Flags.........& Politics.

Errr? Adoption? That very thought is a misnomer.

Flags represent a people.....the nationalist never 'adopted', it was always about them most of all. It's nationalists you are most likely to find in armies fighting for what it represents.....They never 'adopted' it.

They are it.

The adoption....fake of course, is by the left who try to twist its meaning to include 'diversity, equity and inclusion' which are political concepts alien to its original meaning.




It's just a mischaracterisation of the truth.

To paraphrase Powell, 'You can love India without wanting India in Birmingham'.

The left's and liberal's attack on the English working class for wanting to keep their own nation the same their ancestors gave to them is the worst betrayal by a ruling class in history.....it's wanton destruction of something much better than themselves and history won't be kind...it's already turning against them as the sectarianism increases.

It's also a double standard as most of those here with foreign allegiance would hate the British/westerners being in their home countries in transformative numbers.



It's absurd to blame nationalism for an imported problem created by the left and neo/social liberals.
Nationalists were always here.....it's you lot who decided you knew better and declined the country both economically and much more importantly socially.



I'm afraid for types like you...I just don't think you get how far down the line it is......You're going to get a lot more disappointed I think.....there's no one coming down the pipe to address or dress wounds. And all while it does worsen with sectarianism I don't you will see the part 'namby-pamby' liberals played in bringing us here.

But I see it clear as day.
You make assumptions about me and those uncomfortable with the direction in which the flag is being adopted (that word is correct).

There are without doubt those who weep for all immigrants and consider the thought of deporting anyone abhorrent. There are also those who profit from immigration. Two sides of the liberal, metropolitan elite.

However, they are of limited number but disproportionate power. They are the ones who opened the door for cheap labour and short term growth. Not me.

I do get the need to fill the population gap with us white folk getting old and not producing kids, but I wanted that from free movement from EU countries, remember? You lot opposed that.

The rate of immigration and the nature of it in terms of those from cultures who will not assimilate but will expect us to alter for them, alarms me too. And the prospect of illegal immigrants being found and deported does not cause me to lose a wink of sleep.

What I do not like is hatred by one entitled group of that group they consider lack such entitlement. They protest outside asylum hotels picking on those who are lucky enough to have escaped torture and death. Can you imagine the kind of person who does that? One bloke was interviewed. He said they have run away from a war zone. If it was me I would not have run away I would have stood and fought! I think it has been many a year since I have heard a comment so callous and dumb-witted.

This is a good country full of good people. It has its faults, but they are our faults. My issue is that these types have hijacked my flag for their prejudices and hate. Change can be made dispassionately and objectively.

Not in my name and not with my flag.
 
Well, it's inability to fly didn't help

Having no fear of its predators more so.

We have turned tolerance into apathy and sleep walked into the mess we now have

We weren't always so tolerant, the wartime generation and even into the 60s/70s weren't this stupid. The politicians had to essentially wait for a good amount of those generations to die off until the 'Wilson' view of Britain started to gain a grip. None of the famous people of the past who made the country what it was would have accepted it.

That's when you started to see this nation start to die.
 
Last edited:
Not in my name and not with my flag.

The flag belongs to those willing to fight for it.

The only reason it exists is down to them. Our graveyards testify to it.

People can type all sorts of waffle about what they think something represents but essentially it comes down to who wants it most.

And that comes down to what someone feels in their gut.

Liberals, like most of what you wrote in that post with its leftist terminology....well, it's the usual tripe....just Blairite waffle....some liberals might be nice people, but overall....we have to live in their fecking disaster.

Go wrap yourself in the EU flag instead, because it sounds like your preferred destination anyway.
 
Last edited:
You make assumptions about me and those uncomfortable with the direction in which the flag is being adopted (that word is correct).

There are without doubt those who weep for all immigrants and consider the thought of deporting anyone abhorrent. There are also those who profit from immigration. Two sides of the liberal, metropolitan elite.

However, they are of limited number but disproportionate power. They are the ones who opened the door for cheap labour and short term growth. Not me.

I do get the need to fill the population gap with us white folk getting old and not producing kids, but I wanted that from free movement from EU countries, remember? You lot opposed that.

The rate of immigration and the nature of it in terms of those from cultures who will not assimilate but will expect us to alter for them, alarms me too. And the prospect of illegal immigrants being found and deported does not cause me to lose a wink of sleep.

What I do not like is hatred by one entitled group of that group they consider lack such entitlement. They protest outside asylum hotels picking on those who are lucky enough to have escaped torture and death. Can you imagine the kind of person who does that? One bloke was interviewed. He said they have run away from a war zone. If it was me I would not have run away I would have stood and fought! I think it has been many a year since I have heard a comment so callous and dumb-witted.

This is a good country full of good people. It has its faults, but they are our faults. My issue is that these types have hijacked my flag for their prejudices and hate. Change can be made dispassionately and objectively.

Not in my name and not with my flag.
You think the illegal migrant hotels are full of genuine asylum seekers fleeing persecution ( from the French )

That is simply deluded

Is delivering for Food Panda therapy for persecution?
 
They protest outside asylum hotels picking on those who are lucky enough to have escaped torture and death. Can you imagine the kind of person who does that?



---------------------------------------------

anyway, Flags. Just after the homophobic murders described above , there was a big Public campaign in the vicinity. A campaign against Homophobia......its bizarre considering Sligo never had much of a homophobia problem ten or twenty years ago.

And whether such a campaign was orchestrated by those responsible for bringing homophobia into the country ? no comment.
 
Last edited:
You think the illegal migrant hotels are full of genuine asylum seekers fleeing persecution ( from the French )

That is simply deluded

Is delivering for Food Panda therapy for persecution?

As is his point about staying in the EU to avoid third world immigration.....as if Germany and France have avoided that or something!

The EU welcomed it.....which is why the right is on the march.
 
The flag belongs to those willing to fight for it.

The only reason it exists is down to them. Our graveyards testify to it.

People can type all sorts of waffle about what they think something represents but essentially it comes down to who wants it most.

And that comes down to what someone feels in their gut.

Liberals, like most of what you wrote in that post with its leftist terminology....well, it's the usual tripe....just Blairite waffle....some liberals might be nice people, but overall....we have to live in their fecking disaster.

Go wrap yourself in the EU flag instead, because it sounds like your preferred destination anyway.
Says who?

It belongs to every citizen, whether they are a pacifist or not.

The attitude you, and others, regularly display on here stinks. My father, along with millions of others, fought oppression and intolerance in order to be free of it. Not to see it be resurrected at home.
 
Says who?

It belongs to every citizen, whether they are a pacifist or not.

The attitude you, and others, regularly display on here stinks. My father, along with millions of others, fought oppression and intolerance in order to be free of it. Not to see it be resurrected at home.
My father didn't. He went into the army when the war started because he didn't have any choice but in any case had faced more than enough oppression here through the 1930s and before.
 
I dispute that the flag is so polarizing in itself. Some, of course, are bound to hate it based on their imperial heritage or whatever. However, a lot are uncomfortable because of its adoption by nationalists.

Pride is positive. Liberal use during football tournaments is mandatory. No problem there. It's hatred of those who are not "qualified" to carry the flag where the problems begin.

And on that, nationalism creates a spectrum at one end those of different race, religion who cannot speak the language and who lack any cultural affiliation and, at the other, somebody born in Croydon who supports Palace but who's parents were born in Poland.

Grades of "acceptable" become significant in nationalist controlled countries. Recent history shows where that leads. Please forgive namby-pamby liberal types like me expressing concern that the signs are there again of that specter emerging. Surely we can protect and preserve our culture in ways that do not involve descending back into that mire.
There is no intended nuance in the flag thing. It is a symbol of protest and resistance against the continuing colonisation of Britain.

Only morons and the government claim it is 'racist'.
That comes from the same school of thought that thinks that being against mass immigration means that you just hate foreigners. A ridiculous misconception born from either stupidity or adversarial politics.

I think it is quite obvious that not all 'settlers' are equal when it comes to unpopularity.
Immigrants are generally judged as a group by their perceived threat or disadvantageous qualities. Certainly not by skin colour or any other superficial characteristic, or because they are 'foreign'. It is not a question of irrational prejudice. It is simply self preservation based on experience.

Oh, and well done for not mentioning Hitler or Oswald Mosley. I'm sure that was a challenge.
 
Says who?

It belongs to every citizen, whether they are a pacifist or not.

The attitude you, and others, regularly display on here stinks. My father, along with millions of others, fought oppression and intolerance in order to be free of it. Not to see it be resurrected at home.

Mmmm....I wonder what your father would think of you considering your 'racism' comments about him early on in your Hol journey. Once called out on it he now occasionally appears in heroic fashion in your writings.....No doubt he'd agree with everything you think.

Well, if your back story is true then I have respect for your father's service.

I was lucky enough to know my grandfather and great uncle up until they died in the early eighties.....both fought in the war, saw most of the action in Italy. I....as you might expect, was an eager youngster wanting to hear their war stories and they did tell me some of it.

My uncle would talk about it less but my grandfather would talk about it....he suffered a war wound that troubled him until death....Uncle got through it without injury though lost friends.

They hated it.
They didn't want to go to war and weren't invested into any of the propaganda or justifications. It was just expected and part of the duty expected from men of the time.....they didn't complain about that.

Grandfather didn't like Churchill and blamed him a lot for stuff, said he got a lot of people killed.....It greatly surprised me at the time and I never did find out more than that.....at the time I thought Churchill was great and did up until a few years ago, where now I'm more mixed about it.....He had very difficult decisions.

Anyway, the sense I was left with was that it wasn't heroic, it was just how things were.
They weren't that political but being working class they were Labour men....unions were strong back then and I think one of them worked in the print.

But that was very different Labour from Labour today.
 
Last edited:
Does this berk claim he’s a Muslim? Seriously? He’s seriously lost the plot if so. Maybe was admin for the taliban.


A whole 400 years before the violent prophet started spouting his s*** hundreds of miles to the east.
 
There is no intended nuance in the flag thing. It is a symbol of protest and resistance against the continuing colonisation of Britain.

Only morons and the government claim it is 'racist'.

The England Flag is not racist. When a multi-ethnic England team plays against, say, Poland....i never see the England fans dividing the players into the ones they will support and 'other players'. Eze scores for England and everybody cheers.
Norman Tebbitt was onto something relevant when he formulated the 'cricket test'....where are your true allegiances.

Unless you are trying to tell me the England flag on the football terraces is different to the England flag seen elsewhere ?
 
My father didn't. He went into the army when the war started because he didn't have any choice but in any case had faced more than enough oppression here through the 1930s and before.
I didn’t suggest they had any choice. What I was referring to was what they were fighting against. Which was the oppressive and intolerant Nazi regime that had forced itself on the rest of Europe.

There were certainly sympathisers here for that regime but most wanted nothing to do with it. The idea that even weakened down versions of some of their ideas are being resurrected would distress them. It wasn’t an accident that we elected a Labour government immediately after the war. Which lasted for 6 years and changed the UK for ever.
 
I didn’t suggest they had any choice. What I was referring to was what they were fighting against. Which was the oppressive and intolerant Nazi regime that had forced itself on the rest of Europe.

There were certainly sympathisers here for that regime but most wanted nothing to do with it. The idea that even weakened down versions of some of their ideas are being resurrected would distress them. It wasn’t an accident that we elected a Labour government immediately after the war. Which lasted for 6 years and changed the UK for ever.
I doubt he regarded Japan as mortal enemies or threat before being sent off to fight them.
 
Mmmm....I wonder what your father would think of you considering your 'racism' comments about him early on in your Hol journey. Once called out on it he now occasionally appears in heroic fashion in your writings.....No doubt he'd agree with everything you think.

Well, if your back story is true then I have respect for your father's service.

I was lucky enough to know my grandfather and great uncle up until they died in the early eighties.....both fought in the war, saw most of the action in Italy. I....as you might expect, was an eager youngster wanting to hear their war stories and they did tell me some of it.

My uncle would talk about it less but my grandfather would talk about it....he suffered a war wound that troubled him until death....Uncle got through it without injury though lost friends.

They hated it.
They didn't want to go to war and weren't invested into any of the propaganda or justifications. It was just expected and part of the duty expected from men of the time.....they didn't complain about that.

Grandfather didn't like Churchill and blamed him a lot for stuff, said he got a lot of people killed.....It greatly surprised me at the time and I never did find out more than that.....at the time I thought Churchill was great and did up until a few years ago, where now I'm more mixed about it.....He had very difficult decisions.

Anyway, the sense I was left with was that it wasn't heroic, it was just how things were.
They weren't that political but being working class they were Labour men....unions were strong back then and I think one of them worked in the print.

But that was very different Labour from Labour today.
Your memory fails you. I would never have criticised my father as a racist. I think you must be referring to my remarks about my mother’s attitude towards the first wave of immigrants from the Caribbean. Which weren’t positive and, with hindsight, were ignorant. My father had traveled all over the world during his time in the RN so had much more experience.

My father didn’t like Churchill either and blamed him for sending the Prince of Wales to the far east without air cover, its subsequent sinking and the loss of so many of his shipmates. He refused to vote for him. For once I agree with you. He had some very tough decisions to make.
 
Your memory fails you. I would never have criticised my father as a racist. I think you must be referring to my remarks about my mother’s attitude towards the first wave of immigrants from the Caribbean. Which weren’t positive and, with hindsight, were ignorant. My father had traveled all over the world during his time in the RN so had much more experience.

My father didn’t like Churchill either and blamed him for sending the Prince of Wales to the far east without air cover, its subsequent sinking and the loss of so many of his shipmates. He refused to vote for him. For once I agree with you. He had some very tough decisions to make.

Well he was wrong to blame Churchill, What's it to do with him?. I'd blame the commander of the task force, and the skipper of Indomitable who ran her aground leaving the battle group without air cover.
 
I doubt he regarded Japan as mortal enemies or threat before being sent off to fight them.
I cannot recall him ever offering an opinion on that.

I do know that when he was locked below decks and his ship was being hit by bombs dropped from Japanese aircraft, then listing until it eventually sunk with him and a few mates being able to free the escape hatch, get into the water and be rescued, he wasn’t too fond of them.

Nor was he when trapped in Singapore for 6 weeks awaiting evacuation with the advancing forces getting ever closer. I know this because I possess a multi page account of the attack he typed whilst there. An account which was an important source for the definitive book detailing the disaster.
 
Well he was wrong to blame Churchill, What's it to do with him?. I'd blame the commander of the task force, and the skipper of Indomitable who ran her aground leaving the battle group without air cover.
My father was on the staff of Admiral Phillips and handled communications between him and the Admiralty. Clearly they were secret and they remained so but his view of Churchill was unequivocal as it was of the Admiral, who he always said was grossly unfairly treated.

From all I know Phillips was pleading for ground based air cover to be provided before leaving port but was ordered to do so regardless to try to intercept the Japanese landing craft.
 

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top