Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Yesterday Tommy Robinson was concern trolling Restore Britain to bait a reply from Rupert Lowe about what an English person is. Well, this was him few days ago.. after telling Dave Rubin his town is minority English, he then goes onto talk about English history and British DNA.. then...

71,929 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🇸🇪 What Did Jimmie Åkesson Mean? Who Is Swedish? • Jimmie Åkesson operates within the political arena. His job is to change policy. His job is to make it harder for criminals to operate and to ensure that Sweden limits Third World immigration. His job is to combat the destructive policies of the Social Democrats. His job is not to define Swedishness (that job falls to me) – in his words, he uses the term Swedish in a realpolitical context (i.e. based on citizenship). • I operate within the metapolitical arena. My job is to change how people think, how they perceive the world and how they perceive themselves. Metapolitics and politics are connected, but it is important to make a distinction. • Who is Swedish? A Swedish person is Swedish. Quite simple. A misconception arises when various types of Liberals equate being a valued member of society with being part of the dominant ethnic group. To use an example, imagine that a young Swedish man moves to England, assimilates fully, becomes an appreciated and valued member of English society. Is he English? No, he is still Swedish (one cannot change what one is). And that is completely natural; that he is not English does not mean that the English do not like or appreciate him. Were he to marry and have children with an English woman, and the children have English names and grow up with an English identity and in an English context, those children would be English. A bloodline can be incorporated into another ethnos (history is full of examples). What is important is to not reduce an ethnicity to a citizenship. It is also important to emphasise the fact that millions across the West must have their citizenships revoked and be remigrated. I understand what Jimmie means. But it is still important to highlight the fact that the Swedish people is ancient with an illustrious story stretching back through the mists of time. Being part of the Swedish story is about much more than a mere citizenship. Onwards!

The Golden One

12,432 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Allison Pearson and Liam Halligan criticise some people in Restore Britain for being ethno-nationalists They say its "insane" to suggest Bukayo Saka isn't English Both of you Allison Pearson and Liam Halligan couldn't be more wrong Bukayo Saka's parents are both Nigerian. He isn't English and had a Restore Britain government been in power when he was born he would never have been given British Citizenship. He has literally zero ancestral ties to these islands For the record Restore Britain's policy is for Nigeria to be on a red list and you need at least one British parent to be British, which Saka does not have. The truth is the vast majority of White British people are ethno-nationalists, they just don't realise it or understand what the term means, ask them if they want to become a minority in their own country and quickly you will find out they see themselves as different to "ethnic brits" and don't want to be outnumbered by them Ethno-nationalism is simply saying that the indigenous peoples of a country exist and they should be protected That doesn't mean we have to deport all non-white people, that doesn't mean we can never let a single migrant settle here What it means is we, the White British indigenous peoples of these isles who have ancestry stretching back thousands of years do not wish to be replaced and believe our country should consider protecting our people a priority, just like near every other country on Earth throughout all of human history has done for their own people It's as simple as that and absolutely is not an "insane" thing to want

Basil the Great

296,459 просмотров • 23 дней назад

I agree with Carl Benjamin 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 that the government are worried about a revolution. In fact, we know that the Cabinet Office was petrified of what happened in summer 2024 and are actively preparing for what happens if that happens again but on steroids. Which is why they’ve quietly imposed new AI facial recognition laws and even pre-crime monitoring to identity who is likely to commit crime (more on this below). However, I can assure Carl that the British government is not worried about Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 being the one that rallies the public revolution. Tommy is in the position he’s in precisely to avoid that situation. We know that Tommy spends months organising his rallies in conjunction with the police. They are regime approved pressure release valves that are always organised at the beginning or end of summer so people can blow off some steam. They’re also great opportunities for the government to use their AI facial recognition software to build databases of who attends these rallies. Why do you think Tommy insists on people not wearing face coverings? I think there was a time when the British state was very concerned about Tommy’s rallying power and how he might wield it. But I think the moment he left the EDL for Quilliam was when the British state turned him. He even said when he left that he was going to work with the police to identify far-right extremists. We also know he turned up to a meeting with Jayda Fransen with Special Branch officers. If the British government were genuinely concerned about Tommy Robinson they could put him in prison for all manner of things for many years. Real threats to the status quo are crushed in Britain. People like Farage and Robinson who’ve been around for decades, with all of the scandals that have been mostly covered up and could be exposed at a moments notice, are allowed to stay at the top with the consent of the establishment and become millionaires in exchange for compliance.

Wolf 🐺

42,739 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

🔥 Rupert Lowe DESTROYS BBC on Air for Burying Grooming Gangs Report While Obsessing Over Tommy Robinson! 👊 One of the absolute highlights of last night’s election coverage was Rupert Lowe tearing into the BBC live on air for completely burying his devastating independent grooming gangs report! Laura Kuenssberg was in full pathetic gotcha mode, obsessively badgering him over and over about whether Tommy Robinson might join Restore Britain. Lowe shut her down instantly: “That’s up to him.” She kept pushing like a broken record, so he fired back: “It’s a pretty puerile question frankly.” This lot are dangerously obsessed with Tommy Robinson 🇬🇧 . It’s a free country, he can join any political party he likes. Get over it! Then Rupert flipped the script and absolutely shamed them: “Tommy Robinson I’ve given him credit for what he did on the grooming gangs. I don’t know whether you’ve read our grooming gang report but he was very early out of the traps on identifying this pervasive evil which I’m sad to say the BBC have not covered at all.” “We issued this huge report and I’m not aware that you’ve covered it at all as a national monopoly which is supposed to cover everything of relevance to the British people. I think that’s quite extraordinary.” The BBC are a total disgrace. More obsessed with Tommy Robinson joining a party than the industrial-scale r*pe and abuse of hundreds of thousands of young British girls. Rupert Lowe just exposed them live. Well said, Rupert Lowe MP 👏

J Stewart

336,793 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Jacob Rees-Mogg is wrong — and he is wrong on the one subject he claims as his own: the constitution. England is not a synonym for Britain. Britain is a political union. England is a country that existed for centuries before that union, with its own law, its own church, its own parliament, its own people, and its own name. The Acts of Union did not abolish the English nation. They bound kingdoms together. A British passport makes you a subject of the Crown and a citizen of the United Kingdom. It does not, by itself, make you English — any more than it makes a Scot English, a Welshman English, or an Ulsterman English. If those distinctions were meaningless, devolution would be meaningless, the national football teams would be meaningless, and the word “England” on every statute, charter and battlefield before 1707 would be a clerical error. Rees-Mogg’s claim that the newest passport-holder is “as English as I am” collapses two different things into one: legal status and belonging to a people. The constitution recognises the first. It has never pretended the second is created at the counter of a passport office. Englishness is a historic nation, not a filing code. Nations are made of descent, language, custom, memory and time. They are not issued. That is why ancestry is not an optional extra. You do not become English by declaration any more than you become the heir of a house by walking through the front door. Four generations on this soil, of English stock, raised in English life, is the least that has ever been a serious test of whether a family has joined the people rather than merely entered the jurisdiction. Anything less is hospitality, residence, or citizenship. Those can be honourable. They are not the same thing. Rees-Mogg knows this in his bones even as he denies it with his mouth. He talks of Somerset centuries, of Crécy, of Magna Carta, of Fortescue and the king under the law — all of it English inheritance, not a bureaucratic abstraction called “British/English.” Then he tells you the inheritance does not matter. That is not constitutional tradition. That is a political convenience dressed up as history. So let us be precise. British is the state. English is the nation. Confusing the two is how a country forgets itself. The rebuttal starts there.

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 Graham Moore 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

53,844 просмотров • 4 дней назад