No other blog can do this š
There is a one minute cut in the middle. This may have been an accident, but it excludes the bit where I say that the Labour Party in Dundee was telling people not to vote Independence or the SNP would let all the black people in. If this was cut deliberately as it repeats a racist comment, I think that is a mistake. To fight racism you need to face it squarely, and the extreme shame of Labour should be exposed as widely in possible.
Playing catch up.
Mary.
I had a look at your videos, oh dear, man’s inhumanity to man.(Rabbie Burns).
Missing aircraft.
Could have landed on the RAF island of Gaan in the Indian Ocean.
Who was on the plane?, is a question I always ask myself when a plane comes down/disappears.
I see the Scotch is flowing again.
I see a new big wig in the Civil Service is allowed to keep his job with the with Miller brewery. Nice if you can get away with it. Imagine a SNP politician trying that one. Every media outlet would be crying blue murder!
@ Daniel
@ Daniel
What genocide by whom against whom are you talking about and when did it begin?
You talking to me?
If so, my point was surely clear enough.
Mass immigration of mainly young philoprogenetive young adults of an alien race and culture combined with national policies that suppress the fertility of the indigenous population constitutes genocide.
Such is the genocidal policy of the EU and therefore of the mainstream British political parties including the SNP. Only UKIP is opposed.
In Britain this genocidal process is ongoing with the result that the English are a fast declining minority in England’s major urban centers including London, Leicester, and Luton, where the English are already a minority in their own home towns.
“What do you mean by racial assimilation? Are you talking about forced interbreeding by artificial insemenation? Presumably not. So what, actually, do you mean, if I may be so imsolent as to ask while you continue poking that revolver to the side of my head.”
C’mon. You know exactly what I’m talking about. Are you concerned about immigrants changing the face of culture, or diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breeding?
@ Ben
Cāmon. You know exactly what Iām talking about. Are you concerned about immigrants changing the face of culture, or diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breeding?
I certainly don’t know exactly what you are talking about when you speak in only the vaguest terms.
As to the specific question you have now framed:
“Are you concerned about immigrants changing the face of culture, or diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breeding?”
Well obviously those are the reasons people oppose genocide.
If someone were to impose a political regime that meant the wiping out of your culture, whatever that may be, and wiping out your gene pool, whatever that may be, would you not call that regime genocidal? Would you not be concerned?
To ask those questions clearly is surely to answer them. Which is presumably why there is no answer to my repeated question:
What is racist about saying “the SNP would let the black people in”? The only obnoxious thing about it is surely that it singles out black people rather than listing all the alien religions, colors and creeds that are to be admitted in a process that will eliminate the native race and culture and produce a society like that of the United States, Canada and Australia: a racial melting pot, and a culture consisting of various by-products of the commercial system plus a heavy dose of political correctness enforced by the police and legal system, and propagated by state-controlled educational institutions.
“Isnāt mass immigration what CMās supporters believe in?”
It isn’t what I would want. I really believe in no borders (not the No campaign which did not) but for me people should be allowed to travel wherever they wished and live wherever they wished. We’re all human beings whatever our ethnicity. We can all breed with one another. We are not a different species though listening to the Tory front bench you would think we were.
You talking to me?
If so, my point was surely clear enough.
Mass immigration of mainly young philoprogenetive young adults of an alien race and culture combined with national policies that suppress the fertility of the indigenous population constitutes genocide.
Such is the genocidal policy of the EU and therefore of the mainstream British political parties including the SNP. Only UKIP is opposed.
In Britain this genocidal process is ongoing with the result that the English are a fast declining minority in Englandās major urban centers including London, Leicester, and Luton, where the English are already a minority in their own home towns.
Almost from the outset I grasped that your “analysis” of events are predicated on your irrational belief system. That was made clear to me by your support for the unfounded pseudo-scientific based theories of medieval Anglican believers of the supernatural, Pack and Malthus. My suspicions of your motives are reinforced by as a result of the psychobabble nonsense above.
What are the national policies that “suppress the fertility of the indigenous population” are you referring to?
Secondly, please outline the specific definition of genocide which claims to constitute this absurd interpretation of genocide.
Thanks.
“I do however believe everyone on board is dead.”
So do I RoS. Dead people tell no tales. Which suggests that whatever happened and whoever is responsible is not for public consumption.
@Daniel
Almost from the outset I grasped that your āanalysisā of events are predicated on your irrational belief system.
Oh thanks. But what you’re saying is really about the same as my saying that from the outset I realized you were an arsehole and therefore everything you say is obviously crap.
That was made clear to me by your support for the unfounded pseudo-scientific based theories of medieval Anglican believers of the supernatural, Pack and Malthus.
There’s nothing pseudoscientific about the theory of evolution which was inspired in large part by Darwin’s reading of Malthus. Nothing supernatural or mediaeval about it either.
But who the Heck is Pack?
My suspicions of your motives are reinforced by as a result of the psychobabble nonsense above.
Try not to pad out your argument with irrelevant abuse.
What are the national policies that āsuppress the fertility of the indigenous populationā are you referring to?
Sorry, I don’t have time to explain the facts of life to you, but just take note of the differential fertility of indigenous English women and immigrant women, Bangladeshis for example who have more children in England than in seemingly overpopulated Bangladesh. In particular, note that the indigenous population of England, like that of all European states, is below the replacement rate, yet the population of England is exploding as the result of immigration. It only takes minimal numeracy to see that the result is population replacement.
Secondly, please outline the specific definition of genocide which claims to constitute this absurd interpretation of genocide.
Oh, look it up yourself. I’ve quoted it often enough here already. The definition I use is that of Raphael Lemkin the Polish Jewish legal scholar who coined the term as a result of his personal interest in the Armenian genocide.
@Daniel
Almost from the outset I grasped that your āanalysisā of events are predicated on your irrational belief system.
Oh thanks. But what youāre saying is really about the same as my saying that from the outset I realized you were an arsehole and therefore everything you say is obviously crap.
That was made clear to me by your support for the unfounded pseudo-scientific based theories of medieval Anglican believers of the supernatural, Pack and Malthus.
Thereās nothing pseudoscientific about the theory of evolution which was inspired in large part by Darwinās reading of Malthus. Nothing supernatural or mediaeval about it either.
But who the Heck is Pack?
My suspicions of your motives are reinforced by as a result of the psychobabble nonsense above.
Try not to pad out your argument with irrelevant abuse.
What are the national policies that āsuppress the fertility of the indigenous populationā are you referring to?
Sorry, I donāt have time to explain the facts of life to you, but just take note of the differential fertility of indigenous English women and immigrant women, Bangladeshis for example who have more children in England than in seemingly overpopulated Bangladesh. In particular, note that the indigenous population of England, like that of all European states, is below the replacement rate, yet the population of England is exploding as the result of immigration. It only takes minimal numeracy to see that the result is population replacement.
Secondly, please outline the specific definition of genocide which claims to constitute this absurd interpretation of genocide.
Oh, look it up yourself. Iāve quoted it often enough here already. The definition I use is that of Raphael Lemkin the Polish Jewish legal scholar who coined the term as a result of his personal interest in the Armenian genocide.
Your inference that demographic shifts and low birth rates constitute genocide are absolutely laughable.
“Well obviously those are the reasons people oppose genocide.”
No. Genocide is the term for eradicating a people with direct purpose against their will. and I don’t mean the political will opposing immigrants.
Now if you think you were forced into a marriage which produces hybrid offspring against your will, that sounds like a personal problem.
@JG
I really believe in no borders (not the No campaign which did not) but for me people should be allowed to travel wherever they wished and live wherever they wished.
The thing is John, most Brits to not share your belief. SO Should their wish prevail or must they be forced to accept “immigrants changing the face of [their] culture, [and] diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breeding” to use Ben’s terminology?
Weāre all human beings whatever our ethnicity. We can all breed with one another.
Absolutely. And there might be less of a problem if we could not all breed with one another. Then there would be no loss of diversity, so loved by all and sundry, when different peoples mixed.
We are not a different species
No, that follows logically from the fact that we can “all breed with one another” (at least if the combination of sexes is correct) ā the ability to interbreed provides the operational definition of a species.
@ Ben
Genocide is the term for eradicating a people with direct purpose against their will.
The term genocide was coined by Raphael Lemkin, and I use it as he defined it. There is nothing in his definition that requires that genocide be against the will of those upon whom the crime is committed.
Obviously you would not deny the Holocaust was genocide if the Germans has managed to hypnotize the Jews into entering gas chambers voluntarily.
You’re good at playing with words, Ben, but you, like everyone else here, has failed miserably to answer my initial questions:
(1) What’s racist about saying “the SNP will let the blacks in”?
(2) Is not the statement that “the SNP will let the blacks in” not true, if only partially since it fails to mention the Reds and Whites and Yellows that the SNP, like Labour, will also let in.
“Obviously you would not deny the Holocaust was genocide if the Germans has managed to hypnotize the Jews into entering gas chambers voluntarily.”
You can’t be hypnotized into doing something against your moral code, but your severely restrictive context fails all tests. Until the final Solution, Nazis weren’t sure just what to do with the Jews. But before that point in time, they had already begun rounding them up into cattle herds, against their will.
Sorry, but your earnest attempts to conflate immigrants gone wild with genocide against an indigenous people falls flat.
I have not actually met a yes voting monarchist. They may exist, but I have not met one. In George Square my “no monarchy” got the biggest cheer of the day. It enthuses people.
Your inference that demographic shifts and low birth rates constitute genocide are absolutely laughable.
” Whatās racist about saying āthe SNP will let the blacks inā? ”
Possibly nothing but the Labour party might regard the claim as being defamatory.
“I have not actually met a yes voting monarchist. They may exist, but I have not met one. In George Square my āno monarchyā got the biggest cheer of the day. It enthuses people.”
From my experience, inviting people to lop off their heads, normally gets the biggest cheer of the day.
Daniel,
thank you I will try that.
Let me echo Craig’s comment and add to it. No monarchy and no upper house. Let’s get rid of all the hangers on in one fell swoop. I know getting rid of the House of Lords would not affect an independent Scotland. But it would be good for those of us south of the border.
Canspeccy at 7.55 pm. Just re-read your comment. On the one hand you are agreeing that humans are one species. On the other, and this is where your racism slips in, you are suggesting it might be better if people from different ethnicities could not interbreed. Well let me tell you again that we can interbreed. That is one of the virtues that separates the interbreeders from the inbreeders: Royal families, other families, races that think they are superior and snub-nosed dogs that cannot breathe properly.
@ Ben
You canāt be hypnotized into doing something against your moral code
That’s arguable. What if they were persuaded under hypnosis that Zyklon B was a rejuvenating agent?
But in any case, you can substitute for hypnosis propaganda and brainwashing. The logic’s the same. The will of those genocided has nothing to do with whether or not they have indeed been genocided.
In today’s world, propaganda, advertising, Hollywood, the BBC, the MSM, and state-controlled education undoubtedly have the power to persuade many people that their culture and “gene pool,” as you refer to the racial component of a nation, should be extinguished. John Goss seems to be of that opinion. But if he were English and if the English as a racial and cultural entity were extinguished, it would still be genocide, despite John’s personal preference.
But I am sorry that the term genocide as originally coined by Raphael Lemkin logically applies to extinction of a nation by repression of indigenous reproduction and mass immigration. And the confirmation of that is that both you and Daniel are now reduced to the childish strategem of saying, in effect, āNo tisn’tā.
Cheers, gotta go.
CS
“The problem with Scotland, is that it’s full of Scots”
-Longshanks
But before I go, John, you need not lecture me on the biology of reproduction or the definition of a race or a species. I graduated in biology with first class honors and the faculty prize and have kept pretty well since then. It is you, I think, who might benefit by trying to think things through. It would be interesting also if you answer my question:
Most Brits (ca 70%) do not share your belief in an open border to mass immigration. So hereās the question: Should the wish of the majority prevail, or must they be forced to accept āimmigrants changing the face of [their] culture, [and] diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breedingā to use Benās terminology?
“My God. It’s full of stars”
=Dave Bowman.
“I graduated in biology with first class honors and the faculty prize….”
An advocate of the Pinker school of bullshit thought, no doubt. For somebody who claims to have a first class honours is somewhat of a stretch considering you inferred that demographic shifts and relatively low comparative birth rates constitute genocide.
“Most Brits (ca 70%) do not share your belief in an open border to mass immigration. So hereās the question: Should the wish of the majority prevail, or must they be forced to accept āimmigrants changing the face of [their] culture, [and] diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breedingā to use Benās terminology?
The majority are arguably in favour of capital punishment. Does that mean the government should introduce it? The question doesn’t correlate with the assumption underlying the hypothesis which is full of vague, subjective and contested terms. For instance, what evidence do you have that high rates of immigration changes British culture? What do you mean by British culture?
The UK Palestine vote did rattle some cages:
Simon Cobbs, a founder of the grassroots Sussex Friends of Israelā¦ insisted that the vote illustrated how pro-Israel “hasbara” organizations needed to rethink their strategy.
“Mondays vote in Parliament was a very sad day for Israel and UK Jewry,” he said.
“You can dress the loss up in many ways: itās a non-binding resolution, it will make little or no difference to Government policy, less than half of the MPs showed up…
“[But] the bottom line is that in the UK parliament on Monday evening Israel, and, by extension, UK Jewry, got a hammering and that is simply not acceptable.”
“It wasnāt even the margin of victory the anti-Israel MPs achieved on Monday, but the hate-filled rhetoric that came out of their mouths for hour upon hour.” [hate-filled rhetoric?]
“The lack of pro-Israel voices was unacceptable. Those that did speak were eloquent and passionate, but their speeches fell on deaf ears.”
“The anti-Israel side played the āpolitic gameā far better than us and we need to learn from this and quickly.”
“For too long we have tried, as a community, to do something that evidently just isnāt working.”
“Anti-Zionism is on every street and every campus. Anti-Semitism is at its highest level since the 1940ās.”
Plenty more crap at:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/186166#.VD2ADZt0xLM
CanSpeccy
14 Oct, 2014 – 4:34 pm
āYouāre just pushing the Neo-Soviet line that anyone who opposes genocide whether with machine guns or by mass immigration and suppressed native reproduction, is a racist.ā
CanSpeccy you are a nut-case.
CanSpeccy
14 Oct, 2014 – 5:35 pm
āThis neurological feature is associated with great superiority in the ability to navigate the bushā¦ā
____________________________________________
When did you last navigate a bush CanSpeccy?
CanSpeccy
14 Oct, 2014 – 6:59 pm
āYou make it sound like an interrogation by the Chekka.ā
______________________________________________
What or who are the Chekka CanSpeccy? Forgive my ignorance.
“Most Brits (ca 70%) do not share your belief in an open border to mass immigration. So hereās the question: Should the wish of the majority prevail, or must they be forced to accept āimmigrants changing the face of [their] culture, [and] diluting the gene pool by assimilation through inter-breedingā to use Benās terminology?”
If we had no borders it would not be the opinion of a brainwashed majority of the UK (if your figures are right) so much as that of hopefully a free world. I have travelled. One of the advantages of being older is that I can remember what travel was like before Europe became integrated. Every border had its own customs posts both sides of the border. When in 2000 I cycled through five countries without border posts including England, though there were stilted watchtowers near the borders of Austria and Slovakia telling of former days. It was only when I got to Romania that I had to pass through customs.
The red-necked phalarope, as I may have mentioned before, flies from the Shetlands, to Northern Ireland, Iceland, Greenland, Canada, the USA, the Caribbean and Peru (8000 miles) then back again to the Shetlands without ever passing through customs. Oh, the joys of freedom. It does not work out strategies to kill its fellow phalaropes and steal from them. Let’s open our borders Canspeccy and fly free as the birds.