Comparing New Zealand’s rate of immigration to that of the UK, where it is a huge issue and a deciding factor affecting the upcoming Brexit vote. We find that the floodgates have been opened, and our society’s demographics are being dramatically changed at a rate three times as fast as the continuing disaster unfolding in the UK.
According to 2015 statistics, net UK immigration was 333,000. That is a huge number but represents only 0.5% of the UK population. New Zealand is a country of only 4.4 million, yet net immigration for the year to March 2016 was 67,619; a 1.53% increase in population in one year. Most of these people came from India and China.
How many New Zealanders even know of the deliberate demographic changes being wrought on the people of New Zealand? These things are never discussed or debated at large. But rather, are kept out of sight in the hope that our ideologically driven government will be able to continue unimpeded with its liberal plan for New Zealand.
The refugees question came to the fore for a while but then disappeared from view. There was enough of an outcry about taking in 750 refugees a year. That’s our quota. We take our quota, engage in our dutiful virtue signalling and run along like good little white people.
I have already written about the philosophical leanings of the present NZ government in a piece entitled “Ethnic Affairs” on my blog. But we need to dig deeper to find out why our elected leaders have determined to go along with the programme of white genocide emanating from Europe. Does John Key and his National party buddies believe the Marxist propaganda, or are they simply the lapdog lackeys they appear to be; sacrificing the cultural and ethnic identity that defines us as New Zealanders for whatever crumbs are tossed their way from their bureaucratic masters in Brussels?
The Pedigree of KeyMy guess is that John Key is a true believer. The man has displayed a typically cavalier attitude to the rights and liberties of new Zealanders. In fact, I have for a long time regarded our Mr Key as New Zealand's answer to George Bush. The sort of guy you could have around for a beer and a barbie. He could even be a mate of sorts. And there's no problem that can't be solved by a little sweet talk and rule bending.…But this is serious, this is the prime minister were talking about.
Are these the traits of character, intelligence, integrity and honour we should expect to find in the most senior representative of our country? Or am I being just a bit naïve to believe that a prime minister actually represents the interests of the people who elected him?
In terms of connections. You would be hard-pressed to find a more "inside", insider than our Mr Key.
Key spent 6 years at Merrill Lynch where his stellar career took off. He was appointed head of Global Foreign Exchange in 1995, and in 1999 he was made a member of the Foreign Exchange Committee. The Foreign Exchange Committee is interesting, intended as an advisory committee to participants in the global foreign exchange markets, this committee is manned by the top movers in international finance and banking. And sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
It is from this stratospheric position of power and influence, not to mention the multi-million dollar salary, that in 2001 Key decided to opt out and come home to New Zealand. The following year Key is elected to parliament as the member for the newly created electorate of Helensville.
Key’s rise to Prime Minister of New Zealand is the fastest on record at 6 years. His election victory in November 2008 was also celebrated in the Jerusalem Post with the heading “New Zealand gets third Jewish prime minister” (11/09/2008)
Sometimes you can’t tell if an apple has a maggot in it until after you take a deep bite to the core. So it is with Key. After 8 years of John Key’s government, it is clear that early fears of a swing to the right were unfounded.
The distinction between right and left in NZ politics has been rendered a farce. All the really important issues that were formally the domain of right-conservative or Left-Liberal have been surreptitiously taken off the table as issues about which any meaningful vote could realistically be taken. Issues like immigration, foreign policy, monetary policy. Issues that affect the lives of all our people and the character of our society.
After eight years of damage John Key’s left wing, liberal bias is revealed. In 2013 he voted in Parliament for the Marriage Amendment Act which redefines marriage as “the union of 2 people regardless of their sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity”. Marriage is no longer between a man and a woman in New Zealand. And this act more than anything else undermines the Christian basis of our culture.
His disregard for the people and the democratic system has been demonstrated still further;
The GCSB bill, passed in 2013 allowing the security agency to spy on New Zealanders was pushed through against massive public opposition. Some polls recorded opposition over 80%
Asset Sales, In a non-binding referendum Two-thirds of voters, oppose asset sales. In an outrageous demonstration of arrogance and hubris, the government said it would ignore the result, and Key called the 900,000 voters who rejected his plan “extremists”. The Ideology of asset sales comes directly from Wall Street. They even have a name for it; the Washington Consensus.
It almost seems as though Mr Key never left Merrill Lynch after all, he simply moved to New Zealand to head up the local branch office.
Fascinating when you consider the prevailing culture of criminality and immorality at Merrill lynch. The Enron scandal, ML’s leading role in creating the financial collapse of 2008, the payout of $3.6 B dollars in bonuses after posting a loss of 27B. And funding those payouts with taxpayer-funded TARP bailout funds. And various out or court settlements costing hundreds of Millions of dollars.
The character of Mr Key and his contacts with the criminal elite of international banking still does not fully explain the motives for the behaviour of the National Party over the last eight years. So he’s a ratbag, but why would he deliberately run a country into the ground? Money is an unconvincing motive.
There is another reason.
The Kalergi PlanThe European Union is controlled from Brussels. The objective of the EU is to create a United States of Europe. A super-state of a billion people, ruled by unelected bureaucrats and bankers making their rules and casting their decrees from their glass towers in Brussels.
To that end, they seek to abolish not only the political borders within Europe but also the ethnic identity of the people of Europe. If this sounds like a conspiracy theory, that’s because it is. But it’s more than a theory. The philosophical founder of the EU was Richard Coudenhove Kalergi. In 1925 he laid out his plans for Europe in his book Practical Idealism in which he said;
“The man of the future will be a mongrel. Today's races and classes will disappear owing to the disappearing of space, time, and prejudice.
The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its outward appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.”
New Zealanders no longer need to wonder why the vast majority of immigrants are from India and China.
As a final proof of the intentions of the European Union for the European people, please follow the link to the official EU site to promote race mixing, Warning; This site contains explicit sexual information for refugees. Zanzu.
The only New Zealand politician to make any attempt to confront this issue is Winston Peters. In fact, it is only through his efforts that the scandalous 124000 was revealed at all. So in that sense, I must thank Mr Peters for having the courage to stand up to and confront the liberal agenda of the present government. However as a New Zealand Maori, Mr Peters is probably the only member of the house that could raise the issue without facing the usual avalanche of vapid racist abuse that would automatically fall on any Pakeha taking a similar stance,
It is however still a sad indictment of the state of European culture that we have to rely on a non-European spokesperson to make even the most elementary case for our own civilisation.