Some seem to be saying that Britain's is full!

On 30 October 2011, the David Blunkett article, 'This fear of foreigners is behind modern-day slavery' appeared in The Observer:

This, in part, is it:

"WE ARE MOVING INTO AN ERA WHEN IT IS ALMOST FASHIONABLE ON THE LEFT TO BE XENOPHOBIC. We are in danger of moving from one extreme to another. The pendulum is swinging too far. You can't outdo the Conservatives in relation to immigration… To talk as though ANY INFLUX FROM ABROAD IS BOTH DANGEROUS POLITICALLY AND UNWISE SOCIALLY… SOME PEOPLE SEEM TO BE SAYING THAT BRITAIN IS FULL.

The government's policy is frankly bonkers. It seeks to reduce net migration below 100,000 by 2015!"

NET migration is the product of immigrants IN and, for the most part, Brits OUT.

So, as 371,000 of us ethnically cleansed ourselves from our own ancient stamping grounds two years ago and 336,000 left last year, what our former Home Secretary is actually saying is this: 'reducing inward immigration of the alien hordes to below 450,000 is 'frankly bonkers'!' Blunkett continues:

"I understand perfectly well the arguments about the reaction of those whose jobs are threatened, for whom the global meltdown has created insecurity and downright fear of change."

Oh, we know you understand it, Dave. But we also know that you don’t give a flying f*** what happens to any of the insecure folks who happen to be native Britons.

"But the idea that ‘getting tough’ on anyone seeking to enter Britain is the answer is a message of despair."

‘Despair’ is right. We’re desperate for those we vote for to do what we want for a change and ‘get tough’ on the invaders.

"Let us be clear. When we had a substantial increase in work permits… PEOPLE WERE WELCOMED INTO THE COUNTRY LEGITIMATELY, LEGALLY AND OPENLY… And if anyone has any doubts about this balance between those here legally and those surviving clandestinely they only need to look at the statistics back in May 2004. New European citizens entering from the A8 countries, who were entitled to be here, were now empowered to register to work, and 40% OF THEM EMERGED FROM THE SHADOWS. Yes, 40% DID NOT FLOOD’ INTO THE COUNTRY BUT WERE HERE ALREADY."

Yep. Always remember, folks, that when THEY publish ’official statistics’ insisting that that foreigners make up such and such an unworrying percentage of the population, in reality, there are a hell of a lot more of them here than the Blunketts will ever admit to.

"So by all means let's hear and respond to the cries for help of people whose livelihoods are threatened and whose way of life seems to be undermined by both change and the emergence of difference in lifestyle, in language and, yes, in faith. But ABOVE ALL, LET'S COMBAT THIS FEAR OF FOREIGNERS’ AND THE UNDOUBTED XENOPHOBIA THAT ACCOMPANIES IT."

'Above all,' we must keep on putting the foreigner first! Just as, since Labour came to power in 1964, those who occupy the corridors of power always have. Just as the 'left-wing intellectuals’ have since the time of the Russian Revolution, when they never had a bad word to say about the genocidal behaviours of Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Zinoviev, Sverdlov, Kaganovitch, Sokolnikov, Radek, Uritsky, Kamenev and co.

In August 1941, George Orwell wrote this:

"What has kept England on its feet during the past year? In part, no doubt, some vague idea about a better future, but chiefly the atavistic emotion of patriotism, the ingrained feeling of the English-speaking peoples that they are superior to foreigners. FOR THE LAST TWENTY YEARS THE MAIN OBJECT OF ENGLISH LEFT-WING INTELLECTUALS HAS BEEN TO BREAK THIS FEELING DOWN, and if they had succeeded, we might be watching the SS men patrolling the London streets at this moment."

According to Orwell, then, the liberal intelligentsia began doing what they do in 1921. In that year, Israel Zangwill, a member of the Fabian Society (spiritual home of Orwell's 'left-wing intellectuals'), published the book, 'The Voice of Jerusalem.' In this, he wrote:

"Men form one universal brotherhood… their individual lives, their nations and races, INTERBREED AND BLEND and go on to merge again at last in one common human… This conclusion was, in fact, THE STARTING-POINT OF HEBREW LITERATURE… The co-existence of this covenant of co-operation, THIS NEW WORLD ORDER, would… reduce racial frictions to a minimum by THE WORLD-POLICY OF THE OPEN DOOR… In particular, BOUNDARY QUESTIONS COULD BE DENUDED OF THEIR SIGNIFICANCE…

BOLSHEVISM MAY BE GOOD or bad, but the United States of Russia would be in greater congruity with World-Peace than a swarm of conflicting nationalities; and IF THE BOLSHEVISTS CAN SUCCEED IN RE-UNITING THEM, THEY WILL TO THAT EXTENT BE PROMOTING THE LARGER AND TRUER IDEAL."

'One universal brotherhood,' 'interbreed and blend,' 'New World Order,' 'world-policy of the open door,' 'boundary questions denuded of their significance,' 'Bolshevism may be good,' 'United States of Russia.' Bit of an old blueprint for today's global and intellectual elite there, don't you think? That's what they've been after, according to Orwell, since 1921, when the ’interbreed and blend’ fellow’s book was published.

In 1908, Zangwill created a storm in America. He was the author of the most popular play of that year. It was called 'The Melting Pot.' The plot of the play did not contradict its title.

Apart from Israel Zangwill’s literary output, he founded the Jewish Territorial Organisation and was one the leading Zionists of his time.

Of the Russian Revolutionary leaders mentioned above, Trotsky, Zinoviev, Sverdlov, Kaganovitch, Sokolnikov, Radek and Uritsky were as Jewish as Zangwill. Kamenev’s father was a Jew and Lenin’s grandfather was Jewish also. Stalin was a Georgian Asiatic.

1921 was, coincidentally, the year the Council on Foreign Relations, just about the leading advocate of the globalist, elite-driven New World Order, was founded in the USA.

'Above all,' according to Blunkett, we must put the foreigner before 'the cries for help of people whose livelihoods are threatened and whose way of life seems to be undermined by both change and the emergence of difference in lifestyle, in language and… faith.'

Of course, some of us have known for a long time now whose side Blunkett was on. His intentions have been as clear as crystal since the Home Secretary of the time responded thus to criticism of New Labour’s open-door immigration policy in a BBC interview on 13 November 2003:

"It is a crowded island, we’ve always been a crowded, vigorous island… A NET INCREASE OF 200,000 PEOPLE PER YEAR IS PERMANENTLY SUSTAINABLE."

David Blunkett: a name that should appear high up on the first page of your little, black book of traitors to remember.