Tweedledumb, Tweedledumber and Tweedledumbest

Time for a little 'Spot the Difference' competition.

The following is the English Democrats' policy on immigration, copied from their own web site.

"We support a points system for entry to the UK which is based on the Canadian and Australian model.

"Points should be awarded for, among other things: educational and professional qualification; family links with England; financial resources; the ability to speak English. In other words, entry should be determined by our needs as a society and the ability of newcomers to be absorbed into the prevailing public culture."

Note the implicit assumption that our society needs immigration, and that we cannot cope without it.  And this at a time when millions of our own people are without a job, or a home of their own.  The English Democrats appear to believe, without explicitly stating it, that immigration is a necessary part of the solution to society's problems, rather than, as all true nationalists know, the fountain-head of all of society's ills. In politics it is always necessary to read between the lines and to examine what is not said, as well as what is said.

And now for the Conservatives' stated policy on immigration, taken from their own web site.

"Immigration

"The Government believes that immigration has enriched our culture and strengthened our economy, but that it must be controlled so that people have confidence in the system. We also recognise that to ensure cohesion and protect our public services, we need to introduce a cap on immigration and reduce the number of nonEU immigrants.

"We will introduce an annual limit on the number of non-EU economic migrants admitted into the UK to live and work.

"We will end the detention of children for immigration purposes.

"We will create a dedicated Border Police Force, as part of a refocused Serious Organised Crime Agency, to enhance national security, improve immigration controls and crack down on the trafficking of people, weapons and drugs.

"We support E-borders and will reintroduce exit checks.

"We will apply transitional controls as a matter of course in the future for all new EU Member States.

"We will introduce new measures to minimise abuse of the immigration system, for example via student routes, and will tackle human trafficking as a priority.

"We will explore new ways to improve the current asylum system to speed up the processing of applications."

Sounds impressive doesn't it?  At least it does to the politically naive and inexperienced. The more politically astute should understand that once the principle that the mass immigration of ethnic aliens to our country has been and is both unnecessary and undesirable, is cravenly surrendered, one is on a slippery slope without any firm foothold.

Those with longer memories will remember Mrs Thatcher's promises to address the swamping of our country by foreign incomers. They will also remember the way in which those promises were cynically broken once they had served their purpose of seeing off the electoral 'threat' posed by the popularity of the National Front in 1979.

Anyone who wishes for another thirty years of the colonization of our homelend by ethnic aliens should certainly support either Lib-Lab-Con or one of the Establishment's 'false flag' safety valves, such as UKIP or the English Democrats. Of course, as a former member of the British National Party, if you'd like actually to join one of these parties then your options are considerably limited.  The English Democrats might accept you as a member, but only if their chairman is convinced that you are not a 'racist' (read nationalist), in their terms.

If the English Democrats were serious about stopping immigration, in view of the fact that this is what a substantial majority of the electorate want, then they would say so.  Furthermore, they would not have 'bought into' the despicable demonization of the BNP grass roots by the 'mainstream' media.

The fact is that this party is an insult to the name English. This is a party not for the brave, but for cowards. This is a party for the political soft-option merchants, who have no heart for the fight.  These carpet-baggers congratulate one another on their new-found 'respectability' and newly-won 'friends' in the left-liberal media, as if this were a sign of their political nous, instead of the clearest possible indication of their betrayal of the cause.

Remove the Cross of St George from the flag of England and you have the English Democrats' real standard: the White flag of Surrender.

If you are wet enough for their toff of a chairman to be able to shoot snipe off your back, then you're probably acceptable to them.  Otherwise, as a proud, truth-telling patriot, you'll be regarded as beyond the Pale. 

One would have hoped that long-serving members of the BNP, particularly those who had occupied positions of prominence within the party in the past, would have had more self-respect than to hawk themselves and their reputation, such as it was, to the enemy's camp, no matter what provocation and injustice they had suffered.  They were not, by any means, the only ones to have been unjustly victimized.  This should not change one's political outlook.  It ought to have made them even more determined to stay and help the continuing fight to oust Griffin, rather than, by apostatizing, providing him with a ready-made, ex post facto rationalization for his oppression, however implausible.