Gates of Vienna: Ethnically Cleansing the English, by Paul Weston:
To become an ethnic minority in your own country over just a few decades suggests that government policy, as has recently been revealed, was indeed to ethnically cleanse the English from their homeland, although the multiculturalists who committed this wicked act of treason and betrayal never couched it in quite such plain language, preferring instead to frame mass immigration as a means of achieving social objectives.
These figures are not hysterical, nor are they the obtained from the research of paranoid periodicals. In 2007 The Guardian reported that Britain was heading toward a population of 70 million by 2031, but did not mention that the addition of an extra 10 million people whilst the indigenous population was simultaneously declining and emigrating required the importation of an awful lot more than just an extra 10 million immigrants.
Indeed, the liberals and the leftists are only too aware the indigenous population is being ethnically cleansed. In 2000 The Guardian predicted a white minority Britain by 2100, therefore tacitly admitting acceptance of population replacement, but erring only on the time frame necessary to achieve racial cleanliness.
Fjordman said…
Terms such as “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide” should not be used lightly, but Paul Weston is unfortunately entirely correct here: What is happening with the native white population throughout Western Europe is a purposeful, state-sponsored campaign of ethnic cleansing. The only thing that’s unique about Britain is that key members of the ruling party openly admit this, in writing. What Andrew Neather probably didn’t realize when he said this was that he inadvertently laid the basis for a new Nuremberg process where Multiculturalism is listed as an ideology with the stated intention of the physical destruction of whites everywhere. As such it constitutes an organized crime against humanity.
NATO, led by the USA, bombed the Serbs for “ethnic cleansing,” thereby facilitating the Islamic ethnic cleaning of Christians in the Balkans. So, if the Western Multicultural oligarchs are against ethnic cleansing, I guess they must now bomb Britain, where the authorities have publicly admitted that they are deliberately destroying the native population of their country. So why isn’t that happening? Could it be because similar anti-white policies are followed in all white majority Western nations without exception?
It’s time we realize that the humiliation, dispossession and gradual destruction of whites, from Canada to Sweden, is not the accidental result of a failed policy but the deliberate result of an evil policy, the largest campaign of ethnic cleansing in recorded world history. An this is happening in the “free and democratic West.” If “democracy” means the genocide of your people then what the hell is it good for?
Fuchur said…
Terms such as “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide” should not be used lightly, but Paul Weston is unfortunately entirely correct here
I cannot take someone serious who uses the words “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide” in that context. Just look at the word “genocide”: “Killing” is part of the word. Now when, say, a black woman immigrates to GB and then gives birth to a child there – how is that in ANY way related to KILLING somebody??? I can only shake my head in disbelief at the vile twisted minds that could come up with such a warped comparison. Even Orwell would be baffled at that crazy attempt at Doublespeak: giving birth = killing. Ingenious.
This is racism, in it’s purest and simplest form. Period. Now, you could maybe try and make the point that racism isn’t all that bad and so on… but please don’t insult our intelligence by claiming that this isn’t racisim. Really. It’s just too ridiculous…
Paul Weston said…
@Fuchur
Curious name, curious morals.
You read an article pointing out the territorial and cultural displacement of a race of people, and your response is to make the accusation of racism.
You must hate the white race with a passion!
The UN definition of genocide quoted does not include the word “killing” and nor do I make such an association in my article.
I imagine you have an extremely short attention span, so will repeat the UN definition of genocide for you, and the UN rights of indigenous peoples.
“Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part…”
“Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.”
“Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;”
You see, no mention of the word killing…
Perhaps a simple yes or no question might be in order.
Do you think the UN declarations above should be applied to the indigenous English?
Yes or no.
Failure to respond might well lead people to think you a rather silly fuchur.
The genocidal regime in Britain, and indeed in all White countries, agrees with Fuchur.
BNP ‘whites-only’ membership rules outlawed | Politics | guardian.co.uk:
Judge agrees with human rights watchdog that British National party’s rewritten criteria for joining are still racist
In a landmark injunction at the Central London county court, a judge found that the BNP’s membership policy remained discriminatory, even after a direct whites-only clause was removed last month.
The judge, Paul Collins, ordered the BNP to remove two clauses from its constitution as they were indirectly racist towards non-white would-be members.
While one offending clause is largely an administrative matter – a requirement that all new members agree to a vetting visit from BNP officials, something the judge found could intimidate non-white applicants – the other spells out core beliefs.
This is a requirement for members to believe in the “continued creation, fostering, maintenance and existence” of an indigenous British race and action towards “stemming and reversing” migration.
Our enemies see concern for the interests of indigenous Whites as “racist”, and not being “racist” against alien interlopers takes precedence over the desire of native Whites to ensure our very existence. That they have the power to legalize their crimes does not absolve them of responsibility.