I’ve got nothing against the people of Romania and Bulgaria. Indeed I am well aware of the difference between the Romanian people and the Roma Gypsies and do not confuse the two. I can even speak some Romanian and would like to visit their country, as I am more than happy to welcome Romanian tourists here to the UK. I don’t even mind relatively small numbers of Romanians and Bulgarians with useful skills and a determination to work hard coming here for employment.But when large numbers of people from any country, including but certainly not limited to Romania and Bulgaria, come to the UK it cannot help but have a negative impact on our economy and society. An impact which will result in increasing tension between British and European peoples which would not have existed if the floodgates of migration had not been opened so wide.
The BBC, as a national broadcaster, has a responsibility to present the carefully considered facts to the British people, especially when it has taken the time to investigate an issue, and has commissioned polling data to be collected. But the BBC has already decided that its role is not to report the news, but to present it in such a way that it makes the news and directs the opinions of the British people. It is engaged in social engineering, and has been for several decades. Perhaps it always has been? But in the early days of the BBC there was a determination that the society it should help form would be traditional and patriotic in the best sense.
In the 21st century there is a new agenda driving the BBC. The traditional culture and the indigenous white British society it was established to serve are now the enemies of the multi-cultural society it believes it should be creating. Indeed Greg Dyke, previously Director-General of the BBC, has described the organisation he was charged to promote as being ‘hideously white’. We might also imagine that his successors in the senior management team now also consider it ‘hideously British’.
We see this essentially anti-British philosophy working out in the daily business of the BBC. In relation to the expected immigration of Romanians and Bulgarians into the UK we would expect even a neutral media organisation to seek to determine exactly how many migrants might be expected, and what the consquences could be. A biased media organisation would use the information it had discovered to present a particular and partisan explanation. This is, unfortunately all to be expected of the BBC.
It has discovered that a minimum of 1% of the Romanian working population and 4.5% of the Bulgarian working population are already intending to travel to the UK for employment. Of course in ex-communist countries we can reasonably expect people to be less forthcoming about their plans, and many of these intending migrants will also have families who will travel with them. But the bare calculation of workers which the BBC has produced suggests that 153,000 Romanians and 196,000 Bulgarians could enter the UK as soon as the already fragile restrictions on employment are lifted.
Simply put, the BBC has calculated itself that 350,000 Romanians and Bulgarians are waiting to come to the UK, and with family members included this could reasonably equate to 500,000 migrants in less than a year. But the BBC has taken these shocking figures and decided to report them as showing that there was no indication of a “huge Romanian-Bulgarian influx” to the UK.
The leader of UKIP, Nigel Farage, responded to these figures by saying, “It looks to me as though the BBC is using very heavy spin on their polling figures. Quite frankly their headline simply does not match the results they have been given.” While Philip Davies, the Conservative MP for Shipley, agreed that the BBC is biased in its reporting and said, “I don’t see why we should be surprised because the BBC has a track record of not being impartial and giving us their own political bias.”
If the BBC cannot be trusted to be impartial in its reporting then it is reasonable to ask why the British people should be forced to support an organisation whose management consider white British employees to be a matter of embarrasment. It is surely fortunate to find itself in the unique position of being funded by threat of imprisonment. But how much longer can this continue if the British Broadcasting Corporation is actively engaged in subverting the British people. Most people would consider that 350,000 migrants waiting to arrive in the UK from just two countries is reasonably described as an “influx”, and should be reported fairly and openly as likely to cause significant pressures on the British society and people. That it does not consider it in such a light suggests that it is no longer fit to be the national Broadcaster, but it ceased to be that a long time ago.
In my opinion the BBC is the single biggest problem the country faces in maintaining itself, defending itself, recovering economically, and allowing the general population to govern itself as it sees fit. Our second biggest problem is that Cameron’s party are either too scared of them or, more likely, agree with the BBC’s constant war against a country it considers toxic.
How to deal with this unified front?
We start by voting UKIP or anyone but the big 3 or by spoiling papers en masse.
There must also be a legal case for refusing to pay the Licence Fee because of the BBC’s outright refusal to give voice to the population anywhere in proportion to it’s opinions on issues like the EU and immigration. Has anyone looked into this idea?
Sucking out talent from Other Nation makes themselves easier to capture, and dominate for the EU.