Andrew Bron is, of course, entirely correct when he states that Dame Kelly Holmes can not be viewed as “entirely British”. Under the current law she is certainly a British citizen, however, part of her heritage passed on to her by her father, is Jamaican, of African origin, and I am sure that it is a part of her heritage of which she is immensely and equally proud.
To claim otherwise is to deny an vital part of her, which is surely far more offensive than the silly Telegraph article is pretending to find MEP Mr. Bron's statement.
It stands to reason, you can not make something other than what it is merely for the sake of political ideology. If I was born in China that fact alone would not make me Chinese, however, much I might, for whatever reason, wish to be Chinese. Even if my English father had married a Chinese woman rather than my English mother, I would still remain half English, as Kelly remains, no doubt proudly, half Jamaican.
The media always attempt to stress the “Britishness” of athletes and celebrities of immigrant origin, as if desperately trying to impose their new reality upon us, rather as the old soviets would stress the “gloriousness” of their crumbling republics.
It is a form of subliminal brainwashing, and it is amazing to see how widely the brain washing has taken effect. I think many of us must have been shocked at the basic ignorance of leading Political blogger Ian Dale, when he insisted to Simon Darby that second generation immigrants were “indigenous”. Clearly Mr Dale believes that, were he to import a Texan cactus, and then replant a cutting in his back garden, cactus would become indigenous to Sussex.
By Ian Dale's definition, Rudyard Kipling was probably an Indian. If someone in his position is so ignorant, why should we be surprised when ordinary people in the street parrot the same arrant nonsense?.
However, whatever the rights and wrongs of the argument over who is, or is not, fully British, we should not ignore the trick which the Telegraph is attempting to play, when they produce Kelly Holmes, and later various “Black British” footballers, as examples of what they are subliminally implying to he the “wonderful and valuable 'Britons' whom the 'nasty' BNP reject”.
This is the same trick which other Bronco substitutes, such as the Sun and Mirror have been playing for weeks, when they produce individual immigrants who are either attractive or who have made some individual contribution, as proof of the “wrongness” of the BNP position on immigration.
Like every other trick the media plays in this area, this is deeply dishonest, overwhelmingly, the British people do not (yet) have issues with individual immigrants, most of us, including the majority BNP supporters would agree that some have made a contribution to the country, however, this does not change the fact that the negative impact of mass immigration far outweighs any contribution made by the few individuals whom the media parade before us.
The contribution, and relative attractiveness, or otherwise of individual immigrants is not the issue, and the media is being shamefully disingenuous when they suggest it is. Nobody objects to immigrants, just because they are immigrants, and few would be concerned if immigration had been kept to moderate or reasonable levels. Even the numbers had only reached those which Enoch Powell had warned of in 1968 (a warning for which he was ridiculed and vilified) we would not be facing the crisis which we are. However, the numbers have so far exceeded Enoch's , by comparison, relatively modest predictions, that have reached the point where our nation is set to be overwhelmed within the next two generations, this is the issue which has brought us to where we are, not how nice individual runners, pop singers and footballers might be.
What the media is doing with Kelly Holmes and their randomly selected black footballers is the same as if they produced a sweet, cuddly, bunny rabbit and announcing “Isn't it cute? isn't it sweet? harmless and cuddly? how could anyone who is not really bad and really evil object to such a sweet cuddly bunny?!!”
Of course nobody would object to an individual cuddly bunny rabbit, because there is no problem with an individual cuddly bunny rabbit. Its when there are ten million cuddly bunnies, now that's when they become a problem.
To claim otherwise is to deny an vital part of her, which is surely far more offensive than the silly Telegraph article is pretending to find MEP Mr. Bron's statement.
It stands to reason, you can not make something other than what it is merely for the sake of political ideology. If I was born in China that fact alone would not make me Chinese, however, much I might, for whatever reason, wish to be Chinese. Even if my English father had married a Chinese woman rather than my English mother, I would still remain half English, as Kelly remains, no doubt proudly, half Jamaican.
The media always attempt to stress the “Britishness” of athletes and celebrities of immigrant origin, as if desperately trying to impose their new reality upon us, rather as the old soviets would stress the “gloriousness” of their crumbling republics.
It is a form of subliminal brainwashing, and it is amazing to see how widely the brain washing has taken effect. I think many of us must have been shocked at the basic ignorance of leading Political blogger Ian Dale, when he insisted to Simon Darby that second generation immigrants were “indigenous”. Clearly Mr Dale believes that, were he to import a Texan cactus, and then replant a cutting in his back garden, cactus would become indigenous to Sussex.
By Ian Dale's definition, Rudyard Kipling was probably an Indian. If someone in his position is so ignorant, why should we be surprised when ordinary people in the street parrot the same arrant nonsense?.
However, whatever the rights and wrongs of the argument over who is, or is not, fully British, we should not ignore the trick which the Telegraph is attempting to play, when they produce Kelly Holmes, and later various “Black British” footballers, as examples of what they are subliminally implying to he the “wonderful and valuable 'Britons' whom the 'nasty' BNP reject”.
This is the same trick which other Bronco substitutes, such as the Sun and Mirror have been playing for weeks, when they produce individual immigrants who are either attractive or who have made some individual contribution, as proof of the “wrongness” of the BNP position on immigration.
Like every other trick the media plays in this area, this is deeply dishonest, overwhelmingly, the British people do not (yet) have issues with individual immigrants, most of us, including the majority BNP supporters would agree that some have made a contribution to the country, however, this does not change the fact that the negative impact of mass immigration far outweighs any contribution made by the few individuals whom the media parade before us.
The contribution, and relative attractiveness, or otherwise of individual immigrants is not the issue, and the media is being shamefully disingenuous when they suggest it is. Nobody objects to immigrants, just because they are immigrants, and few would be concerned if immigration had been kept to moderate or reasonable levels. Even the numbers had only reached those which Enoch Powell had warned of in 1968 (a warning for which he was ridiculed and vilified) we would not be facing the crisis which we are. However, the numbers have so far exceeded Enoch's , by comparison, relatively modest predictions, that have reached the point where our nation is set to be overwhelmed within the next two generations, this is the issue which has brought us to where we are, not how nice individual runners, pop singers and footballers might be.
What the media is doing with Kelly Holmes and their randomly selected black footballers is the same as if they produced a sweet, cuddly, bunny rabbit and announcing “Isn't it cute? isn't it sweet? harmless and cuddly? how could anyone who is not really bad and really evil object to such a sweet cuddly bunny?!!”
Of course nobody would object to an individual cuddly bunny rabbit, because there is no problem with an individual cuddly bunny rabbit. Its when there are ten million cuddly bunnies, now that's when they become a problem.
________________________
12 comments:
How many killers, muggers, rapists, drug-pushers, etc. is UK society willing to tolerate in order to have a few pop-singers, a few footballers, etc.? It appears that right now you are getting many thousands of the first in return for a handful of the latter. What a deal! How dumb can you be?
If you had to forego all the pop-singers, footballers, etc. in order to get rid of the rest of the trouble makers, it would be a real bargain. Don't I recall that the Beatles were all white Englishmen? No blacks in that group, yet they did manage to make it. And there have been others as well. It is not as though the imports are essential or there will be no sound in Britain.
It is a strawman argument to say that all these foreigners are necessary for the UK. For one or two good ones you are ask to put up with thousands of thoroughly undesirable people. That is absurd!
Thanks, Sarah and Dr. D.
An immigration policy that kept out exceptions that prove the rule would very likely have resulted in Ben Kinsella being alive today, along with scores of other white Briton victims who far outnumber the exceptions.
Further to my last comment, I have some questions for the Left, from whom I would appreciate rational, coherent answers that actually address the questions asked.
(I'm not holding my breath for such answers.)
1. Britain won 47 medals at last year's Olympics, the 4th highest of the 2008 totals, including 19 gold, 17 of which appear to have been won by one ethnic group only. Does Britain really need exceptions from other races, therefore, in the sporting world, where they are trumpeted as being so essential to British sporting success?
2. Further to the sporting realm, it is said that BNP policy on immigration would have prevented the parents of a talented footballer like, say, Rio Ferdinand from entering this country and thus disadvantaged English football. Suppose that had been the case, wouldn't Ferdinand have been able to make a much more meaningful contribution to disadvantaged street kids in his ancestral nation as a sporting role model? Former World Karate Champion Chuck Norris does this for the 1000s of deprived youngsters on his Kickstart programme in the US. Why couldn't Ferdinand and others like him do likewise, in their respective sports in their original ethnic homelands e.g. Jamaica, where 45-60% of households with children are single (female) parent households?
3. Why is it that BME or mixed-race exceptions have to be feted to the skies in this and other English-speaking nations, when it is not the case in any other kind of nation on earth? Isn't that discriminatory?
Given that, since 2004. Kelly Holmes has lived mostly in Southern Africa with the Mozambique athlete Maria Mutola, returning to the UK to make TV appearances, she seems a strange choice for the multi culti zealots. However, I guess we are not supposed to mention that.
Re: Dame Kelly and Mozambique, the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth has never been a multi-culti strong point.
I've just re-read the comments by Andrew Brons, which brought Dame Kelly to the fore recently. It appears that BNP critics are very sensitive to observations equivalent to that of the emperor having no clothes.
Oh, please Sarah, don't point out that Kelly is acting the whore, even while she is being held up as the indispensable half-white / half-black and gold all over model of perfection. That is just too much to bear.
Or have I misunderstood? Is Maria Mutola female? If so, I did misunderstand, and I retract what I said.
The media deliberately confuse Nationality with Ethnicity.
All they are interested in with regards the BNP is the race thing.
They dare not openly discuss any of the BNP's other policies as they are afraid that (they know) the public will like them.
Time the BNP got on the front foot I think.
Dr D
Yes Maria Mutola is female. There has been speculation in the tabloid press as to what her relationship with Kelly Holmes is, however, all I know is that they share a home in South Africa
I've pasted this paragraph taken from the link (Merseyside Black Police Association) in your previous post.
"Full members must be able to satisfy our constitutional definition of ‘black’. Contrary to popular believe (belief?) this does not mean you must be must be black as commonly understood, but rather have the ‘common experience and determination’ of people who are, because it is they that are typically far more likely historically and currently, to be on the receiving end of racism. Indeed we have a number of white full members, one of whom is currently an MBPA Executive Committee member."
Perhaps your British readers (Canada, here) can decipher all this Orwellian "double-speak" more accurately than myself, but this incongruous mixture of professed principles from the Merseyside BLACK Police Association appears to be diametrically opposed to your definition of what Britishness means to you.
I'm in full agreement with your assertion, but this Black Police Association appears to convey their "Blackness" up front, but morphes the standard definition into some ill-defined meaning of their choosing such as: "...this does not mean you must be must be black as commonly understood..." Huh?
Here's another police item of interest. Watch the short video clip and observe how the racial dynamics works out.
The Black protester only argues with a White policewoman despite several White male cops standing on either side of her. Seconds later, a huge Black cop backhands a White female protester after the first incident becomes unruly.
Perhaps the "protected classes" are feeling invincible in these contemporary times??
I also found the rabbit analogy quite interesting, considering what rabbits have done in Australia.
Well, there is one kind of racism that is permitted in Britain, today, that's racism of the anti-English kind. The Labour party bigwigs are stuffed full of it.
Post a Comment