Today on the BBC David Goodheart, Director of Demos, said this:
‘Labour’s immigration policy was ‘easily the most significant aspect of labour’s period in power.’
Despite the overwhelming significance of that immigration policy thanks to the BBC this policy went entirely unremarked and without challenge for a decade denying the British Public a voice in one of the most controversial and contentious issues this country has had to face.
I’ll qualify that comment….not ‘unremarked’ but rather given the full and weighty support of the BBC whose employees were fully convinced of the benefits of the Labour immigration project…and ensured that that was the narrative we, the Public, received.
This is how Mark Thompson explained the BBC’s position….Sensitive or ‘taboo’ subjects such as immigration were avoided by the BBC for fear of being too right-wing.
Mark Thompson conceded that the broadcaster had been ‘anxious’ in the past about playing into what it may have perceived to be a Right-wing political agenda…but he claimed it had now changed its position and was responsible for raising the topic of immigration during the 2010 general election….claiming that ‘We’ve got a duty, even if issues are sensitive and difficult to get right, to confront what the public want. I don’t like the idea of topics that are taboo.’
Fine words but they were not backed by any serious intentions to reform the BBC machine.
The BBC has continued promoting the virtues and benefits of immigration whilst smearing critics of the policy as racist.
Today the BBC indulged in an exercise in news management, fixing the facts to support Miliband’s claims over Labour’s immigration policy.
Neither Mark Thompson’s nor Miliband’s statements are of any consequence. Neither one is intended to engender any subsequent action to remedy the perceived faults but are rather intended to deceive the listener…. for the BBC they wish you to believe that they recognise their failure to cover the subject of immigration in a fair and adequate manner and that this has been rectified, and for Labour to impress upon a credulous public that the Labour Party also recognises its ‘mistakes’ and now seeks to re-establish its working class credentials and work to win the blue collar vote.
Both narratives are clearly based on a false assumption…that any of that is true.
The BBC has been actively involved in a huge public deception instigated by the Labour Party around the subject of immigration giving us a highly dishonest and distorted portrayal of Labour’s actions and the subsequent consequences of mass immigration.
The Today programme team and others are involved in the corrupting and political compromise of a BBC that should be the standard bearer leading the world when it comes to clear and honest reporting that upholds the values once so famously instilled in it by Lord Reith. Now the BBC has been reduced to an institution that would be worthy of any Communist State so thoroughly shot through is it with the values and practises of news manipulation and propaganda in the service of political masters.
This is an organisation that is no longer ‘fit for purpose’ under the cynical leadership of Mark Thompson….allowing the most serious breaches of the BBC charter that amount to a betrayal not only of the BBC and its reputation for impartial news but of the viewer, listener or reader who look to the BBC as the one honest guiding light in the troubling and dangerous times we live in.
Thompson has allowed a culture to flourish in which it is acceptable to bully and demean those who have different views to those deemed appropriate by the BBC…a culture in which it is Ok to deride the white working class and conversely the ‘privileged’ upper classes along with Tories, UKIP, Christians, Climate change sceptics, any one who works for Murdoch or reads the Daily Mail and of course Israelis and Jews.
Far from embodying an ‘all inclusive’ society the BBC has become the cheer leader for multicultural division, class, ethnic and religious conflict.
The conclusion is that “If at all relevant times, Mark Thompson did not take steps to become fully informed about how his Corporation reported immigration, that he turned a blind eye and exhibited wilful blindness to what was going on in his Corporation and publications and failed to fully control, oversee and moderate what was being said on the subject of immigration in his organisation then this culture of untrammelled pro-immigration cheer leading and derision of critics can be considered to have permeated from the top throughout the organisation and speaks volumes about the lack of effective corporate governance at the BBC.
One could conclude therefore that Mark Thompson is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international news organisation and that there have been huge failings of corporate governance and, throughout, it has been the BBC’s instinct to cover up rather than seek out wrongdoing and bring to account the perpetrators of political corruption and abuse of power.”
That failure to govern the BBC properly is still continuing.
.
Today Ed Miliband pronounced, to great fanfare, his and the Labour Party’s ‘mea culpa’ over immigration….and there was a great deal of coverage of the speech but as for indepth analysis of what Miliband really meant or an examination of Labour’s real intentions when they opened the borders to mass immigration there was no discussion.
The most egregious and obvious omission was the voice of Andrew Neather, the Labour Party advisor who openly admitted that Labour’s intentions were to swamp this country with immigrants and force multiculturalism upon Britain, to ‘rub the Right’s nose’ in it. He also revealed explosively that labour knew that the effect of this immigration was that the working class in this country would suffer from competition for jobs and housing but that they, the Labour Party, did not care.
‘It didn’t just happen: the deliberate policy of ministers from late 2000 until at least February last year, when the Government introduced a points-based system, was to open up the UK to mass migration.
But the earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural..
Ministers were very nervous about the whole thing. For despite Roche’s keenness to make her big speech and to be upfront, there was a reluctance elsewhere in government to discuss what increased immigration would mean, above all for Labour’s core white working-class vote.
This shone through even in the published report: the “social outcomes” it talks about are solely those for immigrants.
Part by accident, part by design, the Government had created its longed-for immigration boom.
But ministers wouldn’t talk about it. In part they probably realised the conservatism of their core voters: while ministers might have been passionately in favour of a more diverse society, it wasn’t necessarily a debate they wanted to have in working men’s clubs in Sheffield or Sunderland.’
It is clear why the BBC are afraid to report that…it is a bombshell that when originally published would have destroyed Labour…and so even now, years later, the BBC refuse to tell the Public the real reasons and that Labour knew that the working class would be the people to suffer the most……a class of people that the Labour Party was originally set up to protect and support but who have now been abandoned by the sharp suited, metropolitan elitists of New Labour.
When you read Neather’s words you realise that Miliband’s claim that this was all a ‘mistake’ is an outright lie…Labour knew exactly what it was doing and knew the consequences of it. The suggestion that they only believed 13,000 immigrants a year would come to Britain is another pure falsehood…they clearly expected and wanted far more.
What it also reveals is that Labour politicians engaged in a campaign of deception and subterfuge, one that was maintained by a friendly BBC covering up for them and broadcasting to the public that immigration was necessary for a successful economy and would create a vibrant, diverse and cosmopolitan nation.
Listening to the radio this morning starting with the Today programme there were no voices to be heard other than Labour Party ones pushing their own Party line. It took until 12.39 pm when the Coalition immigration minister, Damian Green, came onto 5live to give his thoughts on the matter, that we heard any voice that wasn’t in some way connected to Labour or pro immigration.
Towards the end of the Today programme we had two Labour Party voices…
Matthew Taylor, who worked with Tony Blair in number 10, and Labour MP John McDonnell to discuss Labour’s immigration policies….both of whom support immigration and claimed that numbers were not an issue…the problem was more to do with coping with the influx, the transitional measures adopted to manage it…to get immigrants housed and into work without seeming to be displacing the locals. The BBC’s Evan Davis, who has an immigrant French partner, as usual promoted immigration as a good thing…central to our economy and culture.
Laughably and lamentably unopposed by Evans was the assertion that Mrs Thatcher was to blame for the problems that Labour’s immigration policy resulted in…selling off council homes and restricting the Union power which meant Unions couldn’t fight for higher wages….which meant immigrants could come here and undercut the locals in labour costs.
Also claimed unchallenged was that Britons were completely unconcerned about immigration and rather were only concerned about jobs, housing and wages….they were not bothered about quality of life or the destruction of their own culture and society.
There was very little effort to ensure that there was a measured, informative and truthful debate about immigration.
The BBC’s coverage of Ed Miliband’s speech in which he purported to apologise for Labour’s failure to control immigration has shown that nothing has changed at the BBC….there is still a culture where immigration is a taboo subject and that people who want controls and limits on immigration are still subtly labelled racist.
Miliband has conducted a most cynical political repositioning…an apparent u-turn of oil tanker proportions…or you might think so….but in fact he is not saying what most people expect him to say…that immigration is too high….it is a charade and not the ‘brave recognition’ as Labour’s Hazel Blears called it of Labour’s failure to address the public’s concerns.
And yet there were no sceptical voices at the BBC….Where were the BBC questions demanding an explanation of why labour deliberately and knowingly implemented this policy of opening the borders. What were the intentions and intended consequences?
Also unmentioned was the ‘coincidence’ that Miliband’s speech came at the same time that the UN’s chief of immigration made this statement:
‘EU should ‘undermine national homogeneity’ says UN migration chief’
The EU should “do its best to undermine” the “homogeneity” of its member states, the UN’s special representative for migration has said….Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.’
Call me cynical but is it possible that a half hearted, disingenuous and politically convenient admission of guilt by Miliband was intended to be ‘offset’ by a statement that endorsed immigration from the respected and august body of the UN.
The BBC programmes looking at Miliband’s speech were shallow and superficial….they gave the impression of intense scrutiny but yielded little enlightenment. The seeming intention was to support Miliband in his repositioning without too much in the way of difficult questions whilst still suggesting that immigration is vital to the country’s interests.
Consider that today is also the day that Anders Breivik’s trial came to an end. For the first part of Victoria Derbyshire’s show she ‘discussed’ Miliband’s speech and then went on to look at the Breivik trial. There was no suggestion at all that there might be some link between the two stories.
Breivik killed Norwegian Labour Party members because mass immigration was changing his country…and no one had asked the Norwegians if they wanted that…they had no voice. Breivik’s actions were the direct result of politicians refusing to allow the Public a say in their own future and imposing unwanted policies upon them….precisely the same scenario that we have here in Britain.
The BBC deliberately chose to ignore the connection between the two stories…it refuses to admit the cause and effect, the consequences of ‘multiculturalism’ imposed without consultation by an out of touch political and social ‘elite’.
Why does the BBC refuse to openly discuss the true consequences of immigration?…it is happy to claim immigration brings great benefits but is reluctant to look at the darker, less palatable outcomes that mass, uncontrolled immigration brings with it.
The BBC editorial policy is guided by two premises…firstly that immigration is of benefit and desirable to our society, secondly that any talk of the harmful consequences of immigration will lead to demonisation of immigrants and attacks upon them.
Naturally this leads to a very one sided discussion and a completely false and dishonest portrayal of the real effects of immigration upon a society. The negative effects are easy to see and have enormous impact upon many segments of society.
Housing, welfare costs, access to the NHS and schools, availability of jobs and the downward spiral of wages are all obvious negative consequences…but there is also the great unspoken one…that of crime.
When Labour opened up the borders it allowed in literally millions of people, unknown and uncontrolled. With them naturally came a number of criminally intentioned people….our prisons now bulge with an extra 12% consisting of foreign prisoners. Murders, rapes, car theft, crime gangs, drug farms, prostitution, fraud , industrial scale shop lifting and pickpocketing were imported into this country by Labour. It is pertinent to ask just how many people have been killed, raped or mugged or otherwise criminally disadvantaged as a result of Labour’s reckless gamble to impose multiculturalism upon us.
The BBC do not ask such questions.
Labour’s immigration policy was intended to be a strange kind of ethnic cleansing of a Britain that was, in the words of Greg Dykes, too ‘hideously white’. The natives were not to be driven out but to be genetically ‘re-engineered’, their ethnic makeup diluted by the introduction of non -white genes into the ‘breeding’ pool…at the very least the enforced mixing of different races and cultures was supposed to engender a new attitude of tolerance and possibly celebration of diversity….failing even that the natives would just have to ‘lump it’. Labour was intent on destroying the national identity of this nation and even its very own biological identity regardless of the cost and suffering.
Such a policy amounts to a ‘coup’, a revolutionary act by a small clique of people who have ignored the democratic process and the rights of the people, instigating a process that involved the demonisation and smearing of critics as racists and the deliberate closing down of debate so that the policies could be enforced without opposition.
The BBC were complicit in all of this, colluding in the deception and the silencing of opposing voices.
The other political parties and indeed media were all cowed by the onslaught of the pro immigration lobby and lived in fear of being labelled ‘racist’. This is why the independence and complete impartiality and honesty of a public news organisation is vital in order to challenge the vested interests and to support those whose voices are otherwise suppressed….remember what Thompson himself said…”We’ve got a duty, even if issues are sensitive and difficult to get right, to confront what the public want. I don’t like the idea of topics that are taboo.”
It is the BBC’s duty to deal with difficult and contentious subjects…it is an organisation that has enormous respect and weight in society that should be used to say things and investigate otherwise ‘taboo’ subjects in a measured, coherent and intelligent manner that neither inflames nor crushes debate.
Labour should not be able to shrug its shoulders and just say ‘sorry’ we made a mistake when their actions were the result of deliberate and malign intentions and were conducted under cover of a BBC whose ‘wilful blindness’ allowed one of the most destabilising and dangerous policies this country has had to suffer to be introduced without challenge.
Both the BBC and the Labour Party should be subject to a judicial inquiry that examines their role and intentions in the implementation of Labour’s immigration policy and which has the power to sanction both parties on the likely conclusion that they were both knowing and deliberate actors in actions which could be construed as not only a failure to conduct themselves according to their stated corporate values but who have acted in ways that are a literal betrayal of the trust that is bestowed upon them by virtue of their position in society and the Establishment.
Someone really needs to be in jail.
This is an excellent article. I suggest everybody copies and sends it to their MP and local councillor. And to the editor of their local paper. It needs to be broadcast!
While Mark Easton remains the BBC’s Chief Home Affairs correspondent there isn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of a thoughtful re-assessment on immigration.
Tonight on the 10pm news he was at it again – minimising, minimising, minimising. He always uses (dubious) government statistics* to ram home his message. There is no problem so move along please.
His weakness is that he is lazy, lazy, lazy, so one day he will fail to cover up in time.
*Like the fact that only 35,000 Romanians have arrived here since 2007 (ONS figure from the International Passenger Survey – the government’s official measure) when they admit 135,000 national insurance numbers have been issued to such nationals.
Fantastic article.
Peter Hitchens has done a great job of highlighting the fact that Labour’s mass-immigration policy was designed to displace, and eventually replace, the indigenous people of Britain, when he appeared on QT last week and AQ this week.
This related story would make Stalin blush:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/12563
There was some suggestion that the ‘satanic abuse’ scaremongering in the same area was linked to political shennanigins. i.e don’t make waves for Tony & chums or your kids go into care …
Plus ca change it would seem.
Unless someone close to the centre of Labour tells the truth, they will get away with the biggest betrayal of the British ever.
You can see why in 1997 they repealed the Treason Act. The only act that still had the death penalty.
Good article. I would also add that the other angle for Labour’s liberal immigration policy was a cynical ploy to gain more votes at elections. But when they lost in 2010, they found that the number of immigrants voting for them was out numbered by the number of British labour voters not voting for them.
Another thing I find disgraceful by the BBC is the regular trotting out of Gillian Duffy as though she is some expert on immigration. So, are we to assume that Gordon was wrong in calling her a “bigoted woman”?
Gordon Brown would likely consider anybody that opposed any labour policy as a bigot.
Immigration the defining issue?
Only according to Demos…Iraq, the economic meltdown, cash for honours, the catastrophic disembowelment of any notion of an honourable and fairly distributed health, care and educational system, lost tax discs, 90 day detention and ID cards, the abolition of the constitution, the rule of law, the pushing of the likes of Mandelson assorted Kinnocks and Ashton into bat for the anation re the EU, the idea of hate crimes and lost pensions…need I go on?
Only at the Beeb would immigration be now seen as an issue-as you rightly say Alan, Labour are incorrigible and Neather speaks for the liberal elite and the BBC in wanting this country as a rape rug for Islam, facing Mecca.
Yet, the likes of Denhan, Miliband are taken seriously only by their chums at the BBC…the rest of us in the nation know what Labour did, and won`t be told otherwise by the relentless propaganda of the bBC.
Only fools like us listen to radio 4…and none of us would ever be influenced by some freeriding bag in Liberia telling me about the entrepreneurial rappers of Freetown…I thought business was a bad thing Sarah!
We all remember where we were when Tony Blair first used the expression ‘a tolerant society’.
That expression was shoehorned into so many New Labour speeches and for so many occasions that it passed unchallenged into common parlance…
Whilst they were calling that tolerant tune, someone at the border opened the gates.
…and now we have ‘most vulnerable members of society’.
Unfortunately, they’re very good at the language game. This kind of phraseology seeps into the atmosphere like a mist, and there are far too many unthinking people who breathe it in and absord it, not realising the manipulation to which they are being subjected.
Newsnight had what they call a debate on this matter. Beyond parody. They just cannot understand. The vast majority of ethnic English have made up their minds.
These media /BBC/liberals live in a world where they believe a rainbow is always in the sky if only people would be “nice” to each other.
When immigration starts to look like colonisation and that is what London and some other cities are becoming then economic arguments become irrelevant.
How often do these over educated but stupid fools have to be told. No people ever has voluntarily given up their homeland to another. It has never never happened. God knows what future awaits our grandchildren. What is certain is that it is now time for those responsible to fall silent. To get out of the way and play no further role in the future of our country which they have so betrayed. New men and women are needed and never in our long history were they so sorely wanted.
As usuall Newsnight highlighted Polish immigration. The most recent numbers I could find were from the guardian gave about a 2 to 1 ration non EU to EU citizens coming here not including assylum seakers which I espect are predominantly non EU.
If the BBC went out and talked to some working class people they would find that it is not Polish immigrants that are most peoples biggest concern.
From Migration Watch, figures available for other periods there to:-
In 2010, net migration from the EU was 77,000, or 26% of total non-British net migration (31% of total net migration)
1997-2010 Non-British Net Migration 3.5 million
1997-2010 British Net Migration -0.98 million
1997 – 2010 EU Net Migration 0.7 million, or 29% of total net migration
Source: ONS Long Term International Migration, 2 Series, Table 2.01a LTIM Citizenship 1991-2010. URL: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-235198
Brilliant analysis.
“thanks to the BBC this policy went entirely unremarked…”
Of course! there wasn’t anything at all about immigration on the BBC. Oh, apart from:
Immigration curbs on Eurostar passengers
UK / 20 March 2000
Asylum-seekers policy under fire
Scotland / 10 April 2000
Asylum camp plan attacked
UK Politics / 18 April 2000
Hague deepens British immigration dispute
Europe / 18 April 2000
Crackdown on Eurostar immigration
UK / 29 May 2000
Asylum seekers face deportation
UK Politics / 7 June 2000
Panorama exposes immigrant racket
UK Politics / 19 June 2000
Illegal immigrants: UK overview
Europe / 27 June 2000
British police intercepts Bangladeshi immigrants
Europe / 1 September 2000
African immigrants expelled
Africa / 26 September 2000
Asylum costs ‘rise sharply’
UK / 11 February 2001
Asylum system ‘needs total overhaul’
UK Politics / 13 February 2001
Straw tells French: Keep Kurdish migrants
UK Politics / 22 February 2001
UK wins tough action on immigration
UK Politics / 15 March 2001
Flights to speed up deportation
UK / 10 April 2001
Police swoop on ‘immigrant racket’
UK / 24 April 2001
100 arrests in illegal immigrant raids
Europe / 24 April 2001
Poles charged in immigration racket
Europe / 25 April 2001
Dawn raids on illegal immigrants
UK / 2 May 2001
Six arrested over immigrant smuggling
Europe / 18 May 2001
Former jail to house asylum seekers
Scotland / 25 May 2001
Immigration concerns multiply
UK / 21 June 2001
Immigrant suspects found in London
UK / 10 July 2001
MP calls for English tests for immigrants
UK / 13 July 2001
UK gets tough on Czech immigrants
Europe / 18 July 2001
Suspected illegal immigrants detained
Scotland / 19 July 2001
‘Illegal immigrants’ sent home
Scotland / 24 July 2001
More immigrants target Channel Tunnel
Europe / 31 August 2001
Blunkett set to get tough on refugees
UK Politics / 9 September 2001
Immigration controls tightened
UK / 19 September 2001
Ethnic birth rate climbs
UK / 21 September 2001
Immigrants ‘to take citizen classes’
UK Politics / 26 October 2001
Three-hour chase of ‘illegal immigrants’
England / 26 October 2001
Lorry driver charged over immigrants
England / 9 December 2001
Longer sentences for people smugglers
UK Politics / 15 January 2002
Blunkett ‘to raise Sangatte concerns’
UK Politics / 20 January 2002
Police hunt escaped asylum seekers
England / 21 February 2002
Minister defends immigration centre
Scotland / 11 April 2002
EU immigration policies condemned
Europe / 20 June 2002
EU to grasp immigration nettle
Europe / 21 June 2002
EU agrees tighter immigration controls
Europe / 22 June 2002
Head to head: Immigration debate
UK Politics / 25 June 2002
Czech asylum seekers deported
England / 20 September 2002
Czech gypsies’ asylum case fails
UK / 10 October 2002
Police arrest 12 in immigration raid
England / 15 October 2002
Immigration force makes 33 arrests
England / 25 October 2002
‘Abused’ asylum loophole scrapped
Politics / 29 November 2002
‘Screen immigrants for HIV’
Health / 4 December 2002
UK tightens entry rules for Jamaicans
UK / 8 January 2003
UK ‘citizenship test’ unveiled
UK / 31 January 2003
Tighter rules over citizenship
UK / 31 March 2003
Asylum issue ‘could spark unrest’
Politics / 8 May 2003
UK ‘will keep own border controls’
Politics / 20 May 2003
Immigration concern over ferry link
Europe / 24 May 2003
Tories target ‘health tourism’
Politics / 1 June 2003
People traffickers ‘target Britain’
Politics / 5 June 2003
UK immigration could rise by 10%
Politics / 5 June 2003
Asylum policies ‘increasing HIV risk’
Health / 10 July 2003
Asylum questions: Are we being swamped?
UK / 16 July 2003
Asylum questions: Can we afford them?
UK / 19 July 2003
Byers seeks more immigration curbs
Politics / 30 July 2003
Immigration farm raids to resume
Lincolnshire / 8 August 2003
Suspected immigrants escape
Cambridgeshire / 2 October 2003
Man charged with smuggling immigrants
Kent / 11 October 2003
Two illegal immigrants stopped
Europe / 13 October 2003
Asylum think-tank attacked by MP
Politics / 17 November 2003
Man charged over immigrant ring
Hampshire/Dorset / 5 December 2003
Family guilty of immigrant scam
Norfolk / 16 March 2004
Immigration ‘culture of deceit’
Politics / 28 March 2004
Migrant ‘scam’ warnings revealed
Politics / 30 March 2004
Tories urge immigration inquiry
Politics / 7 April 2004
Is that enough about immigration yet?
And we are supposed to believe the BBC really cares about the future of my people? Silence from those who have colluded in the attempted colonisation of an ancient country in defiance of reality and historical precedent would serve us all well.
It is unsurprising that there are stories about immigrants, but what there has not been are the discussions outlined in the article. The stories you have cited focus mainly on illegal immigration and asylum seekers.
Moreover, what has been missing from the BBC’s coverage is a full investigation and criticism into Labour’s deliberate open doors policy, a discussion of the crime threat, the fractured communities, the loss of social and cultural identity, whether people actually want it, a full acknowledgement that the majority of people were actually against it, the negative consequences on the white working class, the potential for future Balkanization, the large welfare dependency among certain groups, the unsavoury beliefs of some, the questionable cultural practices of others, the abuse of our freedoms.
The BBC has consistently let us down on these issues.
It is eye-opening and only serves to confirm the opinions expressed in Alan’s article that the BBC spokesman (partially) employed to rubbish this site quite deliberately misses Alan’s point namely that the BBC did (and does) not ignore immigration but, in its reportage on the subject, sought (and seeks) to underplay its extent and/or to convey the impression that immigration had (and has) wholly – or largely – beneficial effects. Setting out (without links) a long list of immigration-related reports does not amount to a convincing – or any – refutation of Alan’s posting.
Only someone employed directly by the INBBC could come up with that lot, or by the Labour party!
…all that, and not one link.
I find it interesting when we are told that the net benefits outweigh the costs as an average.
I wonder if use of the NHS, law system or use of interpreter literature are included in the cost? or the black economy?
I somehow think that putting wealthy immigrants who may work in IT or engineering or other highly paid profession in with low paid or unemployed immigrants to get an average is purely a numbers get out clause.
when the way of calculating net benefit was worked out it excluded the cost of the children of immigrants. So all the costs of educating the children of immigrants are excluded and if English is not their first language then these exceed the cost of educating the child of indiginous parents (and I expect all the childbirth costs, the child benefits etc).
So the latest Labour Party attitude on immigration boils down to this:
The subject is a big problem for us because voters think we got it wrong (well, the working class voters do).
We think immigration was, always has been, is now and always will be, a generally good thing.
Just about now in the electoral cycle we need to say that we got something about it a bit wrong.
If we had our time over again we might do something or other a bit differently – but not really differently.
Meanwhile those battalions of brilliant BBC political commenators are not laying into this hopeless cant?
Perhaps that is because they think in exactly the same way as do the Labour Party leadership.
Excerpt from Stephen Glover article in ‘Daily Mail’ today:
“It was not Labour alone that was guilty. The BBC and significant parts of the Press refused to admit there was a problem. It was not until 2010 that Mark Thompson, director general of the BBC, admitted that the Corporation had often side-stepped the issue.
“The following year he went further, writing in the New Statesman magazine that ‘there were some years when the BBC, like the rest of the UK media, was very reticent about talking about immigration’”
(by Stephen Glover.)
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2163445/Ed-Miliband-So-Labour-says-NOT-racist-debate-immigration-What-sick-hypocrisy.html#ixzz1ybRbsDvE
Britain has become, with BBC-NUJ connivance, a leftist totalitarian state, as the following illustrates:-
“Multi-Culti Child Snatchers”
by Paul Weston.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.ca/2012/06/multi-culti-child-snatchers.html
Many BBC employees can be summed up in the same way that Hitch summed up New Labour on the Daily Politics yesterday: ‘A bunch of bourgeois metropolitan trendies who like a constant supply of cheap servants’.
Couple this with every Marxists dream of a borderless world with no nations (White nations any way), and you can see why they love immigration so much.
It’s interesting to note that Miliband only targeted E.Europeans as well. Obviously being white, they appear further down the ‘Progressive Stack’ than those with brown skin, but I get the impression that they may not be voting as hoped.
I shouldn’t think Poles are natural labour voters, many being hard working and responsible.
Poles I know vote UKIP or Conservative. Granted I only know a few, but they, ironically, also want to stop immigration here too.
And yes, I do mean both the general and local elections, for some reason the government does not check nationality where I live.
East Europeans lived through decades of Socialism and know what it is really like. Turkeys don’t vote for Christimas.
Turks vote for Eid.
Unlike some other immigrants Poles only vote once each per election.
Excellent article
This article is excellent – as far it goes.
It does not cover: –
1. The one ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEED topic of conversation between white people when they are on their own is immigration. EVERYONE talks about it and how it has completely changed the country. Much for the worse. Why is this very deep concern not reflected properly in the media?
2. London in particular now has vast areas where white English people are a very tiny minority. One paper virtually bragged that one primary school had 31 pupils who spoke 31 different languages as their first language. What chance is there of social cohesion in that environment?
3. The “equality” laws are used against the natives in housing, jobs, education, benefits, the “right” to family life. Benefits are provided immediately rather than pro-rata to the period of residence let alone contribution.
4. Customs other than Christian or English are given absolute preference e.g in the banning of pork from school meals and the provision of Halal meat without our knowledge or consent. The tacit acceptance of polygamy in the provision of benefits.
5. Our very culture as a state is being undermined. Everyone who went mentioned the virtual absence of black people at the Jubilee celebrations (see Kelvin McKenzie in the Daily Mail). The BBC, along with most other Main Stream Media, ignored this fact..
6. The health service is overwhelmed in places by Birth defects caused by the marriage practices (i.e. consanguinity) of Pakistani Muslims. It should, it MUST, be banned.
“Sorry” is not enough. “Inquiries” are not enough. Trials for Treason and eventual Execution are called for.
I must make it clear that, in my opinion, once an immigrant is legally settled here then we have a fundamental moral obligation to accept him or her into our society. With our heart and soul.
But we should be in no doubt at the terrible crime that New Labour committed whilst in power and the great difficulty the Coalition is having in unwinding the mess.
There should be a genetic test before first cousins can marry. They not the taxpayer should cover the cost.
If the test shows a high probability of any children having genetic defects, and they still decide to marry then the family and not the taxpayer should cover the cost of any meddical treatment.
That would reduce the burden on the NHS and as the law would apply to everybody getting married could not be considered discriminatory.
Phew .. what a read. Love the photo.
Labour Party (and BBC-NUJ) still refuse to talk of upper limits to mass immigration into Britain because their default political position is STILL that of open-door, mass immigration with no upper limit, so as to enforce the colonisation of British people with huge numbers of immigrants from countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia, India, Afghanistan, Nigeria, etc.
“‘I won’t back migration cap, but I agree it is still too high’:
Ed Miliband tries to appease voters disillusioned by Labour stance on foreign workers.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163425/Ed-Miliband-I-wont-migration-cap-high.html#ixzz1ycHfmtBE
“The outrageous truth slips out: Labour cynically plotted to transform the entire make-up of Britain without telling us.”
By Melanie Phillips (2009).
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1222977/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-The-outrageous-truth-slips-Labour-cynically-plotted-transform-entire-make-Britain-telling-us.html#ixzz1ycKXEO3c
While Thompson’s admission on this subject was telling, this article suffers from selective recall – I remember numerous, if insufficient, broadcast discussions on the subject. More troubling is your willingness to implicate government in the Norway massacre, which is morally indefensible.
If you look at it in terms of deep background you could argue that government policies are as much implicated in the Norway massacre as in the London tube bombings,the Madrid metro bombings, the Toulouse murders, the murder of Theo van Gough etc etc etc. It’s almost as if the ruling classes (especially their social democratic branch) have been frivolously playing with explosives.
Is “morally indefensible” the latest criticism of choice going the rounds at the BBC? It fits right in with the de haut en bas attitude of the BBC to the opinions of its audience or justified criticism. Its use is the latest in a long line of key phrases signalling the BBC’s failure and unwillingness to engage on an issue. Mind you, whatever the result – even the massacre of innocents by a lone nutter – it’s certainly “morally indefensible” to impose a policy on a country which is intended to cause substantial change (for the worse or even the better) without giving the electorate a chance to decide – or even debate – the policy.
Your recall of “numerous, if insufficient, broadcast discussions on the subject” may or may not be correct. Unfortunately, such discussions rarely deviated from the BBC (and Labour) narrative whereby the BBC aided Labour by consistently and knowingly masking the extent, hiding the ill-effects and suppressing genuine public discussion of immigration. Such “discussions” as I recall usually comprised the talking heads taking part nodding wisely in approval of the progress of immigration while excoriating any criticism – in the press or on the streets – as naked (and fascist) racism.
Admittedly, there was the very occasional rare discussion where a critical voice on immigration was allowed near the microphone. These – in my recall – tended to pitch a lone voice (usually and latterly Sir Andrew Green) against one or more hysterical opponents egged on by a BBC presenter/”journalist” who, rather than “holding the ring” for a genuine exploration of the facts joined in the battering of Sir Andrew.
The BBC has a shameful record over its treatment of the immigration issue. Its record – its morally indefensible record – is not improved by its current blatant efforts to further the interests of the Labour Party in its dishonest admission about “mistakes being made”.
Miliband made his pro-mass immigration ‘speech’ in Peterborough (Friday).
That city deserves some investigation re-immigration.
Here is an article (by Sue Reid, April 2010) on Peterborough, as Labour Party was about to lose the General Election-
“City that can’t cope any more: While this Czech family are thrilled with their new council house, such largesse is ruining communities”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1264930/Peterborough-struggling-immigration-toll.html#ixzz1ycSS3a8C
More on how Labour Party’s Mass Immigration enforced on the British people has ruined Peterborough, among many other towns and cities:
1.)
“Unemployed migrants set up makeshift camp on busy roundabout.” (2010)
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1302048/Unemployed-migrants-set-makeshift-camp-busy-roundabout.html#ixzz1ycVLaAHz.)
2.)
“Pupils forced to use mobile classrooms as city is flooded by 20,000 migrants.”(2010.)
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1302875/Pupils-forced-use-mobile-classrooms-City-flooded-20-000-migrants.html#ixzz1ycVtEquw
‘Both the BBC and the Labour Party should be subject to a judicial inquiry…’
I have always believed this. Not only is the BBC in breach of its Charter obligations it is clear that they are not investigating complaints in the manner required of it by statute.
But on the wider issue, there is a ‘Judicial Inquiry’ under way at the moment – Leveson – into the standards and ethics of the press. This should be extended to examine the wider media and in particular the BBC with its dominant position as the provider of news to 80% of the adult population of this country.
It’s time the drains were lifted so we can see what’s flowing beneath.
I love Crimewatch and the Crimewatch roadshow was on every morning this week. The first part of the week focused on Sussex and there was lots of whingeing about budget cuts (i.e. Tory cutz). The second half of the week focused on the Met and the mutli-cultural hellhole it’s officers are unfortunate enough to patrol. There were bits on (1) illegal gaming on the bridges of the Thames. These games included ‘chase the lady’ and the tourists targeted has no chance of winning. There are usually several people involved including stooges. There was a piece on (2) card scams where someones bank card is swiped whilst distracted. Thirdly, there was (3) sleight of hand where a couple took a £5000 piece of jewellery when the staff were distracted. Next up we had (4) pickpocketing in the west end and lastly we had (5) hugger mugging. You’re probably wondering why I have numbered these incidents, well here’s the reason (1) eastern europeans, (2) eastern europeans, (3) eastern europeans/ gypsies, (4) eastern europeans and lastly (5) eastern europeans. I suspect that all these crimes were the work of gypsies but I could only be sure of the third because of their dress. The police unhelpfully suggested that the jewellery thieves were eastern european (which is very vague) when it was obvious they were gypsies. We we also told the illegal gamers were eastern european but in the other cases we were not told. Is this what Milliband meant when he talked about the benefits of immigration?
Why Peter Hitchens is not a BBC-NUJ favourite;
and the severe limitations of Labour’s Chris Bryant’s skills.
(3 min video clip)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18550455
Shame they missed out the part where Hitchens accuses Bryant of cynically trying to win back the votes of people they secretely despise.
Phew, I need to take a nap after reading that! You covered everything. Excellent piece, forwarding it on to all my Guardian reading, intelligent, but sadly, grossly misguided friends..
Interestingly, a few of them are now saying things that ten years ago they excoriated me for coming out with…
“All over Europe, immigration is moving in from the political fringes”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“Immigration, from being the great unmentionable of British politics, is turning into the issue that dominates the political agenda. ”
By Alasdair Palmer.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9350672/All-over-Europe-immigration-is-moving-in-from-the-political-fringes.html
If the rightwing/nationalists got their act together and stopped being so extreme and got charsmatic leadership they would take over this country.
Milibaaandzzzzzzz….immigration speech in full….zzzzzzzzzz… http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2012/06/22/ed-miliband-s-immigration-speech-in-full ..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
“We should survey employers and where there are more than 25 percent migrant workers – double the average share in the population – Jobcentre Plus should be notified.”
Huh?!?! Exactly, there’s nowhere near 25 percent migrant workers in the UK population (YET!!) but sickening do-gooder Miliband completely disproportionately thinks all our employers work forces can be up to a whole quarter foreign though!!
“Ed is only sorry immigrants lost him votes.”
(by Peter Hitchens,’ Mail on Sunday’):-
“I don’t need Edward Miliband to tell me that I’m not a bigot. I knew already.
But for daring – over many years – to oppose mass immigration into this country, I and many others were smeared in this way by Labour sympathisers.
If Mr Miliband now admits that was wrong, what is he going to do about it? Will he and his comrades, deep down, now recognise that we were right? If there are now too many foreign migrants in this country, which is the clear implication of his speech, there isn’t actually anything he can do about it.
The transformation of this country was deliberately sought by New Labour, as we know from the blurted revelations of former party speechwriter Andrew Neather. It’s happened. But Mr Miliband’s private polls tell him the policy is unpopular.
So he makes a speech claiming to have changed his mind.Has he really? I don’t think so. New Labour’s upper crust is made up of rich, snobbish London bohemians, who love the way that mass immigration has provided them with cheap servants and cheap restaurants.
They also despise the older Britain that the rest of us rather liked living in, and want to erase all trace of it.
Now they want to have it both ways – to keep the votes of the maltreated masses, while secretly despising their opinions. The Useless Tories, I might add, are exactly the same. Expect no good news from them.”
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
Only the gentlest of probing sees Miliband and his like pull back from their mea culpa.
‘So, what you are saying is that Labour let too many people in to the country?’ No I’m not saying that,’ seems to be the harmonised refrain from Miliband and, in so many words, from slippery Bliar on Marr this morning. Blair who also incidentally only talks about the 20% immigration from the EU and is silent on the rest.
Actually, I’m no longer sure what Labour are saying, but whatever confessions they are making are very narrow and very carefully constructed, and quite insincere.
I remember a silly playground game in which our rules were; that a lie was never a lie if you said it with your fingers crossed. It seems that Miliband and co have spent the last week with all of their fingers and toes crossed.
Too right. Milibore’s immigration speech was a total joke. Just a wet waffling, pathetically pussy footing, leftie limp joke. As usual he mostly repeated tons of his same old same old coma inducing utter crap on immigration (MY dad was an immigrant too, Ed, from southern Ireland, so fuckin what?!..Little UK’s rather fuller now!) and made something seem ridiculously complex that to the vast majority of us straight talking Brit’s in the real world simply isn’t complex at all. Enough’s enough!…Simples! Straight talking ordinary common sense, nothing complex about it at all. If someone in Africa or Asia (strangely places that Ed’s multi culti mental brain conveniently ignored immigrants still pouring in from) stupidly has 10 kids then that’s their fuckin problem to cope with! If some stupid religion doesn’t allow contraception.. again, THEIR fuckin problem! Our towns, cities, infrastructure and everything’s stuffed and we happen to treasure our precious parklands, farmlands and wildlife rich lush rolling countryside here, thanks! Britain may cope with going back to a reasonable few tens of thousands of immigrants per year, but NO chance the presently still absolutely ludicrous hundreds of thousands though! Crazy!! Mega deluded Milibore (happy for ALL UK work forces to be “25 percent” foreign!) continues treating the British people as just easily hoodwinked complete and utter fools. Just like the clown’s beloved Al-Beeb does.
Just had a wee thought.
It’s fun to go on holiday and experience someone else’s culture. It’s easy to fall in love with the differences and think , ‘wouldn’t it be better if we were more like xxxxx.’
The difference can be exiting and intoxicating.
The problem is , you bring back the Ouzo, the Tuareg carpet , or the carved elephant and you realise they are all a bit crap and in the end you prefer your own home and life.
Labour has tried to bring their holidays with them.
How culturally diverse it will be
How colourful
How interesting
How grateful the immigrants will be
How enriching will it be
Like some awe struck backpackers they have brought back their saris and there Arab scarves but along with them they have imported their culture.
Where is home now?
Where is our culture?
Like we did to the mauri and the aboriginal, we have been brushed aside and we are now a cultural curiosity in our own land.
The weird thing here. Is our own people did this.this wasn’t at the point of a gun but for some trendy lefty theory.
It’s sad, we can’t turn back the clock, but I will always hate labour for it.
So will I. I’m no defeatist though. By hook or by crook, mark my words, Britain WILL BE STAYING BRITAIN…AND BRITISH!! I’m in an ordinary British town and feel the anger growing all the time and guarantee that we’ll only be pushed so far. Fuck vuvuzelas!!
I had a good friend who listened to too much Cafe Bleu stuff in the early/mid 80s.
Style Council?…themes for great cities on the walkman…Gitanes smoked as he rear Correo del sport or whatever it was…he`d read it with a brioche on his plate as he posed round Covent Garden or wherever…the European canon is here and all that.
I`m afraid too many people confused the EFTA notion with giving up our status as a self-determining nation. As if Roy Jenkins and Ted Heath were the future.
Hence our pickle today-Europe is a great place for a holiday, but we`re the offshore island and will never be run from the Continent.
Despite the BBC and its Mandelson, Heseltine fixations…and it`s easier to kill the BBC and let the wrong-headad traitors or fools die off naturally.
Stripping them all of the EU funding and pensions would begin to cause them to think properly and stop supping with Streicher and Suleyman-that IslamoNazi pact has GOT to be strangled as soon as possible.
“Historian David Starkey branded a ‘racist’ and a ‘bigot’ after saying Rochdale sex gang had values ‘entrenched in foothills of the Punjab'”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2163918/Historian-David-Starkey-branded-racist-bigot-saying-Rochdale-sex-gang-values-entrenched-foothills-Punjab.html#ixzz1ykVPyPHF
“The ‘anti-white-skin privilege’ campaign that was started last year by the mayor and the municipal government of Duluth, Minnesota (see our discussions about it) has now been adopted by the University of Minnesota-Duluth, and it is more insidious than ever. The formal claim of the campaign, promoted through video ads, is that whites enjoy unfair white skin privilege, because this society was set up by and for the benefit of whites. But what the campaign is really saying is that whites are racist—i.e., whites are repulsively morally wicked—simply and purely by virtue of being white, because of the unfair privileges that whiteness carries with it.
“However, on an even deeper though unconscious level, what this quintessentially white liberal, anti-white campaign is saying is that whites really are superior—inherently superior—to other races, particularly to blacks, in intelligence, in looks, in the fineness of their vibrations, in every way; and since any inequality is unfair, it is unfair to be white. Therefore whites must in perpetuity impose unearned withering moral censure and material disadvantages on themselves, while granting unearned effusive moral approval and material advantages on nonwhites, particularly blacks, in an endless but never successful effort to overcome the hideous unfairness of being white. ”
-See Lawrence Auster’s blog: ‘A View from the Right’ for more.
The society we have today is because of white european jewish/christian civilisation. The left/cultural marxists have nothing to offer but decay and then destruction.
We the moral silent majority will be beat the left because we have god on our side.
Is Blair to be Labour’s next Open Door Mass Immigration Minister?
“Tony Blair: I don’t regret opening UK borders to European immigrants.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9352335/Tony-Blair-I-dont-regret-opening-UK-borders-to-European-immigrants.html
I wouldn’t “regret” one iota seeing immigration mad Bliar, Brownshite, Milibore and Ballsup all put exactly where they way more than deservedly should be, IN PRISON CELLS!!..for so incredibly traitorously using their powers to completely undemocratically inflict absolutely disasterous massive social engineering on the British public.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-1250096/Using-immigration-turn-Britain-nation-Labour-voters-shameful-I-hardly-believe-it.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html
And I meant prison for the bastards FOR LIFE!!!