Wednesday, April 14, 2010


If Immigration Is So “Financially Beneficial,” Why Do the Lib/Lab/Con Parties Not Suggest It for Poor Third World Nations to “Cure Poverty” There?

BNP: If mass immigration supposedly brings all sorts of financial benefits, why do the Liberal / Labour / Conservative parties not propose it as a solution to the poverty of the Third World, asks our correspondent Maid of Kent.

What the media refers to as “immigration” is in truth nothing other than a Government-sponsored invasion which is becoming the major topic in this election campaign, despite the best efforts of the other parties to ignore it.

“Invasion” can be defined as people from alien cultures intruding and encroaching on a settled indigenous population, forcing that population to make way for them and to adapt to their ways.

The other political parties are still trying to feed the British people the lie that this immigration invasion has ‘enriched’ Britain — even though it costs this country billions of pounds annually in benefits, translation services and public services.

The vast majority of immigrants are low skilled and contribute almost nothing to this country except to take jobs from British people.

Proof of this enormous financial cost to Britain is the fact that our country is bankrupt. Public services are no longer “affordable” and will be cut drastically whichever of the Tweedledee Tweedledum parties wins the election.

As Britons are slowly realising, the ‘enrichment’ of Britain through mass immigration doesn’t end with the fictitious financial benefits, but continues through to the fragmentation of our society, the elimination of the cohesion that formerly existed among the British people, the breakdown of law and order and the eventual but logical total destruction of British culture — and with it, the destruction of Britain as it was — the homeland of the British people. >>> MaidofKent | Wednesday, April 14, 2010