Sir,
Would someone please explain the difference between alien species such
as the grey squirrel displacing the native red squirrel (Daily Telegraph
You're not from these parts are you? 16 November) and alien human beings
known as foreigners displacing the native English population in places
such as Leicester and London. Why is the former invariably represented
as bad and the latter as a wonderfully enriching event?
Yours sincerely,
Robert Henderson
--
--
Robert Henderson
Personal website: http://www.anywhere.demon.co.uk
>Letter to the Telegraph
>
>Sir,
>
>Would someone please explain the difference between alien species such
>as the grey squirrel displacing the native red squirrel (Daily Telegraph
>You're not from these parts are you? 16 November) and alien human beings
>known as foreigners displacing the native English population in places
>such as Leicester and London. Why is the former invariably represented
>as bad and the latter as a wonderfully enriching event?
because humans try to stop the stream of life as it flows
on and is ever changing....
bit like you do...
as one of my biologist friends said in answer to complaints about
the ecosystems being under threat...'don't worry, there'll still
be an ecosystem, it'll just have changed'
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have posted my squirrel theory many times on various Ng’s over a
period of years. Perhaps some may recall my doing so?
Maybe, at last people are beginning to see, that what has happened to
the native red squirrel, is happening to the indigenous white
British?
>On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:45:22 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:20:32 +0000, Robert Henderson
>><phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Letter to the Telegraph
>>>
>>>Sir,
>>>
>>>Would someone please explain the difference between alien species such
>>>as the grey squirrel displacing the native red squirrel (Daily Telegraph
>>>You're not from these parts are you? 16 November) and alien human beings
>>>known as foreigners displacing the native English population in places
>>>such as Leicester and London. Why is the former invariably represented
>>>as bad and the latter as a wonderfully enriching event?
>>
>>because humans try to stop the stream of life as it flows
>> on and is ever changing....
>>bit like you do...
>>
>>as one of my biologist friends said in answer to complaints about
>> the ecosystems being under threat...'don't worry, there'll still
>> be an ecosystem, it'll just have changed'
>Will you still thank that way when they come for you & family?
why on earth would that alter the facts
Unlikely, Cretin.
Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
AADP's 'left-wing Israeli intellectual'
'The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones
who attacked us in America on September the 11th'
(George W. Bush, 12 July 2007)
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>
> Shitzhak Isaac Goldstein
> "Arsehole of the net"
Well you Zionist Yids managed to swamp Palestine when you invaded it
after WW2. Not only that, you had learnt a lot from the Nazis whom
many of you worked for as Kapos in Nazi concentration
camps...................................That is one reason why you are
so good at committing atrocities on woman and children in Palestine
now.
do red and grey squirrels cross breed ?
No only the queer ones have sex with either colour, so if you were a
squirrel, you would be OK.
The poster seems to have forgotten or doesn't know that the British have
spread themselves all over the world. Millions of black and brown men
now speak English as their native language. How did such a thing
happened? My guess is that Britain will never be the permanent home of
people who came from the tropics. Much too cool and damp for that.
cite ?
You were noticed walking a squirrel on Hampstead, it was too dark to
tell whether it was red or grey.
Translation: 'Jon°' doesn't have a cite, because he made the whole thing
up.
Some people don't care. Many who used to post to this newsgroup don't
care. For any argument to stand up against these people, one has to come
up with a rock solid reason why it matters that the English do not die
out. The argument that any people have a natural right to defend their
culture does not apply to the English according to them, because the
'English' as a ethnic type does not exist. You won't change their minsd
- they are even prepared to fight alongside Muslims against you.
They would have to be defeated either in law (by electing a 'racist'
party), or in a fight in the streets. Personally I think the latter is
now more likely.
I agree...I have never been to Hampstead ;-)
I'm curious, what year did this England that you speak of....start ?
And is there a valid argument that one ecosystem is better than another?
I believe there is, whether it's English people or Japanese Knotweed or
whatever. Try looking at the state of the land in the former Soviet
Union and see if you think that some ecosystems are better than another.
I would expect that you would fight for Israel to retain it's nature (as
a Jewish state). Would you not allow this right for others?
So...British spreading themselves all over the world is wrong, therefore
mass immigration into Britain is right?
I'm getting to like you more and more.
Don't try those disingenuous arguments with me - I'm not interested
because you simply will not be consistent.
You would wouldn’t you?
Shitsack prefers Clapham Common I am told, he can get away with murder
there as not many Zionist Yids venture far into South London…….He is
therefore able to display himself better in the cottages there.
Perhaps you have ventured this way yourself sunshine?
He would rather fight the Palestinian kids there then a properly
trained fighting force.
right back at you sista!
nope....now back to those squirrels....cite?
What a stupid inadequate reply.
I agree.....what year did this England that you speak of....start ?
How about 802AD or 1066, whatever your point of view?
my point of view is neither, there is no black and white, only shades
of grey, but I am going to humour you.....;-)
you would need an interpreter just to have a conversation with these
other 'English' people
So what is your point of view? That 'England' does not exist at all?
>
> you would need an interpreter just to have a conversation with these
> other 'English' people
Sorry...not sure who you are referring to.
my point of view is that countries are irrelevant, the same land
existed before a particular label was applied to it
>
> > you would need an interpreter just to have a conversation with these
> > other 'English' people
>
> Sorry...not sure who you are referring to.
you and another English person from 802 or 1066
> my point of view is that countries are irrelevant, the same land
> existed before a particular label was applied to it
Who decides who lives on a particularly desirable land, in your John Lennon
world?
Who is 'they' in this case?
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
>abelard wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:20:32 +0000, Robert Henderson
>> <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Letter to the Telegraph
>>>
>>> Sir,
>>>
>>> Would someone please explain the difference between alien species such
>>> as the grey squirrel displacing the native red squirrel (Daily Telegraph
>>> You're not from these parts are you? 16 November) and alien human beings
>>> known as foreigners displacing the native English population in places
>>> such as Leicester and London. Why is the former invariably represented
>>> as bad and the latter as a wonderfully enriching event?
>>
>> because humans try to stop the stream of life as it flows
>> on and is ever changing....
>> bit like you do...
>>
>> as one of my biologist friends said in answer to complaints about
>> the ecosystems being under threat...'don't worry, there'll still
>> be an ecosystem, it'll just have changed'
>
>And is there a valid argument that one ecosystem is better than another?
not that i can see
>I believe there is, whether it's English people or Japanese Knotweed or
>whatever. Try looking at the state of the land in the former Soviet
>Union and see if you think that some ecosystems are better than another.
it certainly not better from my pov...but i'm prejudiced!
from the pov of knotweed i expect i'd be cussing all those farmers
spreading herbicides, planting potatoes while generally ruining my
environment and happiness
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is entirely the wrong approach maria....
you merely need to decide it is what you want....
you don't need a reason for preferring radishes to cockles
beyond your own preference
could be london....could be brussels
So you reserve the right to select who you have in your front room but
believe nobody else should have that right.
my front room is my business
>On Nov 16, 4:47�pm, Jon� <rays...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Nov 16, 3:36�pm, "nick 'little england' griffin"
>> <michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > On Nov 16, 4:23�pm, "yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic)"
>>
>> > <yitz...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > On 2009-11-16, Jon� <rays...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > > > On Nov 16, 3:15�pm, "nick 'little england' griffin"
>> > > ><michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > >> On Nov 16, 3:52�pm, Jon� <rays...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > > >> > On Nov 16, 2:49�pm, "nick 'little england' griffin"
>>
>> > > >> > <michaelnewp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > >> > > On Nov 16, 2:49�pm, Jon� <rays...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > > >> > > > On Nov 16, 1:20�pm, Robert Henderson <phi...@anywhere.demon.co.uk>
>> > > >> > > > wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > Would someone please explain the difference between alien species such
>> > > >> > > > > as the grey squirrel displacing the native red squirrel (Daily Telegraph
>> > > >> > > > > You're not from these parts are you? 16 November) and alien human beings
>> > > >> > > > > known as foreigners displacing the native English population in places
>> > > >> > > > > such as Leicester and London. Why is the former invariably represented
>> > > >> > > > > as bad and the latter as a �wonderfully enriching event?
>> > > >> > > > I have posted my squirrel theory many times on various Ng?s �over a
>> > > >> > > > period of years. �Perhaps some may recall my doing so?
>>
>> > > >> > > > Maybe, at last people are beginning to see, that �what has happened to
>> > > >> > > > the native red squirrel, is happening to the indigenous white
>> > > >> > > > British?
>>
>> > > >> > > do red and grey squirrels cross breed ?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > > >> > > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > > >> > No only the queer ones have sex with either colour, so if you were a
>> > > >> > squirrel, you would be OK.
>>
>> > > >> cite ?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > > >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > > > You were noticed walking a squirrel on Hampstead, it was too dark to
>> > > > tell whether it was red or grey.
>>
>> > > Translation: 'Jon�' doesn't have a cite, because he made the whole thing
>> > > up.
>> > > Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
>> > > AADP's 'left-wing Israeli intellectual'
>> > > � � � � 'The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq were the ones
>> > > � � � � who attacked us in America on September the 11th'
>> > > � � � � (George W. Bush, 12 July 2007)
>> > > <http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/> �
>>
>> > I agree...I have never been to Hampstead ;-)- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> You would wouldn�t you?
>>
>> Shitsack prefers Clapham Common I am told, he can get away with murder
>> there as not many Zionist Yids �venture far into South London��.He is
>> therefore able to display himself better in the cottages there.
>>
>> Perhaps you have ventured this way yourself sunshine?
>
>nope....now back to those squirrels....cite?
be cautious, he's trying to groom you
That would be ungrammatical.
I'll be honest with you, I think these tales of the death of freedom in
this country are exaggerated.
I can't see them spending the millions, no billions, necessary to
process the information being generated by the various surveillance
systems they've put in place.
They already admit that the vast numbers of TV cameras about the place
aren't any good for anything but spotting people daft enough not to wear
a hoodie while going about their criminal business.
The number of people necessary to process the data they want the ISPs to
collect is vast, too vast for processing. The only real use it will
have will be to convict people they catch who are up to no good.
Er...."Abelard" is a 1947 vintage valve computer in the Bonkers 9000
series. The only people likely to be coming for him are curators from
the Science Museum.... RH
Excellent point, Maria... RH
John Lennon must be spinning in his grave.
Enemies of the state?
<blushes>
Well so far there's no evidence that anyone is using the organs of the
intelligence apparatus to spy on people involved in legitimate political
activity, to the extent that when a Muslim Labour MP interviewed a
terrorist (can't remember if he was convicted or not, but he was
certainly locked up tight) in prison a huge fuss was made when it was
discovered that his conversation had been recorded.
Therefore a reasonable defence against being spied on may well be being
involved in legitimate politics...
>'William Black' wrote thus:
>
>>The number of people necessary to process the data they want the ISPs to
>>collect is vast, too vast for processing. The only real use it will
>>have will be to convict people they catch who are up to no good.
>
>A large part of it is not to process and analyse the data but to
>have it there for reference in case someone steps out of line.
>
>As an East German woman said recently in an interview:
>
> "if you bought a new printer or copier, it wasn't long before
> they turned up and demanded output samples. When asked why,
> they would tell you "we have to be able to track you down if
> necessary"."
there is always the option of expanding the number of spies and
political police to
1)process the data
2)soak up the inevitable ever growing unemployed
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
Red squirrels are much nicer than grey squirrels ..................
Quite so. Any serious political fracture is always settled by force. RH
Try the sixth century. Bede (born circa 670 AD) writing circa 720 AD
produced his Ecclesiastical History of the English. That being so, the
idea of the English must have been around for more than a century by the
time he was born. RH
make your mind up people.....you English can't even agree on the date
you started....
> there is always the option of expanding the number of spies and
> political police to
> 1)process the data
> 2)soak up the inevitable ever growing unemployed
The quality of staff necessary tend not to be your average dole candidate.
Look at the GCHQ job ads for the quality of people they want for doing
this stuff.
http://www.gchq.gov.uk/careers/index.html
It's all graduates in proper subjects from proper universities.
They don't hire someone with a degree in Underwater Basket Weaving from
Polly Wollie Colly
> Red squirrels are much nicer than grey squirrels ..................
Nah, too small, there's a lot more meat on the grey ones.
Signed Robert Henderson (Mrs). SCS Troll.
> On Nov 16, 5:21 pm, Maria <fallingd...@holeinshoe.co.uk> wrote:
>> nick 'little england' griffin wrote:
>>> I agree.....what year did this England that you speak of....start ?
>> How about 802AD or 1066, whatever your point of view?
How about c.450AD.
> my point of view is neither, there is no black and white, only shades
> of grey, but I am going to humour you.....;-)
All shades are equal, but some are more equal than others...
> you would need an interpreter just to have a conversation with these
> other 'English' people
I wouldn't need an interpreter.
make your minds up
> > my point of view is neither, there is no black and white, only shades
> > of grey, but I am going to humour you.....;-)
>
> All shades are equal, but some are more equal than others...
>
no need to denigrate yourself
> > you would need an interpreter just to have a conversation with these
> > other 'English' people
>
> I wouldn't need an interpreter.
because you are a cunning linguist ?
I know Old English, Old Saxon, Gothic, and Old Norse and can reliably
translate Old Frisian as well.
but you would be fucked in a conversation....thats because the English
then are not the English now and not the English in 100 years...
Prove it.
Y.
--
>> I know Old English, Old Saxon, Gothic, and Old Norse and can reliably
>> translate Old Frisian as well.
> Prove it.
For hwi scyle ic tacnian ��t ic onderstande �a reorda �e ic ymb spr�c?
Which means?
> On 2009-11-18, White Spirit <wsp...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
>> yitzhak in eretz isreal (sic) wrote:
>>>> I know Old English, Old Saxon, Gothic, and Old Norse and can reliably
>>>> translate Old Frisian as well.
>>> Prove it.
>> For hwi scyle ic tacnian þæt ic onderstande þa reorda þe ic ymb spræc?
> Which means?
'For' is a preposition, like Modern English 'for'.
'Hwi' is the instrumental form of the indefinite pronoun 'hwa' ('hwa' is
cognate with Modern English 'who' and 'hwi' with Modern English 'why').
'scyle' is the first person singular present subjunctive conjugation of
the verb 'sculan', a preterite-present verb whose cognate is Modern
English 'shall'.
'ic' is the first person singular personal pronoun cognate with Modern
English 'I'.
'Tacnian' is a verb whose infinite form is given above meaning 'show,
prove, demonstrate'. A cognate form is Modern English 'betoken'.
'þæt' is a relative pronoun cognate with Modern English 'that'.
'onderstande' is the first person singular present indicative and
subjunctive form of the verb 'onderstandan', meaning to understand (the
Modern English cognate).
'þa' is the accusative plural definite pronoun meaning 'the'. 'Reord'
is a strong feminine noun meaning language (the accusative plural form
is 'reorda').
'þe' is also a relative pronoun. Unlike 'þæt', it is not used to link
sentence clauses.
'ymb' is an adverb meaning 'by, about, concerning'.
'spræc' is the first person preterite indicative singular conjugation of
the verb 'sprecan' meaning 'to speak'.
In other words, 'Why should I prove that I understand the languages
about which I spoke?'
Fair enough: I'll concede that, although there's no way to be sure that you
didn't google that, or asked someone.
> In other words, 'Why should I prove that I understand the languages
> about which I spoke?'
That's what happens when you make claims.
bloody foreigners...doesn't anyone speak English round here ?
> bloody foreigners...doesn't anyone speak English round here ?
Gea, ic wel sprece on englisc.
an early form of texting !