On 28 April 2010, when Gordon Brown was visiting Rochdale during the General Election campaign, he had a brief, unscheduled conversation with 65-year-old Gillian Duffy, a lifelong Labour supporter.
He bade her farewell with the words:
“Good to see you… It’s very nice to see you. Take care”.
However, as he got into his car, not realising that a microphone was still pinned to his suit, he was overheard saying this:
“That was a disaster. They should never have put me with that woman. Whose idea was that?… It's just ridiculous”.
Asked what she had said, he replied:
“Everything. She was just A SORT OF BIGOTED WOMAN that said she used to be Labour.”
Here’s what Gillian said earlier that caused the Prime Minister to describe her as “bigoted”.
“You can't say anything about immigrants. All these eastern Europeans - where are they coming from?”
So there you have it.
If you complain about immigration, no matter how reasonable, justifiable or moderate the complaint, as far as New Labour’s top brass are concerned, you’re a “bigot”.
Gillian would later say this:
"All I did was ask what was on my mind and the questions that most people want to have answered. Does that make me a bigot?... He was smiling when he spoke to me but he was thinking that. What else is he thinking when he smiles"?
You mean when all the microphones ARE switched off, Gillian?
“Racist, Fascist, Neo-Nazi,” stuff like that, I shouldn't wonder. Anyway, welcome to the real world, Gill. You know, the one where the politically correct set an increasingly surreal agenda?
Isn't it strange how the average Labour voter doesn't ever seem to be aware of PC ghastliness until it kicks them in the shins up close and personal? If it's happening to someone else, it's no concern or of theirs. Or, even worse, they just assume the shin-kicking must be deserved.
The 2010 Conservative Manifesto states:
"IMMIGRATION HAS ENRICHED OUR NATION OVER THE YEARS AND WE WANT TO ATTRACT THE BRIGHTEST AND THE BEST PEOPLE who can make a real difference to our economic growth".
The 2010 Lib Dem Manifesto states:
"BRITAIN HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN OPEN, WELCOMING COUNTRY, AND THOUSANDS OF BUSINESS, SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS IN MANY PARTS OF THE COUNTY RELY ON PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME TO LIVE HERE FROM OVERSEAS."
No change there then.
The 2010 New Labour Manifesto states:
"We are committed to an immigration system that promotes and protects British values".
Like you were promoting and protecting "British values" when you were opening up the UK to mass immigration and your "driving purpose" was "to make the UK truly multicultural"?
On 23 October 2009, Andrew Neather, a former government advisor to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett amongst others, dropped this revelatory bombshell in The Evening Standard:
“THE DELIBERATE POLICY OF MINISTERS FROM LATE 2000 UNTIL AT LEAST FEBRUARY LAST YEAR… WAS TO OPEN UP THE UK TO MASS MIGRATION…
Eventually published in January 2001, the innocuously labelled ‘RDS Occasional Paper no. 67’, ‘Migration: an economic and social analysis’ focused heavily on the labour market case. But THE EARLIER DRAFTS I SAW ALSO INCLUDED A DRIVING POLITICAL PURPOSE: THAT MASS IMMIGRATION WAS THE WAY THAT THE GOVERNMENT WAS GOING TO MAKE THE UK TRULY MULTICULTURAL.
I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that THE POLICY WAS INTENDED… TO RUB THE RIGHT'S NOSE IN DIVERSITY and render their arguments out of date…
The results were dramatic. In 1995, 55,000 FOREIGNERS WERE GRANTED THE RIGHT TO SETTLE IN THE UK. BY 2005 THAT HAD RISEN TO 179,000... In addition, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF MIGRANTS HAVE COME FROM THE NEW EU MEMBER STATES SINCE 2004, MOST REQUIRING NEITHER VISAS NOR PERMISSION TO WORK OR SETTLE… THE GOVERNMENT HAD CREATED ITS LONGED-FOR IMMIGRATION BOOM”.
Gordon Brown, himself, rather gave the game away in a major speech on 31 March 2010, when he said:
"I call on all those in THE MAINSTREAM OF OUR POLITICS to stand together in the coming weeks and PRESENT A UNITED FRONT against those who don't value THE DIVERSE AND OUTWARD LOOKING BRITAIN THAT WE STAND FOR; and WHO WANT TO END IMMIGRATION simply because they don't like migrants."
All three mainstream parties are committed to the globalist Multicult, ladies and gents.
Anyone who imagines that New Labour has seen the light because its vote-sucking Manisfesto suggests it might have had a change of heart is a brainwashed lemming.
On 23 April 2010, Richard Littlejohn wrote this in The Daily Mail:
"Labour boasts that it has transformed Britain over the past 13 years. it promised that things could only get better and claims to have created a 'fairer' and 'safer' society.
Try telling that to the two young girls abducted and sexually abused by Pakistani paedophile Zulfar Hussain. He was released after serving only half of his five years, eight months sentence. And, to add insult to injury, HE HAS ESCAPED DEPORTATION on the grounds that - yep, you guessed - IT WOULD BREACH HIS YUMAN RIGHTS...
This week Hussain won an appeal against deportation because he has a wife and child living in Britain and HE IS ENTITLED, bless him, TO A 'FAMILY LIFE'. If Hussain wants a family life, his family can join him in Pakistan. HE SHOULD BE ON THE FIRST PLANE OUT, IN SHACKLES.
Jack Straw… 'JUSTICE SECRETARY', described the ruling as 'appalling'. THESE PEOPLE HAVE NO SHAME! STRAW WAS ONE OF THE MAIN ARCHITECTS OF THE INCORPORATION OF THE EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS CONVENTION INTO BRITISH LAW.
TONY BLAIR CALLED THIS PERNICIOUS PIECE OF LEGISLATION HIS PROUDEST ACHIEVEMENT. THE WICKED WITCH (Cherie Blair) AND HER LAW FIRM HAVE MADE A FORTUNE OUT OF IT.
OVER THE PAST DECADE WE HAVE BEEN TREATED TO A PROCESSION OF FOREIGN RAPISTS, MURDERERS, DRUG DEALERS AND TERRORISTS GRANTED THE RIGHT TO LIVE IN BRITAIN, COMPLETE WITH LEGAL AID, FREE HOUSING, CARS AND BENEFITS.
YET EVERY TIME ONE OF THESE OUTRAGEOUS CASES COMES TO LIGHT, LABOUR POLITICIANS PRETEND IT IS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. some of us warned at the time that this act was nothing more than a charter for criminals and a goldmine for lawyers. But we were condemned as 'enemies of justice'
So perhaps Jolly Jack would like to explain WHERE IS THE JUSTICE IN A MAN WHO ABDUCTS AND SEXUALLY ABUSES TWO VULNERABLE GIRLS ONLY HAVING TO SERVE LESS THAN THREE YEARS IN PRISON. AND WHO IS ABLE TO ESCAPE DEPORTATION BECAUSE IT WOULD INFRINGE HIS HUMAN RIGHTS?”
On 22 April 2010, The Telegraph linked to a 19 November 2002 article written by Nick Clegg, leader of the Lib Dems, in The Guardian.
“Germany's wealth per head remains a full 6% higher than in the UK... German workers are 29% more productive than their British counterparts...
All nations have a cross to bear and none more so than Germany with its memories of Nazism. But THE BRITISH CROSS IS MORE INSIDIOUS STILL. A MISPLACED SENSE OF SUPERIORITY, SUSTAINED BY DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR… is much harder to shake off... WE NEED TO BE PUT BACK IN OUR PLACE.”
The Telegraph added:
"It also emerged that in 2001 Mr Clegg said Britain should legalise brothels.
'Prostitution is never going to go away and it is no use pretending that it will' he said. 'It’s time we stopped sweeping these issues under the carpet AND TOOK A GROWN-UP ATTITUDE IN BRITAIN LIKE THEY HAVE IN THE NETHERLANDS'.”
The leader of the Lib Dems doesn't appear to think much of the British, does he?
I wonder if that might have anything to do with the fact that he's one quarter Russian, half-Dutch and his wife is Spanish?
On 15 April 2010, the Totally Jewish web site reported a speech made by David Cameron to members of the Movement for Reform Judaism.
This is what Cameron said:
“Urgent, selfless moral compulsion TO CHANGE THE WORLD for the better is right at the heart of the Jewish way of life. If I become Prime Minister, I want to see that idea of responsibility extend right across our society. A key part of that will be about building a stronger, more COHESIVE society - and that means doing much more to tackle the rise in anti-Semitism."
Cohesive, eh Dave? “Cohesion” being a long-standing Blairite buzz-word. Thing is, you remember the blokes who blew up 52 Londoners on 7/7/2005? Why on earth would anyone want to “cohere” with the likes of them? Why would we want to hang out in your “stronger, more cohesive society” when to do so might mean cuddling up to the likes of the 11,546 immigrants in our prison system?
“I was appalled when the Community Security Trust told me that there were more anti-Semitic incidents in the first half of 2009 than in the whole of any previous year.”
Ah, the Community Security Trust, an organisation run by the Jewish jailbird and Guinness scandal fraudster, Gerald Ronson. Yes, I can see how our Dave might rate the likes of him. Check out the Community Security Trust here:
“WE NEED BIG CHANGES to root out this extremism - stopping preachers of hate from entering this country, BANNING THOSE EXTREMIST GROUPS WHO ARE ALREADY HERE."
I’m all for “stopping preachers of hate from entering this country”, Dave, but as for banning “extremists”, well, that would depend on your definition of “extremist”, I guess.
For example, would an “extremist” be someone who dared to point out Jewish misdemeanour on a regular basis? Because there’s lots of it about, you see. I mean, we’ve all heard of the Neoconservatives who forced the Iraq War upon the world. Not so many, however, realise that most of the leading Neocons are Jewish. Would I be “banned” from telling such a truth if you were the boss?
What about the Russian Oligrachs who robbed the ordinary people blind during Russia’s particularly nasty variation on the privatisation scam? Would I be banned from telling the world that most of them are Jewish? Would I be able to tell the British people that a good few of them have been buying up the choicest bits of Britain with their ill-gotten gains and folks like your shadow Chancellor, George Osborne, and New Labour's Lord Peter Mandelson have been hanging out with them?
What about sub-prime, the credit crunch and the world-wide recession that we, who had nothing to do with its creation, are now having to pay for? In a society run by you would I not be allowed to point out the leading role that those who have this “urgent, selfless moral compulsion to change the world for the better” played in it all?
“I am a great admirer of the Jewish people and your extraordinary achievements. I've long seen your community as A SHINING LIGHT IN OUR SOCIETY."
We know, Dave.
We really do. Most Tory parliamentarians think the same. 80 per cent of them are members of the Conservative Friends of Israel group. Which just happens to be the most influential and most substantially funded lobbying organisation in Westminster.
In his 1985 book A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, Professor, Charles Silberman tells us this:
“Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief… that JEWS ARE SAFE ONLY IN A SOCIETY ACCEPTANT OF A WIDE RANGE OF ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOURS, AS WELL AS A DIVERSITY OF RELIGIOUS AND ETHNIC GROUPS. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse ‘gay rights’ and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called ‘social issues’.”
Professor Kevin McDonald comments thus upon the above quote:
“He is saying, in effect, that when Jews make the diversity-is-our-strength argument it is in support of THEIR REAL GOAL OF DILUTING A SOCIETY'S HOMOGENEITY SO THAT JEWS WILL FEEL SAFE… Likewise, as the second part of the Silberman quotation suggests, JEWS MAY SUPPORT DEVIANT MOVEMENTS, NOT BECAUSE THEY THINK IT IS GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY BUT BECAUSE IT IS GOOD FOR THE JEWS.”
There you go, Dave!
Two more "extremists" who aren't too keen on your favourite world-changers. Both of them utterly deserving of a Cameronian ban, don't you think? Oh, I beg your pardon, Professor Silberman is Jewish, isn’t he?
Guess you’ll have to make do with our Kev.
David Cameron's great-grandfather was a Jewish immigrant.
On 14 April 2010, Dr Michael Lewis was quoted thus by Cardiff University's news centre:
“Previous, small scale, studies have suggested that PEOPLE OF MIXED RACE ARE PERCEIVED AS BEING MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN NON-MIXED-RACE PEOPLE. This study was an attempt to put this to the wider test.
A random sample of black, white, and mixed-race faces was collected and rated for their perceived attractiveness. There was a small but highly significant effect, with MIXED-RACE FACES, ON AVERAGE, BEING PERCEIVED AS MORE ATTRACTIVE.
The results appear to confirm that PEOPLE WHOSE GENETIC BACKGROUNDS ARE MORE DIVERSE ARE, ON AVERAGE, PERCEIVED AS MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN THOSE WHOSE BACKGROUNDS ARE LESS DIVERSE…
Although mixed-race people make up a small proportion of the population, THEY ARE OVER-REPRESENTED AT THE TOP LEVEL OF A NUMBER OF MERITOCRATIC PROFESSIONS LIKE ACTING WITH HALLE BERRY, FORMULA 1 RACING WITH LEWIS HAMILTON; AND, OF COURSE, POLITICS WITH BARACK OBAMA.”
Mr Lewis is conveniently forgetting the massive effect that positive discrimination and political correctness has had on any perceived “over-representation”.
Interestingly, "Is it Better to be Mixed-Race", presented by Aarathi Prasad, was first aired on Monday 2 October 2009 on Channel 4.
Introducing the mixed-race-is-best hypothesis, Prasad said:
“There’s a controversial new idea that's not going to please the BNP one little bit. It's a theory outlined in a book called, ‘BREEDING BETWEEN THE LINES’ by science writer, ALON ZIV. It claims that MIXED-RACE PEOPLE ARE BORN WITH A BIOLOGICAL ADVANTAGE, THE RESULT OF THEIR GENETIC DIVERSITY.”
Thing is, certain members of the Jewish fraternity (Ziv is Jewish) have been doing their damnedest to convince the most gullible members of the white race to breed themselves out of existence for a very long time now.
"Breeding Between the Lines" is just one of a veritable plethora of genocidal self-help manuals our Jewish chums intermittently bombard the brain-dead Gentile with.
I reckon Dr Michael Lewis might be Jewish.
He certainly looks it.
Check out an enlightened take on "Is it Better to be Mixed-Race", here:
On 12 April 2010, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican’s Secretary of State said this at a News conference in Chile:
“Many psychologists and psychiatrists have demonstrated that there is no relation between celibacy and paedophilia. But many others have demonstrated... that THERE IS A RELATION BETWEEN HOMOSEXUALITY AND PAEDOPHILIA. THAT IS TRUE. THAT IS THE PROBLEM."
On 12 April 2010, The Times quoted Monsignor Giacomo Babini, the Bishop Emeritus of Grossetto, thus:
"Jews do not want the Church, they are its natural enemies... Deep down, historically speaking, the Jews are deicides.”
"Deicides" are God killers.
After Bishop Babini denied that he had made any anti-Semitic remarks, Bruno Volpe, who interviewed him for the leading Roman Catholic website, Pontifex, insisted that the bishop had made the statement and threatened to release the audio tape of the interview as proof.
On 12 April 2010, Melanie Philips opined thus in The Daily Mail:
“In an unprecedented move, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, and other Church leaders are calling upon the Master of the Rolls and other senior judges TO STAND DOWN FROM FUTURE COURT OF APPEAL HEARINGS INVOLVING CASES OF RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF THE JUDGES' PERCEIVED BIAS AGAINST CHRISTIANITY.
The churchmen believe that BECAUSE OF THESE JUDGES' PAST RULINGS, THERE IS NO CHANCE OF A 'FAIR' JUDGMENT if they hear the latest such case, which has been scheduled for Thursday.
This involves Gary McFarlane, formerly a Christian relationship counsellor for Relate. He is appealing against an employment tribunal ruling that upheld his sacking for refusing to give sex therapy to homosexual couples. According to newspaper reports, Lord Carey has prepared a witness statement in support of Mr McFarlane in which he will apparently accuse the Court of Appeal of making A SERIES OF 'DISTURBING' JUDGMENTS AND BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR SOME 'DANGEROUS' REASONING WHICH COULD LEAD TO CHRISTIANS BEING BANNED FROM THE WORKPLACE.
In the light of recent events, such fears are scarcely exaggerated. For CHRISTIANITY IS UNDER RELENTLESS ATTACK FROM SECULAR BRITISH INSTITUTIONS, AS A RESULT OF WHICH THE FREEDOM OF CHRISTIANS TO PRACTISE THEIR RELIGION IS BEING LOST. A steady stream of Christians have found themselves out of a job on account of their religious beliefs. When nurse Shirley Chaplin refused to remove her cross, for example, she was prevented by the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust from working with patients.
And when Duke Amachree, a Christian homelessness officer with Wandsworth council, advised a client to put her faith in God, he was promptly suspended, marched off the premises and then sacked. In a string of other cases, CHRISTIANS HAVE BEEN PREVENTED FROM SERVING ON ADOPTION PANELS OR AS MARRIAGE REGISTRARS BECAUSE THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS MEAN THEY CANNOT SANCTION CIVIL PARTNERSHIPS OR GAY ADOPTION.
Such employment difficulties reflect a wider institutional animus against Christianity. TEACHERS BEND OVER BACKWARDS TO PROMOTE OTHER RELIGIONS AT ITS EXPENSE. THE BBC AND THE ARTISTIC WORLD MISS NO OPPORTUNITY TO TRASH IT OR HOLD IT UP TO RIDICULE, WHILE THE POLITICAL CLASS AND INTELLIGENTSIA TAKE AN AXE TO ITS MORAL PRECEPTS on issues such as euthanasia, sex outside marriage and abortion…
The last of several final straws for these clerics was the case of Lilian Ladele, a registrar who was sacked by Islington council after she refused to conduct civil partnership ceremonies because they were against her Christian beliefs. LED BY THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS, LORD NEUBERGER - the second most important judge in England - the Appeal Court ruled that it was unlawful for her to refuse to do so… These judges had discretion to rule in Ms Ladele's favour because the law upholds not one principle relevant to this case, but two - and they compete with each other. For enshrined in the European Convention on human Rights is the right to exercise religious conscience.
Why, then, did the judges in this case set aside the human Rights Convention, WHICH THEY NORMALLY REVERE AS HOLY WRIT? Because, said Lord Neuberger, it only protected those human beliefs which were 'WORTHY OF RESPECT IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY AND ARE NOT INCOMPATIBLE WITH HUMAN DIGNITY'.
So what the Master of the Rolls effectively seemed to be saying was that CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ARE UNWORTHY OF RESPECT IN A DEMOCRACY, AND INCOMPATIBLE WITH HUMAN DIGNITY…
Indeed, SUCH A RULING COMES VERY CLOSE INDEED TO CRIMINALISING CHRISTIANITY. For if putting Christian belief into practice is outlawed, it won't be long before Christian believers find themselves outlawed…
Under the guise of promoting ' tolerance' and 'liberal' social attitudes, anti-discrimination law is deeply intolerant and illiberal. That's because IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FAIRNESS AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IDEOLOGY. IT IS INNATELY ON THE SIDE OF MINORITIES on the basis that they are by definition vulnerable to the majority. So IN THE HANDS OF THE JUDICIARY, IT HAS TURNED INTO A FEARSOME WEAPON AGAINST BRITAIN'S MAINSTREAM ATTITUDES AND FAITH.
The result is that CHRISTIANITY IS NOW IN DANGER OF BEING TURNED INTO A DESPISED AND MARGINALISED CREED practised only by consenting adults in private. CHRISTIANS ARE ALREADY BEING FORCED INTO RENOUNCING THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS IF THEY WANT TO REMAIN IN CERTAIN JOBS. This is simply intolerable in a liberal society where freedom of religious conscience is a bedrock value.
Yet while Christians find themselves under the legal cosh, A DOUBLE STANDARD IS EMPLOYED TOWARDS CERTAIN MINORITY FAITHS. Thus A CHRISTIAN NURSE IS TOLD SHE CAN'T WORK WITH PATIENTS UNLESS SHE REMOVES HER CROSS WHILE MUSLIM NHS STAFF HAVE BEEN EXEMPTED FROM HYGIENE RULES STIPULATING THAT THEIR FOREARMS MUST REMAIN UNCOVERED.
The relentless message from the top of our society is that CHRISTIANITY - THE FOUNDATION-STONE OF WESTERN LIBERTY, TOLERANCE AND DEMOCRACY - IS INTOLERANT, BIGOTED AND OBJECTIONABLE IN CONTRAST TO OTHER FAITHS…
On this great issue - the defence of his religion and the values of this society… Dr Rowan Williams, is conspicuously silent. Indeed, more than that HE IS POSITIVELY EMBRACING HIS FAITH'S DESTRUCTION. For ALONG WITH LORD PHILLIPS, THE FORMER SENIOR LAW LORD, DR WILLIAMS HAS WELCOMED THE ADVANCE IN BRITAIN OF ISLAMIC SHARIA LAW - WHICH REALLY IS INIMICAL TO DEMOCRACY AND EQUALITY.”
Lords Neuberger and Philips are Jewish.
As, for that matter, is Melanie Philips.
On 10 April 2010, The Daily Mail quoted Helena Horvatova, an Eastern European immigrant and mother of seven children, thus:
“We came to Britain because we wanted a better life for all of our children. MY HUSBAND IS CLAIMING THE JOBSEEKERS' ALLOWANCE. Back in our country he was a school cleaner, but in Peterborough they say there are no vacancies. THE COUNCIL HAS BEEN VERY GOOD TO US. IT HAS GIVEN US A HOUSE BECAUSE WE HAVE THE CHILDREN. It only has three bedrooms, though, and WE WOULD LIKE MORE.”
The Mail continued:
“Officially, the Horvatovas are among 10,000 new eastern European immigrants who have turned up in the city in the past six years. But THAT IS A CONSERVATIVE COUNT. The East Of England Regional Assembly believes 16,000 have settled in Peterborough since BRITAIN OPENED ITS BORDERS TO MIGRANTS FROM THE FORMER COMMUNIST BLOC COUNTRIES IN 2004.
Yet LOCAL PEOPLE ARE CONVINCED THIS FIGURE IS A GROSS UNDERESTIMATION OF THE TALLY OF FOREIGNERS ARRIVING IN THIS BEAUTIFUL AND ONCE QUINTESSENTIALLY ENGLISH CITY…
'There must be at least 20,000,' said one GP with a surgery near the city centre. 'We can tell because the total number of patients we have registered has gone up by 3,000 in just a few years. MOST OF THE NEW PATIENTS ARE FROM POLAND, LITHUANIA, THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND SLOVAKIA’.”
On 9 April 2010, Leo McKinstry opined thus in The Daily Express:
“Throughout his time in office Gordon Brown has rightly become notorious for his dishonesty but, in his lengthening catalogue of deceit, no utterance has been more grossly misleading than his 2007 vow to promote 'BRITISH JOBS FOR BRITISH WORKERS'.
His pose as the champion of the British people has always been an outrageous fraud. Now the full extent of Brown’s lie has been exposed by new official figures showing how badly home-grown employment has suffered from mass immigration. According to the Office of National Statistics, almost every single new vacancy in the economy since 1997 has effectively gone to a foreigner, with IMMIGRANTS HAVING FILLED AN INCREDIBLE 98.5 PER CENT OF THE 1.67MILLION NEW JOBS DURING THE LAST 13 YEARS OF LABOUR RULE.
OVER THE SAME PERIOD THE NUMBER OF BRITISH-BORN WORKERS EMPLOYED IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR HAS ACTUALLY FALLEN, DOWN BY OVER 700,000 FROM 18.4MILLION IN 1997 TO 17.7MILLION TODAY. So A JOBS BOOM FOR MIGRANTS HAS MEANT BUST FOR ORDINARY BRITONS…
WHAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS DONE IS NOT CREATE JOBS BUT SIMPLY IMPORT WORKERS FROM OVERSEAS ON AN EPIC SCALE… BROWN’S LABOUR PARTY NOW ACTIVELY OPERATES AGAINST BRITISH WORKERS IN FAVOUR OF FOREIGNERS.
THE SOCIALIST OBSESSION WITH MASS IMMIGRATION AMOUNTS TO A CRUEL BETRAYAL OF THE BRITISH PEOPLE. It is a bitter irony, given Brown’s pretence of caring about the poor, that the only real gainers from this vast influx are the affluent, such as the trendy metropolitan elitists rejoicing in the low costs of Polish plumbers or Ukrainian nannies. But there have been no genuine benefits for working- class Britons. JOB SECURITY HAS WORSENED. EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN RESTRICTED, WAGES DRIVEN DOWN.
Labour persistently claims that mass immigration is the route to economic prosperity but THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE. The annual rate of arrivals has been running at more than 500,000 in recent years, just at a time when Britain has endured the deepest recession since the Thirties. IT IS THE ECONOMICS OF THE MADHOUSE TO IMPORT MILLIONS OF FOREIGNERS WHEN MORE THAN FIVE MILLION BRITONS ARE WITHOUT JOBS AND ON BENEFITS. We could cut the welfare bill and boost taxation if we put our own people back to work and slashed immigration. Moreover, the reliance on overseas labour makes a nonsense of the Government’s remorseless expansion of higher education. OVER 40 PER CENT OF ALL YOUNG PEOPLE NOW GO TO UNIVERSITY YET EMPLOYERS COMPLAIN MORE VOCIFEROUSLY THAN EVER ABOUT SKILL SHORTAGES, HENCE THEIR EAGERNESS TO RECRUIT MIGRANTS.
The wider consequences of mass immigration have been disastrous. WITH 5.4MILLION FOREIGNERS HAVING SETTLED HERE SINCE 1997 AND PROBABLY ANOTHER ONE MILLION LIVING ILLEGALLY BRITAIN HAS BECOME ONE OF THE MOST OVERCROWDED PLACES IN THE WESTERN WORLD. PUBLIC SERVICES ARE AT BREAKING POINT IN MANY AREAS. THE ANNUAL WELFARE BILL HAS ROCKETED TO ALMOST £200BILLION, NOT LEAST BECAUSE, CONTRARY TO FASHIONABLE LEFT-WING MYTHOLOGY ABOUT ‘LAZY’ BRITONS, MIGRANTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE BENEFITS CLAIMANTS. IT IS THE INFAMOUS LAXITY OF OUR SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM RATHER THAN THE JOBS MARKET THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF THE BIGGEST ATTRACTIONS FOR FOREIGNERS.
MASS IMMIGRATION HAS BROUGHT US VIOLENT CRIME AND GANG WARFARE, SOCIAL DISLOCATION AND DOMESTIC TERRORISM. The state-enforced dogma of multi-cultural diversity has worsened divisions by emphasising what divides us rather than encouraging integration. WE LIVE IN A FRACTURED LAND WHERE SHARIA COURTS NOW OPERATE INFORMALLY AND THE BURKA IS COMMONLY WORN ON OUR STREETS. OUR HERITAGE IS TRADUCED OR IGNORED.
When UK passports are dished out at the rate of 200,000 a year the once-proud concept of British citizenship has long since lost its meaning. But THAT IS THE WAY LABOUR WANTS IT. THE SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT, FILLED WITH LOATHING FOR OUR NATIONAL IDENTITY, HAS USED MASS IMMIGRATION AS A BATTERING RAM TO DESTROY THE TRADITIONAL STRUCTURE OF BRITAIN…
All the hollow claims about jobs and growth hid THE FEVERISH LEFT-WING DETERMINATION TO CREATE ‘A NEW SOCIAL ORDER’, in the immortal words of Harriet Harman. One of Tony Blair’s aides, Andrew Neather, admitted that Labour’s enthusiasm for mass immigration was not based on economics but on the desire ‘TO RUB THE RIGHT’S NOSE IN DIVERSITY’.”
On 7 April 2010, the impressionist and comedian, Rory Bremner, said this on the BBC's morning news programme:
"And then there's the situation where Tony Blair is the Middle East peace envoy - THAT'S LIKE ASKING A MOSQUITO TO GIVE A BLOOD TRANSFUSION".
Spot on, Rory.
Tony Blair was, by a long way, the most Israel-friendly Prime Minister ever.
On 5 April 2010, Mark Serwotka, the General Secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, delivered the following remarkably truthful critique of New Labour at the National Union of Teachers’ annual conference in Liverpool:
“THIS IS THE WORST GOVERNMENT IN THE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. Not because I have any illusions that David Cameron is going to be better – he’s going to be dreadful – but the facts speak for themselves. In the Civil Service… in the last four years of New Labour, WE’VE LOST 100,000 JOBS, 2,000 OFFICES HAVE CLOSED… MORE PRIVATISATION OF OUR WORK THAN UNDER THE GOVERNMENTS OF MARGARET THATCHER AND JOHN MAJOR COMBINED…
I can tell you absolutely that, even though I worked on the frontline under the governments of Margaret Thatcher and John Major, ALL OF OUR MEMBERS TELL US THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A WORSE TIME TO BE A CIVIL SERVANT THAN UNDER THE CURRENT GOVERNMENT.”
On 5 April 2010, the BBC told us this:
“Tension is growing in South Africa after the killing of… Eugene Terreblanche… The remnants of Mr Terreblanche's AWB party said the killing was a ‘declaration of war’… It blames Julius Malema, head of the ruling ANC's Youth League, for… singing a song about killing white farmers... The far-right movement's secretary general, Andre Visagie, said Mr Terreblanche's killing had political overtones…
MORE THAN 3,000 WHITE FARMERS ARE ESTIMATED TO HAVE BEEN MURDERED SINCE THE END OF APARTHEID IN 1994.
Last week, South Africa's High Court banned Mr Malema from singing the racially charged apartheid-era song with the words ‘KILL THE BOER‘. It ruled the song was hate speech, although THE ANC IS APPEALING. Boer is Afrikaans for a farmer, but is sometimes used as a disparaging term for ANY WHITE IN SOUTH AFRICA.”
On 5 April 2010, Melanie Phillips informed us thus in The Daily Mail:
“Teachers of the NASUWT union voted unanimously at the weekend for a ballot over industrial action — over the behaviour of the children they teach. They say a government scheme called Student Voice, which allows pupils a say over the way they are taught, is being abused by pupils.
One aspect of the scheme is that children help select prospective teachers and provide feedback on teachers’ performance. The all-too predictable outcome has been that SUCH IMMATURE OPINIONS HAVE OFTEN BEEN GENUINELY INFANTILE — AND YET HAVE HAD TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. As a result, ONE TEACHER FAILED TO BE APPOINTED AFTER BEING LABELLED ‘HUMPTY DUMPTY’ BY A CHILD. ANOTHER WAS HUMILIATED BY BEING TOLD TO SING HER FAVOURITE SONG; SHE REFUSED AND DIDN’T GET THE JOB. A THIRD WAS ASKED BY CHILDREN ON THE INTERVIEW PANEL HOW THIS CANDIDATE MIGHT IMPRESS THE JUDGES OF ITV’S BRITAIN’S GOT TALENT.
The union also says pupils are ‘informing’ on their teachers and manipulating questionnaires so they can unfairly criticise staff. FOR CHILDREN TO BE PUT IN THIS POSITION AT ALL IS LUDICROUS. Is there anything more inappropriate than children taking upon themselves the role of adults in this way? Well, actually, yes there is: WHEN ADULTS THEMSELVES HAVE BESTOWED UPON THE CHILDREN IN THEIR CARE A WHOLLY INAPPROPRIATE AUTHORITY — AND THEN TURN ROUND AND COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW THEY USE IT.
Contrary to what the union says, the Student Voice scheme is not being abused. It is itself an abuse of education by drastically confusing the respective roles of teacher and pupil. Student Voice is based on the premise that children are entitled to a role in the management and delivery of their own education…
Having set this hare running, THE GOVERNMENT NOW TRIES TO PRETEND THAT IT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES…
As Chris Keates, general secretary of the NASUWT, said, CHILDREN ARE NOT ADULTS and treating them as such strips teachers of their professional dignity.
Amen to that. But IT’S A BIT LATE NOW FOR MS KEATES TO DISCOVER THESE ESSENTIAL TRUTHS. For this is not a situation just of the Government’s making. TEACHERS THEMSELVES HAVE BEEN PARTY TO THE ASSUMPTION BEHIND THIS SCHEME THAT PUPILS ARE QUASI-ADULTS responsible for their own education. Indeed, at the weekend, educationist Stephen Heppell from Bournemouth told Radio 4’s Today programme that Student Voice had resulted in ‘a better quality of learning’.
TEACHERS HAVE GONE ALONG WITH THE SCHEME’S INFANTILISATION OF THEIR PROFESSION, for example bringing in balloons, a snowboard and a didgeridoo to curry favour with their infant interlocutors on interview panels…
This grotesque approach has not descended out of a clear blue sky. More profoundly and devastatingly, FOR SEVERAL DECADES THE ENTIRE EDUCATION ESTABLISHMENT HAS GONE ALONG WITH THE BENIGHTED BELIEF THAT PUPILS SHOULD USURP THE AUTHORITY OF TEACHERS IN THE CLASSROOM ITSELF. For years, ‘child-centred’ orthodoxy has held sway — THE PERNICIOUS, ANTI-EDUCATION DOCTRINE WHICH HOLDS THAT WHAT CHILDREN ALREADY CARRY INSIDE THEIR HEADS IS MORE IMPORTANT AND VALUABLE THAN WHAT TEACHERS CAN TEACH THEM. Indeed, under this orthodoxy ANY DISCIPLINE, OR STRUCTURE, OR BODY OF KNOWLEDGE IMPARTED BY TEACHERS WAS CONSIDERED TO BE AN IMPOSITION ON A CHILD’S AUTONOMY.
SO, IN EFFECT, CHILDREN BECAME RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN EDUCATION. Instead of teachers initiating their pupils into knowledge of the world beyond themselves, ‘learners’ would discover information for themselves, with teachers relegated to a background position as mere ‘facilitators’. One of the worst examples of this was THE UN-TEACHING OF READING, WITH CHILDREN EXPECTED TO LEARN TO READ THROUGH A KIND OF OSMOSIS RATHER THAN BEING TAUGHT STEP BY STEP TO DECODE WORDS ON A PAGE.
EVERYTHING REVOLVED AROUND THE CENTRAL FIXATION THAT CHILDREN WERE THEIR OWN BEST AUTHORITY AND MUST NEVER BE TOLD WHAT TO DO. SO EVEN VERY YOUNG CHILDREN WERE EXPECTED TO MAKE ‘INFORMED CHOICES’ ABOUT SEX AND DRUGS.
The result was that children supplanted teachers and pupils became active ‘learners’.
While, of course, all pupils learn anyway, this change in terminology was highly significant. It altered learning from being what happens when children are taught to what children do to teach themselves. Founded upon the truism that we all never stop learning throughout our lives, IT DESTROYED THE DEMARCATION BETWEEN SCHOOL AND ADULT LIFE.
The absurdity of this was illustrated some three years ago when one trendy London primary school head teacher relabelled himself ‘lead learner’. Not surprisingly, this loss of belief in the core function of education meant that MANY PUPILS WERE
EFFECTIVELY ABANDONED TO STUMBLE THROUGH THE WORLD. THE RESULT WAS THAT, UNABLE TO READ OR MASTER THE BASICS OF KNOWLEDGE, MORE CHILDREN SWITCHED OFF FROM SCHOOL AND DISORDER ROSE.
And THE MORE THAT HAPPENED, THE MORE DEMORALISED TEACHERS BECAME AND LOADED YET MORE ONTO ‘LEARNERS’ — LEADING TO THE LUNACY OF ‘LEARNACY’, THE NONSENSICAL DOCTRINE THAT A CHILD SHOULD ‘MANAGE ITS OWN LEARNING’ BECAUSE THERE WAS NO POINT IN TEACHING ANYTHING AT ALL. This entailed an enormous transfer of responsibility from adult to child. And THE NASUWT, WHICH IS NOW COMPLAINING SO LOUDLY ABOUT ONE OF THE OUTCOMES OF THIS MADNESS, WENT ALONG WITH IT. Indeed, its website states that the union wants to make ‘learners’ understand ‘the extent to which they are personally responsible for their own learning’. In other words, THE TEACHERS’ UNION IS HAPPY TO GO ALONG WITH THIS DESTRUCTIVE DOCTRINE WHILE IT IS DESTROYING CHILDREN’S EDUCATION — BUT ONLY WHEN IT STARTS TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON TEACHERS’ OWN JOB PROSPECTS DOES IT START TO SQUEAL. And by threatening to strike, it thus further compounds the damage already done to the children in its care.
Sententiously, the union intones:
‘Too often, teachers are afforded fewer rights, entitlements and less professional respect than other professions’.
But IT IS THE TEACHERS THEMSELVES WHO HAVE UNDERMINED THAT RESPECT BY KNOCKING THE STUFFING OUT OF THE VITAL JOB THEY DO.
This profound confusion about the demarcation between adults and children goes far beyond the education world. Family life has also been affected. Too many parents are afraid to impose discipline and boundaries on their children; or they allow them to have highly sexualised clothes or toys; or they regard themselves inappropriately as their children’s friends.
AT ROOT, THIS CONFUSION IS BASED ON THE DESIRE OF ADULTS TO RELIEVE THEMSELVES OF RESPONSIBILITY TOWARDS CHILDREN EITHER AS PARENTS OR AS TEACHERS. IT IS A PROFOUND INFANTILISATION OF THE ADULT WORLD, which has not just deprived a teacher of a job but created an entire Humpty Dumpty society.”
On 3 April 2010, Patrick O'Flynn reported thus in The Daily Express:
“‘I know people think it’s unfair when it feels as though some can take advantage of the freedoms and opportunities we offer in Britain without making a fair contribution or playing by the rules. So do I,’ claimed Brown.
Note those weasel words ‘when it feels as though’. Brown could not bring himself to admit the reality of injustice so he downgraded it to a perception.
On the tidal wave of immigration from Eastern Europe the PM was unapologetic…
‘Even after five years they are over 50 per cent less likely than British people to receive benefits and tax credits and over 40 per cent less likely to live in social housing,’ he boasted. But the main problem with the first Eastern European influx was not any lack of work ethic but sheer numbers…
The same cannot be said about several other immigrant groups… Fortunately I can fill in a few blanks thanks to research by the IPPR think tank in 2007 for a Channel 4 documentary, Immigrants: The Inconvenient Truth. It found that ALMOST 40 PER CENT OF SOMALIS ARE ON INCOME SUPPORT – 10 TIMES THE FIGURE FOR UK-BORN ADULTS. ONLY 19 PER CENT ARE EMPLOYED. AROUND 80 PER CENT OF SOMALIS LIVE IN SUBSIDISED SOCIAL HOUSING. THE SAME IS TRUE FOR 49 PER CENT OF TURKS AND 41 PER CENT OF BANGLADESHIS. PAKISTANIS WERE ALSO FOUND TO BE HEAVILY WELFARE DEPENDENT.
BROWN DIDN’T MENTION ANY OF THAT.
‘No major party has a different position on migration inside the EU going forwards,’ Brown added. That much is true. LABOUR, THE LIB DEMS AND THE CONSERVATIVES ALL PROPOSE TO CARRY ON ALLOWING ANY EU CITIZEN TO LIVE HERE AND, WHAT’S MORE, TO LOBBY FOR TURKEY’S ACCESSION. THAT WOULD MEAN MILLIONS MORE PEOPLE ARRIVING TO MASSIVELY EXPAND A COMMUNITY THAT IS ALREADY 49 PER CENT RELIANT ON SOCIAL HOUSING.
Here’s another big Brown lie on immigration:
‘All newcomers to Britain have a responsibility to obey British law. NO EXCEPTIONS... Next year, criminality will be assessed in determining whether someone has the right to stay.’
But if there are ‘no exceptions‘, then why the need for an assessment? Surely DEPORTATION WOULD BE AUTOMATIC? The truth is that THERE ARE AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE MANY EXCEPTIONS.”
On 3 April 2010, The Sun asked John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York, for his top ten Easter “thoughts… at this special time”.
Four of his special thoughts were:
“A fit Wayne Rooney to help England win the World Cup.”
“A General Election where people actually vote - BUT NOT FOR THE BNP.”
“A nice piece of British beef”.
“The screening of the new Dr Who - I can't wait to see it.”
On 2 April 2010, The Daily Express quoted a summing-up at Guildford Crown Court from Judge Peter Moss:
“EVERYBODY UNDER THE AGE OF 19 HAS ADHD. IT SEEMS TO BE INFECTIOUS”.
The Express explained:
“A Judge has delivered a blistering attack on young thugs who try to escape punishment by claiming they are not responsible for their own bad behaviour.
spoke out after he was asked to spare teenage drunk driver Jake Money from a motoring ban because he suffered from attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, commonly known as ADHD.
HE ORDERED HIM TO ‘GROW UP’ AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS ACTIONS when he appeared in court to plead guilty to escaping from police custody.”
On 31 March 2010, Leo McKinstry opined thus in The Daily Express:
“The belief that the party could regain its popularity by wheeling out Tony Blair shows how deluded and desperate Labour has become… In HIS SPECTACULAR GREED, DECEITFUL RHETORIC AND PHONEY MORALITY, HE IS A POTENT SYMBOL OF BOTH THE DISHONEST MISRULE OF THE SOCIALISTS AND THE SELF-SERVING ARROGANCE OF OUR POLITICAL ELITE…
BLAIR’S CAPACITY FOR DUPLICITY AND SPIN WAS ALMOST LIMITLESS, WHETHER IT BE OVER THE WAR IN IRAQ OR STATISTICS ON CRIME.
‘I’M A PRETTY STRAIGHT KIND OF A GUY,’ he said in 1998 during the scandal over the donation of £1million from the Formula 1 boss Bernie Ecclestone to the Labour Party. Those words could hardly sound more hollow, after years of watching Blair twist the truth. This is why his speech in Sedgefield fell so flat. His performance was just another sham… HERE IS A MAN WHO HAS MADE A FORTUNE THROUGH THE RUTHLESSLY, CYNICAL EXPLOITATION OF HIS FORMER OFFICE, WHILE THE GOVERNMENT THAT HE LEFT BEHIND HAS PLUNGED THE COUNTRY INTO THE DEEPEST RECESSION SINCE THE THIRTIES.
Judging by his tangerine visage, Blair has been spending too much time in the past three years on yachts or poolside at luxury hotels abroad, yet throughout this period ORDINARY BRITONS HAVE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH JOB INSECURITY, FALLING PAY AND RISING TAXES, thanks to the epic mismanagement by his party…
Last week, Channel 4’s dispatches programme exposed THE ROTTEN CORE OF THE LABOUR-LED POLITICAL CLASS by revealing how A STRING OF EX-MINISTERS ARE SEEKING TO MAKE MONEY FROM THEIR PUBLIC POSITION. But Blair is by far one of the worst offenders of this sort. Since he resigned the premiership in 2007, he is estimated to have made MORE THAN £20MILLION BY TRADING ON HIS CONTACTS… His money-grabbing activity includes reported deals with the Kuwaiti royal family and a South Korean oil company, as well as speech-making in the USA where he is reported to charge £100,000 a time. He has built up a property portfolio worth around £12million.
Among his homes are a £3.7million town house in the West End of London and a £5.75million country pile in Buckinghamshire…
IN THE 2005 GENERAL ELECTION LABOUR ONLY RECEIVED 35 PER CENT OF THE POPULAR VOTE, and only clung on to power through the quirks of the electoral system. Since then, as Britain has sunk deeper into the mire, we can see even more clearly what an appalling legacy he left us. BLAIR WAS THE LEADER WHO DEGRADED OUR DEMOCRACY WITH SLEAZE AND DESTROYED OUR SOVEREIGNTY WITH HIS CRAVEN SURRENDERS TO EUROPE. IT WAS BLAIR’S FASHIONABLE DEVOTION TO MULTI-CULTURALISM AND MASS IMMIGRATION THAT TORE APART OUR NATIONAL IDENTITY AND SOCIAL COHESION. HIS ADDICTION TO SO-CALLED HUMAN RIGHTS BELEAGUERED OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. HIS EDUCATIONAL REFORM LED TO A CATASTROPHIC FALL IN STANDARDS. HAVING DEPRIVED THE ARMED FORCES OF THE EQUIPMENT THEY NEEDED, HE FOUGHT TWO BLOODY WARS THAT WERE NOT IN OUR NATIONAL INTEREST.”
On 29 March 2010, The Jewish Chronicle quoted the New Labour MP, Martin Linton, as having said the following at a House of Commons meeting the previous week:
“THERE ARE LONG TENTACLES OF ISRAEL IN THIS COUNTRY WHO ARE FUNDING ELECTION CAMPAIGNS AND PUTTING MONEY INTO THE BRITISH POLITICAL SYSTEM FOR THEIR OWN ENDS.
You must consider over the next few weeks, when you make decisions about how you vote… YOU MUST MAKE THEM AWARE OF THE ATTEMPT BY ISRAELIS AND BY PRO-ISRAELIS TO INFLUENCE THE ELECTION.”
At the same meeting the New Labour MP, Sir Gerald Kaufman, a Jew himself, said this:
“Just as Lord Ashcroft owns most of the Conservative Party, RIGHT-WING JEWISH MILLIONAIRES OWN THE REST,”
The Jewish Chronicle also told us this:
“ANDREW DISMORE (a New Labour MP) HAS BEEN A CONSISTENT CHAMPION OF THE CONCERNS OF THE LOCAL JEWISH COMMUNITY. But after a series of allegations about his EXPENSES, he faces a tough fight with the Tories’ Matthew Offord and MATTHEW HARRIS, SECRETARY OF LIB DEM FRIENDS OF ISRAEL.
One of the most intriguing battles will be for the Bury South seat of MIDDLE EAST MINISTER IVAN LEWIS, A FORMER CHAIR OF MANCHESTER JEWISH FEDERATION. Although Mr Lewis sits on a substantial majority, he faces a formidable opponent in MICHELLE WISEMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF MANCHESTER JEWISH CARE.”
On 29 March 2010, Leo McKinstry wrote this in The Daily Express:
“A key hallmark of totalitarian Communist rule was its obsession with trying to indoctrinate the public through political propaganda. Until recently, the idea that such an approach might be adopted in Britain would have seemed laughable. But ALL THAT HAS CHANGED UNDER LABOUR. THE YEARS OF BLAIR AND BROWN HAVE BEEN DOMINATED BY SPIN. THE MACHINE OF THE STATE IS NOW DEVOTED TO THE IMPOSITION OF SOCIALIST IDEOLOGY...
Looking through some political blogs on the internet I came across a disgraceful video clip posted by a primary school in Hackney. This featured a group of young children who had been instructed by their teacher TO CHANT A RAP SONG EULOGISING THE LOCAL LABOUR MP, THE HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL LEFT-WINGER DIANE ABBOTT. In this nauseating performance the pupils sang of Diane Abbott’s wonderful achievements, including her campaigns for equality and women’s rights. Once they had finished they held up large pictures of Abbott’s beaming socialist visage. It was just like something out of the People’s Communist republic of North Korea.
It is a depressing sign of how far the state education sector has succumbed to Labour’s dogma that A TEACHER COULD ACTUALLY THINK THIS FLAGRANT LEFT-WING INDOCTRINATION IS ACCEPTABLE IN OUR SCHOOLS. The same teacher, so brimming with righteous zeal, so anxious to supplicate his socialist masters, would no doubt be appalled at the idea of a group of private school pupils chanting praises to a local Tory...
NEVER BEFORE IN OUR HISTORY HAVE WE HAD A GOVERNMENT SO FIXATED WITH BRAINWASHING AND LECTURING THE PUBLIC.
THE STATE IS NOW BY FAR BRITAIN’S LARGEST ADVERTISER. The state has been turned into a subsidised arm of the Labour movement.”
The 28 March 2010 edition of The Sunday Telegraph published a letter signed by the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord George Carey; the Rt Rev Michael Scott-Joynt, the Bishop of Winchester; the Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, the former Bishop of Rochester; the Rt Rev Peter Forster, the Bishop of Chester; the Rt Rev Anthony Priddis, the Bishop of Hereford; the Rt Rev Nicholas Reade, the Bishop of Blackburn and the Rt Rev Jonathan Gledhill, the Bishop of Lichfield.
"We are deeply concerned at the apparent DISCRIMINATION SHOWN AGAINST CHRISTIANS and we call on the Government to remedy this serious development. In a number of cases, CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ON MARRIAGE, CONSCIENCE AND WORSHIP ARE SIMPLY NOT BEING UPHELD. THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS DISMISSALS OF PRACTISING CHRISTIANS FROM EMPLOYMENT FOR REASONS THAT ARE UNACCEPTABLE IN A CIVILISED COUNTRY...
To be asked by an employer to remove or 'hide' the cross is asking the Christian to hide their faith.”
The 28 March 2010 edition of The Sunday Telegraph published a statement by The African National Congress, the ruling party in South Africa, expressing astonishment that the South African High Court ruled it illegal and unconstitutional to use the phrase, "KILL THE BOER".
This is what was said:
"We believe that this song LIKE MANY OTHERS that were sung during the struggle days is part of our history and OUR HERITAGE. It will be very unfortunate, if through our courts, that our history and our heritage were to be outlawed."
“Kill the Boer” is the key phrase from the iconic ANC "struggle song", "The Cowards are Scared" which has recently been regularly used to incite the mob by Julius Malema, head of the ANC's youth league.
The Sunday Telegraph added:
"Demands that the President, Jacob Zuma, rein in his subordinate and force him to apologise went unheeded. Instead MR ZUMA CLAIMED THE CHANT 'KILL THE BOER' TO BE A HARMLESS 'STRUGGLE SONG'…
Certainly, he seems confident of the unqualified support of the President, WHO HAS TIPPED HIM AS A FUTURE LEADER OF THE COUNTRY...
Often depicted by newspaper cartoonists wearing nappies, Mr MALEMA IS A QUINTESSENTIAL EXAMPLE OF THE NEW ANC ELITE. Described as a 'tenderpreneur' by the local media, his lifestyle – HE HAS THREE HOMES AND A FLEET OF LUXURY VEHICLES - comes under regular scrutiny as do HIS ALLEGED FINANCIAL LINKS TO COMPANIES WHICH HAVE BEEN AWARDED LUCRATIVE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS…
The controversial chant has now become a focus for a wide range of fears and resentments felt by the white population. In particular, relations between the black government and the minority Afrikaners, who number just three million out of a population of 50 million, are at their worst since the end of apartheid.
IT IS ALSO AN UNWANTED REMINDER OF THE PAST AS THE COUNTRY TRIES TO PORTRAY A SUCCESSFUL, MODERN IMAGE IN THE RUN-UP TO THIS YEAR'S WORLD CUP, held in Africa for the first time.
In much the same way, Mr Zuma's recent state visit to London attracted headlines about which of HIS FOUR WIVES the polygamous President would bring on the trip...
The Freedom Front Plus, a party protecting the rights of Afrikaners, said; 'Mr Malema was nine-years-old when Mandela was freed. HE WAS NEVER REALLY PART OF THE 'STRUGGLE’... If he sang the song today, it has to be judged in the context of 2010 and the fact that FARMERS ARE BEING KILLED WEEKLY.'
A few days later, the government admitted a degree of nervousness, claiming that the growing hostility towards the youth leader was becoming dangerous.
'As the ANC, WE DRAW THE CONCLUSION THAT IT IS MEANT TO INCITE, INSTIGATE AND MOBILISE SOME PEOPLE TO HARM AND EVEN LEAD TO THE EXECUTION OF THE ANC YL PRESIDENT,' an ANC statement said."
So, a courageous High Court decides that Malema's use of the inciteful, ANC murder slogan, "Kill the Boer" is contributing to the deaths of two or three white farmers every week.
The ANC responds by claiming that such criticism of a demonstrably rabble-rousing and dangerous black anthem is "meant to incite, instigate and mobilise some people to harm and even execute" Julius Malema, the politician who is, presently, utilising the genocidal phrase most often.
Well that's PC psychobabble for you. Mandela, his peers and his heirs were always unashamedly Commie.
The Sunday Telegraph also told us this:
"IN SOUTH AFRICA, IT IS SAFER TO BE A MINER THAN A FARMER. AT LEAST TWO WHITE FARMERS OR FAMILY MEMBERS ARE MURDERED EVERY WEEK; LAST YEAR ALONE, 120 WERE KILLED. With a radical new policy on land expropriation being mooted by the ruling African National Congress (ANC), talk in rural areas frequently turns to South Africa becoming the next Zimbabwe. As one farmer said:
'Zimbabwe? About a dozen white farmers were killed in Zimbabwe in the last decade in an unlawful government land grab. WE LOST 10 TIMES THAT MANY JUST IN 2009 – AND WE ARE IN A COUNTRY WHERE FARMERS ARE ALLEGEDLY AT PEACE WITH THE GOVERNMENT. WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT OUR FUTURE'?"
Check out the unspoken reality of life for many (outside of the fashionable spin and tail-wagging) in the new, happy-clappy South Africa, here.
On 27 March 2010, Jonathan Wynne-Jones, Religious Affairs correspondent of The Sunday Telegraph, reported thus:
“SIX PROMINENT BISHOPS AND LORD CAREY, THE FORMER ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, DESCRIBE THE ‘DISCRIMINATION’ AGAINST CHURCHGOERS AS ‘UNACCEPTABLE IN A CIVILISED SOCIETY’...
The bishops express their deep disquiet at THE DOUBLE STANDARDS OF PUBLIC SECTOR EMPLOYERS, claiming that CHRISTIANS ARE PUNISHED WHILE FOLLOWERS OF OTHER FAITHS ARE TREATED FAR MORE SENSITIVELY.
Their intervention follows a series of cases in which CHRISTIANS HAVE BEEN DISMISSED AFTER SEEKING TO EXPRESS THEIR FAITH. They highlight the plight of Shirley Chaplin, A NURSE WHO WAS BANNED FROM WORKING ON HOSPITAL WARDS FOR WEARING A CROSS AROUND HER NECK… CHRISTIANS ARE ALSO INCREASINGLY CONCERNED THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS IGNORING THEIR VIEWS ON ISSUES SUCH AS SEX EDUCATION AND HOMOSEXUALITY when introducing new legislation.
A group of 640 HEAD TEACHERS, SCHOOL GOVERNORS AND FAITH LEADERS HAVE SIGNED A SEPARATE LETTER TO THIS NEWSPAPER WARNING THAT COMPULSORY SEX EDUCATION IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS WILL ERODE MORAL STANDARDS AND ENCOURAGE SEXUAL EXPERIMENTATION. They call for the dropping of LEGISLATION THAT WILL SEE CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS SEVEN TAUGHT ABOUT SEX AND RELATIONSHIPS.
In their letter, the bishops urge the Government to stop the persecution of Christians.
'WE ARE DEEPLY CONCERNED AT THE APPARENT DISCRIMINATION SHOWN AGAINST CHRISTIANS AND WE CALL ON THE GOVERNMENT TO REMEDY THIS SERIOUS DEVELOPMENT. IN A NUMBER OF CASES, CHRISTIAN BELIEFS ON MARRIAGE, CONSCIENCE AND WORSHIP ARE SIMPLY NOT BEING UPHELD.
THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS DISMISSALS OF PRACTISING CHRISTIANS FROM EMPLOYMENT FOR REASONS THAT ARE UNACCEPTABLE IN A CIVILISED COUNTRY'...
Mrs Chaplin will take the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust to an employment tribunal this week after she was told last year that she must hide or remove a small cross on her necklace if she wanted to continue working on hospital wards. While the trust refused to grant her an exemption, IT MAKES CONCESSIONS FOR OTHER FAITHS, INCLUDING ALLOWING MUSLIM NURSES TO WEAR HEADSCARVES ON DUTY...
The bishops criticised the way in which Mrs Chaplin had been treated and stated that she should not be prevented from expressing her faith by wearing her cross.
‘This is yet another case in which the religious rights of the Christian community are being treated with disrespect,’ they say. ‘TO BE ASKED BY AN EMPLOYER TO REMOVE OR 'HIDE' THE CROSS IS ASKING THE CHRISTIAN TO HIDE THEIR FAITH.’
The bishops said that it was ‘deeply disturbing’ that the NHS trust’s uniform policy permits exemptions for religious clothing, but appears to regard the cross as ‘just an item of jewellery’…
Andrea Minichiello Williams, founder and director of the Christian Legal Centre, described the treatment of Mrs Chaplin as ‘scandalous’.
‘THIS IS YET ANOTHER CASE OF DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR CHRISTIANS,’ she said. ‘It would seem THE EXETER HOSPITAL WOULD RATHER USE ITS MONEY TO DENY CHRISTIANS THEIR RIGHTS THAN USING ITS SCARCE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO TREAT PATIENTS. IT IS RIDICULOUS THAT IN OUR COUNTRY WITH SUCH A GREAT CHRISTIAN HERITAGE THE COURT REQUIRES EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE CROSS IS A CHRISTIAN SYMBOL WHILST NOT APPLYING THE SAME STANDARDS TO OTHER FAITHS’.”
Speaking in September 2009, when she was eight months from retirement, Shirley Chaplin said:
"For about 30 years I have worked in the NHS and nursed patients day and night and on no occasion has my cross caused me or anyone else any injury – and to my knowledge, no patient has ever complained about me wearing it. The trust even refused to test the 'breaking strain' on the necklace.
Everyone I have ever worked with has clearly known I am a Christian: it is what motivates me to care for others... This smacks of double standards and appears to discriminate against Christians. This BLATANT PIECE OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS amounts to the marginalising of employees’ personal human rights, a blanket 'secularising and neutralising' of the NHS INTENDED TO STOP CHRISTIANS FROM EXPRESSING THEIR FAITH in the public services of the NHS."
On 24 March 2010, the Reverend Dr Peter Mullen BA, PhD, Chaplain to the London Stock Exchange, spoke thus at a UKIP meeting in Chichester.
“UKIP seems to me to be the only party with the wit to identify these great dangers and to explain their nature without woolliness or that cowardly evasiveness based on THE DEADLY EUPHEMISMS OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.
What about the BNP, Pete?
And the National Front? They were saying what Nigel says decades before he was!
The Reverend continued:
“THE EU IS THE OPPOSITE OF CIVILISATION. THE EU IS THE ENEMY OF EUROPE. It represents Europe in its decadence and its death throes. Whenever a civilisation is in decline, it does what the EU is doing today. Instead of creativity and bold involvement with the world, it turns inwards upon itself and becomes obsessed with its own structures. It begins to despise its own history and tradition and so, instead of being confident in its historic culture, it becomes paranoid and nit-picking… in T.S.Elliot's phrase, ‘dreaming of systems so perfect that no-one will need to be good.’ WE ARE DYING BECAUSE THE ELITES WHICH CONTROL US ACTUALLY HATE WHAT WE HAVE ACHIEVED, ALL THE GOOD THINGS WE HAVE FOUGHT FOR OVER THE CENTURIES…
The labyrinthine, Kafkaesque nightmare of EU procedures is one monstrous lie. And upon this lie, all other lies are constructed like some modern version of the Tower of Babel. THE LIE THAT PEOPLE OF EUROPE HAVE DEMOCRACY, WHEN ACTUALLY WE ARE ALL DOMINATED BY THE DIKTATS OF A CORRUPT AND SELF-SERVING ELITE. THE LIE THAT WE SHALL HAVE A SAY IN THE GOVERNANCE OF OUR CONTINENT, WHEN ACTUALLY ALL THE PLEBISCITES AND REFERENDA WHICH GO AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE LYING ELITE ARE CANCELLED OR RE-JIGGED UNTIL THEY PRODUCE THE REQUIRED RESULT. THE LIE THAT THE BUSINESS OF THE SUPER-STATE IS BEING CONDUCTED EFFICIENTLY AND HONESTLY WHEN, IN REALITY, IT IS A CONTINENTAL BUREAUCRACY RUN ON A SYSTEM OF BRIBES, WITH PROPER ACCOUNTS NEITHER PRODUCED NOR AUDITED FOR DECADES. THE LIE PROPAGATED BY THE BUREAUCRATIC ELITE THAT EUROPEAN CULTURE AND VALUES WILL BE PRESERVED, WHILE WHAT THEY ARE REALLY UP TO IS FIXING IMMIGRATION POLICY ON A MODEL WHICH WILL CREATE A EUROPE ESSENTIALLY MUSLIM WITHIN A GENERATION.
THE TERRIFYING PROSPECT FOR EUROPE IS A TAKE-OVER BY AN ISLAMIST BARBARISM, which will reduce the glittering achievement of 2000 years… to the chaos and desolation of Muslim-dominated states throughout the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and much of Africa. When you mention this apocalyptic prospect to the apparatchniks in the EU, AND THEIR TOADYING FOLLOWERS IN ALL THE MAIN BRITISH POLITICAL PARTIES, YOU WILL BE CONDEMNED AS 'ISLAMOPHOBIC'…
THERE IS A WORLDWIDE JIHAD… Islam is a militant faith. FROM THE START, MUSLIMS BELIEVED IN EXPANSION BY CONQUEST. Efraim Karsh's recent book, Islamic Imperialism, described this policy in detail and he quotes the Founder Mohammed: ‘FIGHT ALL MEN UNTIL THEY SAY THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH.’ As Charles Moore has pointed out, Osama bin Laden quoted these words immediately after the attacks on the twin towers. In the face of this, we are expected to believe that ‘Islam is a religion of peace and love.’ Yes, that's what they say - AND IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE THEM THEY'LL COME ROUND AND KILL YOU.
Militant Islamic expansionism has operated in surges over hundreds of years from the earliest days of the Caliphate, and it has been heroically resisted by such as Charles Martell and at the siege of Vienna. In 1565 there was a notable confrontation. The Muslims were besieging the island of Malta and they captured and killed some of the Christian Knights of St.John. Suleyman the Magnificent beheaded them and floated them across the harbour on crosses. The Grand Master of the Knights of St.John, Jean de la Valette, cut off the heads of many Turkish prisoners and fired them back at the enemy like cannon balls. Gosh - whatever would the General Synod say! Six years after this, 197 ships of the Muslim fleet were destroyed by Don John of Austria at Lepanto, and the Muslim insurgency was diminished. It was at the height of the Reformation, yet Catholics and Protestants were briefly united in thanksgiving for what was definitely seen as a marvellous deliverance.
THE BRITISH PRESS AND THE BBC CONTINUALLY UPBRAID EUROPEAN NATIONS FOR OUR HISTORY OF CONQUEST AND ‘IMPERIALISM’ BUT THEY, AND THE POISONOUS HISTORY IN OUR STATE SCHOOLS, MAKE NO CRITICISM OF ISLAMIC IMPERIALISM. And while the slave trade, along with ‘Hitler,’ is a favourite topic in that history syllabus, there is rarely mentioned the fact that THE BIGGEST SLAVE-TRADERS OF ALL WERE, IN FACT, THE MUSLIMS AND THAT THEIR OPERATIONS WERE BROUGHT TO AN END BY THE BRITISH NAVY. Heathen Africans counted as less than human for the Muslims. British colonial rule actually replaced the Muslim slave trade in Africa. Muslims are bad minorities in any country, continuing their violence against Hindus in India and Buddhists in Thailand.
One of the most intelligent and cultivated Englishmen of the 19th century was the poet and critic S.T.Coleridge. He described Islam as ‘THE MOST EXTENSIVE AND COMPLETE DESPOTISM THAT EVER WARRED AGAINST CIVILISATION AND THE INTERESTS OF HUMANITY’…
Some fathers of Muslim households KILL THE DAUGHTERS they love rather than lose what they call ‘honour’ through her fornication. MANY WOMEN AND GIRLS HAVE BEEN KILLED FOR TRIVIAL OFFENCES SUCH AS SPEAKING TO AN UNRELATED MAN.
TRUTH-TELLING IS NOT AN OBLIGATION FOR MUSLIMS IN THEIR DEALINGS WITH NON-MUSLIMS. For example, Hamid Ali, head of the Al-Madina Masjid mosque in Beeston, Leeds, publicly condemned the London bombing of 2005. But later, speaking to a Bangladeshi reporter, he said that the bombings were ‘a good act’ and praised the bombers as ‘children’ of the militant cleric Abdullah-al-Faisal who had already taught young Muslims to believe, ‘the only way forward is for you, the Muslims, to kill the kufrs.’ (non-believers.)
Certainly non-Muslims are regularly cursed in public as part of the Islamic prayer sequence, especially in the night prayers prescribed to be said during Ramadan. For example: ‘Oh Allah, destroy the kuffar who are trying to prevent people following your path, who deny your messengers and who do not believe in your Day of Judgement. Make them disunited, fill their hearts with terror and send your wrath and punishment against them. O God of truth’…
I have been criticised by my ecclestiastical superiors for speaking out against Islamic militancy - and am accused of jeopardising sensitive talks which are ongoing between our senior bishops and the leaders of moderate Islam. THESE TALKS ARE A WASTE OF TIME, BECAUSE THE MODERATE MUSLIMS ARE DESPISED BY THEIR FANATICAL CO-RELIGIONISTS. AND IT HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD THAT, EVEN AMONG MODERATE MUSLIMS, THERE ARE MANY WHO PREFER THEIR MILITANTS TO WESTERNERS.
TIME IS RUNNING OUT FOR THE WEST, and the same defeat has happened before: 1600 years ago, the Roman Emperor summoned the philosopher Sidonius and told him he was going to shut the gates of Rome against the enemy. Sidonius replied, ‘But IT'S TOO LATE, SIR. THE ENEMY IS WITHIN’. And THE REASON THE ENEMY IS WITHIN IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS FOR YEARS ARRANGED ITS IMMIGRATION POLICY IN THE INTERESTS OF THE IDEALOGICAL SOCIAL-ENGINEERING KNOWN AS ‘MULTICULTURALISM’…
There are about 2,000 mosques in Britain today and MORE THAN TWICE AS MANY MUSLIMS AS METHODISTS. As Melanie Phillips demonstrated in her timely book Londonistan and, as Philip Bobbitt reminded us recently, ‘WE MUST ACCEPT THAT THE GLOBAL CENTRE OF ISLAMIC TERROR IS IN EUROPE, NOT IN PAKISTAN OR AFGHANISTAN OR SAUDI ARABIA. The most important cell, for 9/11, wasn't Jeddah, it was in Hamburg. And I think this will only increase’…
You wonder how The Guardian and the BBC restrain their usual zeal for human rights, and the rights of women in particular, in the face of well-documented truths about the public morality of Islam, where a woman's testimony in court is explicitly regarded as WORTH LESS THAN THAT OF A MAN, WHEN A WOMAN GETS LESS COMPENSATION THAN THAT OF A MAN FOR SIMILAR INJURY, WHEN THERE ARE CHILD MARRIAGES, FORCED MARRIAGES, FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION, RAPE, HONOUR KILLINGS, AND VIOLENT ABUSE BY HUSBANDS. The Sharia Council of Darul Uloom in London has issued a set of rules on divorce and remarriage which clearly envisage THE POSSIBILITY OF PRE-PUBESCENT GIRLS BEING MARRIED. What would our famous champions of liberal enlightenment say if Christian British people were to behave anything like so disgracefully? Instead, OUR ELITES TURN A BLIND EYE…
All criticism of Islam, prominently that of Geert Wilders, is rejected as ‘Islamophobic’ and ‘offensive to Muslims’. That is not the point! THE POINT IS WHETHER THE CRITICISMS ARE ACCURATE AND TRUE… IF TRUTH IS NO LONGER THE ULTIMATE STANDARD OF DISCOURSE IN EUROPE, THEN EUROPEAN CIVILISATION IS DEAD IN THE WATER…
Practical ATHEISM IN OUR SCHOOLS... WHERE TEACHERS ARE BOUND TO TEACH THAT ANY GOD IS AS GOOD AS ANY OTHER - OR NONE. ANARCHY IN PERSONAL AND SEXUAL MORALITY…. A brief, furtive exchange between (or among) strangers, without either commitment or affection, ascribed the same value as Christian marriage. The consequent NEAR-ABOLITION OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY…
Abortion used as a form of contraception and amounting to 200,000 every year. A MASS MEDIA WHICH SEXUALISES YOUNG CHILDREN. CASUAL FORNICATION TAUGHT TO JUNIOR SCHOOL CHILDREN AS PART OF THE ‘DIVERSITY’ AGENDA… COCAINE, HEROIN, A GOVERNMENT THAT DECLARES A ‘WAR ON DRUGS’ AND THEN HANDS OUT KNIGHTHOODS TO DRUG-CRAZED ROCK STARS…
All this uneasily hitched to a TOTALITARIANISM AND BULLYING POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WHICH EVERYWHERE SEEKS TO CURTAIL OUR NATURAL FREEDOMS...
The decadent godlessness we now inhabit is generally agreed to have begun with the permissiveness of the 1960s when we sang ‘All you need is love’ and let it all hang out, debauching our institutions in the process. There is some truth in this and certainly the 1960s was the decade in which the Church of England effectually resigned - throwing out the real Bible and the real Prayer Book and replacing them with unspeakable modern parodies which obscured the fact of sin and so rendered all promises of redemption worthless.
If anyone doubts that the notion of progress is just plain stupid, let them look at Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Vietnam, Rwanda, Sudan, Somalia, take your pick from the repertoire of genocides. The mass media loves to derogate the middle ages and everything in the past as medieval, but THERE WERE MANY MORE SLAUGHTERED IN THE WARS AND GENOCIDES OF THE 20TH CENTURY THAN IN ALL THE PREVIOUS CENTURIES PUT TOGETHER...
In reality, we face not one enemy but two: MILITANT ISLAM IS THE ALIEN PERIL; VALUELESS SECULARISM IS THE DECADENCE WITHIN.”
On 18 March 2010, presenter Louise Minchen said this on the BBC programme, Missing Live:
"200,000 people (in the UK) disappeared last year."
At a meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority convened on 25 February 2010, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson said:
"Rape remains a challenging area. Compared to the same period last year WE HAVE SEEN AN INCREASE IN REPORTING OFFENCES OF RAPE OF JUST OVER 500... THE FIGURES ACTUALLY PAINTED A PICTURE OF HORROR."
On 24 February 2010, UKIP's Nigel Farage, correctly assessed the non-quality of the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, as he made his maiden appearance in the Brussels parliament:
"YOU HAVE THE CHARISMA OF A DAMP RAG AND THE APPEARANCE OF A LOW-GRADE BANK CLERK...
Who are you? I'd never heard of you, nobody in Europe had ever heard of you...
I have no doubt that your intention is to be THE QUIET ASSASSIN OF EUROPEAN DEMOCRACY AND OF EUROPEAN NATION STATES. YOU SEEM TO HAVE A LOATHING FOR THE VERY CONCEPT OF THE EXISTENCE OF NATION STATES. Perhaps that's because you come from Belgium, which is pretty much a non-country."
After that encouraging little outburst, Mr Farage has gone up considerably in my estimation.
On 5 February 2011, David Cameron said these things at a security conference in Munich:
“The biggest threat that we face comes from terrorist attacks, some of which are, sadly, carried out by our own citizens… We should acknowledge that this threat comes in Europe overwhelmingly from young men who follow a completely perverse, warped interpretation of Islam, and who are prepared to blow themselves up and kill their fellow citizens… Europe needs to wake up to what is happening in our own countries…
We have got to get to the root of the problem, and we need to be absolutely clear on where the origins of where these terrorist attacks lie. That is the existence of an ideology, Islamist extremism… At the furthest end are those who back terrorism to promote their ultimate goal: an entire Islamist realm, governed by an interpretation of Sharia. Move along the spectrum, and you find people who may reject violence, but who accept various parts of the extremist worldview, including real hostility towards Western democracy and liberal values...
In the UK, some young men find it hard to identify with the traditional Islam practiced at home by their parents, whose customs can seem staid when transplanted to modern Western countries. But THESE YOUNG MEN ALSO FIND IT HARD TO IDENTIFY WITH BRITAIN TOO, BECAUSE WE HAVE ALLOWED THE WEAKENING OF OUR COLLECTIVE IDENTITY. UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF STATE MULTICULTURALISM, WE HAVE ENCOURAGED DIFFERENT CULTURES to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream. WE’VE FAILED TO PROVIDE A VISION OF SOCIETY TO WHICH THEY FEEL THEY WANT TO BELONG. WE’VE EVEN TOLERATED THESE SEGREGATED COMMUNITIES BEHAVING IN WAYS THAT RUN COMPLETELY COUNTER TO OUR VALUES.
So, WHEN A WHITE PERSON HOLDS OBJECTIONABLE VIEWS, RACIST VIEWS FOR INSTANCE, WE RIGHTLY CONDEMN THEM. BUT WHEN EQUALLY UNACCEPTABLE VIEWS OR PRACTICES COME FROM SOMEONE WHO ISN’T WHITE, WE’VE BEEN TOO CAUTIOUS FRANKLY – FRANKLY, EVEN FEARFUL – TO STAND UP TO THEM.
THE FAILURE, FOR INSTANCE, OF SOME TO CONFRONT THE HORRORS OF FORCED MARRIAGE, THE PRACTICE WHERE SOME YOUNG GIRLS ARE BULLIED AND SOMETIMES TAKEN ABROAD TO MARRY SOMEONE WHEN THEY DON’T WANT TO, IS A CASE IN POINT… HANDS-OFF TOLERANCE… Young Muslims… don’t turn into terrorists overnight, but what we see, and what we see in so many European countries, is a process of radicalisation…
Some organisations that seek to present themselves as a gateway to the Muslim community ARE SHOWERED WITH PUBLIC MONEY DESPITE DOING LITTLE TO COMBAT EXTREMISM. As others have observed, this is like turning to a right-wing fascist party to fight a violent white supremacist movement… Would you allow the far right groups a share of public funds if they promise to help you lure young white men away from fascist terrorism? OF COURSE NOT…
COMMON PURPOSE can be formed as people come together and work together in their neighbourhoods. It will also help build stronger pride in local identity, so people feel free to say, ‘Yes, I am a Muslim, I am a Hindu, I am Christian, but I am also a Londonder or a Berliner too’. It’s that identity, that feeling of belonging in our countries, that I believe is the key to achieving true COHESION.”
"Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives... We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values."
You and the rest of the PC Crowd in parliament and the press encouraged them, we didn't. The British Nationalist warned the people about multiculturalism and all the other, Brit-bashing, politically correct dictats issued by people like you that have so diminished the British people in their own land. And we were always roundly condemned for doing so.
Hey Dave! Now most folks seem to accept that we were right all along, do you have a good word to say about us? That'll be the day. The bought-and-paid-for globalist would rather cut off his own head than congratulate a Nationalist.
No matter how right he was.
As reported by The Daily Telegraph of 17 February 2010, Professor Cheryl Thomas tells us this in her wide-ranging report, Are Juries Fair?
"WHITE JURORS LIVING IN DIVERSE COMMUNITIES MAY BE MORE CONSCIOUS OF RACE AND MORE CENSORIOUS TOWARDS WHITE DEFENDANTS in cases involving interracial conflict compared to white jurors living in predominantly white communities."
Brainwashed, fashion-following sheeple then.
On 15 February 2010, Muslim gang member, Amir, was quoted thus by The Sun:
"BRITAIN'S UNDERWORLD BELONGS TO THE MUSLIMS…
People don't f*** with us because they think we're all in al-Qaeda. Our status in the criminal hierarchy changed literally the day the Twin Towers went down. From then, Asians have been associated with terrorism. People, including other criminals, think if you're Asian you'll blow up a Tube train or bomb an aeroplane. IN THE PAST 20 YEARS WE'VE CAPITALISED ON THAT. IF WE'RE GOING TO BE THOUGHT OF AS EXTREMISTS, WHY NOT USE THAT FEAR?…
WITH ISLAM COMES FEAR, AND WITH FEAR COMES POWER…
Through religion we speak the same language, live in the same areas, go to the same schools AND CAN EVEN USE MOSQUES AS A SAFE PLACE AWAY FROM THE POLICE OR OTHER GANGS. If you f*** with a Muslim gang you'd better be able to run fast or hide well, because THEY WILL COME BACK AT YOU IN NUMBERS…
WE CARRY SWORDS FOR PROTECTION. I'VE HAD TO USE MINE MORE THAN ONCE… These days NOBODY FIGHTS ON THEIR OWN. YOU'LL GET ATTACKED BY A WHOLE GANG…
If you go to school in an ethnic area you either join a gang or end up bullied, in some cases TO THE POINT OF BEING KILLED. So TO AVOID A LIFE OF HELL A KID JOINS A GANG. Once you're in, life is easy - no more beatings, people to talk to, stuff to do. AFTER SCHOOL YOU GRADUATE INTO MORE SERIOUS GANG ACTIVITY…
A boss can make up to £8,000 a day running a gang of 40 workers drug-dealing or scamming credit cards, and a worker can make £1,000.
Ten years ago, Asian gangs would go to war with Yardies and white gangs. But now, WE'VE GOT LONDON ALL SEWN UP… MUSLIMS HAVE THIS COUNTRY UNDER CONTROL. NOBODY CAN TOUCH US."
The Sun added:
“The 21-year-old, WHOSE ORGANISATION TURNED OVER THOUSANDS OF POUNDS A DAY FROM DRUG-DEALING AND CREDIT CARD SCAMS, claims a post-9/11 fear of terrorism has allowed Muslims to develop a stranglehold on our criminal community. Through Islam, he says, THEY HAVE NUMBERS WHICH CANNOT BE MATCHED, and rival gangs are being forced out by ruthless Islamic criminals who only deal with each other.
They recruit black and white members in Britain's jails, TEMPTING THEM TO CONVERT TO ISLAM in exchange for a cushier life inside. Once released, THE CONVERTED CONS HAVE ACCESS TO AN ENTIRELY NEW NETWORK OF MUSLIM CRIMINAL CONTACTS - and are trusted because they pray to Allah.
Amir claims that BRITAIN'S UNDERWORLD WILL SOON BE COMPLETELY DOMINATED BY ISLAMIC GANGS…
We spoke to a former prisoner we will refer to only as Steven, who was repeatedly approached by prison imams - Muslim priests - and asked to convert. Steven, who is British-born and white, rejected the approaches. He says:
‘When I went inside the MUSLIMS OFFERED ME HELP FROM TOP LAWYERS ON THE OUTSIDE WHO WOULD FIGHT TO GET MY SENTENCE CHANGED, IF I JOINED THEM.
I always resisted, but you have to understand how tempting it is to convert. First, you have their protection. You're totally alone in prison when you get there, AND IF YOU CAN'T LOOK AFTER YOURSELF LIFE IS HELL. YOU'RE BEATEN, ROBBED AND BULLIED.
Second, EVERY FRIDAY MUSLIMS ARE ALLOWED PRAYER MEETINGS. THIS IS FREE TIME AWAY FROM THE GUARDS, SO THEY CAN PLOT, MAKE NEW CONTACTS AND OFTEN DISCUSS ANTI-WEST IDEOLOGY.
MUSLIMS ALSO GET BETTER FOOD. They have money sent in for their kitchens from the Muslim community outside, and they get special Halal dishes stipulated by Islam. Then, WHEN A CONVERTED PRISONER FINISHES HIS TIME, HE LEAVES AS AN EVEN BIGGER CRIMINAL WITH AN ENTIRELY NEW CONTACT BOOK OF MUSLIM CRIMINALS TO DO BUSINESS WITH…
Where the Muslim gangs come into their own is shifting drugs. If a white gang from London buys a kilo of coke, they then have to sell it. You can only sell your gear if you have contacts. The white gang will only know a few people in their area and won't trust or be trusted by other gangs. They won't deal with Eastern European, black or Asian gangs.
But THE MUSLIM NETWORK IS VAST AND STRETCHES UP AND DOWN THE UK, SO THEY CAN SHIFT DRUGS EXTREMELY QUICKLY. THAT MAKES THE MONEY-MAKING POTENTIAL OF A MUSLIM GANG A HUNDRED TIMES THAT OF A BRITISH OR EUROPEAN GANG’.”
This is what the politicians have given us over the course of the last fifty years, ladies and gentlemen.
Along with more than a thousand Mosques and a hundred thousand Asian-run businesses. This is what the anti-British race laws tell us we must endure. This is what the same politicians, the media darlings, the PC Crowd, Big Business, the Global Villagers and the immigrants themselves insist we must now “cohere” with.
If ever some brainwashed lemming dares to call you “racist” for railing against those who gave away what was once wholly ours to such savage effect that the immigrant criminal is now able to boast that “Muslims have this country under control”, call him TRAITOR!
For that, indeed, is what he is.
Anyone claiming to be British who would put the “Eastern European, black or Asian gangs”, the “Islamic gangs”, the "Muslim Priests”, the “Muslim network” and the plotters who “often discuss anti-West ideology”, before those such alien forces routinely brutalise, should be tried for treason, found guilty and punished accordingly.
Even if it is only stupidity or cowardice that causes them to attack their own with such rubber-stamped, fashion-following zeal.
On 12 February 2010, Sir Andrew Green said this in The Mail Online:
"So there was indeed a Labour conspiracy to change the nature of our society by mass immigration. New evidence confirms claims made by a Labour political adviser last October which he subsequently tried to recant.
In an article for the Evening Standard, Andrew Neather revealed that ‘it didn’t just happen: the deliberate policy of ministers from late 2000 until at least February last year ...was to open up the UK to mass migration’…
He said that ‘drafts were handed out in summer 2000 only with extreme reluctance: there was paranoia about it reaching the media’. The paper eventually surfaced as a purely technical product of the research department of the Home Office but earlier drafts that he saw ‘included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural’.
We in Migrationwatch have now obtained an earlier draft of that policy paper, circulated in October 2000. It had already been censored but it was to be neutered still further. In the executive summary, six of eight references to ‘social’ objectives were cut from the version later published.
What could have been meant by social policy in the context of immigration, especially as it was dressed up as combating social exclusion? This must surely have been code for increasing the numbers substantially, as Mr Neather revealed. If not, why all the secrecy?…
Reading between the lines of these documents it is clear that political advisers in Number 10, its joint authors, were preparing a blueprint for mass immigration with both economic and social objectives.
None of this was in the Labour manifesto of 1997 or 2001. One passage in the report that the political censors failed to cut was a prediction about foreign immigration from outside the European Union.
This had it climbing from 142,000 in 1998 to nearly 180,000 in 2005 (in fact, it reached nearly 200,000 by that date). But what this shows is that ministers were clearly warned about a continuing rise in immigration which, even leaving aside the East Europeans, has been even greater than expected.
So what can we deduce from all this? Mr Neather later withdrew some of his remarks but examination of the texts shows that he had, in fact, blurted out the truth. It seems there was a project led by Downing Street political advisers to introduce a secret policy of mass immigration.
Their economic arguments surfaced in an obscure research document but the social objective of greatly increased diversity was entirely suppressed for fear of public reaction – especially from the white working class. THESE ARE THE VERY PEOPLE WHO ARE NOW PAYING THE PRICE FOR A DECADE OF LABOUR DECEPTION. What the Government now fears is that they will take their revenge on election day. Why on earth should they have taken such a risk with their traditional supporters? Was it pure ideology or were there other factors at play?
One point to consider is the impact on the electorate. It is not generally realised that Commonwealth citizens legally in Britain acquire the right to vote in general elections as soon as they put their names on the electoral register. In Labour years we have now seen an additional 300,000 from the Old Commonwealth and about one million from the New Commonwealth. They may well have been conscious that they have much stronger support among the ethnic communities than their Conservative rivals.
Given that mass immigration is heavily in Labour’s electoral interest, they may have thought that they could get away with it. The trades unions have been silent despite the concerns of their members. And they may have calculated that ANYONE WHO OPPOSED IT COULD BE SILENCED BY ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM.
They have not succeeded but WE ARE LEFT WITH A TALE OF BETRAYAL WHICH HAS GENERATED A VERY DANGEROUS CURRENT OF EXTREMISM WHICH COULD YET COME TO HAUNT US.”
On 10 February 2010, James Slack reported thus in The Mail Online:
"LABOUR THREW OPEN THE DOORS TO MASS MIGRATION IN A DELIBERATE POLICY TO CHANGE THE SOCIAL MAKE-UP OF THE UK, secret papers suggest. A draft report from the Cabinet Office shows that MINISTERS WANTED TO ‘MAXIMISE THE CONTRIBUTION’ OF MIGRANTS TO THEIR ‘SOCIAL OBJECTIVES’.
The number of foreigners allowed in the UK increased by as much as 50 per cent in the wake of the report, written in 2000.
Labour has always justified immigration on economic grounds and denied it was using it to foster multiculturalism. But suspicions of a secret agenda rose when Andrew Neather, a former government adviser and speech writer for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett, said THE AIM OF LABOUR’S IMMIGRATION STRATEGY WAS TO ‘RUB THE RIGHT’S NOSE IN DIVERSITY AND RENDER THEIR ARGUMENTS OUT OF DATE’.
Mr Neather said he helped to write the 2000 report which outlined a strategy to ‘open up the UK to mass migration’. The document was not published in its original format over fears of an adverse public reaction. Instead it was released a year later as a research document on the economic benefits of migration. The highlighted text below was contained in the original draft of the document drawn up in 2000 for a discussion on immigration policy - but deleted from the version published in 2001.
1) The emerging consensus, in both the UK and the rest of the EU, is that we need a new analytical framework for thinking about migration policy if we are TO MAXIMISE THE CONTRIBUTION OF MIGRATION TO THE GOVERNMENT'S ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL OBJECTIVES.
2) Indeed, over the medium to longer term, migration pressures will intensify in Europe as a result of demographic changes. But THIS SHOULD NOT BE VIEWED AS A NEGATIVE - to the extent that migration is driven by market forces, it is likely to be economically beneficial. On the other hand, trying to halt of reverse market-driven migration will be very difficult (perhaps impossible) and economically damaging.
3) Chapter 4, focusing on the Government's aim to regulate migration to the UK in the interests of social stability and economic growth, argues that it is clearly correct that the Government has both economic and social objectives for migration policy.
4) The more general social impact of migration is very difficult to assess. BENEFITS INCLUDE A WIDENING OF CONSUMER CHOICE AND SIGNIFICANT CULTURAL CONTRIBUTIONS. These in turn feed into wider economic benefits.
5) In practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion, and THERE ARE A NUMBER OF AREAS WHERE POLICY COULD FURTHER ENHANCE MIGRANTS' ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONTRIBUTION in line with the Government's overall objectives.
6) It is clear that migration policy has both social and economic impacts and should be designed to contribute to the government's overall objectives on both counts. The current position is a considerable advance on the previously existing situation, when the aim of immigration policy was, or appeared to be, to reduce primary immigration to the 'irreducible minimum' - an objective with no economic or social justification.
Mr Neather’s claims last October were denied by ministers, including Justice Secretary Jack Straw, who said they were nonsense. A draft of the original Cabinet Office report has now been published following a freedom of information request by Migrationwatch. It contains six references to social policy, all of which were removed from the later, published version.
One deleted paragraph said a framework was needed to ‘maximise the contribution of migration to the Government’s social and economic objectives’. Another says that migration pressures will intensify because of demographic changes across Europe but that this ‘should not be viewed as a negative’…
Also cut out was a statement that ‘in practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion’.
Damian Green, Tory immigration spokesman, said: ‘This is a very significant finding because it would mean that Labour’s biggest long term effect on British society was based on a completely secret policy.
This shows LABOUR’S OPEN-DOOR IMMIGRATION POLICY WAS DELIBERATE’…
Neather… said Labour’s relaxation of immigration controls was A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT TO ENGINEER A ‘TRULY MULTICULTURAL’ country and plug gaps in the jobs market. He remembered ‘coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that THE POLICY WAS INTENDED – EVEN IF THIS WASN’T ITS MAIN PURPOSE – TO RUB THE RIGHT’S NOSE IN DIVERSITY’.
Whitehall research shows that the number of foreigners arriving in the UK rose from 370,000 in 2001 to 510,000 in 2006. The figures for net foreign immigration– the number of non-British citizens arriving, less the number leaving – are even more dramatic. In 2001, this figure stood at 221,000 but by 2007 it had risen as high as 333,000 – up 50 per cent.
The number fell to 250,000 in 2008 mainly because of a decline in arrivals from Eastern Europe.
It had already emerged that THE CABINET OFFICE REPORT WAS CENSORED TO REMOVE DETAILS OF POSSIBLE LINKS BETWEEN IMMIGRATION AND ORGANISED CRIME…
One of the sections missing from the final report said: ‘THERE IS EMERGING EVIDENCE THAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH ASYLUM SEEKERS ARE LIVING IS LEADING TO CRIMINAL OFFENCES, INCLUDING FIGHTS AND BEGGING.’ A second section warned: ‘MIGRATION HAS OPENED UP NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR ORGANISED CRIME’.”
On 8 February 2010, David Cameron said the following things in a keynote speech titled, 'Rebuilding trust in politics' at the University of East London:
"Anger at the expenses scandal is just the most forceful expression of a deep frustration people feel with our whole political system. IT’S A SYSTEM IN WHICH TOO MUCH POWER IS CONCENTRATED IN THE HANDS OF THE ELITE AND DENIED TO THE MAN AND WOMAN ON THE STREET… Decisions made behind closed doors. The Houses of Parliament bypassed and undermined. MONEY BUYING INFLUENCE. Too often just an elite few choosing the people who become MPs for many years…
Never has the reputation of politics sunk so low. We’ve got to fix our broken politics and we’ve got to start fixing it now… People are fed up with politicians hiding behind the cloak of independent inquiries and endless reviews…
How Gordon Brown can claim to be a reformer with a straight face, I just don’t know. He can’t reform the institution because he is the institution. The character of his Government – secretive, power-hoarding, controlling – is his character… For the health of our democracy it is now essential that this shameless defender of the old elite goes as soon as possible. If he goes, and if we get a new Conservative government… why should people believe we will fix our broken politics any more than Gordon Brown?…
When we say we will take power from the political elite and give it to the man and woman in the street - it's not just because we believe it will help fix broken politics. It's what we believe, full stop. We don't believe that an arrogant, all-controlling government sitting in London passing endless laws and regulations actually makes things better. In fact, on many occasions it makes things worse...
We'd want to reduce the power of the executive and increase the power of Parliament even if politics hadn't fallen into disrepute. We'd want to take power from the centre and give it to local communities even if we didn't have MPs in the dock potentially accused of fiddling their expenses. This is what we believe. It's not what Gordon Brown believes. He believes in state control; we believe in social responsibility. He represents the dying days of secrecy and suspicion; we are a new generation at ease with openness and trust…
We’re going to take power away from the political elite and hand it to the man and woman on the street. That power shift must start with an attack on the privilege, excess and exemption from normal rules that has infected Parliament… We’d sweep away the subsidies and luxuries that sit so uneasily with public service – including the gold-plated pensions…
There is another big issue that we can no longer ignore. It is the next big scandal waiting to happen. It’s an issue that crosses party lines and has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money. I’m talking about lobbying – and we all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisors for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism. We believe in market economics, not crony capitalism…
It’s important that businesses, charities and other organisations feel they can make sure their voice is heard. And indeed, lobbying often makes for better, more workable, legislation. But I believe that it is increasingly clear that lobbying in this country is getting out of control. Today it is a £2 billion industry that has a huge presence in Parliament. The Hansard Society has estimated that some MPs are approached over one hundred times a week by lobbyists. Much of the time this happens covertly.
We don’t know who is meeting whom. We don’t know whether any favours are being exchanged. We don’t know which outside interests are wielding unhealthy influence. This isn’t a minor issue with minor consequences. Commercial interests - not to mention government contracts - worth hundreds of billions of pounds are potentially at stake.
I believe that secret corporate lobbying, like the expenses scandal, goes to the heart of why people are so fed up with politics. It arouses people’s worst fears and suspicions about how our political system works, with money buying power, power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions in their own interest. We can’t go on like this. I believe it’s time we shone the light of transparency on lobbying in our country and forced our politics to come clean about who is buying power and influence.
Politics should belong to people, not big business or big unions, and we need to sort this out. So if we win the election, we will take a lead on this issue by making sure that ex-ministers are not allowed to use their contacts and knowledge - gained while being paid by the public to serve the public - for their own private gain…
There was a time when Parliament used to stand tall, a beacon of democracy leading national debate. But people look at it now and see a place they feel little connection to, play little part in, and don’t feel proud to represent them… We need to restore proper accountability – we need to give people the feeling that they are the ones pulling the strings and that they hire and fire their representative in parliament…
But strengthening Parliament also means making sure people feel they can play a part in it. At the moment the conversation between Parliament and the country is more like a monologue: one talks, the country listens. IT’S ABSURD THAT A TINY PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION CRAFT LEGISLATION THAT WILL APPLY TO ONE HUNDRED PER CENT OF THE POPULATION…
So we’ll create a right of initiative nationally, where any petition that collects one hundred thousand signatures will be eligible to be formally debated in the House of Commons. Any petition with a million signatures will allow members of the public to table a Bill that could end up being debated and voted on by MPs…
Parliament also gets its strength from the pride people have in it. THERE’S NOT MUCH OF THAT AROUND TODAY. An institution that was once famous for its radical legislation, elevated debate and forensic scrutiny of laws has turned into a giant franking machine that stamps whatever Acts the government wants...
And one of the biggest constitutional changes in our history - our membership of the European Union - has practically passed Parliament by. WE ARE HOPELESS, TOTALLY HOPELESS, AT SCRUTINISING THE EUROPEAN LEGISLATION, REGULATION AND SPENDING THAT AFFECTS OUR COUNTRY. No wonder PEOPLE THINK PARLIAMENT HAS BECOME A WASTE OF SPACE. Much of the time - and THANKS IN LARGE PART TO THE THINGS THIS LABOUR GOVERNMENT HAS DONE TO UNDERMINE PARLIAMENT - IT REALLY IS A WASTE OF SPACE…
We’ve got to give Parliament its teeth back so that people can have pride in it again – so they can look at it and say ‘yes: those MPs we elect – they’re holding the government to account on my behalf’…
We will make MPs more independent, with more free votes so that they can vote as they wish and not as they’re told to...
With these and similar reforms, we can make Parliament a place where people feel a connection to their politicians, where they know that politicians are talking about issues people want them to talk about, and where they know those politicians are fighting in their interest, not for some other vested interest. This all adds up to a Parliament people can admire, trust and have pride in – Parliament with the people in charge of it.
But reforming lobbying and reforming Parliament are just two aspects of our comprehensive plan to fix our broken politics. We want to go way beyond Westminster and Whitehall in redistributing power in our country.
We will push power down not just from the government to parliament but from Whitehall to communities; from the state to citizens; from Brussels to Britain; from judges to the people; from bureaucracy to democracy. It’s your community and you should have control over it…
It’s your life that’s affected by political decisions and the people who make those decisions should answer to you… WE WOULD CLAW BACK POWERS FROM THE EU and make sure no future government can ever give powers away in future without first asking the British people. And it’s why WE WILL ABOLISH THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT… so that Britain’s laws can no longer be decided by unaccountable judges. ..
Everything I have spoke about today adds up to this: a new politics. Politicians as public servants… Above all, power to people.
Yes, it will be tough – taking on vested interests always is. But… I promise you this: I will see it through.
But this change also needs something else. It requires a change in the attitude not just of politicians, but of the media too. I want to see a whole new culture of responsibility from those who report the news…
I believe it's no coincidence that trust in politics has been destroyed on the watch of a man who believes that politics is the answer to everything. Who created a culture where his closest advisor in No.10, Damian McBride, spent his time, paid by the taxpayer, to mount a campaign of personal smears aimed at the families of his opponents?
We have had thirteen years of government by initiative, press release and media management and it is literally pointless. I would rather that we attempt big, serious change and fail than fiddle around with footling, meaningless promises that are never really meant, let alone delivered, limping through office and clinging to power for the sake of it…
We are a new generation that understands and believes in openness, transparency, accountability. Yes we have a political philosophy that at its heart is about taking power and control from the political elite and giving it to the man and woman in the street. But more than any of this, we have the determination to change our political culture, build a new political approach and bury the whole rotten mess of Mandelson, Campbell, Blair and Brown.”
“We’ll create a right of initiative nationally, where any petition that collects one hundred thousand signatures will be eligible to be formally debated in the House of Commons.”
This, indeed, was done. But the first petition, thus, presented, which asked that the three party leaders make good on their pre-election promises to institute a referendum on EU membership, was subjected to a three line whip. 21 months after the would-be Prime Minister said what he said here, he would conspire with Labour leader, Ed Miliband, to deny MPs a free vote on the subject dearest to the hearts of the British people.
“We will make MPs more independent, with more free votes so that they can vote as they wish and not as they’re told to.”
You said it, Dave. We want our MPs to ‘vote as they wish and not as they’re told to.’
“We are hopeless, totally hopeless, at scrutinising the European legislation, regulation and spending that affects our country.”
You said it, Dave. That’s why we signed the petition.
“It’s absurd that a tiny percentage of the population craft legislation that will apply to one hundred per cent of the population.”
You said it, Dave.
“No wonder people think Parliament has become a waste of space."
You said it, Dave.
“We’re going to take power away from the political elite and hand it to the man and woman on the street… Power to people.”
You said it, Dave. You said it jusr before the 2010 election.
Which says it all, really.
On 8 February 2010, Vanessa Allen informed us thus in The Daily Mail:
“For generations Dover has stood as an indomitable symbol of Britain’s freedom and independence. The town, with its white cliffs, port and sprawling castle stood at the very edge of the nation’s frontier with the Continent.
But now part of THAT PROUD HISTORY IS UP FOR SALE AND THE LEADING BIDDER IS REVEALED AS THE FORMER AGE-OLD ENEMY – FRANCE.
It is one of a string of public assets which have been EARMARKED FOR PRIVATISATION AS THE GOVERNMENT BATTLES WITH A RECORD £830BILLION NATIONAL DEBT.
A sale of the Port of Dover, Europe’s busiest ferry port, could net up to £350million for the Treasury. Its harbour board applied to the Transport Secretary for voluntary privatisation last month. THE SALE IS EXPECTED TO BE RUBBER-STAMPED AND THE LEADING BIDDER HAS EMERGED AS NORD-PAS-DE-CALAIS REGIONAL COUNCIL, WHICH ALSO OWNS CALAIS...
The Port of Dover is the largest British port still in the public sector and made a profit of £15.1million in 2008.”
As I keep saying, ladies and gentlemen, the powers-that-be are at war with us.
On 6 February 2010, Aaqil Ahmed, the BBC's Head of Religion, was quoted thus in The Sunday Telegraph:
“I THINK ALL THE FAITHS SHOULD BE TREATED IN THE SAME WAY. I DON'T BELIEVE IN TREATING ANY FAITH DIFFERENTLY.”
So the CHURCH OF ENGLAND should be treated no differently to Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism or any other non-indigenous religion, according to the BBC’s Head of Religion, who is a Muslim.
Why am I not surprised?
“I don't believe that we should be basing the debate on 20-year-old figures... IT'S VERY EASY TO LIVE IN THE PAST, BUT WE LIVE IN THE PRESENT. In a few years' time THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO VIEW TELEVISION WILL CHANGE RADICALLY, SO THE CONVERSATION WILL BECOME EVEN MORE REDUNDANT. We'll listen to what they say, but WE'RE CLEAR THAT WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WE'LL STICK TO THAT.”
Oh, yes, Aaqil, you and the rest of the PC Crowd know what you’re doing alright.
And the British people can be damn sure you’ll all be sticking to it until you’re stopped.
“The BBC wasn't brilliant in the past, but all we can do is talk about this year going forward... Who knows what's going to happen in five years, ten years time? I won't be here.”
The BBC wasn’t brilliant in the past, Aaqil?
It was a lot better than it is now, pal.
It was on the side of the British people once.
That would have been before you and the PC Crowd arrived, of course.
In "ten years time"?
You won’t be here, that’s true. But if we’re not in charge by then, someone just like you will be running the show.
There nothing so certain as that.
On 6 February 2010, The Bishop of Durham, Dr Tom Wright, the fourth-most-senior Bishop in the church's hierarchy, was quoted thus by The Times:
"THE ENLIGHTENMENT KICKED GOD UPSTAIRS LIKE THE ELDERLY RELATIVE IN THE ATTIC".
The Times also told us that the Bishop said the British public had been left to "LURCH IN A SEA OF AMORALISM", and that the Prime Minister had become akin to an "ABSOLUTE MONARCH" with little or no accountability.
The Times added:
"Dr Wright, who grew up in Northumberland and witnessed the devastating effects of coalmine closures, said that THE DECLINE BEGAN UNDER MARGARET THATCHER BUT UNDER TONY BLAIR AND GORDON BROWN HAD REACHED THE POINT WHERE ‘SOMETHING IS DANGEROUSLY WRONG WITH OUR SYSTEM'...
Dr Wright... singled out for criticism THE CREATION OF THE SUPREME COURT AND THE ABOLITION OF THE OFFICE OF LORD CHANCELLOR, which he described as ‘constitutional reform on a wing and a prayer’. He said:
‘Tony Blair wanted to be rid of Lord Irvine of Lairg, so he did it by abolishing his post. SO THERE’S THAT THOUSAND-YEAR-OLD POST GONE.
We are supposed to have a democracy where we have a system of checks and balances developed over a long period which have got very deep roots. And if you say we’re going to cut down those trees and pave this bit over with concrete then ALL SORTS OF THINGS MAY HAPPEN TO THE ECOSYSTEM. THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES IS REALLY RATHER POWERFUL HERE’.
A consequence was THE EROSION OF CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY AND A LOSS OF TRUST IN POLITICIANS, he warned."
Lance Price, Alastair Campbell's deputy during his spell as communications director to Tony Blair, wrote the book Where Power Lies after he left government.
On 5 February 2010, The Daily Express quoted this passage from it:
"I was told repeatedly by very senior members of the PM’s staff that HE (Gordon Brown) SEEMED TO HAVE NO IDEA HOW ANGRY AND DISILLUSIONED PEOPLE WERE. Whenever there was a crisis – and the expenses scandal is the perfect example – HE WAS OBSESSED WITH SAVING HIS OWN SKIN, NOT WITH FACING UP TO THE THREAT TO THE REPUTATION OF PARLIAMENT.”
Price also quotes unnamed Brown "confidantes" and "insiders" as saying:
"He is psychologically and emotionally incapable of leadership of any kind".
"No 10 ISN'T A VERY NICE PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO WORK. HOWEVER BAD IT SOMETIMES SEEMS FROM THE OUTSIDE, IT'S FAR, FAR WORSE FROM THE INSIDE.”
On 1 February 2010, Pope Benedict XVI gave an Ad Limina Address to the Bishops of England and Wales at Consistory Hall.
In this he said:
“Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.
Continue to insist upon your right to participate in national debate through respectful dialogue with other elements in society. In doing so,you are not only maintaining long-standing British traditions of freedom of expression and honest exchange of opinion, but you are actually giving voice to the convictions of many people who lack the means to express them. When so many of the population claim to be Christian, how could anyone dispute the Gospel’s right to be heard?”
In February 2010, Tory leader, David Cameron, was interviewed by the gay magazine, Attitude:
Here are some of the things he said:
"I think it's much more about culture than about law now... I don't want to get into a huge row with the Archbishop (of Canterbury) here, but the Church has to do some of the things that the Conservative Party has been through... Sorting this issue out and recognising that full equality is a bottom-line, full essential.
The 1951 Convention (on the rights of refugees) doesn't mention sexuality, but because it mentions membership of a social group, that phrase is being used by the courts, RIGHTLY, to say that if someone has a realistic fear of persecution they should be allowed to stay...
I don't want to get into a huge row with the Archbishop (of Canterbury) here, but THE CHURCH HAS TO DO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY HAS BEEN THROUGH... Sorting this issue out and recognising that full equality is a bottom-line, full essential…
Looking back, YOU CAN SEE THE MISTAKE OF SECTION 28. I think we can look gay people in the eye and say: 'YOU CAN NOW BACK US BECAUSE WE NOW SUPPORT GAY EQUALITY'."
In other words, "you can now back us because the Tory leader has his tongue all the way up homosexuality's cheeky bot."
Section 28 prevented the PC Crowd from promoting gay matters in the classroom.
On 31 January 2010, The Independent on Sunday quoted Emma, a young girl who was groomed, raped and prostituted by Asian men from the age of 13, thus:
"Looking back, my family set-up was perfect to make me more vulnerable...
It was easy for me to tell lies, to pull the wool over their eyes. No wonder the bad guys wanted to know all about my family… They're very clever. They get the younger ones to talk to you first. They know you've been taught if you come from a decent home not to talk to strangers, especially older men, but you will talk to boys just a bit older than yourself…
Other girls in my class were hanging out with boys of 14, but I was getting to drive in smart cars with men. I felt my life was more exciting, better. That's how they got inside my mind…
The gangs know that if they take a girl from a nice family, she will probably be more naïve, not as streetwise as kids who have been in care. And because you are naïve, you are more trusting, easier to impress. They like that. It makes you easier to control. They'll have anybody – doctors' children, lawyers' children – anybody…
They teach you to lie and deceive… It becomes normal… They isolate you, so I felt isolated from everyone around me. I believed that there was no one I could tell. They had convinced me that the gang were the only people I had. I remember at that time wanting someone to notice that I'd changed. My grades at school had gone from As to Ds and Es. I wanted someone to ask me what was happening, if there was a problem, and then I would have told them everything, but until someone asked me, I felt I couldn't say. That is how far they controlled me…
They said that if I ever told anybody about what was happening they would firebomb my house, or rape my mother and make me watch. Tarik made me feel like a worm, or the shit on his shoe. That's what I am, I thought, shit on his shoe...
White girls are classed as lower… These men class women as lower anyway, but white women are lower still….
I wanted it to stop, of course I did but the way I look at it now is that it can take an adult who is in an abusive relationship several years to find the courage to escape and I was only 13 and being mentally, physically and sexually abused. How was I going to have the courage to walk away?...
I never thought of myself as a prostitute because, in my child's view of the world, prostitutes walked the streets, wore short skirts and high heels and I wasn't doing any of that. It is only now that I can see that, much as I wanted to believe Tarik had feelings for me, he didn't have any at all, except to make money out of me...
I'll never forget the look on my dad's face. It was like he'd been hit with a thunderbolt, his world crashing down…
I can't say I hate him (Tarik). If anything I pity him. I feel like he'll never prosper in life. He'll always be an evil person."
You know Tarik, don't you?
He's the lovely, fluffy immigrant that the global elite and their bought politicians have been encouraging and promoting for the last 60 years. He's the nice guy that the PC Crowd and the media darling have been rasing up above you for just as long.
He's what the race laws were designed to protect. He's what the bogey words ('racist,' 'Fascist,' 'Nazi,' 'bigot') force you to tolerate. He's the man you cowards do nothing about as he rapes your children.
And sells them on to others.
On 27 January 2010, David Pilditch wrote the following in The Daily Express:
"TONY BLAIR WAS WARNED TWO MONTHS BEFORE THE INVASION OF IRAQ THAT IT WOULD BE ILLEGAL TO GO TO WAR WITHOUT UN BACKING... SENIOR GOVERNMENT LAWYERS TOLD THE IRAQ INQUIRY THAT THEY ADVISED THE ACTION HAD 'NO LEGAL BASIS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW'.
Last night it was reported EVERY ONE OF THE 27 LAWYERS IN THE DEPARTMENT ADVISED THE WAR WAS ILLEGAL. Yesterday Sir Michael Wood, who was the Foreign Office’s chief legal adviser, told the hearing HE WARNED THE THEN FOREIGN SECRETARY JACK STRAW AN INVASION WOULD 'AMOUNT TO THE CRIME OF AGGRESSION'.
Sir Michael said he considered resigning in protest at the decision to join the US-led attack. He described how HE WAS SIDELINED AFTER HE MADE CLEAR HIS OBJECTIONS TO MILITARY ACTION. His deputy, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, quit in protest on the eve of the invasion in March 2003...
Newly declassified Government papers show Lord Goldsmith, then Attorney General, was initially 'pessimistic' that there was sufficient legal basis for military action. HE WAS URGED TO CHANGE HIS VIEW BY MR STRAW – AND EVENTUALLY RULED IT WAS LAWFUL. Sir Michael told the inquiry:
'He [Straw] took the view that I was being very dogmatic and that international law was pretty vague and that HE WASN’T USED TO PEOPLE TAKING SUCH A FIRM POSITION.'
Ms Wilmshurst told the inquiry the FOREIGN OFFICE LAWYERS HAD BEEN UNITED IN THEIR BELIEF OF THE NEED FOR A SECOND UN RESOLUTION. But she said:
'IT WAS CLEAR THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS NOT GOING TO STAND IN THE WAY OF THE GOVERNMENT... THE PROCESS THAT WAS FOLLOWED IN THIS CASE WAS LAMENTABLE'...
Labour MP John McDonnell SAID IT BROUGHT THE PROSPECT OF A TRIAL OF TONY BLAIR AND OTHER LEADERS OF THE GOVERNMENT AT THE TIME OF THE INVASION A STEP CLOSER.
'The net is clearly closing in on those who took us into the illegal and immoral war. The time is coming when THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE WILL BE FORCED TO CONSIDER THE PROSECUTION OF THOSE WHO PERPETRATED THIS ACT OF UNJUST AGGRESSION'."
On 22 January 2010, Barnaby Lenon, the headmaster of Harrow School, warned us thus in The Daily Telegraph:
"LET US NOT DECEIVE OUR CHILDREN, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN FROM POORER HOMES, WITH WORTHLESS QUALIFICATIONS SO THAT THEY BECOME LIKE THE CITIZENS OF WEIMAR GERMANY OR ROBERT MUGABE'S ZIMBABWE CARRYING THEIR CERTIFICATES AROUND IN A WHEELBARROW. Or produce people like those girls in the first round of X-Factor who tell us they want to be the next Britney Spears but they can't sing a note.”
That's dumbing-down for you.
Courtesy of New Labour.
On 20 January 2010, The Huffington Post quoted the gay rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell, thus:
“IN BRITAIN… WE CAN ONLY DREAM OF A BLACK HEAD OF STATE… The UK system is rigged against A BLACK LEADER… The Windsors are WHITE and only their descendants are eligible to be monarch and British head of state. The result is a de facto RACE BAR... BLACK PEOPLE ARE EXCLUDED. THE ALL-WHITE WINDSOR FAMILY has the exclusive franchise on the office of head of state. THIS WHITE-FAVOURING FEUDAL SYSTEM is totally out of step with the democratic, egalitarian and meritocratic ethos of modern British life.
A head of state is supposed to represent the nation and its people, and to symbolise its values and culture. In a DIVERSE MULTI-ETHNIC SOCIETY SUCH AS BRITAIN, surely it is wrong to automatically, a priori, deny this honoured, revered role to non-WHITE citizens?…
THE CURRENT METHOD OF APPOINTING THE HEAD OF STATE (is) RACIST BY DEFAULT… It reflects an INSTITUTIONAL RACISM…
ONLY THE GREEN PARTY IS CALLING FOR A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED HEAD OF STATE…
THIS MANNER OF DETERMINING BRITAIN'S HEAD OF STATE IS SURELY AN OFFENSIVE, BIGOTED ANACHRONISM. It is premised on the assumption that the most ignorant, stupid, immoral WHITE Windsor is more entitled to be head of state than THE BEST-INFORMED, WISEST AND MOST MORAL BLACK BRITON. THIS IS A TRULY REPULSIVE RACIST ASSUMPTION…
Catholics and people of non-Christian faiths are also barred from being monarchs and heads of state…
It is true, of course, that BRITAIN COULD ONE DAY HAVE A BLACK HEAD OF STATE. If a future monarch married a non-WHITE person, their first born child could ascend to the throne and become head of state… WHY SHOULD BLACK AND ASIAN BRITONS HAVE TO WAIT IN LINE FOR GENERATIONS? IT IS A VILE INSULT TO MAKE THEM STAND AT THE BACK OF THE QUEUE FOR THE OFFICE OF HEAD OF STATE…
IF WILLIAM MARRIED A BLACK BRITISH WOMAN HIS FIRST-BORN MALE CHILD FROM THAT MARRIAGE COULD INHERIT THE HEAD OF STATE TITLE.” More...
On 17 January 2010, an article from the LiveLeak news service informed us of an astounding set of statistics released by the Oslo police.
This is what was said:
“ALL 21 REPORTED CASES OF RAPE WITH AGGRAVATED ASSAULT — THE HIGHEST NUMBER SINCE RECORDS WERE STARTED — IN THE NORWEGIAN CAPITAL OF OSLO LAST YEAR WERE COMMITTED BY ‘NON-WESTERN IMMIGRANTS’ AND 90 PERCENT OF ALL RAPE VICTIMS WERE NORWEGIAN WOMEN, police have announced.
Oslo police spokesman Hanne Kristine Rohde defied the strictures of political correctness to release the figures in an interview on the national Norwegian broadcaster, NRK. She said she was aware that the ‘statistics are controversial.’
When she was asked by NRK if the police were not ‘stigmatising an entire community’ by releasing the statistics, Ms Rohde said she ‘wants to contribute to a better and safe world. That’s why the truth needs to be told. I hope the debate will focus on that,’ she told NRK.
According to the police figures, the number of rapes with violent assault committed in Oslo also doubled compared to 2008. According to the police statement, ‘IN EACH AND EVERY CASE, NOT ONLY IN 2008 AND 2009 BUT ALSO IN 2007, THE OFFENDER WAS A NON-WESTERN IMMIGRANT. AT THE SAME TIME, IN 9 OUT OF 10 CASES, THE VICTIM WAS NORWEGIAN, NOT JUST BY NATIONALITY, BUT ALSO BY ETHNICITY… NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THE OFFENDERS HAD A WESTERN BACKGROUND… THE VICTIMS REPORTED THAT THE OFFENDERS EITHER LOOKED LIKE NON-WESTERN IMMIGRANTS, OR THEY SPOKE A NON-WESTERN LANGUAGE. NOT A SINGLE CASE HAS BEEN CONNECTED TO A WESTERN MAN.’
According to official figures released in 2008, THIRD WORLD IMMIGRATION ACCOUNTED FOR 25 PERCENT OF OSLO’S POPULATION. Data from the city and state statistics bureau shows THAT OF OSLO’S 560,484 RESIDENTS, 137,878 WERE IMMIGRANTS.
The largest single immigrant group continues to be from Pakistan. Next in line is Somalia. Other countries with relatively large immigrant groups in Oslo include Sri Lanka, Iraq, Turkey, Vietnam and Iran…
In A study by Tyra Ekhaugen of the Frisch Centre for Economic Research and the University of Oslo concluded that IMMIGRATION HAS INCREASED THE PRESSURE ON THE WELFARE STATE, because many immigrants do not join the tax-paying part of the population.
THIRD WORLD IMMIGRANTS ARE, THE STUDY SHOWED, RECIPIENTS OF SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS AT A RATE TEN TIMES THAT OF NATIVE NORWEGIANS, destroying the liberal argument used by pro-immigration politicians in Norway that immigration was necessary to maintain the social welfare state.
MORE THAN HALF OF ALL SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS IN THE CITY OF OSLO ARE SPENT ON NON-WESTERN IMMIGRANTS. Immigrants from Africa have the highest unemployment rate, with official figures in 2005 showing a black unemployment rate of 17.5 percent. Immigrants from Asia had an unemployment rate of 12.3 percent, while those from South and Central America had an unemployment rate of 10.1 percent. The average unemployment rate amongst native Norwegians was 2.4 percent.”
On 17 January 2010 Muslim "hate-preacher", Anjem Choudary spoke of the Government's decision to ban Islam4UK, the fundamentalist Islamic group he heads, in the The Daily Star Sunday.
“THERE COULD BE A BLOODBATH ON THE STREETS... When you start to suppress ideological movements, you push them underground and THERE IS MORE CHANCE OF CONFLICT.
IN SOME CITIES, ONE IN SIX OF THE YOUNG PEOPLE ARE MUSLIM. PEOPLE DON’T REALISE THAT THERE ARE ACTUALLY FOUR TO FIVE MILLION MUSLIMS IN THE UK. Many of them do not register to vote so the GOVERNMENT’S FIGURES DO NOT REFLECT THE TRUE SIZE OF THE MUSLIM POPULATION…
IT’S A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION. You have to consider how, IF THERE IS ANOTHER 7/7, the country would cope. More and more disaffected whites would be driven towards far-right extremist groups such as the British National Party and the English Defence League IF THERE WAS ANOTHER ATTACK."
Don't you mean "when"?
On 16 January 2010, The Daily Telegraph quoted Lord Ahmed of Rotherham thus:
"PEOPLE SAY EUROPE NEEDS 50 MILLION IMMIGRANTS IN THE NEXT 30 OR 40 YEARS… THIS PERCEPTION THAT FOREIGNERS ARE COMING IN AND TAKING ALL THE JOBS CREATES DIFFICULTY IN COMMUNITIES AND HAS A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON COMMUNITY RELATIONS IN THIS COUNTRY.
As a result you have people looking towards the BNP and other right wing fascist groups…
IT IS BETTER FOR LEARNED PEOPLE (like Ahmed?) TO BE DRIVING THIS DEBATE… rather than those who are racist and fascist (like those who want immigration stopped and vote for the BNP?)…
There is this perception that people are coming in from Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia as well as Eastern Europe. There is the perception that THEY ARE TAKING ALL THE RESOURCES AND THAT BRITISH WHITE WORKING CLASS PEOPLE ARE NOT GETTING THEM. (It’s not just a perception, Milord, it’s a stone cold fact of life) That perception is bad. (Stone cold facts are “bad” in PC Land)
MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE WHITE WORKING CLASS ARE NOT IN THE POSITION AND THE CONDITION THAT THEY ARE."
For once, we agree, Milord.
Trouble is, New Labour have had 13 years to ensure “the position and the condition” of the “white working-class”, whom the Labour Party was formed to represent, was other than it is today. Trust me, if anyone votes for the Brown/Blair combo next time round, it’s much more likely to be your lot than mine.
In 1998, Tony Blair appointed Nazir Ahmed to the House of Lords, making the newly created Baron the first Muslim life peer in the process.
Ahmed took his oath on the Qur'an.
On 15 January 2010, New Labour Communities Secretary, John Denham wagged his finger thus in The Daily Express:
“No one working in public services today can turn a blind eye to racism or inequality. Every single public service, EVERY SINGLE PUBLIC BODY – ALL 43,000 OF THEM – HAVE TO POSITIVELY PROMOTE RACE EQUALITY AND BETTER RACE RELATIONS…
Over the past decade, Britain has changed immeasurably for the better. WE’VE BECOME A SOCIETY MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH DIVERSITY than ever before. We cannot yet say that we are a society wholly free of prejudice, discrimination and inequality. But we can say that WE ARE A GOVERNMENT WHICH WILL NOT REST UNTIL WE HAVE BUILT THAT SOCIETY”.
That’s your New Labour jobsworth for you: always doing his damnedest to make whitey feel inferior and criminalising him if he refuses to accept it.
On 13 January 2010, in an interview with The Independent Nick Clegg, the leader of the Lib Dems, described Britain’s asylum system as “the most inhumane, irrational, cruel systems imaginable”.
If you're right here, Nick, I wonder why hundreds of thousands of those we treat with such inhumane cruelty continue to flood into our country every year?
“It’s a moral stain on our collective consciousnesses. The public debate has transformed asylum seekers into threats rather than human beings... It’s not just me that says this, it’s international law that says it.”
That would be the international law that globalists like you constructed, would it, Nick?
And by the way, the asylum system might be a stain on your consciousness but it isn’t on mine. Besides, I have a sure-fire way of fixing any "moral stain" you PC-crowders are having a problem with. Don’t allow any more asylum seekers in! That way none of your lovely, fluffy, pity-the-poor-immigrant types get to suffer the “most inhumane, irrational, cruel systems” of which you spoke.
The Independent article also informed us thus regarding Nick’s attitude to homosexuality.
“In a pitch for the gay vote unprecedented in its scope… the father-of-three detailed a series of proposals, among them:
FORCE ALL SCHOOLS TO... TEACH THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS ‘NORMAL AND HARMLESS‘.
CHANGE THE LAW TO ALLOW GAY MEN AND WOMEN THE SAME MARITAL RIGHTS AS STRAIGHT COUPLES...
REVERSE THE BAN ON GAY MEN BEING ALLOWED TO GIVE BLOOD.
GUARANTEE ANY REFUGEES GENUINELY FLEEING A COUNTRY BECAUSE OF PERSECUTION OVER THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION ASYLUM IN THE UK...
The Lib Dem leader complimented Labour for its track record on gay rights, which has included THE INTRODUCTION OF CIVIL PARTNERSHIPS, THE EQUALISATION OF THE AGE OF CONSENT AND THE REPEAL OF SECTION 28, WHICH FORBODE LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND SCHOOLS FROM 'PROMOTING' HOMOSEXUALITY. But MORE MUST BE DONE, he said.”
Well, I suppose if you’re one of those gay people who would put his or her gayness before everything else, you could do worse than vote for Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems.
On the other hand, if you’re a homosexual who prefers to keep his sexuality to himself and don’t care much for such electioneering interventions, you could do worse than vote for me.
As for those who would rather the aggressive, militant gay agenda folks (and their political sponsors) would stop insisting that their minority rights matter more than the feelings of the majority, well, put your cross against my name when the time comes.
During the January 2006 leadership contest, two of the four candidates, Mark Oaten and Simon Hughes, were outed as gay.
In the May 2008 contest for London Mayor, the chosen candidate of the Liberal Democrats was the top gay cop, Brian Paddick.
Nick Clegg’s mother, Hermance van den Wall Bake, is Dutch.
His father, Nicholas, a banker, is half-Russian. His great-great-grandfather, the Russian nobleman Ignaty Zakrevsky, was Attorney General of the Senate in Imperial Russia.
That's 75% non-Brit in my book.
On 13 January 2010, Samantha Mosedale described what happened after a family of Romanian Gypsies moved into their home in The Daily Mail:
“We called the police as soon as we found out they were in there. AN OFFICER SUGGESTED I WAS RACIST when I asked if they were Romanians, and did they have a legal right to be in this country.
We are hard-working citizens YET GET TREATED LIKE CRIMINALS WHEN OUR HOME IS STOLEN. This whole thing is making me feel constantly sick. All we want to do is get on with our lives. WE FEEL LET DOWN BY THE LAW, BY GOVERNMENT, AND BY THE POLICE, IN FACT ALL THE AUTHORITIES THAT ONE WOULD EXPECT TO PROTECT SOCIETY...
All the children are incredibly unsettled… We were in the process of creating our dream home and it has been ruined. At the moment there are at least four women, four children and one man living in our home, but neighbours said they have seen many more people going in and out. In the meantime WE FACE THE PROSPECT OF BECOMING HOMELESS OURSELVES”.
Her husband Julian added:
“When the papers were served on them THEY TORE THEM UP AND THREW THEM BACK AT THE GUY WHO'D TAKEN THEM ROUND”.
The Mail added:
“When Mr Mosedale turned up with a possession order to reclaim his property yesterday, the families demanded compensation for the £2,000 they claim to have paid to an unnamed man they claim posed as the landlord...
Before the police arrived yesterday, the two husbands disappeared into another house about 100 yards away with an estate agent's board outside. Throughout the day, the women carried their five children (plus some kitchen equipment and one of their two TVs) down the street."
Samantha Mosedale added:
“I just hope someone takes notice of what has happened and the law changes in future.”
Someone take notice, Samantha?
What, like the cop who called you racist? Like a traitorous New Labour government that would rather see a bunch of Romanian Gypsies living in YOUR house than YOU? No, love, those who make our laws are at war with us. THEY wish the British disenfranchised and demoralised in their own land. Characters like the ones who stole your house are merely THEIR willing foot-soldiers.
I just hope the British people are taking notice. I just hope they still give a damn. Trouble is, we’re not what we were. Too few, nowadays, are prepared to raise any kind of a fuss unless it’s actually happening to them.
Will you and Julian be voting New Labour when the next General Election rolls around, Samantha? Perhaps not. But I guarantee that many who read of your plight will.
It hasn‘t happened to them yet, you see.
Check out the video, Gypsies.
And the essay, Renata Gural and the Demetries.
On 13 January 2010, Patrick O'Flynn opined thus in The Daily Express:
“FAR FROM PROTECTING US AGAINST TERRORISM, LABOUR’S POLICIES ARE ALLOWING RADICAL ISLAM TO TAKE A TIGHTER GRIP THAN EVER ON YOUNG MUSLIMS, creating perfect conditions for the extremist cultural, political and terrorist war on British society to continue…
Consider this: (Anjem) Choudary is paid nearly £26,000 a year in benefits... He is understood to receive some income from a hardline Muslim group but is on a shoestring salary enabling him to claim taxpayer-funded income top-ups...
What might the large benefits cheques of this man, linked to terrorism by the Home Secretary, get spent on? Put it this way: what do Islamist fanatics spend their money on? Islamism of course, just as football fans spend theirs on football.
THE GOVERNMENT IS USING TAXPAYERS’ MONEY TO BANKROLL PEOPLE IT HAS DEFINED AS PROMOTERS OR EVEN INSTIGATORS OF TERRORISM. That is criminally irresponsible. Indeed it seems quite possible that ministers are as of today breaking their own Terrorism act 2000, part III of which outlaws ‘entering into funding arrangements for a proscribed organisation‘.
Choudary is by no means alone among Islamist agitators in being prepared to live off the beneficence of a society he wishes to destroy. On the contrary, ALL THE LUTON AGITATORS CONVICTED THIS WEEK OF THREATENING BEHAVIOUR ARE ON BENEFITS. They even boasted outside the court:
‘THE TAXPAYER PAID FOR THIS COURT CASE. The tax payer will pay for the fines too out of benefits.’
Their supporters held aloft a banner declaring:
'Islam will dominate the world. FREEDOM CAN GO TO HELL.’
Who paid for the banners and loudhailers they used to criminally pour hatred upon troops returning from Afghanistan? We did. Our taxes. The fact is that THE APPROACH OF THE LIBERAL POLITICAL ELITE, OF WHICH MR JOHNSON IS A SENIOR MEMBER, IS ALL BUT USELESS IN THE FACE OF SUCH FANATICISM.
LABOUR'S CRUDE MULTICULTURALISM HAS ALLOWED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF GHETTOS WHERE PREACHERS OF HATE HOLD SWAY, WHILE ITS FEEBLE MIGRATION POLICIES HAVE LED TO YOUNG MUSLIMS SUCCUMBING TO PARENTAL PRESSURE TO MARRY NON-¬ENGLISH SPEAKERS FROM THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT TO FACILITATE FURTHER IMMIGRATION, THUS GUARANTEEING ANOTHER GENERATION OF SEPARATION RATHER THAN INTEGRATION.
Labour’s obsession with universal human rights, which yesterday saw police anti-terror stop and search tactics branded illegal, has enabled extremists to time and again thwart bids to contain or deport them...
If the likes of Choudary lived in an Islamic country, say Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, and were judged to pose a threat to public order they would face indefinite imprisonment without trial, torture, dismemberment on the say-so of their beloved Sharia or even execution. There would be no welfare state to subsidise their activities either. But IN SOFT-TOUCH BRITAIN, WHICH HAS LOCKED THE LONG ARM OF THE LAW IN POLITICALLY CORRECT HANDCUFFS, THEY ARE FREE TO PLOT THE DOWNFALL OF CIVILISATION AND ARE GIVEN GRANTS TO DO SO.
We are mad to allow this cancer to continue growing in our midst for it will destroy everything that we hold dear.”
On 7 January 2010, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, wrote this in The Times:
“Too often in recent years the call for a rational debate on mass migration has degenerated into NAME-CALLING AND CHARGES OF RACISM. Even the campaign for Balanced Migration, which I have supported, representing cross-party politicians, has barely been heeded by party leaders who have run scared of the issue.
This is why we have launched a declaration calling on the leading political parties to make manifesto commitments to prevent THE UK POPULATION REACHING 70 MILLION, WHICH IS PROJECTED IN OFFICIAL FIGURES BY 2029.
The fact is that a rise in the UK population by ten million in two decades will put our nation’s resources under considerable strain, STRETCHING ALMOST TO BREAKING POINT THE ENORMOUS RESERVES OF TOLERANCE AND GENEROSITY OF THE BRITISH PEOPLE…
In Dagenham, where I was brought up, there is a very real danger that a white working-class electorate, ALIENATED BY FAR-REACHING SOCIAL CHANGE AND LARGELY IGNORED BY THE MAINSTREAM PARTIES, COULD VOTE FOR A BNP MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT…
The sheer numbers of migrants from within Europe and elsewhere put the resources of Britain under enormous pressure, but also THREATEN THE VERY ETHOS OR DNA OF OUR NATION…
We must look also to language, institutions and our shared history in valuing what it means to be British and WHAT WE COULD LOSE IF THE MAKE-UP OF OUR NATION CHANGES TOO RAPIDLY.
Democratic institutions such as the monarchy, Parliament, the judiciary, the Church of England, our free press and the BBC also support the liberal democratic values of the nation. SOME GROUPS OF MIGRANTS, HOWEVER, ARE AMBIVALENT ABOUT OR EVEN HOSTILE TO SUCH INSTITUTIONS. The proposed antiwar Islamist march in Wootton Bassett is a clear example of the difficulties extremists pose to British society.
Furthermore, THE IDEA THAT BRITAIN CAN CONTINUE TO WELCOME WITH OPEN ARMS IMMIGRANTS WHO IMMEDIATELY ESTABLISH THEIR OWN TRIBUNALS TO APPLY SHARIA, RATHER THAN MAKE USE OF BRITISH CIVIL LAW, IS DEEPLY SOCIALLY DIVISIVE…
Just as we should expect immigrants to subscribe to democratic principles, abide by our laws, speak English, support freedom of speech and a free press, so they should also respect the Christian nature and history of our nation with its broad, hospitable Establishment.”
“THE NUMBER OF FOREIGN-BORN WORKERS HAS ROCKETED BY 22,000 DURING THE WORST RECESSION ON RECORD. AT THE SAME TIME, THE NUMBER OF BRITISH-BORN EMPLOYEES SLUMPED BY 625,000.
The figures emerged in analysis by the Government's Migration Advisory Committee of data from the Office for National Statistics. It found that while the number of British-born workers slumped to 25,104,000 in the year to June, those born outside the UK increased to 3,730,000. This was fuelled in part by a 12,000 leap in number of Eastern Europeans, to 518,000.”
On 1 January 2010, Daniel Bates said this in The Daily Mail:
“The disastrous impact on the NHS of Labour's licensing laws has been laid bare. A report showed THE COST OF TREATING ALCOHOL-RELATED ILLNESSES AND INJURIES ALMOST DOUBLED IN SIX YEARS, FROM £1.47BILLION IN 2001/02 TO £2.7BILLION IN 2006/07. Experts blame the legalisation of 24-hour drinking in 2005 and the availability of cheap alcohol in supermarkets and pubs.”
On 27 December 2009, Jonathan Petrie said this in The Daily Mail:
“BRITISH TRANSPORT POLICE HAVE DROPPED THE WORD ‘CHRISTMAS’ FROM A NATIONAL PUBLICITY POSTER TO AVOID UPSETTING PEOPLE WHO DO NOT ‘BUY INTO’ THE FESTIVAL…
The slogan – devised by an advertising company commissioned by the Transport Police – read ‘Christmas presence’, a pun on the word ‘presents’. But in a move branded ‘bonkers’ by Christian leaders, THE POLICE’S MARKETING DEPARTMENT DECIDED THE WORD CHRISTMAS COULD ANGER NON-BELIEVERS OR PEOPLE FROM OTHER FAITHS WHO DISLIKED ITS CHRISTIAN CONNOTATIONS… Critics… accused the Transport Police of BOWING TO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. The poster is the latest in a series of instances of public bodies removing references to Christmas for fear of upsetting minorities.”
On 27 December 2009, Beezy Marsh told us this in The Daily Mail:
“Teenagers are using repeat abortions as a form of birth control, with some girls having four or more terminations by the age of 18.
Nearly 1,500 of the 19,000 girls under 18 who had a termination last year had previously undergone one earlier abortion for an unwanted pregnancy – and in at least one case a teenage girl had her eighth abortion.. THE EXACT DETAILS REMAIN HIDDEN FROM PUBLIC SCRUTINY BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT SECRECY...
For some girls abortion is not seen as a traumatic life event, but a routine way of dispensing with an unwanted pregnancy, EVEN THOUGH IT CARRIES HEALTH RISKS THAT CAN HARM FERTILITY later in life… Girls are choosing to take risks and have unprotected sex knowing they could get pregnant or expose themselves to SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES SUCH AS CHLAMYDIA.”
On 26 December 2009, Christopher Leake said this in The Daily Mail:
“MORE THAN 6,000 RAPISTS, ROBBERS, PAEDOPHILES AND VIOLENT CRIMINALS HAVE BEEN GIVEN COMMUNITY SERVICE ORDERS OR SUSPENDED SENTENCES EVEN THOUGH COURTS WERE WARNED THEY POSED A HIGH RISK OF CAUSING SERIOUS HARM IF THEY REOFFENDED.
The alarming figures are revealed as Britain’s chronically overcrowded prisons reach breaking point. There are a record 84,231 inmates in prisons in England and Wales – just 1,755 short of the capacity...
Figures from the Ministry of Justice disclose that BETWEEN 2006 AND 2009, 6,370 CRIMINALS WERE GIVEN A COMMUNITY ORDER OR SUSPENDED SENTENCE AFTER HAVING BEEN ASSESSED AS POSING A HIGH OR A VERY HIGH RISK OF CAUSING SERIOUS HARM IF THEY REOFFENDED. A further 96,000 offenders given such sentences were deemed to pose a ‘medium’ risk of serious harm, according to the Ministry.”
On 25 December 2009, Forward Maisokwazo, a development worker for the ‘City of Sanctuary Bristol’, was quoted thus by the BBC:
“This is a movement of local organisations, individuals and faith groups, to make sure that those PEOPLE SEEKING SANCTUARY GET THE HOSPITALITY THEY DESERVE.”
The BBC explained:
“Bristol wants to become only the second City of Sanctuary in the UK. If successful, it would mean a more hospitable welcome and BETTER SUPPORT FOR ASYLUM SEEKERS AND REFUGEES.”
On 24 December 2009, The Daily Telegraph’s Christopher Hope informed us thus:
“Since Labour came to power, ministers have increased categories of 'HATE' CRIMES from simply covering RACISM to include RELIGIOUS AGGRAVATION, HOMOPHOBIA AND 'TRANSPHOBIC’ OFFENCES. THE RESULT HAS BEEN A SEVEN-FOLD INCREASE IN PROSECUTIONS FOR HATE CRIMES OVER THE PAST DECADE, FROM 1,602 CRIMES IN 1998/9 TO 11,624 IN 2008/9.
However, campaigners are now accusing ministers of intensifying their pursuit of hate crime offenders and of allowing prosecutors to go ‘fishing’ for offences, opening them up to accusations of sometimes CRIMINALISING APPARENTLY INNOCENT REMARKS AND COMMENTS.”
On 23 December 2009, Martin Fletcher said this in The Sunday Times:
“The war in Somalia... is a conflict that has driven TENS OF THOUSANDS OF SOMALI REFUGEES TO BRITAIN... A PEOPLE WHOSE DISAFFECTED YOUNG ARE ALL TOO EASILY RECRUITED BY GANGS OR, WORSE, ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS...
Government officials say that dozens have already returned to Somalia to join al-Shabaab, the brutal militia with links to al-Qaeda that is fighting the Western-backed Government. They fear that THESE BATTLE-HARDENED JIHADISTS WILL BRING THEIR NEWLY ACQUIRED SKILLS BACK TO THE UK. One senior official told The Times that SOMALIA HAD RISEN SHARPLY UP THE LIST OF THREATS TO BRITAIN’S SECURITY AND WAS PROBABLY NOW SECOND AFTER PAKISTAN.
‘It’s something we worry about a lot,’ he said. Lord Malloch-Brown, the former Foreign Office Minister, warned before leaving office in July that ‘THE MAIN TERRORIST THREAT COMES FROM PAKISTAN AND SOMALIA, NOT AFGHANISTAN‘.
Radicalised Somali immigrants have already launched botched terrorist attacks in Britain and Australia. THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RELIABLE STATISTICS ON HOW MANY SOMALIS NOW LIVE IN BRITAIN. One official reckoned that THERE WERE 150,000 LEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND THREE TIMES AS MANY ILLEGAL ONES. The usual estimate is about 250,000, mostly in London but with sizeable numbers in Liverpool, Sheffield, Bristol, Cardiff and other cities.
It is almost certainly the biggest Somali community in the worldwide diaspora and suffers from shockingly HIGH LEVELS OF UNEMPLOYMENT, LOW LEVELS OF EDUCATION and wretched living conditions.”
So, whilst 'radicalised Somali immigrants' launch'terrorist attacks' against us, the PC Crowd insists that we give as many as 600,000 of them sanctuary here.
Ladies and gentlemen, if that's not a declaration of war I don't know what is.
On 23 December 2009, The Shadow Justice Secretary, Dominic Grieve, was quoted thus by The Daily Express:
“It is bad enough THAT GORDON BROWN LOST CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS AND HAS LET THOUSANDS OF FOREIGN CRIMINALS INTO THE COUNTRY. Now we learn FOREIGN PRISONERS ARE BEING GIVEN CASHCARDS LOADED WITH HUNDREDS OF POUNDS OF TAXPAYERS’ MONEY. The lesson is clear – UNDER LABOUR, CRIME DOES PAY AND THE TAXPAYER FOOTS THE BILL.”
Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, added:
“IT’S A DISGRACE THAT WE BRIBE FOREIGN CRIMINALS TO GO HOME at all. THEY SHOULD BE DEPORTED IMMEDIATELY. The fact that we also give them a hefty cash bonus will rightly anger the law-abiding taxpayers who are footing the bill for this hare-brained scheme. THIS SORT OF TREATMENT IS FINANCIALLY AND MORALLY UNJUSTIFIABLE WHEN ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE ENDS MEET.’’
The Express added:
“FOREIGN CRIMINALS ARE BEING SENT HOME WITH £500 CASH AS PART OF A TAXPAYER-FUNDED PACKAGE WORTH UP TO £5,000. AS WELL AS THE STANDARD £46 GIVEN TO EVERYONE RELEASED FROM A BRITISH PRISON, FOREIGN INMATES WHO AGREE TO BE DEPORTED WILL BE GIVEN CASHCARDS LOADED WITH £454 TO USE ONCE THEY ARE SENT HOME. The extra payment has been introduced as part of support packages – which some critics are calling BRIBES – worth up to £5,000 to help offenders start businesses or train in their own countries.
THE GENEROUS PAYOUTS WERE CONDEMNED AS IT EMERGED BRITISH PENSIONERS WILL BE RECEIVING A £10 CHRISTMAS BONUS THIS YEAR – THE SAME AS THEY GOT WHEN THE PAYMENT WAS INTRODUCED NEARLY 40 YEARS AGO.
The £5,000 payouts sparked fresh outrage at hard-pressed taxpayers being forced to foot the bill not only for housing foreigners who enter Britain under Labour’s lax immigration rules and then commit crimes, but for sending them home to make new lives for themselves.”
On 22 December 2009, Hazel Barrett said this in The Guardian:
“My research in the west Midlands with postgraduate student Betselot Mulugeta, talking to groups of immigrant men and women from the Ethiopian and Eritrean communities, has revealed serious misconceptions about the nature of the HIV/Aids epidemic in the UK…
NEWLY REPORTED CASES OF HIV IN THE UK ARE HIGHER THAN EVER BEFORE. BETWEEN 1995 AND 2006, THE RATE OF HIV INFECTION AMONG BLACK AFRICANS IN THE WEST MIDLANDS INCREASED 100-FOLD, compared to a two-fold increase among white people, a three-fold increase among black Caribbeans and A SIX-FOLD INBCREASE AMONGST OTHER MIXED ETHNIC GROUPS (according to the region's strategic health authority figures).
Taking the Ethiopian and Eritrean population… This group… represents A RESERVOIR OF HIV INFECTION… SOCIAL NETWORKS AMONG THE ETHIOPIAN AND ERITREAN COMMUNITIES IN THE WEST MIDLANDS DO NOT CONDONE OR TOLERATE THE DISCUSSION OF SEXUAL ISSUES…
THE RESPONDENTS IN OUR STUDY SAID THEY BELIEVED THE UK WAS ‘CIVILISED’ AND THEREFORE THEY COULD NOT CONTRACT HIV/AIDS, THAT THE PROBLEM HAD BEEN LEFT BEHIND IN AFRICA…
Culturally, condoms are a difficult issue. It is considered unacceptable for either partner in a sexual relationship to ask for a condom to be used, because it's thought to suggest the woman is promiscuous or a prostitute, or that there is a lack of trust between them…
SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA IS HOME TO 67% OF GLOBAL CASES OF HIV/AIDS.”
On 22 December 2009, the thisisbath.co.uk website told us this:
“A charity which reaches out to OLDER BLACK PEOPLE in Bath has been given nearly £150,000 BY A LOTTERY FUND. The Bath Ethnic Minority Senior Citizens’ Association has fewer than 50 people on its books at present... The money has come from the Big Lottery Fund Reaching Communities programme.”
On 22 December 2009, the BBC told us this:
“Help services for SCOTLAND'S ETHNIC MINORITY POPULATION have been given almost £1M FROM THE BIG LOTTERY FUND. The grant of £926,660 will allow the Ethnic Minorities Law Centre (EMLC) to train advisors from Citizens Advice Scotland and Advice UK. The training will cover a variety of issues ranging from DISCRIMINATION TO NATIONALITY AND EMPLOYMENT LAW.”
On 22 December 2009, The Daily Mail reported thus:
“Life in Britain is being 'ruined' by yobbish behaviour taking place at the rate of ONE INCIDENT EVERY SECOND. Analysis of the Government's own crime figures shows an estimated 33MILLION INCIDENTS OF ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR LAST YEAR, the equivalent of MORE THAN 90,000 EVERY DAY.”
On 22 December 2009, Gordon Brown said this whilst being interviewed by the British Forces Broadcasting Service:
"I have got absolutely no doubt that WE ARE TAKING THE RIGHT DECISIONS FOR OUR COUNTRY…
The very presence of our forces in Afghanistan, taking on the Taliban and preventing the return of al Qaida, has A DIRECT LINK TO THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF PEOPLE IN OUR STREETS AND IN OUR NEIGHBOURHOODS IN BRITAIN TODAY.
Every time I think WE HAVE TAKEN THE RIGHT DECISION about what our objectives have got to be. We have got to protect the safety of British citizens…
If you are trying to deal with a terrorist threat that operates from Pakistan and has links to Afghanistan, you have got to deal with it where the epicentre of global terrorism is. So I think WE HAVE MADE THE RIGHT DECISIONS ALL ALONG on this…
WE HAVE BEEN IN AFGHANISTAN LONGER THAN THE SECOND WORLD WAR, LONGER THAN THE FIRST WORLD WAR… IT HAS TAKEN A LONG TIME, BUT WE HAVE A STRATEGY."
On 22 December 2011, The Daily Mail’s James Slack reported thus:
“IMMIGRANTS ARE REGISTERING WITH A GP FOR FREE HEALTH CARE AT A RATE OF MORE THAN ONE EVERY MINUTE. Analysis of NHS research shows that 605,000 PEOPLE WHO ARRIVED FROM OVERSEAS REGISTERED WITH A DOCTOR IN ENGLAND AND WALES LAST YEAR - up by 50 per cent in only seven years…
Of the total, 536,000 were migrants who - under Government rules - were entitled to free care. Others are Britons returning from a stint overseas, but there are fears A PROPORTION OF THE REMAINDER ARE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TAKING ADVANTAGE OF FREE NHS CARE.”
On 21 December 2009, George Pitcher opined thus in The Telegraph:
“This Government has never learnt that YOU CAN'T LEGISLATE FOR EQUALITY AND FREEDOM… Fuzzy, feel-good laws, under which we're generally enjoined to be nice to one another, are too easy to draft and dangerous to implement.
The latest such Bill has been drafted by the hapless Minister for Women and Equality, Harriet Harman. The Equality Bill allegedly aims to consolidate earlier anti-discrimination legislation into a single, simple, happy and enlightened Act of Parliament, one consequence of which will be to require Christian churches not to discriminate against homosexuals and transsexuals or, in the case of Roman Catholics, against women or married men as candidates for priesthood...
We might assume that POLITICIANS AND EQUALITY PANJANDRUMS JUST LIKE BANNING THINGS and they might as well get in some more banning while they still have jobs. But it's not as simple as that. Just look at what Michael Foster, Harman's fall-guy at the ‘Ministry for Equality‘, had to say when he was asked whether the Equality Bill would lead to legal action between churches and atheists.
‘Both need to be lining up [their lawyers],’ he said. ‘The secularists should have the right to challenge the church.’
So there we are. IT'S JUST ANOTHER BID FROM THE MARCHING BAND OF PARLIAMENTARY SECULARISTS TO DRIVE RELIGION FROM THE PUBLIC SPHERE. ANY ISSUE WILL SERVE AS A MEANS FOR SECULARISTS TO MARGINALISE BELIEVERS.
You could call that discriminatory, but to do it under the banner of equality is peculiarly hypocritical.”
On 20 December 2009, The Times quoted Tony Blair thus:.
“When you are someone like me, you create a lot of controversy one way or another… IT’S NOT TRUE THAT NOBODY LIKES ME! Reading the papers in Britain, you’d end up thinking I’d lost three elections rather than won them. THERE IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ATMOSPHERE AROUND ME OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY… They don’t see anything wrong with being successful FINANCIALLY AND ALSO DOING GOOD WORK.”
On 20 December 2009, The Independent‘s Nina Lakhani reported thus:
“Hundreds of British schoolgirls are facing the terrifying prospect of female genital mutilation over the Christmas holidays as experts warn THE PRACTICE CONTINUES TO FLOURISH ACROSS THE COUNTRY. Parents typically take their daughters back to their country of origin for FGM during school holidays, but The Independent on Sunday has been told that ‘CUTTERS’ ARE BEING FLOWN TO THE UK TO CARRY OUT THE MUTILATION AT ‘PARTIES’ INVOLVING UP TO 20 GIRLS TO SAVE MONEY.
The police face growing criticism for FAILING TO PROSECUTE A SINGLE PERSON FOR CARRYING OUT FGM IN 25 YEARS; new legislation from 2003 which prohibits taking a girl overseas for FGM has also failed to secure a conviction. Experts say the lack of convictions, combined with the Government's failure to invest enough money in education and prevention strategies, mean THE PRACTICE CONTINUES TO THRIVE…
Specialist doctors and midwives are struggling to cope with INCREASING NUMBERS OF WOMEN SUFFERING FROM LONG-TERM HEALTH PROBLEMS, including complications during pregnancy and childbirth. An estimated 70,000 WOMEN LIVING IN THE UK HAVE UNDERGONE FGM, AND 20,000 GIRLS REMAIN AT RISK, according to Forward. THE PRACTICE IS COMMON IN 28 AFRICAN COUNTRIES, including SOMALIA, SUDAN and NIGERIA, as well as some MIDDLE EASTERN AND ASIAN COUNTRIES such as MALAYSIA and YEMEN. It is generally considered to be an essential rite of passage TO SUPPRESS SEXUAL PLEASURE, preserve girls' purity and cleanliness, and IS NECESSARY FOR MARRIAGE IN MANY COMMUNITIES EVEN NOW. It has no religious significance.
The most common age for the procedure is between eight and 11 but it can be carried out just after birth or just before marriage. IT CARRIES THE RISK OF DEATH FROM BLEEDING OR TETANUS, AND LONG-TERM PROBLEMS INCLUDE URINARY INCONTINENCE, RECURRENT INFECTIONS AND CHRONIC PAIN.”
At the 25th anniversary Gala Dinner of the charity, Islamic Relief, held at the Grosvenor House Hotel, Park Lane, on 17 December 2009, the guest of honour, HRH The Prince of Wales said this:
"Islamic Relief’s fine achievements bear witness to THE ENERGY, DYNAMISM AND SELFLESSNESS OF OUR BRITISH MUSLIM COMMUNITY….
We hear rather too much misleading information about a small minority of your community and not nearly enough about the vastly more numerous acts of compassion and commitment which characterise the work of Islamic Relief and its supporters.”
Ah, we’re hearing too much about the London bombers, the ongoing terrorist threat from the Muslim community and the paedophiles who drug up, rape and prostitute our little girls, are we, Charlie?
All the information we have at our disposal regarding the criminality of such as these would be ’misleading’, would it? What about the four hundred thousand or so who didn’t see mucvh wrong with what the bombers did? What about the extended families of the paedophiles who don’t report their activities to the cops, would you care to bear witness to their energy, dynamism and selflessnes?
What about all the Muslims who took our concil houses, Charlie? That wasn’t very selfless, was it? What about the ones who kept piling into our country despite the fact that they must have known we didn’t want them here? That wasn’t altogether compassionate, now was it?
I’m afraid, Charlie, that sometimes you are full of sh*t. Your attitudes and behaviours, one presumes, stem from the fact that the melting pot agenda requires you to spout such b***ocks and you live well away from the alien hordes you cuddled up to on 17/12/2009.
Go here for more Chronological Quotations 8