I quote:

The indications are that Dimeeteeooo is of Greek national or ethnic origin, assuming he was born here, who presumes to sneer at all things in England! Instead of tolerating such creeps – as we English people have in the past – we should ostracise them, shun ‘em, let ‘em know we are not going to put up with their bad manners without protest.

After all, if it is really so despicable here, they can always go the land of their forebears and save valuable space here. With luck, they might even enjoy another military junta, which could be more to their sour taste.

Such pieces as Dimeeteeooo’s serve to encourage right thinking English folk that something needs to be done to rid us of all those foreigners who do not want to fit in but impose their ideas on us, whether they come from north or west of the borders or from further afield!

Charmer!

Sure, I could google it and pretend to know, but I won’t ’cause I don’t really care. It is all just a constructed mythology.

I can quite see why someone that thought it was important would say I was a Philistine or somesuch, but, honestly, it isn’t important enough to get het up about.

There are injustices in this world, and I am sure that the status of Saint George is one of them, but really it is an abstraction, a thing to get excited about, as a substitute for dealing with things that really do matter.

Like?

Oh I don’t know?

Like, well, anything else really.

How’s the popcorn MatGB?

So he was a Frenchman who turned English. Sounds perfectly fair to me.

*continues munching popcorn*

This does remind me why I stopped posting on this subject 2 years ago, the brick wall just keeps getting in the way…

http://whatenglandmeanstome.co.uk/?p=76

“Frenchman turned English poet Hilaire Belloc wrote, When you have lost your inns drown your empty selves, for you will have lost the last of England.” Gareth Young from ‘What England means to me.’

To paraphrase you Gareth: You refer to Hilaire Belloc as a Frenchman. Does this tell people all they need to know about your peculiar brand of English nationalism?

.

His encyclopaedic knowledge is so great that for years he used the pseudonym ‘Toque’ without knowing that, in England, it is generally used to refer to a type of woman’s hat and, to a much lesser extent, a chef’s [cook's] hat. Shortly after I apprised him of the fact (which he did not acknowledge, pleading it means something else in – yes, you’ve guessed – the USA!), he felt constrained to modify his pretentious blog to add the rider “Hoodie in the Blog Steerage”. I guess this tells you much about Gareth alias Toque!

Consistent with his avoidance of addressing issues – in this case whether he is truly a faux English nationalist – he seeks to associate me with another person who has used the same phrase. Again, this tells you much about Gareth alias Toque!

It seems that – to use a sporting analogy – if you can’t play football, you tackle the players instead of playing the ball. After all, by Gareth’s tactic is to divert attention from his own inadequacies. He says he really does have to go. Life can be so fair and fortunate on occasion!

.

I wait to be ‘put in my place’, wherever that may be, at the appropriate time, whenever that may be. Sorry to cut and run but I really do have to go.

As Joe Louis once said: “He can run, but he can’t hide!”

YOUR words are available Gareth to put you in your place at an appropriate time. If I have my way, it will be when you are present and in public before a large number of people where you will not be able to scuttle off like a mean minded crab.

.

More embarrassing ‘past’ here.

I’m off to Heathrow this evening to fly to the North American continent – missing you already.

xxx

You adopt your usual practice of standing off and bombarding us with distorted generalisations and sneering. To apply your formula: “This tells people all they need to know about YOUR bogus brand of English nationalism”. It would be expecting far too much for you to engage with the issues which prompted this thread. Oh no, you’d rather move onto other ground and seek to confuse them. On the evidence, you merely raise other matters which are not relevant in your attempts to vilify me and to divert attention from valid concerns.

For the record: I’ve never met you [as far as I am aware], and I’ve no desire to change that. No doubt you’ll be scavenging around [in the past, of course] for more rubbish to post in lieu of decent, honest and, above all, relevant argument.

.

You bring up George Orwell’s Scottish surname (Blair) and refer to him a “a Scot who has been dead for more than half a century”.

This tells people all they need to know about your peculiar brand of English nationalism.

That your stable mate Steve Uncles maligns the memory of Chris Lightfoot by describing him as ‘a waster’ is equally informative.

I’ve rarely had the displeasure of meeting bigger wasters than you and Steve Uncles.

I suppose a faux English nationalist bent on creating mischief would adopt your position.

If you’d bothered to read the background to this thread, you might – just might – have understood, but then, that would have required an open and receptive mind, not one stuffed with its own conceit and sanctimonious pomposity! From your dubious position, it is kosher for anyone to indulge in “. . unwanted conduct which has the purpose or effect of– (a) violating that other person’s dignity, or (b) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment . . . ” aimed at England and English cultural practices and to single them and no one else out for such treatment.

According to you, the English have no effective rights . . . after all, with your biassed precepts, it is profoundly un-English to assert any. It is this type of arbitrarily silly nonsense which is designed to render the English ineffective! If you weren’t so appallingly ignorant and prejudiced, you might be inclined to zip your mouth and not [in the words of Mark Twain] prove you’re a fool! Why, with “that’s all you need to know” you even suggest that limiting one’s knowledge is desirable.

As I said earlier: “Those with feeble positions to defend, frequently resort to the past.” PLUS (on the evidence of at least one knuckle-dragging reaction) plain abuse! The intellectual credentials of any group [such as The Freedom Party] which professes that: “the freedoms of the people whose ANCIENT roots lie in the United Kingdom” as distinct from England must be in grave doubt, not only by reason of its invalidity but (once again) because of its whimsical resorting to the past instead of the present!

It doesn’t endear you to anyone, it’s profoundly un-English, and by threatening to sue people under the Race Relations Act you associate St George’s Day with race when it should be a day of national rather than ethnic celebration.

Unfortunately the course of action that you have chosen is not only illiberal but also self-defeating. What’s worse is the fact that it appears to little more than a fund-raising scheme for the English Democrats, if we take the view of goon-in-chief Steve Uncles.

Frankly I find you and Steve Uncles a complete and utter embarrassment. I hope that people don’t take the simplistic view and regard English nationalism as one cohesive movement because it would be a tragedy if they came to see you and Steve Uncles, or the EDP and English Lobby, as the standard bearers of English nationalism. Personally, if I owned a hotel and you goons turned up and put an England flag in the window I’d remove it as well.

The three founding organisations behind the English Lobby were Third Way, The English Democrats and The Freedom Party. That’s all that people really need to know.

Anti-English nit pickers are not only so endlessly literal about totems such as St George [droning on about how he was middle eastern etc - bit like St Andrew really!] but seem unable to comprehend that he is a contemporary symbol representing England and the English . . . NOT us representing him!

Such contrarians are entitled to THEIR disloyal opinions, but I do wish they’d not seek to inflict them on me and other English people, singling us out to do so. Such is their prejudice, one never seems to encounter similar petty criticism of other nationalities and their symbols.

.

Here’s another quote that I like.

“I wished I had been born early enough to have been called a Little Englander. It was a term of sneering abuse, but I should be delighted to accept it as a description of myself.” – J.B.Priestley

And another.

“I am an Englishman. My passport was issued by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and it describes me as a British citizen. But English is what I feel and, therefore, English is what I am.” – Roy Hattersley

And again.

“England is being run, at an important level, by people who hate it.” – Hal G.P. Colebatch

Feel free to contextualise, or not. Orwell would have been appalled at the state of democracy and liberty in England. He would have agreed with me about these Scots who govern us without the democratic mandate to do so. Maybe he would be more horrified at the prospect of Eton toffs, but I doubt it.

.

“A family with the wrong members in control – that, perhaps, is as near as one can come to describing England in a phrase.”

Brown and Darling are the wrong members, and unelected members at that, as are all Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs.

You’re a nationalist, you prat. Your position is utterly feeble which, I suppose, is why you base it on a past that never existed to describe a present with no relation to reality and hope for a future that no-one else wants.

xD.

I suppose the opinions of many [most?] English folk TODAY are of no account to pompous dictatorial types!

Clearly, you are neither a liberal nor a socialist!

.

I think you’ll find that the view of ‘Englishness’ espoused here, and by Toque and the other Witans, is nicely encapsulated by this passage from Orwell’s ‘The Lion and the Unicorn.

The gentleness of the English civilization is perhaps its most marked characteristic. You notice it the instant you set foot on English soil. It is a land where the bus conductors are good-tempered and the policemen carry no revolvers. In no country inhabited by white men is it easier to shove people off the pavement. And with this goes something that is always written off by European observers as ‘decadence’ or hypocrisy, the English hatred of war and militarism. It is rooted deep in history, and it is strong in the lower-middle class as well as the working class. Successive wars have shaken it but not destroyed it. Well within living memory it was common for ‘the redcoats’ to be booed at in the streets and for the landlords of respectable public houses to refuse to allow soldiers on the premises. In peace time, even when there are two million unemployed, it is difficult to fill the ranks of the tiny standing army, which is officered by the country gentry and a specialized stratum of the middle class, and manned by farm labourers and slum proletarians. The mass of the people are without military knowledge or tradition, and their attitude towards war is invariably defensive. No politician could rise to power by promising them conquests or military ‘glory’, no Hymn of Hate has ever made any appeal to them. In the last war the songs which the soldiers made up and sang of their own accord were not vengeful but humorous and mock-defeatist. The only enemy they ever named was the sergeant-major.

One rapid but fairly sure guide to the social atmosphere of a country is the parade-step of its army. A military parade is really a kind of ritual dance, something like a ballet, expressing a certain philosophy of life. The goose-step, for instance, is one of the most horrible sights in the world, far more terrifying than a dive-bomber. It is simply an affirmation of naked power; contained in it, quite consciously and intentionally, is the vision of a boot crashing down on a face. Its ugliness is part of its essence, for what it is saying is ‘Yes, I am ugly, and you daren’t laugh at me’, like the bully who makes faces at his victim. Why is the goose-step not used in England? There are, heaven knows, plenty of army officers who would be only too glad to introduce some such thing. It is not used because the people in the street would laugh. Beyond a certain point, military display is only possible in countries where the common people dare not laugh at the army. The Italians adopted the goose-step at about the time when Italy passed definitely under German control, and, as one would expect, they do it less well than the Germans. The Vichy government, if it survives, is bound to introduce a stiffer parade-ground discipline into what is left of the French army. In the British army the drill is rigid and complicated, full of memories of the eighteenth century, but without definite swagger; the march is merely a formalized walk. It belongs to a society which is ruled by the sword, no doubt, but a sword which must never be taken out of the scabbard.

Inconsistent bugger that he was, Orwell’s account of the ‘English Genius’ has an honesty and truthfulness that your own brand of faux English victimhood utterly lacks.

Semple & Co will like Blacker’s piece but probably find anti-English, undemocratic excuses to discount the comments it provoked!

.

Swivel-eyed lunacy? Tellingly even BNP members are questioning Uncles’ associations.

See my comment @ 86. You’re still repeating the same tired old rubbish after it’s been answered.

Steven Uncles @ 106:
>You will do everything possible to appear not to be racist, infact, appearing not a racist is more important then defending England.

Are you insinuating that Toque IS racist? What are you basing this on?