Don’t be Conned By Immigration Figures
Whether the media is discussing current immigration figures or those during the Blair Government when Labour deliberately engineered mass immigration, the Lib-Lab-Cons – and even the Ukipers – stick to the net input. Perhaps because it gives less worry to the UK aborigines that way. It helps to soften the reality that we are being flooded by the Afro-Asian world.
If they made the gross immigration figures as prominent as the net gain, achieved by taking the number of those who leave our shores from the total coming in (the gross figure), then it would become clear that the average gain in the non-Brit sector of our population is not just the average 220,000 a year of the net figure but more like 300,000. That’s a million in just over three years! Don’t take my word for it – I might be slightly biased. Look at the official statistics.
In a report by Will Somerville, and others, of the Migration Policy Institute, it states that for the period 1997 to 2007 (the Blair years of encouraged immigration) gross immigration was 5,466,000 and gross emigration was 3,614,000 giving a net gain of 1,852,000. In 2007 alone gross immigration was 577,000, with a net gain of 237,000.
To find out who were the people leaving these shores permanently go to the Home Office ‘Emigration from the UK, Research Report 68’ of November 2012. This shows that of those leaving in 2011, 43% were British citizens and almost half of these were working in professional or ;managerial roles.
Of the remaining 57% of emigrants precisely half were EU citizens and half were non-European. It estimates that 4.7m British-born people now live abroad, with Australia and Spain being favourites.
If we allow for the fact that possibly up to 500,000 immigrants (certainly no more) during 1997-2007 were British-born returning to live in the UK, with these official figures it can be seen that in the period 1997-2007 we not only gained around 5 million non-Britons but lost around 1.5m Britons through emigration.
Thus it can be seen that even UKIP’s claim of wanting to reduce immigration to ‘only’ 50,000 a year (well, that was the Farage figure last week) can only delay the inevitable by a couple of years. Unless we can reduce immigration to just one or two per cent of present totals our grandchildren will end up living in a third world country.
Take in the Afro-Asian birth rate and you will see that would be their fate..
We know we are right. There is no choice. We must halt the flood now.
Fiddling The Crime Figures
It is not only immigration figures that our masters and their mouthpieces try to bamboozle us with. Crime has fallen considerably, they tell us. But speak to most people, particularly the elderly living in inner cities, and they will laugh with scorn. How does this fit in with the recent claim that the number of people dealt with by the courts has fallen to its lowest level for 40 years? That is 1.2 million criminals today compared with around 1.7 million in 1970.
Data published by Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, showed that thousands of prolific offenders avoided prison. Too often the Police, looking to polish their effectiveness with lower figures, will prefer to give them a verbal warning. Nearly 12,000 people with at least 15 previous convictions were given an absolute or conditional discharge, which in reality meant no punishment.
Data published in the report also revealed that 16 males were given a caution for rape or attempted rape last year, emphasising concerns over inappropriate punishment for serious criminals, particularly amongst immigrants, illegal and otherwise, who claim victimisation by racism, or that they thought the women they raped were prostitutes. We would emphasise, however, that serious criminal offences overall are still mainly committed by whites. Mass immigration is, of course, adding to it.
It’s Those Sub-Prime Mortgages Again
One of the distinctive things about this Democratic Nationalist website is it does what it says on the label. It allows all views in the discussion of nationalist policies. An outcome of this is that some subjects raise more different opinions than others; money, how it is handled and supplied and who gains by its control, is one such.
As a believer in Disraeli’s view that ‘race is the basis of politics’ my views on the money issue are secondary but quite simple. Although we cannot isolate ourselves completely from the erratic behaviour of the world’s money markets, the nationalist way of modifying its effect does not change.
We must give protection for industry and jobs by selective tariffs on foreign manufactured goods that we can make competitively ourselves. We should stop artificially inflating the value of the pound, reduce quantitative easing, both of which make British workers more expensive and foreign workers cheaper.
Having said that, the collapse of the Western economies since 2008 would have affected countries run on nationalist principles as well as the present laissez-faire globalists. Remember it started in the US with the granting of cheap mortgages to immigrants and poor blacks with little chance of paying them back. This was mainly handled by the federal mortgage firm Freddie Mac. They were later accused of misreporting profits by billions of dollars in order to deceive investors prior to the 2008 crash.
But are we about to see a repeat as the global capitalists memory cells become obscured by greed?
It was reported in the Sunday Telegraph, June 2nd, 2013, that America’s sub-prime mortgage market is beginning to reheat, leading investors to warn of the possibility of a renewed financial crisis. Demand for sub-prime mortgage bonds not backed by the government controlled lenders of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, has surged in recent months. The demand has led to fears that investors could be taking risks so big that they will pave the way for a repeat of the financial collapse.
Climate Change May Not Be Man-made
Tim Yeo, the MP who is chairman of the Commons energy and climate change committee, appears to have had a change of heart. Many critics of the view that climate change is now caused primarily by man’s activities, were not surprised when he said last month that “natural phases” may be responsible for the Earth’s temperat ure rising.
To look at what we now know of the history of the earth it seems obvious that carbon emissions caused by mankind burning fossil fuels are still only a fraction of those emitted by nature in activities ranging from volcanic eruptions to mass attacks of wind by beef herds on the prairies or the Argentine pampas. But the Lib-Lab-Con are now committed to the massive expense of wind turbines – all manufactured in Germany or Denmark – and have craftily passed the cost on to the householder as a “carbon tax”.
This has, of course been discussed before on the BDP website and it has been made clear that we fully support a mix of our energy sources, in which wind and all renewables will play a part.
Several papers greeted Yeo’s admission by saying it was “at odds with the scientific census” and repeated the fiction that it is the view of 97 per cent of scientists in various academic papers. Well, most of them would, wouldn’t they? If they said that climate change was not man-made then the funding would not be provided to try and halt climate change and they would be out of a job. In any case, according to a letter by a Christopher Wright of Sussex in the Daily Telegraph, around 32 per cent of papers endorsed Anthropogenic Global Warming (i.e. man-made) while around 66 per cent stated no position for or against. He added: “To add these two numbers together is fraudulent”.
Putin On Minorities
We can perhaps criticise Vladimir Putin for the apparent harshness of some of his actions as Russia’s President. But what he does is not for personal financial gain: he considers it for the benefit and advancement of Russia as a nation.
Just read this speech he gave on February 4th, 2013 to the Duma (Russian Parliament) about the tensions with minorities in Russia. You will see why our liberal/left media doesn’t like Putin.
“In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that’s the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell ‘discrimination’. We better learn from the suicides of America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation.
The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of most minorities. When this honourable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the national interest first, observing that the minorities are not Russians.”
The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation.