14 5 mins 12 yrs

WE can’t say they didn’t warn us. A “new Britain” is precisely what the Labour Party promised in 1997 and millions of drones voted for it. Thanks alot, arseholes.

Labour threw open Britain’s borders to mass immigration to help socially engineer a “truly multicultural” country, a former Government adviser has revealed.

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

We we haven’t been swamped by millions of aliens, dispossessed of our ancient liberties and robbed of our nationhood only because Labour is a faction of revolutionary communists who despise our nation and actually believe the Marxist sociology that was pumped into their heads at university in the 1960s and 70s. These things happened also because New Labour wanted to rub the Right’s nose in diversity.

The destruction of British society by toxic racial aggravation; not the policy of misguided, overgrown students but the intended objective of the government since 1997.

He said Labour’s relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to “open up the UK to mass migration” but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its “core working class vote”.

As a result, the public argument for immigration concentrated instead on the economic benefits and need for more migrants.

Critics said the revelations showed a “conspiracy” within Government to impose mass immigration for “cynical” political reasons.

Mr Neather was a speech writer who worked in Downing Street for Tony Blair and in the Home Office for Jack Straw and David Blunkett, in the early 2000s.

Writing in the Evening Standard, he revealed the “major shift” in immigration policy came after the publication of a policy paper from the Performance and Innovation Unit, a Downing Street think tank based in the Cabinet Office, in 2001.

He wrote a major speech for Barbara Roche, the then immigration minister, in 2000, which was largely based on drafts of the report.

He said the final published version of the report promoted the labour market case for immigration but unpublished versions contained additional reasons, he said.

He wrote: “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.

“I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”

The “deliberate policy”, from late 2000 until “at least February last year”, when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration, he said.

Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month.

Sean Gabb, in his recent speech, stated:

The purpose of the Government that took power in 1997 was to bring about a revolutionary transformation of this country – a transformation from which there could be no return to what had been before.

In the entirety of English history, an Englishman would have lived and died in a land recognisably his own; the language, customs, laws, liberties and civil values were Anglo Saxon in origin and his own. This wicked revolutionary Labour junta has denied us our Anglo Saxon way of life and made our land unrecognisable in little more than a decade. We are foreigners in our own land, our children are denied their heritage, our customs crushed and our laws are turned against us “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity”. 

The next election (please, Labour voters, feel free to kill yourselves first) is about more than kicking out the worst government in our history, a regime which long made itself illegitimate, the election is about crushing for good this cancer on our nationhood.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

14 thoughts on “ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE

  1. It really is an extraordinary admission, I say admission but Neather is boasting about it rather than issueing a mea culpa. Labour not only decided that the population was insufficiently "interesting" they deliberately sought to stoke racial tensions for political advantage:

    "policy was intended – even if this wasn’t its main purpose – to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."

    They really are the worst government in British history, no one else even comes close to their sheer destructiveness.

  2. "the European of the future will be a Euro-African hybrid"-Count Kalergi, Pan European Union, 1922

  3. The only ones who have their noses rubbed in it are working class communities given the pressure "diversity" places on schools, hospitals, available social housing stock and general community cohesion. And they wonder why the BNP is attracting more and more support (much more it seems since the spectacular misfire that was Thursday’s QT).

  4. Ross (I’ve just seen you picked this up from Sky News last last night) –

    Until the extent of Brown’s economic mismanagement became clear I said that Clement Atlee’s 1945-50 Labour government was the most damaging in our history. It collectivised an extraordinary amount of civil society and ushered in decades of socialist ruin. But for all its folly it was a government of patriots, many of whom had fought in either world war. Forgotten now is the fact that this Labour government made Britain a nuclear armed power to deter aggressors.

    Well this New Labour has surpassed Atlee’s in the damage it has done and we know it was done with malicious intent against the British people. As you say, it’s an extraordinary admission, although I’m not wholly surprised. It’s been plain since before 1997 that the Labour Party is a faction of Trots and Stalinists which won a war for control of the party against old, socialist patriots.

    When we next have a civilised, patriotic government these revolutionary Leftist vandals will be put on trial.

  5. Jesus Christ. This is an utterly galling admission.

    Just read this in the Telegraph. And in an article which ran the results of a poll suggesting a substantial number of people are going to vote BNP. Every comment thread in the broadsheets and tabloids is teaming with people who are angry as hell. Did you read that Bonnie Greer piece? NOW she has the gall to come out and wax lyricial about the British traditional nature? Now??!!

  6. Can there be anyone who did not know what Neather has just admitted? I think those middle aged white men Blair, Brown, Straw, Blunket, Hain, Clark, and those awful women were of one mind following the fall of the Berlin wall and the end of the USSR; that communism could only succeed by following Gramsci’s teaching that the English culture must first be destroyed, and that multiculturalism would ensure the permanent debasement of the native culture, as it has done everywhere. Curious how their own native people were anathema to them, but that is a hallmark of British socialism, and after all the English are natural conservatives, more especially the English working class.

  7. It certainly would be an extraordinary admission if it were true. And maybe it is, although I would wait for something more substantial than the word of a former "advisor" before making up my mind. What he says is in itself hardly proof that the point of the immigration policy was to make Britain more multi-culti, and certainly not that the govt. pursued the policy deliberately to antagonise its opponents. Surely he must have some copies of all those damning drafts that he claims passed thru his hands.

    Mind you, the fact that so many people in the UK are now prepared to believe such an incredible story says a lot about British politics at the moment.

  8. I’m afraid i don’t subscribe to the deliberate conspiracy theory of mass immigration by Labour’s leaders. I think it was more pure laziness mixed with a sense of ‘liberal guilt’ and uncomfortableness at dealing firmly with managing numbers that allowed the vast numbers to settle here in the last decade.

  9. Noel & Colm- the story does sound incredible, but why would he make it up considering that he is a supporter of the government and their immigration policy and doesn’t have a book to sell?

  10. Ross

    Only becasue – and call me naive – I just can;t imagine Tony Blair,Gordon Brown et al sitting round the cabinet table in 1997 and deliberately plotting to undermine national social harmony with an intensive race based policy of mass ethnic foreign importation. I just do not see them as that ideologically manic.

  11. >>the story does sound incredible, but why would he make it up considering that he is a supporter of the government <<

    Ross, he was employed by the govt, not necessarily a supporter of same. There have been many cases recently, in the US, of former advisors, speechwriters etc. turning against their former employers. On the face of it, there isnt enoujgh reason to assume he’s telling the truth, also in view of the point Colm raises. If he has evidence – and he must have if it were true – let’s see it.

  12. Colm –

    I can imagine them doing that. They are that ideologically manic. Almost all ministers are Fabians (go look at the Fabian website, they’re hiding in plain view). Many of them are unapologetic communists and radicals – Mandelson, Straw, Harman, John Reid, Charles Clarke, Peter Hain and that’s just off the top of my head.

    Many of the lawyers, including Cherie Blair, long ago admitted that they went into the law as a way to bring about revolutionary change instead of having to go the tiresome route of persuading others to vote for them. A number, including Blair, were CND when CND was a communist dominated block in the pay of Moscow.

    A civil war took place in the Labour Party in the 1970s and 80s between the old, straight socialists on the one hand and Stalinists and Trots on the other. The Stalinists and Trots won the war and have been in government since 1997.

    That Gordon Brown realised that the City would bankroll the regime had blinded and continues to blind many people who perversely believe that "Tory Blair" nonsense. Brown created an inflationary boom, the City maintained it and filled the Treasury tax coffers and all along Brown encouraged it.

    Meanwhile, the rest of the pack became the most revolutionary government since 1649. Of course they are ideologically manic. If anyone believes otherwise, they can name here one – just one – law made by this regime which is explicitly patriotic and explicitly makes the interests of the British people paramount.

  13. I can’t imagine them sitting down together to plot either. Tony liked to be liked, Gordon likes to control. Cherie hates Gordon, John P really, really likes his office staff (didn’t he Twacey!) – and pies…..

    It may be that all had been infected with the "BBC/Guardian worldview virus", now believed to be totally out of control in some of the more fashionable parts of London. That virus manifests as a bleeding heart for all minority group issues, an extremely sensitive conscience, violent reaction to bourgeois traditional British values, and an allergic reaction to open democratic debate.. oh! and an intense craving for money and knighthoods.

  14. (Spotted in the comments section of Devils Kitchen):
    The blogger "Katabasis" used to work as an immigration case officer, and has written about some of his experiences here and here.

    All just "mere incompetence", of course.

Comments are closed.