Phew. Well, for a start, there’s coming over to make a new life, job, wife, home, having gone through extensive hoops, awarded points … as against flooding in, just to dip the wick into our women … and there was a saying in WW 2 about that: “Overpaid, overfed, oversexed … and over here,” referring to American GIs. Could also have referred to the Vikings way back when.
What of lil ole moi though? WN2 Serbian, fiancee Russian a decade after that fizzled. Now what did the Russki men think of me dipping the wick into their fairhaired girl and producing mixed gene progeny? Plus, in our town, they’d been mixing genes between Bolgars and Russkis for hundreds of years.
Long after that itself was over, in Sicily, at the end of my Russki gal’s visit, we were heading for the airport, up came a Sicilian girl and in their effusive way, she planted one, my Russki turned eyes up to the heavens … she must have thought I was leaving, Claudia.
So who am I to speak of purity of bloodline? And what of my dad and mum? What the heck was a dour Yorkshireman doing dalliance-ing a colleen from County Cork? I mean … what gives here?
And yet the third photo below which I refuse to post … so I’ll describe it instead … I didn’t like it one little bit because shirley it negated everything we are currently trying to do?
All right … to the first pic:

I know nothing of whether she was married, had a child with her, came to marry and for a better life, any of that. She stated that she came for a better life but now it was what it is … readers, I am slowly getting to the point, bear with me.
All right, second pic:

All right, I see a Thomas Sowell type, articulate, loves the culture. Uh huh. I like him. Plus I run reaction vids by blacks. How does that fit in with that rally yesterday?
Before I get to that … the third pic I’m describing, not posting … can’t be unseen. Four late teen, early 20s, whatever. Left to right … black girl, not one of the massive mamas bashing other people … white girl, let’s just call it western, entangled by the typical new thug/spiv middle-eastern or African and he was obviously in for the dipping of the wick, ignoring his own ethnic girl … then a white male, nondescript, slight, weakish.
I’m not sure I need add anything to that pic. The one to ask questions of is obviously the white girl and already I know the answer, judging by the two males.
To my mind, factors in answering the question of which immigration is acceptable include:
a. Connection by family stretching back, bloodline, culture, followed by birthplace
b. Attitude, intention and behaviour
c. Sheer numbers and mass breeding capacity.
“Intention” includes mission, purpose in being here … is it to take over, outbreed, kill off the indigenous? With the ability to do it?
As part of “culture”, I’m including the Christian underpinnings of civility, safety on the streets and so on. I understand the pagans were here earlier but look at them and their wickerman savagery, the druids, oak grove sacrifices etc. … very appealing, for example, to woke left women … throw soup and paint over old art, the little savages.
What’s the solution, good reader?
Complaints about the 'other' moving in go back past the Roman invasion. Read the complaints about the Danes from the Angles, who themselves had only moved in a couple of centuries before.
ReplyDeleteThe difference in any historic immigration, are the numbers. Even with Saxons, Vikings, Danes, Normans, etc. the indigenous population was never replaced.
ReplyDeleteRecent DNA findings have surprised scientists, because they thought that populations had been replaced over time, but they were wrong. There is a strand of DNA in the UK that stretches back thousands of years unbroken.
The people that came here and settled, settled in specific areas and ruled over that specific area. In the case of the Normans, they replaced the ruling class, but not the whole Anglo-Saxon population.
The Magna Carta is the exemplification of King John (the last of the kings with direct Norman ancestry) getting a bit out of his depth, raising taxes and the Anglo-Saxon barons giving him a reality check.
In fact there are parallels with Starmer: King John was a bad manager, lost wars, lost his land in France and raised taxes on his subjects in the UK to pay for it all. The Saxons told him where to go..
Wasn't it the Norman royalty who forced him to sign the Magna Carta?
ReplyDeleteThe Barons were Anglo-Norman, the Normans having intermingled with the Saxon nobility as it was. But I'll give you that they weren't actual full Saxons, although they had intermingled Saxon/Norman heritage.
Delete