DNA, Genes, Surnames
"The former Minister for Immigration
recently described Britain as 'nation of immigrants'. It is
very hard to see what she meant. Since the Norman conquest (1066)
there has been relatively little immigration into Britain, perhaps
because we are an island nation. English population history is known
better than almost any other in the world. And research into
surnames and genes confirms that our population has been little
affected by immigration for nearly a thousand years. ... Instead,
Britain has been a country of considerable emigration since the 17th
"The DNA studies of Britain and
especially Ireland show that it is almost untouched significantly
since neolithic times. The Irish and Basques have the oldest DNA in
Europe with the Brits not far behind. These are truly ancient races
- anything else is NWO spin"
"Contemporary Britons are descended
mainly from the varied ethnic stocks that settled there before the
11th century" [US State Department, quoted at
"The Celts arrived in around
800-600BC, followed by the Romans, some of whom stayed and
intermingled ... then you had the Anglo-Saxons from the 400sAD,
followed by Danes and Norse, then Normans. Jews arrived in the early
middle ages, and later still Irish, Flemish, Dutch, Frisians and
Huguenot French. However all these people have eventually fitted
into the fabric of Britain, and have a shared culture and identity
today" [comment at
"Until the latter half of the [20th]
century, Britain had almost negligible levels of immigration. Unlike
America, for instance, Britain has never been a 'nation of
immigrants'. And although there was often a trickle of people
moving in, the mass movement of people was almost unknown. In fact
immigration was so unknown that when it did happen people talked
about it for centuries" [Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of
Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam, (2017), p.30].
Immigrants Integrate and Others Don't...
"It's a generalisation, but there are
two sets I think...
- Those that seem to fit in, work
hard, obey the law, are loyal to Britain and have social values
and cultures that allow them to integrate are generally speaking
as follows: Jews, Middle Eastern Christians, Chinese/Orientals,
Hindu Indians and Sikhs, Greeks/Cypriots, Maltese, Italians,
Poles and Czechs (in reasonable numbers!) and those Arabs and
Iranians who came here in the 19650s and 60s;
- Since the 1950s peoples have
come into the UK from totally alien cultures, peoples with
Religions, Social Values, Beliefs, Political Ideals and National
Characteristics that are simply incompatible with the UK. Those
that do not integrate, do poorly in the job market and
education, sponge off the state
[EMcD: ie, the British
taxpayer], commit more crime,
are not loyal to the UK, and have cultures, religions and social
values that are incompatible, are generally speaking as follows:
Pakistanis, Afghans, Bangladeshis, Somalis, Eritreans,
Albanians, Romanians, Kosovans, East European Gypsies,
Moroccans, Algerians, Kurds, a fair number of Afro-Caribbeans,
and those Arabs that have come here [since 1997]"
"[The Jewish example] illustrates
just how well, with the appropriate will, an immigrant minority with
traditions and beliefs quite different from those of the majority of
Britain's population can successfully integrate and become part of
the British nation without having to forfeit anything that makes it
distinctive and sets it apart from others. Consider the prayer on
behalf of the British royal family that Britain's Jews recite weekly
in their synagogues on their Sabbath in English. Over the centuries,
Jews domiciled outside their national homeland have always included
such a prayer on behalf of the head of whichever state they reside
in. They have done so in accordance with the divine injunction
contained in a letter to their exiled community in Babylon by the
prophet Jeremiah: 'And seek the peace of the city whither I have
caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the LORD for
it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace.' In their
prayer for the royal family, British Jews exhort God to bless the
reigning monarch and members of the royal family, before calling
upon God to 'put a spirit of wisdom and understanding into the
hearts of all [the ruling sovereign's] counsellors, that they may
uphold the peace of the realm, [and] advance the welfare of the
nation'. The prayer ends with God being called on to
'spread the tabernacle of peace over all the dwellers on earth'."
"When discussing migration into the
UK today one can expect someone to mention the Huguenots - those
Protestants forced to flee persecution in France to whom Charles II
offered sanctuary in 1681. The Huguenot example is more resonant
than people realise. Firstly, because despite the proximity of
culture and religion enjoyed by French and English Protestants of
the time, it took centuries for the Huguenots to integrate into
Britain, with many people still describing themselves as coming from
Huguenot stock. But the other salient point about the Huguenots -
and the reason people cite them so frequently - is the matter of
scale. It is believed that up to 50,000 Huguenots arrived in Britain
after 1681, which was undoubtedly a huge movement for the time. But
this scale was in a wholly different league to the mass immigration
Britain has seen in recent years. From the period of the Blair
government onwards Britain has seen an equal number of immigrants to
that one-off number [50,000] of Huguenots arriving not once in the
nation's history, but every couple of months. And this immigration
was by no means composed of French Protestants"
The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam,
"Another example often given to
defend the 'nation of immigrants' story is that of the 30,000
Ugandan Asians who were brought into Britain in the early 1970s
after Idi Armin expelled them from Uganda. In the UK memories of
this one-off influx are generally coloured with pride and good
feeling, not just because it was a demonstrable and limited relief
of a desperate people, but because those Ugandan Asians who arrived
in Britain often made a palpable and grateful contribution to public
life. In the post 1997 years of immigration the same number of
people as that one-off 30,000 strong influx arrived into the country
every six weeks" [Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe:
Immigration, Identity, Islam, (2017), p.31].
Politically Correct Revisionist
"It's difficult to wake
Britain up when the younger generations know little or nothing of
Britain how it used to be, and have been taught nothing about our
own history in the context of world history. They are stuffed to the
gills with [Hitler], the Nazis and the Holocaust and that's about
it. ... they think history begins and ends in the first half of the
20th century with terrible wars. Children I know are unaware that
our country used to be a white, Anglo-Saxon or Celtic, Christian,
homogenous society. For them, the present mish-mash is the norm and
they are educated at school to regard themselves as just another
ethnic group. The children of indigenous people of these islands are
slowly but surely being robbed of their heritage and birthright. If
the present situation continues, future generations won't even know
that these islands in the north west corner of Europe used to belong
to their forebears. The worst of it is that no one is allowed to
warn of the danger without being demonised by the liberal/left
Common Purpose pro-multiculturalism establishment. Do you remember
being consulted or being invited to vote on whether this country
should become multicultural? No, of course not" [comment at
"'Nation of Immigrants'
bears little relation to reality. It is a rhetorical device employed
to silence those opposed to open immigration. If Britain was a
nation of immigrants it would mean that we are all at some remove
immigrants, therefore have no right to question further
immigration. This would ultimately mean that we have no more right
to live and work in these islands than anyone else who cares to
turn up. Which is the standpoint of those who employ the term"
"In short, the slogan that Britain is
a 'nation of immigrants' is a lie, devised by the left, to destroy
the indigenous heritage of Great Britain. They honestly think that
if they can do it, they can have their accursed socialism" [source].
"They say it every time we mention
mass immigration and they do it to brainwash the more gullible into
thinking we have no right to call this our country. We have every
right to call this our country. Our forefathers fought to keep it
for us and succeeded admirably. Should we then just roll over and
surrender it to the New World Order, the EU, the PC Idiots, New
Labour, The Muslims ... those who continually try to cry us down and
defeat our spirit?" [comment at
"One such [politically correct] claim
is that even after a period of such extraordinary change as Britain
has been through in recent decades, 'It's nothing new.'
This argument can be heard across Europe, but in Britain it now most
often goes as follows: 'Britain has always been a melting pot of
people of different races and backgrounds. Indeed we are a nation of
immigrants.' This was the claim, for instance, of a
well-received book on immigration by Robert Winder that came out
during the the Blair years and was often used to defend the
government's policies. Among other things, the book argued that 'we
are all immigrants: it simply depends how far back you go. '
The book also claimed that Britain has always been 'a mongrel
nation'." [Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe:
Immigration, Identity, Islam, (2017), p.30].
"Here is Barbara Roche making the
same claim in a talk in the East End of London in 2011: 'When we
think of immigration or migration it's very tempting to think that
it's something that happened in the 19th century ... there is a
tendency to think that it's somehow quite recent - if it isn't 19th
century than it's very much something that is a post-war phenomenon.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I've always believed that
Britain is a country of migrants.' Of course Ms Roche is
welcome to believe this. But that does not make it true"
Murray, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam,
"The movement of people in recent
years - even before the European migration crisis - was of an
entirely different quantity, quality and consistency from anything
that had gone before. Yet despite this fact, it remains one of the
most popular ways to cover over the vast changes of recent years to
pretend that history was similar to what is happening now. Not the
least advantages of this suggestion is that any current problems
arising from migration are nothing we haven't dealt with - and
triumphed over - before. It falsely presents any current challenges
as normal" [Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe:
Immigration, Identity, Islam, (2017), p.31].
"But revising the past is just one
attempt at a staging-post argument. After this comes a whole a range
of implicit and explicit claims which respond to mass immigration by
pretending either that the country of arrival does not have a
culture, or that its culture and identity are so especially weak,
worn out or bad that if it did disappear then it could hardly be
mourned. Here is Bonnie Greer ... on Newsnight: 'There's always
this failsafe, spoken or unspoken, that there is a British identity.
That's always interesting to me. I think one of the geniuses of the
British - of being British - is that there isn't this sort of
rock-solid definition of identity that an American has.'
It is hard to think of another part of the world where such a claim
would be acceptable, let alone from the mouth of an immigrant: your
culture has always been like this - it never really existed. If one
even said anything similar in Greer's native Chicago - let alone on
the main television network - it would be unlikely to receive such a
polite reception as it was accorded on Newsnight"
The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam,
Result of Mass Unrestrained Immigration
"Perhaps instead of simply
celebrating such levels of immigration it would make matters easier
of the proponents of mass immigration revealed what levels of
'diversity' they would like to get to and what they see as their
optimal target figure? Is a ceiling of 25% white Britons in London -
or the country at large - a target? Or should it be 10%?
Or none at all?" [Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe:
Immigration, Identity, Islam, (2017), p.p.34-35].
"Perhaps at some point the 'just
lying-down and taking it' period will stop, with repercussions quite
as unforeseeable as all those to date. But in the meantime, if any
politician wanted to try to pre-empt that eventuality and felt like
indulging in an act of humility, he or she could do worse than ...
compare the statements derided as clichés that have come from so
many working- and middle-class white voters in recent years and set
them alongside the statements of the leaders of each of the
mainstream political parties. All these years on, despite the
name-calling and the insults and the ignoring of their concerns,
were your derided average white voters not correct when they said
that they were losing their country? Irrespective of whether you
think they should have thought this, let alone whether they should
have said this, said it differently or accepted the change more
readily, it should at some stage cause people to pause and reflect
that the voices almost everybody wanted to demonise and dismiss were
in the final analysis the voices whose predictions were nearest to
being right" [Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe:
Immigration, Identity, Islam, (2017), pp.35-36].
"Those for whom this country has
always been a model of tolerance and freedom cannot but have cause
for deep concern about the seemingly reckless pace and scale on
which immigration has recently been allowed to proceed, if not
actively encouraged. As a result of it, the country may possibly
have already reached a tipping point beyond which it can no longer
be said to contain a single nation. Should that point have been
reached, then, ironically in the course of Britain having become a
nation of immigrants, it would have ceased to be a nation.
Once such a point is reached, political disintegration may be
predicted to be not long in following"
"Some will welcome Britain's demise
as a nation-state ... Others will be of a different opinion. They
will believe that, apart from within the context of nations,
political cooperation and mutual civility between strangers cannot
for long be maintained" [source].
"In the cause of preserving the union
... the first duty of all true patriots must be to acknowledge that,
just as Britain would never have achieved all that it has done
without having a country of immigration, so too it would never have
been able to achieve all this, unless its immigrants become a part
of what never has been a nation of immigrants, nor ever could become
one without destroying itself in the process"
extended extract is from the
The Origin of 'Identity Politics' & 'Political Correctness'
(sometimes dubbed 'political correctness') is the result of a
political-Left major backlash against the mass of ordinary people
(in Europe and 'the West'), beginning in the 1920s/30s, in the wake
of the persistent failure of Marxist theory to be realised in
European 'revolution' or any real change through democracy. In
shifting the blame away from Marxist theory and those gullible
enough to adhere to it, and on to those the theory had prescribed
and predicted would have been the beneficiaries, if only they had
responded accordingly ('the [white, male] workers'); then the
cognitive-dissonance within the political-left mindset caused by
this crisis to an extent was salved"
"As with any fervent ideology, a
hallmark of the political-Left is interpreting anything and
everything in its own ideological terms to claim as a manifestation
of the ideology and its prophecy - jumping on a bandwagon, so to
speak; though here only to hijack it. The bandwagon here was, of
course, the American civil rights movement, which though enjoying
ubiquitous support within black communities - to the point often of
various forms of extremism - featured virtually nil endorsement of
socialism ... It is from the time of this co-option that 'identity
politics' dates; many considering that the movement was incorporated
into the Left in the wake of King's assassination in 1968 - the
major turning-point year in political-Left politics generally"
"'Civil rights', as the first great
'single-issue' campaign, served not least to provide an acceptable
cloak for the Left to avoid provoking a resurgence of McCarthysim.
The major social upheaval of 'civil rights' with its large-scale and
widespread rioting was easily the nearest thing in then recent US
history to look like the promised Marxist 'revolution', and
obviously was just the practical application the 'theory' was
seeking. Moreover, the protagonists (black Americans) were eminently
separable form the now despised 'workers' per se, in being
presentable as a new 'group; from outside of the former fray of
'boss' versus 'worker'.
"This accident of history served to
add 'black' to 'woman' as 'the new oppressed' ... 'The worker' in
effect was retrospectively stereotyped as both 'man' and 'white'.
With the inverse of this stereotype of 'white' being not just 'black
American' but 'black' - that is, ethnic-minority generically ... so
it was that the new 'agents of social change' / 'disadvantaged' /
'oppressed' were extended from women to also include all ethnic
"It is only with the knowledge of how
this developed that sense can be made of why ethnicity is held above
the myriad other possible differences that could be utilised as
in-group markers, when in fact there is nothing inherent in
ethnicity as an in-group marker to produce inter-group prejudice
that is particularly more pernicious"
"Indeed, the worst inter-communal
conflicts nominally between different ethnicities usually are
between different cultural heritages with no discernible 'racial'
differences of any kind - and what (non-ethnic) differences there
are can be minimal; the lack of contrast actually fuelling the
intensity of conflict, such is the need for groups to feel
distinguished from each other"
"Furthermore, ethnic prejudice is
anything but restricted to or even predominantly 'white' on 'black':
inter-ethnic (eg, 'black' on Asian) and ethnic-on-'white' 'racism'
can be, often is and may usually be the greater problem; and a
negative attitude to a certain ethnicity does not imply a similar
attitude to other ethnicities"
"The specific US experience, given
the highly divisive politics in the wake of the American Civil War
over the basis of the Southern US economy in African slavery, does
not translate to elsewhere; notably not to Europe - as was starkly
evidenced in the experience of World War II 'black' American GIs
stationed in England in how they were favourably received by locals,
who sided with them when discriminated against"
"'Racial divides' in European 'white'
host countries are the result not of mutual antipathy but
affiliative forces, principally within migrant enclaves and
secondarily within the 'host' community; in both cases being through
in-group 'love', not out-group 'hate'"
[EMcD: though the latter
part of this observation is indeed true in normal circumstances,
this does not, of course, take account of the Islamic/Koranic
doctrines of Al-Hijra (Immigration), Taqiyya (Lying and Deceit), and Razzia/Ghazwa
(Rape and Slavery), Dawa (Cultural and Stealth Jihad), and Terrorist
and Violent Jihad, carried out by fundamentalist Muslims as
they settle in increasing numbers in Western countries with the sole
purpose of making every remaining Dar al-Harb ('House of War': i.e.
any non-Muslim country) into a Dar al-Islam ('House of Submission': i.e all Muslim countries) until Islam finally achieves its
longed-for global Caliphate.]
[End of Extract]
"The Frankfurt School
believed that as long as an individual had the belief - or even the
hope of belief - that his divine gift of reason could solve the
problems facing society, then that society would never reach the
state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary
to provoke socialist revolution.
Their task, therefore, was as
swiftly as possible to undermine the Judaeo-Christian legacy. To do
this they called for the most negative destructive criticism
possible of every sphere of life which would be designed to
de-stabilize society and bring down what they saw as the
'oppressive' order. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a
virus - 'continuing the work of Western Marxists by other means' as
one of their members noted.
To further the advance
of their 'quiet' cultural revolution ... the [Frankfurt] School
recommended (among other things):
(1) the creation of racism
(2) continual change to create confusion,
(3) the teaching
of sex and homosexuality to children,
(4) the undermining of
schools' and teachers' authority,
(5) huge immigration to destroy
(6) the promotion of excessive drinking,
(7) emptying of
(8) an unreliable legal system with bias against victims
(9) dependency on the state or state benefits,
control and dumbing down of media,
(11) encouraging the breakdown of
One of the main ideas
of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud's idea of 'pansexualism'
- the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences
between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships
between men and women. To further their aims they would:
the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and
mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary
educators of their children,
(b) abolish differences in the
education of boys and girls,
(c) abolish all forms of male dominance
- hence the presence of women in the armed forces,
(d) declare women
to be an 'oppressed class' and men as 'oppressors'."
eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to
create a social state:
Healthcare - Control healthcare and you control the
Poverty - Increase the Poverty level as high as
possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight
back if you are providing everything for them to live;
- Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That wa6y you are
able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty;
Control - Remove the ability to defend themselves from
the Government. That way you are able to create a police state;
Welfare - Take control of every aspect of their lives
(Food, Housing, and Income);
Education - Take control of that people read and listen
to - take control of what children learn in school;
Religion - Remove the belief in God from the Government
Class Warfare - Divide the people into the wealthy and
the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier
to take from (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor" [source].
"Woe unto them that call evil
good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that
put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
note that the inclusion of any quotation or item on this page does not
imply we would necessarily endorse the source from which the extract is
taken; neither can we necessarily vouch for any other materials by the
or any groups or
ministries or websites with which they may be associated, or any
periodicals to which they may contribute, or the
beliefs of whatever kind they may hold, or any other aspect of their
work or ministry or position.