mongrel Island?

As a postscript to August’s excellent article on Liberal democrat candidate Sandy Walkington's deeply bigoted and ignorant comments about Britain, which was posted earlier, I think it is important to make clear that not only are Mr. Walkington’s views flawed and misguided for the reasons which August highlighted so well, but that Walkington's basic premise, that we, the British, are a nation of mongrels is blatantly untrue.

This claim is, of course, made frequently by liberals and multicultural zealots, but it is a lie based on ideological wish fulfillment and pure fantasy exposing a total ignorance of history.

Prior to 1950, Britain was, in fact, one of the most racially homogeneous nations on Earth, even today over 80% of the native population are able to trace their genetic ancestry back by means of DNA at least 15 thousand years, that is to say some sixteen times longer than the indigenous  Maori people of New Zealand and roughly as long as the Clovis people of North America.

The “mongrel claim” depends on the hypothesis that previous influxes of immigrants and refugees changed the ethnic make up of the British people.  This hypothesis if frankly incorrect.  In the main the groups involved were so small in number that they had no perceptible impact on the indigenous population.  For example, the very largest group, the French Huguenots, amounted in number to less than a fifth of the current Somali population and there are currently over one hundred times as many people originating from the Indian sub continent (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh) living in Britain today than all the Huguenots who came here in the 16th and 17th centuries. 

As the two main invasions of Britain, at least those which occurred prior to the second half of the 20th Century, these did not have the effect the multicultural fairy tale tellers would have us believe. Following the Norman conquest most Norman troops returned home and the only significant interbreeding with our ethnically identical kin the Normans was primarily restricted to our aristocracy.

Some limited interbreeding unquestionably took place following the Roman conquest  thousand years before, however, again, unlike today, this was insufficient to have any impact on the native population.

One can dismiss Bonnie Greer’s fanciful claims on the infamous Question Time edition with Nick Griffin, about platoons of Africans arriving with the Roman troops, this is the sort of dubious “history” which usually appears in books with large print, lots of colours and repeated references to “diversity”.

There is no firm historical evidence that African troops accompanied the Roman invaders in any significant numbers if any did at all. If such Africans actually existed, there is no evidence they were not castrated, as was the general fate of freed slaves in ancient Rome, or that they were “Africans” as we would understand the description today, the demographics of much of North Africa were very different than it is in our time. 

Finally, there is certainly no evidence any African were “left behind" to mate with the flan haired natives as the disingenuous Miss Greer whimsically suggests.

To be blunt Greer’s claims were laughable and devoid of any historical substance. It is a shameful indictment of our times that no mainstream historian had the guts or the honesty to challenge her.  

It may be true that over any milenia Britain became the home of a small number of other Northern European tribes  such as Angles, Saxons and Vikings but they were ethnically identical to the Picts and Celts who were before them.  Sharing the blood of a small number of identical Northern European tribes does not make us mixed race and most definitely does not make us “mongrels”.

The politically correct Mr.Walkington should remember that the population of Ethiopia, for instance is made up of no less than eighty North African tribes, meanwhile the people of Kenya include some forty ethnically identical East African tribes. If this hypocrite calls us mongrels on the basis that we are made up of half a dozen Nothern European tribes, he is clearly implying that Ethiopians and Kenyans are far more "mongrels" than we are.

How many times would hell have to freeze over before Walkington could bring himself to use a term, which trips so easily off his narrow lips in relation to white Europeans, when describing an African or Asian people?.

Lies such as those parroted by the unpleasant Mr. Walkington are repeated over and over again for ideological reasons, and in order to achieve a political goal. That goal is the destruction of Western Nations states by imposing an alien culture and finally an alien ethnicity upon once homogenous peoples.  They form part of an act of deliberate genocide by stealth, which I have described here before, and must be challenged every time they are told..

Walkington lies also when he says he has “no problem” with what he calls “the fact” that in 200 years we will all be coffee coloured.  In fact he glories in the prospect, as it is after all the outcome which the political masters he serves are determined to achieve.        

But a lie is a lie is a lie. Goebbels may have been correct that if you tell a lie often enough people will come to believe it, however, a lie can never become a truth no matter how often our enemies repeat it.