The English should know where the main political risks lie in this modern world. We are the bogey men of the myths of many countries. England was to 1550-1950 as Rome was to 50BC-350AD, so it is going to get a lot of flak. But "the past is another country" and blaming the English of today for the past is absurd and like a teenage tantrum.
The British Government and political elite No, this is not a joke, the only joke is that electors still go to the polls in a country where elections are rigged to return small minorities with their own agenda. Elected by as little as 22% of the electorate (2005 election) but with huge majorities in Parliament the British government is an elected dictatorship run by a small political elite. It appoints the Governors of the BBC and licenses commercial TV and radio. It claims to represent the population but considers the English to be a "threat" to the UK. It organised devolution without an English component. It is overpopulating the country so that the people are becoming at risk from changes that result from climate, war and economic instability. It involves the UK in overseas military adventures. It imports foreign extremists to provide a continuous sense of threat. It implements nationwide monitoring and surveillance of the population at a level that exceeds that of any nation in history. The elite considers English culture and history to be irrelevant and does not consider it worthwhile to preserve sovereignty. The current political elite, because it is striking from within, is more dangerous to the English than any foreign power or anyone since William the Conqueror.
Major Danger
Argentina for some obscure reason the Argentines believe that British occupation of the Falkland Islands is the most serious event in world history. For generations Argentines have been taught that the only thing that matters in world politics is that the Argentines occupied the Falklands for a few years in the early nineteenth century, taking it from the British and then the British "stole" it back from them (even though the Americans actually destroyed their settlement). The British have long forgotten and forgiven the Falklands War that resulted from Argentina's invasion of the early 1980s but the Argentines have not. Be wary, be very wary. (See note below)
Saudi Arabia Wahhabis are responsible for Islamic Terrorism.
Afghanistan Britain has invaded this country far too often. It has lodged in their national psyche. The only "good" thing from the point of view of threat level is that in the previous three and a half wars the Afghans have won. Its hard for the victor to remain bitter about a war. Perhaps the English should accord the Afghans greater respect, with respect comes caution.
The rest of this article is, perhaps, deliberately provocative. It refers to mainly political dangers, who the English can trust. The anti-British mythology of the USA, Scots and Irish is particularly acute because of the shared language and popular culture.
Lesser Dangers
Scotland Watch your backs! Scots history is a long catalogue of how the Scots nobles had a drunken party, invaded England then had a terrible hangover with defeat at the hands of an English army. The English would withdraw and the Scots would just repeat the experience. Even when their own king was adopted as ruler of a union of England and Scotland they thought they had been diddled by the English. Their own tribal leaders sold their land out from under them and made them work down mines as slaves and they blame that on the English. They will always side with enemies of the English now the union is broken.
USA Just look at Canada or New Zealand to see what would have happened if the American "Revolution" (War of Independence) had not occurred. In 1938 the US was planning the next war against the Canadians and English ("War Plan Red") and then happily stood by whilst the Canadians, British, Indians, Aussies and New Zealanders etc. fought the Germans, Italians, Vichy French, Russians - yes, the Russians were on the side of the Germans at the start - and Japanese simultaneously. They were busy counting their money from arms sales and prepared for millions of Jews to die and the light of freedom to be snuffed out in Europe. It took a direct attack by the Japanese to stop them waiting for the demise of the British. They ended that war by carving up the world between themselves and the Russians, those ex-allies of the Germans. They then spent the rest of the twentieth century wondering how the "cold war" had come about and financing the death of British people at the hands of IRA terrorists. At the time of the Falklands War the population of the USA was genuinely shocked that their government had sided with Britain rather than the murderous Argentine Junta - I know, I was in the States at the time.
Ireland the Irish....
Iran inclined to believe the British are responsible for everything that ever went wrong in their country even though siding with the Germans and then the Russians were not good moves.
Hostile
South Africa ask a Boer or Zulu who they can both hate.
Egypt the "protectorate" and Suez.
Israel and Palestine for stopping them killing each other.
Unpredictable
France because the French Normans and Plantagenets had the temerity to hang on to their bits of France. Because Napoleon was defeated and English is the Lingua Franca. Prefer the Germans to the English.
Germany for obvious reasons though friendlier than the English might expect. Germans are fanatical nationalists, stand in their way at your peril.
Russia for Crimea and the Great Game.
Turkey for invading them in the first world war.
China for the Boxer Rebellion
Serbia for the NATO intervention
Neutral
Greece, Italy, Norway, Austria, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Croatia, much of Africa, Thailand, Japan, much of South America despite the British role in their liberation.
Friends
Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Holland, Sweden, India (surprisingly), Belgium, Spain despite Gibraltar, Portugal, Poland, Hungary, Chile.
Note: The relations between Britain and Argentina are crazy. British companies will obviously exploit any resources that are available but there is no actual conspiracy to "steal" these, as the Argentines might believe. The way forward is for Argentina to be conciliatory, to make a public declaration that they will never take up force of arms against the islands again and to embrace the Falkland Islanders with easy communications, tourism etc., eventually suggesting deals on fisheries in the ocean between the islands and Argentina, exploration rights etc. In time, perhaps over 30-50 years after a declaration of non-aggression and given a stable democracy in Argentina, the Islanders may even accept a federation with Argentina... I am sure that Britain would not stand in the way of the wishes of the Islanders (the oceans are scattered with ex-British islands). Had the idiot Galtieri not happened this federation might already have occurred.
The British Government and political elite No, this is not a joke, the only joke is that electors still go to the polls in a country where elections are rigged to return small minorities with their own agenda. Elected by as little as 22% of the electorate (2005 election) but with huge majorities in Parliament the British government is an elected dictatorship run by a small political elite. It appoints the Governors of the BBC and licenses commercial TV and radio. It claims to represent the population but considers the English to be a "threat" to the UK. It organised devolution without an English component. It is overpopulating the country so that the people are becoming at risk from changes that result from climate, war and economic instability. It involves the UK in overseas military adventures. It imports foreign extremists to provide a continuous sense of threat. It implements nationwide monitoring and surveillance of the population at a level that exceeds that of any nation in history. The elite considers English culture and history to be irrelevant and does not consider it worthwhile to preserve sovereignty. The current political elite, because it is striking from within, is more dangerous to the English than any foreign power or anyone since William the Conqueror.
Major Danger
Argentina for some obscure reason the Argentines believe that British occupation of the Falkland Islands is the most serious event in world history. For generations Argentines have been taught that the only thing that matters in world politics is that the Argentines occupied the Falklands for a few years in the early nineteenth century, taking it from the British and then the British "stole" it back from them (even though the Americans actually destroyed their settlement). The British have long forgotten and forgiven the Falklands War that resulted from Argentina's invasion of the early 1980s but the Argentines have not. Be wary, be very wary. (See note below)
Saudi Arabia Wahhabis are responsible for Islamic Terrorism.
Afghanistan Britain has invaded this country far too often. It has lodged in their national psyche. The only "good" thing from the point of view of threat level is that in the previous three and a half wars the Afghans have won. Its hard for the victor to remain bitter about a war. Perhaps the English should accord the Afghans greater respect, with respect comes caution.
The rest of this article is, perhaps, deliberately provocative. It refers to mainly political dangers, who the English can trust. The anti-British mythology of the USA, Scots and Irish is particularly acute because of the shared language and popular culture.
Lesser Dangers
Scotland Watch your backs! Scots history is a long catalogue of how the Scots nobles had a drunken party, invaded England then had a terrible hangover with defeat at the hands of an English army. The English would withdraw and the Scots would just repeat the experience. Even when their own king was adopted as ruler of a union of England and Scotland they thought they had been diddled by the English. Their own tribal leaders sold their land out from under them and made them work down mines as slaves and they blame that on the English. They will always side with enemies of the English now the union is broken.
USA Just look at Canada or New Zealand to see what would have happened if the American "Revolution" (War of Independence) had not occurred. In 1938 the US was planning the next war against the Canadians and English ("War Plan Red") and then happily stood by whilst the Canadians, British, Indians, Aussies and New Zealanders etc. fought the Germans, Italians, Vichy French, Russians - yes, the Russians were on the side of the Germans at the start - and Japanese simultaneously. They were busy counting their money from arms sales and prepared for millions of Jews to die and the light of freedom to be snuffed out in Europe. It took a direct attack by the Japanese to stop them waiting for the demise of the British. They ended that war by carving up the world between themselves and the Russians, those ex-allies of the Germans. They then spent the rest of the twentieth century wondering how the "cold war" had come about and financing the death of British people at the hands of IRA terrorists. At the time of the Falklands War the population of the USA was genuinely shocked that their government had sided with Britain rather than the murderous Argentine Junta - I know, I was in the States at the time.
Ireland the Irish....
Iran inclined to believe the British are responsible for everything that ever went wrong in their country even though siding with the Germans and then the Russians were not good moves.
Hostile
South Africa ask a Boer or Zulu who they can both hate.
Egypt the "protectorate" and Suez.
Israel and Palestine for stopping them killing each other.
Unpredictable
France because the French Normans and Plantagenets had the temerity to hang on to their bits of France. Because Napoleon was defeated and English is the Lingua Franca. Prefer the Germans to the English.
Germany for obvious reasons though friendlier than the English might expect. Germans are fanatical nationalists, stand in their way at your peril.
Russia for Crimea and the Great Game.
Turkey for invading them in the first world war.
China for the Boxer Rebellion
Serbia for the NATO intervention
Neutral
Greece, Italy, Norway, Austria, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Croatia, much of Africa, Thailand, Japan, much of South America despite the British role in their liberation.
Friends
Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Holland, Sweden, India (surprisingly), Belgium, Spain despite Gibraltar, Portugal, Poland, Hungary, Chile.
Note: The relations between Britain and Argentina are crazy. British companies will obviously exploit any resources that are available but there is no actual conspiracy to "steal" these, as the Argentines might believe. The way forward is for Argentina to be conciliatory, to make a public declaration that they will never take up force of arms against the islands again and to embrace the Falkland Islanders with easy communications, tourism etc., eventually suggesting deals on fisheries in the ocean between the islands and Argentina, exploration rights etc. In time, perhaps over 30-50 years after a declaration of non-aggression and given a stable democracy in Argentina, the Islanders may even accept a federation with Argentina... I am sure that Britain would not stand in the way of the wishes of the Islanders (the oceans are scattered with ex-British islands). Had the idiot Galtieri not happened this federation might already have occurred.
Comments
Comrade Brown see's them alright via the people's cheque book.
After breaking their oath 1689 English Bill of rights both they and the present occupier of Buck palace should be tried for TREASON!
the short and the sweet of it is, that the euro union has entered into a compact with a number of north african states to make operable a governmental entity called euro-med, and that a chief feature of its raison d’être and operation is a vast migration of peoples from north africa and the mediterranean basin into europe proper, and a great number of them will be muslim. pamela geller of atlasshrugs2000 has written extensively of this, here, here and here, and is a recognized authority on the subject.
her articles have told how the euro-med councils were formed and established, and that they were active, and then focused on the assertion that the euro union intends to admit nearly 50 million muslim/north african workers into the euro union by the years 2050-2060.
she does not view that prospect with enthusiasm.
and, neither do i. my concerns are several about this issue. one, is that most europeans are ignorant that this is happening. and, two, those who do know what is happening seem inclined to try and discredit these assertions by questioning the sources of pamela’s figures, to back up her claims in the posts linked above.
I thought, what better source and authority for these assertions that the horse’s mouth, that is, the official documents and statements of the euro union on such matters. as it turns out, i can demonstrate the authenticity of the figures and the scope of the european union immigration scheme, by recourse to official euro union documents.
http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/eliminate-nationalism_-the-radical-left-so-despises-europe-it-intends-to-destroy-it-by-muslim-immigration/
Five years of researching Euromed and now thank God American bloggers have woken upto it.
We here also have the Dane Anders at www.euro-med.dk./?
Scroll down for the English version.
All three parties agree to the EUMED.
The United Kingdom since 1707 has been nothing more than a patient exercise in undermining, denigrating and destroying England and the English identity.
I thought the turnout of the last General election was 65% of the electorate, and the 2005 election had 61%?
And although the UK has one of (if not THE) highest ratio of surveillance cameras per capita - I thought the vast majority of them are privately owned and controlled.
That aside, an interesting read. Certainly food for thought...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005