'Islam is taking over, says Dutch politician'

22ANDUK · 13-04-2007, 02:21 PM

I don't think its a plot, just a natural progression of mankind.

Take the example of Britain.

We all started as tribes. Who then merged into larger tribes. Who formed small kingdoms (Wessex, Anglia, Mercia). Who then became England.

As technology and travel grow, people come together. Trains, planes, boats, cars, the internet, TV, all makes the world smaller and people get pulled about. Cultures clash, people mix, ideas come, ideas go. But the world is in many ways like the lawless tribal land of England of millennia ago.

I qoute from a previous post:

Quote:

I would rather we had a mixed-race majority that was committed to national independence, reverence and respect of our history and our past, as well as scientifically and technologically progressive with sound moral groundings and preservation of democractic values and individual liberty, than an 'all -white' country locked into a federal europe, poverty or fascist/socialist isolation.

What would you rather have? A mixed race Prime Minister of an independent UK or a white President of a Federal Europe? An effective and hard-working British Archbishop who defends christanity who happens to be black or a weak feeble white archbishop who is easily cowed by a secular auhoritarian government? This applies to everything really.

I reckon in the end we'll all became a pretty unified race of people with a single colour - mostly likely a coffee coloured complexion with slight oriental touch (perhaps with variations), brown hair and brown eyes, with a united language English with a strong Chinese and Hindu flavour. Religion will be about, but the majority will be secular and united under a world government. Whether it is a bad thing or good thing is a matter of your opinion. Who cares if its a world of democracy, freedom and liberty?

Westcountryman · 13-04-2007, 02:39 PM

I won't hold my breath on a world government just yet.

andypandy · 16-04-2007, 08:49 PM

How can multi-culturalism be a natural prgression, when the various races and nationalities of mankind are THEMSELVES a a result of the natural divergence of human populations? Mankind, if aything, is becoming more specialised and distinct regardless of the actions of lefty politicians to alter border controls, thus national demographics, through plain abandonment and tampering with media imagery of the perfect human.

I don't read whatever the name of that site was as mentioned, as quite frankly, I imagine that many of its contributors are as blind to their own opinions as many on this forum are, so consequently, I am not likely to learn anything that I could find out by my own means elsewhere.

As for a 60 year plan to deliberately change the demographic nature of he West, well, some things are plain obvious to those willing to see them, as for others, they wallow in their own self-denial of post-war events for which they view through a giant pair of rose coloured spectacles.

C_steam · 16-04-2007, 09:21 PM

Quote:

As for a 60 year plan to deliberately change the demographic nature of he West, well, some things are plain obvious to those willing to see them

In which case it is just your opinion based on observation. hardly the proof of existeance of 'a plan'!

g hall · 17-04-2007, 12:59 PM

22ANDUK

Quote:

Take the example of Britain.

We all started as tribes. Who then merged into larger tribes. Who formed small kingdoms (Wessex, Anglia, Mercia). Who then became England.

Much too simplistic - migratory pressures from the eastern parts of asia, power politics and many other factors

andypandy · 17-04-2007, 09:41 PM

"In which case it is just your opinion based on observation. hardly the proof of existeance of 'a plan'!"

If ever a case of cause an effect was self evident, then the deliberate fiddling with nationalility acts and migration controls more than justifies the existance of a deliberate marxist plan to demographically change the west. The British Nationality Act of 1948 effectively gave a quarter of the world's population the right of settlement in a tiny piece of the earth's surface called Britain that represented a mere 1/500 of the planetry land available.

Yet more self denial.

g hall · 17-04-2007, 09:55 PM

andypandy

Quote:

The British Nationality Act of 1948

But with the Empire becoming the Commonwealth was this not a 2 way street

andypandy · 17-04-2007, 10:04 PM

For who exactly? How many Brits settled in the 'New Common Wealth', India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, the West Indies, or large parts of Africa? How many are still there? How many where met with cries of joy at the settlement of "white folk" in their millions?

Answers on a post card.

13-04-2007, 02:39 PM	#22 (permalink)
Westcountryman Uber Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: The Westcountry. Posts: 5,922 Party: None	I won't hold my breath on a world government just yet. __________________ Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietam - "This hand of mine, which is hostile to tyrants, seeks by the sword quiet peace under liberty."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

16-04-2007, 08:49 PM	#23 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	How can multi-culturalism be a natural prgression, when the various races and nationalities of mankind are THEMSELVES a a result of the natural divergence of human populations? Mankind, if aything, is becoming more specialised and distinct regardless of the actions of lefty politicians to alter border controls, thus national demographics, through plain abandonment and tampering with media imagery of the perfect human. I don't read whatever the name of that site was as mentioned, as quite frankly, I imagine that many of its contributors are as blind to their own opinions as many on this forum are, so consequently, I am not likely to learn anything that I could find out by my own means elsewhere. As for a 60 year plan to deliberately change the demographic nature of he West, well, some things are plain obvious to those willing to see them, as for others, they wallow in their own self-denial of post-war events for which they view through a giant pair of rose coloured spectacles.

17-04-2007, 09:41 PM	#26 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	"In which case it is just your opinion based on observation. hardly the proof of existeance of 'a plan'!" If ever a case of cause an effect was self evident, then the deliberate fiddling with nationalility acts and migration controls more than justifies the existance of a deliberate marxist plan to demographically change the west. The British Nationality Act of 1948 effectively gave a quarter of the world's population the right of settlement in a tiny piece of the earth's surface called Britain that represented a mere 1/500 of the planetry land available. Yet more self denial.

17-04-2007, 10:04 PM	#28 (permalink)
andypandy Senior Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 880	For who exactly? How many Brits settled in the 'New Common Wealth', India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, the West Indies, or large parts of Africa? How many are still there? How many where met with cries of joy at the settlement of "white folk" in their millions? Answers on a post card.