"Almost a quarter (24 per cent), of the English said they considered their flag to be racist, compared to 10 per cent of Scots and seven per cent of Welsh, when asked about their own flags... The survey found that while 80 per cent linked the British flag with such feelings, only 61 per cent associated them with English one.
By contrast, the Scottish and the Welsh were far more likely to feel pride in their flag – the St Andrew’s Cross and Red Dragon respectively – than the English in theirs.
The survey was carried out by the think tank British Future as part of a report analysing how people from around the UK view their 'national identity.' It will be released tomorrow, on St George’s Day."
"The survey was carried out by the think tank British Future."
Of the eight trustees of "British Future", three are Asian, two are Jewish and seven are rabid, PC globalists. When such folk as these put an opinion poll before the public you can be sure the question asked and the demographic questioned will be designed to provide them with the politically correct answer required. From British Future's web site:
"British Future has four main areas where it wants to open up more public debate - identity and integration, migration and opportunity. In considering these, its starting point is a belief in:Building a modern British identity which helps to build an inclusive citizenship...
Promoting integration in Britain, so that people from all backgrounds contribute fully to the society that we want to share.
Understanding that migration has long made a positive contribution to British life...
Working for economic and social opportunity to be shared across our society - so that the chances in life of Britain's next generation are not determined by where their parents came from."
This anti-British bunch are not in the business of telling the British people that their flag is NOT a "racist symbol."
Check out what the British Future type has flooded, and will continue to flood, our country with (until they're stopped) in Rogues' Gallery at the roguesgallery.blogspot and "Rochdale Paedophiles" at YouTube.
On 19 April 2012, The Daily Mail quoted Miranda Suit, founder of campaign group Safermedia, thus:
"This generation is going through an experiment. No one knows how they will survive this unprecedented assault on their sexual development. They are guinea pigs for the next generation."
The Mail added:
"Four out of five 16-year-old boys and girls regularly access porn online while one in three ten-year-olds has seen explicit material, a disturbing cross-party report reveals. It also cites figures showing that more than a quarter of young patients being treated at a leading private clinic are receiving help for addiction to online pornography.
One appalled MP revealed that her son had told her that swapping hardcore images on memory sticks between pupils at his school is ‘absolutely rife’.
There are fears that the rise of internet pornography is leaving teenagers unable to maintain normal relationships and even increasing their susceptibility to grooming by sexual abusers.
Yesterday the backbench Tory behind the study, Claire Perry, demanded that internet providers offer parents a simple way of filtering out adult content... Miss Perry’s report also revealed that the privately run Portland Clinic in London reported that 26 per cent of young people coming to it for psychological treatment were hooked on internet porn. And Tory MP Andrea Leadsom revealed that her own son had told her that ‘handing around very hardcore porn on memory sticks is absolutely rife at his school’...
The report suggested 12 per cent of young teenagers were involved in sharing intimate images of themselves, which were often circulated around the class when a relationship broke up...
Tink Palmer, of the Marie Collins Foundation, said porn could be ‘a vehicle for perpetrators who wish to harm children online to encourage them to enter into that sort of fantasy and then often meet them offline.’
She said well over half of young women victims of grooming and abuse she encountered were from ‘middle-class’ families living in ‘very comfortable’ homes."
On 19 April 2012, UKIP employment spokesman, Derek Clark, commented thus in The Daily Express:
"166,000 jobs were created in the last quarter for non-UK nationals. At the same time 166,000 jobs were lost by UK nationals. What this appears to be is a straight switch between British jobs, and jobs for non-Britons... We are seeing the negative result of years of denigration of British workers.
I have almost given up counting the times I have heard official Government spokesmen, including the Employment Minister yesterday, talk about how British workers are feckless, not interested in working and not conscientious...
This makes it harder for young British people to find work. If they are told they are useless, firstly they begin to believe it, then, more worryingly, so do employers. With this mood music from the Government, who would blame an employer for choosing an immigrant over a British worker?...
I have met hundreds of young people, unemployed but willing to work. It is their life chances that are being undermined by this drip-drip propaganda."
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of think tank Migration Watch, added:
“Yet again, the number of British workers has fallen while the number of foreign nationals in the workforce has increased.”
Tory MP Peter Bone also said this:
“We need to take back control of our borders from the EU. If this goes on, more and more indigenous people will blame foreigners for taking their jobs.”
According to the Office for National Statistics, the total number of foreigners working in Britain now has increased to more than 2.5 million. The figures also showed an 89,000 rise in the number of people working part-time because they could not find full-time jobs, to a total of 1.4 million, the highest since records began in 1992.
Conservative Employment Minister Chris Grayling admitted this:
“There is no doubt that a young person coming out of school, college or university without the experience [of work] is at a disadvantage compared to someone coming into the UK from overseas. EU law does not allow us to discriminate.”
If "EU law" puts foreigners first then a patriotic government that cared for its citizens would ditch the law and the EU.
That's never going to happen in a country run by traitors.
On 18 April 2012, Stephen Glover opined thus in The Daily Mail:
"Jack Straw... is accused of knowingly agreeing to the forced transfer or rendition of a Libyan dissident from Bangkok to Libya in 2004 when it was obvious that the man would be tortured by Colonel Gaddafi’s thugs.
This dissident, Abdel Hakim Belhadj, is now a senior military commander in Libya. Yesterday his lawyers in London served papers on Mr Straw after a newspaper claimed he was complicit in the rendition. The former Foreign Secretary also faces a separate police investigation over the same issue...
MI6 officers have just shown him evidence that he did, in fact, sign off Belhadj’s rendition. Mr Belhadj was subsequently tortured, having been flown to Tripoli by the CIA against his will with his pregnant wife, who was allegedly severely mistreated...
These are very grave charges which Mr Straw will have to answer one way or another. He is being accused of handing over a man to certain torture by the monstrous Gaddafi...
It is very difficult to believe that he would have taken such a momentous step without the approval, possibly the encouragement, of the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair. A couple of weeks after Belhadj was abducted and sent to Libya, Mr Blair paid his first visit to Gaddafi in Tripoli, beginning a close liaison that ended only last year with the Libyan rebellion. There is good reason to believe that MI6’s then head of counter terrorism, Mark Allen (now Sir Mark), had arranged Belhadj’s rendition as a sop to Gaddafi before Mr Blair’s visit...
Whatever happens, I trust Mr Straw is not going to play the fall guy for his old boss, who by 2004 was, in effect, acting as his own Foreign Secretary. If he is to be investigated by the police, so should the former prime minister be...
How odd that on the same day he was served these papers by Mr Belhadj’s lawyers, Mr Straw’s reservations about the Freedom of Information Act should have been widely reported. Mr Straw, who may harbour a lethal secret of his own, is in favour of greater governmental secrecy — as, unsurprisingly, is Mr Blair...
In his memoirs, Mr Blair wrote that he ‘quaked at the imbecility’ of the Act. That is a telling use of the word ‘quake’, conveying as it does the suggestion of terror of a damaging revelation. Without doubt, the former Prime Minister has a good deal to quake about.
Now Mr Straw has climbed on the same bandwagon, arguing that the Act needs to be watered down so as to protect the secrecy of government decision-making...
The Government can always exercise a veto to prevent the publication of material it wants to keep secret, as Mr Straw did himself when he was Justice Secretary in 2009 in relation to the Cabinet meeting in March 2003 which approved the invasion of Iraq. He argued then that release of the papers would do ‘serious damage’ to the principle of Cabinet government.
As it is, we will have to wait until at least 2023 under the new 20-year rule to discover whether there were any ministers who had the gumption to speak out on that occasion, or whether they tamely rubber-stamped what a war-mongering Mr Blair demanded.
The truth is that both Mr Blair and Mr Straw have become self-serving cheerleaders of the cult of governmental secrecy... Information that is declared to be sacrosanct very often conceals mistakes, errors of judgment or downright skulduggery on the part of ministers, civil servants or the intelligence services.
Only yesterday, papers reluctantly released by the Foreign Office showed that in 1970 it lied that the inhabitants of the Indian ocean island of Diego Garcia were ‘contract labourers’ so that they could be deported without fuss and a U.S. base built. In fact, they were largely indigenous islanders forcibly removed from their homes.
I’m afraid that in recent weeks there have been disquieting signs that some leading lights in the Coalition have contracted a version of the same secrecy disease that so afflicted the last Labour Government. Secret courts and plans for email surveillance suggest this Government is catching the same bug."
On 18 April 2012, The Daily Express quoted Councillor Zulfiqar Ali, a former Mayor of Rochdale, thus:
"I have known Mr Abdul Qayyum since the 1990s when he arrived in Rochdale.
He has lived in Rochdale all of this time. All the years he has lived in Rochdale he has always been involved in community activities and always makes time to help others, for example cleaning the neighbourhood, helping out in the local youth club and most importantly he looks after his family.
Abdul has a wife and children that live in Rochdale. He has fully adopted the British way of life and has made many friends because of this. Abdul is one of those men the community has really taken to – they are really proud to have him as part of the wider family. He is hard-working and dedicated."
Councillor Aftab Hussain added:
"I have known Abdul Qayyum for the last 10 years as a local resident in the area. He lives with his wife and two children. Mr Qayyum is a hard-working person. He has worked hard throughout his life. Within the community, he comes across very well and I have never seen or heard of any wrongdoing before this case. I personally was shocked to hear about this news."
The Express explained:
"Two councillors have told a court that a taxi driver accused of grooming under-age girls for sex is a 'hard-working family man'. Members of Rochdale council and a solicitor spoke in support for Abdul Qayyum, 44, one of 11 men accused of abusing girls as young as 13."
On 22 March 2012, Daniel Miller told us this in The Daily Mail:
“Chris Nathaniel, 34, was seized by police at Heathrow airport in connection with the killing of 18-year-old Danny O'Shea who was stabbed in the neck after being chased down the street by a mob.
Nathaniel, who was returning from the U.S., has worked with many leading sports and show business stars AND WAS INVOLVED WITH ANTI-KNIFE CRIME MEETINGS WITH FORMER PRIME MINISTERS TONY BLAIR AND GORDON BROWN...
Nathaniel is the head of the NVA entertainment Group based in London's Canary Wharf, which is believed to have worked with celebrities including Jordan and girl band Misteeq…
Last year he brokered a deal, believed to be worth several million pounds, allowing Chelsea star Cole to open a London branch of U.S. rapper Jay-Z's 40/40 restaurant and bar franchise. He also represents Jamaican sprint star Usain Bolt as well as Manchester United Footballer Antonio Valencia and Birmingham City defender Curtis Davies…
He was arrested with a 33-year-old man and questioned at an East London police station before being freed on bail until March pending further inquiries…
Danny O'Shea, was stabbed on December 2 last year outside his mother's home in Canning Town…
Police investigated the killing say THEY HAVE BEEN MET WITH A WALL OF SILENCE FROM THE LOCAL COMMUNITY.”
Wikipedia tell us this:
“In 2010, Chris Nathaniel was named as a new entrant onto The Times Sport Power 100. The Voice newspaper named him as one of the Top 30 most influential Black Britons in football in 2008, 2009 and 2010.”
Ah, the mercenaries and footsoldiers of the globalists, how they run true to form.
All you teeterers on the brink of patriotism looking in, don't you think it's about time you checked things out in a serious way? I mean, if you've been coming here for a while, you must have some idea by now of the desperate treachery of those who raised up characters like Nathaniel.
"Meetings with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown."
That's the bloke who just been arrested in connection with the murder of an 18-year-old British lad. Hobnobbing with the traitors. Nibbling at the brandy snaps and sipping the Pimms. Figuring out how best to do away with Whitey.
Remember the traitor, you teeterers. Remember those who brought the Nathaniels here, in their many millions, to kill our teenage sons.
On 6 March 2012, a disgruntled Labour supporter said this to Ed Miliband during a phone-in on BBC Radio 5 Live:
“It is quite clear to everybody that you are not going to be the prime minister of this country by any stretch of the imagination. If Labour are going to win the election it will be with somebody else.”
The Labourite then proved he was your typical party hack and no National Front plant by saying this:
“Someone like Peter Hain, who has a wealth of experience of life.” (Hain is a foreigner, just like Miliband’s parents)
One ‘lifelong Labour supporter’ also said Miliband was a 'laughing stock' and two others said he should step aside if the party was to have any chance of being elected in 2015.
I hope he sticks around. A recent study of the tolerability of celebrities by the Flower Council of Holland found David Attenborough captivated people for longest, averaging 9minutes and 26seconds. On the other hand, people could only bear listening to Ed Miliband for 28 seconds before becoming 'bored' or 'irritated'.
On 6 March 2012, after six British soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, Thomas Ball, a Scottish National Party member and activist, twittered thus:
“There’s no British soldier fighting for anything I believe in. Bunch of child killers… Our Heroes are protecting their country by bayoneting 10-year-olds… Majority of UK soldiers are racist, arrogant, undereducated thugs who join up for the ‘thrill’ of killing humans… They accept danger as an occupational hazard of the enjoyment they get from killing human beings.”
Thus spake the British mainstream.
In March 2012, Jonathan Roberts, Labour’s parliamentary candidate for Thirsk and Malton at the 2010 election, left an open letter to Ken Livingstone at the Labour Uncut web site.
This is it:
“I write as a Labour party and trade union member. I have spent many evenings in dusty, cold community centres with left of centre colleagues arguing over the minutes of last month’s branch meetings. I have walked more miles than I care to remember on the Labour doorstep. I have stuffed so many envelopes that I feel as though I’ve single-handedly kept my postman in employment.
I do it because I believe Labour values can help people. But I am not, now, doing any of these things for you. Your supporters will say I’m disloyal to the Labour Party, but don’t seem to mind you campaigning against our candidate in Tower Hamlets.
Your supporters cheered you when you called tax avoiders ‘rich bastards,’ but they don’t seem to mind THE £50,000 YOU HAVE ALLEGEDLY AVOIDED YOURSELF…
Your supporters sing about how you speak the truth, but don’t seem to mind how INDEPENDENT FACT-CHECKING ORGANISATIONS REGULARLY DESCRIBE YOUR CLAIMS AS ‘FICTION’… YOUR RELENTLESS CYNICISM AND NEGATIVITY IS MATCHED ONLY BY YOUR HYPOCRISY…
It bothers me that, because I am a proud member of this party, I am expected to give up countless hours of my life to fight through the rain and cold to campaign for A MAN WHO HAS MADE SO MANY ANTI-WEST COMMENTS THAT IRANIAN STATE TELEVISION GAVE HIM HIS OWN TV SHOW…
On May 3rd I will get on a tube and go to the office. I’ll put in a decent day’s work and then go home in the evening. Whatever I do, I won’t be stopping off to vote. I won’t support any other candidate because they do not match my values. But I won’t be supporting you because yours don’t match them either. I love Labour, but more importantly I love London and my country. I do not think you are good for either.”
On 6 March 2012, The Economist described "the American-Israeli relationship" as a "sort of crazy co-dependency... doomed... stubborn and unstable... increasingly delusional and dangerous... disastrous... paranoid."
The magazine added:
"During his meeting with Barack Obama on Monday, Bibi Netanyahu said Israel 'must have the ability always to defend itself, by itself, against any threat.'
'I believe that's why you appreciate, Mr. President, that Israel must reserve the right to defend itself,' Netanyahu said. 'After all, that's the very purpose of the Jewish state, to restore to the Jewish people control over our destiny. That's why my supreme responsibility as prime minister of Israel is to ensure that Israel remains master of its fate.'
News flash: Israel is not master of its fate. It's not terribly surprising that a country with less than 8m inhabitants is not master of its fate. Switzerland, Sweden, Serbia and Portugal are not masters of their fates. These days, many countries with populations of 100m or more can hardly be said to be masters of their fates. Britain and China aren't masters of their fates, and even the world's overwhelmingly largest economy, the United States, isn't really master of its fate.
But Israel has even less control over its own destiny than Portugal or Britain do. The main reason is that, unlike those countries, Israel refuses to give up its empire. Israel is unable to sustain its imperial ambitions in the West Bank, or even to articulate them coherently... For over a decade, the tone of Israeli politics has been a mix of panic, despair, hysteria and resignation.
No one bears greater responsibility for the trap Israel finds itself in today than Mr Netanyahu. As prime minister in the late 1990s, he did more than any other Israeli leader to destroy the peace process. Illegal land grabs by settlers were tolerated and quietly encouraged in the confused expectation that they would aid territorial negotiations.
Violent clashes and provocations erupted whenever the peace process seemed on the verge of concrete steps forward; the most charitable spin would be that the Israel is failed to exercise the restraint they might have shown in retaliating against Palestinian terrorism, had they been truly interested in progress towards a two-state solution...
Having trapped themselves in a death struggle with Palestinians that they cannot acknowledge or untangle, Israelis have psychologically displaced the source of their anxiety onto a more distant target: Iran. An Iranian nuclear bomb would not be a happy development for Israel. Neither was Pakistan's, nor indeed North Korea's. The notion that it represents a new Holocaust is overstated, and the belief that the source of Israel's existential woes can be eliminated with an airstrike is mistaken.
But Iran makes an appealing enemy for Israelis because, unlike the Palestinians, it can be fitted into a familiar ideological trope from the Jewish national playbook: the eliminationist anti-Semite."
News flash (2):
Jourmnalistic honesty regarding the overclose relationship of America and Israel now appears to be spittal-drenchedly mainstream.
News flash (3):
Unlike Israel, the white world IS the "master of its fate." It can still dismiss the racial suicide option insisted upon by the New World Order elite.
On 6 March 2012, French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, said this on French TV:
“Our system of integration is getting worse and worse. We have too many foreigners on our territory and we can no longer manage to find them accommodation, a job, a school…
Over the five year term, I think that to restart the process of integration in the right way, we must divide by two the number of people that we welcome, that is to say to pass from 180,000 per year to 100,000.”
Sarkozy said he also wanted to limit the amount of welfare benefits paid to immigrant workers so that only those had lived in the country for 10 years, and worked for at least five, received them.
The French Presidential Election is just two months away and Sarkozy is trailing badly in all the opinion polls. His Socialist rival, Francois Hollande, is predicted to finish eight points ahead of him in May. Thus, he goes the way Thatcher once did. “We are being swamped”, she said, just before the 1979 election. Thirty two years later, at least five million more immigrants are living here than were doing so back then.
Along with their many children and grandchildren.
On 5 March 2012, Chris Greenwood and Julian Gavaghan told us this at The Mail Online:
"A third of teenage girls have been victims of sexual violence by a boyfriend…
Experts fear that some do not even realise they are victims of a crime and others are too terrified or embarrassed to speak out. THEY BLAME THE PROBLEM ON THE SEXUALISATION OF TEENAGERS AS TV, FILMS AND THE INTERNET bombard them with provocative messages. SEXUAL VIOLENCE IS OFTEN FUELLED BY ONLINE PORNOGRAPHY that can be shared between mobile phones at the click of a button.”
On 5 March 2012, Leo McKinstry said this in The Daily Express:
“The most depressing feature of today’s politics is the chasm between the British public and the ruling elite. We are supposed to live in a democracy yet THE MAINSTREAM VIEWS OF THE PEOPLE ARE SO OFTEN TREATED WITH CONTEMPT BY OUR ARROGANT GOVERNING CLASS.
On everything from the EU to immigration, from benefits to criminal sentencing the majority of voters want a far more robust approach from the Government. But IN THEIR DETERMINATION TO MAINTAIN THEIR BUREAUCRATIC EMPIRES AND POLITICALLY CORRECT IDEOLOGY OUR MASTERS SNEER AT SUCH AN OUTLOOK, dismissing it as ‘reactionary,’ unrealistic’ or ‘extreme.’
So the public develops a profound sense of disillusion towards the political process. Nothing ever seems to change. No matter what the outcome of elections the same dripping wet officials always appear to remain in charge, PROPPING UP THE WELFARE STATE AND THE EU SUPERSTATE, LETTING OUT THE PRISONERS AND LETTING IN THE MIGRANTS. All the politicians’ noisy promises that they will listen to the public turn out to be hollow rhetoric.
So deep is the mood of disillusion that it has even reached the heart of 10 Downing Street. At the end of last week it was announced that David Cameron’s most senior and trusted adviser Steve Hilton will shortly leave his job…
Hilton’s departure was… hastened by his deep frustration with the sclerotic Government machine, which blocked radical change at every turn… He had hoped that he would be able to bring about real change once Cameron reached office… But Hilton’s optimism soon turned to exasperation once the coalition was established. He was dismayed at the reluctance of even Tory ministers to challenge conventional bureaucratic thinking while he also grew furious at how much of the Government’s time was taken up in compliance with EU directives...
Once more the politically correct establishment has prevailed. Hilton is right to feel an acute sense of disappointment over the lack of rigorous, challenging conservatism in the Government. At times IT ALMOST FEELS LIKE LABOUR WON THE LAST ELECTION AS MINISTERS BOAST OF THEIR ENTHUSIASM FOR GAY MARRIAGE OR THE EXPANSION OF FOREIGN AID…
Across too much of the Government there has been a mood of cowardice, a supine unwillingness to fight for radical reform against the failing status quo… The same is true of the reluctance to cut red tape on businesses and the failure to amend the despised Human Rights Act. Immigration remains out of control; criminal sentences are still too soft; civic bureaucracy is as bloated as ever… and the destruction of our nationhood by the EU gathers pace,”
On 5 March 2012, Ian Drury reported thus at The Mail Online:
“The Equality and Human Rights Commission has spent at least £150,000 of taxpayers’ money publishing a review into how public bodies safeguard people’s rights. The left-wing quango, led by former Labour politician Trevor Phillips… calls for more rights for groups that include criminals, travellers and gipsies on illegal camps, and suspected extremists… The report, called How Fair Is Britain?, states…
‘Offenders may be punished with a prison sentence, which means a denial of their right to liberty. Treating the right to vote as a privilege to be removed for bad behaviour is A DISPROPORTIONATE INTERFERENCE WITH A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT.’
The report also states that travellers and gipsies had no choice but to occupy sites illegally because local authorities had undermined their rights by failing to provide land for caravans. Evicting them therefore contravened Article 8 of the Human Rights Act – the right to a private and family life.
‘Gipsy and traveller communities face a shortage of caravan sites,’ the report claims. ‘This means it is difficult for them to practise their traditional way of life.’
Tory MP Philip Davies said:
‘I don’t really think the commission needed to spend tens of thousands of pounds telling us we need more human rights… It seems a complete waste of money. In many cases the people who the commission says are not getting human rights have forfeited them. DO PRISONERS THINK OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE VICTIMS OF THEIR CRIME? DO TRAVELLERS THINK OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF THOSE WHOSE LAND THEY ILLEGALLY CAMP ON? Not for a second.
THESE ARE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO SEEM TO HAVE RIGHTS, NOT THE DECENT LAW-ABIDING PEOPLE WHOSE RIGHTS SEEM TO BE IGNORED TIME AFTER TIME.’
The document, which took more than two years to compile, also criticises Britain’s terror laws.”
In the March edition of Attitude Magazine, Elton John interviewed gay activist, Peter Tatchell.
During the course of the interview, the homosexual pop star praised him thus:
“You’ve never said anything hateful about anybody, you’ve just told the truth.”
Which isn’t true. I’ve seen him snarl at quite a few.
“You never condemned anybody – well you have – but you haven’t done it with hate. You’ve just said: Listen, this is unfair, this is not right, with the Pope, and the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the thing in Moscow, and you’ve never reacted violently and reacted with hate. YOU’VE JUST BEEN LIKE JESUS CHRIST WOULD’VE BEEN WHEN HE FORGAVE ALL THE PEOPLE THAT SINNED…
Like you, I am not afraid of going anywhere. I’m not afraid of going to Iran. I’m not afraid of going to Syria… If they shoot me, they shoot me.”
For Pete‘s sake, Mr Ahminedjad, what are you waiting for?
As for the USA:
“It’s so f*cking homophobic, it’s ludicrous”.
“If someone has been a homophobe and they change, I am first in line to welcome and embrace them. When Michael Portillo was defence minister, gays and lesbians were witch-hunted out of the armed forces. He voted against LGBT equality in the House of Commons. So when he stood for Parliament in Kensington and Chelsea, I HARRIED HIM WHEREVER HE WENT…
During the 80s and 90s… I was bashed about 300 times, mostly by homophobes and neo-Nazis…
The police refused to end their homophobia and wouldn’t negotiate. So the queer rights group OutRage!, which I was involved with, began a high-profile campaign of direct action. WE INVADED POLICE STATIONS, INTERRUPTED POLICE PRESS CONFERENCES…
Within three months, the police were pleading with us to negotiate. WITHIN A YEAR, THEY AGREED TO MOST OF OUR DEMANDS for a non-homophobic policing policy. Within three years, THE NUMBER OF GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN CONVICTED FOR CONSENTING BEHAVIOUR FELL BY TWO-THIRDS… I’m really proud of that campaign.”
I wonder, has the transmission of AIDS and other diseases shot up as a consequence?
“EDUCATION AGAINST HOMOPHOBIA AND ALL PREJUDICE SHOULD BE A COMPULSORY SUBJECT IN EVERY SCHOOL, FROM PRIMARY LEVEL UPWARDS, WITH NO OPT-OUTS FOR INDEPENDENT AND FREE SCHOOLS AND NO RIGHT OF PARENTS TO WITHDRAW THEIR KIDS. THERE SHOULD BE EXAMS IN TOLERANCE. THE RESULTS SHOULD GO ON PUPIL’S RECORDS AND SHOULD HAVE TO BE DECLARED WHEN APPLYING FOR HIGHER EDUCATION AND JOBS.”
Elton John’s partner, David Furnish, chipped in with:
“We need people like Peter Tatchell in the world.”
We need more Tatchells in the world about as much as we need an injection of the Black Death.
On 3 March 2012, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, President of the Bishops’ Conference of Scotland and Britain's most senior Catholic, said this in The Sunday Telegraph:
"Civil partnerships have been in place for several years now, allowing same-sex couples to register their relationship and enjoy a variety of legal protections. When these arrangements were introduced, supporters were at pains to point out that they didn’t want marriage, accepting that marriage had only ever meant the legal union of a man and a woman. Those of us who were not in favour of civil partnership, believing that such relationships are harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, warned that in time marriage would be demanded too. We were accused of scaremongering then, yet exactly such demands are upon us now.
Since all the legal rights of marriage are already available to homosexual couples, it is clear that THIS PROPOSAL IS NOT ABOUT RIGHTS, BUT RATHER IS AN ATTEMPT TO REDEFINE MARRIAGE FOR THE WHOLE OF SOCIETY AT THE BEHEST OF A SMALL MINORITY OF ACTIVISTS.
Redefining marriage will have huge implications for what is taught in our schools, and for wider society. It will redefine society since the institution of marriage is one of the fundamental building blocks of society. The repercussions of enacting same-sex marriage into law will be immense.
If same-sex marriage is enacted into law what will happen to the teacher who wants to tell pupils that marriage can only mean – and has only ever meant – the union of a man and a woman? Will that teacher’s right to hold and teach this view be respected or will it be removed? Will both teacher and pupils simply become the next VICTIMS OF THE TYRANNY OF TOLERANCE, HERETICS, WHOSE DISSENT FROM STATE-IMPOSED ORTHODOXY MUST BE CRUSHED AT ALL COSTS?
In Article 16 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, marriage is defined as a relationship between men and women. But when our politicians suggest jettisoning the established understanding of marriage and subverting its meaning they aren’t derided. Instead, their attempt to redefine reality is given a polite hearing, THEIR MADNESS IS INDULGED. THEIR PROPOSAL REPRESENTS A GROTESQUE SUBVERSION OF A UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED HUMAN RIGHT...
TODAY ADVANCING A TRADITIONAL UNDERSTANDING OF MARRIAGE RISKS ONE BEING LABELLED AN INTOLERANT BIGOT…
All children deserve to begin life with a mother and father; the evidence in favour of the stability and well-being which this provides is overwhelming and unequivocal. It cannot be provided by a same-sex couple, however well-intentioned they may be…
In November 2003, after a court decision in Massachusetts to legalise gay marriage, school libraries were required to stock same-sex literature; PRIMARY SCHOOLCHILDREN WERE GIVEN HOMOSEXUAL FAIRY STORIES such as King & King. Some high school students were even given an explicit manual of homosexual advocacy entitled The Little Black Book: Queer in the 21st Century. Education suddenly had to comply with what was now deemed ‘normal.’
Disingenuously, the Government has suggested that same-sex marriage wouldn’t be compulsory and churches could choose to opt out. This is staggeringly arrogant. No Government has the moral authority to dismantle the universally understood meaning of marriage…
If the Government attempts to demolish a universally recognised human right, THEY WILL HAVE FORFEITED THE TRUST WHICH SOCIETY HAS PLACED IN THEM AND THEIR INTOLERANCE WILL SHAME THE UNITED KINGDOM IN THE EYES OF THE WORLD.”
On 3 March 2012, Eurosceptic MEP, Roger Helmer, announced his decision to defect to UKIP after 40 years as a Tory.
Helmer, who blamed Party Chair, Baroness Warsi, for his decision to quit, had grown increasingly angry over her refusal to confirm Rupert Matthews as his successor. It is thought that Warsi wished to block Matthew’s appointment so she could parachute an approved ‘A-list’ candidate into the seat.
“After decades with the Conservative Party, this has been a tough decision to take… I sought in good faith to do the honourable thing, and to resign in favour of the next-in-line Conservative, Rupert Matthews. Indeed, in October I announced my intention to resign at the end of 2011 but that plan was frustrated by the deliberate obstinacy and recalcitrance of the Party Chairman.
She has brought this on herself. I couldn’t make her do the right thing, but I can make her regret doing the wrong thing. The fact is that UKIP REPRESENTS THE VALUES AND INTERESTS OF EAST MIDLANDS CONSERVATIVES MUCH BETTER THAN CAMERON’S TORY PARTY DOES...
THE EUROPEAN PROJECT IS COLLAPSING BEFORE OUR EYES, YET THE THREE MAIN PARTIES REMAIN WEDDED TO THE BRUSSELS DREAM.”
During the course of last summer's riots, Malaysian student, Ashraf Rossli, was violently attacked for no reason by street thug, Beau Isagba.
Left with a broken jaw, his distress was seen on national television. Posing as good Samaritans, Reece Donovan, who is white, and John Kafunda subsequently robbed him.
Interviewed in Kuala Lumpur for The Sunday Express, (3 March 2012) Ashraf's father said this:
"The boy who attacked my son was young – he was only 17. But he wasn’t at school, he wasn’t at work, and he was getting Government money. THE SYSTEM IN BRITAIN MAKES PEOPLE LAZY. In Malaysia, if you want to earn money, you have to work. And if you want to earn more money, you have to study hard.
This kind of system is not good. I believe if you are physically well, if there is nothing wrong with you, you should work. THEY SHOULDN’T GIVE MONEY TO PEOPLE WHO CAN WORK BUT DON’T.
You should only give this money to the right people, people who are disabled, people who are ill, people who are in hardship. But NOT TO PEOPLE WHO ARE WELL AND CAN WORK, BUT CHOOSE NOT TO…
It is up to parents to raise their children. Children need to be taught civic responsibility and discipline as they grow up…
The police in Malaysia would have taken action sooner… YOUR POLICE LET IT GROW AND GROW UNTIL IT WAS OUT OF CONTROL. I don’t understand why people were allowed to run riot and rob in that way. Here in Malaysia the police can catch you and grab you if you do something wrong. But IN BRITAIN IT SEEMS THAT YOU CANNOT…
After this happened, people asked Ashraf why he went outside when there were riots and he replied, ‘Because in Malaysia we are always free to walk outside’. We have a tough government in Malaysia, but when something like this happens, THEY TAKE ACTION. THEY DON’T LET IT GET OUT OF CONTROL. THE STREETS ARE SAFE.”
They’re not safe here, Rossli, the politicians, the PC Crowd and their immigrant foot soldiers have seen to that.
Ahraf’s grandfather, Abu, said this:
“What happened to Ashraf doesn’t make me feel bad towards Britain. It IS JUST A CERTAIN KIND OF PERSON WHO DOES THESE THINGS. I believe most in Britain are very good people.”
They are, Abu.
Unfortunately those who beckon in the Beau Isagbas and John Kafundas, create the Reece Donovans and then encourage them all to do their worst, are very bad people. And, until the 'very good' pluck up the courage to do something about it, it's the bad who'll be making the rules.
A US sitcom heartthrob in the 80s, Kirk Cameron said the following in an interview with CNN's Piers Morgan on 2 March 2012:
“Marriage is almost as old as dirt, and it was defined in the Garden between Adam and Eve. One man, one woman for life till death do you part. So I would never attempt to try to redefine marriage. And I don’t think anyone else should either. So do I support the idea of gay marriage? No, I don’t…
I think that IT'S... UNNATURAL. IT'S DETRIMENTAL AND ULTIMATELY DESTRUCTIVE TO SO MANY OF THE FOUNDATIONS OF CIVILIZATION."
On 2 March 2012, Margaret Hodge, MP for Barking, and Chairperson of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, appeared on BBC Radio 4’s Any Questions?
At one point, Hodge interrupted a fellow panellist and asked:
“Are you suggesting that the riots last summer did not have legitimate causes?”
Which implies that Hodge, herself, thinks the rioters had a case, does it not? She added:
“We all regret the damage that was caused but what you do have to understand is, the reason that young people were rioting across Britain was because they had lost hope in the future. In my own constituency, if you are among the one in four young people out of work and you are starting your life, you apply for endless jobs, you cannot afford to go to university, you may not have the right qualifications, then you lose a bit of hope.”
'You lose a bit of hope.'
So you riot. And steal. And destroy. And kill. And it’s understandable. According to the left-wing New Labour MP whom Tony Blair thought fit to make Children’s Minister in the last administration.
Margaret Hodge is an Egyptian Jew.
Her maiden name is Oppenheimer.
On 2 March 2012, Councillor Peter Golds, leader of the Conservative opposition in Tower Hamlets, posted this at the Conservative Home web site:
“In terms of the conduct of elections, the Borough of Tower Hamlets is in a league of its own. The lack of action taken on fraud and intimidation can be laid at the (door of) police and election officials…
On 1 December 2007 the borough electorate was 152,466... On 1 April 2010 it was 164,847. On 4 May 2010 it was 171,870. In one month, in the lead up to the combined elections WE HAD A 7,000 PERSON INCREASE IN THE ELECTORATE…
Let us look at the case of our most well publicised councillor Shelina Akhtar, currently resident in Holloway Prison and appealing against her sentence on the grounds that she is a ‘hard working councillor.’ This woman is a benefit fraudster who illegally sublet a flat that she had been allocated and then did the same for the flat allocated to her sister. One may ask, how two single women, in a borough with 23,000 on the waiting list, were allocated these properties in any case?
In March 2010, she was nominated as Labour candidate for the Spitalfields ward of Tower Hamlets. She gave as her address, 37 Toynbee Street, E1. At the time this property was occupied by her mother. Immediately both Akhtar sisters were added to the electoral register . In early April two additional males were added and then in the days before election day another additional male name appeared, making six voters where six weeks previously there had been one. This woman and her sister are corrupt. Yet the system has only convicted her for benefit fraud and neither the illegal sub letting or her electoral malpractice…
In 2009 I handed over to the police copies of emails regarding postal vote farming. The police spoke to the sender who ‘promised not to do it again’ and therefore indicated A PROSECUTION WOULD NOT BE IN ‘THE PUBLIC INTEREST,’ despite the fine for this being £5,000...
We also suffer from appalling intimidation at polling stations. POLLING STATIONS ARE BESIEGED BY ACTIVISTS, OVERWHELMINGLY MALE, WHO HARASS VOTERS on their entry to the polling stations, canvassing support and worse of all standing with electoral registers giving names to people entering the polling station – a kind of reverse telling operation. The numbers often reach 40-50 people at individual stations… Andrew Gilligan… was present at a polling station in Mile End, when some of these men have tried to turn away women voters for ‘not being modestly dressed’…
There are well publicised rules about conduct at polling places, TOWER HAMLETS COUNCIL AND THE POLICE ARE UNABLE OR UNWILLING TO ENFORCE THEM WITHIN THIS BOROUGH, creating an environment of intimidation…
Secret ballots to prevent intimidation of voters by landlords and employers have been enshrined in this country since the Ballot Act of 1872. THE RULES ARE ROUTINELY FLOUTED IN TOWER HAMLETS. Female Asian voters hand over ballot papers to males or are directed in public as to how to vote…
One of the most extreme examples of this conduct of this was seen in Tower Hamlets during the 2008 Mayoral election when AN ELECTION OFFICIAL IN THE VIRGINIA POLLING STATION, WEAVERS WARD, WAS POINTING OUT THE POSITION OF KEN LIVINGSTONE ON THE BALLOT PAPER TO BENGALI WOMEN AND THEN CHECKING THE PAPER AFTER THEY HAD VOTED TO ENSURE THAT IT ‘WAS CORRECT.’ He was not removed until mid afternoon after repeated complaints to the local Returning Officer…
On the same day an organisation called Muslims4Ken were handing out thousands of leaflets at polling stations which had the message were Boris Johnson to be elected Mayor of London, he would ban the Koran. AGAIN THE POLICE AND OFFICIALS DID NOTHING.”
On 2 March 2012, James Slack reported thus in The Mail Online:
"Brussels has drawn up a secret diktat which could force Britain to admit 12,000 workers from India despite soaring unemployment at home.
The order is part of an EU-wide plan to boost trade with India.
EU officials say that, in return for opening up the jobs market, countries such as Britain will be helped to land lucrative export deals.
But, of 40,000 workers who will be allowed to live and work in Europe, Britain has been told it must take 12,000, according to leaked EU documents. This is far more than any other EU nation - and three times the number which will be permitted France. Even Germany, which has one of the world’s largest economies, will admit only 8,000 workers."
On 2 March 2012, Mark Hughes, Crime Correspondent of The Telegraph, informed us thus:
“Foreign crime suspects are being allowed to walk free from police custody before questioning because of a shortage of interpreters caused by cost-cutting. ..
In one case, it took West Midlands Police two weeks to find an interpreter for someone who volunteered to make a statement in an Asian language. In some instances, the force has had to bring in more expensive interpreters from Leeds and Manchester.”
On 2 March 2012, The Mail Online quoted Chris Humphries, Chairman of the charity, National Numeracy, and former Chief Executive of the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, thus:
“Official Government figures quote that 17million people have maths capabilities, at best, of the age of an 11-year-old. And actually half of that group’s capacity tends to operate down around the level of a nine-year-old… They often can’t understand deductions on their payslip. They have problems with timetables, they are certainly going to have problems with tax and even with interpreting graphs and charts that are necessary for their jobs…
The history of attitudes and concerns about mathematics in the UK, and particularly in England, dates back 40 years.”
The Mail added:
"Seventeen million adults – nearly half the working population – have the maths skills of a child at primary school, a report revealed yesterday. Their grasp of numbers is so poor that they struggle to work out deductions on their pay slips or calculate change.
THE NUMBER WHO STRUGGLE WITH BASIC NUMERACY HAS GROWN BY TWO MILLION OVER THE PAST DECADE, even though billions of pounds has been poured into schemes to improve standards. The scale of poor numeracy far exceeds the equivalent figure for poor literacy, WHICH IS NOW FIVE MILLION.
The report, released by a new charity, National Numeracy, found that 49 PER CENT OF WORKING-AGE ADULTS IN ENGLAND ARE SO BAD AT MATHS THAT THEY HAVE NO MORE THAN THE SKILLS EXPECTED OF A NINE TO 11-YEAR-OLD and would struggle with graphs and charts. About half of these adults – A QUARTER OF THE WORKING POPULATION – HAVE ONLY THE ABILITIES EXPECTED OF A SEVEN TO NINE-YEAR-OLD and might struggle to pay household bills.
Launching the report, National Numeracy said school-leavers who have failed to master basic maths are more likely to end up jobless, in prison or pregnant at a young age.
The charity said Britain’s low numeracy levels, which place us 17th in a global league of 30 nations, are partly due to DECADES OF NEGLECT OF MATHS IN SCHOOLS. But it also blamed a prevalent attitude that IT IS A ‘BADGE OF HONOUR’ TO BE BAD AT THE SUBJECT.”
On 1 March 2012, Arthur Jones, a Republican Congressional candidate running in the forthcoming Illinois primary, was quoted thus in The Mail Online:
“As far as I’m concerned, the Holocaust is nothing more than an international extortion racket by the Jews… It’s the blackest lie in history. Millions of dollars are being made by Jews telling this tale of woe and misfortune in books, movies, plays and TV. The more survivors, the more lies that are told…
These war-mongering fools in congress like Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney, we can’t let Iran have one nuclear weapon but we let Israel have all the nuclear weapons they want. This is ridiculous…
Our country is falling apart economically, politically, culturally, militarily… We are going down.”
On 1 March 2012, James Tozer reported thus in The Mail Online:
"When a strand of cotton fell from one of her gloves as she was out shopping, Valerie George didn’t even notice. So the 71-year-old grandmother was astonished when A COUNCIL WARDEN POINTED OUT THE THREAD ON THE PAVEMENT – AND HANDED HER A £75 SPOT FINE FOR DROPPING LITTER…
Mrs George said that when the environmental enforcement officer first stopped her, she had protested her innocence. But then he took her to the scene of the crime, showed her the curled-up strand of cotton, and issued the fine.
Yesterday, COUNCIL OFFICIALS CONTINUED TO INSIST THAT AN OFFENCE HAD BEEN COMMITTED, but said they would no longer be demanding that Mrs George paid the penalty, which would have had to come out of her £105 weekly pension. The pensioner said:
‘I wouldn’t have paid it anyway – I would rather have gone to court. It is ridiculous.’
Mrs George, the wife of a retired factory worker, was shopping in her home town of Brynmawr, near Ebbw Vale, South Wales, when she was stopped.
‘I had caught my watch on my glove and a piece of cotton had come off and fallen to the ground,’ she said. ‘I didn’t notice. If I had I would have picked it up. I told the man it was a complete accident but he said it was still litter and to take the matter up in court. It was a strand of cotton, not a cigarette butt. I can’t believe they would fine a pensioner for dropping something like that.
I asked the enforcement officer, who was burly and rude, ‘Are you really going to take £75 off an old age pensioner?’ I am a pensioner, I’ve worked all my life and I’ve never claimed anything. I live on my £105 pension – £75 is a big chunk of that for dropping a tiny piece of cotton.’
Her husband Les, 72, said: ‘My wife was very shaken by the whole thing’…
In 2009, Kerrie-Anne Hickin, 30, was given a £75 fine after a tissue she was using to wipe her nose blew away in strong winds as she ran to catch a bus in Oldbury, West Midlands.
Last year, Nicola Bayston was threatened with a fine of up to £75,000 after putting up 1,000 posters around her home in South Hiendley, South Yorkshire, when her Patterdale terriers, Jess, five, and Bramble, three, disappeared.”
On 1 March 2012, after saying that the crimes were almost certainly ‘far more prevalent’ than official figures suggest, The Mail Online quoted Detective Superintendent Terry Sharpe thus:
“Children have been physically beaten and forced to drink unknown liquids in rituals to rid hem of evil spirits. They have been starved or deprived of sleep. They have had liquids poured on their genitals and been murdered.”
The Mail explained:
“More than 80 children have suffered appalling abuse after being branded as witches in a crimewave fuelled by medieval beliefs imported from Africa, Asia and the Caribbean… Eric Bikubi, 28, faces life in prison after murdering 15-year-old Kristy Bamu in a four-day orgy of almost unimaginable violence….
Bikubi was in the grip of a lifetime obsession with kindoki, or witchcraft, and believed he had special powers to detect evil. His girlfriend, former Marks & Spencer worker Magalie Bamu, 29, the victim’s eldest sister, was also convicted of murder at the Old Bailey.
Kristy suffered 130 injuries as he was attacked with weapons including a metal bar, hammer, chisel, pliers and even heavy ceramic floor tiles. He drowned in a bath on Christmas Day 2010 in front of his four terrified siblings as Bikubi hosed them down with freezing water in an abhorrent ‘cleansing’ ritual.
The murder took place just nine days after a woman disembowelled her four-year-old daughter as a sacrifice because she believed the child was possessed. Shayma Ali, who was later detained indefinitely in a mental hospital, was obsessed with evil spirits…
Officials suspect grotesque acts continue to thrive behind closed doors, fuelled by a toxic combination of extreme evangelical Christianity and traditional beliefs… Senior officers are worried the abuse has slipped down the agenda since the death of eight-year-old Victoria Climbie in 2000 at the hands of her aunt who branded her a witch…
Detectives fear there may be hundreds of other young victims.”
Cohesion? Diversity? Enrichment?
In Cloud Cuckoo Land, maybe.
On 29 February 2012, BBC Director General, Mark Thompson, ‘a practising Catholic’, was interviewed by historian and author Timothy Garton-Ash for the Free Speech Debate, a research project at Oxford University.
At one point, Garton-Ash mentioned Jerry Springer the Opera and wondered:
“It is the case, isn’t it, that the BBC wouldn’t dream of broadcasting something comparably satirical if it had been the Prophet Mohamed rather than Jesus”.
“Essentially THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS YES… In the end with Jerry Springer, I felt that freedom of expression and the right of the public to judge the thing for themselves was the trump card.”
So, the BBC aren’t prepared to broadcast anything that might upset Muslims but they are quite happy to air the stuff that upsets Christians?
Yep. That's fair. Later Thompson makes his excuses for the double standard.
“The thing about religion I think it's very different to talk about Christianity in the UK… A lot of our thinking about human rights comes out of the Christian tradition. I would argue a pretty broad-shouldered religion compared to religions which have, in the UK, a very close identity with ethnic minorities.”
Is he implying that those whom the PC Crowd imposed upon us against our will are overly-sensitive?
Nah. It's just another PC dollop of the same old pity-the-poor-immgrant-we-mustn't-hurt-their-feelings thing they were bashing us with fifty years back.
“The Satanic verses that was an absolute moment for us it after that was before 9/11... and Theo Van Gogh there was a sense that some of this could lead to direct violence against individuals… Solicitation or a threat to murder… massively raises the stakes…
I think it is wrong to imagine that… a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed is no more challenging than a debate about what two plus two equals… The point is that for a Muslim, a depiction, particularly a comic or demeaning depiction, of the Prophet Mohammed might have the emotional force of a piece of grotesque child pornography. One of the mistakes secularists make is not to understand the character of what blasphemy feels like to someone who is a realist in their religious belief…
Without question, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms’, is different from, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write’. This definitely raises the stakes.”
Ah, now I get it!
Mr T is happy to broadcast anti-Christian unpleasantness because, when he takes the p*** out of us, we won’t shoot him, whereas, if similarly unpleasant anti-Islamic stuff is aired, your Muslim will.
Thanks for the straightforward explanation there, my son. If you weren’t such a tw*t, I’d be prasing you for an honest man.
“It’s not as if Islam is randomly spread across the UK population. It’s almost entirely a religion practiced by people who may already feel in other ways isolated, prejudiced against and where they may well regard an attack upon their religion as racism by other means.”
Yep, gotta be extra-specially nice to the 'isolated and prejudiced against,' non-native fanatic who might get his AK-47 out if you aren’t.
“I think there are multiple considerations. That it’s not unreasonable to ask what the consquences of broadcasting something or writing something will be for a particularly individual or for a community, especially communities who may reasonably, that’s an important word to use, take the thing to be an attack or to be threatening…
To a Muslim, I think, there are certain things that could be said that might potentially feel like a threat of violence… It’s completely bound up with identity and a particularly racial identity and the idea that you might want to, not just for Muslims but for Sikhs, Hindus, for Jews, a Jew being a interesting example here, think quite carefully about whether something done, in quotes, in the name of freedom of expression, might to the Jew, or the Sikh, or the Hindu, or the Muslim, who receives it, feel threatening, isolating and so forth, I think those are meaningful considerations.”
It seems to me that Thompson, in a roundabout, utterly unintentional kind of way, is suggesting that being an easily offended, touchy b*gger pays.
As does intimidation and the threat of terminal violence.
Whereas, tolerance and the quiet British way does not.
And the moral of the story is?
We should complain more.
And, perhaps invest in the odd AK-47.
On 29 Feb 2012, The Telegraph quoted a wide-ranging report into the treatment of the elderly in hospitals and care homes by a commission of senior NHS managers, charities and council chiefs, thus:
“Undignified care of older people does not happen in a vacuum, it is rooted in the discrimination and neglect evident towards older people in British society… Age discrimination is the most common form of discrimination in the UK…
The Government needs to take a lead by setting a positive tone for debate about our ageing society… rather than casting them as a problem to be solved.”
The Telegraph added:
“The report calls for NEW STANDARDS to ensure ALL CARE STAFF HAVE A GOOD GRASP OF ENGLISH.”
On 29 February 2012, former Cabinet Minister, Ann Widdecombe, opined thus in The Daily Express:
"When Lynne Featherstone, the Lib Dem Minister for Equality, challenged the Church, claiming it did not own marriage, she was effectively suggesting the major source of opposition to coalition plans for gay marriage is religious.
And, while claiming the debate was not between religious belief and gay rights, she was in reality trying to create just that impression. It would suit ministers to paint a picture in which everyone wants gay marriage except the Church.
It is an old ploy. When the abortion debate was raging in the late Eighties TV programmes regularly put on debates between pro-abortion doctors and pro-life politicians. Offers of pro-life doctors were regularly refused because THE MEDIA AGENDA WAS TO SUGGEST THE MEDICAL PROFESSION WAS IN FAVOUR OF WIDER ABORTION AND THAT IT WAS ONLY POLITICIANS WHO WERE AGAINST IT.
The same phenomenon is apparent when euthanasia is debated: it is nearly always a politician versus a terminally ill person demanding the right to die, even though terminally ill people taking the opposite view are offered to the programme producers. The impression they want to create is that politicians are standing in the way of merciful solutions…
I have no doubt that as gay marriage is debated we shall see bishops deployed against gay activists but it is simply not true that only the Church is opposed to redefining marriage. An opinion poll, independently carried out for the Coalition for Marriage, suggests 86 PER CENT OF THE POPULATION BELIEVES IT PERFECTLY POSSIBLE TO PROMOTE GAY RIGHTS WITHOUT REDEFINING MARRIAGE.
So if, as Ms Featherstone claims, marriage is owned by the people maybe she should start listening to the people’s voice. I know gays who oppose this measure, as does Christopher Biggins, and one can hardly call them homophobic. People who never go inside a church from one year to the next oppose it.
Some of those who spoke out in favour of civil partnerships oppose it. Writers on Left-wing newspapers oppose it. So as this is the most fundamental change to society in centuries, LET DAVID CAMERON ASK THE PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANT. If he insists on pushing ahead then I challenge him to hold a referendum. THE REDEFINITION OF MARRIAGE IS TOO BIG AN ISSUE FOR THE STATE TO FOIST ON AN UNWILLING POPULATION.”
Over the last fifty years or so, you politicians foist a ton of ‘big’ stuff on ’the people’ they didn’t want, Ann. How come your on the side of the 86 per cent’ now?
Now you’re no longer a politican?
On 29 February 2012, Laura Clark said this in The Mail Online:
"THE BILLIONS OF POUNDS SPENT ON EXPANDING UNIVERSITIES OVER THE PAST 20 YEARS HAS FAILED TO HELP THE POOREST CHILDREN... The failure of the comprehensive system was blamed for the stubbornly low proportion of undergraduates from disadvantaged backgrounds, according to researchers...
The study, which covered 34,000 Britons, found that teenagers with white-collar parents have taken up university places twice as fast as peers with blue-collar parents…
Peter Elias, a Warwick University employment expert who helped lead the research… said the dramatic expansion of higher education from the early 1990s had widened the gaps between social groups…
‘Over the next three, four, five years we are going to need to make significant progress. If we don’t, the whole concept of the underclass is going to reappear. We only need to look at what happened last summer to see what problems lie in wait if we have an unequal distribution across society’.”
On 28 February 2012, Lib Dem MP, Simon Hughes, said this at the Leveson Inquiry:
“I am frustrated even now that there wasn't comprehensive action taken then, that was the window of opportunity, a lot of pain and grief could have been spared…
It was clear from September 2006... THE HIGHEST LEVEL THE NEWS OF THE WORLD KNEW ABOUT THIS... There was a whole range of people clearly acting in concert either directly or indirectly illegally AND THEY WERE NOT TOUCHED.”
On 28 February 2012, after James Chapman told us that ‘proposals for sweeping new powers... would allow the Government to withhold any evidence it deems sensitive from an open civil court,' Lord Macdonald, QC, was quoted thus:
“These unprecedented proposals are an audacious attack on the fundamental principle of British justice... They threaten to put THE GOVERNMENT ABOVE THE LAW, WHILE LEAVING ORDINARY CITIZENS… SHUT OUT OF THEIR OWN JUSTICE SYSTEM. After a decade in which we have seen our politicians and officials caught up in the woeful abuses of the war on terror, the last thing the Government should be seeking is to sweep all of this under the carpet. However, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEIR DISASTROUS SECRET JUSTICE PROPOSALS ARE LIKELY TO DO.
We cannot afford to sleepwalk into a system of secret courts. David Cameron came to power saying ‘sunlight is the best disinfectant.’ WE SHOULD NOT SACRIFICE BRITAIN’S OPEN AND TRANSPARENT JUSTICE SYSTEM SIMPLY TO PROTECT POLITICIANS AND THEIR OFFICIALS FROM EMBARRASSMENT.”
James Chapman added:
“The reforms, detailed in a Green Paper on justice and security, are backed by senior figures in the security community, notably Sir Malcolm Rifkind, chairman of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee.”
Rifkind is Jewish.
On 28 February 2012, Professor Hamid Ghodse, eminent psychiatrist, President of the International Narcotics Control Board and a member of the UN International Narcotics Control Board since 1992, was quoted thus by The Mail Online:
“In many societies around the world, whether developed or developing, there are communities within the societies which develop which become no-go areas… Drug traffickers, organised crime, drug users, they take over. They will get the sort of governance of those areas. Examples are in Brazil, Mexico, in the United States, IN THE UK, BIRMINGHAM, LIVERPOOL, MANCHESTER…
It is crucial that the needs of communities experiencing social disintegration are urgently tackled before the tipping point is reached, beyond which effective action becomes impossible. The consequences of failure are too high for society and should be avoided at all cost…
Disturbingly, illegal internet pharmacies have started to use social media to publicise their websites, which can put large audiences at risk of dangerous products… The World Health Organisation has found more than half of medicines from internet pharmacies are counterfeit…
International illicit pharmacies… use YouTube, they use Facebook, they attract you to their website ... Then when you go there you will see they are also selling illicit drugs… They are using the social media, engaging people in a variety of ways which in the first instance you do not see they are marketing the drug. But then, in a very sophisticated way, they are getting the right question on to YouTube, on to Facebook, and even chatting in the chatrooms, they get engaged, and then bombard them with drugs.”
An International Narcotics Control Board statement tells us this:
"India was identified as the leading country of origin for these substances, accounting for 58 percent of the substances seized, while the United States, China and Poland were also identified as significant countries of origin.”
On 27 February 2012, Melissa Kite opined thus in The Mail Online:
"What a ghastly, Orwellian disgrace the detention of war hero David Jones at Gatwick airport is for daring to question why Muslims can pass through scanners with their faces completely covered.
Mr Jones, the creator of Fireman Sam, a former member of the Household Cavalry and an all-round nice bloke, was DETAINED AND ACCUSED OF RACISM BECAUSE A MUSLIM SECURITY GUARD SAID HE HAD OFFENDED HER by cracking a joke about what would happen if he covered his own face in his scarf. He made a good point and highlighted a very real problem, but of course, THE TRUTH IS NOT ALLOWED IF IT OFFENDS A MINORITY GROUP…
The total and utter lack of common sense by the authorities at Gatwick which led to Mr Jones being detained for an hour is staggering. The absolute determination of the Muslim security guard to be offended when no offence was meant nor logical to be taken is absurd and ridiculous. The failure of British Airways to come to a paying customer’s defence when clearly he had done nothing wrong is shameful.
But the worst part of it all is the childish insistence of all concerned that Mr Jones must apologise. Why? If what he had done was really so bad then surely he should be taken away by the police and charged. If Mr Jones had really committed some sort of race hate crime by asking what would happen if he put his scarf over his face then surely he should feel the full force of the law.
Apparently she was ‘deeply distressed.’ I always get suspicious when people use the language of no-win-no-fee compensation lawyers, but we will leave that aside. Let’s just say that her motives in trying so hard to be offended by a joke that didn’t concern her in the least were suspicious, whichever way you slice it. But instead of telling the Muslim employee to get a grip, THEY FORCED MR JONES TO GROVEL FOR SOMETHING HE HAD NOT DONE. That, my friends, is discrimination. Plain and simple.
How apt that it should be taking place at one of the country’s main airports. The terminal should bear a sign: Welcome to Britain, WHERE ALL PEOPLE ARE PROTECTED FROM PREJUDICE, UNLESS THEY ARE WHITE.”
For thirty or so years media darlings like Melissa have been accusing British Nationalists of racism for saying much the same as she is saying here. Even now, the most outspokenly politically incorrect choose to sneer at the BNP and National Front.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m very, very happy that she is courageous enough to speak out againt the rest-of-the-world-on-white awfulness that has our society by the fair hair of its head right now. Many others are are now daring to do likewise.
Unfortunately, I haven’t noticed any of these nu Brit-protectors acknowledging that we were trying to get the message out decades ago.
The majority will always appreciate forthright honesty from the media. It’s just a pity that, until it’s safe and fashionable to do so, not one Melissa will ever pay any credit to those who have always put the David Jones folk first in the land that they and their ancestors made.
On 27 February 2012, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Sue Akers, who leads the police investigation into the phone hacking scandal, said this at the Leveson inquiry:
“The cases we are investigating are not ones involving the odd drink, or meal, to police officers or other public officials. Instead, these are cases in which arrests have been made involving the delivery of regular, frequent and sometimes significant sums of money to small numbers of public officials by journalists… One of the arrested journalists has over several years received over £150,000 in cash to pay his sources…
Multiple payments have been made to individuals amounting to thousands of pounds… There is also mention in some emails of public officials being placed on retainers…
The current assessment of the evidence is that IT REVEALS A NETWORK OF CORRUPTED OFFICIALS. IT SUGGESTS PAYMENTS WERE BEING MADE TO PUBLIC OFFICIALS IN ALL AREAS OF PUBLIC LIFE. THERE APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN A CULTURE AT THE SUN OF ILLEGAL PAYMENTS and systems have been created to facilitate those payments whilst hiding the identity of the officials receiving the money…
The vast majority of the disclosures that have been made have led to stories which I would describe as salacious gossip rather than anything that could be remotely regarded as in the public interest.”
Akers also said that the illegal payments were "openly referred to" at The Sun, were approved "at a very senior level" and that those concerned were "well aware that what they were doing was unlawful."
On 27 February 2012, after receiving £600,000 in damages from Rupert Murdoch's News International, the singer Charlotte Church made her opinion of his Empire known outside the High Court in London.
“I brought this legal claim with my parents, as many others have done, because we wanted to find out the truth about what this newspaper group has done in the pursuit of stories about our family. What I have discovered as the litigation has gone on has sickened and disgusted me.
NOTHING WAS DEEMED OFF-LIMITS by those who pursued me and my family, just to make money for a multinational news corporation…
My parents were not in the public eye, they just happened to have a well-known daughter. Whatever I have had to go through, they have suffered as well. They have been harassed, put under surveillance, and my mother was bullied into revealing her own private medical condition for no other reason than they were my parents. Someone in a newspaper thought that was OK. How can that be, in any right-thinking society?…
Today marks the settlement of my claim and the day News International admitted their wrongdoing in court… I have finally discovered in the last week or so much more about what lengths these people were prepared to go to in order to publish stories about myself, my friends and my family.
However, I have also discovered that DESPITE THE APOLOGY WHICH THE NEWSPAPER HAS JUST GIVEN IN COURT, THESE PEOPLE WERE PREPARED TO GO TO ANY LENGTHS TO PREVENT ME EXPOSING THEIR BEHAVIOUR, not just in the deliberate destruction of documents over a number of years, but also by trying to make this investigation into the industrial scale of their illegal activity into an interrogation of my mother's medical condition, forcing her to relive the enormous personal distress they caused her back in 2005.
'It seems they have learned nothing, and I would have learned nothing more from an actual trial since it was clear that NO ONE FROM NEWS INTERNATIONAL WAS PREPARED TO TAKE THE STAND TO EXPLAIN THEIR ACTIONS… THEY ARE NOT TRULY SORRY, ONLY SORRY THEY GOT CAUGHT.”
On 26 February 2012, The Mail on Sundayquoted a report by an all-party committee of MPs and peers.
“It is becoming increasingly difficult for Christians to speak out about their views on sexuality without fear of recrimination.”
The former junior Minister and Conservative MP for Devon South West, Gary Streeter, Chairman of the Committee, added:
“Christians are not asking for special treatment but we are looking for a level playing field and for sincerely held beliefs to be given equal space in our law and in our society.”
The Mail’s Jonathan Petrie told us more:
“Equality laws introduced by the last Labour Government have been attacked by a group of MPs for promoting ‘unacceptable’ discrimination against Christians. In a strongly worded report out tomorrow, they say the legal system now places the freedom of believers to express their faith below the rights of other groups, such as the gay community.
The report… criticises Government, the courts, employers and police for ignorance over religion and unfairly curbing expressions of faith. Calling for changes in the law, it says there are ‘significant problems’ with the controversial Equality Act 2010, steered though Parliament by deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman.
Interpretation of the Act, the committee says, has resulted in religious belief being ‘relegated’ below the rights of other groups. Referring to a series of cases highlighted by The Mail on Sunday, it says: ‘Critically, early indications from court judgments are that sexual orientation takes precedence and religious belief is required to adapt.’
The report cites registrar Lillian Ladele who lost her job at Islington town hall, North London, after refusing to officiate at civil partnerships, and Roman Catholic adoption agencies banned from turning away gay couples.
The report also refers to bed and breakfast owners Peter and Hazelmary Bull, who were fined for refusing a bed to a gay couple, even though they also barred unmarried heterosexual couples.
The committee says it is ‘clearly unfair’ for the gay couple’s rights to overrule those of the owners of the B&B. Similar problems were faced by those who expressed their faith at work by displaying a religious symbol, the report said.
Electrician Colin Atkinson faced the sack from Wakefield District Housing after refusing to remove a cross from his van. The report concludes: ‘It is hard to conceive how this common and ancient tradition could have caused any offence. The case became a symbol of the excesses of political correctness.’
MPs and peers were also critical of the treatment of Cumbrian street preacher Dale McAlpine, arrested and charged for saying homosexuality was a ‘sin’.
In another case, Adrian Smith was demoted and had his pay slashed by Trafford Housing Trust after he criticised gay marriage on his Facebook site.”
On 26 February 2012, Kirsty Buchanan informed us thus in The Sunday Express:
“SCHOOLS WILL BE FORCED TO TEACH CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS FIVE THE IMPORTANCE OF GAY MARRIAGE.#
Teachers who refuse because of their religious beliefs could face disciplinary action.
Ministers are pushing ahead with a legal overhaul of the definition of marriage.
Campaigners against the Coalition Government’s plans warn it will put classrooms on the frontline of a political correctness war and parents who object to the teaching of same-sex marriage could be classed as bigots.
The Government will next month publish its consultation on giving same-sex marriage the same legal definition as traditional marriage. It is the first step towards a Gay Marriage Bill… Peter Bone, Tory MP for Wellingborough, warned:
‘If marriage is redefined, schools will have no choice but to give children equivalent teaching on same-sex marriage, even those of a very young age. Parents who object will be treated as bigots and outcasts. And what of the teachers who object to teaching about same sex marriage. Will they face disciplinary action?’…
The Coalition for Marriage, which includes bishops, politicians and lawyers, warns GAY RIGHTS ARE BEING CHAMPIONED AT THE EXPENSE OF THE RIGHTS OF CHRISTIANS AND OTHER FAITHS. They collected 36,000 signatures against the change.
However, Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone yesterday told the Church it was up to the nation, not religious institutions, to decide who could marry. She said:
‘This is not a battle between gay rights and religious beliefs. This is about the principles of family, society and personal freedoms’.”
Lynne Featherstone is Jewish.
On 25 February 2012, David Rose informed us thus in The Mail Online:
“Having proclaimed that Parliament has ‘three months to save our NHS’, and that the Government’s Health and Social Care Bill will turn out to be David Cameron’s Poll Tax, Labour leader Ed Miliband has been basking in his first opinion poll lead for many months. But hanging over Mr Miliband’s party’s stance is the stench of hypocrisy.
Although it is true that Health Secretary Andrew Lansley’s Bill is the most radical since the NHS was founded in 1948, and will lead to unprecedented private-sector involvement, ALMOST ALL OF ITS MAJOR CHANGES BEGAN UNDER NEW LABOUR – SEVERAL OF WHOSE MOST PROMINENT HEALTHCARE EXPERTS STAND TO PROFIT FROM ITS MEASURES, AS DOES CHERIE BLAIR, WIFE OF THE FORMER PRIME MINISTER.
Two weeks ago, The Mail on Sunday revealed that McKinsey, the multinational management consultancy, has been advising the Government on every level of the Bill’s design and implementation, although BOTH IT AND THE FOREIGN PRIVATE HEALTHCARE COMPANIES IT REPRESENTS HOPE TO BE AWARDED MULTI-MILLION-POUND CONTRACTS IF IT BECOMES LAW. At the time, Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham was moved to comment, saying he would ask the Cabinet Secretary to investigate McKinsey’s role.
But since then he and his colleagues have been silent because, as one senior Labour source confirmed, they are only too aware that WHEN IN POWER LABOUR ALSO MADE HEAVY, AND EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE, USE OF MCKINSEY.
A 2009 report by the Commons Public Accounts Committee found that the NHS had spent £600 million on consultants, including McKinsey, in the financial year 2005-06. Between 2006 and the 2010 Election, DR PENNY DASH, A PARTNER AT MCKINSEY, WAS THE MAIN AUTHOR OF SEVERAL KEY HEALTH SERVICE REVIEWS OVERSEEN BY THE SURGEON AND LABOUR PEER LORD DARZI, WHICH RECOMMENDED BOTH CUTS IN THE NUMBERS OF DOCTORS AND PARTIAL PRIVATISATION.
Uncoincidentally, Dr Dash is also vice-chairman of the King’s Fund, one of the two most influential health think-tanks. Her McKinsey colleague, Nicolaus Henke, is a trustee of the other, the Nuffield Trust. Unlike most doctors’ and nurses’ professional groups, BOTH THESE BODIES SUPPORT THE PRESENT BILL, AS THEY DID ITS NEW LABOUR PRECURSORS…
Under Labour, McKinsey came up with the direct forerunner to the present Bill’s central and most controversial component – a fundamental change to the way GPs refer their patients for further treatment in hospitals or specialist clinics. The Labour prototype, introduced in 2007, was called World Class Commissioning. And as with Mr Lansley’s Bill, it was intended that GPs, via the trusts that managed them, should commission services from competing ‘providers’, which could be from either the public OR PRIVATE SECTORS…
Like its successor, Labour policy opened up the NHS to big insurance, consultancy and private health firms, both as suppliers of services and as managers. Companies on a Government-approved list were invited to take on the commissioning and referral role – in effect, spending GPs’ budgets – through what was known as FESC, the Framework for procuring External Support for Commissioners.
THOSE SAME FIRMS ARE NOW IN THE RUNNING FOR HUGE CONTRACTS UNDER THE COALITION’S BILL, including insurers Axa and Bupa, the US private healthcare giants United Health and McKesson and the consultants KPMG – AND MCKINSEY…
The real power will be held not by the GPs and their consortia – who, after all, have been trained in medicine, not contracts and administration – but by ‘COMMISSIONING SUPPORT ORGANISATIONS’, which will do almost all the actual commissioning. There will only be about 40 of these across the country, some covering areas with millions of inhabitants and thousands of GPs.
Nominally, the doctors will be in charge of them. In reality, THEY WILL BE RUN – PRESUMABLY AT A PROFIT – BY THOSE FAMILIAR PRIVATE-SECTOR COMPANIES ON LABOUR’S OLD FESC LIST…
Documents obtained by The Mail on Sunday under the Freedom of Information Act show that senior Health Department officials have been in close and frequent contact with these firms since the 2010 Election… It was envisaged there would be about 150 commissioning groups, so devolving power much closer to the GPs and their communities. The firms have successfully argued that this would have made commissioning too expensive and for them, therefore, less profitable. But the result, say the Bill’s critics, is the replacement of an old NHS bureaucracy with a new, private-sector one, WHICH WILL BE DRIVEN BY PROFIT AND MUCH LESS ACCOUNTABLE.
Details of contracts now being negotiated are deemed SECRET ON GROUNDS OF ‘COMMERCIAL CONFIDENTIALITY’.
Dr Clare Gerada, chairman of the Royal College of General Practitioners, said yesterday: ‘The idea that this will actually give power to GPs is nonsense. The real engine driving things will be the firms that run the commissioning.’
Some firms could make big money, both from commissioning and as healthcare providers – INCLUDING THOSE THAT EMPLOY FORMER NEW LABOUR LUMINARIES. Cherie Blair’s company, Mee Healthcare, is reportedly trying to raise £65 million for a chain of private clinics in places such as shopping centres and near Olympic venues, and has started recruiting medical staff.
The executive vice-president of United Healthcare, which a spokeswoman said is ‘actively engaged in discussions with NHS commissioning support services about partnership opportunities’, happens to be Simon Stevens, TONY BLAIR’S FORMER CHIEF HEALTH ADVISER IN DOWNING STREET.
Alan Milburn, Health Secretary from 1999 to 2003, is a paid adviser to Bridgepoint Capital, WHICH OWNS PRIVATE HEALTH FIRMS INCLUDING ALLIANCE MEDICAL.
LORD DARZI IS AN ADVISER FOR GE HEALTHCARE, WHILE HIS COLLEAGUE LORD WARNER, HEALTH MINISTER FROM 2005 TO 2006, HAS BEEN A CONSULTANT TO THE PRIVATE EQUITY FIRM APAX, WHICH ALSO HAS HUGE HEALTHCARE INTERESTS.
It was at an APAX conference in 2010 that Mark Britnell, head of healthcare at KPMG and the head of commissioning at the Department of Health under Labour, spoke of the profits to be made from commissioning. He said:
‘GPs will have to aggregate purchasing power, and THERE WILL BE A BIG OPPORTUNITY FOR THOSE COMPANIES THAT CAN FACILITATE THIS PROCESS.’ HE ADDED: ‘THE NHS WILL BE SHOWN NO MERCY, AND THE BEST TIME TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS WILL BE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS’.”
If anyone out there ever thought the Blairite chiseler was any less self-serving than the Thatcherite and Cameronian chiseler, you are one stupid chump.
On 24 February 2012, The Mail Online reported thus:
"Make Bradford British is billed as a social experiment in which eight housemates from differing backgrounds will live together to see if they will co-operate and learn something about tolerance - or clash and stay segregated.”
Here are some of the things The Mail quotes the ‘housemates’ as saying:
Sabbiya, a hijab-wearing British Muslim of Pakistani heritage.
"I was born here. I've been educated here. I'm more British than anyone that you can see."
I'm sure most of the politicians and media darlings would agree, Sabbiya.
Damon, a sheet metal worker:
"It does look like you're in Pakistan in some places you go, 'cause all the men are wearing baggy trousers and all the women are wearing hijabs."
Racist! Fascist! Nazi! Bigot!
He whose opinions and attitudes the race laws and the non-stop media propaganda were supposed to have erased all trace of by now! (We'll have him sorted by the end of Make Bradford British, don't you worry!)
Audrey, the landlady of a Bradford pub:
"People are very resentful because there are certain segments of society that don't want to live with anybody else. My business has suffered because people don't want to come into the centre of Bradford any more."
Racist! Fascist! Nazi! Bigot!
She whose opinions and attitudes the race laws and the non-stop media propaganda were supposed to have erased all trace of by now! (We'll have her sorted by the end of Make Bradford British, don't you worry!)
Mohammad, a taxi driver:
"Britishness is going on p*** ups and getting bladdered really. That's what British means."
With you there, Mo!
Nothing but drunken bums whose time is over! Pack 'em all off to Botany bay!
Oh yes, to those who don't know or care for us I guess Britishness might mean precisely whatever your average Abdul wants it to mean. The desire to feel superior to the folk who made a nation that all the Mohammeds on the planet wish to come to, (to get away from the sh*t-pile their own ancestors made) is strong in those who are less than us, that's for sure.
Maura, a former magistrate who ‘has spent the past 40 years living in one of Bradford's wealthiest, whitest suburbs’: had this to say:
"One of the most important values that Britain has to give the world is its tolerance and I think we should be intolerant of intolerance."
Particularly of the British kind that doesn’t like having its country invaded, eh, Maura?
Here is a little more from Maura's extended CV:
"I helped to run a campaign to stop a huge Tesco being built in Ilkley."
Not in my back yard, eh, Maura!
Yeah, we inner city folk know what you mean.
"My father was adamant that any form of racism was abhorrent. We were always very interested in the South African question and loathed apartheid. I get very, very upset when I hear racist remarks."
As you're interested in the SA question, I'm sure you'll know that, up to April last year, around 3,800 white farmers, smallholders and other rural folk (including many women and children) had been murdered by marauding black gangs since Nelson Mandela came to power.
You would, I hope, think that that 'form of racism was abhorrent' too, wouldn't you, Maura?
And when the elderly Communist saint was caught on camera singing 'Death To Whites,' you would be happy to wag a magisterial finger in his direction for being a nasty 'racist', I hope.
Mandela Sings Death to Whitey!
"What I discovered when I went to stay with Mohammed in Keighley, Bradford, was that their community likes to live near each other because of mutual support. They look after their elderly people, and neighbouring families who are in distress, in their own community. Our history has led to a different outcome."
The Mohammeds are so much better than us native Brits.
Of course they are.
"I think if you were a foreigner coming to a strange place, you'd want to be near people who are like yourself, particularly if you felt different and lonely. The Irish did that - I'm Irish - when they came to London and Liverpool and places like that."
A.N.Other immigrant bumming up her fellows immigrants and sneering at the indigenous then.
Whilst living in the part of the city where the foreigners she's so fond of are least visible. A tale of our achingly PC (but not in my back yard) times alright.
"Just because you're white, middle class, live in a nice house, in a nice town, some people assume that you're a racist. These are the assumptions that some people might make. But all of my friends would absolutely loathe and detest the idea of accepting racist remarks."
Don't rub it in, Maura.
We know whose side your on.
"I'm a feminist..."
Oh, you do surprise me.
"When I went to Mohammed's house, because he was a bloke, and because his wife didn't speak English... But Jasmine and Maria were so gorgeous to me, and so kind and loving..."
"The low point was when Mohammed left. I was so disappointed."
Fancied him, did you?
"Sabbiyah and I are from totally different generations and backgrounds, but we had so many things in common."
You got that right, Maura.
And yet, strangely, you have so little in common with the rest of us.
This is Maura:
Methinks the lady might be singing from a different hymn sheet if she’d been forced to live alongside the alien hordes in inner-city Bradford over the course of the last four decades.
By the looks of our Irish immigrant she might well prefer to chant the Kol Nidre prayer than sing Away in a Manger.
On 23 Feb 2012, former MP and Lib Dem peer, Lady Tonge, said this at Middlesex University:
"Beware Israel… Israel is not going to be there for ever in its present form. One day, the United States of America will get sick of giving £70BN A YEAR TO ISRAEL to support what I call America's aircraft carrier in the Middle East – that is Israel. One day, the American people are going to say to the Israel lobby in the USA: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Israel will lose support and THEN THEY WILL REAP WHAT THEY HAVE SOWN."
Oh, the politicians are catching up alright.
At least, the odd honest one is.
When the usual suspects arose in uproar at her remarks, Lady Tonge explained that they were made during a 'very ill-tempered meeting in which Zionist campaigners attempted continually to disrupt proceedings.'
"They mouthed obscenities at the panelists, to the extent that university security attempted to remove them from the premises. The comments I made were in protest at the treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and the treatment of Israeli Arabs."
She also said this:
"I am disappointed the leadership of my party did not consult me before issuing a press release and seems always TO ABET THE REQUEST OF THE PRO-ISRAEL LOBBY. ISRAEL IS ACTING AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW, THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS. THEY DO THIS WITH IMPUNITY and if our political parties will not take action then individuals must."
Nick Clegg, the leader of the Lib Dems, responded thus:
"These remarks were wrong and offensive and do not reflect the values of the Liberal Democrats. I asked Baroness Tonge to withdraw her remarks and apologise for the offence she has caused. She has refused to do so and will now be leaving the party."
The Chief Rabbi, Lord Sacks, added:
"I am appalled at Baroness Tonge's remarks. They are dangerous, inflammatory and unacceptable. I commend Nick Clegg for his decisive action. Views such as those expressed by Baroness Tonge have no place in civil public discourse."
On 29 February 2012, an unidentified Lib Dem spokesman was reported as having said this by The Guardian:
"Jenny Tonge does not speak for the party on Israel and Palestine. Her presence and comments at this event were extremely ill-advised and ill-judged. The tone of the debate at this event was wholly unacceptable."
The Liberal Democrats Friends of Israel group was quoted thus in the same newspaper:
"LDFI applaud Nick Clegg's decisive action in sacking Baroness Jenny Tonge. Nick rightly gave Jenny Tonge the chance to apologise and retract her recent statement on Israel and she declined. The rest is history. I hope this now draws a line under the continual smearing of Lib Dem party policy on Israel and the Middle East by former Lib Dem Baroness Tonge. I'm pleased to say she is now somebody else's problem."
The Board of Deputies of British Jews issued this statement:
"Given her longstanding, pernicious views on Israel, her comment that Israel 'is not going to be there forever' is both sinister and abhorrent. THERE IS NO PLACE FOR SOMEONE LIKE JENNY TONGE IN MAINSTREAM POLITICAL PARTIES IN THIS COUNTRY."
John Woodcock MP, the chairman of Labour Friends of Israel, said:
"This is the latest in a series of outrageous remarks from Baroness Tonge – words of excuse or apology in response are no longer enough."
What would be 'enough,' John?
A firing Squad? The rope? A cauldron full of boiling oil?
Or just seven long years in clink for ‘incitement to racial hatred?’
Leon Brittan was the Home Secretary when the bill that upped the ante to two years in prison for ’incitement to racial hatred’ was first proposed.
His parents were Jewish immigrants. Jack Straw, who describes himself as ‘a third-gereneration Jewish immigrant,’ was Home Secretary when another raft of race law saw the maximum penalty for this thought crime raised to SEVEN years!
The machinations of the Board of British Deputies and Lord Anthony Lester was key in the creation of the voluminous body of British race law. Lester, who is Jewish also, suggested and wrote up much of the law himself and advised all shades of government as to how it might be implemented.
On 17 December 1998, just after Jack Straw seven-year intervention, the Board of Deputies of British Jews issued the following triumphal communiqué:
"The Board has been at the forefront of the development of proposals for race relations legislation in the UK… The Defence Policy and Group Relations Division, which monitors the activities of political extremists and racists, has urged successive governments to enact and strengthen race relations legislation… It has also sought allies and made common cause with other religious and minority groups.
THE BOARD PLAYED A FUNDAMENTAL PART IN URGING UPON GOVERNMENT THE FIRST RACE RELATIONS ACT WHICH WAS BASED, IN PART, ON REPORTS PREPARED FOR THE BOARD BY PROFESSOR GEOFFREY BINDMAN AND LORD LESTER OF HERNE HILL. Subsequently the Board has provided written and oral evidence to enquiries which preceded the passage of the Public Order Act 1986, the Criminal Justice Act 1994 and the Crime and Disorder Act 1998...
We regard the proposals of the Commission for Racial Equality for legislative change to be well thought out and substantiated… We are pleased to welcome and endorse the CRE’s published proposals. In particular we draw attention to proposed 1B, which recommends that the Race Relations Act should apply to all aspects of the activities of Government and all Public Bodies. We would support the extension of the RRA to all government and public bodies. These organisations play a leading role in forming public opinion on social issues…
The Board can also see the case for new legislation to combat discrimination and incitement on religious grounds… We are also shortly to respond to the Government’s request that it might consider introducing specific legislation to outlaw Holocaust Denial…
In addition to changes in the main body of national law, changes are needed in the rules and regulations of many institutions and organisations."
And the Home Secretary who introduced the very first race law in 1965?
Frank Soskice was also an immigrant. I am as sure as I can be that the bloke who arrived here as a 16-year-old Russian refugee had Jewish blood close up in his pedigree as well.
When those for whom there is ’no place… in mainstream political party’ tell a truth the establishment doesn’t want told, the bought-and-paid-for lash out. Which, as it happens, isn’t the worst thing in the world.
Seeing as how it makes good and evil really easy to spot.
On 23 February 2012, Dr. Francesca Minerva, a research associate at Oxford University and the University of Melbourne and Alberto Giubilini, a bioethicist at the universities of Milan and Melbourne had their article ‘After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?’ published in The Journal of Medical Ethics.
"People with Down's syndrome, as well as people affected by many other severe disabilities, are often reported to be happy. Nonetheless, to bring up such children might be an unbearable burden on the family and on society as a whole, when the state economically provides for their care. On these grounds, THE FACT THAT A FETUS HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BECOME A PERSON WHO WILL HAVE AN (AT LEAST) ACCEPTABLE LIFE IS NO REASON FOR PROHIBITING ABORTION. Therefore, we argue that, when circumstances occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call AFTER-BIRTH ABORTION SHOULD BE PERMISSIBLE…
We propose to call this practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide’, to emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus (on which ‘abortions’ in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child. Therefore, WE CLAIM THAT KILLING A NEWBORN COULD BE ETHICALLY PERMISSIBLE IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE ABORTION WOULD BE. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. Accordingly, a second terminological specification is that we call such a practice ‘after-birth abortion’ rather than ‘euthanasia’ because THE BEST INTEREST OF THE ONE WHO DIES IS NOT NECESSARILY THE PRIMARY CRITERION FOR THE CHOICE, contrary to what happens in the case of euthanasia.
Failing to bring a new person into existence cannot be compared with the wrong caused by procuring the death of an existing person… If the death of a newborn is not wrongful to her on the grounds that she cannot have formed any aim that she is prevented from accomplishing, then IT SHOULD ALSO BE PERMISSIBLE TO PRACTISE AN AFTER-BIRTH ABORTION ON A HEALTHY NEWBORN TOO, GIVEN THAT SHE HAS NOT FORMED ANY AIM YET...
The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus, that is, NEITHER CAN BE CONSIDERED A ‘PERSON’ in a morally relevant sense… MERELY BEING HUMAN IS NOT IN ITSELF A REASON FOR ASCRIBING SOMEONE A RIGHT TO LIFE…
Now, hardly can a newborn be said to have aims, as the future we imagine for it is merely a projection of our minds on its potential lives. It might start having expectations and develop a minimum level of self-awareness at a very early stage, but not in the first days or few weeks after birth. On the other hand, not only aims but also well-developed plans are concepts that certainly apply to those people (parents, siblings, society) who could be negatively or positively affected by the birth of that child. Therefore, the rights and interests of the actual people involved should represent the prevailing consideration in a decision about abortion and after-birth abortion…
Although FETUSES AND NEWBORNS ARE NOT PERSONS, they are potential persons because they can develop, thanks to their own biological mechanisms, those properties which will make them ‘persons’ in the sense of ‘subjects of a moral right to life’…
If a potential person, like a fetus and a newborn, does not become an actual person, like you and us, then there is neither an actual nor a future person who can be harmed, which means that THERE IS NO HARM AT ALL. So, if you ask one of us if we would have been harmed, had our parents decided to kill us when we were fetuses or newborns, our answer is ‘no’, because THEY WOULD HAVE HARMED SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT EXIST (the ‘us’ whom you are asking the question), which means no one. And if no one is harmed, then no harm occurred.
A consequence of this position is that THE INTERESTS OF ACTUAL PEOPLE OVER-RIDE THE INTEREST OF MERELY POTENTIAL PEOPLE TO BECOME ACTUAL ONES…
The ALLEGED right of individuals (such as fetuses and newborns) to develop their potentiality, which someone defends, is over-ridden by the interests of actual people (parents, family, society) to pursue their own well-being because, as we have just argued, merely POTENTIAL PEOPLE CANNOT BE HARMED BY NOT BEING BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE. Actual people's well-being could be threatened by the new (even if healthy) child requiring energy, money and care which the family might happen to be in short supply of. Sometimes this situation can be prevented through an abortion, but in some other cases this is not possible. In these cases, SINCE NON-PERSONS HAVE NO MORAL RIGHTS TO LIFE, THERE ARE NO REASONS FOR BANNING AFTER-BIRTH ABORTIONS…
A possible objection to our argument is that after-birth abortion should be practised just on potential people who could never have a life worth living. Accordingly, healthy and potentially happy people should be given up for adoption if the family cannot raise them up. Why should we kill a healthy newborn when giving it up for adoption would not breach anyone's right but possibly increase the happiness of people involved (adopters and adoptee)?…
What we are suggesting is that, if interests of actual people should prevail, then AFTER-BIRTH ABORTION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A PERMISSIBLE OPTION FOR WOMEN WHO WOULD BE DAMAGED BY GIVING UP THEIR NEWBORNS FOR ADOPTION.
If criteria such as the costs (social, psychological, economic) for the potential parents are good enough reasons for having an abortion even when the fetus is healthy, if the moral status of the newborn is the same as that of the infant and if neither has any moral value by virtue of being a potential person, then THE SAME REASONS WHICH JUSTIFY ABORTION SHOULD ALSO JUSTIFY THE KILLING OF THE POTENTIAL PERSON WHEN IT IS AT THE STAGE OF A NEWBORN...
If economical, social or psychological circumstances change such that taking care of the offspring becomes an unbearable burden on someone, then people should be given the chance of not being forced to do something they cannot afford."
After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
[b]Julian Savulescu, editor of The Journal of Medical Ethics, and thus responsible for the publication of the above, insisted that the arguments had been made before by eminent figures.[/b]
"I’m not defending practising infanticide," he said. "I’m defending academic and intellectual freedom."
So that’s all right then.
[b]Savulescu is a Professor of Practical Ethics at the University of Oxford, a Fellow of St Cross College, Oxford and a Director of the Oxford Centre for Practical Ethics[/b].
As of this moment, Melbourne and Oxford Universities are jointly involved in high-powered Stem Cell research. Savulescu heads this collaborative venture.
I wonder, when the followers of Francesca Minerva and Alberto Giubilini extinguish the life of their first ‘healthy newborn’, with the defenders of ‘academic and intellectual freedom’ nodding benignly in the background, will that newborn be Italian or Romanian?
Or is it likely to have been born a little closer to Oxford?
On 23 February 2012, Larisa Brown reported thus in The Daily Mail:
"A Labour MP has been suspended from the party after was arrested following an alleged brawl in a House of Commons bar last night. Eric Joyce is said to have punched several Tory MPs in the fracas just before 11pm last night. It is reported he also hit a Labour MP…
An eyewitness told the Politics Home website that Mr Joyce, a former Army officer who represents Falkirk, pushed a Tory MP and then started punching other Conservative members seated at the back of the bar. Drinks were also allegedly thrown over some bar patrons… Joyce, 51, complained the bar, popular with MPs from both parties, was 'full of Tories'…
Joyce, 51, has served only briefly on the frontbenches, acting as a Northern Ireland spokesman following the 2010 election defeat until forced to resign later that year when he lost his driving licence for failing to provide a breath test…
He rose to the rank of major in the Royal Army Educational Corps… A series of articles and media interviews in which he accused the Army of private school bias put him on a collision course with the top brass, and he quit in 1999.
AFTER WORKING FOR THE COMMISSION FOR RACIAL EQUALITY Scotland for some months, he was elected to Parliament as Labour MP for Falkirk West in a by-election…
In Parliament, he has developed an interest in AFRICA AND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT alongside his defence concerns…
Mr Joyce set an extraordinary record by CLAIMING MORE THAN £200,000 EXPENSES IN A SINGLE YEAR IN 2010... Nicknamed 'Airmiles Eric', Mr Joyce clocked up £45,411 in travel costs. The figure is equal to nearly £1,600 for every week Parliament sits.”
A tw*t then.
A bullyboy tw*t. He’s a warmonger as well. Joyce was just about the most oft seen face of slavering backbench enthusiasm for slaughter in the build up to war in Iraq.
On 23 February 2012, Emily Allen reported thus in The Mail Online:
“Germany is rejecting demands from an EU body that it should stop surgically castrating sex criminals - a practice that dates back to the Nazis - because it is ‘degrading’. Defying Brussels, THE GERMAN GOVERNMENT SAID IT INTENDS TO CARRY ON WITH THE PRACTICE citing low re-offending rates among sex criminals who had opted to have the procedure.
It pointed out the results of a 1997 study that tracked the history of 104 sexual offenders 'who subjected themselves to castration in the decade between 1970 and 1980. Their REOFFENDING RATE WAS THREE PER CENT,' the German authorities explained, 'AS OPPOSED TO 46 PER CENT FOR A CONTROL GROUP’.”
The Gerries de-b***ock their pervs?
What a spiffing idea! Let’s try it here!
“Their reoffending rate was three per cent… as opposed to 46 per cent for a control group.”
Common sense really.
Of course, when political correctness and pity-the-poor-paedo is in fashion, well, common sense isn’t far off being a criminal offence, is it? So I don’t think we’ll be chopping the nuts off Nigel any time soon.
You know, our parliamentary betters are always shaking their heads, wringing their hands and complaining that they can’t do anything about this, that and the other because Europe won’t let them.
It’s not true, is it? They’re lying. The rest of Europe do just as they please. They obey the law when it suits them and, when it doesn’t, they don’t.
Sarkozy does what he wants, Merkel does the same. French farmers and lorry drivers and Spanish fisherman have always been a law unto themselves. God knows what the former Commies get up to when they’re not over here nicking all the work.
And then there’s us. Sometimes I think that the EU was invented purely to screw us and give the rest a laugh. But I guess the Greeks and the Irish might have something to say about that.
On 23 February 2012, Leo McKinstry's essay, Mass immigration has changed our country for ever, appeared in The Express:
This is it:
"The colossal scale of mass immigration in recent years represents a savage betrayal of the British people by our governing elite. No one ever voted for Britain to be transformed from a cohesive nation into a fractured multicultural society. Yet just such a revolution has been brought about by the ideological trashing of our national identity and the wilful collapse of our borders, with the influx of foreign arrivals now running at almost 600,000 a year, most from Africa and Asia.
What we are witnessing is the systematic destruction of a once-proud country. As the pace of change accelerates Britain is fast becoming a place without any mutual sense of belonging or any shared heritage or even a common language.
The very concept of our British national identity is sinking into irrelevancy. In large swathes of our cities, amid the burkas and babble of foreign tongues, too many indigenous Britons now feel like aliens in their own land.
The revolutionary impact of mass immigration has been reinforced this week by astonishing figures that show two-thirds of all babies born in London have foreign parents.
In just six of the 32 boroughs in the capital were British parents in the majority, while in Newham, part of the East End, an incredible 84.1 per cent of births were to migrants, most from India, Pakistan or Poland...
In modern history no country has ever gone through such rapid social upheaval without being conquered by an enemy power.
If this kind of enforced revolution were taking place elsewhere Left-wingers would be outraged. Fulminating about the rights of the indigenous population they would portray the change as a colonialist takeover.
But when Britain’s own nationhood is under threat they celebrate because they are the architects of this change. In government from 1997 to 2010 Labour cynically used mass immigration as a vast tool of social engineering to restructure Britain.
The impression sometimes given is that uncontrolled immigration has been an accident, supposedly the result of administrative incompetence. This outlook was largely adopted over the latest fiasco at the UK Border Agency, which was castigated in an official report this week over its failure to maintain proper checks... Yet the truth is that the Border Agency failed so dramatically in its work because LABOUR POLITICIANS WANTED IT TO. They loathed the idea of a tough approach to immigration.
A free-for-all is precisely what they desired to refashion Britain. As Tony Blair’s aide Andrew Neather famously admitted, Labour sought to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”. That is why they eagerly allowed the immigration rate to rocket by relaxing controls and dishing out passports, work permits and student visas like confetti.
If Labour had really wished to crack down on immigration they could easily have done so. But the integrity of our position was destroyed from within by Labour’s wreckers, who were filled with loathing for the traditions of our country, obsessed with the dogma of racial diversity and eager to expand their inner city client vote.
Their revolution was implemented against the will of the people through repression, whereby open debate was stifled through hysterical accusations of racism and through remorseless propaganda about the benefits of immigration, especially supposed economic growth and the “cultural enrichment of ourcommunities”.
We can now see how hollow all that propaganda was. Mass immigration has brought falling living standards as millions of working-class Britons have been thrown on the economic scrap heap.
The burdens on our infrastructure have become intolerable from the costs of welfare benefits for migrants to the pressure on schools and housing.
Contrary to all the upbeat rhetoric about diversity, immigration has also brought social dislocation, urban crime and gangland violence...
Moreover alien practices have been imported into our once well-ordered society, such as mass voter fraud, sharia law or exploitation of vulnerable white teenage girls."
Some sections of the media are catching up fast.
Here and there, telling the truth is now a mainstream activity. The bloke who wrote the above was once a Labour councillor and a parliamentary aide for that high-priestess of political correctness, Harriet Harman, no less.
If such as him can prize himself free of the shiny-eyed b***ocks, there's hope yet for the I'm-not-racist-buts.
And the future of our children.
On 22 February 2012, Simon Heffer opined thus in The Mail Online:
"The very nature of our society was being changed by a new kind of uncontrolled mass immigration… without the British people ever having been asked whether they supported the policy.
Labour arrogantly accused its critics of racism, though most of the incomers were white, and of scaremongering. It claimed it had no choice but to open our borders to the nationals of ten mainly ex-Soviet bloc countries which joined the EU in 2004. The truth was that, as other EU countries which restricted immigration from these states proved, it did have a choice.
The cynicism did not end there. Such, Labour claimed, was its commitment to ensuring that only people with a right to be in Britain could come here that in 2008 it set up the UK Border Agency. The truth, unfortunately, was very different...
Despite the strong threat from international terrorism, the evidence of eastern European criminal gangs infiltrating Britain, and our overburdened public and social services, 500,000 unchecked people were let in to Britain via Eurostar between 2007 and last year, while countless so-called students were just nodded through.
The game was given away in 2009 by Andrew Neather, a former Labour Home Office and Downing Street adviser, who revealed that MASS IMMIGRATION WAS A DELIBERATE POLICY BY THE LEFT TO CHANGE THE SOCIAL FABRIC OF THE COUNTRY AND TO ‘RUB THE RIGHT’S NOSE IN DIVERSITY’.
This appalling policy was never discussed publicly because Labour strategists feared it would upset the party’s traditional white working-class support. For self-interested political reasons, the public could not possibly be consulted.
Mass immigration gratified the Left in two ways that have inflicted enormous damage on our country. It furthered the bogus notion of multiculturalism — undermining national identity and common values, and preventing the successful integration of immigrant communities into the British cultural mainstream. Moreover, at a time of growing economic crisis, it added an enormous number of people to Labour’s client state.
Recent immigrants were grateful for their admission to the country, and for the costly safety net of the welfare state that was provided for them: a gratitude that, Labour hoped, would help it garner more votes at elections. That aside, it is generally accepted that new arrivals to a country — who are often relatively impoverished — are more likely to vote for Leftish governments...
This cocktail of ideology and blatant gerrymandering is of the Left’s making. In the interests of creating a society with which Leftist ideologues felt comfortable, and which would help shore up Labour’s vote at elections, THE WISHES OF THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE BRITISH PEOPLE, AND THEIR SECURITY, WERE RIDDEN ROUGHSHOD OVER.
The idea of multiculturalism was advanced with varying degrees of stealth over several decades by politicians, civil servants and council officials. Its doctrine was spread in schools and in teacher-training colleges.
Weak as it so often is, the Church of England appeared to welcome it, even though it posed a mortal threat to that institution. The BBC, never to be found wanting when political correctness was required, suppressed any debate about mass immigration, took the tenets of multiculturalism as its gospel and preached it to the nation.
Internationalism is one of the core principles of the Left. IT ABHORS THE NATION STATE, WHICH IT SEES AS A FOUNDRY OF BIGOTRY, RACISM AND AGGRESSIVE NATIONALISM.
The Left has always understood this: that if you manage to wreck a national culture and a national identity, you shatter the ties of history and nationhood forged over centuries. Although there used to be patriotic Leftists, and there still are one or two, MANY IN THE NEW LABOUR PROJECT IN THE NINETIES AND NOUGHTIES WERE, EFFECTIVELY, SELF-HATING BRITONS.
They tortured themselves with post-imperial guilt, wanted the country to lose its independence and be ruled by Brussels, AND SOUGHT TO HAVE WHAT A BBC EXECUTIVE CALLED THE ‘HIDEOUSLY WHITE’ MAINSTREAM CULTURE DILUTED BY ‘DIVERSITY’.
This was immensely dangerous. In a world where even Trevor Phillips, the chairman of the Equality Commission, highlights the threat that multiculturalism poses to social cohesion, it is surprising it has taken ministers so long to become alert to this danger. However one of them, at last, has. Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary, has said that the culture of the majority will once more be given pre-eminence in society…
To promote — as opposed to tolerate — the practices of other cultures is to drive people into ghettos. It prevents integration and assimilation and causes strife in society between religious and social groups who find themselves gazing at one another suspiciously across the social divides created by multiculturalism.
In a society that remains more than 90 per cent indigenously British, it is ludicrous to be ashamed of national traditions, rooted in common values from a shared past. And it is entirely right to expect those who come here to accept those values and traditions, and not be made — USUALLY BY MISCHIEVOUS, POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED WHITE LIBERALS — to feel hostile towards them.
When even many atheists recognise the central importance of Christianity to the culture and institutions of our country, and I am one of them, it is offensive to the intellect as well as to the spiritual to seek to downgrade or marginalise that faith.
OUR SOCIETY NEEDS AN END TO MASS IMMIGRATION… OUR NATIONAL IDENTITY, founded on Christian values of tolerance and decency, and on a history of which we can be exceptionally proud, HAS BEEN GRAVELY INJURED BY BRITAIN’S LEFT-WING ENEMY WITHIN.”
On 21 February 2012, The Guardian quoted former Home Secretary, Foreign Secreary and and Lord Chancellor, Jack Straw, thus:
"I am now clear that THERE IS A MAJOR DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT WITHIN THE EU. And it is absolutely certain, in my judgment, that THE MECHANISM THAT WAS ESTABLISHED 30 YEARS AGO TO FILL THIS GAP OF THE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT, WHICH WAS A DIRECTLY ELECTED EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, HAS NOT WORKED and, in my judgment, cannot work in that form. And the paradox is that AS THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT HAS BEEN GIVEN MORE POWERS IT HAS BECOME LESS, NOT MORE, LEGITIMATE…
A SYSTEM OF POLITICAL ELITES leading people by the nose… the EU should not be involved in issues like the working time directive, health and safety and so on. I am in favour of much that is in those instruments but what I'm not in favour of is having a single, one-size-fits-all instrument which works on the presumption that there will be single, one-size-fits-all enforcement when nothing of the kind takes place…
It is also clear that THE PRIORITIES THE EU POLITICAL ELITES CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON ARE TAKING US AWAY FROM CORE AREAS, SUCH AS TACKLING TERRORISM AND INTERNATIONAL CRIME… Tackling this dichotomy at the heart of the EU will be critical if the union is to not only survive the euro crisis but also avoid an even more serious democratic crisis.
The Guardian added:
“He was speaking at an Institute for Public Policy Research seminar at which poll findings were released showing ONLY 8% OF THE POPULATION BELIEVE THEIR VOICE COUNTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION.”
UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, commented thus upon Straw’s epic volte face:
“It’s a shame that Mr Straw spent years failing to realise that the parliament is useless.”
Decades more like.
On 21 February 2012, various mainstream media outlets quoted Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, thus:
"Under Harriet Harman’s agenda, the Labour government encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream. Political correctness replaced common sense, people were left afraid to express legitimate concerns and frustrations...
It’s sad to see how, in recent years, the idea of tolerance has become twisted. A few people, a handful of activists, have insisted that it isn’t enough simply to celebrate the beliefs of minority communities; they want to disown the traditions and heritage of the majority, including the Christian faith and the English language. In recent years we’ve seen public bodies bending over backwards to translate documents up to and including their annual report into a variety of foreign languages.
We’ve seen men and women disciplined for wearing modest symbols of Christian faith at work, and we’ve seen legal challenges to councils opening their proceedings with prayers, a tradition that goes back generations, brings comfort to many and hurts no one. This is the politics of division."
It's the politics of treachery, Eric.
It's the politics of war.
Putting the immigrant first has been institutionalised ibn this country since Harold Wilson's government introduced the first race law. Every government since then has gone the foreigner-first, anti-British route.
Let's hope the deeds of this government matches its rhetoric.
On 20 February 2012, Melanie McDonagh said this in The Spectator:
"During the leaders debates before the last general election, David Cameron declared that he wanted to make immigration a non-issue and he would go about it by reducing immigration numbers from hundreds of thousands a year to tens of thousands a year. He hasn’t succeeded in the second objective — more than half a million people arrived here in 2010, only 30 per cent of whom were from the EU — and he most certainly hasn’t succeeded in the first...
It’s hard to have a decent debate about welfare tourism without numbers. That figure of… 591,000 last year is under-publicised… The number of people coming here less the numbers of Brits leaving… amounted to a quarter of a million, or 252,000, in 2010...
More than half the 371,000 claiming benefits had since their arrival acquired British citizenship, or the indefinite leave to remain. That deserves close scrutiny; it may tell us about the Government’s overall failure to control immigration. Because, as Frank Field and Nicholas Soames MPs made clear in their study of immigration policy, there has been a tendency for the right to work in Britain to come with a near-automatic right to citizenship; that doesn’t happen in Germany.
Perhaps the most remarkable feature of the debate has been the world-class chutzpah exhibited by Chris Bryant, the Labour immigration minister. He says the situation will only get worse due to lax border controls, rising migration and increasing unemployment. ‘Tory ministers are resorting to rhetoric and misinformation to hide the reality of their failures on immigration and unemployment. Far from strengthening immigration control the Government is returning fewer illegal migrants and net migration has continued to increase.’
Ahem. Some 3.2 million people came here during Labour’s time in office, that is, between 1997 and 2009 — and that’s the gross figure. (The rough estimate for illegal immigration during the period is between half a million and a million.) During this time, about half a million National Insurance Numbers were given out to East Europeans and some 300,000 people came here from the old West European EU states, making roughly 800,000 in total. In other words nearly two and a half million people came to the UK from non-EU states under the last government. I’d say that on this one, Messrs Miliband and Bryant should lie low.”
On 19 February 2012, Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote the following in The Daily Mail:
“Marriage will ONLY remain the bedrock of a society if it is between a man and a woman…
When David Cameron told his party’s conference last autumn about his plans to bring in gay marriage, he said that this was because he was a ‘Conservative’ and believed in ‘commitment’. Like many others, I was baffled by this statement… For it threatens to fatally weaken what is still one of our country’s greatest strengths – the institution of marriage.
I was also baffled because THIS GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSAL CONSTITUTES ONE OF THE GREATEST POLITICAL POWER GRABS IN HISTORY. The state does not ‘own’ the institution of marriage. Nor does the church. The honourable estate of matrimony precedes both the state and the church, and NEITHER OF THESE INSTITUTIONS HAVE THE RIGHT TO REDEFINE IT IN SUCH A FUNDAMENTAL WAY.
For thousands of years, the union of one man and one woman has been the bedrock of societies across cultures, all around the world. Marriage is now an integral part of the modern world not because of a government diktat, or a church decree, but because it has stood the test of time – and proved to be the fundamental building block for every stable society.
Marriage is one of the most important aspects of our culture, and one that the public hold in great esteem. Most people still get married, and many young people aspire to be married. Even if couples choose not to, when children come along many of them instinctively tie the knot. By their actions they affirm their belief in what many of us know to be true – that the ideal is for children to be raised by a mother and father who are married.
ACADEMIC STUDY AFTER ACADEMIC STUDY HAS SHOWN THAT ADULTS, CHILDREN AND THE WIDER COMMUNITY ALL PROSPER BECAUSE OF MARRIAGE.
A report recently published by researchers at the University of British Columbia found that cultures where monogamy is the norm are safer, while COUNTRIES IN WHICH OTHER ARRANGEMENTS ARE MORE COMMON HAVE HIGHER LEVELS OF SERIOUS CRIME.
For many centuries, Britain has known much more stability than most other nations on Earth, and marriage has been essential to our national welfare. It keeps families together. It is clear that family breakdown has a personal and societal cost…
Marriage is the glue that binds our country together. When a couple marries, they are not just joining with one individual, but connecting two families – and in doing so creating a support network far better than anything the state can supply…
Perhaps, as a nation, we can fool ourselves into thinking that we don’t need marriage. But we’d be terribly wrong. Marriage is a cornerstone of our society. Because of this, I believe the general public will oppose the present attempt to fundamentally alter – and undermine – the institution.
This is not because we oppose gay couples, but because WE SIMPLY DON’T ACCEPT THE MANTRA OF THE EQUALITIES INDUSTRY – THAT BEING EQUAL MEANS BEING THE SAME.
Marriage and civil partnerships have been defined for two different types of relationship and should be kept distinct – it is not and should not be ‘one size fits all’. Civil partnerships were brought in to give same-sex couples the rights that they said they badly needed. These rights are virtually identical to those of married couples. At the time the Government reassured us in the House of Lords that civil partnerships would have no effect on marriage. Marriage, we were told, would remain distinct because it is a relationship between a man and a woman.
Now THE GOVERNMENT, EGGED ON BY PRESSURE GROUPS AND IMAGE ADVISERS – NOT THE GENERAL PUBLIC, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE – IS PRESSING AHEAD WITH PLANS TO REWRITE THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE…
If same-sex marriage is legalised, schools will be forced to teach children the new definition of marriage – which will run counter to the wishes of many parents. We know what will happen, for we have already had a taste of it – it will encourage religious discrimination. A marriage registrar from Islington believed in traditional marriage, and was disciplined by her employers for it. The elderly owners of a B&B believed in traditional marriage, and were successfully sued for it. Numerous Roman Catholic adoption agencies believed in traditional marriage, and were closed down for it…
I do not believe the British public wants any of this. The move to legalise same-sex marriage is undemocratic. That is why I am so pleased that a new organisation, the Coalition For Marriage, has been formed with the aim of forcing the Government to hold a proper debate on this issue.
I have added my name to their petition for marriage – in the hope of safeguarding an institution which is a vital part of British life – and I would encourage you to do likewise.”
On 19 February 2012, The Express quoted Tony Blair's 'right-hand man', 'recovering alcoholic', Alistair Campbell, thus:
"I must admit that THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT I WORKED FOR MIGHT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO OUR ALCOHOL CRISIS…
The idea had been around for a long time. We were trying to signal that WE COULD CHANGE THE CULTURE but I never bought that because of this country’s history. When you think about Britain with the gin epidemic and other things, we are a drinking nation…
Is it in fact the case that THE GENIE CANNOT BE PUT BACK IN THE BOTTLE because shops are open 24 hours a day?”
Ted Jeory added:
"The decision by Tony Blair’s government to roll out 24-hour drinking was a mistake that has fuelled a frightening alcohol crisis among Britain’s middle classes...
Campbell, one of the architects of New Labour, conceded his party ‘might have got it wrong’ when it introduced all-day licensing in 2005 – and he said David Cameron should now consider reversing the move. Instead of creating a new ‘continental café culture’ as Mr Blair had hoped, he said IT SIMPLY INCREASED THE AVAILABILITY OF CHEAPER SUPERMARKET BOOZE AND HELPED KILL OFF THOUSANDS OF PUBS WHERE ALCOHOL WAS TRADITIONALLY MORE TIGHTLY REGULATED.
The former director of Downing Street communications said it had also contributed to a new drinking culture in which middle class professionals live in denial about their alcohol dependency...
Thousands of Britons a year are dying of alcohol-related liver disease, with a major rise in the number of women victims...
Campbell… said Britain was in a love affair with wine, with 1.6 billion bottles drunk every year."
On 19 February 2012, Jo Macfarlane decribed trainee the plight of trainee GP, Alison Hewitt, thus:
“Cowering under her living room table with a duvet for comfort, Dr Alison Hewitt prepared to spend a sleepless night in her small Brighton flat… The trainee GP clutched her mobile phone ready to dial 999 at the slightest noise… Then, uncertain if she would survive the night, she waited.
Alison was convinced that she was about to be visited by her ex-boyfriend Al Amin Dhalla, who had subjected her and her family to a vicious campaign of harassment over several months. Her terror was heightened knowing that POLICE, WHO KNEW ALL ABOUT DHALLA, HAD FREED HIM ON BAIL AFTER FINDING HIM FIRING A CACHE OF WEAPONS...
Last week, Dhalla… was found guilty of nine charges following a four-week trial at Lewes Crown Court, including two counts of harassment, theft, arson with intent to endanger life, criminal damage and possession of an offensive weapon.
Dhalla was described as a narcissistic psychopath whose outwardly mild-mannered personality and stable career was completely at odds with a violent and obsessive streak, which was only revealed after he was spurned by Alison after a year-long romance…
Speaking at her mother's thatched cottage in the pretty hamlet of Aston Abbotts near Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, she says: 'I've been in major shock and total disbelief all the way through. I'm still in shock. I've also felt humiliated and mortified that I let these things happen, that MY JUDGMENT WAS SO BAD’…
Dhalla, from Toronto, told Alison he was 35, had been in the UK for five years and was orphaned when his parents died in a car crash. All would later turn out to be lies…
He demonstrated an odd determination to move in to her flat by bringing a bag of possessions each time he visited… Friends seemed unenthusiastic, but most agreed he was charming and had a good job, as a financial auditor with insurance company LV.
Alison's suspicions about Dhalla were first aroused when he was introduced to her family at the wedding of Alison's mother Pamela, 66, who married David Gray in June 2010... Alison recalls: 'My gran confided she thought there was something suspicious about Al. She'd asked him about the car crash and decided that he was evasive. She wondered whether he was married or had kids.'
Soon afterwards, Dhalla asked Alison about the kind of rings she liked. 'He meant an engagement ring,' she says. 'I said to him, very clearly, “Don't buy me a ring. I'm not ready for that’…
In July they took a week-long holiday to the Greek island of Skiathos… During the trip Dhalla buried a ring in the sand, inside a sandcastle. Alison says: 'My heart sank. It was such a beautiful beach and such a romantic setting. It was a stunning £5,000 ring – gold, with three diamonds. I said, ‘I told you I wasn't ready for this’…
Dhalla increased the pressure on Alison to commit as the year progressed but by now her parents were concerned and decided to investigate his past… Alison says: 'David's company had carried out some basic screening and some suspicions had been raised. It was vague, but suggested a criminal record. They had also hired this private detective who said Al had lied on his visa to get into the UK’…
When the four of them took a holiday to Alicante in Spain in October 2010, the trip turned sour.
'Al accused my parents of moving his things and looking at his passport. He was deadly serious, furious. I'd never seen him like that'…
Back at home, Dhalla explained to Alison that his parents were alive, but had separated and his mother treated him as dead. He claimed it was easier to lie to avoid questions. He also confessed to a criminal record…
As Dhalla began emailing Alison's parents about potential wedding plans, they continued to examine his past… The family told Alison to leave Dhalla, saying he was dangerous, and she moved out of her flat and into a Premier Inn for some breathing space..
Her family had advised her to look at a website, titled The Memoirs of Al Dhalla (His Legacy and Contributions to Society). Alison recalls: 'There were pictures of me, under a section called Family Achievements. It was all a bit weird. I knew then it was over, but didn't know how to finish it.'
Then Dhalla's employers received an anonymous letter repeating the claim that he had lied on his work visa, and he resigned rather than face an investigation…
On Christmas Eve, just before starting a night shift at the hospital, she suggested they should break up… When Alison came home the following morning, their Christmas decorations, including the Christmas tree, had all gone… 'He said the decorations were in the bin outside, along with a butterfly picture from the wall and my medical degree certificate, which he'd ripped apart. That really upset me’…
On January 11, Alison's mother called her to report that neighbours in their quiet village had received anonymous poison-pen letters, making ludicrous claims about the family. One slur, directed at David, claimed he was in 'illegal possession of a human corpse' and had conducted 'indignity to human remains', while Alison's mother was described as 'obese' and a 'black widow' who dated men very soon after her husband's death…
It was late February before she heard from him again, but the occasional text, email and phone call quickly escalated until he was bombarding her with near-constant contact.
Reluctantly Alison agreed to meet him one Saturday night but arrived home from work to find him waiting and angry that she was late. He jumped into her car and refused to leave until Alison threatened to call the police. She says:
'For the first time, I saw his eyes blazing. His pupils were animated and angry, like he was enjoying the argument. It was suddenly really intimidating. I had to promise to see him on Monday to get him to leave. But I spoke to the police and they agreed to come along and arrest him on Monday night.'
Dhalla was arrested on March 28... He was given a restraining order, banning him from Sussex and forbidding him from contacting Alison or her family. But on April 4 a policeman arrived at Alison's work to tell her about the arrest… and how Dhalla had been shooting at targets in a field… HE WAS RELEASED ON BAIL THE NEXT DAY. Alison says:
'I was really shocked. I had felt relieved that he would be locked up. I just knew he would come and find me’…
At 3am, police arrived at Alison's flat to tell her that HER MOTHER'S HOME HAD BEEN SET ON FIRE… Dhalla was seen on CCTV at the Princess Royal hospital at Haywards Heath, West Sussex, where Alison was working at the time in obstetrics. He had posed as a doctor by stealing a stethoscope…
That night, Dhalla tried to set fire to a police station in Wing, a couple of miles from Alison's mother's home. He returned to the hospital at 5am – when Alison should have been working – and was spotted by staff and locked in a toilet until armed police arrived.
In his hired car, police found a loaded crossbow, a large knife, a claw hammer, pliers, bolt cutters, and a doctor's outfit…
Alison learnt he had rented a flat on a neighbouring street in Brighton in a bid to follow her movements, and police later said that ARRESTING HIM HAD PREVENTED THREE MURDERS.”
A sad, little tale of today.
Inspired one hundred per cent by a PC Crowd that has always sought to damage and demoralise the native, British majority. Machiavellian propaganda from the media and politician alike has, for the last six decades, instructed well-meaning British women and girls to make excuses for behaviours in foreign men that they would not excuse in their own.
“My judgement was so bad”, says Alison. Yes it was. It was ridiculously, air-headedly bad. But you were encouraged to judge things as you did by a remorseless, 60-year campaign of treachery that put the alien first and the indigenous lowly last wherever the northern European man predominated.
Know this, Alison: the global forces who conned you and the many, many other Alisons into behaving as you did could not care less about your welfare and happiness. Their business is destruction. Their business is the destruction of the Western man and those who would put him first in the land that he made.
THEY are at war with our culture, values, traditions, heritage and identity. And the more Alisons they can persuade to favour the foreign man over their own, the closer THEY are to winning that war.
On 18 February 2012, Christopher Booker reported thus in The Telegraph:
"The number of children taken into care every month in the UK has reached a record level.
Such is THE REIGN OF TERROR NOW BEING IMPOSED ON INNOCENT ENGLISH FAMILIES BY SOCIAL WORKERS that scores of parents have been fleeing with their children to Ireland to escape their clutches. I have followed a dozen such stories over the past two years, and in all of them two things stand out. One is that the English social workers seem prepared to stop at nothing to get the children back. The other is the extraordinary contrast between them and the Irish social workers, who again and again have satisfied themselves that the children are at no risk from their loving parents and are astonished by the ruthless behaviour of their English counterparts…
A mother and baby were pursued to Ireland by six social workers and police, who sat in Dublin for 10 days of court hearings, until a judge ruled in their favour (with the social workers seen giving ‘high fives’ on emerging from the court). When the mother again escaped to a remote cottage, she was violently knocked down by a policeman, so that her baby could be taken back to England.
Vicky Haigh, a former racehorse trainer, managed to escape to Ireland before her daughter was born. But then she was brought to England to be quite bizarrely punished, in a case relating to her beloved older daughter, with a three-year prison sentence, leaving her baby to be looked after in Ireland.
A 14-year-old boy lived happily with his mother in Ireland for six months until, after an equally bizarre judgment based on evidence neither he nor his mother were allowed to see, he was deported miserably back to care in England.
Last week, another such story came my way. It concerns a respectable family which was hit with disaster last summer, after the semi-autistic 8-year-old son, who tends to make things up, had lashed out at his 13-year-old sister, leaving bruises. When these were investigated, the boy told the police that his father had done it. The girl denied this and the boy admitted in video evidence what had really happened but the police stuck with his earlier story and arrested the father. Although he was never charged, the interventions of social workers became so menacing that, last October, the family escaped to Ireland, where the father has his roots.
There they have happily settled, and the 13-year-old daughter has become a star pupil of the local school. But the social workers eventually tracked them down, after the children’s grandmother, back in England, had been arrested by 10 police officers, handcuffed, held for three hours in a cell, and told she would be charged with perverting the course of justice unless she revealed their whereabouts. The English social workers pressed their Irish counterparts to co-operate in getting the children back to England (there are no court orders), but were told there was no reason for this because the children were in no danger.
The social workers then tried to lean on the school principal, saying that the children were ‘at risk of emotional harm.’ The sensible headmistress gave them very short shrift, saying that the English social workers had behaved deplorably in trying to destroy a perfectly normal family, and that England’s loss was Ireland’s gain, since the girl was a brilliant pupil, who was learning five languages. Thanks to their origins, the family will soon be safely confirmed as Irish citizens.
What is striking about these stories is how often the parents emphasise the contrast between the two countries’ social workers. ‘In England,’ says this father, ‘we were treated like dangerous criminals. In Ireland the social workers could not be more different, warm, friendly, treating us like human beings.’
And of course it is in England that THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN TAKEN INTO CARE HAS SOARED TO A RECORD LEVEL, just having topped 900 a month.”
On 18 February 2012, hullandeastriding.co.uk told us this:
"A boy of seven is facing accusations of racism after asking a fellow pupil if he was ‘brown because he was from Africa.’ Elliott Dearlove asked the question of the five-year-old boy at Griffin Primary School in Barham Road, east Hull.
The younger boy’s mother complained to the school, which launched an investigation.
Elliott’s mother, Hayley White, 29, says she received a phone call to say her son had been at the centre of A ‘RACIST INCIDENT.’ She was summoned to the school by her son’s teacher, where she WAS READ THE SCHOOL’S ZERO-TOLERANCE POLICY ON RACISM. Miss White, an NHS healthcare worker, said:
‘Elliott does not even know the meaning of the word racist… This was not racism. It was simply curiosity from a seven-year-old boy’…
Miss White said her son was left in tears after she spoke to him. She said:
‘Elliott kept saying to me, ‘I was just asking a question. I didn’t mean it to be nasty’. He was extremely distressed by it all.’
Miss White says she was led to the head teacher’s office, where she was asked to sign a form.
‘The form said my son had made a racist remark,’ she said. ‘I refused to sign it. I told the teacher I did not agree the comment was racist. My son is inquisitive. He always likes to asks questions. But that does not make him a racist.’
Since the incident, Elliott dislikes going to school, according to his mother. She said:
‘He is bright, not a trouble-maker at all. This has really affected him. I am trying to pull out of that school. I am disgusted and extremely upset. I want him to go to another school.’
In a statement, head teacher Janet Adamson said:
‘We are unable to discuss conduct issues relating to individual children. However, in this matter, we are satisfied we have acted in accordance with the council’s guidance for schools on the reporting of racist incidents.’
Vanessa Harvey-Samuel, head of localities and learning at Hull City Council, said:
‘There is a statutory duty to report any incident that is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person. The council’s policy is informed by Ofsted’s guidance on the inspection framework for schools in England.’
ABEL RIVERA, chief officer of Humber All Nations Alliance, which works with 38 different ethnic groups in Hull to encourage race equality, BACKED THE SCHOOL. He said:
‘The school has to follow its racism policy. THE BOY HAS SINGLED ANOTHER PUPIL OUT ON THE BASIS OF HIS COLOUR. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION AND IT’S WRONG.’
According to the school’s latest Ofsted inspection, children are taught to BE CULTURALLY AWARE. Inspectors said:
‘Pupils are reflective in response to thought-assemblies and personal and social education lessons. As a result, they have a good understanding of social and moral issues, such as racial intolerance’.”
QUESTION: Of those pictured below, who would you say looks least like a tw*t?
"The school's zero tolerance policy on racism."
Funny how intolerant the PC Crowd is of the curiosity of a seven year-old English boy, isn't it? How do you think this matter would have been dealt with if Hayley White had complained about her son being bullied by a black boy? Do you think the institutional outrage would have been similar? Or do you think all of the adults cited above would have colluded to cover it up?
You know, the MacPherson report told us that a 'racist' incident is one perceived to be so. In practice, this means that ANYONE who SAYS they have witnessed a 'racist' incident must be taken seriously. In other words, using the legislation that emerged as a result of the report, anyone who wishes to screw around with anyone else by bringing an accusation of racism against them, can do so if they feel like it.
As long as the complainant is non-white, that is.
A murderer, a rapist, a drug dealer, a drugged-up psychopath, a known liar, all could go the 'racist' route, aim the big, bad bogey word at the nicest person on the planet and the authorities would have to take the accusations seriously. And, of course, the PC Crowd would insist that they do so.
And, we all know, who would be taken 'seriously,' don't we? And who would not. This too is institutionalised. Just a few weeks ago Lee Jasper, once Ken Livingstone's whip-hand man in the London Assembly, twittered 'black people in the UK cannot be racist.' So, according to him at least, MacPherson's anti-British b***ocks was intended purely and simply for Whitey.
And, in the behaviours of Adamson, Harvey-Samuel and Ribera, we see the fruits of the good judge's treachery born out.
The results of the tw*t poll were as follows:
The PC Crowd, the MacPherson-sniffers and related Brit-loathers all insisted that Elliot be sectioned.
The true Brits asked that his persecutors be flogged.
And barred from having anything to do with the education of our children in the future.
On 18 February 2012, Terry Wogan said this in The Telegraph:
“Clutching at straws appears to have replaced rational thought in our economics... It’s not just unfortunate people who are out of work. NOTHING’S WORKING…
Quantitative easing (just print more money, quick!)… is clearly not working. The European single currency is not working, the €230billion being lent to Greece is not working. The NHS is not working, and neither is the Welfare Reform Bill…
Football itself is not working, particularly if you’re Carlos Tévez, Luis Suárez, Fabio Capello or Mick McCarthy. If, however, you’re Harry Redknapp, everything is working out just fine.
The list is endless and it’s even more dispiriting when you look at the people who are working, but against their will. It appears that more than one in 10 people have had to scrap their retirement plans this year because they can’t afford to stop working. Which will keep the younger generation even longer in the dole queue.
What is working, like a dream, is the ambulance-chasing compensation industry. How many phone calls do you get every day from someone telling you that there’s a crock of gold at the other end of the phone if you’ve been mis-sold payment-protection insurance for a loan or mortgage? Sometimes it’s half a dozen in our house. And don’t get me started on those TV ads for personal injury.
Still, mustn’t grumble. Dictatorships aren’t working. Apart from in North Korea, where such is the sense of loss over Kim Jong-il, bears have been spotted weeping in the woods.”
On 18 February 2012, The Daily Mail told us this:
“Eastern European criminals were responsible for more than 11,000 crimes in London last year. Nationals of Poland, Romania and Lithuania are most likely of all foreigners to be prosecuted by the police… Overall, foreigners are accused of one in four of all crimes committed in London. Astonishingly, they make up nine out of ten drug suspects and are responsible for more than one in three sex offences...
The programme makers spoke to one Polish ex-offender who said the British legal system was weak.
Polish criminals thought British prisons were like being in ‘a spa’, he said, adding they would ‘think twice’ if they thought they would be sent home to serve time.
Last month, Lithuanian Rimvydas Liorancas hanged himself in prison while on remand for the double murder of Carole and Avtar Kolar at their home in Birmingham. After his death, it emerged Liorancas got into Britain despite a conviction for armed robbery.
Earlier this month, a senior judge demanded to know why a Lithuanian child-rapist, Victor Akulic, was let into Britain, where he went on to beat and rape a woman. He had been jailed for nine years in his homeland after raping a seven-year-old.
Critics say Britain’s open borders with other EU members make it impossible to control who comes and goes. In many cases, Brussels regulations make it impossible to stop criminals from entering even if we know of their convictions. EU laws also restrict the Government’s ability to send criminals back home after prison.
More than 11,000 foreign national offenders are behind bars in England and Wales.”
On 17 February 2012, the novelist Frederick Forsyth said this in The Express:
“You know when a government is a moral wimp. It has an invisible but very evident imaginary banner above its head saying ‘there’s nothing we can do.’ But there always is, if only they had nerve or the moral courage to act for the people.
In Sussex a ‘traveller’ (gypsy) family was told to remove an illegally planted caravan. The non-travelling travellers are appealing – right up to the Supreme Court. Now that takes a lot of lawyers, meaning a lot of fees, meaning a lot of money. But not for the truly impoverished.
They get the lot on you and me. It’s called legal aid. But if you have private assets legal aid is removed. unless you are politically correct...
This particular family has just ordered a £20,000 new mobile home, which had to be towed through tiny South Harting with a pricey (but free) police escort. Destination? The illegal site. As they are not you and me it’s all on the house. And they still get legal aid, in breach of all the rules.
A few miles away in West London lives freshly released Abu Qatada... on the taxpayer. An estimated £50,000 a year is ingested by the Qatada family – housing, schools, family allowance, the lot. All right, so this merchant of hate cannot achieve gainful employment. But he has more than £170,000, formerly impounded but now presumably released with its owner.
If he were you or me that private fortune would immediately terminate the state aid. That’s three and a half years’ living costs. Will he be required to spend his own money first?…
Even on crime there are two completely different standards our wimpy Govern- ment refuses to abolish.
In Kent, a police canteen cleaner was filmed tipping three spoons of powdered coffee from a jar into his own cup. He is now an ex-cleaner with no job, no chance with a criminal record (a caution counts as such) and not much coffee. Silly man! He should have brought in six kilograms of cannabis and he could have walked around free as air. That’s the new law.
In the Appeal Court a fundamentalist Christian couple of B&B owners are given the heave-ho when trying to lift a £3,600 damages ruling against them for refusing to let a gay couple share a bed in their home. They thought the man who booked the double room by phone would come with his wife, not his boyfriend. The case against them was brought under the sexual orientation regulations. But the judges were adamant: mistaken booking or not they had infringed the gay couple’s civil rights.
But another offence close to that of perceived bigotry on sexual matters is the fomentation of hatred against racial or religious groups (unless that group is Christians when it seems to be allowed). Back to Abu Qatada.
We are told he cannot be sent back to Jordan, nor charged with any British crime. Another wimpy lie. If you take the entire compendium of his numerous speeches, sermons, CDs, DVDs and other utterances by him distributed in this country they constitute an entire lifetime of fomentation of hatred. If you or I uttered 10 sentences of his decades of hate- preaching, we’d be in a cell with the Lib-Lab Left headed by the BBC screaming for revenge. But neither establishment nor judiciary wish to lay a finger on this wellspring of bigotry and venom. So much easier to hammer non-complying trawlermen and too devout Christians.
And why does Home Secretary Theresa May go on and on calling the Strasbourg decision that Qatada stays here in subsidised comfort ‘unacceptable’ (I think she used that weary adjective five times at the Despatch Box)? of course a snub to Britain is acceptable, or it would not be accepted. But it will be, they always are.
That’s what I mean by ‘wimp.’ We have become a wimp country. There were men from my native Ashford, Kent, who went up the beaches of Normandy. They must be spinning in their mass graves.”
Our politicans aren’t wimps, Fred.
They are traitors. Betrayal of the British people is their business.
It’s a business they have been making a damn, fine job of for more than sixty years now.
Not wimps, Fred.
On 17 February 2012, Trevor Phillips, Chairman of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, was quoted thus in The Mail Online:
“You can’t say ‘because we decide we’re different then we need a different set of laws. There’s nothing different in principle with a Catholic adoption agency, or indeed Methodist adoption agency, saying the rules in our community are different and therefore the law shouldn’t apply to us.
Why not then say sharia can be applied to different parts of the country? It doesn’t work.
Once you start to provide public services that have to be run under public rules, for example child protection, then it has to go with public law.”
The difference being, of course, that Christianity is the religion that has been practiced by the indigenous British majority from time immemorial. Islam was imposed upon us just a few decades ago.
Militant secularism is an even more recent imposition.
On 17 February 2012, after Abu Qatada was released on bail as a result of a Strasbourg ruling, Thomas Hammarberg, Commissioner for Human Rights at the Council of Europe, was quoted thus by The Mail Online:
“It’s more the bad example. It would send a signal that the UK, which currently holds the chair in the Council of Europe… that would be used by other countries in Europe which are less keen on human rights. It would be extremely unfortunate to ignore the ruling. It’s a serious ruling and a serious matter.
I have read the discussions in the UK and know that he is seen as a dangerous person. So I understand the heat but I’m not impressed by the arguments. The key point in the judgment in Strasbourg is torture, but it seems that the arguments have become about whether Britain should co-operate with European institutions.
It seems the ministers had not even read the judgments. They mixed up the EU and the Council of Europe. It was about torture, not whether to co-operate with European institutions.”
On 17 February 2012, Jason Groves reported thus in The Mail Online:
“Infighting in the Eurozone risks 'utterly destroying' Greece, a Foreign Office minister warned last night. Lord Howell, father-in-law to the Chancellor George Osborne, told peers that Britain was pressing for a 'realistic and sustainable' solution to Greece's debt crisis, which he warned was having a 'chilling effect' on the British economy. He said 'uncertainty in Greece must be brought to an end... without utterly destroying that noble country'…
In an alarming development there were also fresh signs of economic 'contagion' in Europe, with unemployment in Spain topping five million as its economy went into reverse. Official figures showed Spain's economy shrank by 0.3 per cent in the final quarter of last year, with unemployment jumping by 400,000 to 5.3 million.
Lord Lamont said Greece was being forced to choose between the 'utterly impossible and utterly incredible'. He warned it now seemed a 'certainty' that Greece would be forced to leave the single currency, leaving the Eurozone facing a 'bleak future'.
The former Tory European commissioner Lord Tugendhat said Germany's overwhelming economic dominance following the crash was 'dangerous' for the EU. He said anti-German feeling was now 'rife in many European countries'…
Anti-German feeling is running particularly high in Greece after Berlin's finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble suggested the country was becoming a 'bottomless pit'. Some other northern European countries are also now thought to favour Greece leaving the euro...
In one small symbol of the scale of the challenge facing Greece it was reported yesterday that virtually every traffic light in central Athens was smashed during anti-austerity riots at the weekend. But the transport department is so strapped for cash that it cannot afford to replace them, leaving to disastrous congestion in the Greek capital…
Simon Denham, chief executive of Capital Spreads, said:
‘You’d be forgiven for thinking that parts of Europe were gearing up for a war after the comments that have been made flung around the continent in recent days... The lack of trust from the likes of Germany, France and other countries that Greece will not actually implement the agreed austerity measures is fuelling a loathing amongst the Greeks, especially against the Germans’.”
On 16 February 2012, Sharon Jayson told us this at USA Today:
“Interracial marriage in the USA reached an all-time high in 2010: 8.4% of all marriages, compared with 3.2% in 1980...
‘Interracial marriage has gone from taboo to a rarity, and with each passing year, it's less of a rarity,’ says Pew's Paul Taylor. Pew reviewed Census data from more than 850,000 people in the American Community Survey between 2008 and 2010.
In addition, Pew surveyed 2,003 adults in September and found more tolerance: 43% agree that ‘more people of different races marrying each other has been a change for the better in our society.’ Another 44% say it made no difference; 11% say it's been a change for the worse…
Pew found that minorities, younger adults, the college-educated, those who say they're ‘liberal’ and those who live in the Northeast and the West are more likely to view intermarriage positively… Pew also found that… among blacks, 24% of newlywed men married outside their race, compared with 9% of women.”
And the breeding out of Whitey continues apace.
Hands up who wants to see the white race disappear? Hands up who wants their descendants to resemble no one in their family album?
Well, whether you want it or not, that's what you're voting for if you vote for the establishment.
THEY are at war with us. If you vote for those who at war with you, you vote for your own destruction. You play the traitor with your own history.
The sheeple don't care. Nor do the lemmings. If there are no honourable men left to call a halt to the genocide, there won't be a fair-haired, blue-eyed girl left on the planet a century or two from now.
On 16 February 2012, Max Hastings opined thus in The Mail Online:
“Sir Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England, this week renewed his assault on Britain’s banks, for failing to provide the lending to small businesses which is indispensable to their growth, and often survival. New figures show that last year net lending fell by almost £11 billion. This was in defiance of promises made by the institutions’ bosses under the so-called Project Merlin deal, to increase funding for companies..
In addition, though their bonuses have fallen from stupendous to merely disgusting, bankers are still giving themselves rewards for their own services out of all proportion to their usefulness to society or their shareholders.
I recently read a pundit’s appeal for an outbreak of truth and reconciliation in the on-going war between the City and the public. The writer argued that, after all the abuse we have heaped on bankers, it is time to call a halt, recognise their importance to the economy and let them get on with their jobs.
My answer to that, and probably yours, would be: TIME ENOUGH FOR RECONCILIATION WHEN THESE PEOPLE STOP ROBBING US BLIND AND MEND THEIR WAYS. AS LONG AS THEY CARRY ON EXACTLY AS BEFORE, THERE IS NOT THE SMALLEST REASON TO STOP KICKING THEM…
These institutions are brutes run by brutes, each one as bad as the other…
One of the most notorious bank bosses, a man whose remuneration is delivered in an armoured truck, invited me to lunch. Stupidly, I thought he wished to confess the error of his ways. I could not have been more wrong.
‘I am becoming extremely concerned, Max, you don’t mind if I call you Max?’ he began with headmasterly gravity, ‘that Britain is turning against capitalism and the payment of appropriate rewards.’
I said: ‘You mean you think people like me are unjust in criticising your remuneration?’ Yes, he answered, saying my denunciations upset his children when they read them.
I told him that a few days earlier I had met an industrialist — one of the really good ones — and told him I was booked to lunch with this particular banker. ‘Ask him,’ responded the industrialist, ‘how he can conceivably justify his obscene display of personal greed.’
My banker host refused to give up. ‘I ask you this, Max,’ he demanded, ‘do you or do you not believe Britain needs a healthy and vigorous financial services industry? Would Britain be a better place if we take this bank to New York?’
I replied that I was sure that Mervyn King does not think anyone should be frightened by such a threat, which my host has often made before. I added: ‘Are you suggesting we have only one choice: to clap prettily as you collect untold millions every year, or watch you take the bank somewhere else in a huff?’
The banker batted stubbornly back: ‘Are you against paying people the going rate for what they do?’
I gave serial answers: first, almost no one criticises entrepreneurs who make fortunes by taking personal risk. Instead, our spleen focuses on privileged employees who play with company money, not their own, and who pay themselves grotesque sums for doing so.
Second, had he not noticed what is happening in the real world? Everybody else is getting hammered. The European financial system is hanging by a thread. We are entering what looks like a long period of austerity. Unless bankers want the peasants storming their Winter Palaces, is it not prudent to be seen to curb their appetites?
Finally, in addition to screwing their customers, bank bosses have ravaged shareholder value. My friends who understand these things say that the banks’ balance sheets are not worth the paper they are written on, because no one knows the real value of their declared assets. They are scarcely presiding over success.
My host said portentously that since he signs off his bank’s accounts, he is sure they accurately depict their condition. He travels the country meeting clients and customers, and he claims to find them pretty happy, too.
He himself is an entrepreneur: he has built a terrific investment business at the bank and created lots of jobs. He and his team deserve to be properly rewarded.
I left our lunch bewildered that my host should have chosen to waste 75 minutes of his valuable time to tell me that he regrets nothing, and give me a dressing-down for casting aspersions on the proper workings of the capitalist system. ‘When I voluntarily waived my bonus for two years, nobody gave me any credit,’ he said crossly.
HE AND HIS KIND — FOR THERE ARE MANY MORE LIKE HIM OUT THERE — INHABIT A LAND SO REMOTE FROM THE REST OF US THAT NO UNITED NATIONS INTERPRETER COULD BRIDGE THE COMMUNICATIONS GAP.
I see no hope of a reconciliation between bankers and the balance of mankind unless, or until, they suffer a shock, a divine thunderbolt, a revelation of a severity which will make St Paul’s experience in transit to Damascus look like amateur stuff. These vastly pampered moguls really believe they are worth the money, and cannot comprehend why most of the rest of us so passionately hold them in contempt.
The answer is that WE MUST KEEP KICKING UNTIL THEY GET THE MESSAGE.”
Councillor Sarah Bevan (Lib Dem, Peasedown) was incensed when opposition Tories blocked the allocation of £1.8 million for the development of new gypsy and traveller sites.
She was subsequently quoted thus at the This is Somerset website:
“If the Conservative group… believes that those who hold the purse strings should prioritise potholes over people, some of whom may well be members of minority groups such as the Romany, it is swerving perilously close to the kind of low level, INSIDIOUS RACISM THAT ULTIMATELY LED TO THE HOLOCAUST.” (16 February 2012)
Bevan is Jewish.
A Jew playing the ‘Holocaust’ card.
In hopes that £1.8 million of Somerset taxpayer cash be spent on improving the living quarters of those whom the majority of Somerset taxpayers would not want living alongside them.
I reckon most Somerset folk would be happy if the Gypsies went elsewhere.
I reckon they’d be ecstatic if Bevan went the same way.
On 15 February 2012, the remarkable essay 'How political correctness is ruining Britain's police' appeared in The Daily Mail.
It was written by Kevin Hurley, a former Detective Chief Superintendent of the Metropolitan Police.
This is it:
"THE MET HAS BEEN PARALYSED BY FEARS OF BEING BRANDED RACIST..
The Metropolitan Police continues to stumble from one self-inflicted crisis to another, weakening its ability to fight genuine crime. It is a force that FOR TOO LONG HAS BEEN GRIPPED BY A DANGEROUS COCKTAIL OF POOR LEADERSHIP, POLITICALLY CORRECT DOGMA, WARPED PRIORITIES AND TACTICAL INCOMPETENCE.
Those flaws have been graphically illustrated by the appalling case of Ali Dizaei, THE NOTORIOUSLY CORRUPT IRANIAN-BORN OFFICER who was this week sent back to jail for a second time after his conviction for perverting the course of justice.
Only AN ORGANISATION OBSESSED WITH THE CREED OF DIVERSITY AND LACKING IN MORAL INTEGRITY WOULD HAVE ALLOWED A SWAGGERING, CRIMINAL BULLY LIKE DIZAEI TO RISE UP ITS HIERARCHY AND GAIN A SENIOR POSITION. He should have been drummed out long ago, not constantly rewarded with promotion.
But DIZAEI IS A SYMBOL OF THE ROT WITHIN THE TOP RANKS OF THE MET. TOO MANY SENIOR OFFICERS SEEM TO HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT THEIR CENTRAL DUTY IS TO PROTECT THE LAW-ABIDING BRITISH PUBLIC. Instead of taking tough decisions, like challenging Dizaei, THEY INDULGE IN POLITICISED MANOEUVRES DESIGNED TO PROTECT THEIR OWN BACKS AND FURTHER THEIR OWN CAREERS.
The high command of the Met inhabits a culture where cowardice is dressed up as pragmatism, WHERE A TALENT FOR SPOUTING JARGON TRUMPS DETERMINATION TO TAKE ON THE CRIMINALS. The biggest losers from this approach are not just ordinary decent British citizens, but also the constables out on the streets, often doing a heroic, selfless job ONLY TO BE UNDERMINED BY THEIR SELFISH, CAREERIST SUPERIORS.
It is no exaggeration to say that the Met frontline are lions led by vacillating donkeys. As a former detective chief superintendent at the Met myself, I have been appalled by the Dizaei saga.
I was actually the borough commander in West London at the time when, in July 2008, he tried to frame an innocent Iraqi businessman, Waad al-Baghdadi, with whom he was engaged in a bitter feud over money. The incident ultimately led to two criminal trials and Dizaei’s conviction this week.
From the moment Dizaei hauled Mr al-Baghdadi into Hammersmith police station on charges of assault, I had the severest doubts about his tale. This was not just because of the unconvincing nature of his story that al-Baghdadi had attacked him, which turned out to be a pack of lies, but also BECAUSE OF DIZAEI’S APPALLING RECORD OF DISHONESTY, CORRUPTION AND ABUSE OF OFFICE.
LIKE ALMOST EVERYONE ELSE IN THE MET, I HAD ALWAYS KNOWN THAT HE WAS A WRONG ’UN. On a superficial level, he could be charming and personable, but his easy manner barely disguised his dark side. HE WAS A FIGURE OF EPIC VENALITY, AMBITION AND RUTHLESSNESS, HIS ENTIRE CAREER GEARED TOWARDS FURTHERING HIS OWN INTERESTS, REGARDLESS OF THE LEGALITY OR PROBITY OF HIS METHODS.
When he joined the Met as a superintendent in 1999, former colleagues in the Thames Valley Police, where he was an officer for more than a decade, warned us to BEWARE, TELLING US OF HIS ENTHUSIASM FOR PLAYING THE RACE CARD TO ACHIEVE HIS ENDS. BUT IN A CLIMATE OF HYSTERIA OVER ACCUSATIONS OF ‘INSTITUTIONALISED RACISM’, THE MET’S TOP BRASS WERE DESPERATE TO RECRUIT MORE ETHNIC MINORITY SENIOR OFFICERS.
The warnings from Thames Valley Police were grimly fulfilled. DIZAEI WAS A MASTER AT USING FEARS ABOUT RACISM TO THWART ANY CHALLENGE TO HIS INCREASINGLY AGGRESSIVE, SELF-SERVING CONDUCT. THE NATIONAL BLACK POLICE ASSOCIATION, OF WHICH DIZAEI WAS PRESIDENT, WAS HIS CHOSEN INSTRUMENT WITH WHICH TO BULLY AND INTIMIDATE THE MET’S HIERARCHY.
He became a law unto himself. The Met’s terror of taking any action against him made him feel even more invincible. Even the Independent Police Complaints Commission, NORMALLY ALL TOO KEEN ON ENFORCING THE POLITICALLY CORRECT CODE, urged the Met to discipline Dizaei, but TOP COMMANDERS WERE TOO PUSILLANIMOUS TO DO SO. MOST HAD PROSPERED BY AVOIDING TOUGH DECISIONS. They were not going to risk all by taking on a formidable adversary WHO LOVED TO SMEAR HIS CRITICS AS RACISTS.
THANKS TO THEIR LACK OF COURAGE, HE GOT AWAY WITH BEHAVIOUR THAT WOULD HAVE LED TO THE SACKING OF ANY OTHER MET EMPLOYEE.
So he gained a PhD with a thesis ATTACKING THE MET ON RACISM, while in 2007 he wrote an autobiographical book called Not One Of Us, which contained severe criticism of the Met.
Yet instead of being sacked for gross disloyalty, HE WAS PROMOTED. Can you imagine any successful company that would behave in such a pathetic manner towards a senior member of staff making money out of trashing the firm’s reputation? Fuelled by his invulnerability, DIZAEI’S EGO WAS LEGENDARY AMONG THE RANK-AND-FILE.
On one occasion he alleged that two constables had damaged his private car. On investigation, it turned out that the damage was inflicted by one of his many mistresses. Any other officer behaving in that way would have been disciplined or sacked, especially because he had shown such a contemptible lack of respect towards the two constables. But NOTHING HAPPENED TO DIZAEI, PROTECTED AS HE WAS BY THE SHIELD OF SPURIOUS ANTI-RACISM.
On another occasion, he drove into the station and parked so carelessly that HE BLOCKED THE EXIT OF THE EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES. Almost immediately, the emergency vehicle was needed.
‘Can you move your car?’ called out the officers, needing to rush to the scene of the incident. ‘You move it,’ replied Dizaei, throwing them the keys and marching brazenly inside. That was THE ARROGANCE OF THE MAN. HE HAD NO SENSE OF PUBLIC SERVICE, NOT A SHRED OF DECENCY. HE WAS A BRUTE IN UNIFORM, WHO ONCE THREATENED TO KILL THE MOTHER OF ONE OF HIS MISTRESSES ‘LIKE A DOG’.
But Dizaei was clever enough to exploit the political pressures on the Met for more than a decade.
And, of course, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WAS TO BLAME FOR THE PUSILLANIMOUS WAY THE RAMPAGING GANGS OF LOOTERS AND VANDALS, MANY FROM ETHNIC MINORITIES, WERE DEALT WITH DURING THE RIOTS LAST SUMMER.
PARALYSED BY POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM, TERRIFIED OF BEING ACCOUNTABLE FOR CONTROVERSIAL DECISIONS OVER PUBLIC ORDER, THE MET’S SENIOR OFFICERS ALLOWED THE MOB TO CONTROL THE STREETS FOR FIVE DAYS BEFORE LAUNCHING A CRACKDOWN.
This is not the police force that the public deserves. The one great hope is that the Met has a new Commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, who made his name fighting crime on Liverpool’s tough streets. Hogan-Howe’s virtues are that he does not crave adulation from the politicians, always a sign of good judgment, and that he has real experience of operational requirements.
Far too many senior officers in the Met have reached the top without such a background. In fact, THE AVOIDANCE OF TOUGH, FRONTLINE RESPONSIBILITIES IS OFTEN THE HALLMARK OF A MODERN SUCCESSFUL CAREER IN THE MET. The arrival of Hogan-Howe, combined with the welcome downfall of Ali Dizaei, may put an end to this pattern.
And, FINALLY, POLICING WILL BE GOVERNED BY THE NEEDS OF THE PUBLIC INSTEAD OF POLITICS."
Well done and well said, Kev.
This essay is about as honest and honourable a commentary on the way things are now, and how we got there, as it would be possible for a former top cop to admit to. Thing is, why did you wait until now to say it? Why did you wait until you were retired and in receipt of your pension to tell all? Why did you not say something when all of this was happening?
When it it needed to be said.
You, along with all the others you rightly condemn here, said nothing about Dizaei at the time. You said nothing about the effect political correctness was having on the ability of the force to police properly.
You waited until you had nothing to lose. You waited until your pension was secure.
Still, you speak out now. Way too late but you are speaking out. Others haven’t. Others won’t. You are to be congratulated for being one of the first to tell it like it is, I guess. But you will understand why you won’t be getting any rosettes from us, who have been saying this all along.
You won’t been rushing to defend us any time soon, will you, Kev? That would be a politically incorrect bridge too far, methinks. Even for the man who dared to write the courageous article seen here.
'He was a brute in uniform, who once threatened to kill the mother of one of his mistresses ‘like a dog’.'
A ‘brute in uniform.’ You got that right, Kev. Check out what the British Nationalist was saying about the ‘brute’ seven years before you decided to come clean.
"At the Old Bailey, an Iranian immigrant faced charges of dishonesty, perverting the course of justice, corruption, consorting with prostitutes, using cocaine, taking bribes, wasting police time and making fraudulent expense claims.
At work, the man in question had irritated many in his unseemly choice of outfit, choosing to wear sunglasses, cowboy boots and a trendy Versace belt. He also drove an expensive BMW and did not socialise with his co-workers, preferring instead to frequent the Roof Gardens club in central London, for which he had taken out a £400-a-year membership.
In one interview, he had said that his car had been damaged by the police. Later, however, he was forced to admit that he had lied. It transpired that he had driven his car to a point close to a police station so that suspicion would fall upon the force.
This wasn't all. Even though his wealthy parents had given him a fine education, such that he was in possession of doctorate in law, even though he was a trained barrister and was regularly seen in the company of Iranian diplomats, the court heard him subject a girlfriend, who had just broken up with him, to an intimidating series of juvenile, low-life threats.
Mandy had discovered that, even though he was a married father-of-three, she was just one of a string six girlfriends that he was thought to be maintaining at that time.
A tape of a telephone conversation was played in court where, after insisting that he would have Mandy and her mother killed, the man, whose wife has since left him, said:
"I will take such revenge on you that, like a dog, you will be sorry. You will never treat me like this again. Mandy, I am going to declare war on you and I have declared it as of now. See what I will do to you. From now on, you are dead. You think it's a bluff. I give you an hour and see what I will do to you."
In a second call, he said:
"You are not safe. I am going to come and catch you."
And, in a third phone call, he was heard to say:
"You want war, bitch, you're going to get war. First I will start with your family, then I come to you and your reputation. I will spread all over London that you are a prostitute."
The tapes were given to the police by Mandy's mother, who told them that her daughter's abuser, a serving police officer, had taken a bribe from a motorist on a drink-drive charge.
However, in April 2003, after our Iranian policeman claimed in court that the police investigation into his behaviour was conducted by racist officers out to block his progress, Ali Dizaei was acquitted of most of the charges that had been brought against him.
This, despite the threats to harm Mandy and her mother, and a surveillance operation and trial which is rumoured to have cost the Metropolitan Police as much as £7,000,000,
In September 2003, Dizaei was acquitted of the remaining charges. He was awarded £80,000 in compensation and is now working as a policeman once again.
He has since been promoted.
Dizaei was born in Tehran, in 1962, and came to Britain at the age of 10.
His grandfather and father were both deputy commissioners in Tehran's police force. After studying at a public school in Sussex and the South West London College of Business Education, he gained a law degree at City University in 1982, and studied to become a barrister.
He joined Thames Valley police in 1986. By 1996 he was a chief inspector in Oxford. He subsequently gained a masters degree in law from Brunel University and in 1998 he gained a doctorate in law.
By 1998, Dizaei was one of the top officers in the Black Police Association. He was being taken seriously by the movers and shakers in governmental and media circles and the BPA's members knew that they should see him if they wanted something done. He said:
This networking forum quickly became mobilised and people like me who were legally qualified got almost daily referrals. People didn't want a shoulder to cry on, they wanted help in suing the force... The whole issue of diversity and race relations within policing came on the blind side of the police force.
He was soon seconded to the Home Office as vice chairman and legal adviser to the BPA, WITH SPECIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO THE HOME SECRETARY, JACK STRAW.
In March, 1999, Dizaei joined the Met as a Superintendent and was frequently cited as the person most likely to be Britain's first non-white police chief. It was even suggested that he might become the first black officer to head the Metropolitan Police.
He hit the headlines when he said that procedures used to pick senior ranks were 'culturally biased,' and he also dared to criticise the Home Secretary for reinstating a PC who called a teenager a 'black bastard' during a struggle to arrest him. Nevertheless, JACK STRAW AWARDED HIM A CERTIFICATE OF COMMENDATION for his BPA work and HE WAS ALSO INVITED TO ATTEND A DOWNING STREET SEMINAR ON BRITISHNESS WHICH TONY BLAIR ATTENDED.
However, in August, 1999, his bosses began investigating his behaviour and, in January 2001, he was suspended, just prior to his taking the Strategic Command course, which was almost obligatory if an officer wanted to get to the very top in Britain's Police Force.
In The Guardian, Dizaei stated that black officers tend to be better qualified than their white peers, citing this as a reason why so many black officers resort to the courts.
"I suppose I've been a market leader in it, which may explain why the police administrators hate me. You deprive me of my right and I will sue you and I will win... I'm not going to let a handful of bigots stop me."
In August 2005, after the murder of Anthony Walker, Dizaei was one many to jump aboard the PC bandwagon.
He told the BBC's Today Programme that Anthony's death was:
"An unequivocal indication that the cancer of racism is still here, 10 years after the Lawrence inquiry... We will not tolerate these abhorrent acts of racism on young, innocent people."
As far as I know, Dizaei has never mentioned the 'abhorrent act' of black-on-white 'racism,' that 'young, innocent' Richard Whelan suffered, to the BBC. (Richard was murdered by Anthony Joseph on the same day Anthony Walker was murdered.)
Dizaei now works out of Hounslow police station.
In a world where fairness and equity still applied you might have thought that a killing in London might have concerned a Metropolitan Police officer rather more than one in Liverpool. But then, fairness and equity are not exactly the favourite buzz-words of the Dizaeis, are they? The Chief Superintendant seems to prefer an entirely different kind of language. To whit:
"I will take such revenge... like a dog, you will be sorry... I am going to declare war on you... See what I will do to you... You are dead... You are not safe. I am going to come and catch you... You want war, bitch, you're going to get war. First I will start with your family, then I... will spread all over London that you are a prostitute."
Between 1987 and 1990, PC Albert Bernard and PC Ali Dizaei were beat bobbies together.
To this day, Albert, who did not have positive discrimination, affirmative action, 'fast-tracking,' Jack Straw, Downing Street or well-to-do parents to help him, is still a police constable.
This is the face of an Iranian immigrant whom some were once touting for the top job in British policing:
Thanks a lot for telling the unfashionable truth, Kev.
It's always welcome.
Now why don't you surprise us all and let the world know that there are some out here who actually care about the British? Who were, in fact, trying their damnedest to warn them about political correctness and the Dizaeis ages ago. And that they are the very same people that the PC Crowd in parliament and the Press have always vilified the most.
It's all gone quiet over there.
On 14 February 2012, actor Bill Nighy was quoted thus in The Telegraph:
“The way the elderly are treated, and in some cases warehoused and medicated, rather than nurtured and listened to, is distressing...
The fact that they pay taxes all of their lives and then are expected to give all of their savings to maintain themselves should they need assistance is absolutely disgraceful and one of the great scandals of our society.”
Dame Judi Dench was also quoted. She said:
“We’re not good at dealing with old age in this country. We shove people in a room and leave them sitting round a television."
On 13 February 2012, Tory Party Chair, Baroness Warsi, said this in The Telegraph:
“FAITH HAS BEEN NEGLECTED, UNDERMINED – AND YES, EVEN ATTACKED – BY GOVERNMENTS IN RECENT YEARS...
I will be arguing for Europe to become more confident and more comfortable in its Christianity… THE SOCIETIES WE LIVE IN, THE CULTURES WE HAVE CREATED, THE VALUES WE HOLD AND THE THINGS WE FIGHT FOR ALL STEM FROM CENTURIES OF DISCUSSION, DISSENT AND BELIEF IN CHRISTIANITY.
THESE VALUES SHINE THROUGH OUR POLITICS, OUR PUBLIC LIFE, OUR CULTURE, OUR ECONOMICS, OUR LANGUAGE AND OUR ARCHITECTURE…
My fear today is that A MILITANT SECULARISATION IS TAKING HOLD OF OUR SOCIETIES… It seems astonishing to me that those who wrote the European Constitution made no mention of God or Christianity. When I denounced this tendency two days before the Holy Father’s State Visit in September 2010, saying that government should ‘do God,’ I received countless messages of support. The overwhelming message was: ‘At last someone has said it .’
That so many people felt moved to write showed just how uneasy they were at the rising tide of secularism.
For me, one of the most worrying aspects about this militant secularisation is that at its core and in its instincts IT IS DEEPLY INTOLERANT. IT DEMONSTRATES SIMILAR TRAITS TO TOTALITARIAN REGIMES – DENYING PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO A RELIGIOUS IDENTITY… That’s why IN THE 20TH CENTURY, ONE OF THE FIRST ACTS OF TOTALITARIAN REGIMES WAS THE TARGETING OF ORGANISED RELIGION.”
For Sayeeda Warsi to speak out thus on behalf of Christianity is both commendable and, frankly, easy.
Every now and again up pops a non-indigenous type to say what we all think when our own elite folk daren't or don't want to.
Excuse the cynicism but this IS a way THEY have of reinforcing the ‘foreigner cares more for you than your own’ message.
However, there is something else going on here. Warsi’s generosity towards Christianity comes at a barely disguised price. Quid pro quo: if she speaks up for our religion, we must tolerate hers!
In the article, she also says:
“Today I have the honour of leading the largest ministerial delegation from the United Kingdom to the Vatican.”
Globalism and the Multicult in all its glory. Cameron chooses a Muslim to represent the UK in its dealings with the head of the Roman Catholic Church. Same old, same old.
“To create a more just society, people need to feel stronger in their religious identities and more confident in their creeds. In practice this means individuals not diluting their faiths and nations not denying their religious heritages.”
That would be ALL religious IDs, creeds and faiths, I’m guessing. Not just the Christian.
“We see (militant secularism) in any number of things: when signs of religion cannot be displayed or worn in government buildings; when states won’t fund faith schools; and where religion is sidelined, marginalised and downgraded in the public sphere.”
Christianity suffers much more in this regard than Islam but ‘religion’ and ‘faith’ cover all the bases, don’t they?
Now she really gets down to it:
“When we look at the deep distrust between some communities today, there is no doubt that FAITH HAS A KEY ROLE TO PLAY IN BRIDGING THESE DIVIDES. If people understand that ACCEPTING A PERSON OF ANOTHER FAITH ISN’T A THREAT TO THEIR OWN, THEY CAN UNITE IN FIGHTING BIGOTRY AND WORK TOGETHER TO CREATE A MORE JUST WORLD.”
And everything will be unutterably fab in the happy-clappy, Multicult wonderland of tomorrow!
Can anyone remember the last time a politican argued for a multicultural China? Or India, Pakistan or Iran? For sure, different religions are practiced in those countries (friction thus abides) but no one is ever going to suggest the Chinese Commies should get together with their Buddhist neighbours to create 'a more just world.' Nor will anyone ever demand that the Hindus hug their Untouchable chums. And any talking head who implored the Israeli Jew and the Alabama Christian to 'unite' with the Pakistani and Iranian Muslim in some universal, religious sisterhood would, doubtless, be sectioned.
Oh, no, Sayeeda's [I]'faith'[/I]-based unity is intended for Western Man alone.
"All the major religions ask their followers to stand up for their neighbours. Doing so doesn’t make you less of a Christian, less of a Jew, less of a Muslim – it makes you more of one."
So, come on, you Christian Brits! Stand up the for the Jews and Muslims who live next door!
Both of whom hate your guts.
Unlike Sayeeda, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, Jack Straw, the Milibands, Trevor Philips, Diane Abbott and all the other Jewish, Muslim and assorted BME politicians and media darlings who determine our future.
PS. A few years back the second-generation immigrant Muslim who chairs the Tory Party was saying that BNP members, 99.9 percent of whom would be native Brits, should 'get off OUR island!'
Which non-'accepting' demand was, I would have thought, guaranteed to inspire 'deep distrust' in the hearts and minds of those whose 'divides' she want bridged.
On 12 February 2012, ynetnews.com, an online Jewish news resource, informed us thus:
"Some two years after the assassination of senior Hamas operative Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, MOSSAD AGENTS ARE STILL USING FOREIGN PASSPORTS, INCLUDING THOSE OF BRITISH NATIONALS, while conducting covert intelligence operations overseas."
On 11 February 2012, Rebeca Seales told us this in The Daily Mail:
“The stereotypical student is a messy sort of beast… But for all their foibles, most people would expect the teenaged scamps to have mastered the use of a toilet. Not so at Swansea University, where campus chiefs have put up signs in a helpful attempt to provide students with toilet training.
University bosses said they put up instructions about how to use the toilets properly after some were found in a mess, sparking a series of complaints. Explaining their decision, they blamed 'CULTURAL DIFFERENCES' IN THE WAY THE TOILETS ARE USED BY FOREIGN STUDENTS…
A university spokeswoman said: 'The posters were produced to help address CULTURAL DIFFERENCES THAT WERE UNFORTUNATELY CAUSING DAMAGE AND HYGIENE ISSUES. SWANSEA UNIVERSITY IS A MULTI-CULTURAL CAMPUS COMMUNITY’.”
And this, ladies and gents, is what we’re supposed to ‘cohere’ with.
This is ’diversity’ THEY keep on telling us is so much better, smarter and more worthy than us. And yet, at 18, 19, 20 and over the diversity that currently swamps our university colleges and campuses even more than our towns and cities has to be shown how use the lavatory.
And told to wash its hands.
If you don’t hate those you vote for by now, folks, you are the enemy of your own children.
On 11 February 2012, George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, was quoted thus by The Telegraph:
“THERE ARE DEEP FORCES AT WORK IN WESTERN SOCIETY, HOLLOWING OUT THE VALUES OF CHRISTIANITY AND DRIVING THEM TO THE MARGINS… JUDGES SAY THAT THE LAW HAS NO OBLIGATION TO THE CHRISTIAN FAITH, but I say 'rubbish’ to that. Historically there has been a great interlocking of Christianity with our laws in this country.”
The former Archbishop’s grandson died as a result of his addiction to drugs.
Of this matter, he said:
“As a Christian, even if you don’t understand, you have to accept. THESE TRAGEDIES ARE HAPPENING IN MANY FAMILIES, whether you are an archbishop or not.”
Lord Carey, who is opposed to the call to decriminalise drugs, added:
“For many who start using soft drugs, THERE IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE and in Simon’s case that slippery slope led to his death.”
Oh yes, ladies and gents, the drugs the powers-that-be have foist upon our people do not just destroy the poor.
They are everywhere now and could just as easily take your sons and daughters as they could ours. Have a think about that next time you put your cross against a traitor.
On 11 September 2011, Janet Daley said this in The Telegraph:
“The real casualty of the past week has been the New Politics, by which all sophisticated electoral strategy is now run. This is the philosophy which holds that THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IS JUST A SPECIALISED FORM OF MARKETING EXERCISE, whose outcomes are determined by the same techniques as any other advertising or public persuasion campaign, in which the personalities of candidates and party policies are products that must be pre-tested, packaged and MANIPULATED TO SUIT POPULAR TASTES...
The Prime Minister is now getting what might be seen – rather brutally, perhaps – as his just deserts FOR HAVING BEEN DELIBERATELY DUPLICITOUS ABOUT HIS PARTY’S INTENTIONS ON HEALTH REFORM. Everything that everybody (including me) has said about the hopelessness of his Health Secretary’s presentational skills and political ineptitude may be true but in the end, IT WAS THE SHOCKING DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE CAMERON PRE-ELECTION UNDERTAKING NOT TO PLUNGE THE NHS INTO A MAJOR RE-ORGANISATION, AND HIS POST-ELECTION DETERMINATION TO DO EXACTLY THAT which was his undoing.
What could the electorate conclude from this? That the assurances he gave about the NHS when he was in opposition were systematically misleading catchphrases simply designed to reassure that large proportion of voters who – the expert opinion samplers told him – did not trust the Conservatives on health? And if that is what voters think, then are they not right?…
As your grandmother used to say, if you tell an untruth, even by omission, you will eventually have to take the consequences, which, in this case, may be that nobody will ever believe another word you say.”
On 11 February 2012, David Barrett reported thus in The Telegraph:
“Court of Appeal judges quashed the ruling in which Mr Justice Blake and a colleague allowed Rocky Gurung, from Nepal, to remain in the UK. They said the original judgment suffered from an ‘error of approach’ and looked like ‘A SEARCH FOR REASONS FOR NOT DEPORTING HIM.’
The decision landed Mr Justice Blake in a second controversy, only days after he was criticised FOR PERMITTING AN INDIAN MALE NURSE TO REMAIN IN BRITAIN FOLLOWING A JAIL TERM FOR INDECENTLY ASSAULTING A WOMAN PATIENT…
The case will now have to be heard again by the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber, of which Mr Justice Blake is president.
Gurung came to Britain in 2005, just three years before he committed the crime. The victim of his attack… was a hard-working waiter… In April 2008 Bishal was working at a Nepalese restaurant in Esher, Surrey, when he came to London to celebrate Nepalese new year. After leaving a party on a boat on the Thames in the early hours he was chased along the Embankment by 10 to 15 men including Rocky Gurung… One witness told the court that Bishal was ‘on his hands and knees’ being kicked or beaten by seven or eight men and was then thrown into the river by Rocky Gurung and (Kemik) Thakali...
Gurung and Thakali were both jailed for three years for manslaughter… At the end of his sentence Rocky Gurung… appealed against the Home Office’s decision to deport him, and lost. He then appealed again to the Upper Tribunal – the case overseen by Mr Justice Blake. He claimed that deporting him to Nepal would breach his ‘right to family life’ EVEN THOUGH HE WAS SINGLE, HAD NO CHILDREN AND LIVED WITH HIS PARENTS. In a judgment first disclosed in January last year, the court ruled in the killer’s favour that deporting him would be ‘DISPROPORTIONATE.’
The Home Office later appealed to the Court of Appeal and a panel led by Lord Justice Rix concluded Mr Justice Blake’s decision was faulty. ‘It appears to us that there has been an error of approach on the part of the Upper Tribunal,’ ruled the three appeal judges.
They said they were ‘troubled by the conclusion of Mr Justice Blake that the ‘nature and seriousness’ of the offence did not in themselves justify interference with Rocky Gurung’s human rights through deportation. Such an argument ‘MISPLACES THE EMPHASIS,’ said the panel. ‘MUCH OF THE DETERMINATION HAS THE APPEARANCE OF A SEARCH FOR REASONS FOR NOT DEPORTING HIM…’ they said.
'Much of the determination has the appearance of a search for reasons for not deporting him.'
Said the court of appeal.
'Much of the determination' along with many other prior determinations, 'has the appearance' of TREASON.
On 11 September 2011, Peter Hitchens said this in The Daily Mail:
"As the age of sexual consent is 16, what are state employees doing fitting contraceptive implants in 13-year-old girls? AREN’T THEY COLLUDING IN A CRIMINAL ACT?
These sinister devices are a clear admission by the Government. IT ACTUALLY EXPECTS THESE CHILDREN TO HAVE UNLAWFUL SEXUAL INTERCOURSE, AND WANTS TO MAKE IT EASY FOR THEM. How strange, given that the one crime we all disapprove of utterly and completely is paedophilia. Even convicted gangsters, rapists, burglars and muggers look down on the paedophiles in their midst...
Those who engage in paedophilia are often also accused of ‘grooming’, preparing their victims for violation and abuse. Yet HERE WE HAVE A POLICY THAT DIRECTLY CONDONES AND ENCOURAGES THE SEXUALISATION OF CHILDREN, and is at the very least comparable to the ‘grooming’ we are all so shocked by.
What child, equipped with this rather revolting chemical lump or dose, would not grasp that she was expected by the authorities to act accordingly? I would be very interested to know exactly what the victims of this scheme are told, AND HOW THEY ARE CHOSEN.
This thing is done by doctors and nurses, supposedly symbols of rectitude and mercy. It often takes place in schools, where our children are meant to be safe from molesters. IT IS PROTECTED BY LAW. It is paid for by your taxes and mine, extracted under the threat of prison. Perhaps most sinister of all, it is – like all child-molesting – ‘our little secret’. THE GIRLS’ PARENTS ARE NOT ASKED THEIR PERMISSION BEFOREHAND FOR THEIR DAUGHTERS TO BE CORRUPTED BY OUR SICK STATE. NOR ARE THEY TOLD AFTERWARDS. THIS IS BOTH TOTALITARIAN AND EVIL.
The judges are always ready to confirm that this is no longer a Christian country... But it is much worse than that. WE ARE TURNING INTO A SORT OF BABYLON... ALMOST EVERY SEXUAL PRACTICE AND HABIT – WITH THE SINGLE EXCEPTION OF FAITHFUL MARRIAGE – IS NOW ENCOURAGED BY THE STATE. FIRST, THE STATE POISONS YOUNG MINDS WITH SO-CALLED SEX-EDUCATION, WHICH IS NOW UNLEASHED IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS.
THEN, WHEN THE POOR THINGS ACT ON WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD, DOCTORS PUSH CHEMICAL ANTI-BABY CAPSULES UNDER THEIR SKIN…
Having privatised the telephones, electricity and the railways, WE HAVE NATIONALISED PAEDOPHILIA."
On 10 February 2012, Laura Clark reported thus in The Daily Mail:
"Universities are dropping maths from degree courses because students AND THEIR LECTURERS cannot cope with it, a report warns today. DECADES OF SUBSTANDARD MATHS EDUCATION IN SCHOOLS HAS led to a ‘crisis’ in England’s number skills…
UNIVERSITIES ARE BEING FORCED TO DUMB DOWN DEGREE COURSES requiring the use of maths, including sciences, economics, psychology and social sciences. Students are unable to tackle complex problems and their lecturers struggle to teach them anyway, it is claimed.
The reputation of the country’s universities and graduates is now under threat, according to the report, ‘Solving the Maths Problem’, published by the education lobby group RSA. After looking at maths education in other countries, the authors found that LESSONS AND QUALIFICATIONS IN ENGLISH SCHOOLS WERE ‘NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE’.
They say that CLASSES FAIL TO STRETCH THE BRIGHTEST WHILE LEAVING WEAKER PUPILS ILL-EQUIPPED TO USE MATHS FOR WORK AND FAMILY BUDGETING, and warn of a growing knock-on effect on universities.
‘English universities are sidelining quantitative and mathematical content because students and staff lack the requisite confidence and ability,’ the report says, adding that English universities are ‘not keeping pace’ with international standards.
Some universities are no longer advertising the level of maths needed to study particular subjects for fear of putting off applicants, the report warns. It adds: ‘Recent research suggests that universities are marginalising mathematical content in the delivery of degree courses because ENGLISH STUDENTS ARE NOT CAPABLE OF STUDYING IT.’
The report by the RSA – formally called the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce – suggests that… ‘mathematics knowledge and qualifications are increasingly important gateways to further and higher education, for crucial life-skills and in order to respond to economic change… But THE WAY MATHEMATICS IS TAUGHT AND ASSESSED IN ENGLAND HAS NOT ALWAYS KEPT PACE WITH THESE CHANGES OR WITH THE NEEDS OF LEARNERS AND HAS LEFT ONE IN FOUR ADULTS FUNCTIONALLY INNUMERATE’.”
And the most illuminating two words in the article above are?
'Dumb' and 'down.'
The are many way to win a war and the stupidifying of a nation is just one of them.
On 10 February 2012, after the billionaire financier Nathaniel Rothschild, lost a High Court libel action brought against The Daily Mail over a claim that he was the ‘puppet master’ behind a deal involving Lord Mandelson and Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, The Telegraph quoted Mr Justice Tugendhat as saying that Rothschild's conduct had been ‘inappropriate in a number of respects.’
"In my judgment that conduct foreseeably brought Lord Mandelson's public office and personal integrity into disrepute and exposed him to accusations of conflict of interest, and it gave rise to the reasonable grounds to suspect that LORD MANDELSON HAD ENGAGED IN IMPROPER DISCUSSIONS WITH MR DERIPASKA ABOUT ALUMINIUM…
Mr Rothschild states that he took Lord Mandelson on the trip as a friend and not for any other business reason. I cannot accept that the position was as simple as that... I do not accept that there is a clear line between the business and the personal sides of Mr Rothschild's relationship with Mr Deripaska. They have very extensive business relationships."
In a written judgment, Mr Justice Tugendhat noted that Mr Rothschild was ‘clearly not comfortable’ when cross examined about whether or not Lord Mandelson had been aware that he would be staying with Mr Deripaska, visiting an aluminium plant and flying in Mr Deripaska's jet. He said it was ‘clear’ that that the visit to Siberia had ‘always been a business trip’ so far as Mr Rothschild was concerned, and criticised the financier for giving ‘quite unrealistic’ answers to certain questions…
Tugendhat said there were ‘at the very least’ reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Deripaska's interest in providing Lord Mandelson such ‘luxurious and generous’ hospitality was because he had trade and business responsibilities. He said that Mr Rothschild's differing accounts of the reasons for the visit to the plant were confusing’ and found that the banker had ‘not been entirely candid’ throughout the different stages of the case. ..
Rothschild, who was not present, said in a statement that he intended to appeal.
‘I am disappointed with today's ruling, although I do not regret bringing the action… I brought this action seeking an apology for the Daily Mail's utterly false claim that I had arranged for Lord Mandelson to attend a dinner in Moscow to close a deal between Alcoa and Rusal and that this had caused the loss of 300 British jobs…
Lord Mandelson's trip to Russia was entirely recreational’…
It emerged during last month's hearing that during the visit to Siberia, in January 2005, THE MEN HAD VISITED A SAUNA WHERE THEY WERE THRASHED WITH BIRCH LEAVES AND PLUNGED INTO AN ICE BATH TOGETHER.
Mr Rothschild described the experience as ‘incredibly enjoyable’… He told the court: ‘WE WERE BEATEN BY A 25-YEAR-OLD BANYA KEEPER MAN, WHO HAS SPENT HIS LIFE PERFECTING THE ART OF BANYA'."
Never heard it called that before. Must be an illuminati thing.
"Then we jumped into ice-cold water. Everyone woke up the next day feeling revitalised and excited about the day’….
Mr Rothschild said the former Labour minister's presence was ‘PURELY RECREATIONAL.’
The Daily Mail article claimed that Mr Rothschild acted like a ‘puppet master,’ inviting Lord Mandelson to a dinner in Moscow to ‘impress’ Mr Deripaska, who was in the process of signing the £500 million deal with America's biggest aluminium company, Alcoa. It was alleged that LORD MANDELSON'S PRESENCE WAS REQUIRED TO ASSURE BOTH PARTIES THAT EU ALUMINIUM IMPORT TARIFFS WOULD NOT RISE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
During the hearing, Lord Feldman, co-chairman of the Conservative Party, accused Mr Rothschild of trying to arrange a donation to the party from Mr Deripaska in 2008.
However, his version of events contradicted that of Mr Rothschild, who, in a letter to The Times in October 2008, claimed it was Lord Feldman who raised the possibility of Mr Deripaska channelling a donation to the Conservatives through one of his British companies.”
Rothchild, Deripaska and Feldman are Jewish.
Mandelson’s father was a Jew.
Mandleson is also gay. By the sounds of the ‘purely recreational… thrashed with birch leaves and… beaten by a 25-year-old banya keeper man’… one wonders whether Mr Rothschild might not be averse to the odd spot of todger twiddling, as well.
On 9 February 2012, Laura Clark reported thus in The Mail Online:
“BRITISH CHILDREN ARE MISSING OUT ON TRADITIONAL CORE SUBJECTS AND ARE LANGUISHING BEHIND PUPILS FROM ALMOST ALL OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES, it was revealed yesterday.
Department for Education figures showed that 516 SCHOOLS FAILED TO ENTER A SINGLE PUPIL FOR GCSES IN BIOLOGY, PHYSICS OR CHEMISTRY LAST SUMMER. Thirty did not enter any pupils for a language GCSE, while 57 DID NOT PUT ANY FORWARD FOR GCSE HISTORY.
The figures emerged as an international study showed how BRITAIN HAS MORE TEENAGE DROP-OUTS THAN ALMOST ALL OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES. Nearly ONE IN FIVE UK YOUNGSTERS FAIL TO ACHIEVE ‘A MINIMUM LEVEL OF SKILLS TO FUNCTION IN TODAY’S SOCIETIES’ - many more than in countries including Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Estonia and Chile, according to the respected research body the OECD.
WHITE BRITISH CHILDREN FROM POOR HOMES ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE LIKELY TO FAIL AT UK SCHOOLS THAN YOUNGSTERS FROM ANY OTHER ETHNIC GROUP. THEY TRAIL FAR BEHIND CHILDREN FROM INDIAN, PAKISTANI, BANGLADESHI, BLACK CARIBBEAN AND BLACK AFRICAN FAMILIES WHOSE PARENTS ARE SIMILARLY DISADVANTAGED.
Yesterday’s education figures presented a gloomy picture, revealing how hundreds of thousands of young people are leaving school simply to claim the dole. They will also raise fears over Britain’s capacity to compete with emerging nations training thousands of science and technology graduates.
The Department for Education published new figures highlighting the extent of the departure from traditional academic subjects.
SOME 516 SECONDARY SCHOOLS - ONE IN SIX OF THE TOTAL - FAILED TO ENTER A SINGLE PUPIL FOR ANY OF THE INDIVIDUAL SCIENCE GCSES, IN BIOLOGY, PHYSICS OR CHEMISTRY.These schools are likely to have entered pupils for either one or two general science GCSEs - thought to be poor preparation for the study of science at A-level.
Other schools sidelined languages and the humanities. A total of 219 schools entered no-one for French, and 1,067 failed to put a single pupil in for Spanish.
YOUNGSTERS AT THESE SCHOOLS HAVE NO CHANCE OF ACHIEVING THE NEW ENGLISH BACCALAUREATE AWARD, introduced for youngsters gaining at least a C in English, maths, a science, a language and a humanity.
Schools Minister Nick Gibb said: ‘These core subjects are the stepping stone to higher education and employment. But FAR TOO MANY SCHOOLS SIMPLY AREN’T GIVING THEIR PUPILS THE OPPORTUNITY TO STUDY THEM.’
The trend emerged as the OECD put the UK AT 25TH PLACE IN A LEAGUE TABLE OF 33 NATIONS FOR EDUCATING YOUNGSTERS TO ‘LEVEL THREE’ STANDARD…
The proportion of 25 to 34-year-olds who had failed to achieve a so-called ‘upper secondary’ education was 18 per cent - leaving the UK trailing behind most European countries including Germany, Ireland and France. South Korea had the lowest dropout rate, at just two per cent.
The OECD… implicated poor vocational training and a failure to get a grip on under-performing schools and DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS.”
On 9 February 2012, Jenny Hope told us this in The Mail Online:
"CHILDHOOD SHYNESS COULD BE RECLASSIFIED AS A MENTAL DISORDER under controversial new guidelines, warn experts.
They also fear that depression AFTER BEREAVEMENT AND BEHAVIOUR NOW SEEN AS ECCENTRIC OR UNCONVENTIONAL WILL ALSO BECOME ‘MEDICALISED’. Internet addiction and gambling might also become forms of illness…
Although the changes to the fifth edition of the (US) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders would not directly affect clinical practice here, where doctors tend to use different guidelines, experts say it would eventually influence thinking.
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, INCLUDING BRITONS, COULD BE GIVEN A PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS WHICH COULD RUIN THEIR LIVES, warn psychiatrists and psychologists here.
The DSM5 changes are also opposed by many experts in the U.S., some of whom claim THEY REFLECT EFFORTS BY DRUG COMPANIES TO SELL MORE PRODUCTS.
Simon Wessely, of the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London, said…
‘BACK IN 1840 THE CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES INCLUDED JUST ONE CATEGORY FOR MENTAL DISORDER. BY 1917 THE AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION RECOGNISED 59, RISING TO 128 IN 1959, 227 IN 1980, AND 347 IN THE LAST REVISION…
There is a real danger that SHYNESS WILL BECOME SOCIAL PHOBIA, BOOKISH KIDS LABELLED AS ASPERGER’S AND SO ON.’
Peter Kinderman, head of the Institute of Psychology, University of Liverpool, said:
‘It will exacerbate problems that result from trying to fit a medical, diagnostic, system to problems that just don’t fit nicely into those boxes. It WILL PATHOLOGISE A RANGE OF PROBLEMS WHICH SHOULD NEVER BE THOUGHT OF AS MENTAL ILLNESSES. MANY WHO ARE SHY, BEREAVED, ECCENTRIC, OR HAVE UNCONVENTIONAL ROMANTIC LIVES WILL SUDDENLY FIND THEMSELVES LABELLED AS ‘MENTALLY ILL.’
THIS ISN’T VALID, ISN’T TRUE, ISN’T HUMANE’…
Dr Felicity Callard, of King’s College, warned:
‘PEOPLE’S LIVES CAN BE ALTERED PROFOUNDLY, AND SOMETIMES RUINOUSLY, BY BEING GIVEN A PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS.’
Among the U.S. psychiatrists against the changes is Allen Frances, of Duke University, North Carolina. He warned:
‘DSM5 WILL RADICALLY AND RECKLESSLY EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES OF PSYCHIATRY. MANY MILLIONS WILL RECEIVE INACCURATE DIAGNOSIS AND INAPPROPRIATE TREATMENT.’
David Elkins, of Pepperdine University, Los Angeles, said individuals could be ‘LABELLED WITH A MENTAL DISORDER FOR LIFE AND MANY WILL BE TREATED WITH POWERFUL PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS’.
Defenders of the American Psychiatric Association guidelines say they will make diagnosis more accurate and scientific.”
These ‘defenders of the American Psychiatric Association guidelines’, hands up who thinks they should be boiled?
Along with the American Psychiatric Association bigwigs and the CEOs and Chairmen of the ‘drug companies’ happy to ‘sell more products’ at the expense of the mental health of millions.
On 9 February 2012, Bagehot said this in The Economist:
I think the British are losing faith in the idea that they live in a meritocracy… For months there has been angry scrutiny of the sums paid to the bosses of public or publicly controlled bodies…
Stephen Hester, the RBS chief executive recruited on a commercial contract by the previous Labour government to salvage the stricken bank, found himself pilloried on tabloid front pages...
Mr Hester mounted a valiant defence of high pay in his bank and elsewhere. RBS was a ‘time-bomb’ saddled with £45 billion in losses, he said. He had scoured the world for the best people to defuse it, and if they did a good job they deserved recognition. He warned Britain not to seek fairness by ‘cutting down success’…Yet Mr Hester’s arguments will not end the storm...
Interview voters almost anywhere, and they couch their anger in terms of natural justice. THE BANKERS CAUSED THIS MESS BUT ARE DOING FINE WHILE ORDINARY FOLK SUFFER, is the invariable charge. Ask them about bonuses in particular, and THEY WONDER WHY WELL-PAID BOSSES NEED EXTRA FOR DOING THEIR JOBS PROPERLY.
None of these explanations is wholly wrong. But none really explains the depth of national outrage...
Explanations are needed for the public mood… Their desire to slash bosses’ pay leads to one conclusion: THE PUBLIC DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT EXECUTIVES ARE AS EXCEPTIONAL AS TODAY’S PAY LEVELS WOULD SUGGEST. Some voters may be ready for a gamble, believing that bosses are not as globally mobile as they claim to be and would stick around if their pay was cut. Others may be more cynical, suspecting that BOSSES ARE NOT AS UNUSUALLY TALENTED AS THEY CLAIM, SO THAT OTHERS COULD DO AS GOOD (OR AS MEDIOCRE) A JOB FOR LESS…
Cut through the noise about bankers and their bonuses, and it turns out that MANY VOTERS THINK THE FIX IS IN.”
On 9 February 2012, interviewed at the Imperial College in London, Professor Norman Finkelstein said this:
“If Israel were to attack Iran... and things start to go badly, I don’t think American Jews will rally behind them… because they’re getting tired of defending Israel’s wars.
And it’s embarrassing. It’s a crazy country. Every three years it goes to war… It’s like a junkie. They need their… fix. First they led the war in Iraq, 2006 attack Lebanon, 2008 and 2009 Gaza, and now they wanna go after Iran. They’re lunatics. And Americans just don’t wanna defend them.”
Profsssor Finkelstein is Jewish.
On 9 February 2012, The Daily Mail reported thus:
"Scotland Yard declared war on gangs yesterday as it emerged they are responsible for half of London’s shootings and one in seven rapes.
Police said 4,800 gangsters were to blame for almost a quarter of the capital’s serious violence, a sixth of all robberies, 16 per cent of the drug trade and 20 per cent of stabbings...
New Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe is expanding the existing Trident squad, increasing its remit from probing shootings in the black community to all gangs. The force is also doubling the number of officers dedicated to gang crime from 450 to 1,000.
Police are aware of 435 ‘crews’ operating in London, but only 250 are criminally active. Of those, 62 are categorised as posing a risk of ‘high harm’ and are estimated to be behind two thirds of gang-related offences.
According to the crime figures, 480 rapes or 14 per cent of the 3,431 sex attacks in London every year are carried out by known gang members."
Let's suppose for a moment that this initiative is, to some extent, successful. Wouldn't that suggest that Scotland Yard should have 'declared war on gangs' when the problem first arose. I mean, if the gang problem can be cured by extra officers and pots of cash was the 'cure' considered too expensive in the past? Did the politicians decide that all the the rapes, shootings, stabbings and robberies had to be borne because they didn't want to spend the necessary cash to sort it out?
And you know, ladies and gents, this is the time of austerity, isn't it? When there isn't much spare cash about. If they can fix it now, when the crime levels are so terrible and the money is scarce, why didn't they fix it at the start when it would have been so m,uch easier do so?
You know the answer.
THEY are at war with us. It suited them to have us under permanently subject to the criminal cosh.
All the question posed above are rhetorical. Whatever an anti-British, PC establishment promises regarding law enforcement, things will stay the same at best or get worse.
Only those who care about the nation and its people can and would fix things. The globalists despise the nation state and the pride, peace and homogenous stability it implies. THEY will not rest until the whole world is theirs and the white race is gone.
On 8 February 2012, The New Statesman featured a Jemima Khan interview with Ken Livingstone.
During the course of the interview, Livingstone described Margaret Thatcher thus:
“Clinically insane… I do not want to feel sympathy for her. I FEEL SYMPATHY FOR THE PEOPLE WHOSE LIVES SHE DESTROYED.”
I can’t stand Red Ken but, when a bad guy tells the truth, that truth should be acknowledged.
“THE WORLD IS RUN BY MONSTERS AND YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM. SOME OF THEM RUN COUNTRIES, SOME OF THEM RUN BANKS, SOME OF THEM RUN NEWS CORPORATIONS.”
“Hypocrisy, like some TORY MP DENOUNCING HOMOSEXUALITY WHILE THEY ARE INDULGING IN IT… The Labour ones have all come out… AS SOON AS BLAIR GOT IN, IF YOU CAME OUT AS LESBIAN OR GAY YOU IMMEDIATELY GOT A JOB. It was wonderful… you just knew THE TORY PARTY WAS RIDDLED WITH IT like everywhere else is.”
So, according to Red Ken, homosexuality abounds in Westminster.
Indeed, the Tory Party is ‘riddled with it,’ apparently. As are Blair’s job-getting New Labour lesbians and gays. The Lib Dems, of course, would be the most renowned in this area and tend to attract the largest part of the gay vote.
Anyway, the fact that the Tories are at it as well explains a lot, don’t you think?
“I don't work hard enough. If I had worked harder I MIGHT HAVE BEEN PRIME MINISTER.”
Yes, Ken, of course you might.
“I HAVE GONE THROUGH MY ENTIRE PUBLIC CAREER NEVER TELLING A LIE… I NEVER KNOWINGLY LIED.”
And that, ladies and gents, is as big a lie as you’ll ever hear a politician tell.
Check out TRUTH: LIVINGSTONE-STYLE to see a politician doing what politicians do best.
On 8 February 2012, The Daily Mail quote a tweet sent by Piara Powar to a remark by one Parmjit Singh regarding a football fan's arrest:
"Get lost Singh. Don't be a coconut."
Powar is the executive director of Football Against Racism in Europe.
On 7 February 2012, Quentin Letts said this in The Mail Online:
“Theresa May had a strikingly rough time of things. She was trying to justify Government policy… on Abu Qatada... He has been let out of prison. Mrs May said she wanted to deport him but was unable so to do.
Conservatives beat her up. Labour beat her up… the Lib Dems? THEY JUST KEPT VERY, VERY QUIET…
Her difficulties stemmed from a judgement in the European Court of Human Rights… She said that ‘the highest courts in our land’ had found against Qatada but still we could not deport him. IF THAT IS THE CASE, CLEARLY THEY ARE NOT THE ‘HIGHEST COURTS IN OUR LAND’...
Mark Pritchard (Con, The Wrekin) said that THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS WAS ‘UNDERMINING BRITISH JUSTICE’... Stewart Jackson (Con, Peterborough) was ‘appalled and disgusted’ by the decision of an immigration court to release Qatada on bail. Eleanor Laing (Con, Epping Forest) said ‘enough is enough’...
Anne Main (Con, St Albans)... opined that THE ‘RIGHTS OF TERRORISTS NOW TRUMP THE RIGHTS OF BRITISH CITIZENS’.
Dominic Raab (Con, Esher & Walton) held that it was ‘TIME FOR BRITAIN TO SAY NO TO STRASBOURG’.
Philip Davies (Con, Shipley) said ‘A PROUD, SOVEREIGN COUNTRY’ WAS BEING DENIED THE RIGHT TO DEPORT A WRONG ’UN. David Ruffley (Con, Bury St Edmunds) suggested that WE SHOULD SIMPLY IGNORE THE ECHR. Italy did. Mrs May wilted and wimpered.
Labour complained that rules brought in by the Coalition were not as rigorous as those in place under the Blair Government... David Winnick (Lab, Walsall N) asked WHY QATADA HAD NOT BEEN PROSECUTED HERE FOR HIS ALLEGED MISDEEDS. Mrs May failed to answer that one with much clarity, too.”
On 7 February 2012. editor of The Sun, Domic Mohan, said this in a written statement to the Leveson inquiry:
“Page 3... is neither harmful nor offensive… PAGE 3 GIRLS CAN BE ROLE MODELS AND A FORCE FOR GOOD… THE SUN (IS) A FORCE FOR GOOD...
The Sun… distils complex important issues of public affairs, including politics, finance and law into concise, readable copy which educates, informs and entertains.
The Sun is a private enterprise that performs a public duty with a public interest: to inform a mass readership SO THAT BRITISH DEMOCRACY CAN FUNCTION PROPERLY…
The Sun is occasionally boisterous and often cheeky.”
Cheek, Mr Mohan, is not the word.
On 7 February 2012, The Mail Online reported thus:
“Nicolas Sarkozy has been promising to cut back on his presidential spending, but he’s actually splashing out £10,000 A DAY ON FOOD AND KEEPS 121 CARS UNDER THE ELYSEE PALACE, according to a new book.
Socialist MP Rene Dosiere, in L'argent de l'État (Money from the State), sets out what he sees as extraordinary excesses by the French President. In the explosive book, he accuses Sarkozy of ‘ignoring the most elementary principles of the separation between private and public accounts’…
His fleet of cars is double the size of predecessor Jacques Chirac’s and cost, annually, £100,000 to insure and a whopping £275,000 to fuel. He uses an Airbus A330 – dubbed Air Sarko One - that drained the public purse of £215million to kit out, is accompanied by a delegation of 300 people on trips abroad and travels more often that previous presidents, claims Dosiere.
Recent excursions include an 80-mile trip to Saint-Quentin, from Paris, that cost £350,000, a £109,000 sortie to the Lascaux caves with Bruni and a two-and-a-half-hour trip to Ain that Dosiere worked out cost £700 a minute…
The French people also chip in for a thousand pounds worth of daily newspapers and Sarkozy’s ‘house’ wine, the red option being a £160 bottle of Crozes-Hermitage, which guests use to wash down foods such as lobster carpaccio and calves cheeks.
His total annual expenditure comes to £95million.”
On 6 February 2012, Andrew Pierce said this in The Mail Online:
"The pariah Fred Goodwin has at last been stripped of his knighthood, but still there is no action against the liars and cheats sitting in the House of Lords. Take Baroness Uddin, Britain’s first Muslim woman peer. SHE HAS NOT FACED CRIMINAL CHARGES EVEN THOUGH SHE WAS SUSPENDED FROM THE UPPER HOUSE FOR A RECORD 18 MONTHS AFTER FRAUDULENTLY ABUSING HER PARLIAMENTARY SECOND HOME ALLOWANCE TO THE TUNE OF £125,000.
SHE HAS NOT REPAID A PENNY AND KEEPS HER TITLE. As if that’s not bad enough, I hear SHE IS STILL LIVING IN A THREE-BEDROOM HOUSING ASSOCIATION PROPERTY IN TOWER HAMLETS, East London, paying taxpayer-subsidised rent of just £124 a week.
Uddin, who has held highly-paid directorships on companies such as Carlton Television, claims she can’t afford to repay the £125,000 even though SHE OWNS THREE PROPERTIES WITH HER HUSBAND.
Not only did Uddin claim more than £100,000 between 2005 and 2010 by stating her main residence was a small flat in Maidstone, Kent, when in fact it was her Tower Hamlets property, managed by Spitalfields Housing Association, she also claimed mileage to Kent even though NEIGHBOURS SAID THE FLAT HAD NEVER BEEN OCCUPIED.
Spitalfields Housing Association, which gets more than £35 million from the taxpayer, provides rents as low as ONE-SIXTH OF THE MARKET RATE. THE BOROUGH HAS 23,000 PEOPLE ON ITS HOUSING WAITING LIST.
Legally, a tenant with an assured or secure tenancy must live in social housing as their ‘only or principal home’, so she could have breached her agreement. But because the tenancy is joint with her husband, THE HOUSING ASSOCIATION SAYS IT CAN’T (OR WON’T) EVICT HER. IT DIDN’T RETURN MY CALLS.
Peter Golds, the Tory group leader on Tower Hamlets Council, has written to Housing Minister Grant Shapps demanding her eviction. ‘IT’S SCANDALOUS THAT A STATE-FUNDED HOUSING ASSOCIATION HAS NOT KICKED HER OUT,’ he said.’
I couldn’t agree more.”
It’s scandalous that they let her in in the first place.
Along with God knows how many other gimme-gimme-gimme immigrant chancers.
On 6 February 2012, guidance issued at a BBC newsroom editorial meeting, chaired by senior manager, Andrew Roy, instructed staff thus:
“Do not call him an extremist – we must call him a radical. Extremist implies a value judgment.”
The BBC's senior management did not want hate preacher Abu Qatada described thus. This despite the fact that 'Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe' has been described by a British court as a 'truly dangerous individual.'
Andrew Roy is a New Zealander.
On 6 March 2012, The Daily Mail quoted Finance Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, thus, as he spoke in the Indian parliament:
“WE DO NOT REQUIRE THE AID. IT IS A PEANUT IN OUR TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SPENDING.”
Tory MP Philip Davies commented thus:
“India spends tens of billions on defence and hundreds of millions a year on a space programme, in those circumstances it would be unacceptable to give them aid even if they were begging us for it. Given that they don't even want it, it would be even more extraordinary if it were to be allowed to continue. There will be millions of hard-pressed families wondering why on earth the Government is wasting money in this way.'“
Fellow Tory Douglas Carswell added:
“This is concrete proof that Britain's aid programme is run in the interests of Whitehall officials and the DFID machine. The fact is that India's economy is growing much faster than our own.”
Tory MP Peter Bone said:
“INDIA HAS ITS OWN FOREIGN AID PROGRAMME SO IT IS ABSURD FOR US TO BE STILL GIVING THEM AID. They are more than capable of looking after their own issues. As for the 0.7 per cent target, it is a vanity project that is being pursued for no good reason at all. I do not understand the Government's position on this and I don't think the British public do either.”
The Mail added:
“It also emerged that in a leaked memo dating from 2010 India's then foreign minister Nirupama Rao suggested India should not accept any further aid from Britain's Department for International Development because of the 'negative publicity of Indian poverty promoted by DFID'.
Sources in Delhi suggested British officials begged India to accept the aid. One commented:
'THEY SAID BRITISH MINISTERS HAD SPENT POLITICAL CAPITAL JUSTIFYING THE AID TO THEIR ELECTORATE. THEY SAID IT WOULD BE HIGHLY EMBARRASSING IF [INDIA] PULLED THE PLUG’…
Despite India's rapid economic development the INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT SECRETARY ANDREW MITCHELL DECIDED LAST YEAR TO APPROVE A FURTHER £1.1BILLION IN AID OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS.
The timing of the latest revelations is particularly embarrassing for ministers, coming in the wake of India's decision last week to reject the British-built Typhoon fighter jet as preferred candidate for a £13billion defence deal. Mr Mitchell said last year that the continuing aid programme was partly 'about seeking to sell Typhoon’.”
On 28 February 2012, after James Chapman told us that ‘proposals for sweeping new powers... would allow the Government to withhold any evidence it deems sensitive from an open civil court,' Lord Macdonald, QC, was quoted thus by The Daily Mail:
"These unprecedented proposals are an audacious attack on the fundamental principle of British justice... They threaten to put THE GOVERNMENT ABOVE THE LAW, WHILE LEAVING ORDINARY CITIZENS… SHUT OUT OF THEIR OWN JUSTICE SYSTEM. After a decade in which we have seen our politicians and officials caught up in the woeful abuses of the war on terror, the last thing the Government should be seeking is to sweep all of this under the carpet. However, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEIR DISASTROUS SECRET JUSTICE PROPOSALS ARE LIKELY TO DO.
We cannot afford to sleepwalk into a system of secret courts. David Cameron came to power saying ‘sunlight is the best disinfectant.’ WE SHOULD NOT SACRIFICE BRITAIN’S OPEN AND TRANSPARENT JUSTICE SYSTEM SIMPLY TO PROTECT POLITICIANS AND THEIR OFFICIALS FROM EMBARRASSMENT."
James Chapman added:
"The reforms, detailed in a Green Paper on justice and security, are backed by senior figures in the security community, notably Sir Malcolm Rifkind, chairman of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee."
Rifkind is Jewish.
On 5 February 2012, Beezy Marsh reportd thus at The Mail Online:
“Thousands of NHS patients could be secretly monitored by the Government for symptoms of the human form of mad cow disease amid concerns that THERE COULD BE ANOTHER WAVE OF INFECTIONS.
Experts advising the Department of Health… are considering conducting their surveillance secretly because they fear that informing patients they are at risk and are being monitored will cause unnecessary alarm… The panel's report, published online, suggests conducting 'covert health surveillance' of around 30,000 patients known to have received a high number of blood transfusions.
Experts would expect to see AT LEAST 150 CASES OF VCJD IN THIS GROUP OF PATIENTS, BASED ON SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT BETWEEN ONE IN 4,000 AND ONE IN 20,000 OF THE POPULATION MAY BE INFECTED.”
On 5 February 2012, Rob Waugh reported thus in The Mail on Sunday:
“Right-wingers tend to be less intelligent than left-wingers, and people with low childhood intelligence tend to grow up to have racist and anti-gay views, says a controversial new study...
The study, published in Psychological Science, claims that right-wing ideology forms a 'pathway' for people with low reasoning ability to become prejudiced against groups such as other races and gay people.
The study, by academics at Brock University in Ontario, Canada, used information from two UK studies from 1958 and 1970, where several thousand children were assessed for intelligence at age 10 and 11, and then asked political questions aged 33. The British Cohort Study involved 3,412 men and 3,658 women born in 1970.
The researchers also compared their results against a 1986 American study which included tests of cognitive ability and questions assessing prejudice against homosexuals.
The authors claim that there is a strong correlation between low intelligence both as a child and an adult, and right-wing politics. The authors also claim that conservative politics is part of a complex relationship that leads people to become prejudices.”
I think it’s a safe bet that the ‘academics at brock University’ would not be right-wingers, don’t you?
Oh yes, ‘left-wingers’ and ‘other races and gay people’ will be delighted with the results of this PC b***ocks.
Speaking to the Italian TV station, RAI, on 5 February 2012, Fabio Cappello, manager of the England football team, was critical of the FA decision to sack John Terry as England captain without telling him.
"What really hit me and forced me to take this decision was the fact the much-vaunted Anglo-Saxon sense of justice, as they are the first to claim that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
In Terry's case, they gravely offended me and damaged my authority at the head of the England side, effectively creating a problem for the squad.
I have never tolerated certain crossing of lines, so it was easy for me to spot it and take my decision to leave."
Terry was sacked unilaterally by the FA Chairman, David Bernstein, because of his alleged racial abuse of fellow player, Anton Ferdinand.
'Innocent until proven guilty,' Fabio?
Not any more, my son. Not where the made up crime of racism is concerned.
Especially when those who foist those laws upon us have the power to exercise them.
David Bernstein is Jewish.
As was his predecessor, Lord David Triesman.
Once upon a time, at the Labour Party website there were 6 subsections, one of which was titled Get Involved. There was a photograph at the top of the page which features 8 recognisable individuals. One presumes that those in the photo represented the kind of people that New Labour wished would "get involved" in their politics and party.
Of the 8 individuals featured, four were black men, one was a black woman and the remaining three were young, white women.
There were no white men at all.
At the bottom of the same page were told that the contents of the above page were: "Promoted by David Triesman, General Secretary, the Labour Party."
Triesman, who was a significant figure in the Euro-communist movement of the 1970s, was ennobled by Tony Blair and made Baron Triesman in January 2004.
During the course of Gulf War II, Blair saw to it that unelected, former Communist became an Under Secretary in the Foreign Office.
On 4 February 2012, Mark Duell and Hugo Gye reported thus in The Mail online:
"Fears of a global nuclear war breaking out were today stoked after Israel suggested Iran has been developing missiles with an extraordinary range of 6,200 miles - enough to reach the U.S.
An international political storm is now in full force as the U.S. desperately tries to talk Israel out of an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities amidst fears a strike could now come within just two months.
Israel's deputy prime minister Moshe Ya'alon said the missiles were being tested at a site near Tehran that was destroyed three months ago and they were ‘aimed at America, not at us’.
Mr Ya'alon said Iran is creating ‘a nightmare for the free world’. Iran, which is accused of preparing to build a nuclear bomb, says it will retaliate over Western-backed oil sanctions and any attack threat.
The U.S. doesn’t believe Iran is producing such a long-range missile, but Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is still reportedly fearful of a growing chance Israel would attack Iran as early as April.
South-east Asia's most-wanted terrorist with $5m U.S. bounty on his head killed in Philippines air strike.
Britain to pull out troops from Afghanistan frontline role by the end of next year after surprise U.S. announcement on early war exit. Pull the other one! Iran's leader claims satellite launch 'will bring humans of the world closer together'
‘Threatening Iran and attacking Iran will harm America,’ Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned in a defiant speech on Friday.
‘Sanctions will not have any impact on ‘our determination to continue our nuclear course’ and it will impose any threats ‘at the right time’, he added.
‘I have no fear of saying that we will back and help any nation or group that wants to confront and fight against the Zionist regime (Israel).’
America is leaning heavily on Israel, even though it has largely concluded that outside argument will have little effect on Israeli decision-making.
Warning: Israel's deputy prime minister Moshe Ya'alon suggested Iran is developing missiles with an extraordinary range of 6,200 miles - enough to reach the U.S.
'In light of the realisation of the divine promise by almighty God, the Zionists and the Great Satan (America) will soon be defeated,' Mr Khamenei added, reported World Net Daily."
On 3 February 2012, Robe Waugh reported thus in The Mailonline:
"Google's informal motto is 'don't be evil', but a huge change to its Blogger service could see the search giant help oppressive governments stamp out voices of protest.
Bloggers who have relied on the popular service to organise dissent as seen during the Arab Spring could find their posts being blocked by Google itself.
The company will now block posts or blogs from being seen in a country if they their local laws, handing a victory to regimes that crack down on free speech to keep a lid on dissent.
The move has caused widespread concern - and echoes Twitter's recent decision to block Tweets on a similar 'per country' basis to comply with local laws.
Posts on Google's Blogger service will now be taken down if they violate local laws - so in repressive regimes, governments may be able to use local speech laws to block controversial posts
Twitter was credited with the change of regime in Egypt last year, where the site was used to co-ordinate protests. Both Google and Twitter have now agreed to take down posts that violate local laws
'If more and more companies follow the lead of Google and Twitter, as seems quite likely, it could represent the beginning of the end of the truly global Internet,' says Techdirt Internet freedom group Open Net Initiative said of Twitter's recent policy change, 'The change marks a new trend in American Internet companies bowing to the demands of authoritarian regimes.'
Amnesty International said, 'As with other sectors, business decisions in the digital world have human rights implications. Human rights monitors and advocates have a lot more work to do since the digital revolution.'
'Our collective vigilance is needed more than ever.'
Thailand heartily backed Twitter's recent decision to block Tweets at the request of governments, as did China's state-run newspaper.
But Google claims that the move will actually allow more freedom of speech.
The blogs will be visible from everywhere else in the world, but invisible in one country.
'This will allow us to continue promoting free expression while providing greater flexibility in complying with valid removal requests in local law,' said the company.
Blogger, a blogging service which launched in 1999, and was bought by Google in 2003, has previously been banned outright in repressive regimes such as Syria, Iran and China.
Blog services and social sites such as Twitter and Facebook were crucial to the recent 'Arab Spring' revolts in countries such as Egypt - acting as a conduit for news and carrying messages of freedom and democracy.
During the week running up to Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak’s resignation the number of Tweets about political change in Egypt rose tenfold.
Bloggers in Egypt: Uprisings such as the 'Arab Spring' were orchestrated online - but Google now says it will censor posts in line with local laws
Google and Twitter claim that their move will simply allow their services to co-exist with regimes, rather than being banned outright.
But many were concerned that the move could lead to protesting voices being silenced for good.
Tech blog Techdirt said, 'If more and more companies follow the lead of Google and Twitter, as seems quite likely, it could represent the beginning of the end of the truly global Internet.'
'In its place will be an online world subject to a patchwork of local laws.'
Read Write Web was more optimistic, 'This is a way around censorship. Would you rather Blogger and Twitter be blocked in some countries outright?'
Neither Google nor Twitter are currently available in China due to the censorship demands of the government.
Both openly share the number of censorship demands they have received from governments around the world.
'We believe that access to information is the foundation of a free society. Where content is illegal or breaks our terms of service we will continue to remove it,' said a Google spokesperson.
Massive U.S. Military Buildup Reported Around Iran; Up to 100,000 Troops Ready By March."
On 3 February 2012, Ian Drury said this in The Mail Online:
"Fifty British troops have been killed in Afghanistan without taking out life insurance. They could not afford premiums of up to £74 a month to cover their loved ones in the event of their death or serious injury...
35,600 troops have served in Afghanistan without life insurance."
On 3 February 2012, Jennifer Matthys informed us thus at the BNP website:
“Unemployment in the UK is still soaring, but that doesn’t stop BRITISH BOSSES OFFERING THOUSANDS OF JOBS TO ROMANIAN WORKERS…
The number of British unemployed has now reached a 17 year high of 2.68 million. And yet, despite this, 2,785 VACANCIES, INCLUDING ROLES FOR NURSES, ENGINEERS, CHEFS AND OTHER SKILLED WORKERS, ARE BEING ADVERTISED BY AN ONLINE RECRUITMENT AGENCY IN BUCHAREST, ROMANIA.
Earlier this month, UK unemployment hit 8.4%, the highest level since 1994. And now official figures show that NINE OUT OF TEN JOBS CREATED IN 2010 WENT TO FOREIGN NATIONALS.
Phil McCabe, of the Forum of Private Business, said… ‘There is a shortage of skilled workers from the UK, and MANY PEOPLE HAVE BASIC SKILLS LACKING SUCH AS NUMERACY AND LITERACY. In addition YOUNG PEOPLE’S ATTITUDES ARE SOMETIMES FOUND TO BE LACKING, so advertising in Romania possibly reflects this situation.'
In the South West, there are currently 176,000 unemployed people living there, and yet a whole host of taxi driving jobs in the region are currently being advertised in Romania. Meanwhile, in the South East, there are 276,000 jobless people, yet supposedly many hotel worker jobs are available here and advertised in Romania.”
On 3 February 2012, in an interview with The Manchester Evening News, Mike Harding, one-hit wonder (Rochdale Cowboy), former President of the Ramblers’ Association, Radio 2 DJ and long-standing MC of the annual Radio 2 Folk Awards, said this:
"The total number of people going to folk festivals last year was in excess of 100,000. It’s enormous. And the number of people who listen to my programme (Wednesdays from 7pm to 8pm on Radio 2) at last count was 860,000. It’s not a minority music any more. So the state of folk is incredibly healthy. What is unhealthy is THE MEDIA ATTITUDE TOWARDS IT, WHICH IS COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS.
IT’S ALMOST AS IF WE’RE ASHAMED OF OUR OWN CULTURE IN THIS COUNTRY. We’ll laugh at something like morris dancing, which is actually over a thousand years old. WE HAVE A NATIONAL DANCE, BUT EVERYBODY MOCKS IT. They don’t understand folk music because you can’t package it AND IT CAN’T BE SOLD LIKE POP MUSIC CAN...
The pub scene’s sh**… You’ve got these pub companies running everything. And they wonder why people stop going to pubs. Well, why would you want to go? There’s nothing to attract you there any more, because THEY ARE RUN BY MANAGERS; THEY ARE NO LONGER RUN BY PEOPLE WHO HAVE THEM IN THEIR FAMILY FOR YEARS. There’s no sense of continuity."
Of Manchester’s council, Harding said:
"To give part of what was a public park, Piccadilly Gardens, and sell it off was disgusting. I don’t believe they had the right to do that, and they’ve done a great deal of damage to the city centre.
I also think they have given people like (architect) Ian Simpson and that monstrous bloody Beetham Tower far too much of a go-ahead. THEY GOT INTO BED TOO MUCH WITH THE DEVELOPERS. THEY DIDN’T THINK ENOUGH ABOUT PEOPLE, THEY THOUGHT TOO MUCH ABOUT COMMERCE AND MONEY."
Of the Radio 2 Folk Awards being presented in Salford, their first time outside London, he said:
"Anywhere out of London is good as far as I’m concerned."
Know what you mean, old fellow.
Know what you mean. And Mike, from one who is, most definitely not ashamed of his own culture, all the best, mate.
On 3 December 2011, The Independent quoted the government's own fiscal watchdog, the Office for Budget Responsibility, thus:
"Our assumption for population growth is based on average net inward MIGRATION OF 140,000 PER ANNUM OVER THE FORECAST PERIOD [2011-16]."
The Independent added:
“MINISTERS WILL NOT REDUCE AVERAGE ANNUAL IMMIGRATION DOWN TO THE ‘TENS OF THOUSANDS’ OVER THE COURSE OF THIS PARLIAMENT according to the OBR's projections. Instead, net inward MIGRATION TO BRITAIN WILL REMAIN AT AN AVERAGE OF 140,000 A YEAR UNTIL 2016... DESPITE REPEATED PROMISES FROM CONSERVATIVE MINISTERS that they will reduce immigration flows to substantially below these levels.”
After a freedom of information request demonstrated that at least 2,823 ‘honour’ attacks were recorded in 39 of the 52 police forces in the UK, on 3 December 2011, Diana Nammi, Director of the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation, said this on BBC TV:
"For some cases, police and some organisations just help them up to a length of time, then they will stop. With honour-based violence, the threat may be a lifetime threat for them…
THE PERPETRATORS WILL BE EVEN CONSIDERED AS A HERO WITHIN THE COMMUNITY because he is the one defending the family and community's honour and reputation.”
The BBC added:
“Among the 12 forces also able to provide figures from 2009, THERE WAS AN OVERALL 47% RISE IN SUCH INCIDENTS. Honour attacks are punishments on people, USUALLY WOMEN, for acts deemed to have brought shame on their family. Such attacks can include acid attacks, abduction, mutilations, beatings and in some cases, murder.
In 2006, Iraqi Kurd Banaz Mahmod, 20, from Mitcham, south London, was strangled on the orders of her father and uncle because they thought her boyfriend was unsuitable. They believed she had brought shame on her family after she left her violent husband and began the relationship. WEEKS BEFORE HER DEATH, MISS MAHMOD HAD WARNED POLICE HER FAMILY WERE TRYING TO KILL HER…
Diana Nammi says she suspects THE REAL PICTURE IS "FAR DARKER" THAN FIGURES SHOW…
A quarter of police forces in the UK were unable or unwilling to provide data.”
On 2 December 2011m The Daily Mail quoted Alan Hazell, of the Rotherham Safeguarding Children Board thus:
“Laura’s situation was very complex, which made it difficult for agencies to engage with her. However, THERE WERE TIMES WHEN AGENCIES MAY HAVE WORKED DIFFERENTLY OR MORE EFFECTIVELY. All agencies which had links with Laura have taken part in the review and have already shown a strong commitment to LEARN any LESSONS the case has highlighted. This commitment has already been reflected in the work done to improve services for children and young people in the borough.”
So that’s alright then.
The Mail told us more:
“A teenage student stabbed to death and dumped in a canal was groomed for sexual exploitation by adults from the age of 12... Laura Wilson, 17, had been tracked by social services since 2005 after she was identified as being 'AT RISK' OF SEXUAL EXPLOITATION BY BRITISH PAKISTANI MEN...
THE WHITE TEENAGER WAS THE VICTIM OF A CYCLE OF SEXUAL ABUSE AND LITTLE WAS DONE TO HELP HER, Laura's family have claimed….
The student was murdered in October last year AFTER BRINGING 'SHAME' ON TWO ASIAN FAMILIES... She had a brief fling with married Ishaq Hussain… and became pregnant with his child while she was in a sexual relationship with Ashitaq Asghar.
A few days before she was murdered and dumped in the canal she had revealed to the two families that she had had affairs with both men. After being informed of the relationship, ASGHAR'S MOTHER APPARENTLY HIT LAURA WITH A SHOE. SHE SAID HER SON WOULD NEVER HAVE A BABY WITH A WHITE GIRL AND CALLED LAURA A 'DIRTY WHITE B****', and she should 'keep her legs closed'.
THE TEENAGER HAD BECOME PREGNANT JUST A MONTH AFTER SHE TURNED 16 and gave birth to Hussain's child in June last year. Asghar pleaded guilty to murder in May, while yesterday a Sheffield Crown Court jury cleared 22-year-old Mr Hussain of Laura's murder after deliberating for nearly 11 hours.
Prosecutor Nicholas Campbell QC told the trial that Mr HUSSAIN AND ASGHAR MOUNTED A 'MISSION TO KILL' LAURA. They adopted the language of the cult British film 'Four Lions', a dark comedy about Islamic terrorists plotting an attack…
Asghar sent a series of texts to Mr Hussain using language from the film. Asghar talked about BUYING A 'SHOOTER' FOR £400 and he boasted about bringing his 'hit list' out. In fact, said Mr Campbell, the murder weapon of choice turned out to be a knife.
In one message, Asghar said to Hussain the day before she died which read: 'I'M GONNA SEND THAT KAFFIR B**** STRAIGHT TO HELL'… Hussain told the jury he did not plot anything with Asghar and there was no plan to kill Laura…
Laura's links with Risky Business - the town's child exploitation project - Risky Business, and the fact that THE RELEVANT AUTHORITIES KNEW SHE WAS HAVING UNDER-AGE SEX WITH PAKISTANI MEN DID NOT COME UP IN THE MURDER TRIAL AND HAS NEVER BEEN PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGED, the Time reported.
Earlier this year an investigation by the same newspaper triggered an assessment of street grooming. THE TIMES UNCOVERED A PATTERN OF CHILD-SEX OFFENDING INVOLVING PAKISTANI MEN AND GIRLS AGED 12 TO 16.”
An English girl ‘groomed’ and ‘exploited’ by men of Pakistani origin at 12, impregnated by one of them at 15, murdered by another at 17. A sordid, little tale of second-generation immigrant criminals, aided and abetted to the max by the PC Crowd in parliament, the police, the media and the so-called social services since before their victim was born.
These days, what does a second-generation Pakistani immigrant get for impregnating an underage English girl? What jail time does he do for foreknowledge of a would-be murderer’s intention to kill the mother of his child and doing nothing to prevent that killing?
Nothing. Zero. Zilch. Not even any community service. Nothing. The British establishment is not at war with the Ishaq Hussains, you see.
They’re at war with us.
On 2 December 2011, the Governor of the Bank of England, Sir Mervyn King, and the the Bank's financial policy committee presented their Financial Stability Report to a press conference at the Bank.
Sir Mervyn said:
“Banks should brace themselves to withstand THE EXTRAORDINARILY SERIOUS AND THREATENING ECONOMIC SITUATION…
An erosion of confidence, lower asset prices and tighter credit conditions are further damaging the prospects for economic activity and will affect the ability of companies, households and governments to repay their debts. That, in turn, will weaken banks’ balance sheets further. This spiral is characteristic of A SYSTEMIC CRISIS...
Maybe the eurozone won't break up, maybe it will continue in various forms but maybe there will still be questions of default. NONE OF US REALLY KNOW…
The interconnectedness of major banks means that BANKING SYSTEMS, AND HENCE ECONOMIES, AROUND THE WORLD ARE ALL AFFECTED... Here in the UK, we must try to bolster the resilience of our financial system, better to withstand THE STORMS THAT MAY COME IN OUR DIRECTION.”
Deputy Governor Paul Tucker added:
“In THESE EXCEPTIONALLY PERILOUS CONDITIONS… ALMOST ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN in the next few months.”
On 2 December 2011, the President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, said this in a major policy speech before 5,000 supporters in Toulon:
“Europe could be swept by the crisis if it doesn't PULL ITSELF TOGETHER AND CHANGE… Europe is no longer a choice. It is a necessity… EUROPE MUST BE RETHOUGHT. IT MUST BE REESTABLISHED… If Europe does not change quickly enough history will write itself without it. Europe needs more political responsibility…
THE REFORM OF EUROPE is not a march towards supra-nationality. THE INTEGRATION OF EUROPE will go the inter-govermental way…
France and Germany, after so many tragedies, have decided to UNITE THEIR DESTINY AND LOOK TO THE FUTURE TOGETHER… F%RANCE AND GERMANY UNITED means ALL OF EUROPE that is UNITED and stronger…
There is a reality that everybody must understand, that EVERYONE HAS TO ACCEPT. SOVEREIGNTY IS ONLY POSSIBLE WITH OTHERS…
THE CRISIS IS NOT FINISHED... The same crisis that hit banks is now hitting states. It is hitting all developed countries whether left-wing or right-wing..
WE WILL NOT RE-TAKE CONTROL OF OUR DESTINY ALONE… WE WILL NOT CHANGE THE RULES OF GLOBALISATION ALONE."
The rest of you are coming with us! Or else!
Thus does the eternal Jew press on for the one world order, with him, of course, in charge. Aided and abetted by his Commie (Merkel is East German) henchwoman.
Makes one wonder whether the various financial crises weren’t invented by the creatures in the shadows, doesn’t it? Whether all this b***ocks was just the means the Machiavellians dreamt up to a very dark end for most of us.
On 1 February 2012, Charles Walford told us this in The Mail Online:
"TEN BORDER CONTROL STAFF WERE CAUGHT HARBOURING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHILE SUPPOSEDLY PROTECTING THE UK, it emerged today…
ANOTHER 39 STAFF HAD BEEN DISCIPLINED FOR ABUSE OF POSITION IN RELATION TO IMMIGRATION MISCONDUCT AND A FURTHER EIGHT CITED FOR ORGANISED ACTIVITY."
On 1 February 2012, The Daily Mail reported thus:
"DRINKING JUST A SINGLE CAN OF DIET FIZZY DRINK EVERY DAY CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF A HEART ATTACK OR STROKE, research has revealed. The new findings have suggested that JUST A COUPLE OF DAILY CANS OF THE SUPPOSEDLY 'HEALTHIER' CARBONATED DRINKS, SUCH AS LEMONADE OR COLA, CAN RAISE THE RISK OF LIVER DAMAGE, AS WELL AS POTENTIALLY CAUSING DIABETES AND HEART DAMAGE.
Researchers from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Columbia University Medical Center claim THOSE WHO DRINK DIET SOFT DRINKS ARE 43 PER CENT MORE LIKELY TO HAVE HEART ATTACKS, VASCULAR DISEASE OR STROKES THAN THOSE WHO HAVE NONE.
Previous analysis of soft drinks has shown that the SOFT DRINKS, WHICH HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS, CAN CAUSE LIVER DISEASE SIMILAR TO THAT CAUSED BY CHRONIC ALCOHOLISM."
On 1 February 2012, The Daily Mail reported thus:
"Drinking just a single can of diet fizzy drink every day can increase the risk of a heart attack or stroke, research has revealed.
The new findings have suggested that just a couple of daily cans of the supposedly 'healthier' carbonated drinks, such as lemonade or cola, can raise the risk of liver damage, as well as potentially causing diabetes and heart damage.
Diet fizzy drinks are marketed as a healthy option, but in reality their health benefits over full-fat alternatives remain unclear
Researchers from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine and Columbia University Medical Center claim those who drink diet soft drinks are 43 per cent more likely to have heart attacks, vascular disease or strokes than those who have none.
Previous analysis of soft drinks has shown that the soft drinks, which have a substantial amount of artificial sweeteners, can cause liver disease similar to that caused by chronic alcoholism."
On 1 February 2012, This is Nottingham told us this:
“A Radford-based project to help Polish people integrate into the community has been given a £299,952 grant. Signpost to Polish Success… received the money from the Big Lottery Fund.”
“Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots?”
Will the tw*ts in charge of our lottery money ever stop giving it away to everyone else on the planet? When 10,000 or so traitors have been executed, maybe. Or, perhaps, when pigs develop wings.
On 1 February 2012, Kim Sengupta reported thus in The Belfast Telegraph:
"ISRAEL HAS SET UP A SPECIALIST COMMANDO UNIT DESIGNED TO CARRY OUT MISSIONS DEEP INSIDE ENEMY TERRITORY amid growing consensus in government circles that MILITARY STRIKES MUST BE CONTEMPLATED IF ECONOMIC SANCTIONS DO NOT HALT IRAN'S NUCLEAR PROGRAMME.
The ‘Depth Corps’ has been organised with the aim of co-ordinating deep penetration operations in other countries at a time when the defence ministry acknowledges that THE NUMBER OF COVERT ISRAELI OPERATIONS ABROAD HAS INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE LAST YEAR...
The Tehran regime has repeatedly claimed that Israeli, US and British agents are responsible for the assassination of six scientists involved in the country's nuclear programme…
‘Of course I see about the killings in the media. I see it happens,’ said Dan Meridor, the Minister for Intelligence and Nuclear Affairs… ‘The fact that they continue to work on this programme despite sanctions means they want to get nuclear and are prepared to pay a heavy price… Pressure is important here, to leave them in a state where they are on the threshold of getting nuclear weapons would be a mistake,’ he said…
Israeli officials say that any military action must take place by the end of summer to prevent Iran moving more of its nuclear capabilities underground. They also point out that the Western powers which have imposed them are now fully aware of the dangers posed by the regime. Yesterday in Washington, James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, told a Congressional panel that Iran may launch terrorist attacks in response to a perceived threat.”
Chronological Quotations 1