for their tattooing. Picts or 'painted men' were known for their ferociousness in battle!Of course some British forefathers were shorter and some were taller and some were fair while some were pale and some a snowy white. Some had brunette hair and some white blonde or golden hues. We speak in general terms of the physical descriptions of the Viking races. Remember that Denmark and Sweden and Norway are all simply Viking tribes which broke apart as warfare and disputes broke out amongst them. They do not look identical and neither do you or i.Now, what pattern do we see in the forefathers of the British? We see that the people who settled Britain had a great deal in common when it comes to racial bloodlinesYes the Romans were in Britain just as they were once in France . It was in 55 and 54 BC, after Rome had conquered Gaul or as we call it now France that Gaius Julius Caesar decided that he needed to deploy troops to Britain to crush the British resistance. Is France not French because Rome was there? Is Britain not British because Rome was there? Of course this argument is ludicrous.Caesar was driven back from Britain when he met with fierce resistance from the free British peoples.After coming up against the fierce inhabitants of Britain a disgruntled Caesar decided it was best to return his troops to Gaul. Between 54BC and AD 43 trade links developed between Britain and Rome , but then Rome just had to try again and in AD 43 the Roman Emperor Claudius invaded Britain. He was met with a ferocious resistance by the indigenous British and could only conquer lowland England.The British were such a fierce people, such a proud people that even the might and glory of ancient Rome knew itself to be in serious peril when up against the British people. In AD 60 the Roman Suetonius Paulinus was campaigning in North Wales against the Druids, when a major anti Roman uprising was started by Boudicca who openly rebelled when her daughters were raped by roman occupiers.The major Roman settlements were destroyed in Britain before the uprising was defeated. Rome was now more certain than ever that Britons could be a terribly proud and fierce people when stirred, and if truth be told Rome never could conquer all of Britain. Highland scotland was never conquered by Rome and the areas of Britain which were conquered never would stay conquered. The British never did accept defeat. They simply would not stay down. In AD 409 the Imperial occupation of Britain came to an end.
Let us look at what the British took for themselves culturally from the days of the Roman occupation and we shall see how ancient Greece became an important part of the British people's culture. Whilst Roman empirical forces occupied warlike Britain , or shall we say "attempted" to occupy it? Remember that even the forces of the Roman Empire could never occupy or hold of all Britain . Many of the British incorporated much of the philosophical and educational ideology of Rome into their own lives.Now let us remember that much of Roman civilisation, culture, literature and art came almost entirely from ancient Greece. For example, no Roman of good family could have called himself truly cultured unless he was able to speak fluently in the Greek language and had a good knowledge of all Greek literature.The Celts likewise had made a strong impact in the collective Roman mind.We have already established the racial bloodline from where the British originated and all of this talk about the Romans and the Greeks is in regards to CULTURAL influences on the ancient British, not racial. It is also important to remember that the British ALREADY had their own arts and ideologies in place.They simply added, via ancient Rome, some of the best that ancient Greece had to offer by way of literature and philosophy, to their own vast Northern European, Celtic and Germanic based storehouse of knowledge.The Church became a major influence in Rome which became predominantly Christian by the year AD 200, and this added to the influence of the church as a major force in Britain.It was not until Elizabeth the First promoted and created the Church of England that the hold of Rome was lessened in matters of the Church in a permanent way in Britain. So we see that the racial heritage of Britain was culturally influenced by the old ways, by the philosophy and art of ancient Greece, by way of the Roman occupation which ended in Rome leaving Britain, but most of all by the legends and lore and culture of the ancient Northern European Caucasians from where the blood of the ancient British sprang.So yes – we have had waves of immigration over the centuries but in relatively small numbers, most who were assimilated into our culture and ALL were from the same racial stock. What we have had since 1948 with the arrival of the SS Windrush is an open door policy allowing people of any colour and culture to settle irrespective of numbers or culture or beliefs – nobody knows how many immigrants, illegal or otherwise are currently in our land. However the effects of this can be seen daily on our streets and in our schools and in our communities with race ghettos springing up and spates of anti-white attacks on our people –on our sons, and on our daughters, on our neighbours and on our friends. Taxes have increased to tyrannical levels and our freedom of speech is under direct threat from a government too cowardly to attack the problems but quite happy to betray their own people for the price of a vote. But we are the descendants of these proud and ancient British people, they never rolled over – we shouldnt either!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
