“We are stronger together as a United Kingdom and that essential strength comes from our ability to EMBRACE MULTIPLE IDENTITIES. The nationalist case, wherever we find it, is based on the fallacy that one identity necessarily erodes another.
I believe we can all be proud of our country, the United Kingdom. And of the nations that comprise it… THAT MEANS ENGLAND TOO. And those on the left have not been clear enough about this in the recent past. We must be in the future. We should embrace a positive, OUTWARD LOOKING version of English identity.
I know what I am proud of… I am proud to be Jewish… To me, BRITAIN IS A COUNTRY WHERE IT IS ALWAYS POSSIBLE TO HAVE MORE THAN ONE IDENTITY… This is the reality of modern day Britain…
Throughout our history we’ve been improved by each other… And it’s not just about the present. It’s about the future too…
For too long people (LibLab politicians and the PC Crowd) have believed that to express English identity is to undermine the United Kingdom. This does not make sense. You can be proudly Scottish and British. And you can be proudly English and British.
We (LibLab politicians and the PC Crowd) have been too nervous to talk of English pride and English character. For some it was connected to the kind of nationalism that left us (LibLab politicians and the PC Crowd) ill at ease.
In the 1970s and 1980s, the Union flag was reclaimed from the National Front. Since Euro 96, English football fans have helped to reclaim the flag of St George from the BNP… (The NF and the BNP are still flagwaving, Dave)
Political leaders should be cautious about simplifying our national qualities… The essence of English identity is not found with the grandeur of public office or in Westminster and Whitehall. But in the courageous communities across our land… From those who campaigned for universal suffrage, for equality and for GAY RIGHTS…
We know that the greatest of our institutions save us from the worst of the market. Protecting us from the continual calculation of pounds and pence... (LibLabCon and the banks did no such thing. They led us up the garden path to disaster!)
A BETTER TOMORROW will be built on the solid foundations of our past. (The past’s foundations were, indeed, solid. These have been undermined and destroyed by mass immigration, social engineering and political correctness a la Miliband)…
Our commitments don’t stop at our borders. Britain is at its best when it looks out to the world… People outside our country… see… A PROGRESSIVE PATRIOTISM. CELEBRATING OUR DIFFERENCES… Remembering our history but BUILDING A SHARED FUTURE.” A shared future. With every last immigrant Miliband who wants to come. To rise within one generation to beome leader of the Labour Party and, possibly, leader of the country. Something that the rest of haven’t managed to accomplish in the whole of our island history.
This man was forced upon the British people, as was his brother, David. Neither are particularly distinguished or capable. But they were the proteges of the most Jew-friendly Prime Ministers ever. Dave was Blair’s boy, Ed was Brown’s. They were also the sons of immigrants. In other words, they fit the destructive PC, take-the-p***-out-of-the-English model perfectly.
During the course of his speech, Miliband said this of his origins:
“Neither my Mum nor my Dad came from Britain… They arrived here as refugees from the Nazis. My Dad was 16 when he caught one of the last boats from Ostend to Britain. He was a Jew… This is who I am. The son of a Jewish refugee and Marxist academic…His father, then, was ‘a Jewish refugee and Marxist academic,’ who ‘talked about the spirit of the Blitz,’ ‘was very suspicious of narrow nationalism… an avowed internationalist.’
My father, as so many parents did, talked about the spirit of the Blitz…
Let me end with this thought. What you might call the paradox of patriotism, growing up in the household I did. At one level, although he would never have described himself as such my dad was a great patriot… He loved Britain for the home it had enabled him to build here… At another level, he was very suspicious of narrow nationalism… An avowed internationalist.”
So, he wouldn’t have been too keen on the England that he found here in 1940. You know, the one that gave him and his father sanctuary? Homogeneous, nationalistic, happy in its own skin?
Think I’m being judgemental here? This from Raplh (Adolphe) Miliband’s own 1940 diary:
"The Englishman is a rabid nationalist... They are perhaps the most nationalist people in the world... When you hear the English talk of this war YOU SOMETIMES ALMOST WANT THEM TO LOSE IT to show them how things are."Makes you wonder what he really thought when the Blitz was on, doesn’t it?
On 28 February 2004, The Guardian reported thus:
"Driving around the capital with other labourers... Ralph acquired a sense of England and its underlying structures: 'We found out about middle-class meanness and snobbery'...Looks like the Milibands' dad wasn't up to doing any labouring himself, doesn't it? Oh no, young Adolphe was going to do all the thinking for us instead!
One boiling afternoon during his first summer in London, he went to Highgate cemetery, found Karl Marx's grave and, standing with his fist clenched, swore 'my own private oath that I would be faithful to the workers' cause'. Not that he intended to remain a worker himself: he found clearing bombsites 'an arduous business' and felt a distance from his fellow labourers... He wanted to be an 'intellectual'."
Ralph Miliband went on to become one of the most influential lecturers of the second half of the twentieth century, pumping Marxist philosophy into the hearts and minds of the Blair, Brown, Straw, Harman and Mandelson type for more than thirty years.
At one point in his speech, Ed said this:
“As George Orwell wrote in the Lion and the Unicorn: ‘Are we not forty-six million individuals, all different?... How can one make pattern out of this’?”Not one homogeneous whole then, according to the wannabe PM. Bit of a multi-somethingorother mish-mash waiting to be shaped by the likes of a Ralph, Dave or Ed, perhaps.
He wrote with affection of the ‘gentle-mannered, undemonstrative, law-abiding English’ and said that foreigners were amazed by our ‘gentleness… by the orderly behaviour of English crowds, the lack of pushing and quarrelling’. He also said that there was ‘very little crime or violence.’
Despite the war, that’s how our world was in 1944.
Here’s something else you’ll never hear in a Miliband speech:
“What has kept England on its feet during the past year?… Chiefly the atavistic emotion of patriotism, the ingrained feeling of the English-speaking peoples that they are superior to foreigners.” (‘Wells, Hitler and the World State,’ August 1941)Those Orwell directed the next paragraph at were the Milibands’ direct intellectual ancestors:
“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.”Orwell wrote the above in the same year he wrote The Lion and the Unicorn.
Miliband also said this in his speech:
“I am one of only quarter of a million Jews in Britain.”Which makes him a tad unrepresentative of the remaining 62,938,000 in my book.
That such such atypical types as he and his brother got to be the only candidates in with a serious chance of election to the leadership of the Labour Party in 2010 is no mystery. The patronage of Blair, Brown, the Unions and the Jewish lobby saw them slither to the very top of the greasy pole with the minimum of fuss.
Let’s do the math and see just how unrepresentative the Milibands really are. Demographically speaking, it was something in the region of a 63,182,000/250,000-to-1 chance that a Jew should come top of Labour’s electoral leadership poll. It was a precisely similar chance that another Jew should come second. Thus, the chance that two Jews (brothers no less) should occupy the top two spots were 63,182,000/250,000 x 63,182,000/250,000, or a 63,871 chance!
The enormous improbability of this statistic arising from an ‘equal’ and ‘inclusive’ (LibLab buzz words) application of the demographics should give you some idea how the Jews and their allies have managed to stitch-kipper the British over the course of the last seventy years.
We made mistakes on welfare, admits Ed Miliband
Ed Miliband: We made mistakes on the economy
"We made mistakes on immigration, on bank regulation and other things."
Don't you find it interesting that our former Foreign Secretary felt politically secure enough to parade his own far-left sympathies so ostentatiously? I mean, he chose to eulogise, on BBC Radio 4 no less, a man who was both a terrorist and a Communist!
At one point, Matthew Parris, the presenter of 'Great Lives,' asked Miliband whether there were any circumstances in which terrorism was justified. This was his reply:
"YES, THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH IT IS JUSTIFIABLE, AND YES, THERE ARE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH IT IS EFFECTIVE."Anyone out who always votes the way their dad did going to vote the same way next time round?
No comments:
Post a Comment