HM

Will non-indigenous races be subordinate to Caucasians in your great future?

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!

Baron von Lotsov

I did say to my Tory eurosceptic MP that it's coming to the time when we should seriously consider leaving the EU. He didn't disagree and I think privately he probably knows it is the only real solution. However he only has a few thousand majority against some Libdem woman who is about as wishy-washy as you can get, so he has to be careful. The sentiment is there but the practicality of it is not quite now. We are building up to it though and it won't be a case of a single announcement, it will just edge further and further in that direction with each person making their announcements just a tad more daring than what has gone before.

The incremental approach was how the EU was built and might just be the way to dismantle it. My position is that we should get out via the most effective route possible. I'm happy to see the Tories shift to an even more eurosceptic position after the Irish vote and I'm happy to see the UKIP stick to its guns. Both parties will do well out of a eurosceptic position but if anything the UKIP looks set to benefit a little more, since it has always held this position. If the Tories want some of those votes they will have to shift further to the eurosceptic position and by doing so with such a large following will tilt the seesaw quite a bit further in the anti-EU direction.

I really don't see a problem, but for one thing, and that is the UKIP looking too extreme. This has always been a hindrance and it has been attacked for it by most europhiles. Attacking the Tories eurosceptic position over the referendum will only add to this perception that they can't get on with anyone. And I'm saying that purely because I want to see the UKIP do better than it is at the moment. There will always be a spread of people on the eurosceptic side, what counts though is that they are on the right side.

__________________
"A government big enough to supply you with everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have..."

For_England

Everyone will have their own countries where they will be put first. Answer this for a change, wise guy - are the Kurds racist for wanting their own country? What about the Israelis - I'm waiting for an answer to these two questions.

HM

Nobody is racist for wanting their own country - self-determination by referendum seems like a great idea to me.

For facts about Israel and the Israelis, see https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...k/geos/is.html and Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

N.B. My question above remains.

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!

For_England

I know alot about Israel, and I think it's great they have their own country, and that they don't allow the goyim to go in and wreck it (though some Russian ones did get in and are causing problems - like spraying swastikas on walls). So why is it so wrong for the British to want their own country? Kurds is an ethnic term, that's why I used that example. And Israelis only allow Jewish immigrants. I answered your question:
Everyone will have their own countries where they will be put first

I'm not sure what is was about that that wasn't clear enough?

HM

I have already said before that immigration and how it is managed/cut is not an issue with me and I would support measures to limit it. So if we already have a country (i.e. the United Kingdom), what are you getting at?

And can you please provide a straight yes/no answer to my question: Will non-indigenous races be subordinate to Caucasians in your great future?

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!

For_England

I am getting at the fact that you are inconsistant: you claim that the BNP is racist because it wants a national homeland for the indigenous British people, yet you are quite happy supporting another nation that only wants its people living there. Why is that? We don't have a country - it is being given away by politicians to foreigners. Or do you think that minorities within a country 'have their own country'? I'm sure even you wouldn't stretch definitions that far. The idea of minorities being treated well by the majority population is largely, if not exclusively, a white idea, and even they haven't always done a good job of it. Yet you attack people, like myself, who wish to vote for the only party around that will ensure that the indigenous population do in fact stay the majority population, and keep control of their country.

Are non-Japanese 'subordinate' to Japanese in Japan? Yes or no? You are using a very broad word, and then expecting a straight yes or no. That is unreasonable. If you are asking whether I want a return to colonialization, with whites running non-white countries, and telling them what to do, then no. Heck, I don't even support the way America and the G8 are screwing Africa and Africans even now. However, if you are asking whether I think whites should be put first in their own country (and your use of 'non-indigenous suggests that is the case) - then yes, they should!

HM

1. I don't "claim that the BNP is racist because it wants a national homeland for the indigenous British people". I claim that it is racist because it wants to discriminate against racial minorities.
2. I only support self-determination - not ethnic cleansing once there are already racial minority inhabitants.
3. The United Kingdom is a country. Yes policicians are giving the EU too much power (if that's what you're trying to say).
4. You are saying that only people with British ancestry could "keep control of their country". So would there be no ethnic minority MPs, lords and councillors? Sounding a little like white supremacism...
5. Subordinate: lower in rank or position
6. I have not studied Japan's racial policies. Could you give me a link?
7. What about Jews, Poles and other eastern Europeans? They are not British, yet you say that "whites should be put first in their own country". Since they are whites, but this is not their own country, doesn't that destroy your modus cogitandi?

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!

For_England

It wishes to put its own people first in its own country. If that is racist, why didn't you condemn the state of Israel as racist? Or the Japanese?

The BNP advocates a policy of voluntary repatriation: that is not ethnic cleansing. However, ethnic cleansing is what is happening to the indigenous people, yet you don't raise your voice about that, because you are an anti-white racist. And whites will continue to experience ethnic cleansing of their communities and towns as the ethnic population gets bigger. They will continue to move into formerly white neighbourhoods, and make the whites feel unsafe and unwelcome through anti-social behaviour. What has taken place wasn't voluntary: it was the forced colonization of white areas by anti-white racists in government - and yet you condemn the BNP for a policy of voluntarily trying to reverse the forced colonization and ethnocide of our country.

I'm not talking about countries. I'm talking about nations (the correct and proper and traditional sense of the word, as an ethnic unit), not civil-states.

How can it be supremism, when I support the right of national self-determination to all people? Was Woodrow Wilson a white supremist? Am I a white supremist when I advocate Africa for the Africans? No, but you have unwittinly exposed the anti-white double standard - it's ok for Jews and Kurds and the Japanese to have national-self-determination, but it's evil and 'white supremism' for white nations to have the same. There is absolutely nothing wrong with each nation governing itself through self-determination. You are also a traitor to the Constitution, because the British Constutition states that those who are ethnically foreign are not to be Lords. Your hatred and double standards with regards to the indigenous population, and your apathy with regards to whether the English even continue to have a homeland of their own, are quite obvious.

Yes, very general.

Not off hand, but shops have signs saying 'Japanese only' etc. Becoming a citizen does not make you 'Japanese' as far as the people are concerned. The country is interested in preserving their ethnic identity and culture, and in making sure that what they have inherited is passed on to their children. Good for them! It must be true that they have a higher IQ than white Europeans, because they would cart people like you off to the nut house. We do the same for species of parrots, yet you couldn't care less if the English survive as a people! Could you imagine the outcry if I said that Nigerians are lazy and don't deserve to exist, and we need to breed them out and make them a minority in their own land? Now that is racism!

Poles have their own homeland, and there is no reason why we must allow them to put our people out of work. We don't owe them anything. Funny to hear a supposed 'eurosceptic' justifying the eastern European invasion. When I say 'whites' obviously it is short for 'white indigenous britons'. When Churchill said that the Conservatives should adopt the slogan, Keep Britain White, do you really suppose he was in favour of allowing millions of eastern, southern, northern or any other kind of European into the country? If you are forced to resort to such hyper-analytical fault-finding, I can only assume it's because you know you don't have anything of substance.

HM

Ethnic cleansing is "the mass expulsion or killing of members of one ethnic or religious group in an area by those of another". So it's not happening here - don't be silly. I am not a racist; I am actually an anti-racist.

National self-determination is not the same as racial discrimination.

I never justified the "eastern European invasion". I was just pointing out the fault in your post. "When I say 'whites' obviously it is short for 'white indigenous britons'". Well sorry! When you write something, people tend to interpret it as what it actually means!

Where is your proof that there is an organised plot by racial minorities to deliberately outnumber whites?

As I have said, opposing immigration is fine but opposing all racial minorities from equal treatment to whites and Jews in this country is monstrous and unfair.

From your posting above, I take it that the BNP would indeed only allow white British-descended Lords, MPs and councillors. I am absolutely disgusted.

__________________

• Respice post te; hominem te esse memento!