Let’s get one thing clear: the relationship between race and nationality. A person born in Europe of Third World extraction is NOT a European; any less than a British person born in India is an Indian, a German person born in China is Chinese or a Frenchman born in West Africa is an African.
So why then, do the liberal elite insist otherwise? The most recent outrageous example is contained in the Telegraph’s coverage of the (latest) Muslim terror plot.
“British Al-Qaeda gang planned ‘another 9/11’ in UK” reads the Telegraph’s headline…but the names of the accused are Irfan Naseer, Irfan Khalid and Ashik Ali—all obviously Anglo-Saxon to the core….
According to the Telegraph, the “jihadist group from Birmingham” wanted to carry out “another 9/11” and planned to hit crowded public places to cause “mass death” and “carnage in the name of Allah”.
The article continued: “The alleged terrorists discussed methods of killing people, including using AK47 assault rifles and poisons and even attaching blades to the wheels of cars to drive into crowds, it was claimed. One was even said to have joked to his estranged wife that they were not the ‘Four Lions’, a reference to the film about home-grown British jihadists, because there were only three of them.”
The liberal elite’s obsession with claiming that anyone born in the UK is “British” is an evil multi-cultural—and hypocritical—lie, which needs to be firmly dispelled once and for all.
Mr Telegraph editor: these people are not “British.” They are Third Worlders who might have been born in Britain, but that does not make them British.
Who is British? The answer to this question is simple. British people are those white people, mainly of north-western European stock, who have inhabited these islands long enough to claim indigenous status, in exactly the same way that other peoples around the globe claim indigenous status. And no-one else.
Mr liberal editor, you can pretend to be shocked and horrified by this, but you know it is the truth. It is only your evil, hypocritical lying nature and your wage-enslavement to the ruling elite which prevents you from acknowledging it as such.
If an article had to appear in any newspaper announcing that by 2066, Indians would be a minority in India, these same liberal editors would be up in arms.
Hand-wringing cries of “extermination,” “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” would be heard in the pages of the Telegraph and their fellow rodent press outlets.
Yet, articles announcing the imminent death of the White race in Britain (White Britons a minority by ’66) can appear in those same newspapers, and those editors remain as quiet as proverbial church mice.
Let there be no misunderstanding the situation: the White race stands on the brink of extermination under an invasion of Third World immigration and breeding.
Those who actively participate in this genocide are traitors, to their race, their nation and their own children.
And lying, treasonous editors who insist that racially-alien fanatics, whipped into a frenzy of hatred against Britain because of the Jewish Supremacist domination of the British government’s foreign policy, are just as guilty as the lunatics who want to drive cars with knives on wheels into crowds.
They are, Mr Editor, as “British” as King Kong.
frederickdixon
- Edit
I first noticed this tendency to dignify the enemies of our country with our national name in the 1990s. In a now almost forgotten terrorist atrocity in the Yemen several European tourists (tourists? in Yemen?) including some Brits were ambushed and killed by gunmen described by the BBC as “British men”). After I had got over my initial confusion – those days before 9/11 were more innocent – I realised that they were in fact Arabs who had somehow got their grubby hands on UK passsports.
Thus is everything taken from us, even our name for ourselves.
MsBridgit
- Edit
Blacks can call themselves British, but they are not,
I can call myself a Squirrel but I am not.
VoidPhilla
- Edit
Yes, Joanna Lumley doesn’t look particularly Indian & wouldn’t be thought of as such.
Stuart
- Edit
I think the term used ought to be ”British Born of Asian decent” or words to that effect. Although nowadays people seem to take it that the word British means the civic label of anyone born here and English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish as the ethnic label of those of us who have ancestry going far enough back through a given number of generations who have been born and bred in Britain and have the required dna to be Western European.
To put it all into perpective without adopting double standards, if there is no such thing as a coloured Brit then there is no such thing as a white South African or a white American etc etc. I doubt the white population of the USA would appreciate being told they are not American. Do you get my point?
Roger Bennett
- Edit
An excellent article making good and just points. Switzerland has a law which does give citizenship to anyone who happens to be born there. My friend was born in Siwtzerland of Spanish parents. Her nationality, Spanish. The Swiss have long had more sense than most of Europe and is a better country for it. The UK should adopt this law as soon as we can. Further, no immigrants should be able to vote in UK elections. What is happening in areas of our cities is that immigrants outnumber the local and true British population then vote Muslims into council and parliamentary seats. An outrage that we should also stop.
W.L.Pierce
- Edit
I sometimes drop in on the loons at ‘Stormfront’ to see what nonsense they are prattling on about. Old Venutius here pens a few ‘intellectual’ posts on their site now and again
Editor: You have the wrong person, our VB is not linked to anyone posting under that name on SF.