The Madhouse Update

On 2 October 2011, the Home Secretary, Theresa May, was quoted thus by The Sunday Telegraph:

"I’D PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT GO because I think we have had some problems with it. I see it, here in the Home Office, particularly, THE SORT OF PROBLEMS WE HAVE IN BEING UNABLE TO DEPORT PEOPLE WHO PERHAPS ARE TERRORIST SUSPECTS. Obviously WE’VE SEEN IT WITH SOME FOREIGN CRIMINALS WHO ARE IN THE UK."



On 2 October 2011, David Cameron said this:

“I DON’T WANT BRITAIN TO LEAVE THE EU. I think it’s the wrong answer for Britain. People in rooms up and down Britain aren’t thinking, gosh, if only we could have a treaty change in Europe. They’re thinking, get the economy moving, get jobs going in this economy. That’s what my leadership’s about, that’s what this conference is all about... IT’S NOT OUR VIEW THAT THERE SHOULD BE AN IN-OUT REFERENDUM…

WHAT MOST PEOPLE WANT IN THIS COUNTRY IS NOT ACTUALLY TO LEAVE THE EU, but to reform the EU and make sure that the balance of powers between a country like Britain and Europe is better.

I have been very clear that I think we have given too many powers to Europe. There are some powers I would like to get back. Any future treaty change would be an opportunity to do that, but RIGHT NOW THAT IS NOT ON THE IMMEDIATE AGENDA…

I will always defend the British national interest. I think OUR INTEREST IS TO BE IN THE EU, because we need that single market. We are a trading nation, it is vital for our economic future.”

On 2 October 2011, Foreign Secretary, William Hague, said this:

“WE WON’T BE IN FAVOUR OF HOLDING NOW AN IN-OUT REFERENDUM ON EUROPE. At a time of economic difficulty to actually say to people, instead of getting everything growing in our economy, we are going to spend our time on an in-out referendum which will create uncertainty for businesses in Britain, that wouldn’t be a very sensible course of action…

This is a party committed to the return of powers from the EU to the UK. We ARE CONSTRAINED BY BEING IN A COALITION ON THAT SUBJECT, but that is something that I still believe in. It may well be one of the dividing lines in the general election.”

In the General Election, eh, Billy?

So the EU gets to take the p*** out of us for at least another three years? And even then, because Dave Cameron is a committed ’European’, the likelihood is that the Brussels bureaucrat will be ruling the British roost for at least another four years on top of that!

We don’t care whether you’re 'in favour' of what the rest of us want or not, Billy. We’re sick to death of voting for people do not give a damn what concerns us. If a bill is passed in Parliament calling for a referendum and you, Dave and one or two more of the global elite types decide to block it, then you and said elitists will be for the high jump, lad.

Do not doubt it!



In the 2 October 2011 edition of The Independent on Sunday, senior Conservative cabinet minister, Francis Maude, described National Trust and Tory grassroots opposition to the Government’s controversial planning reforms thus:

“Our position is right. I think this idea that creating a presumption in favour of sustainable development is somehow a massive erosion of the ability to conserve, IS BOLLOCKS, FRANKLY. Actually the presumption that we are putting in place is arguably more constrictive, because it’s a presumption in favour of SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT instead of just development.”

‘Sustainable development.’

Such words in mouth of a trough-gobbler like Maude sound like ‘bollocks, frankly’.

Oh yes, to me, such words sound suspiciously like, ‘concrete over the f***er.’

England, that is.



On 1 October 2011, Christopher Booker said this in The Telegraph:

“First, there was the speech by European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, in which, after admitting that this was the worst crisis the EU had ever faced, he renewed his wish for it to impose a tax on ‘financial transactions,’ TO PROVIDE BRUSSELS WITH… UP TO £70 BILLION A YEAR.

Since Britain’s share of the EU’s financial markets is 72 per cent, THE COST TO THE UK WOULD THUS BE UP TO £50 BILLION… The very fact that THE EX-MAOIST IN CHARGE OF THE COMMISSION should suggest anything so suicidal is a measure of just how surreal this crisis is becoming.

Equally bizarre was the spectacle of Germany’s MPs defying the wishes of most of the German people by supporting the EU’s £380 BILLION BAIL-OUT FUND, to pour much of it into THE BOTTOMLESS PIT OF GREEK DEBT… The peoples of the EU’s richest and poorest countries are thus equally powerless in the face of what amounts to A BUREAUCRATIC DICTATORSHIP OF UNELECTED APPARATCHIKS – who, in a vain bid to save their pet project, are now talking about the need for A FURTHER BAIL-OUT FUND OF £1.7 TRILLION,

The truth about the euro project is that IT WAS ALWAYS BASED ON A COLOSSAL ACT OF MAKE-BELIEVE, launched in defiance of all economic and political reality…

The story of the euro, as THE SUPREME SYMBOL OF THE LUNATIC DRIVE TO WELD EUROPE TOGETHER INTO A WHOLLY UNDEMOCRATIC POLITICAL UNION, is now entering its Nightmare Stage. PEOPLE LIKE BARROSO PREDICTABLY CLAIM THAT THE ONLY WAY FORWARD IS MORE OF THE SAME: ‘MORE EUROPE’… There seems to be no means by which Europe’s leaders can halt the chaos that now threatens to bring down the euro, much of the world’s financial system – and, ultimately, even the EU itself.”



On 1 October 2011, Chris Greenwood said this in The Mail Online:

"A police officer who repeatedly accused colleagues of racism has been rebuked by a judge for his ‘unjustified’ claims. PC Peter Vince-Lindsay brought 14 ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION against British Transport Police, including claiming that, because he was black, officers failed to back him up quickly enough WHEN HE WAS HIT BY SNOWBALLS!"



On 1 October 2011, Peter Allen blew the whistle thus in The Mail Online:

“Eleven supercars worth up to £5 million have been seized from outside an African dictator’s Paris mansion as part of a FOREIGN AID MONEY-laundering investigation.

The vehicles... are all registered to Teodoro Obiang Nguema, the president of Equatorial Guinea. He is one of numerous African heads of state WHO REGULARLY RECEIVE VAST HANDOUTS IN FOREIGN AID – INCLUDING BRITISH CASH VIA EUROPEAN FUNDING.

Police swooped on his £15 million mansion... piling all of the vehicles on to a car transporter. They are all thought to be ‘ill-gotten gains’ bought so as to hide huge amounts of cash smuggled into France from Africa...

Obiang Nguema, who is THE CURRENT CHAIRMAN OF THE AFRICAN UNION, was not thought to be present at the time of the seizures...

EQUATORIAL GUINEA IS OIL RICH, BUT POVERTY REMAINS RIFE AND THERE ARE REGULAR ALLEGATIONS OF HIGH-LEVEL CORRUPTION, ESPECIALLY BY OBIANG NGUEMA AND HIS ELDEST SON, TEODORIN…

Earlier this year it emerged that BILLIONS IN FOREIGN AID WAS BEING USED TO FUND A MULTI-MILLION-POUND PARIS PROPERTY PORTFOLIO FOR AFRICAN DICTATORS...

They include Ali Bongo, President of Gabon, with at least 39 properties, and Denis Sassou-Nguesso, President of the Republic of the Congo, who has 16. Obiang Nguema’s six-floor period building is used by his family on shopping trips to France, while Obiang Nguema – who came to power in a bloody 1979 coup – prefers to occupy a 2,000 pounds-plus-a-night suite at the Plaza Athenee Hotel, off the Champs Elysee.
They are also investigating claims that Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt – both deposed in the Arab Spring – retain numerous homes in France. Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi is also thought to be a Gallic property owner, as is Bashar Al-Assad, accused of killing his own subjects in Syria.

The dossier’s main accusation is that FOREIGN AID FLOODING INTO BLIGHTED AFRICAN STATES WAS USED TO FUND THE EXTRAVAGANT LIFESTYLES OF UNELECTED LEADERS. French authorities have been accused of turning a blind eye to the scandal. Liberation newspaper highlighted PRESIDENT SARKOZY’S APPARENT INABILITY TO HIS GIVE UP HIS SUPPORT FOR DESPOTS…

The Republic of Equatorial Guinea is one of the smallest nations in Africa, with an area of around 11,000 square miles and a population of 676,000. It is also one of the richest nations in Africa, but the DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH IS DESPERATELY UNEVEN. THE LIKES OF TEODORO OBIANG NGUEMA ENJOYS RUDE WEALTH, WHILE 70 PER CENT OF THE POPULATION ARE LIVING UNDERNEATH THE UNITED NATIONS POVERTY THRESHOLD OF £1.50 A DAY. The gulf between rich and poor comers from the recent discovery of large petroleum reserves. THE NATION'S GDP PER CAPITA RANKS 28TH IN THE WORLD, but few people benefit.”



On 1 October 2011, the comedy actress, Roseanne Barr, told Max Keiser of the The Keiser Report why she spoke at the 'Occupy Wall Street' protests:

“I ended up speaking there to announce my candidacy of PRESIDENCY OF THESE UNITED STATES AS WELL AS PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL."

She added:

“If corporations are people then GOLDMAN SACHS NEEDS TO BE EXECUTED FOR PREMEDITATED MASS MURDER, TERRORISM, MAYHEM AND GRAND LARCENY…

Part of my platform is, of course, that THE GUILTY MUST BE PUNISHED AND THAT WE CAN NO LONGER LET OUR CHILDREN SEE THE GUILTY GET AWAY WITH MURDER. Because it teaches them that THEY DON’T HAVE TO HAVE ANY MORALS AND AS LONG AS THEY HAVE GUNS AND ARE BULLIES THAT THEY’LL WIN. And I don’t think that’s a good message. I DO SAY THAT I AM FOR THE RETURN OF THE GUILLOTINE AND THAT IS FOR THE WORST OF THE WORST OF THE GUILTY…

I first would allow the guilty bankers the ability to pay back anything over $100 million personal wealth because I believe in a maximum wage of $100 million. And if they are unable to live on that amount then they should go to the re-education camps and IF THAT DOESN’T HELP THEN BE BEHEADED.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXYAKJ5ZHzw



On 1 October 2011, The Daily Express reported thus:

“Christians reacted furiously last night after it emerged that COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE BEEN BANNED FROM SAYING PRAYERS AT MEETINGS. Two councils in East Sussex have been warned that CHRISTIAN PRAYERS ARE NOT PART OF THEIR DUTIES.

Mayfield parish council was issued the ‘advice’ by the Sussex Association of Local Councils after voting to include a prayer session in its meetings. Councillors were told it was not appropriate at a public meeting and should be taken off the agenda. The row prompted councillors from nearby Crowborough town council to get involved, claiming prayers have formed part of their meetings for as long as anyone could remember."

So, ladies and gents, tell me whose side you’re on here?

Are you with the Crowborough Mayor, Kay Moss, who says:

“NO ONE’S EVER SAID THERE WAS A PROBLEM. THE prayer predates me by a long way. There was a motion a few years ago to do away with it but WE VOTED FOR THE PRAYER TP CONTINUE. I’ve never heard since that we were doing anything wrong.”

Or do you prefer the thought processes of Former Crowborough town councillor, Julian Salmon, the bloke responsible for the ‘motion a few years ago,’ who says:

“When I attended meetings I just wanted to get on with it and talk about issues in the town, rather than anything religious. If people want to pray just do it before you come to the meeting.”

Do your own opinions coincide with those of Alan Craig, leader of the Christian Peoples Alliance?

“THIS DEMAND IS PART OF THE SECULARISATION OF OUR SOCIETY. As we rip up Christian values and now Christian prayers we see the result on our streets in the form of rioting, binge drinking and drug culture. The most important thing is to get Christian values and Christian prayers back into our society and not take them away. Having Christian prayers is saying Christian values are good values for public life and a council meeting is a part of public life.”

Or do your opinions line up with the outlook of Jacqui Simes of the Sussex Association of Local Councils, who says:

“Prayers are not part of a parish council’s duties AND CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA. THEY SHOULD NOT BE PART OF THE MEETING. It should be something completely separate.”

The fact that prayers CAN be included in the agenda and are so included by many parish councils should not, in this politically correct day and age, encourage anyone to think that Ms Simes is a liar.

Well, folks, I know whose point of view I tend towards and I’m an agnostic!

Just in case you’re undecided as to which way to go on this matter, just remember that those who would ‘rip up Christian values’ NEVER have a bad word to say about Islam, mass immigration or foreigners being given preference in the jobs and council housing markets. Then write down the names of a reprentative of ‘the Sussex Association of Local Councils’ and a ‘former Crowborough town councillor’ in the blackest of your little black books.

For reference in a future governed by a different kind of Briton.



On 30 September 2011, Mark Field said this in The Mail Online:

'New Labour isn't dead yet. Even in 2011, New Labour's narrative lives on, AND WE ARE ALL SUFFERING FOR IT. Almost eighteen months ago the Labour Party plunged to electoral defeat. AT 29.8 PER CENT ITS SHARE OF THE BRITISH VOTE WAS ITS SECOND LOWEST SINCE THE WAR and smaller still than the Conservatives had achieved in our 1997 and 2001 debacles…

The entire elite political class colluded in a failure during the last election campaign to level with the British public on the tough economic choices that lay ahead… The most destructive delusion that threatens to undermine future prosperity is the keen sense of collective and individual entitlement which was fostered under the last government…

Following this summer’s riots, David Cameron returned to one of his earliest (and most authentic and passionate) themes, ‘The Broken Society.’ However, much of his ambitious programme of welfare and community reform is unachievable WITHOUT THE REPEAL OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, ONE OF THE MOST TOXIC PILLARS OF THE BLAIR/BROWN LEGACY.'

"New Labour isn't dead yet... New Labour's narrative lives on and we are all suffering for it."

How can New Labour ever be dead? They imported more than three million unwanted immigrants just 'to rub the right's nose in diversity.' Unless we send them all back where they came from we'll be suffering from their Brit-loathing treachery forever. Beg your pardon, until the 'white man' is, as Yasmin Alibhai-Brown so earnestly put it, 'the lost species in 100 years.'

Oh, and as the New Labour mindset coincides precisely with that of the PC Crowd, until political correctness is consigned to the rubbish bin of history, the 'narrative' will, unfortunately, live on.



On 30 September 2011, Graeme Archer said this in The Telegraph:

“Let me tell you about our friend Marion. She lives on her own in a seaside town and works as a hospital nurse… She doesn’t want much from life… to discharge her duties well; to be at peace in her home… She has a quiet faith. And she’s never literally alone: because she lives in a flat – with an upstairs neighbour who is slowly destroying her peace of mind. If the exaggerated cries of sexual ecstasy he and his partner share with the rest of the building are just one of those things flat-dwellers must tolerate, then THE NOISY, THUDDING DANCE MUSIC WHICH KEEPS MARION AWAKE NIGHT AFTER NIGHT IS NOT.

In vain she has invoked the freehold lease, which forbids music after midnight. She phones and knocks on the neighbour’s door: she is not answered. She contacts the council, which has a ‘noise abatement service’: they tell her to keep a diary. She phones us in London and… we do our best with practical words: we will go with her to talk to the neighbour, we will be on her side when she interacts with the council bureaucracy; but none of this is what Marion really needs. Those needs are twofold: to hope that matters will improve, and for such a hope to be realistic. But this would require the agents of society – the council, the other neighbours, the police (whom she is scared to contact, lest anti-social disturbance escalates to something more frightening) – to be unequivocally on her side. MARION, LIKE MOST GOOD PEOPLE, HAS LEARNED NOT TO MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION.

I’m sure there’s 'a law' which could help Marion, but that’s not the point. The point is how scared she feels in negotiating a part of life that once would have been resolved by simple social interaction. SHE IS SUFFERING BECAUSE WE REPLACED THE ORGANIC TIES THAT BOUND A COMMUNITY WITH A SET OF POORLY UNDERSTOOD, MASSIVELY OVER-INTERPRETED, LEGALISTIC 'RIGHTS'; RIGHTS WHICH HAVE ENCOURAGED, ALMOST INSTITUTIONALISED, ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR. I am Marion when I’m on the bus, and I’m frightened to tell children to stop misbehaving. You are Marion when you don’t tell a feckless pedestrian to pick up their litter. We used to know 'the rules': that, for example, you could speak to a neighbour about noise, without fearing that your life would be rendered unbearable for ever after. WE ARE ALL FRIGHTENED OF THE OVER-REACTION OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT BEHAVING AS GOOD ADULTS SHOULD, AND IT LEAVES US AT THEIR MERCY. WE ORDERED THE INSTITUTIONS OF CIVIL SOCIETY TO STOP JUDGING BEHAVIOUR, AND THEN WE WONDER AT THE CHAOS TO WHICH GOOD PEOPLE ARE ABANDONED...

It sounds ridiculous to say 'It’s not the economy, stupid', when the economic outlook is so grim, but I’ve never believed the reductionist argument which says we cast our vote primarily for economic reasons. WE VOTE BECAUSE THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT SOCIETY WE WANT TO SEE RE-ENGINEERED...

TOO MUCH IN SOCIETY FEELS THE SAME AS IT DID BEFORE THE ELECTION… Lib Dems may claim that it’s either impossible to tell the difference between right and wrong, or, if it is possible, that only a judge on a bench is able to make the distinction; the Prime Minister should ignore them. If that makes Lib Dems uncomfortable, so be it; MANY OF US HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF THE LIBERAL SOCIETY WHICH THROWS THE MARIONS OF THIS WORLD TO THE WOLVES...

Right and Left may not matter so much in the post-Cold War world. Right and Wrong do. “

"She is suffering because we replaced the organic ties that bound a community with a set of poorly understood, massively over-interpreted, legalistic 'rights'; rights which have encouraged, almost institutionalised, anti-social behaviour."

Excellently well put, Graeme. However, the root cause of Marion's suffering is this: she will not vote to end that suffering. She will carry on voting for the politicians who enfranchised the anti-social folk who cause it.

As long as the media routinely smears the British Nationalist, and the Marions do not think to determine the veracity of the smears, 'the chaos to which good people are abandoned' will never abate. You see, only the Nationalist cares enough for the world she represents to put her feelings and concerns before those of her oppressors.



On 30 September 2011, The Daily Express quoted UK Independence Party MEP, John Bufton, thus:

“THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION MAKES UPWARDS OF 75 PERCENT OF OUR LAWS. We now learn that SOME OF THEM ARE TO BE WRITTEN BY TURKS DESPITE THEM NOT HAVING MEMBERSHIP OF THE UNION. IT IS OUTRAGEOUS THAT LAWS AFFECTING EVERYBODY IN BRITAIN CAN BE WRITTEN BY TURKISH OFFICIALS WHO HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE PUBLIC AND WON’T REFLECT THE INTERESTS OF THE UK. The British government must demand that this utterly ridiculous plan be halted.”

Bufton said this after Turkey’s EU minister, Egemen Bagis, told MEPs:

“TURKS WILL HAVE A ROLE IN SHAPING EU’S FUTURE POLITICS AND LEGISLATION.”

The Express explained:

“Civil servants from Ankara are being sent to work on policy matters alongside Eurocrats in Brussels… It was revealed in a statement released to the European Parliament setting out details of the 'milestone' agreement signed by the European Commission.”



On 30 September 2011, The Daily Mail quoted Paul Verhaeghen, the leader of a research team from Georgia Tech's School of Psychology, thus:

“MOST PEOPLE ASSOCIATE BLACK PEOPLE WITH VIOLENCE AND THIS SEEMS TO BE UNIVERSAL.”

In view of this ’racist thinking,’ Verhaeghan’s team investigated ‘racist pairings of words,’ and found that ‘BLACK-MURDER’ was ‘FAIRLY-COMMON in… literature… POPULAR CULTURE APPEARS TO BE DRIP-FEEDING PEOPLE WITH PREJUDICE.’

Interesting how the PC Crowd ALWAYS ignores the elephant in the room in its desperation to cement the ‘racism’ accusation, isn’t it?

The elephant in the room being the fact that people associate black people with violence because, the whole world over, (universally) BLACK PEOPLE ARE MORE VIOLENT THAN WHITE.

Ladies and gentlemen, if anyone ever informs you that the telling of such a truth is ‘racist’, be assured, that person is your enemy.



On 30 September 2011, Ben Shapiro said this at Townhall.com

"In fall 2009, Eric Holder (Obama Attorney General) and the Department of Justice decided on a strategy supposedly designed to combat gun trafficking on the Mexican border. They didn't want the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to seize illegal firearms anymore; instead, THEY WANTED THEM TO GIVE FIREARMS TO MEMBERS OF THE MEXICAN CARTELS.

According to the Congressional report, ‘ATFS PHOENIX FIELD DIVISION BEGAN ALLOWING SUSPECTS TO WALK AWAY WITH ILLEGALLY PURCHASED GUNS... THIS SHIFT IN STRATEGY WAS KNOWN AND AUTHORIZED AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT… ATF and DOJ leadership were interested in seeing where these guns would ultimately end up… ATF WOULD ONLY SEE THESE GUNS AGAIN AFTER THEY TURNED UP AT A CRIME SCENE’…

U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered using the weapons authorized for free flow by ATF and DOJ. Terry wasn't the only person killed… the weapons OK'd by the DOJ and ATF were used in three murders, four kidnappings and an attempted murder in Mexico. They've been identified at 11 other crime scenes in the United States.

So what was the real goal of the DOJ and ATF?… It was, very simply, to establish for political reasons that American guns were being used in crimes by foreign cartels. ..

President Obama and his administration clearly wanted to set up a narrative that AMERICA'S LAX GUN LAWS WERE KILLING AMERICAN TROOPS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS. They wanted their misuse of law enforcement authority to create THE IMPETUS FOR A CRACKDOWN ON GUN SALES IN THE UNITED STATES.”



On 29 September 2011, the European Commission threatened the UK with court action if it didn’t scrap rules which state that EU immigrants must have worked here previously or have a decent chance of getting a job, before they can claim benefits.

Yet again we were told the ‘human rights’ of such would-be benfit tourists infringed if the rules weren’t changed. If Cameron and co. cave in to this latest demand, we could be forced to fork out an extra £2.5billion to support the unwanted immigrant citizenry of the former Communist states of eastern Europe.

Chris Grayling, the Employment Minister, subsequently told the BBC:

“I don’t think somebody coming from another EU state should be able to access benefit simply by turning up here and saying, ‘I am going to live in the UK from now on… We had a case three months ago in which WE WERE INSTRUCTED BY THE EUROPEAN COURT TO MAKE DISABILITY PAYMENTS TO A BRITISH CITIZEN, A YOUNG WOMAN LIVING IN SPAIN. WE CAN’T BE RESPONSIBLE BOTH FOR BENEFITS TO BE PAID TO OUR CITIZENS OVERSEAS AND TO CITIZENS OF OTHER COUNTRIES IN THE UK.”

Former Cabinet minister, John Redwood, said Foreign Secretary William Hague should be flexing his muscles more:

“What is he doing about it? Why won’t he get on with renegotiating the UK position? Most UK electors want a trade agreement BUT DO NOT WANT TO BE BOSSED AROUND BY A HIGH SPENDING LEGISLATURE POKING ITS NOSE INTO OUR DOMESTIC AFFAIRS.”

Ian Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary, said this:

“THIS IS OUT OF ORDER. Social security was always considered to be a national responsibility, but now Europe is encroaching on these areas. THIS KIND OF LAND GRAB FROM THE EU HAS THE POTENTIAL TO CAUSE MAYHEM TO NATION STATES, AND WE WILL FIGHT IT.”

‘Fight it,’ Ian?

What, like successive governments have fought the good fight on our behalf on so many occasions since we joined the Common Market? Be nice to see it, wouldn’t it? But, if the last thirty eight years of baring bum for Brussels is anything to go by, it isn’t likely to happen.

Mark my words, the British taxpayer will end up subsidising the scroungers of eastern Europe, (as, in many cases, they already do now) as well as our own.

Bleeding the British white is the global way of things.



On 29 September 2011, former Vice President, Dick Cheney, was quoted thus in The Toronto Sun:

"My biggest concern today when I think about a threat is the possibility that there'll be another major attack but next time they will have deadlier weapons… I worry very much about the possibility of A GROUP OF TERRORISTS GETTING THEIR HANDS ON A BIOLOGICAL AGENT OF SOME KIND OR A NUCLEAR DEVICE AND SETTING ONE OF THOSE OFF IN THE MIDDLE OF ONE OF OUR CITIES… The death toll would run into the hundreds of thousands.”

Write this down:

If a “biological agent or a nuclear device” hits “one of our cities”, cherchez le Cheney. The man who got a 42million golden goodbye from Haliburton before 9/11 added:

“The farther we get away from the actual events of 9/11 without a follow-on attack, I THINK IT'S EASIER FOR PEOPLE TO FORGET WHAT THAT MORNING WAS LIKE or to be relaxed and say WELL THAT WAS A ONE-OFF AFFAIR AND THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.”

So, you will be reminding them?

You going to make sure it happens again?

"The problem still exists.”

We know it does, Dickie.

You and your proxies keeping doing the most terrible things to innocent people all over the planet. As long as the relatives of the dead still live, the rest of us are going to have that problem you mentioned. Seeing as how they might reasonably presume the Western majority might be closer in moral outlook to a psychopathic former Vice President than them.

“For example, there was a report in The New York Times and The Washington Post of North Korea buying technology from Pakistan in order to enrich uranium to make weapons-based uranium enrichment technology. They've now got the centrifuges, the feedstock and they're in operation."

Keep your hard hats on, you Gooks!

"We did, in fact, have a program of ENHANCED INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES.“

We systematically interrogated the f*** out of the oil-rich enemies of Israel!

“It was done with the approval of the President.”

The smirking chimp thought it would be a good idea.

“I heard one of the critics on television since I arrived here in Vancouver, saying this was done to dozens, hundreds of people and was done by the military. No, waterboarding, for example, was used on exactly three individuals.”

But all the rest got the illegal treatment they deserved!

“I get as frustrated as anybody I know with the United Nations… Over time, it can be a very, very frustrating organization to work with.”

A man like me shouldn’t have to listen to the rest of the world!

“Certainly in the U.S. we've got a major debt problem. I think it's driven primarily by our entitlements programs, the health program, social security and so forth. That's where the bulk of spending is in our budget.”

Us rich folks loathe a loser.

“I worry that we'll go looking to the defence department to solve the long-term debt problem, and that won't work. The long-term debt problem is primarily one of entitlements."

We’d much rather kill foreigners than take care of our own.



On 29 September 2011, Peter Oborne opined thus in The Telegraph:

“In economic terms, the age we are living in is simply terrifying. But politically, it is of special interest, because EVERY ACCEPTED ORTHODOXY IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING DISMANTLED. Most senior politicians are condemned to operate within an exceptionally narrow set of parameters, meaning that they do little more than administer a system they inherited from others…

For many years, and particularly during the long and now widely exposed Murdoch ascendancy, political reporting has suffered from a shameful defect. LOBBY CORRESPONDENTS HAVE REGARDED THEMSELVES AS COURTIERS, ALIGNING THEMSELVES WITH THE GANG IN POWER RATHER THAN SEARCHING OUT THE UNDERLYING TRUTHS…

One of the unintended consequences of Margaret Thatcher’s reforms of the Eighties was THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW CLASS OF FERAL RICH, WHO ABANDONED THE ORDINARY MORALITY OR SENSE OF CIVIC DUTY FELT BY PREVIOUS GENERATIONS. NEW LABOUR, WITH ITS UNASHAMED WORSHIP OF OSTENTATIOUS WEALTH, MADE THE PROBLEM MUCH WORSE, AND WENT A LONG WAY TOWARDS UNDOING THE BONDS THAT OUGHT TO TIE TOGETHER EVERY SOCIETY.”

"One of the unintended consequences of Margaret Thatcher’s reforms of the Eighties was the emergence of a new class of feral rich, who abandoned the ordinary morality or sense of civic duty."

'Unintended,' Pete? Milton Friedman's 'theory of market forces' (monetarism) wasn't intended to enrich those who owned the markets? Yeah, right. I bet that'd make Friedman and the most notorious of Thatcher's gurus, Keith Joseph, Arthur Seldon, David Wolfson and Alfred Sherman snigger if they were still around.

As for Nigel Lawson, he's been laughing unintentionally all the way from privatisation and the Big Bang to the collapse of the banking system.

Friedman, Joseph, Seldon, Wolfson, Sherman, Lawson (and Home Secretary, Leon Brittan) are/were, of course Jewish.



On 28 September 2011, Ed West said this in The Telegraph:

“Little Englanders, xenophobes, eccentric constitutionalists, men of intellectual violence, extremists, Europhobes, even Mosleyites – Eurosceptics have been called everything. So if long-standing opponents of the EU are starting to sound a little tedious in their denunciations of ‘the Guilty Men’ who tried to push Britain into the euro, forgive us. But WHEN THE ENTIRE POLITICAL CLASS OF OUR CONTINENT HAS GOT SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE SO UTTERLY WRONG IT’S NOT SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE BRUSHED ASIDE. And when the establishment has been so exposed, it is rational that we start to question its other orthodoxies…

The European project – THE EURO DELUSION – IS PART OF A WIDER UTOPIAN MANIA THAT GRIPS THE POLITICAL class.

At the Labour Party conference two days ago, Ed Miliband said that Labour had got it wrong over immigration, and ‘underestimated the level of immigration’ from Poland. ONLY BY A FACTOR OF 100 TO 1 – so don’t worry about it…

They were systematically, fundamentally wrong in their entire philosophy, A LEVEL OF WRONG-NESS THAT ONLY COMES ABOUT WHEN INTELLIGENT PEOPLE SUFFER FROM COLLECTIVE MADNESS. THEIR APPROACH TO IMMIGRATION, AS MANY PARTY WORKERS HAVE SINCE CONFESSED, CAME ABOUT FROM A FLAWED BELIEF THAT ETHNIC, RELIGIOUS AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY WAS ITSELF A GOOD AND LIBERAL THING, A MILLENNIAL BELIEF IN A UNIVERSALISM THAT COULD BE CALLED THE DIVERSITY DELUSION.

THE DIVERSITY DELUSION AND THE EURO DELUSION ARE BOTH SYMPTOMS OF A SIMILAR PSEUDO-RELIGIOUS MANIA. Both sprung from a noble attempt to ensure that the horrors of 1914-1945, inspired by nationalism and scientific racism, were never repeated. BOTH MAKE THEM MORE LIKELY TO BE REPEATED. Jean Monnet, architect and first president of the European Coal and Steel Community, conceived the idea of a United States of Europe in order to ensure such wars never happened again, through a new empire in which nationalism had been erased. Because Monnet was opposed by Charles de Gaulle, who favoured a Europe of nations, he therefore he developed the ‘Monnet method’ of ‘INTEGRATION BY STEALTH’, A POLICY THAT ULTIMATELY LED TO THE TRAGEDY OF ECONOMIC UNION.

Perhaps more influential still was Alexandre Kojeve, who set up the embryonic European Union and influenced a generation of pro-EU thinkers in France. He came up with the ‘end of history’ theme, whereby NATIONAL BOUNDARIES AND EXCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES WOULD WASH AWAY AND A NEW WORLD WITHOUT BORDERS WOULD EMERGE. THE EU’S VAPID MOTTO, UNITED IN DIVERSITY, REFLECTS THIS NEO-CHRISTIAN UTOPIANISM.

WITHOUT EXCEPTION THE GUILTY MEN OF EUROPE ALSO SHARED, AND STILL, SHARE, THE DIVERSITY DELUSION. THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS HAVE ENTIRELY SIGNED UP, AND MOST OF THE LABOUR PARTY TOO, although the Tories must share the blame too. ONLY ONE SENIOR TORY SPOKE UP AGAINST BOTH MASS IMMIGRATION AND THE COMMON MARKET, ENOCH POWELL.. Powell’s provocative language certainly helped his opponents, but as immigration is by its very nature a more toxic subject, so milder opponents have been silenced, leaving only the cranks, oddballs and extremists to represent opposition to this new utopia.

This in turn makes it easier to present critics as extremists, just as even a couple of years ago opponents of the euro were labeled extremists and xenophobes. Contrary to what proponents of this delusion claim, it is not about xenophobia or racism; the issue, as Charles Moore wrote on Saturday, is one of sovereignty, and SOVEREIGNTY RELIES ON THE LEGITIMACY THAT ONLY NATIONS CAN PROVIDE.

Instead, as Roger Scruton noted, European intellectuals tried to ‘discard national loyalty and to replace it with the cosmopolitan ideals of the Enlightenment… The problem… is that cosmopolitan ideals are the property of an elite and will never be shared by the mass of human kind.’

The European project was a utopian idea, and I suspect that Britain’s peripheral part in the third great stupid, European idea of the last century will soon be over. NATIONAL LOYALTY, WHATEVER THE ELITES FEEL, IS HERE TO STAY. I guess we’re all extremists now.”



On 28 September 2011, The Atlantic magazine web site quoted Kainat Soomro, a 17-year-old Pakistani girl, thus:

"I was walking home from my school and I went to the store to buy a toy for my niece," she said, staring at the floor of the office. While I was looking at things a guy pressed a handkerchief on my nose. I fainted and was kidnapped. Then four men gang raped me… I want justice, I will not stop until I get justice."

Kainat said that, despite the pressures, her family had refused to kill her.

"IT IS THE TRADITION, but if the family doesn't permit it, then it won't happen. My father, my brother, my mom didn't allow it… I am not giving up, I will take this all the way to the Supreme Court of Pakistan."

The Atlantic clarified the above thus:

“Kainat Soomro... is fighting to get justice for a gang rape that she insists happened four years ago in Mehar, a small town in Pakistan. After three days, she was finally able to escape...

As she spoke, her father gently tapped her head. He said he tried to get Kainat's alleged rapists arrested, but instead HE WAS REBUFFED BY THE POLICE. According to the Kainat family's account, the tribal elders declared her kari, (which literally means black female), FOR LOSING HER VIRGINITY OUTSIDE MARRIAGE.

In Pakistan, women and men who have illicit relationships or WOMEN WHO LOSE THEIR VIRGINITY BEFORE MARRIAGE ARE AT RISK OF PAYING WITH THEIR LIVES.

‘THESE ARE MATTERS OF HONOR AND THE LEADERS CALL A JIRGA AND THEY DECLARE THAT THE WOMAN OR THE COUPLE SHOULD BE KILLED,’ said Abdul Hai, a veteran field officer for the Human Rights Commission in Pakistan. These acts of violence are most commonly labeled as ‘HONOR KILLINGS.’

The most recent report from the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan noted that in 2009 roughly 46 PERCENT OF ALL FEMALE MURDERS IN PAKISTAN THAT YEAR WERE IN THE NAME OF ‘HONOR.’ The report noted that A TOTAL OF 647 INCIDENCES OF ‘HONOR KILLINGS’ WERE REPORTED BY THE PAKISTANI PRESS. However, experts say that actual incidences of ‘HONOR KILLINGS’ IN PAKISTAN ARE MUCH HIGHER AND NEVER GET REPORTED TO THE POLICE BECAUSE THEY ARE PASSED OFF BY THE FAMILIES AS SUICIDES.

Kainat said that despite the pressures her family refused to kill her… That defiance has left the family fearing for their lives. The family's new home in Karachi has been attacked a number of times. But, according to Abdul Hai, Kainat is lucky:

‘THE WOMAN OR THE GIRL USUALLY GETS KILLED AND THE MAN GETS AWAY,’ he said. ‘Over 70 percent of the murdered victims are women and only 30 percent of victims of honor killings are male.’ In Karachi, Kainat and her family are now sharing one room in a run-down apartment block, and they have to rely on charities to help them pay for food. ‘We go hungry many nights,’ said Kainat's older sister.

But their fight might never pay off. A local judge has already ruled against Kainat in the case. ‘There is no corroborative evidence available on record. THE SOLE TESTIMONY OF THE ALLEGED RAPE SURVIVOR IS NOT SUFFICIENT,’ THE JUDGE SAID IN A WRITTEN DECISION. Another problem is that material evidence is usually not collected in rape cases in Pakistan since THE POLICE RARELY BELIEVE RAPE VICTIMS and therefore don't order rape kits in a timely manner. Without medical tests to corroborate her story, it remains Kainat's word against the alleged rapists.”

And these are the attititudes that, for forty six years now, the race laws have been defending. These are the people who have been put to the top of the housing lists. These are the people that the PC Crowd, in parliament and the press, insist we must ‘cohere’ with. This is the ‘diversity’ they wish to ‘enrich’ us with.

I desoise the honour killers with all my heart but I do not hate them. However, I am happy to preach hatred of those who bring them here. Of those who promote their customs and culture above our own. Those who have, with malice aforethought, sought to diminish us in our lands as they encouraged and rewarded them should be hated by all of us. In a just world they would be arrested, tried for treason, found guilty and executed. Such an eventuality will, unfortunately, only ever come to pass when those the traitors have successfully hynotised into slumbering acquiescence finally wake up. And it will take more than a family of honour killers on either side of such folk to trigger the alarm.



On 28 September 2011, Matthew Goodwin, an expert in electoral behaviour and extremism at the University of Nottingham, said this in an episode of Radio 4's Four Thought:

"Sharon was born and raised in the local village. She knew everyone, and devoted much of her spare time to helping the Residents Association. She was never really that interested in politics… But then, over the years, things began to change. For Sharon, it seemed as though the way of life she had become accustomed to was under threat. She talked about FEELING A SENSE OF INJUSTICE ABOUT WHAT HAD BEEN PERPETRATED ON HER FELLOW CITIZENS - OUR INCREASING INVOLVEMENT WITH EUROPE, THE LOSS OF OUR MANUFACTURING BASE, A DWINDLING SENSE OF RESPECT AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE AND THE CREEPING ADVANCE OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.

But more than anything, she was concerned about a new phase of IMMIGRATION into the country… Her concern wasn't simply about the economy. It stemmed from her feeling that BRITISH CULTURE, VALUES AND THE NATIONAL COMMUNITY WERE UNDER THREAT.

Sharon was Jewish, and the party that she decided to join was the British National Party. Though aware of its history of anti-Semitism and holocaust denial, for her the far right was the only movement that was serious about tackling the threat from Islam. But as she quickly found out, involvement with the far right comes with consequences. Some of HER FRIENDS STOPPED RETURNING HER CALLS - AFTER 17 YEARS THE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION NO LONGER REQUIRED HER HELP. When she stood for the party at an election, HER EMPLOYER THREATENED TO HAVE HER DISMISSED.

Then ONE NIGHT, WHEN HOME ALONE, SHARON WAS WOKEN BY A CAR FULL OF ANTI-FASCISTS WHO PULLED UP OUTSIDE TO SHOUT ABUSE. Sharon told me she could handle all of that, but what really hurt, she explained, was that SHE WAS REVILED BY THE VERY PEOPLE THAT SHE WAS FIGHTING TO PROTECT. When I asked Sharon why, despite all of these consequences, she carries on there was little hesitation: ‘Because DOING NOTHING IS NOT AN OPTION. I AM FIGHTING FOR THE SURVIVAL OF MY PEOPLE’…

Conventional wisdom tells us there is something ‘wrong’ with people like Sharon. Implicit in the stereotypes is that they are driven by crude racism, irrational impulses, and psychological problems. THE INADEQUACY OF THESE STEREOTYPES BECAME QUICKLY APPARENT DURING THE INTERVIEWS. ON THE WHOLE, MOST OF THE ACTIVISTS APPEARED AS RELATIVELY NORMAL PEOPLE. Rather than isolated, THEY SEEMED WELL CONNECTED TO THEIR LOCAL COMMUNITIES. Rather than irrational, they had a clearly defined and coherent set of goals. RATHER THAN PSYCHOLOGICALLY DAMAGED, THEY SEEMED BALANCED, REASONABLE AND ARTICULATE.

Clearly, there were some exceptions, but the point is that these were very much the exception rather than the norm. LIKE SHARON, MOST OF THESE SUPPORTERS WERE NEITHER NAZIS NOR FASCISTS. MORE THAN ANYTHING, THEY WERE A GROUP OF CITIZENS WHO WERE PROFOUNDLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF IMMIGRATION AND RISING DIVERSITY ON THEIR COMMUNITIES AND THE COUNTRY...

The British story has contrasted sharply with experiences across the Channel where since the 1980s the far right has moved from the margins to the mainstream… But is Britain really immune to a successful far right party?… When we look at the evidence there is a large reservoir of potential support for a far right party. LARGE NUMBERS OF US HAVE BECOME CONCERNED ABOUT THE ISSUE OF IMMIGRATION - at one point, it was more important to us than education, crime and the NHS. In fact, ONE OUT OF EVERY FIVE OF US THOUGHT IT WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FACING THE COUNTRY. And the concern was not simply about competition over jobs or council housing. Surveys told us that TWO-THIRDS OF THE POPULATION THOUGHT BRITAIN WAS ‘LOSING ITS CULTURE’ BECAUSE OF IMMIGRATION.

Also, those who are concerned about immigration are not concerned simply about traditional immigration. SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF US ARE ALSO ANXIOUS OVER THE PRESENCE AND PERCEIVED COMPATIBILITY OF SETTLED MUSLIM COMMUNITIES.

At the time that two BNP members were elected to the European Parliament in 2009, OVER TWO-FIFTHS OF THE POPULATION EXPRESSED AGREEMENT WITH THE SUGGESTION THAT EVEN IN ITS MILDER FORMS ISLAM POSES A DANGER TO WESTERN CIVILISATION...

The failure of the ‘old’ far right parties like the National Front or the BNP should not lead us toward the conclusion that Britain is somehow immune to the ‘new’ far right, nor should we dismiss their supporters as a fringe and irrelevant minority. LARGE NUMBERS OF US SHARE THEIR CONCERNS… and the number who are potentially receptive… is far higher than the number who have turned out over the past decade.”



On 28 September 2011, the Foreign Secretary, William Haig, was interviewed by The Spectator.

During the interview, he said:

“It will be written about for centuries as A KIND OF HISTORICAL MONUMENT TO COLLECTIVE FOLLY… I described the euro as A BURNING BUILDING WITH NO EXITS and so it has proved for some of the countries in it…

GREEKS, OR ITALIANS OR PORTUGUESE HAVE TO ACCEPT SOME VERY BIG CHANGES IN WHAT HAPPENS IN THEIR COUNTRY… and Germans will have to accept that THEY ARE GOING TO SUBSIDISE THOSE COUNTRIES FOR A LONG TIME TO COME REALLY, FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFETIMES...

THE EU DOES HAVE TOO MUCH POWER… I haven’t changed that view from being in government, in fact IF ANYTHING BEING IN GOVERNMENT HAS REINFORCED THAT VIEW.”

Clearly, Billy, your views on the EU having 'too much power' haven’t blossomed into Prime Ministerial advice since you gave this interview.

Seeing as how David Cameron didn’t just vote against giving us a referendum, he wouldn’t even allow his MPs to vote according to their consciences! He imposed a three-line whip and bullied most of them into the no referendum lobby. As, interestingly, did Labour leader, Ed Miliband.

All three party leaders voted to deny us a say on the issue closest to our hearts. This despite all of them having PROMISED us a referendum BEFORE the 2010 General Election.



On 28 September 2011, Daniel Bates said this at The Mail Online:

"Facebook has admitted that IT HAS BEEN WATCHING THE WEB PAGES ITS MEMBERS VISIT – EVEN WHEN THEY HAVE LOGGED OUT… The social networking site was forced to confirm that IT HAS BEEN CONSTANTLY TRACKING ITS 750MILLION USERS, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE USING OTHER SITES…

Most would assume that Facebook stops monitoring them after they leave its site, but technology bloggers discovered this was not the case. In fact, DATA HAS BEEN REGULARLY SENT BACK TO THE SOCIAL NETWORK’S SERVERS… The website’s practices were exposed by Australian technology blogger Nik Cubrilovic and have provoked a furious response across the internet."

Big Brother is watching you, ladies and gents.


On 27 September 2011, Janet Daley said this in The Telegraph:

“The values which he (Ed Miliband) would put at the centre of his definition of Labour are the CENTRAL MARXIST PRINCIPLES that had once been consigned to history. (This is not a smear: as AN EX-MARXIST MYSELF, I RECOGNISE THE THEMES HE REITERATES WITH A DEGREE OF SENTIMENTAL AFFECTION.) Wealth creation, he stated, can only truly come from producers not predators. And the producers, he made clear, were those who made real things: the inventors, the manufacturers, and ‘every man and woman who goes out and does a day's work’ especially if that that work involves ‘building with [their] hands.’ The predators are those who simply manipulate money and then profit from that manipulation. Sweet. I haven't actually heard anybody put this hard Left view of the moral relationship between wealth and labour for about thirty years. It is, of course, completely wrong and deeply unhelpful to any proper understanding of Britain's present economic situation.

This country's greatest wealth creating sector is financial services which do not ‘make’ anything but whose contribution to the actual economy is very real. The money that is earned by these predators, however dislikeable they may be personally, goes into the economy and can end up as investment and job creation just like any other form of money. So even what Mr Miliband calls ‘bad businesses’ can end up producing wealth that creates ‘good businesses.’ And there is the problem for this childlike view of economic morality and Mr Miliband's proposal for government intervention to see to it that only ‘good business’ will prosper. You can't actually tell who is good and who is bad until it's too late.

The case he cites of Southern Cross care homes illustrates this point precisely. It was assumed to be a ‘good’ business, providing a vital social service until it collapsed – whereupon we discovered that it had been run in a horrendously ‘bad’ way.”

Ms Daley clearly has no idea about what constitutes a good care home. The idea that wherever ‘care’ is on offer it could be provided more lovingly by introducig the profit motive is beyond obscene and only a Conservative who sees nothing wrong with gobbling at the trough in plain view could imagine it isn’t. The system worked well before privatisation, after the trough-gobblers got their hands on it began to go downhill. Of course it did. With the bad guys sucking up the gravy did anyone out there seriously expect there would be MORE money to go around?

"An ex-Marxist myself, I recognise the themes he reiterates with a degree of sentimental affection," says Janet.

It all begins to make sense now. Tell me, Janet, do all Jews have to pay homage to big daddy Karl at some point? You know, his being Jewish himself? I mean, the Russian Revolutionary Leon Trotsky (inventor of the term 'racist') did. As did Zinoviev, Sverdlov, Sokolnikov, Radek, Litvinov, Uritsky, Yagoda et al. (Lenin's granddad, Israel Blank, was also Jewish, as was Kamenev's father)

I wonder if Bernie Madoff, the $50bn-dollar fraudster was ever a Marxist? Do we think Dick Fuld, the boss of Lehman Brothers, might have been at some point? I wonder if the man most responsible for the laissez-faire attitudes that led up to the current financial crisis, Alan Greenspan, was ever a Marxist? Or his successor at the Fed Res, Ben Bernanke? And Sir Fred 'the shred' Goodwin, did he ever think of Karl Marx with a ‘degree of any sentimental affection.’

The half-Jewish Peter Mandelson was a Marxist. I wonder if the half-Jewish Dominique Strauss-Kahn was as well? Ralph, the father of the Milibands E and D, certainly was. His Marxist teachings influenced two generations of those who now currently inhabit the uppermost layer of the political canopy in this country.

The lists really do go on and on and on. I shouldn't think they'd all be 'ex-Marxists' like Janet. But I'd bet my beer belly that plenty were. Enough to make the difference, that is.

PS. Hey, Janet! You know when you ex-Marxists leave Marxism behind, do you all become Neocons at that point? You know, do you all sign up for invading Iraqs and spreading 'western values'? I mean David Aaronovitch, the guy you did that 'Head to Head' stint with for the BBC, (Janet and Dave spouting in the spotlight on matters of the day for 30 minutes) he's Jewish and he used to be a Marxist as well.

And he was all a-slaver with the bash-Iraq thing at the time.

As, of course, were you.



On 27 September 2011, The Mail Online quoted the head of the nursing union, Dr Peter Carter, thus:

“If you have a 24-bed ward and have got five nurses and everybody is having lunch at the same time and half the patients need feeding, IT BECOMES DIFFICULT TO GET IT ALL DONE. If someone is coming in and sitting with their loved one, they are going to have the focused dedicated time. You get this business of wards, very, very busy people, patients dying to go to the loo, elderly patients wetting themselves, then they lie there feeling embarrassed, it is about helping gran get out and go to the loo.”

Anna Smith continued:

“The very idea of urging relatives to help care for the elderly in hospital will always be one of the great taboos. But that THE SUGGESTION COMES FROM THE HEAD OF THE NURSING UNION, DR PETER CARTER, speaks volumes. It tells us that THE PEOPLE AT THE FRONTLINE HAVE ALL BUT GIVEN UP THE GHOST OF BEING ABLE MEET THE NEEDS OF OLD PEOPLE IN GERIATRIC WARDS.

Either they have completely surrendered and accepted that they cannot cope, or they are so burned out THEY’VE BECOME DE-SENSITISED TO THE BASIC HUMAN NEED TO CARE. But whatever way you look at it, when the head of the Royal College of Nursing suggests relatives should be encouraged to do more, you have to ask ARE WE BACK IN THE DARK AGES WHERE PATIENT CARE WAS DONE BY VOLUNTEERS.

As taxpayers, we sink millions of pounds a year into the NHS. Are we not entitled to expect that they will look after our elderly relatives in their hour of need?

But whether or not we join the chorus condemning Dr Carter’s words, there is a terrifying reality that when our elderly loved ones go into hospital they are being failed by the people we trust to look after them. And anyone who has ever had to spend time sitting at the bed of an elderly relative will testify to a system in meltdown.

Of course, the nurses at whatever geriatric ward your loved one ends up in, will assure you they will be given the best of care. They will tell you that despite being under immense pressure, there is a system in place so that mealtimes are sacrosanct, and that nursing staff will stop whatever they are doing and help those unable to feed themselves. And you believe them, because you want to believe, you have to believe, that the NHS will step in and look after that cherished loved one who has never asked for help in their lives. But THE BOTTOM LINE IS THEY SIMPLY CANNOT DO IT…

We cannot just heap the blame on the nurses for failure to care for the elderly. They are busy, working flat out most of the time… I know this, because I’ve been there, too many times in recent years, sitting at the bedside of my mother, who died a year ago tomorrow.

In the years before she died, sadly, she had been hospitalised with various problems, the same as several of the elderly patients in the ward. So I was able to witness at first hand the pressure nursing staff are under trying to answer the needs of geriatric patients. I was impressed by some nursing staff, but to be honest, I WAS LESS THAN IMPRESSED BY THE ATTITUDE OF OTHERS.

Because I was able to, I spent most of my days in hospital, so it was a real eye opener for me. On a daily basis, the hot food would arrive and be dished up by ancilliary staff. There would be some 90-year-old woman with a broken hip, barely able to sit up, or a patient with dementia unable to feed herself, therefore a nurse would come in and take the time to spoon-feed her.

But invariably, an alarm would go off in another room, and the nurse would disappear leaving the patient with her half eaten meal. By the time she returned, if she returned, the food would be cold, and the old person would have fallen asleep hungry. I saw this happen IN ALMOST EVERY MEAL TIME DURING THE WEEKS I WAS THERE to help my mother with her meals.

No wonder THE FIGURES SHOW THAT ELDERLY PATIENTS END UP MALNOURISHED AFTER A STAY IN HOSPITAL. The very idea that an old person goes to sleep hungry because they cannot feed themselves strikes at the very heart of a system that is supposed to care for people every step of the way. Whether we like it or not, this is where we are in the NHS and the care for the elderly...

We can bang our heels on the floor, because WE PAY A FORTUNE FOR AN NHS THAT MEETS FEWER OF OUR NEEDS EVERY DAY, but we have to be there for our old people. I would encourage people to make their presence felt when an elderly relative is in hospital.

I did that on a daily basis – yet MY POOR MUM STILL DIED BECAUSE NURSING STAFF, EITHER BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO BUSY OR HAD JUST GIVEN UP, FAILED TO SPOT AN INFECTION THAT WAS RAGING INSIDE HER.

And that is THE REAL HUMAN COST OF AN NHS THAT DOES NOT CARE ENOUGH.”

“My poor mum” died because she went into hospital desiccated and came out with her belly full of water she couldn’t pass.

Someone had left the tap on. Oh, and someone else had given her far too much medication and it buggered up her blood.

Terminally.

I was in such shock when they told me she only had two days to live that I failed to ask the appropriate questions and point an accusing finger in the right direction.

In such ways do we let down those we love the most.

I got her out the following day and she lived another ten. At least she died at home and had a few more happy, untroubled days before she went.

But she shouldn’t have died then.

They let her down.

As did I.



On 27 September 2011, Clive Aslet posed the question, ‘Is it one law for travellers, another for everyone else?’ at The Mail Online.

"The planning rules are up in the air at the moment… In this new document there is plenty about ‘sustainable development’… but nothing about the glaring injustice which appears to allow one group in our midst to ride a Winnebago and horses through the system, while the rest of us have to jump through hoops.

TRAVELLERS, SUCH AS THOSE AT DALE FARM, ESSEX, CAN SHOW A CONTEMPT FOR THE REGULATIONS, AND GET AWAY WITH IT. The rest of us have to go on bended knee if we so much as want to convert the garage.

How can the travellers on Dale Farm get away with breaking the law on planning? Look at Victoria Campbell: Havant Council have just banner her from living in a shed – rather a nice one – in her parents’ garden, while she and her boyfriend save up the deposit to buy a house. Being a law abiding person she'll probably move out; IF SHE DIDN'T, THE COUNCIL, BEING LESS AFRAID OF A NURSE THAN A BAND OF WELL-FORTIFIED TRAVELLERS, WOULD HAVE IT DEMOLISHED.

One landowner I know who had the laudable desire to build some almshouses in his village in which old people could retire had the planning application thrown back in his face. Why? HE HAD FAILED TO GIVE THE LATIN NAMES OF THE PLANTS WITH WHICH HE INTENDED TO BEAUTIFY THE PROJECT...

When I reported on a planning battle at Meriden earlier this year, where the local villagers have manned an observation post to stop a Dale Farm developing, I was charmed by Noah Burton, the Gypsy King.
As he leapt, tanned, OUT OF HIS JENSEN INTERCEPTOR, he looked, dare I say it, rather more dashing than the stout villagers, intent on defending their backyards.

But rules are rules, and if we didn’t have (and respect) them, we’d become – heaven help us – like Ireland, where the countryside has been bungalowed out of existence. PEOPLE EXPECT A BASIC MEASURE OF FAIRNESS; THEY GET CROSS WHEN CERTAIN GROUPS ARE FAVOURED AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS.

Of course, people like Miss Campbell don’t have leftward-leaning lawyers like Cherie Blair to argue (their case) under Europe human rights legislation… If the Human Rights Act is the problem, NOW WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO GET RID OF IT.”



On 27 September 2011, Andrew Pierce said this at The Mail Online:

“Harriet Harman, THE HIGH PRIESTESS OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, is leading the drive for Labour to change its rules to ensure that a woman is either leader or deputy leader in the future, IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR ABILITY OR POPULARITY. IT WILL BE THE ULTIMATE ACT OF POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION from the party that first championed controversial all-women short lists for Labour seats…

All you need to know about Harman’s attitude to Tory women MPs emerged shortly after she entered Parliament in a by-election in 1982 at the age of 32.

Hattie caused a stir by breast-feeding in the Commons, before going into the division lobby to vote while still cuddling her baby.

“Mrs Thatcher spotted me with the baby and came over. I was in great conflict. I wanted her to see my baby and the Prime Minister was obviously going to admire my baby. But I was torn. I DID NOT WANT THE EYES OF A TORY PRIME MINISTER TO FALL ON MY BABY. I walked away as fast as I could.”

I’m no fan of Margaret Thatcher.

Her policies devastated British industry and the working-class communities that depended on it. But Harman’s behaviour here sums her up well. She breast feeds, seeking attention, making a schoolgirl gesture and embarrassing many in the process. The Prime Minister wants to wish her well. Preposterously, she says she doesn’t want the eyes of the oppo ‘to fall on her baby’.

Who has done more damage to British society, Thatcher or Harman? Perhaps Thatcher edges it. However, I'm as certain as I can be that Thatcher did not intend to do us damage. I’m even more certain that a malign and destructive Marxist called Harriet Harman, ‘the High Priestess of political correctness,’ did.




On 27 September 2011, Richard Littlejohn opined thus in The Daily Mail:

"Call Me Dave was elected on a promise to scrap the venal European yuman rites act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. But he says his hands are tied because his Lib Dem Coalition partners won’t let him.

Only last week, Nick Clegg nailed his colours to the yuman rites mast and declared the Act would never be abolished while he was in government. His infantile conference delegates cheered him to the rafters.

This is precisely what we have come to expect from a politician who openly admits HE FEELS MORE EUROPEAN THAN BRITISH. But he’s not just the leader of a soft-headed minority party of protest, he’s Deputy Prime Minister. He has a responsibility to put the national interest before political posturing. CLEGG SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO PLACE HIS PRO-EUROPEAN FANATICISM AHEAD OF THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE HE IS PAID TO SERVE.

Yet again we have glaring evidence that THE PERVERSE RULINGS OF LEFT-WING JUDGES IN HUMAN RIGHTS CASES ARE NOT ONLY AN AFFRONT TO NATURAL JUSTICE BUT POSE A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY. It has been revealed that TWO OF THE MEN INVOLVED IN THE PLOT TO SET OFF SUICIDE BOMBS IN LONDON ON JULY 21, 2005, ARE BACK ON THE STREETS AFTER SERVING DISGRACEFULLY SHORT PRISON SENTENCES. Eritrean national Siraj Yassin Abdullah Ali was released halfway through his nine-year jail term and is living in a bail hostel. He was photographed at the weekend boarding a London bus. Somali Ismail Abdurahman spent just three years behind bars before being freed. Both men were convicted of providing support to the gang of five Al Qaeda terrorists who intended to repeat the carnage of two weeks earlier on the London Transport network, which claimed 52 lives and wounded hundreds of commuters.

The fact that they were let out halfway through their sentences is another shocking indictment of the deceit of our so-called criminal justice system. No one ever serves their full tariff.

In the cases of Ali and Abdurahman… THE COURTS HAVE DECIDED THAT THEIR LIVES COULD BE IN DANGER IF THEY WERE RETURNED HOME AND IT WOULD THEREFORE BE AN INFRINGEMENT OF THEIR INALIENABLE YUMAN RITES. Consequently, THEY ARE FREE TO MINGLE WITH THE VERY PEOPLE THEY PLANNED TO MURDER AND THE HARD-PRESSED SECURITY SERVICES HAVE TO SPEND A VAST AMOUNT OF MONEY AND MANPOWER TO KEEP THEM UNDER CONSTANT SURVEILLANCE.

Convicted foreign terrorists routinely argue that they would face torture, or worse, if they were repatriated. THE COURTS ALWAYS TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD. THE MORE HEINOUS THEIR CRIMES, THE MORE LIKELY THEY ARE TO BE BELIEVED. AS A RESULT, DOZENS OF FOREIGN NATIONALS EITHER CONVICTED OR SUSPECTED OF PLANNING ATROCITIES ARE GRANTED LEAVE TO REMAIN. MOST OF THEM END UP LIVING IN COUNCIL HOUSES ON BENEFITS, LEECHING OFF THE INNOCENT BRITISH TAXPAYERS THEY WANT TO KILL… Thanks to the Human Rights Act, BRITAIN HAS BECOME A SAFE HAVEN FOR TERRORISTS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD.

BRITISH COURTS SEEM TO DELIGHT IN IMPLEMENTING THE MOST EXTREME INTERPRETATIONS OF THE LAW. OUR EUROPEAN ‘PARTNERS’ APPEAR TO HAVE NO SUCH DIFFICULTY DEPORTING UNDESIRABLE ALIENS.”

Ah, but Richard, though the bad guys may be at war with all of Europe in an economic sense, psychologically, we are, by a long, long way, their foremost target.

It’s us the New World Order Gods truly wish to destroy.



On 26 September 2011, Philip Johnston said this in The Telegraph:

“'We got it wrong.’ If this is not quite the slogan for Labour’s annual conference in Liverpool, it is the message the leadership wants the public to hear, though WITHOUT HAVING TO APOLOGISE FOR THE MISTAKES MADE by the last government. What they really mean by this phoney self-flagellation is this: if we spent too much, it was with the best of intentions; if we borrowed too much, well so did everyone else; if the economy went down the pan, blame the bankers. And as for immigration – it was all the fault of the Poles.

‘'I THINK WE UNDERESTIMATED THE LEVEL OF IMMIGRATION FROM POLAND WHICH HAD A BIG EFFECT ON PEOPLE,' said Ed Miliband. But hang on a second. Labour came to office in 1997 and Poland did not join the EU until 2004. Yet whereas IN 1996, NET IMMIGRATION TO THE UK WAS 40,000, BY 2003 IT WAS 150,000. IT IS NOW ABOUT 250,000. As even a cursory glance at immigration graphs will show, the beginnings of this rapid rise long predated the accession to the EU of the former Soviet bloc countries of eastern Europe...

THE BEGINNINGS OF THIS RAPID RISE LONG PREDATED THE ACCESSION TO THE EU OF THE FORMER SOVIET BLOC COUNTRIES of eastern Europe. True, the figure rose again after the Poles joined and THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT DECIDED IN ITS WISDOM TO ALLOW THE NEW ARRIVALS TO COME AND WORK IN BRITAIN, EVEN THOUGH IT COULD HAVE DENIED THEM ACCESS FOR UP TO SEVEN YEARS – as Germany and France did. WHITEHALL OFFICIALS ESTIMATED THAT ONLY 13,000 WORKERS FROM THE EAST WOULD COME LOOKING FOR JOBS; IN THE EVENT IT WAS HALF A MILLION… The fact remains THAT NET IMMIGRATION HAD ALMOST QUADRUPLED BEFORE THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE EU. Mr Miliband’s mea culpa is, therefore, just SO MUCH HOT AIR. He is trying to give the impression that apart from under-estimating the influx from Poland and the other new members, it was really all beyond Labour’s control.

In fact, the last Labour government did more than ‘get it wrong’ on immigration: EITHER WILFULLY OR RECKLESSLY, IT RIPPED UP A NATIONAL CONSENSUS THAT HAD PREVAILED SINCE THE EARLY 1970S. Next month, in fact, sees the 40th anniversary of one of the most seminal pieces of legislation of the post-war years, the 1971 Immigration Act. It was fashioned to take the heat out of an incendiary political debate over levels of immigration that were far smaller than anything we are seeing today. The issue had exploded in the late 1960s with Enoch Powell’s ‘rivers of blood’ speech and his subsequent dismissal from the shadow cabinet by Edward Heath.

But the Tories could not evade A SUBJECT THAT WAS CAUSING DEEP DISQUIET IN THE COUNTRY and when Heath took office in 1970 it was on a promise to reduce significantly the number of people coming from what was then called the New Commonwealth, essentially the Indian sub-continent, for whom there had previously been free admission to the UK.

When the Immigration Bill received its second reading in the Commons on March 8 1971, Reginald Maudling, the Home Secretary, said: ‘IF WE ARE TO GET PROGRESS IN COMMUNITY RELATIONS, WE MUST GIVE ASSURANCE TO THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ALREADY HERE BEFORE THE LARGE WAVE OF IMMIGRATION THAT THIS WILL BE THE END AND THAT THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER LARGE-SCALE IMMIGRATION’… From that point on until the mid-1990s, net immigration to the UK ran consistently around or below 50,000 per annum...

So, Labour did more than simply ‘get it wrong.’ IT UNDERMINED THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS OF THE 1971 SETTLEMENT, WHICH WAS TO ENSURE THAT IMMIGRATION DID NOT BECOME A SOURCE OF FRICTION WITHIN COMMUNITIES, AS IT CLEARLY HAS DONE ONCE MORE.

Politicians have always felt it necessary to emphasise the economic benefits of immigration, even though A HOUSE OF LORDS COMMITTEE SHOWED THESE TO BE A MYTH. But they often shy away from discussing its social significance, the impact on communities of a rapidly changing demography about which Maudling spoke 40 years ago. FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE NORMAN CONQUEST, THE POPULATION IS GROWING PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF IMMIGRATION. This has had a significant impact on schools and hospitals, on infrastructure and housing, especially in London and the South-East, where most immigrants settle.

NONE OF THIS WAS PLANNED FOR. Moreover… FAR MORE BRITISH PEOPLE ARE DEPARTING THESE SHORES THAN ARE RETURNING AFTER A PERIOD ABROAD. SO THE ETHNIC MIX OF THE COUNTRY IS CHANGING FASTER THAN AT ANY TIME IN OUR HISTORY. ALL THIS HAPPENED WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION; nobody was asked at an election to support a new policy to replace the 1971 Act. When, in 2001, the Tories tried to get a national debate going THEY WERE HOWLED DOWN AS RACISTS.

Now the best the Labour leader can come up with is that HIS PARTY ‘GOT IT WRONG.’

So, that’s all right then.”

There was ‘widespread pubic approval?' for ‘50,000 a year?’

You’re full of it, Phil.

In the 1950s, the British people were saying they wanted ALL immigration stopped. (Ninety percent of us according to Equality boss, Trevor Philips) So, as there were many more immigrants in the country by then and we’d had the obscenity of the immigrant-partial 1965 and 1968 Race Relations Acts foist upon us, (Enoch Powell’s speech was a consequence of the latter) you’re being economical with the actualité, to put it mildly.

And I say this as I welcome your accusing finger pointed at Ed Miliband (himself a second-generation Jewish immigrant) and the totality of New Labour.



After Yvonne Fletcher was fatally shot during a 1984 demonstration outside the Libyan embassy, PC John Murray, who was with Yvonne at the time, vowed that he would bring her murderers to justice.

On 26 September 2011, The Mail Online quoted John thus:

"It is a very embarrassing situation for the Metropolitan police. The rank and file want the murderer charged, but THEY HAVE BEEN PREVENTED BY POLITICAL REASONS. There is no doubt about that…

The then Foreign Secretary DAVID MILIBAND REFUSED EVEN TO MEET WITH ME. We bombarded the foreign office, but THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. I did think when Cameron took over that it would get better, but it didn't much… Each time I was told the case was under investigation, and that it was progressing well. BUT 27 YEARS ON IT STILL IS NOT RESOLVED. This must be the longest ongoing investigation in the history of the police force…

UNDER COL. GADDAFI, WE WERE TRAINING IN LONDON LIBYAN POLICE OFFICERS WHEN THEIR LEADER WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MURDER OF ONE OF OUR OFFICERS!…

Moussa Koussa, holds vital information to Yvonne Fletcher's case. I have no doubt that any orders to fire on demonstrators must have come through him. The only chance police had to question him was when he defected to the UK, and as far as I am aware HE WASN'T APPROACHED ON THIS MATTER…

THE POLITICAL WILL IS NOT THERE. THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT DOES NOT WANT ANYONE ARRESTED OR CHARGED AS IT COULD REVEAL HOW THEY COSIED UP THE LIBYAN GOVERNMENT, AT THE EXPENSE OF YVONNE'S CASE."

Hey John, have you ever considered that ‘the British government’ might not want the full facts revealed because there is more to hide than ‘how they cosied up?’

From the web site of Joe Vialls:

“During the morning of 17 April 1984, WPC Fletcher was gunned down outside the Libyan Embassy in St James Square, London. Media claims that the Libyans were responsible for her murder were lies. Yvonne was murdered by a high velocity bullet fired from the top floor of Enserch House, a building located well to the west of the Embassy, in a covert ‘sting’ operation stage- managed by American and Israeli intelligence operatives…

Yvonne Fletcher was shot in the back while on crowd control duties… The subsequent coronial inquest into her death was rushed and lacking in detail. On closer examination of the available scientific evidence, it became very clear that the shot which killed Yvonne Fletcher could not have been fired from the Libyan Embassy, but only from Enserch House a few doors away.

In-depth investigation proved links between this building in 1984 directly to the CIA, and indirectly to the Israeli Mossad. Exactly why these two agencies ordered the execution of an unarmed policewoman doing her duty on the streets of London is unclear, but general motivation seems obvious. Israel in particular has always viewed Libya as an enemy, and the murder of Yvonne Fletcher completely undermined Libya's standing in the international community. In addition, economic sanctions rapidly imposed on Libya caused severe damage to its defence, health and other internal structures…

Yvonne Fletcher was murdered in a pre-meditated ‘black’ Psyop designed to manipulate British emotions on television. Two years later when America launched a vicious bombing attack on Libya from British bases, only a handful of voices were raised in protest. After all, the Libyans murdered an unarmed English policewoman didn't they?…

Two professional television cameras were filming at the time, one located outside the Bureau at 5 St James and the other outside 8 St James. In ballistics terms the footage from those two cameras provides most of the hard scientific proof needed to prove the shots could not have been fired by the Libyans, and confirms the firing platform was located in a building on the northern side of the square, well to the west of the Libyan Bureau. Forensic details from Yvonne Fletcher's post mortem provide the balance of irrefutable scientific evidence.

Early that day crowd barriers were placed round the central garden pavements of St James Square, and also to the west of the Libyan Bureau in front of numbers 7 and 8. The anti-Quadhafi demonstrators were ushered behind the barriers in the inner square at 10.15 am and a senior police officer then personally positioned twenty police constables, including WPC Fletcher, in an arc facing the inner square. Significantly, although there were more than 50 police personnel present in the Square, Yvonne Fletcher, the shortest constable in the Metropolitan Police Force, was the only female officer present.

As the constable with the lightest body weight facing multiple demonstrators of considerable bulk, every rule in the book says the senior officer should have positioned Yvonne well out on one of the flanks, but he did not do so. Yvonne Fletcher was deliberately positioned on the apex of the curve in front of the Libyan Bureau, in front of the television cameras, and directly in the chosen line of fire from 8 St James Square.

Just four minutes later at 10.19 am a 3-shot burst of automatic fire rang out. Yvonne Fletcher was hit by the first bullet in the upper right back. Bullet entry angle was 60 degrees from the horizontal, with an exit wound visible below the left rib cage. If the entry and exit wounds are lined up with her known height, and her televised position when the shots were fired, the line of fire backtracks precisely to the top floor of 8 St James Square. No other building in St James Square is high enough or at the correct azimuth to facilitate the sixty degree shot. At the coronial inquest into her death, creative media deception ‘proved’ that Yvonne Fletcher was killed by a shot fired from the first floor of the Libyan Bureau on her left-hand side, at only 15 degrees from the horizontal!

The continuous television video sound track records the crowd chanting, followed by a bullet strike on a human body, followed in turn by the sounds of three equally-spaced very fast shots. By far the most important point proved by the sound is that the camera microphone located outside the Libyan Bureau recorded the ‘whump’ of the bullet striking Yvonne Fletcher before it recorded the sound of the three shots being fired. What this means in layman terms is that the bullet which killed her was supersonic, and was fired from a position more distant from the camera's microphone than Yvonne Fletcher herself. This analysis alone proves the shots could not have been fired from the Libyan Bureau under any circumstances.

If the shots were fired from the Libyan Bureau they would have crossed over the camera microphone before the first bullet hit Yvonne Fletcher, i.e. the microphone would have recorded a different sound sequence: first a single shot, then the bullet impact, then shots two and three - whether the bullets were supersonic or not. There is absolutely no trace of this latter sequence on the audio, which also destroys the claim made at the coronial inquest that two 9-mm Sterling sub-machine guns fired at the same time from the Libyan Bureau. The professional television audio proves in absolute scientific terms that no shots were fired from the Bureau, nor from any other building on the eastern side of St James Square that day.

The camera positioned outside the Bureau panned left and right, showing demonstrators massed along the pavement on the inner square. When the shots were fired, this camera zoomed in and filmed the demonstrators falling sideways to the ground towards the camera's left. So their physical response was to shrapnel and noise from the opposite direction: exactly the line of fire from 8 St James. The massive kinetic energy and inertia of the high velocity assault round fired at her from 8 St James Square, knocked Yvonne Fletcher to the ground in precisely the same direction as the demonstrators, once again proving the direct line of fire. The second TV camera at 8 St James then zoomed in to show Yvonne Fletcher rolling from side to side on the road, dying on national television in excruciating agony for the greater good of the ‘international community’.”

Interesting stuff, don’t you think, John?

If you return from Libya empty handed, maybe you and some of your more concerned of the ‘rank and file’ friends could have a little think about how right (or wrong) Joe Vialls might be.

Check out the rest of Joe’s hypothesis here:

http://vialls.homestead.com/yvonnefletcher.html

Hope you find Yvonne's killer(s), John.

Whoever he/they happen to be.



On 26 September 2011, during a BBC Radio 4 interview, the former cricketer and leader of the Pakistan Movement for Justice, Imran Khan, urged the UK to cut aid to his countryas it fuelled corruption.

He added:

"If we don't have aid we will be forced to make reforms and stand on our own feet. Unfortunately, aid has been a curse for Pakistan. Total aid is about $20bn. This $20bn is not helping the people of Pakistan."

The UK plans to increase its annual aid to Pakistan from £140m to £350m over the next few years.

The country detonated five atomic devices in May 1998. Remind me again, how much does it cost build an atomic bomb?



On 26 May 2011, former cricketer, Sir Ian Botham, was quoted thus by The Express:

“BRITAIN IS IN A MESS. I BELIEVE IN THE CANE. IT DIDN’T DO ME ANY HARM. BRING IT BACK. YOUNGSTERS TODAY NEED DISCIPLINE AND TO GET OFF THEIR BACKSIDES… We have Ed Miliband telling us where the Conservatives are going wrong. But hang on a minute. YOU WERE THE ONES WHO LANDED US IN THIS SITUATION AND WE ARE IN A PERILOUS SITUATION…

THE GOVERNMENT CAN LIE AS MUCH AS IT WANTS BUT HALF THE PLAYING FIELDS ARE BEING SOLD OFF.”

Speaking of his experience during the riots, Sir Ian added:

“We all sat in silence. No one went out. The hotel doors were locked.”



On 26 September 2011, The Guardian told us that Ed Balls, former Education Secretary and Shadow Chancellor, believed that the economic situation was "the most dangerous time in the economy in my lifetime".

He added:

"The banking crisis was a disaster. All around the world the banks behaved irresponsibly, but REGULATION WASN'T TOUGH ENOUGH. WE WERE PART OF THAT. I'm sorry for that mistake, I deeply, deeply regret it.

The thing which we said at the time was, we wanted it to be risk-based, we wanted it to be lighter where there was less risk, tougher when there was more risk… WE FAILED… TO SEE… THE SCALE OF THOSE RISKS. I'm sorry about that. It's also the case WE MADE SOME MISTAKES IN OTHER AREAS – OF COURSE WE DIDN'T SPEND EVERY POUND OF PUBLIC MONEY WELL…

It took the Conservatives years after 1997, it took Labour 18 years after 1979 to restore credibility. We've not got 18 years, we have to do this in this parliament because THE WORLD IS IN SUCH A DANGEROUS PLACE, the coalition's economic plan is clearly not working in Britain and around the world, people are crying out for a better way and opposition is about answering the big question."

On 26 September 2011, Balls said this on ITV Daybreak:

“WE AND GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD SHOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH TOUGHER ON THE BANKS AND TOUGHER ON REGULATION. WE DIDN'T SPEND EVERY POUND OF PUBLIC MONEY RIGHT. WE ARE FACING A CRISIS NOW THAT IS WORSE THAN THE ONE THREE YEARS AGO.”

He told BBC Breakfast:

“THE ECONOMY IS CLEARLY DOING REALLY BADLY, THE WORLD IS IN A MESS.”



On 26 September 2011, Martyn Brown told us this in The Daily Express:

“LABOUR COVERED UP THE UK’S BURGEONING IMMIGRATION CRISIS WHILE THEY WERE IN POWER, according to secret reports revealed last night. DOCUMENTS ON BULGARIAN AND ROMANIAN IMMIGRANTS, commissioned at a cost of £165,000 to the taxpayer, WERE NEVER PUBLISHED…

Among the hidden details was the revelation that A QUARTER OF MIGRANTS ARRIVING FROM BULGARIA AND ROMANIA HAD LOW EDUCATION LEVELS, MANY HAD FOUR OR MORE CHILDREN AND WERE MORE LIKELY TO CLAIM UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS THAN OTHER IMMIGRANTS…

BOTH FORMER PRIME MINISTERS INSISTED, WHILE IN POWER, THAT ONLY PEOPLE FROM BULGARIA AND ROMANIA WHO BROUGHT SKILLS AND ADDED VALUE TO THE UK WOULD BE ALLOWED IN AFTER THEY JOINED THE EU IN 2007... Grant Shapps called it a 'another disturbing cover-up'.”

The reports “also include A PREDICTED POPULATION EXPLOSION OF FOUR MILLION IN THE 10 YEARS TO 2018. The reports also said that UNEMPLOYMENT WAS WORSE AMONG IMMIGRANTS AND ONE IN THREE PEOPLE LIVING IN LONDON WAS BORN OUTSIDE THE UK. It was also revealed that net immigration rocketed from 9,200 a year in 1992-1995 TO 178,300 BY 2004-2007...

The secret reports… shine the spotlight on the party’s failings on immigration.

Until 2008, THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT EFFECTIVELY OPERATED AN ‘OPEN DOOR’ POLICY WHERE THE NUMBER OF VISAS, WORK PERMITS AND EXTENDED RESIDENCIES GRANTED BALLOONED.”



On 26 September 2011, Dr Nicholas Allen, an expert on standards in public life at the University of London, was quoted thus in The Daily Mail:

“It is not altogether clear that Blair is separating his work as the representative of the Office of the Quartet AND HIS BUSINESS INTERESTS. Clearly if he was holding a ministerial office in Britain, THAT KIND OF CONFLICT. . . WOULDN’T BE TOLERATED.”

The Mail clarified this comment thus:

“Tony Blair is facing fresh questions over his role as a Middle East peace envoy after claims that HE HAS USED THE POSITION TO PROMOTE LUCRATIVE BUSINESS DEALS FOR CLIENTS OF AN INVESTMENT BANK THAT PAYS HIM £2MILLION A YEAR.

As a representative of the Quartet – the UN, the EU, the U.S. and Russia – the former prime minister is tasked with fostering peace between Israel and Palestine. But HE HAS ALSO USED THE POST TO PROMOTE TWO CONTRACTS WORTH MORE THAN £1BILLION IN PALESTINE WITH BRITISH GAS AND MOBILE PHONE FIRM WATANIYA – BOTH MAJOR CLIENTS OF J P MORGAN, THE U.S. INVESTMENT BANK WHICH EMPLOYS HIM AS A SENIOR ADVISER…

Wataniya Mobile’s chief executive officer Bassam Hanoun said that although the network had been built, it was ‘dead’ until Mr Blair’s forceful intervention with Israeli ministers.

Wataniya is owned by the Qatari telecoms giant QTEL, which bought the network’s parent company Wataniya International in 2007 with a £1.3billion loan arranged by J P Morgan. The deal for the gas field, worth £3.9billion, has not yet been signed but is a development Mr Blair has been pushing for the Israeli government to adopt.

Since leaving Downing Street in 2007, Mr Blair has been widely criticised for blurring his official duties with lucrative opportunities for his private consulting firm Tony Blair Associates. The Dispatches documentary, The Wonderful World Of Tony Blair, found that unlike the UN or the British Parliament, the Quartet does not have a code of conduct preventing such behaviour.

Anis Nacrour, a senior French diplomat who worked for Mr Blair at the Quartet’s Jerusalem office, said:

‘I THINK HE MAKES HIS OWN RULES’… Mr Nacrour also believes THE QUARTET IS MERELY A ‘SMOKESCREEN’ FOR AMERICAN-ISRAELI BUSINESS INTERESTS IN THE REGION...

In the four years since leaving Downing Street, Mr Blair has amassed more money than any other ex-British Prime Minister.”



On 26 September 2011, Melanie Phillips, said this in The Daily Mail:

“One of the most sinister aspects of political correctness is the way in which its edicts purport to be in the interests of minority groups. This is despite the fact that, very often, they are not promulgated at the behest of minorities at all, but BY MEMBERS OF THE MAJORITY WHO WANT TO DESTROY THEIR OWN CULTURE and who use minorities to camouflage their true intentions.

The latest manifestation stars once again that all-time world champion of political correctness, the BBC. Apparently, it has decided that the terms AD and BC (Anno Domini, or the Year of Our Lord, and Before Christ) must be replaced by the terms Common Era and Before Common Era…

Nevertheless, the terms CE and BCE are now increasingly finding their way onto news bulletins and on programmes such as University Challenge or Melvyn Bragg’s Radio Four show In Our Time. The reason given on the website is that, since the BBC is committed to impartiality, it is important not to alienate or offend non-Christians. Well, I am a Jew, so I am presumably a member of this group that must not be alienated.

It so happens, however, that along with many other Jewish people I sometimes use CE and BCE since the terms BC and AD are not appropriate to me. But the idea that any of us would be offended by anyone else using BC and AD would be totally ridiculous. How could we possibly take offence, since these are the commonly used and understood expressions when referring to the calendar? Moreover, I most certainly would not expect society in general to use these Common Era terms rather than BC and AD. Indeed, I would go much further and react with undiluted scorn and disapproval to any attempt to do so.

That is because I feel passionately that a society should be allowed to express its own culture – and this attack on BC and AD, fatuous as it may seem on the surface, is YET ANOTHER ATTACK ON BRITISH CULTURE AND THE CHRISTIAN UNDERPINNINGS WHICH PROVIDE IT WITH ITS HISTORY, IDENTITY AND FUNDAMENTAL VALUES.

The impulse behind changing such established terms, obviously as familiar to us all as the names of the days of the week, is part of THE WIDER DESIRE TO OBLITERATE CHRISTIANITY IN BRITISH CULTURE…To do so has nothing whatever to do with impartiality – indeed, quite the reverse. For WHAT ABOUT THE NEED NOT TO OFFEND OR ALIENATE CHRISTIANS?

To ask the question is to realise how far we have travelled down this invidious road. FOR CHRISTIANS IN BRITAIN ARE NOW ROUTINELY OFFENDED AND ALIENATED – INDEED, POSITIVELY HARASSED, AND WITH THEIR RELIGIOUS RIGHTS DENIED – AND ALL IN THE ORWELLIAN CAUSE OF PROMOTING ‘DIVERSITY’.

In the latest example, POLICE HAVE THREATENED A CHRISTIAN CAFE OWNER WITH ARREST FOR DISPLAYING PASSAGES FROM THE BIBLE ON A TV SCREEN, WHICH ARE SAID TO INCITE HATRED AGAINST HOMOSEXUALS. Why stop at a TV screen, one might ask. For in such a climate, it is hardly frivolous to wonder HOW LONG IT WILL BE BEFORE THE BIBLE ITSELF IS BANNED…

The pressure on Christians, however, is merely part of a far wider onslaught on Western culture through the hijacking or censorship of language. Thus CHRISTMAS HAS BEEN RENAMED IN VARIOUS PLACES ‘WINTERVAL’. Last week, it was reported that Southwark council has renamed its Guy Fawkes fireworks display ‘The Colour Thief: A Winter Extravaganza Celebrating the Change of the Seasons’. This ludicrous gesture is presumably aimed at being more ‘inclusive’ of Catholics upset by references to the 17th-century Popish gunpowder plot. What is actually does is EXCLUDE BRITONS BY AIRBRUSHING OUT PART OF THEIR HISTORY. Even more bizarre are the latest edicts by so-called ‘equality’ experts, who say that THE TRADITIONAL BLACK GARB OF WITCHES IN CHILDREN’S STORIES LEADS TO RACISM… WITCHES SHOULD THEREFORE BE GIVEN PINK HATS, AND FAIRIES DRESSED IN DARK COLOURS.

Meanwhile Anne O’Connor, an ‘early years consultant’, advises that ‘WHITE PAPER’, ESPECIALLY IN SCHOOLS, PROVOKES RACISM SINCE IT DOES NOT REFLECT THE RANGE OF HUES OF THE HUMAN RACE… And finally, TEACHERS ARE TOLD THEY SHOULD BE READY TO LIE, IF NECESSARY, WHEN ASKED BY PUPILS WHAT THEIR FAVOURITE COLOUR IS AND, IN THE INTERESTS OF GOOD RACE RELATIONS, ANSWER ‘BLACK’ OR ‘BROWN’.

Can you believe this? WHAT ON EARTH HAS OUR SOCIETY COME TO WHEN GROWN INDIVIDUALS IN RECEIPT OF PUBLIC MONEY DESCEND TO SUCH MIND-BLOWING IMBECILITY?

CALLING CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS TWO ‘RACIST’ IS SIMPLY GROTESQUE. HELPING THEM ‘UNLEARN’ NEGATIVE ASSOCIATIONS WITH DARK COLOURS IS TO TRY TO BRAINWASH THEM IN WAYS REMINISCENT OF SOVIET STALINISM. BUT THEN, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS IS ALL ABOUT DICTATING WHAT PEOPLE ARE PERMITTED OR FORBIDDEN TO SAY AS A WAY OF CONTROLLING AND RESHAPING A SOCIETY AND ITS VALUES.

Look at the way the Labour leader Ed Miliband has refused to call people who defraud the welfare system ‘benefit cheats’. He has condemned abuses of the welfare system and said it must be stopped. So why does he say he cannot accuse the people who behave in this way of being ‘cheats’? The answer is surely that POLITICAL CORRECTNESS MEANS YOU CAN’T CRITICISE ANYONE WHO DOES WRONG IF THEY BELONG TO A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE CONSIDERED MARGINALISED OR OPPRESSED. THIS IS EFFECTIVELY TO GIVE SUCH GROUPS A FREE PASS FOR ANY BAD BEHAVIOUR. And anyone who dares criticise is accused of ‘demonising’ such groups.

This means, of course, that THOSE WHO CRITICISE SUCH BAD BEHAVIOUR ARE THEMSELVES DEMONISED. Indeed, THEY CAN BE POSITIVELY VICTIMISED AND EVEN THREATENED WITH THEIR LIVES by vicious campaigns on Twitter or the internet – all on the grounds that they have ‘demonised’ some ‘victim’ group or other. If this wasn’t so terrifying, it would be hilarious.

The result of this hijacking of the language is that DEBATE BECOMES IMPOSSIBLE because words like rights, tolerance, liberal, justice, truth and many more have come to mean the precise opposite of what they really do mean. THE RESULT OF THIS INVERSION OF RIGHT AND WRONG IS THAT MORALITY ITSELF HAS BEEN REVERSED OR NEGATED. POLITICALLY CORRECT LANGUAGE IS THUS A WAY OF SHIFTING THE VERY CENTRE OF MORAL AND POLITICAL GRAVITY. So what was once considered far-Left has become the centre-ground; and those who stand on the real centre-ground are now dismissed as extreme. The attack on BC and AD is merely the latest salvo in the war of the words, PART OF THE DEFINING MADNESS OF OUR TIME.”



On 26 September 2011, Stephen Glover wrote the following in The Mail Online:

“Tony Blair's obsession with making millions of dollars on the back of his reputation as a former Prime Minister is well known. So, too, is the readiness of this supposedly devout Christian to rub shoulders with some very unsavoury characters. Even so, the latest revelations about the extent of his relations with the monstrous ex-Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, take one’s breath away.

At the very least, Mr Blair appears to have compromised the dignity of his position as an erstwhile Prime Minister, and made a nonsense of his present role as a Middle Eastern peace envoy.

To pay one, or even two, visits to Gaddafi might have been deemed a regrettable necessity. In fact, it has emerged that MR BLAIR HAD SIX PRIVATE MEETINGS WITH THE LIBYAN DICTATOR IN THE THREE YEARS AFTER HE LEFT DOWNING STREET. On at least two of these occasions he flew to Tripoli on a luxurious private jet put at his disposal by the Libyan regime.

As a former British ambassador to Libya has recently remarked, it is plain that Mr Blair was such a frequent visitor to the country because HE WAS PURSUING HIS BUSINESS INTERESTS THERE.

There are different ways of making huge sums of money. We may have squirmed when we learned that the former PM had been paid £240,000 to deliver a single speech in China in November 2007. But if his hosts were credulous and generous enough to throw their money at him, there could hardly be a valid moral objection. Not so where the mass-murdering Gaddafi is concerned. I’m afraid the Libyan tyrant is not the only unsuitable leader with whom Mr Blair has been on friendly terms.

He has also visited Rwanda, whose president, Paul Kagame, has been accused by a UN report of horrifying war crimes and human rights abuses. Mr BLAIR’S CHARITY, AFRICA GOVERNANCE INITIATIVE, HAS HAD EMPLOYEES WORKING AT THE HEART OF KAGAME’S REGIME...

There is no mention in Mr Blair’s various websites of his private visits to Gaddafi. This strongly suggests that he knows they were ill-judged… These visits to an Arab despot were apparently made despite – not because of – his role as a Middle Eastern peace envoy…

I was not surprised to read yesterday that our ex-PM has also befriended a billionaire Israeli divorcee, though there is no evidence of impropriety. This relationship is certainly according to form, inasmuch as ONE CAN’T IMAGINE TONY BLAIR BEFRIENDING AN ISRAELI PAUPER. It gets worse…

Blair has persuaded the Israeli government to open up radio frequencies so that phone company Wataniya Mobile can operate on the West Bank. The company’s owner, a Qatari telecoms giant, is a significant client of none other than J P Morgan.

Dispatches also alleges that Mr Blair has championed the development of a huge gas field off Gaza potentially worth more than £4billion. The suggestion is of a connection between British Gas’s ownership of the right to operate the field and the fact that the company is a major client of J P Morgan.

If the claims made by Dispatches are correct, Mr BLAIR FACES VERY SERIOUS CHARGES THAT HE HAS ABUSED HIS POSITION AS A PEACE ENVOY TO PROMOTE THE INTERESTS OF J P MORGAN, AS WELL AS HIS OWN…

Most people will probably register little surprise.”

You’re right about that, Stevie.



On 26 September 2011, The Guardian told us that Ed Balls, former Education Secretary and Shadow Chancellor, believed that the economic situation was "the most dangerous time in the economy in my lifetime".

He added:

"The banking crisis was a disaster. All around the world the banks behaved irresponsibly, but REGULATION WASN'T TOUGH ENOUGH. WE WERE PART OF THAT. I'm sorry for that mistake, I deeply, deeply regret it.

The thing which we said at the time was, we wanted it to be risk-based, we wanted it to be lighter where there was less risk, tougher when there was more risk… WE FAILED… TO SEE… THE SCALE OF THOSE RISKS. I'm sorry about that. It's also the case WE MADE SOME MISTAKES IN OTHER AREAS – OF COURSE WE DIDN'T SPEND EVERY POUND OF PUBLIC MONEY WELL…

It took the Conservatives years after 1997, it took Labour 18 years after 1979 to restore credibility. We've not got 18 years, we have to do this in this parliament because THE WORLD IS IN SUCH A DANGEROUS PLACE, the coalition's economic plan is clearly not working in Britain and around the world, people are crying out for a better way and opposition is about answering the big question."

On 26 September 2011, Balls said this on ITV Daybreak:

“WE AND GOVERNMENTS AROUND THE WORLD SHOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH TOUGHER ON THE BANKS AND TOUGHER ON REGULATION. WE DIDN'T SPEND EVERY POUND OF PUBLIC MONEY RIGHT. WE ARE FACING A CRISIS NOW THAT IS WORSE THAN THE ONE THREE YEARS AGO.”

He told BBC Breakfast:

“THE ECONOMY IS CLEARLY DOING REALLY BADLY, THE WORLD IS IN A MESS.”



On 26 September 2011, Martyn Brown told us this in The Daily Express:

“LABOUR COVERED UP THE UK’S BURGEONING IMMIGRATION CRISIS WHILE THEY WERE IN POWER, according to secret reports revealed last night. DOCUMENTS ON BULGARIAN AND ROMANIAN IMMIGRANTS, commissioned at a cost of £165,000 to the taxpayer, WERE NEVER PUBLISHED…

Among the hidden details was the revelation that A QUARTER OF MIGRANTS ARRIVING FROM BULGARIA AND ROMANIA HAD LOW EDUCATION LEVELS, MANY HAD FOUR OR MORE CHILDREN AND WERE MORE LIKELY TO CLAIM UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS THAN OTHER IMMIGRANTS…

BOTH FORMER PRIME MINISTERS INSISTED, WHILE IN POWER, THAT ONLY PEOPLE FROM BULGARIA AND ROMANIA WHO BROUGHT SKILLS AND ADDED VALUE TO THE UK WOULD BE ALLOWED IN AFTER THEY JOINED THE EU IN 2007... Grant Shapps called it a 'another disturbing cover-up'.”

The reports “also include A PREDICTED POPULATION EXPLOSION OF FOUR MILLION IN THE 10 YEARS TO 2018. The reports also said that UNEMPLOYMENT WAS WORSE AMONG IMMIGRANTS AND ONE IN THREE PEOPLE LIVING IN LONDON WAS BORN OUTSIDE THE UK. It was also revealed that net immigration rocketed from 9,200 a year in 1992-1995 TO 178,300 BY 2004-2007...

The secret reports… shine the spotlight on the party’s failings on immigration.

Until 2008, THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT EFFECTIVELY OPERATED AN ‘OPEN DOOR’ POLICY WHERE THE NUMBER OF VISAS, WORK PERMITS AND EXTENDED RESIDENCIES GRANTED BALLOONED.”



On 26 September 2011, Ed Miliband was quoted thus by The Telegraph:

“I don’t agree that we lied but I do agree that WE GOT IT WRONG. I think we underestimated the level of immigration from Poland, which had a big effect on people… We did allow the entry of Poland into the free movement of labour too quickly, and THAT CLEARLY HAD EFFECTS ON PEOPLE RIGHT UP AND DOWN THE COUNTRY… If you have a more open economy in Europe, you’ve got to put in the right protection for people, for workers…

I THINK WE GOT SOME THINGS WRONG… We didn’t do enough to change the ethic of our economy. WE’VE GOT A SHORT-TERM FAST BUCK ECONOMY.”

The Telegraph’s Robert Winnett commented thus :

“THE PREVIOUS LABOUR GOVERNMENT ALLOWED VIRTUALLY UNCHECKED IMMIGRATION FROM EASTERN EUROPE TO BRITAIN. MINISTERS INITIALLY CLAIMED THAT THE POLICY WOULD ONLY LEAD TO ABOUT 15,000 PEOPLE MOVING TO THIS COUNTRY ANNUALLY – BUT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF POLES AND OTHER EASTERN EUROPEANS ARRIVED. It came as the Coalition will this week publish FIVE REPORTS WHICH THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT FAILED TO PUBLISH WHICH SHOWED THAT SOME MIGRANTS WERE MORE LIKELY TO BE UNEMPLOYED AND LESS LIKELY TO ENGAGE WITH THEIR COMMUNITIES.

One suggests that ‘IMMIGRANTS IN THE UK EXHIBIT LOWER EMPLOYMENT RATES THAN NATIVES’ and ‘MMIGRANTS ARE LESS LIKELY THAN NATIVES TO ENGAGE IN ANY FORM OF CIVIC PARTICIPATION’. Another reveals that 27 PER CENT OF PEOPLE FROM BULGARIA AND ROMANIA, WHO JOINED THE EU IN 2007, HAD ‘LOW EDUCATION LEVELS’, while, as of 2009, MORE THAN 15 PER CENT OF THOSE IN THE UK WERE CLAIMING BENEFITS.

Mr Miliband, a former adviser to Gordon Brown and Minister under the former Prime Minister, is increasingly being urged to distance himself from the previous administration.”

On 26 September 2011, The Daily Mail quoted Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, thus:

“WE DID GET THINGS WRONG ON IMMIGRATION. WE SHOULD HAVE HAD TRANSITIONAL CONTROLS ON MIGRATION FROM EASTERN EUROPE.”



On 26 September 2011, The Daily Mail quoted Ed Miliband thus:

“WE GOT IT WRONG IN A NUMBER OF RESPECTS INCLUDING UNDERESTIMATING THE LEVEL OF IMMIGRATION FROM POLAND, WHICH HAD A BIG EFFECT ON PEOPLE IN BRITAIN. What I think people were worried about, in relation to Polish immigration in particular, was that THEY WERE SEEING THEIR WAGES, THEIR LIVING STANDARDS DRIVEN DOWN.

Part of the job of government is if you are going to have an open economy within Europe you have got to give that protection to employees so that they don’t see workers coming in and undercutting them…

“I’m not going to make promises that I can’t keep. We need a tough immigration policy but I THINK FREE MOVEMENT OF LABOUR IS RIGHT FOR BRITAIN.’

The Mail's James Slack added:

“In a separate development, the Coalition published a string of reports, which cost £165,000 to produce, which ministers claimed had been SUPPRESSED BY LABOUR. The documents, commissioned by the Department for Communities and Local Government, revealed that IMMIGRANTS FROM ROMANIA AND BULGARIA HAD LOW EDUCATION LEVELS AND WERE MORE LIKELY TO CLAIM UNEMPLOYMENT-RELATED BENEFITS THAN NON-IMMIGRANTS OR OTHER MIGRANT GROUPS IN BRITAIN. MIGRANTS FROM THE TWO COUNTRIES WERE ALSO MORE LIKELY TO HAVE FOUR OR MORE CHILDREN THAN THOSE COMING TO BRITAIN FROM ELSEWHERE, PLACING A SIGNIFICANT STRAIN ON THE EDUCATION SYSTEM…

In the 1980s the UK saw 42,000 more people leaving than arriving each year. By 1992-95 a total of 9,200 people were arriving each year. BETWEEN 2004 AND 2007 THE TOTAL OF NEW ARRIVALS HAD BALLOONED TO 178,000.

BRITAIN'S POPULATION WILL RISE BY FOUR MILLION TO 65.6 MILLION BY 2018. 34% OF LONDON'S POPULATION WAS BORN OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY.”



On 25 September 2011, Labour leader Ed Miliband, said this on BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show.

“WE DID ALLOW THE ENTRY OF POLAND INTO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF LABOUR TOO QUICKLY, and that clearly had effects on people up and down the country and we’ve clearly got to learn those lessons for the future when it comes to future accession… I think it’s very hard to reverse free movement of labour in Europe – British people working abroad benefit from that – but we obviously have to learn lessons from that.

If you have a more open economy in Europe, you’ve got to put in the right protection for people, for workers. I DON’T THINK WE DID QUITE ENOUGH OF THAT, in ensuring, for example, agency workers got proper protection, so that when people came in from abroad, they weren’t used to UNDERCUT BRITISH WORKERS.”

“I think it’s very hard to reverse free movement of labour in Europe.”

You know what that means don’t you, ladies and gentlemen? Despite the mealy-mouthed apologies, there’ll be as many immigrants as ever piling into our country if they ever get back in again.



On 25 September 2011, Labour leader Ed Miliband, said this on BBC1’s Andrew Marr show.

“WE DID ALLOW THE ENTRY OF POLAND INTO THE FREE MOVEMENT OF LABOUR TOO QUICKLY, and that clearly had effects on people up and down the country and we’ve clearly got to learn those lessons for the future when it comes to future accession… I think it’s very hard to reverse free movement of labour in Europe – British people working abroad benefit from that – but we obviously have to learn lessons from that.

If you have a more open economy in Europe, you’ve got to put in the right protection for people, for workers. I DON’T THINK WE DID QUITE ENOUGH OF THAT, in ensuring, for example, agency workers got proper protection, so that when people came in from abroad, they weren’t used to UNDERCUT BRITISH WORKERS.”

“I think it’s very hard to reverse free movement of labour in Europe.”

You know what that means don’t you, ladies and gentlemen? Despite the mealy-mouthed apologies, there’ll be as many immigrants as ever piling into our country if they ever get back in again.



On 25 September 2011, David Rose and Simon Walters told us this in The Daily Mail:

Tony Blair has developed a close personal friendship with one of the richest – and most controversial – women in Israel. OFRA STRAUSS… IS THE HEAD OF A £1.3BILLION FOOD COMPANY WHOSE HIGH PRICES TRIGGERED THE BIGGEST SOCIAL PROTESTS IN ISRAEL’S HISTORY.

She has been seen so often in Mr Blair’s company that THE ISRAELI PRESS HAS EVEN SPECULATED OPENLY THAT THEY ARE HAVING AN AFFAIR…

The former Prime Minister is a frequent visitor to Israel through his role as the international Middle East peace envoy representing the so-called ‘Quartet’ – the United Nations, United States, European Union and Russia.

The apparent closeness between Ms Strauss and Mr Blair is such that earlier this year a columnist for Maariv, a highly respected daily Hebrew newspaper, went so far as to write an ‘open letter’ to Mr Blair’s wife Cherie, suggesting she might like to clarify the nature of the relationship…

‘The official car allocated to Tony Blair by the Quartet glided through the gates of Ofra’s house, which is protected by tight security measures… all kinds of bad people have called me trying to suggest this visit had the character of a sexy conspiracy’…

Another article stated: ‘OFRA STRAUSS IS GROOMING HER FRIENDSHIP WITH TONY BLAIR’…

In the wake of such pieces, others have written of Mr BLAIR’S SEX APPEAL TO ISRAELIS. An Israeli news website wrote earlier this month that while David Cameron was cleaning up London after the riots, Mr Blair had ‘reasons to smile’, noting that HE WAS A ‘MILKY, THROBBING ALPHA MALE WITH unexplained sex appeal’, and that on his visits to Tel Aviv he ‘awakens hidden desires’…

In Israel, being friends with Ms Strauss is seen as politically controversial… Chaim Asa, a strategic security adviser to successive Israeli prime ministers and the founder of a new internet-based political movement which has sprung up in the wake of the protests said ISRAELI POLITICS HAD BECOME ‘CORRUPTED’ BY THE CLOSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POLITICIANS AND TYCOONS SUCH AS MS STRAUSS.

Did he find it strange that a former Labour Prime Minister should cultivate such friendships?

‘I DON’T THINK HE’S A SOCIALIST ANY MORE: HE WANTS TO BE A TYCOON HIMSELF,’ he said. ‘MAYBE ONE OF THE REASONS HE LIKES MS STRAUSS SO MUCH IS THAT SHE HAS SO MUCH MONEY.’

MS STRAUSS IS BY NO MEANS THE ONLY MULTI-MILLIONAIRE MR BLAIR HAS CULTIVATED SINCE LEAVING DOWNING ST in 2007. He has been widely criticised for blurring his official duties as a diplomat with lucrative business opportunities for his private consulting firm, Tony Blair Associates, whose clients include the rulers of Kuwait and Abu Dhabi… ESTIMATES OF THE WEALTH HE HAS AMASSED SINCE LEAVING OFFICE RANGE FROM £25M TO £60M…

The Mail on Sunday has learnt that, last year, the renowned Interdisciplinary Centre in the Israeli town of Herzliya asked Mr BLAIR TO TAKE PART IN A PRESTIGIOUS ‘WAR GAME’ INVOLVING TOP MILITARY PERSONNEL, POLITICIANS AND ACADEMICS, to examine what might happen if ISRAEL WENT TO WAR WITH IRAN. Mr BLAIR REPLIED THAT HE WOULD BE DELIGHTED TO PARTICIPATE, BUT ONLY FOR A FEE OF £100,000’.”

This is what the British sheeple voted for.

THREE BLOODY TIMES!!!



On 25 September 2011, Kirsty Buchanan said this in The Express:

“Labour was last night accused of trying to 'BURY THE TRUTH' as secret reports revealing the full impact of immigration on Britain were made public for the first time. The studies, which cost tax-payers more than £165,000 during Labour’s time in office, were suppressed because MINISTERS WERE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE FINDINGS...

The reports, all commissioned while Labour was in power, show the party presided over a rise in net immigration to 178,000 a year. They also reveal that the previous Government kept quiet about projections of sharp population growth, as well as details of immigrants’ literacy and take-up of state benefits…

It concludes that 44 per cent of migrants were attracted by these policy changes and the 'relative openness' of Britain, 23 PER CENT CAME TO JOIN RELATIVES AND 30 PER CENT ARRIVED AS A DIRECT CONSEQUENCE OF THE EU EXPANSION.

A study by researchers at Oxford University found there was 'no detectable effect of high relative house prices in the UK deterring potential migrants from the Indian sub-continent'. It found 94 PER CENT CAME FROM INDIA, PAKISTAN AND BANGLADESH OR POVERTY-STRICKEN EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES SUCH AS POLAND, LITHUANIA AND SLOVENIA.

A total of 43 per cent said they were coming to Britain to work, 26 per cent wanted to study and 18 per cent came to live with relatives.

Another study revealed that by 2009 a total of 34 PER CENT OF THE POPULATION OF LONDON HAD BEEN BORN OUTSIDE BRITAIN COMPARED WITH 22 PER CENT IN 1992. The proportion of non-UK residents DOUBLED over the same period in Scotland, Wales and the North East. While London remained the main magnet for migrants the last decade saw sharp rises in immigrant populations in the East Midlands, Yorkshire and Humberside.

Independent research found IMMIGRANTS WERE 18 PER CENT LESS LIKELY TO BE PROFICIENT IN READING AND 19.5 PER CENT LESS LIKELY TO BE PROFICIENT IN WRITING THAN UK-BORN RESIDENTS.

Particularly damaging is a report on the impact of immigration from Romania and Bulgaria, which joined the EU in 2007, which demonstrates the impact of immigration on the benefits system. It showed A QUARTER OF MIGRANTS FROM THESE COUNTRIES HAD 'LOW EDUCATION LEVELS' AND WERE ALSO MORE LIKELY TO HAVE FOUR OR MORE CHILDREN. They are currently restricted from claiming benefits until they have worked for a year in Britain but RESEARCHERS FOUND THAT WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THEIR ARRIVAL ONE IN SEVEN ARE CLAIMING BENEFITS…

Also kept from the public by Labour, was a projection that THE UK POPULATION WILL RISE BY MORE THAN FOUR MILLION TO 65.6MILLION BY 2018.”



On 24 September 2011, Peter Hitchens said this The Mail Online:

There used to be a sport called ‘all-in wrestling’ which was funny because it was faked. Despite all the grunts, squeals and crashes, as huge bodies were slammed, gasping, on to the canvas, we all knew it wasn’t serious. I do hope people realise that the same is true of the current alleged row between Nicholas Clegg’s Liberal Democrats and David Cameron’s Liberal Conservatives.

Mr CAMERON IS FAR CLOSER TO MR CLEGG THAN HE IS TO HIS OWN VOTERS. He loves being manacled to him, and much prefers Coalition to governing alone. MR CLEGG HELPS DAVID CAMERON ENSURE THAT THE GOVERNMENT REMAINS PRO-EU, PRO-CRIME, ANTI-EDUCATION, PRO-TAX, POLITICALLY CORRECT AND PRO-IMMIGRATION…

New Labour were the most revolutionary Leftist British Government since Cromwell. Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats, who have allowed Mr CAMERON TO IGNORE HIS VOTERS AND RUN A LEFTIST GOVERNMENT, HAVE LOST MOST OF THEIR LEFTIST SUPPORT.

This is the reason for the silly fake fight, in which Mr Clegg and Mr Cameron pretend to be at odds about the 50p tax rate, or Human Rights… But the biggest fake of all will be the stage-managed split between the two, which I predict will take place by the spring of 2014. There will be some pretext or other - probably spending cuts. THE IDEA WILL BE TO MAKE THE LIBERALS LOOK LIKE PRINCIPLED LEFTISTS AND THE TORIES LOOK LIKE PRINCIPLED CONSERVATIVES. THE MEDIA WILL, AS USUAL, PLAY ALONG.

The Liberals will then noisily leave the Coalition but quietly agree to maintain a minority Tory Government on the basis of ‘confidence and supply’. Mr Cameron will then find ministerial jobs for some of his friends. Mr Clegg may possibly go off to the European Commission - a seat falls vacant in 2014.

If he does, I suspect Vince Cable will become leader, a change worth many votes to his party. The Tories will try and fail to get a few ‘Right-wing’ measures through Parliament. And at the 2015 Election, voters will be asked to choose between Liberal Conservative, Liberal Democrat or Liberal Labour candidates, PRETENDING TO DISAGREE WITH EACH OTHER.

The Liberal Democrats will then form a coalition with whoever gets most seats. And your wishes, hopes and fears will continue to be ignored. Unlike the wrestling, THIS FRAUD ISN’T FUNNY. IT IS DEADLY SERIOUS, AND WE SHALL ALL PAY FOR IT.'



On 24 September 2011, Sue Reid’s article, The truth about polygamy: A special investigation into how Muslim men can exploit the benefits system, appeared in The Mail Online.

This, in part, is it:

“Ghulam is a taxi driver who lives in Blackburn, a once-booming textile town in Lancashire. He has a terrace house near his local mosque (one of 53 in the area), a silver Nissan car and a very complex private life. For HE HAS SO MANY CHILDREN THAT HE STRUGGLES TO REMEMBER THEIR NAMES, AND FIVE WIVES FROM VARIOUS COUNTRIES, INCLUDING YEMEN, EGYPT, TURKEY AND HIS OWN BIRTHPLACE, PAKISTAN.

Ghulam’s latest bride is a shy 20-year-old called Hafeza. He brought her to Britain from Morocco, soon after his 45th birthday earlier this year. They married in an Islamic wedding ceremony called ‘the Nikah’ in her village, with Hafeza’s pleased parents among the guests.

Thirty miles across the Pennines in Yorkshire, pizza delivery driver Wasim, 27, has an equally complicated domestic life. He lives in a part of Dewsbury called Savile Town, a network of 11 terrace streets dominated by one of the biggest mosques in Europe, where most residents are Asian with origins in Pakistan or India. Wasim has three wives, the first of whom lives with him and their three teenage sons. His other two wives have separate houses in Savile Town, one down the road and another round the corner. He visits each two nights a week. The women have had several of Wasim’s children and he hopes the youngest bride (aged 19) will soon present him with another baby.

I learned of Ghulam and Wasim this week while investigating A SUBJECT THAT IS TABOO IN POLITICALLY CORRECT BRITAIN. IT IS THE HUGE RISE OF BIGAMY (HAVING TWO WIVES) AND POLYGAMY (MORE THAN TWO) IN OUR MUSLIM COMMUNITIES. The issue was recently bravely highlighted by Baroness Flather, a crossbench life peer who was herself born in Lahore, now part of Pakistan. She warned the Lords (and also wrote an article for the Mail on the subject) about how OUR SHAMBOLIC BENEFITS SYSTEM IS BEING EXPLOITED BY MEN HAILING FROM PAKISTAN AND OTHER MUSLIM NATIONS WHO INDULGE IN MULTIPLE MARRIAGES — WITH TAXPAYERS FORCED TO FOOT THE BILL. As Baroness Flather explained: ‘THE WIVES ARE REGARDED BY THE WELFARE SYSTEM AS SINGLE MOTHERS, AND ARE THEREFORE ENTITLED TO A FULL RANGE OF LONE PARENT PAYMENTS. AS A RESULT, SEVERAL ‘FAMILIES’ FATHERED BY THE SAME MAN CAN ALL CLAIM BENEFITS, AS THEY ARE PROVIDED FOR BY THE WELFARE STATE, WHICH TREATS THEM AS IF THEY WERE NOT RELATED.’

Lady Flather also lamented the reluctance of politicians to address the issue:

‘It is certainly difficult to discuss this phenomenon of serial marriage and exploitation of the benefits system, WITH FEW PEOPLE IN BRITAIN SEEMING TO WANT TO CONFRONT THE DISTURBING TRUTH.’

Two years ago, another peer, Baroness Warsi, born in Dewsbury to Pakistani parents, and now a Coalition Cabinet Minister, also voiced her concerns. She said cultural sensitivity was stopping politicians addressing the problem…

Although THE GOVERNMENT SAYS THERE ARE ONLY 1,000 SUCH BIGAMOUS OR POLYGAMOUS UNIONS IN THE UK, two experienced Lancashire social workers, one of Indian-English heritage and the other with Pakistani origins, told me that, although it’s difficult to be precise, IN THEIR ESTIMATION THE FIGURE IS CLOSER TO 20,000. The social workers said THE MULTIPLE MARRIAGES ARE ENCOURAGED BY A WELFARE SYSTEM WHICH ALLOWS A SECOND, THIRD OR FOURTH WIFE TO BE TREATED AS A SINGLE MOTHER WHO GETS A HOUSE AND AN ARRAY OF OTHER STATE PAYMENTS FOR HERSELF AND HER CHILDREN. Controversially, it means that A MAN CAN TAKE A NEW SPOUSE (FROM ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD), SIRE ANY NUMBER OF CHILDREN WITH HER, AND YET HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS FAMILY’S UPKEEP OR CARE.

To avoid breaking Britain’s matrimony laws, the men marry their extra ‘wives’ in an Islamic Nikah ceremony, either in their own homes or a mosque. These marriages are not recognised officially, so they do not appear in government statistics or have any status under the law. THEY ALSO DO NOT COUNT WHEN ASSESSING WELFARE PAYMENTS.

Another technique is for a couple to marry legally under British law but then divorce, leaving them then to have a Nikah ceremony and continue living together. THE WOMAN WILL THEN BE ENTITLED TO WELFARE PAYMENTS AS A SINGLE MOTHER AND THE MAN CAN THEN BRING ANOTHER WOMAN FROM ABROAD AND LEGALLY MARRY HER IN BRITAIN.

Men also cheat the system by bringing brides from abroad as nannies for their children, or as carers for a sick relative. The bride gets a year’s visitors’ visa, disappears into a tight-knit local community, AND IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE WELFARE HAND-OUTS.

While it has long been a cliche for men to complain that their wives and children take up most of their income, THE REALITY FOR POLYGAMOUS HUSBANDS IS THAT THE MORE BABIES HE SIRES, THE MORE MONEY POURS IN FOR HIM AND HIS WIVES.

As Tariq Ali, the 45-year-old co-founder of Project BME (Black Minority Ethnics), a charity based in Darwen, Lancashire, admits:

‘THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF BIGAMOUS AND POLYGAMOUS MARRIAGES IN THE UK’S PAKISTANI COMMUNITY… EVERY SINGLE MAN OF MY AGE WHO I BUMP INTO SEEMS TO HAVE A THIRD, FOURTH OR FIFTH WIFE. The issue is going unreported but IN THE ASIAN COMMUNITIES THIS IS BECOMING A WAY OF LIFE. I THINK THE NUMBER OF POLYGAMOUS RELATIONSHIPS MUST BE 20,000.

The men find second wives in the UK as well as any Muslim country abroad. The new favourite places to find women are Turkey and Morocco, because the men can drive there by car to meet them and bring them back.’

His colleague, Zed Ali, the manager of Project BME, added:

‘These arrangements satisfy a man’s sexual desires when he is trapped in an unhappy or sexless arranged marriage with a first wife and their families don’t countenance a divorce. The first wives often accept the situation as a compromise. THERE IS A LIMITLESS NUMBER OF GIRLS LIVING IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES WANTING TO COME TO THE UK FOR WHAT THEY, AND THEIR PARENTS, THINK IS A BETTER LIFE EVEN AS A SECOND, THIRD OR FOURTH WIFE. WHAT’S MORE, THEY ARE VIRGINS, WHICH THE MEN LIKE. BUT IT MEANS BRITISH LAWS ARE BEING ABUSED, AND SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE BY THE GOVERNMENT’…

Officially, bigamy and polygamy are punishable by up to seven years in prison. IT WAS DECLARED ILLEGAL IN ENGLAND AND WALES IN 1604, WHEN THE PARLIAMENT OF JAMES I TOOK ACTION TO RESTRAIN ‘EVIL PERSONS’ MARRYING MORE THAN ONE WIFE — ON PENALTY OF DEATH. BUT OFFICIALDOM NOW TURNS A BLIND EYE BECAUSE OF CULTURAL SENSITIVITIES.

A 2007 Government report estimated there were 1,000 bigamous or polygamous marriages in England and Wales. It claimed that men living in a harem arrangement, with their wives under the same roof, were each claiming state handouts of £10,000 a year for the spouses through income support, housing and child benefits. But THE REPORT IGNORED THE THOUSANDS OF MEN SQUEEZING MORE MONEY FROM THE STATE BY HAVING A STRING OF WIVES LIVING IN SEPARATE HOMES, ALL CLAIMING BENEFITS INTENDED FOR SINGLE MOTHERS AND THEIR CHILDREN. THOSE WOMEN ARE ELIGIBLE FOR FULL HOUSING BENEFIT, REACHING £106,000 A YEAR IN SOME PARTS OF LONDON — AND CHILD BENEFIT PAID AT £1,000 A YEAR FOR A FIRST CHILD, AND NEARLY £700 FOR EACH SUBSEQUENT ONE…

Tackling this phenomenon will be difficult. I was told this week that EVEN THE MOSQUES’ PREACHERS — THE IMAMS THEMSELVES — HAVE SECOND OR THIRD WIVES, SOME CHOSEN FROM AMONG THEIR OWN WORSHIPPERS. One female health visitor in Lancashire, whose parents were born in Pakistan and came here in 1971, explained:

‘My sister has been asked by her own imam in Manchester to marry him as his second wife. She is 38 and went to school here. She played netball, socialised normally, and had British friends. But her marriage to a British Asian broke down when she became very fundamentalist about religion and wanted to wear a burka. Then she turned to the mosque for advice. THE IMAM, WHO RECENTLY ARRIVED FROM AFRICA, SUGGESTED A BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE TO HIM WOULD BE THE SOLUTION. My family are horrified, but PLENTY OF IMAMS IN THE UK HAVE MORE THAN ONE WIFE.’

A little later in the day, I was introduced to Javeria, a 26-year-old British-born Muslim who is the second wife of a 29-year-old man in Rochdale, Lancashire… Now she lives in a block of flats with her two children, aged five and three, and works in a bank as a cashier. Her husband, meanwhile, lives half a mile away with his first wife and their three children in a semi-detached house with a garden. He visits Javeria three nights a week…

‘I GET TAX CREDITS BECAUSE I AM ON LOW PAY AND HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN. I ALSO GET HOUSING BENEFIT, BECAUSE THE COUNCIL SAYS I NEED THREE BEDROOMS FOR MYSELF AND THE KIDS. THE CHILD BENEFITS FOR OUR SON AND DAUGHTER ARE PAID INTO MY ACCOUNT.’

But, of course, not all multiple marriages work this well… Orpita contacted me through her lawyer when she heard I was writing about multiple marriages in the Muslim community. She was deserted by her husband of 20 years when he went on holiday to Bangladesh and returned to say he was about to marry a girl of 19... and wanted to bring her to Britain as his second wife… The husband told the British immigration authorities that Saba was from his home village and was to be a nanny for his children. They needed, HE LIED to them, a caring person who understood his family’s cultural heritage.

THE OFFICIALS BELIEVED HIM and, after the Nikah in Bangladesh, Orpita’s husband set up home with his second wife two years ago in Maida Vale, North London. They now have a one-year-old baby.

‘I am only just recovering from the shock,’ says Orpita. ‘We are not divorced, because I will not allow it. When he walked out, HE SAID THE STATE COULD LOOK AFTER ME AND THAT WAS HOW IT WORKED IN BRITAIN. ALL OVER THE PLACE, IN LONDON’S EAST END, IN YORKSHIRE TOWNS, DOWN THE ROAD, ACROSS THE STREET, I SEE MUSLIM MEN TAKING SECOND OR THIRD WIVES. I CANNOT COUNT THE NUMBER OF TIMES I HAVE BEEN APPROACHED TO BE A SECOND WIFE MYSELF BY BANGLADESHI MEN WHO KNOW I AM NOW ON MY OWN.

‘THIS BIGAMY AND POLYGAMY IS DESTROYING FAMILIES. CHILDREN GROW UP ANGRY AND BEWILDERED. MANY RARELY SEE THEIR OWN FATHERS BECAUSE THEY HAVE SO MANY WIVES TO VISIT…

It is a tragedy for everyone in this country, whether they are Muslim or not. And it is the crazy welfare system that encourages it all to happen’.”

The crazy welfare system, Orpita, is just the way the craziness manifests itself.

The root cause and problem we all face is the mentality and morality of the political elite who, for more almost fifty years now, have put the immigrant first and those who dared to raise their voices against immigrant misbehaviour a long way last in this country.

Yet again, I will tell anyone who finds their way to this essay, THEY are at war with us. THEY will wage this war ceaselessly until one of two things happen. Either the British people, as we once were, will have ceased to exist. Or we fight back.

As what we once were has already almost all gone and the generality of the British people as we are now would be disinclined to fight back no matter what their rulers do them, the point of no return has almost certainly been reached. Especially as the Muslim male in this country seems determined to use the benefits system and the protection afforded by political correctness to outbreed us by a factor of God knows what.

When you’re old and grey and in a care home staffed entirely by non-white folk of first, second and third generation immigrant origin, remember how your ancestors worked and slaved and died the deaths in all the wars dreamt up for them to die in by the Kings and Queens and Prime Ministers. Remember the sacrifices they made. For you. So you could prosper and be happy.

Remember too, how you betrayed them.



On 24 September 2011, James Delingpole informed us this in The Mail on Sunday:

“The BBC... is taking action on your behalf. No longer will its website refer to those bigoted, Christian-centric concepts AD (Anno Domini – the Year of Our Lord) and BC (Before Christ). From now on, it will use initials which strip our traditional Gregorian calendar of its offensive religious context. ALL REFERENCE TO CHRIST HAS BEEN EXPUNGED, replaced by the terms CE (Common Era) and BCE (Before Common Era). But the BBC isn't doing this because it has been flooded with complaints, you understand. Nor is it responding to public demand. No, as it primly explains… it is doing it to be 'IN LINE WITH MODERN PRACTICE'.

'Whose modern practice?' you might well ask. Do you know anyone outside the BBC or the fields of Left-wing academe who has even heard of CE and BCE? Or anyone who seriously finds them preferable to the perfectly innocuous term 'AD'?… The implication of 'in line with modern practice' is that anyone who disagrees with the change must be reactionary, backward, fuddy duddy. Note, too, how the phrase is careful to evade responsibility for the decision. Nothing to do with us, it's 'modern practice'.

And so yet ANOTHER SMALL PART OF OUR TRADITION, LANGUAGE AND CULTURE TAKES A STEP CLOSER TO EXTINCTION. WE DIDN'T ASK FOR IT; WE DIDN'T WANT IT; YET STILL IT'S HAPPENING BECAUSE A TINY MINORITY OF POLITICALLY CORRECT BUSYBODIES HAVE WORMED THEIR WAY INTO INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS THE BBC AND TAKEN CONTROL.

THEIR GOAL IS TO CREATE A WORLD WHERE LEFT-WING THINKING, ON 'FAIRNESS', ON RACE, ON SEXUAL EQUALITY, ON THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENTM BECOMES THE NORM. So far, they are doing brilliantly.

This capture of the language for political ends was exactly what George Orwell warned us of more than 60 years ago in his book 1984. In the appendix he described how Big Brother devised its language Newspeak to make it impossible for people to think in the 'wrong' way.

‘NEWSPEAK WAS DESIGNED NOT TO EXTEND BUT TO DIMINISH THE RANGE OF THOUGHT,' he wrote. 'IT WAS INTENDED THAT WHEN NEWSPEAK HAD BEEN ADOPTED ONCE AND FOR ALL AND OLDSPEAK FORGOTTEN, A HERETICAL THOUGHT SHOULD BE LITERALLY UNTHINKABLE.'

'BC' AND 'AD' ARE JUST THE LATEST EXAMPLES OF THE OLDSPEAK THAT THE LINGUISTIC COMMISSARS OF THE BBC ARE SO DESPERATE TO EXPUNGE. BUT THE PROCESS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR DECADES, ACCELERATING UNDER NEW LABOUR. Tony Blair's rejection of history ('We're a young country' he once nonsensically claimed) and his embrace of modernity may have seemed vacuous but THEY WERE PART OF A DELIBERATE POLITICAL STRATEGY. WHO CONTROLS THE LANGUAGE CONTROLS THE CULTURE. WHO CONTROLS THE CULTURE WINS THE WAR.

So it was, for example, that… 'diversity' no longer meant 'plentiful variety' but 'an excuse to nurture grievance at taxpayers' expense'. 'Discrimination', formerly used to mean 'discernment', now meant 'yet another excuse to nurture grievance at taxpayers' expense'… ‘EQUALITY' – 'STATE-ENFORCED MEDIOCRITY' as you and I might see it – is made through the power of language to seem like THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE SOCIAL NORM…

IT'S AN ACT OF CULTURAL SUICIDE. Most of us may not realise this but the ideological Left certainly does, for IT HAS LONG BEEN PART OF ITS GRAND PLAN TO DESTROY WESTERN CIVILISATION FROM WITHIN. The plan's prime instigator was the influential German MARXIST thinker ('the father of the New Left') HERBERT MARCUSE. A JEWISH ACADEMIC who fled Germany for the US in the Thirties, he became the darling of the Sixties and Seventies 'radical chic' set.

HE DELIBERATELY SET OUT TO DISMANTLE EVERY LAST PILLAR OF SOCIETY – TRADITION, HIERARCHY, ORDER – and key to victory, he argued, would be a Leftist takeover of the language, including 'THE WITHDRAWAL OF TOLERATION OF SPEECH AND ASSEMBLY FROM GROUPS AND MOVEMENTS WHICH PROMOTE aggressive policies, armament, CHAUVINISM, DISCRIMINATION ON THE GROUNDS OF RACE AND RELIGION, or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care etc'. In other words, those of us who believe in smaller government or other 'Right-wing' heresies should be forever silenced.

Marcuse's teachings were de rigueur among student radicals on the campuses of the Sixties; HIS TEACHINGS FORMED THE INTELLECTUAL BEDROCK FOR EVERY REVOLUTIONARY GROUP FROM THE BLACK PANTHERS TO THE BAADER-MEINHOF GANG. AND ALSO FOR THAT GENERATION OF LONG-HAIRED STUDENTS WHO NOW OCCUPY SENIOR POSITIONS IN UNIVERSITIES, IN THE JUDICIARY, IN GOVERNMENT, IN THE CIVIL SERVICE AND, OF COURSE, AT THE BBC.

They may no longer define themselves as Marxists but they have absorbed the lessons of Marcuse unquestioningly. At the time, Marcuse may have seemed like one of those fashionable Left-wing academics whose silly ideas you grow out of once you've got a job. Only now are we beginning to appreciate just HOW LETHAL HE WAS.

Thanks to the sterling work done by his acolytes, MARCUSE'S MOST FERVENT DESIRES – AND ORWELL'S DARKEST PREDICTIONS – ARE COMING TRUE. There was a time when we used to complain about it – remember our outrage when nursery children were taught to sing about 'Baa baa rainbow sheep'? – but now we've grown so used to it that we tend to shrug our shoulders, mutter under our breath about 'political correctness gone mad' and accept it as the way things are.

THIS COMPLACENCY IS FATAL. Great civilisations do not die from the sudden arrival of the barbarians at the gates. They succumb much more slowly than that, from the DEATH-BY-A-THOUSAND-CUTS permitted from within by THOSE WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN WHY THEIR TRADITIONS AND CULTURAL VALUES ARE WORTH DEFENDING.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2041518/JAMES-DELINGPOLE-How-BBC-fell-Marxist-plot-destroy-civilisation-within.html#ixzz1Yz9ORYbN

The Nationalist has been trying to warn the British people that the establishment was at war with them for many decades now.

Check out below just one of the essays I, myself, was promoting more than four years before James Delingpole’s excellent exposé was published.

http://www.iamanenglishman.com/page.php?iCategoryId=1127&iParentId=1097

In this essay, the historian, William Lind, fingers those whom he believes, along with Marcuse, ‘stole our culture.’ Apart from Antonio Gramsci, whose ancestry is Albanian, foremost among these thieves are Georg Lukacs; Felix Weil; Karl Marx; Sigmund Freud; Max Horkheimer; Theodor Adorno; Eric Fromm; Wilhelm Reich; Walter Benjamin; Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud.

All of whom are Jewish.



On 23 September 2011, David Aaronovitch’s essay, Our Jewish Communist Past, appeared in the Jewish Chronicle.

This, in part, is it:

“A Polish politician… campaigned against an apology to Polish Jews for their treatment at the hands of native Poles in the village of Jedwabne in 1941. This politician had suggested that Poles should only apologise once Jews also said sorry for the fact that SO MANY OF THEM HAD BEEN COMMUNISTS.

An article on the Economist website… referred readers to a long piece in the Covenant magazine – a magazine catering for Jewish interests. Written by a philosophy professor at the University of Warsaw, Stanislaw Krajewski, also the Jewish co-chair of the Polish Council of Christians and Jews, the essay is a slightly tortuous attempt to explore and explain the relationship between Jews and Communism...

It was long an antisemitic trope that BOLSHEVISM WAS ESSENTIALLY A JEWISH CONSTRUCT; THAT COMMUNISM WAS LED BY, AND FINANCED BY, JEWS. IT WAS A JUSTIFICATION, FROM 1917 ONWARDS, FOR PERSECUTING AND HATING JEWS AT WORST, AND FAILING TO DEFEND THEM, AT BEST.

But WAS THERE A FAMILIARITY BETWEEN JEWISHNESS AND COMMUNISM THAT NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR?…

‘There was no such phenomenon as Jewish Communism… The number of Jewish Communists was important, but not as large as antisemites asserted'. But, 'THE PROBLEM LIES IN THE QUASI-RELIGIOUS ZEAL OF COMMUNISTS WHO WERE JEWS. THE MESSAGE IS THAT COMMUNISM DOES POSE A MORAL PROBLEM TO JEWS.'

It isn't easy for everyone to see that the question ‘WHY WERE SO MANY COMMUNISTS JEWISH?’ is a very different one to ‘WHY WERE SO MANY JEWS ATTRACTED TO COMMUNISM?’ As Krajewski allows, Jewishness was not in any way essential to Communism. It would have happened had all the Jews in the world been living on Madagascar.

From Lenin to Gorbachev none of the Soviet Communist Number Ones were Jews. Although Krajewski says he cannot refute estimates from the 1920s that ‘75 PER CENT OF THE LEADING BOLSHEVIKS ARE OF JEWISH ORIGIN’, a cursory examination of membership of the top committees shows this figure to be an absurd exaggeration.

According to Krajewski in post-war Poland, at one point, of the 26,000 employees of Stalinist state security, 450 (1.7 per cent) were Jewish, rising to 13 per cent of the top officers. Yet Poles had a specific phrase, ‘Zydzi w UB,’ meaning ‘JEWS IN THE SECURITY FORCES’, CONNOTING JEWISH CONTROL OF THE ORGANS OF REPRESSION. I hardly need to point out that even among the top brass, this figure means that 87 per cent were Gentile. Even so, Communist leaders were sensitive to the accusation of Jewish influence, with one writing to Stalin that there was a ‘NECESSITY TO NOT ONLY STOP INCREASING THE PERCENTAGE OF THE JEWISH ELEMENT IN THE STATE AND PARTY APPARATUS BUT RATHER TO GRADUALLY DECREASE THIS PERCENTAGE’.

Given this, how can there be something specific that Jews must account for in East European Communism? Krajewski suggests that THERE WAS SOMETHING ‘MESSIANIC’ IN JEWISH COMMITMENT TO COMMUNISM, that the combination of a deep desire for assimilation and religious background gave AN ALMOST MAD QUALITY TO SOME JEWISH COMMUNISM. But he provides no evidence for this and, frankly, I don't believe it. The commitment to the cause could be found amongst all kinds of Communists. Consequently I cannot also accept his contention that, as a Jew, he ‘CAN BE ASHAMED. EVEN THOSE JEWS WHO WERE ACTIVELY OPPOSED TO COMMUNISM CAN FEEL SHAME.’ For ‘can’ read ‘should’ and it makes no sense.”



On 23 September 2011, Frederick Forsyth said this in The Daily Express:

“The Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne’s tasks are twinfold and he knows it: cut back our ruinous annual deficit (ie spend less) and restore our once-thriving wealth creation sector (ie earn more)… You cannot achieve one without the other... But the two are linked by this: they have a common enemy and this is a gigantic burden of bureaucracy…

Identify and destroy the enemy and you might win. Problem: THE ENEMY IN LARGE PART STEMS FROM A GREAT ARMY OF EU REGULATIONS and this army has powerful allies: THE BUREAUCRATS AND THE LIB DEMS. THE FORMER ADORE THE JUNGLE OF REGULATIONS WHICH GIVE EMPLOYMENT TO THAT EXTRA MILLION JOBSWORTHS TAKEN ON DURING THE BLAIR/BROWN YEARS AND THE LATTER BECAUSE FOR THEM THE EU IS FAR DEARER THAN UK…

So intimidated are the Tory Ministers by their guiding bureaucrats and the Brussels-worshipping Lib Dems that they dare not disobey. THE FRENCH SIMPLY IGNORE REGULATIONS THAT DO NOT SUIT FRANCE, even though they voted for them in Brussels. In theory they could and should be massively fined for this institutional disobedience but they are not. Even if they were they would ignore that too and get away with it…

As for the Lib Dems… they are, simply like Labour, THE OPPOSITION BUT INSIDE GOVERNMENT WHERE THEY CAN DO MOST DAMAGE BY BLOCKING ANY AND ALL MOVES TO DEREGULATE."

In the same column, Forsyth also said this:

"Boris Johnson defends his friends the bankers, WHOSE GREED AND INCOMPETENCE ALMOST DESTROYED OUR COUNTRY, on the grounds we need their talent and skill to recover. Wrong again, O Fluffy One. Permit me an analogy.

An airline captain takes off with a plane full of passengers but flies with such insane recklessness that he drives his kite into a mountain and destroys all on board. Save himself, he was the only one with a parachute. Boris decrees we must give him a new airliner and put him back in control because we need civil aviation.

Yes, we need civil aviation and the banks. BUT NOT WITH THE SAME GREEDY SWINE AT THE HELM.”

Amen to that, Fred.



On 23 September 2011, Stephen Wright told us this in The Mail Online:

“A property tycoon's company has bought half the Olympic Village AT A KNOCK-DOWN PRICE, MONTHS AFTER MAKING A £50,000 DONATION TO THE CONSERVATIVES. Jamie Ritblat's firm Delancey purchased the site where the athletes will stay during the Games for £557million – AN ESTIMATED LOSS OF £275MILLION TO TAXPAYERS. The investment could net the firm enormous profits…

Cynics will question the timing of the deal, coming so soon after Delancey's substantial donation to the Tories. In a further twist, MR RITBLAT'S FATHER, PROPERTY GIANT SIR JOHN RITBLAT, WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY'S OLYMPICS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE.

THE SECTION OF THE VILLAGE INVOLVED HAS BEEN SOLD FOR ALMOST £300MILLION LESS THAN THE OLYMPIC DELIVERY AUTHORITY SPENT BUILDING IT using taxpayers' money...

Details of the sale, to a consortium of Delancey and Qatari Diar, the property branch of Qatar's sovereign wealth fund, were revealed last month. But it was only this week that it emerged that Delancey made a £50,000 donation to the Tories in April.”

Cllr Jenny Jones, Chairman of the GLA's planning and housing committee, said:

“On the face of it this needs to be stopped. I'm going to call for an immediate investigation and will be raising this matter with Mayor Boris Johnson as a matter of urgency’…

Mr Ritblat's consortium beat bids from Hutchison Whampoa, the Hong Kong-listed conglomerate, and UK medical charity the Wellcome Trust…

Mr Ritblat, who is chief executive of Delancey, declined to comment on the issue of Tory Party donations… Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, has described the sale of the Olympic Village as a 'FANTASTIC DEAL that will give taxpayers a great return and shows how we are securing a legacy from London's Games'.

The Village consists of 2,818 homes in total. Of these, 1,379 have already been sold to Triathlon Homes, which will turn them into affordable housing. Delancey and Qatari Diar will get the remaining 1,439 homes – which will become private housing – along with six adjacent plots with the potential for a further 2,000 homes.”

Jamie Ritblat and his father, Sir John, are Jewish.



On 23 September 2011, Quentin Letts reported thus in The Daily Mail:

“High-level rancour has been caused by the PLANNING LAW PROPOSALS WHICH COULD ENDANGER THE GREEN BELT. Cue political carnage. Our first victim is Lord Wolfson, a cerebral schmoozer. Matey with George Osborne. Matey with Cabinet Office Minister Oliver Letwin. Matey with the editor of The Times.

Simon Wolfson, chief executive of Next and the son of former Great Universal Stores chairman Lord (David) Wolfson, this week signed a business executives’ round-robin letter WHICH DEFENDED THE PLANNING PROPOSALS. No great surprise, really. IT IS WOLFSON WHO IS CREDITED WITH DEVISING THE ROTTEN IDEA IN THE FIRST PLACE…

Some were surprised (aghast, even) when THIS RICH DONOR WAS MADE A PEER BY DAVID CAMERON. They hope the PM now recognises the man’s limitations and is never, ever made a minister.”

Simon Wolfson is Jewish.

His mates, Oliver Letwin and the editor of The Times, James Harding, are also Jewish.

David Cameron's great-great granddad was a Jewish immigrant.



On 23 September 2011,Ross Clark said this in The Daily Mail:

"Next time Jonathan Dimbleby feels like mooting the idea of decriminalising hard drugs, perhaps he should take a walk beneath the stairwells of some of our inner-city housing estates. There, he won’t find the junkies gently sneezing, as he tells us he did when he snorted a line of cocaine in the U.S. in the late Sixties. HE IS MORE LIKELY TO FIND THAT THEY SET ON HIM WITH A KNIFE IN A STATE OF PSYCHOTIC RAGE. THE CONNECTION BETWEEN COCAINE, MENTAL ILLNESS AND VIOLENCE IS INDISPUTABLE.

Among the many studies that have found a link was an analysis of 1,000 people arrested for violent offences in Greater Manchester, more than 400 of whom tested positive for cocaine. Even when users are not harming others, they are certainly taking up more than their fair share of places on NHS emergency wards.

Sneezing is not listed as a side-effect of cocaine use in medical textbooks, but there are plenty of acute conditions that are on the list: STROKE, BRAIN HAEMORRHAGE, HYPOTHERMIA, AGITATED DELIRIUM, CARDIAC ARREST, IRREGULAR HEART RHYTHM AND CONVULSIONS.

And before anyone tries to say coke-users are just exercising their right to take whatever risks they like with their health, they might like to consider THE THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN OF JUNKIES KILLED OR INJURED BY THEIR PARENTS EACH YEAR, EITHER AS A RESULT OF VIOLENCE OR BECAUSE THEY ENDED UP SWALLOWING THE DRUGS THEMSELVES.

Croydon Hospital alone revealed recently it has admitted 56 children with acute intoxication as a result of illegal drug ingestion in the past five years. NONE OF THIS SEEMS TO REGISTER WITH THE CELEBRITIES AND METROPOLITAN LIBERALS, among whom the legalisation of hard drugs has become a cause celebre. To them, it seems, hard drugs are a slightly naughty way to brighten up a party…

Unlike the residents of drug-ridden estates, THEY DON’T LIVE WITH THE DAY-TO-DAY CONSEQUENCES OF LIVING AMONG DRUG ADDICTS: THE CRAZED INDIVIDUALS ON THE STAIRS, THE CHILDREN’S PLAYGROUNDS LITTERED WITH HIV-INFECTED SYRINGES, THE URINE-SOAKED LIFTS and so on.

Jonathan Dimbleby’s case, and that of the drugs legalisation lobby in general, is that the war on drugs has been an expensive failure. Prohibition, goes the theory, has led people to experiment with drugs due to the allure of doing something illegal.

It has caused drug producers and suppliers both here and abroad to fight each other and forced addicts to steal in order to fight their addictions. Legalise drugs and their use can be regulated, so the argument goes, while users can be better supported. It is all a dangerous delusion, often supported by suspect arguments and questionable statistics.

In June, a self-appointed legalisation pressure group called the Global Commission Of Drug Policy, whose supporters include SIR RICHARD BRANSON and former UN CHIEF KOFI ANNAN, published a report claiming the worldwide use of illegal drugs had soared as a result of their illegality. Its call for an end to the war on drugs was taken up by stars including JULIE CHRISTIE, DAME JUDI DENCH and STING…

The idea that the illegality of drugs promotes their use is absurd. You only have to compare the number of drug addicts with the vastly larger number of alcoholics to see the potential for drug abuse were hard drugs to legalised. Whenever drugs have been prohibited in the past, such as with the U.S. Narcotics Act of 1914, the number of users has plummeted, as the substances become harder to obtain.

The idea that the war on drugs has failed is based on a false premise. There was a war on hard drugs in Britain, but that was over 100 years ago, when opium use was stamped out. IN THE PAST 40 YEARS, WE HAVE HAD STEADY LEGALISATION BY STEALTH. Far from being a voice from the wilderness, THE LEGALISATION LOBBY HAS HAD A HUGE INFLUENCE ON DRUGS POLICIES SINCE THE SIXTIES, WITH HUGELY DAMAGING EFFECTS.

There was a time when drug-users could expect stiff sentences. In 1967, for example, Brian Jones of the Rolling Stones was sentenced to nine months in jail, though it was later commuted to a £1,000 fine (£10,000 in today’s money) for possession of marijuana… But over the years, sentencing policy has reduced the law to a farce. In May of this year, Pete Doherty was finally sentenced to six months in jail for possessing cocaine, but that was after multiple previous convictions. Most are let off with a caution.

It is little better with dealers, only one third now receive custodial sentences. MEANWHILE, THE AUTHORITIES HAVE ALLOWED PRISONS TO BECOME SWAMPED WITH DRUGS. Surely, it cannot be hard to keep a secure environment, such as a jail, free of drugs; at least sniffer dogs could be used on every visitor and piece of prisoner’s mail. Yet drug-use continues inside on a scale that suggests SOMEBODY MUST DELIBERATELY BE TURNING A BLIND EYE…

SUCCESSIVE GOVERNMENTS HAVE ALLOWED THE LAW TO BE WEAKENED, while maintaining the pretence they are still fighting a war on drugs. TONY BLAIR’S GOVERNMENT QUIETLY DOWNGRADED DRUGS FROM A CRIME PROBLEM TO A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE. Thus, hundreds of millions of pounds have been switched from fighting drug-dealers to managing drug-users’ habits: the Government annually spends £380 million on tackling the supply of drugs, compared with £800 million on treatment.

OF THAT LATTER SUM, £300 MILLION IS SPENT SUPPLYING THE HEROIN SUBSTITUTE METHADONE TO ADDICTS. YES, THE STATE IS NOW SPENDING NEARLY AS MUCH ON SUPPLYING DRUGS TO ADDICTS AS IT IS ON INVESTIGATING AND TRAPPING DRUG-DEALERS.

The Government will make no progress in reducing drug-use, so long as it treats drug-users as innocent victims of the drugs trade, rather than the law-breakers they are. We don’t treat users of child porn as victims of porn merchants: we punish them for being complicit in the abuse of the children in the images they download from the internet. So why is it any different with drugs? Without users to buy drugs, there would be no drugs trade; it is simple as that.

Jonathan Dimbleby asserted this week that ‘by criminalising the use of cocaine we are causing mayhem to the lives of millions of people in South America’. That is a perverse logic: it is the coke-snorters who are causing the misery: EVERY TIME A CELEBRITY TIPS OUT A LINE OF COCAINE AT A PARTY THEY ARE COMPLICIT IN THE DRUGS TRADE, FROM COLOMBIA TO PECKHAM…

And it’s not just the LIB DEMS, WHO ANNUALLY VOTE FOR THE LEGALISATION OF DRUGS AT THEIR CONFERENCE, AS THEY DID THIS WEEK. It wasn’t so long ago that then Conservative shadow home secretary Ann Widdecombe was vilified by members of her own party at a Conservative conference for proposing drug-users be subject to a £100 fine.

While the pro-legalisation lobby will carry on trying to make the desperate argument that swamping the country with more drugs will make society happier and more peaceful, people whose daily lives are blighted by violent drug-users want to ask a different question: WHEN WILL A BRITISH GOVERNMENT END THE PHONEY WAR ON DRUGS AND ACTUALLY START FIGHTING?”

The ‘phoney war’ will end when a party of British Nationalists takes over, James.

A political party actually on the side of the indigenous folk, as opposed to being at war with them, would sort out the drugs problem in no time.



On 22 September 2011, the Totally Jewish web site told us this:

“There were red faces at Bicom (British Israel Communication and research Centre) this week when an email from its director intended for donors was in fact sent to the organisation's media database. The email, sent by Lorna Fitzsimons, the director of the organisation, ‘dedicated to creating a more supportive environment for Israel in Britain,’ stated:

‘Throughout the weekend, BICOM STAFF WERE IN CONTACT WITH A WHOLE HOST OF BBC AND SKY NEWS DESKS AND JOURNALISTS, ENSURING THAT THE MOST OBJECTIVELY FAVOURABLE LINE WAS TAKEN, and offering talking heads, relevant to the stories unfolding…

BICOM HAS ONE OF BBC NEWS' KEY ANCHORS on a bespoke delegation. When planning her very first trip to the region, SOPHIE LONG GOT IN TOUCH WITH BICOM TO SEE IF WE COULD HELP HER OUT with meeting in the region. SOPHIE IS NOW SPENDING THREE DAYS OF HER TRIP WITH BICOM ISRAEL’…

Most embarrassing, however, was the revelation that FITZSIMONS… had ‘BRIEFED JONATHAN FORD, THE FINANCIAL TIMES LEADER WRITER FOR HIS UPCOMING LEADING ARTICLE’ in the paper. She noted BICOM HAD ‘REGULAR CONTACT WITH THE EDITOR AT LARGE OF PROSPECT MAGAZINE, DAVID GOODHART’…

A BICOM spokesman told the Jewish News that this ‘administrative error’ was ‘slightly embarrassing’.”

Here’s a key line from the email that Totally Jewish missed:

“After contact with the BICOM Media Team, Sky News CHANGED THEIR NARRATIVE in explaining the prior events in the region.”

Lorner Fitzsimons, the former New Labour MP for Rochdale and a former NUS President, was a notorious Blairite during her time in Westminster.

Sophie Long, as Totally Jewish suggests, is a leading BBC News presenter.



On 22 September 2011, Nick Clegg said this at the Lib Dem conference in Birmingham:

“These are not easy times for the country. Economic insecurity. Conflict and terrorism. Disorder flaring up on our streets. Times like these can breed protectionism and populism."

'Protectionism' = putting the country’s needs first.

‘Populism’ = Giving the people what they want. Two things the Lib Dems have never been very good at.

“Times like these are when liberals are needed most.”

The globalists and the PC Crowd and the immigrants need the 'liberal' mindset. The rest of us need it about as much as we need a hole in the head.

“For liberals, the litmus test is always the national interest.”

This is 100 per cent bulls ***! For the modern Liberal, the ‘litmus test’ is how much you can give away to the EU, the immigrant and International Development without waking up the indigenous sheeple.

“People before politics. Nation before party.”

Absolute 180 degree dishonesty! Clegg couldn‘t care less about the nation. His agenda has always been global. As for the British ‘people’, well, if you think a half-Dutch, quarter Russian silver-spoon boy whose dad was a banker and whose wife is Spanish is going to care more for the British working-classes than we do, you’re nuts.

“You never, ever play politics with people's jobs.”

Before the coalition came to power we learned that 90% of all the jobs created under New Labour had been taken up by foreigners. That statistic hasn’t changed in the sixteen months Clegg has been Deputy Prime Minister. The traitors in Westminster have been playing Brit-bashing politics with our jobs since Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979.

“We can say until we're blue in the face that no one will have to pay any fees as a student, but still people don't believe it. That once you've left university you'll pay less, week in week out, than under the current system, but still people don't believe it. That the support given to students from poorer families will increase dramatically, but still people don't believe it.”

They don’t believe it because it isn’t true. You were photographed before the election signing a National Union of Students pledge vowing not to raise tuition fees if you were elected. You lied. You broke the foremost promise you made before the last election. No wonder ‘people don’t believe’ what you say.

“In our long, proud liberal history, WE HAVE NEVER SERVED: THE MEDIA MOGULS, THE UNION BARONS OR THE BANKERS. WE DO NOT SERVE, AND WE WILL NEVER SERVE, VESTED INTERESTS. WE ARE IN NOBODY'S POCKET. That's why the Lib Dems can take decisions in the national interest."

Why are the bankers not being prosecuted then? Why are you waiting until 2019 before sorting them and their banks out? And how can you sayyou're 'in nobody's pocket' when you 'serve' the ‘vested interests’ of the EU, the immigrant and the PC Crowd so slavishly?

For that matter, Nick, we want our troops out of Afghanistan. Why do you care more for what the Western elite and the massively corrupt Afghan puppet leaders want than we do?

“Of all the claims Ed Miliband has made, the most risible is that his party is the enemy of vested interests. While we were campaigning for change in the banking system, they were on their prawn cocktail offensive in the City. While we've led the charge against the media barons, Labour has cowered before them for decades. The most shocking thing about the news that Tony Blair is godfather to one of Rupert Murdoch's children is that nobody was really shocked at all.”

Your lot leading the 'charge against the media Barons' doesn’t ring any bells, Nick, but you’re on the money with Miliband. New Labour was on board with every last top table requirement. Fot trough-gobbling with the bankers, the oligarchs, the Multinationals, the Neocons and the Murdoch empire, Tony, Gordon, Mandy and co. were every bit as bought and paid for as the Tories ever were.

"We are right to stand up for civil liberties. No retreat to the ILLIBERAL POPULISM OF THE LABOUR YEARS."

New Labour was about as concerned with what the British people wanted as a fox would be with a brood of chicks. No illiberal populists they. Nicky's spouting b***ocks again.

“WE WILL ALWAYS DEFEND HUMAN RIGHTS, at home as WELL AS ABROAD."

Of course, you will. The obscenity that is the Human Rights Act is right up the politically correct alley of the Lib Dems. The rights of foreign criminals versus the welfare of the British citizen whom he preys upon? It’s non-starter.

“The European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act are not, as some would have you believe, foreign impositions. These are British rights, drafted by British lawyers.”

Well, maybe. Lord Lester was the prime mover behind the imposition of the Human Rights Act upon the British people and he was born here. He’s Jewish though. And the Jews do have a bit of a historical reputation for not being overly concerned about the non-Jew in the societies into which they enter.

“Let me say something really clear about the Human Rights Act. In fact I'll do it in words of one syllable: IT IS HERE TO STAY.”

Oh yes. We will never be able to deport the alien bad guy if our Nicky's crew has anything to do with it.

"I know I have had all the advantages, good school, great parents. I was lucky. But it shouldn't be about luck. Other children need these opportunities."

If that’s what you think, why have the Lib Dems insisted that British children be taught alongside immigrant kids who can’t speak the language? Their education has, for the last sixty years, been severely compromised as a result of the attention of the teacher being focused upon the least able. Upon those who could not speak English. And you were all for it. All for little Abdul. And to hell with the ‘opportunities’ of Tom, Dick and Harriet.

"In terms of opportunity, we are a nation divided. Children from a poor background a year behind in language skills before the age of five; MORE YOUNG BLACK MEN IN PRISONS THAN AT RUSSELL GROUP UNIVERSITIES.”

Nice of you to own up to the criminal disposition of your favourite folk, Nicky.

“And within one city, two nations: in Hammersmith and Fulham in West London, more than half the children leaving state schools head to a good university. Just thirty minutes east - down the district line to TOWER HAMLETS - AND JUST 4 PERCENT DO.”

Hammersmith and Fulham = 0.8 per cent Bangladeshi. (2008) Tower Hamlets = 22.1 per cent Bangladeshi. (2008) Figure it out, Nick. And these stats are the official estimates. They don’t include all the illegals.

“I'VE BEEN LEADING THE CHARGE FOR SOCIAL MOBILITY.”

Of course, social mobility in the mind of the most fervent Lib Dem means positive discrimination and upward mobility for the foreigner and negative discrimination and downward mobility for the native Briton.

“This summer, we saw the consequences of a society in which some people feel they have no stake at all.”

Yep. We saw the society built by the three establishment parties falling apart all right.

“On the peace wall in Peckham there was a note that simply read: 'Our home. Our children. Our future.' Six words that say more than six hundred speeches. Our home. Our children. Our future. Britain is our home. We will make it safe and strong. THESE ARE OUR CHILDREN. WE WILL TEAR DOWN EVERY BARRIER THEY FACE. AND THIS IS OUR FUTURE. WE START BUILDING IT TODAY.”

Nick is about to 'tear down every barrier' that the rioters and the looters of Peckham (the non-indigenous ones) might face in the future. Oh yes, ladies and gents, Nick and the rest of his insanely anti-British Lib Dem posse don’t believe in punishing the alien hordes when they misbehave. They’d rather throw money at them, pander to them and promote them over us. And, in a future where ‘every barrier’ to the progress of the bestial has been torn down, to replace the British people entirely with such anti-societal types.

Norman Tebbit commented thus on his Telegraph blog:

“Clegg even invoked the spirit of Gladstone in his speech. That prompts me to contemplate what that grand old man would have thought of such a speech, or even such a leader of his once great party.”

He would would have considered Clegg an enemy of the people, Norman. A self-server as far removed from his own values as Tony Blair’s values are from those of Snow White.

Gladstone and his wife used to walk the streets of London looking for prostitutes to help and rehabilitate. If Clegg had been around back then, he would have been one of the few prostitutes the Gladstones would have ignored.



On 22 September 2011, Davina Parker was quoted thus by The Peterborough Evening Telegraph:

“THEY GOT OFF FAR TOO LIGHT AND IT IS DISGUSTING THEY WILL BE OUT SOON. THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN HUNG. I said that at the time and I will say that until the day I die.”

The Telegraph explained:

“Ross Parker was killed in a racially motivated attack by Muslim youths 10 days after the 9/11 attack on New York… Ross… was killed while walking along a cycle path… with his girlfriend at 1.15am in the morning on September 21, 2001. His murderers were Ahmed Ali Awan (32), Shaied Nazir (22) and Sarfaz Ali (35)…

The five foot five inches tall teenager was set upon in a totally unprovoked attack, sprayed with CS gas and hit with a hammer, before being stabbed in the chest and neck. Despite the brutal end to his life, positive memories of a boy affectionately nick-named ‘Half Pint’ live on through friends, family and others who have learned about him after his death.”

‘They should have been hung.’

That they should, Davina, That they should. Unfortunately, in the weird world of Westminster, where our overlords can trumpet a Stephen Lawrence more than a thousand times and whisper a Ross Parker just once, the traitorous Brit-loathers who rule our world are more likely to make excuses for the killers than string them up.



On 22 September 2011, Leo McKinstry said this in The Daily Express:

“ Nick Clegg represents so much that is depressing in our modern politics. Over-privileged, condescending, ambitious for power rather than the genuine good of the nation, he hails from A NARROW POLITICAL CLASS THAT TREATS THE MAINSTREAM VIEWS OF THE BRITISH PUBLIC WITH SNEERING CONTEMPT…

This is a man who has little experience of life outside the cocooned world of politics, having spent almost all his adulthood as an apparatchik or an elected party representative. Like most MPs he knows nothing of business or management. He might sit for a constituency in Sheffield but HE IS AN ARCHETYPAL MEMBER OF THE AFFLUENT METROPOLITAN ELITE, REPLETE WITH MONEY AND ACHINGLY RIGHT-ON OPINIONS.

THE SON OF A WEALTHY BANKER, CLEGG WAS EDUCATED AT WESTMINSTER, ONE OF BRITAIN’S MOST EXCLUSIVE SCHOOLS, and Cambridge University before embarking on his political career. For all the Liberal Democrats’ neo-Marxist bleating about equality and soaking the rich, Clegg is just as much a toff as David Cameron. What is so extraordinary about him is that he has the nerve to deliver his patronising lectures when HE HAS BEEN WRONG ABOUT EVERY SINGLE MAJOR ISSUE OF OUR TIMES, whether it be on Europe, taxation, crime, immigration or human rights…

In one laughable passage he said that ‘for Liberals, the litmus test is always the national interest.’ Ah, so that explains why he wants to see BRITAIN’S INDEPENDENCE DESTROYED BY BRUSSELS AND OUR NATIONAL IDENTITY OBLITERATED BY UNCONTROLLED IMMIGRATION. Inevitably he shrieked about ‘fairness,’ supposedly ‘what our party cares most about.’

But WHAT COULD BE MORE UNFAIR THAN THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT defended by Clegg yesterday when he said, to rapturous applause: ‘It is here to stay!’ This is THE GROTESQUE LEGISLATION WHICH PREVENTS THE DEPORTATION OF A NIGERIAN RAPIST ON THE GROUNDS THAT HE HAS A ‘RIGHT TO A FAMILY LIFE’ HERE.

Perhaps the most ill-conceived passage was about the August riots. Descending into the classic guilt-tripping Lib Dem mindset HE IMPLIED THAT THE BRUTES WHO RAMPAGED THROUGH OUR STREETS WERE REALLY VICTIMS OF SOCIETY WHO NEED SUPPORT RATHER THAN PUNISHMENT. To this end, he wants £50million to establish a network of summer schools for disadvantaged youths.

THIS IS LEFT-WING GESTURE POLITICS AT ITS WORST, FEEDING INTO THE DANGEROUS NARRATIVE OF VICTIMHOOD WHERE VIOLENT RIOTING IS CAUSED BY POVERTY AND CRIMINALS ARE NOT HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS. That mentality is a profound insult, not just to the morality of civilised society but also to millions of deprived people who continue to abide by the law.”



On 22 September 2011, Stephen Glover said this in The Daily Mail:

“The Lib Dems were tempted into government chiefly out of a desire for power… THEY ARE ABOUT AS PRINCIPLED AS A PACK OF HYENAS. They were eager to share office with people whom they openly despise, and with whom they appear to agree about precious little. And, in order to achieve power, they were prepared to jettison the cornerstone of their campaign in the 2010 general election, the abolition of tuition fees.

There are many broken pledges in politics, and Mr Cameron is certainly not blameless, but THE ENORMITY OF THE LIB DEMS’ BETRAYAL CANNOT BE OVER-ESTIMATED. They fought, and won, a number of seats in university towns, including Cambridge, Norwich, Bath, Manchester and Mr Clegg’s own Hallam constituency in Sheffield, by attracting students on the promise of getting rid of tuition fees. In the event, THESE FEES HAVE BEEN VIRTUALLY TREBLED…

TREACHERY ON THIS SCALE WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN OR FORGIVEN BY VOTERS… Anyone who has followed them over the years knows that THEY ARE SERIAL POLITICAL WHORES. In rural constituencies in southern England, they offer themselves as alternative Tories. In urban seats in northern England, they are magically transformed into grittier variants of Labour.

So long as they were in permanent opposition, these inconsistencies barely registered on the national stage. Now that they are in government, their ability to speak out of two sides of their mouths at the same time, and their unscrupulous pursuit of power, inevitably count against them. The Lib Dems have illuminated their essential untrustworthiness…

The question which Mr Cameron and senior Tories need to answer is why they should so often defer to their discredited junior partner. University College London’s School of Public Policy has calculated that 75 per cent of the Lib Dem manifesto found its way into the Coalition Agreement, as against 60 per cent of the Tory document. And yet the Lib Dems have only 57 MPs in the Commons compared to the Tories’ 306...

The Lib Dem leader yesterday boasted of his ‘power to hold our Coalition partners back’ and brazenly informed Mr Cameron that he would not agree to the slightest reform of THE PERNICIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS ACT. Why should he be allowed to frustrate measures which have widespread public support?… It is the same with the European Union, where the Europhile LIB DEMS ARE APPARENTLY DETERMINED TO OPPOSE THE REPATRIATION OF SOME POWERS, a real possibility with a new treaty looming, EVEN THOUGH THIS WOULD BE HIGHLY POPULAR WITH THE GREAT MAJORITY OF VOTERS.

THE LIB DEMS ARE… RUTHLESS, TREACHEROUS, TWO-FACED and unctuous, all at the same time. They are also weak and unpopular.”



On 21 September 2011, Martin Robinson told us this in The Daily Mail:

“CHILDREN AS YOUNG AS 10 WERE GIVEN THE CHANCE TO WIN AK-47 SEMI-AUTOMATIC ASSAULT RIFLES as part of a Koran-reading and general knowledge quiz in Somalia… To celebrate the holy month of Ramadan the country's al-Shabab Islamist group ran the competition and said the guns were offered so youths can use them 'to defend Islam'…

The second prize-winners also received an AK-47 and £320, while THE THIRD PRIZE WAS TWO HAND GRENADES and £250. It is the third year the competition has been run and previously the first prize was a rocket-propelled grenade launcher.

Al-Shabab, which has strong links to Al Qaeda, controls much of southern and central Somalia, a country with many child soldiers and serious piracy problems. A splinter group of al-Shabab is also behind the kidnapping of Judith Tebbutt and the murder of her 58-year-old husband David this month…

AL-SHAHAB IS ALSO STOPPING AID FROM ENTERING PARTS OF SOMALIA THEY CONTROL EVEN THOUGH THE COUNTRY IS IN THE MIDST OF SEVERE DROUGHT AND FAMINE.”



On 20 September 2011, Adrian Hart, of the Manifesto Club, was quoted thus by The Christian Institute web site:

“Children need space to play and to learn the meaning of words, WITHOUT BEING REPORTED TO THE LOCAL EDUCATION AUTHORITY. These policies are an inappropriate intervention into playground life, and undermine teachers’ ability to set a moral example to children and to teach them right from wrong. THERE IS A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RACIST ABUSE AND PRIMARY SCHOOL PLAYGROUND SPATS.”

http://www.christian.org.uk/news/toddlers-among-thousands-of-children-branded-racist/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+christianinstitute+%28The+Christian+Institute%29&utm_content=FaceBook

The Christian Institute told us why Adrian was so peeved:

“TEACHERS HAVE BRANDED MORE THAN 20,000 PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN RACIST OR HOMOPHOBIC following spats in the playground, figures have disclosed. EVEN SOME TODDLERS IN NURSERY SCHOOLS HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES FOR SO-CALLED HATE SPEECH…

Under THE 2000 RACE RELATIONS ACT schools are obliged to report all ‘HATE SPEECH’ incidents to local authorities."

The PC Crowd in parliament have got the nation's teachers reporting children as young as three for "hate speech", ladies and gents. Any bets what colour those hateful children will be? Any bets on their nationality?

Got it in one.



On 20 September 2011, remarking on the riots, Dame Helen Mirren was quoted thus by The Daily Mirror:

“It was terrifying. There was a rush of crazed adrenaline and everyone… got caught up in it. We’re a funny, complicated country, Britain, THERE’S A STREAK OF SAVAGERY AND THIS WAS LIKE CANNIBALISM, society eating itself in a way."

After Boris Johnson said he would like to see a Jane Tennison figure at the Met, Mirren, who played the character, Jane Tennison in ‘Prime Suspect,’ said:

"The Met have a Jane Tennison figure. They've got Sue Akers." Akers is the Deputy Assistant Commissioner in charge of the Met’s phone-hacking investigation.

She added:

“I actually met Sue when I was doing research for some of the Prime Suspect. So they do have a Jane Tennison already. And what they need are more of them, BLACK JANE TENNISONS AND ASIAN JANE TENNISONS.”

Very helpful, Ms Mironoff.

Isn’t it funny how those with non-British blood close up in their pedigree never lose an opportunity to bang the drum for immigrant advancement? I wonder, did Dame Helen not notice all the black folk rioting in Tottenham, Croydon and Hackney? Hey, Helen! How about the BNP doing the policing? Do you think they’d back off the way the PC version of the boys in blue did?

As it stands, the establishment does not allow members of the BNP to become police officers.



On 20 September 2011, The Daily Mail quoted the Bishop of Manchester, Nigel McCulloch, thus:

“FOR HALF A CENTURY THAT MASSIVE AND CONTINUING CHANGE HAS CONTRIBUTED TO AN EROSION OF CHRISTIAN VALUES. In their place has emerged a ME-FIRST, CONSUMERIST CULTURE. The recent riots were a stark, but by no means only, example of what can happen WHEN THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN RIGHT AND WRONG IS BLURRED.”

I wonder, Nigel, are you an honest enough Christian to admit that the politicans whose anti-indigenous designs and motivations brought about the ‘massive and continuing change’ also created the ‘me-first, consumerist culture’?

Are you Christian enough to admit that the biggest thing that has changed over the course of the last fifty years is the population demographic? Are you prepared to admit that mass immigration, and the attitudes and behaviours of the immigrant, played a huge role in the riots?

No?

Thought not.



On 20 September 2011, the Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, said this at the Lib Dem conference in Birmingham:

"One abiding set of values that all Liberal Democrats share is a respect for our environment, natural systems and sustainability."

Natural systems? Sounds a bit new age that. A bit Kabbalistic.

"In the thirties, we did not create new jobs by bringing back the textiles, coal and iron jobs that were lost."

Don’t bang on about the olden days!

"We created new jobs in new industries."

For the immigrants and one or two native Brits just for show.

"Every month, more than 300,000 people leave the unemployment register to find new jobs."

New jobs for the immigrants and one or two native Brits just for show.

"I am proud to announce that our party is putting our principles into practice."

Principles? Those would be global, Brit-loathing principals one supposes.

"Onshore wind farms that are now the cheapest form of renewable electricity. Offshore wind farms that are setting the standard for the world."

On 19 September 2011, The Daily Mail told us this:

"Two thirds of wind turbines in Britain are owned by foreign firms… Of the 3,419 turbines, no fewer than 2,276 are either fully or partly owned by companies which are based abroad. It means that more than half a billion pounds in generous incentives offered by the Government is going overseas every single year – at a time when many public services are facing the axe.”

“Britain privatised the energy companies, but most consumers never noticed.”

Bit patronising there, Chris. I think you might be taking the notice quotient of the British people for granted in a major way.

"Contrary to the Times’ report, I neither said nor meant that this was laziness."

This what he said:

"They do not bother, they frankly spend less time shopping around for a bill that’s on average more than £1,000 a year than they would shop around for a £25 toaster.”

There’s that patronising thing again.

"John Donne once said that no man is an island entire unto himself, and no government in this complex and interdependent world is entire unto itself."

We’re all globalists now, whether you like it or not!

"National sovereignty’s historic writ does not run over so many issues that matter to every family in this country."

F*** national sovereignty!

"National frontiers do not bar toxic waste, sulphur or carbon."

F*** national frontiers! F*** the nation state and, most of all, f*** the British Nationalist!"

That is why we must always work with our partners in Europe, and more widely, to secure our objectives."

That is why, behind your backs, we have been working with our fellow globalists for decades now, to secure our objectives.

"The European Union is also key to our prosperity."

Ah, the EU, my old home town, where I learned the tricks of the globalist trade and made a mint for NOT representing my contituents in the way that most of them would have wanted.

"We export more to Ireland alone than to China, India and Brazil put together."

Whereas, we’ve been importing tons of cheap, Chinese stuff for over thirty years now. Which is why we no longer have a manufacturing base and owe them bundles.

"Being part of Europe is not a political choice. It is a geographical reality."

You’re right about it not being our choice, Chris. It was the choice of globalist groupies like you. A case of the unscrupulous Europhile few overcoming the trusting Eurosceptic many. That’s what happens when you fall asleep on the job. You wake up to find a very different ‘reality’ has you by the short and curlies.

"And until the tectonic plates break up, it always will be."

Until hell freezes over, eh, Chris? Sounds just a bit like a threat to me.

"We will not, as Liberal Democrats in government, weaken the ties that deliver our national interest through Europe."

The patriotic dinosaurs of little England are trying to unlock the chains that bind us to Europe! They are threatening our international interests!

"For Liberal Democrats compromise is not and cannot be a dirty word. Finding common ground. Uniting in joint purpose."

Common… purpose? Now where have I heard those deeply sinister words before?

"Let that be a warning to the Conservative right here: we need no Tea Party Tendency in Britain."

Let that be a warning to the far-right!

"If you fail to compromise…"

If you fail to surrender…

"If you fail to seek the common ground that unites us."

If you fail to accept the terms of the surrender…

"If you insist that only you have the answers…"

If you insist on stating a contrary point of view…

"If you keep beating the anti-European drum…"

If you keep banging on about Britain and the British…

"Then you will put in peril the most crucial achievement of this Government!"

Then you imperil the project! The ancient plan! Everything your superiors have worked for these many years! You will imperil the protocols!

"You will wreck the nation’s economy and COMMON PURPOSE!"

You dare to question our glorious common purpose? Then, with common purpose, we illuminated few will wreck the economy of the national many!

"We are all in this together and we can’t get out of it alone."

We’ve got you where we want you and you’ll never break free without our permission! Now look at the eyes, look at the eyes, do not look away. You are feeling sleepy...



On 20 September 2011, The Daily Mail quoted Oliver Miles, a former British ambassador to Libya, thus:

"Mr Blair is clearly using his Downing Street contacts to further his business interests.”



On 20 September 2011, Mark Seddon said this in The Daily Mail:

“As a member of Labour’s ruling National Executive Committee and editor of the Left-wing Tribune newspaper, I was never at ease with Tony Blair’s leadership of the party. And as his premiership went on, I became increasingly alarmed at HIS ALMOST MESSIANIC BELIEF IN HIMSELF.

On occasions he has drifted into parody, as he did while DRESSED IN WHITE ROBES AT THE BAPTISM OF HIS GOD-DAUGHTER, RUPERT MURDOCH’S SECOND DAUGHTER, GRACE, ON THE BANKS OF THE RIVER JORDAN.

As Labour leader, HE SHOWED A DEEP IGNORANCE OF HISTORY AND AN UTTER DISDAIN FOR PARLIAMENT. HIS FORAYS INTO THE WARS IN AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ PROVED DISASTROUS, YET HE WAS UNACCOUNTABLY MADE A PEACE ENVOY IN 2007 WORKING ON BEHALF OF THE SO-CALLED QUARTET — THE U.S., RUSSIA, THE UN AND THE EU…

What the letters and emails now emerging from Tripoli show is that, at the very least, Mr BLAIR DEMONSTRATED SERIOUSLY FLAWED JUDGMENT AS PEACE ENVOY, giving every impression that he struck A FAUSTIAN BARGAIN over the release of the Lockerbie bomber IN RETURN FOR VAST OIL DRILLING RIGHTS FOR COMPANIES SUCH AS BP...

The fact that he was prepared to accept free flights from the despot who supplied the IRA with weapons for decades and condoned the Lockerbie bombing and the murder of WPc Yvonne Fletcher’s outside the Libyan embassy in London should immediately disqualify him from continuing in the role.

Ever since leaving office, Tony Blair has attempted a high-wire act, juggling his peace envoy role with CASH-MAKING ON AN OBSCENE SCALE.

THE FORMER PRIME MINISTER IS BECOMING A SERIOUS EMBARRASSMENT TO THE PARTY. In recent weeks we have heard claims that BRITAIN WAS ENGAGED IN ‘EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION’ OF TERRORIST SUSPECTS TO LIBYA WHEN MR BLAIR WAS IN NUMBER  10 and, most shocking of all, that DETAILS OF OPPONENTS OF THE GADDAFI REGIME WHO HAD FLED TO THIS COUNTRY TO ESCAPE PERSECUTION WERE HANDED OVER TO THE LIBYAN AUTHORITIES.

This kind of activity has seriously compromised our intelligence services. The Labour Party I joined at the age of 15 used to be a party of principle, a party that put helping the poor before stuffing one’s pockets. UNDER TONY BLAIR’S AUTHORITARIAN GRIP, IT BECAME A PARTY DISTANCED FROM ITS ROOTS AND ONE WHICH BLEMISHED THE NAME OF BRITAIN. AN ALMOST CASUAL AMORALITY PERMEATED ITS UPPER REACHES, AND THE RESULT WAS THE LOSS OF NEARLY FIVE MILLION LABOUR VOTERS AT THE LAST GENERAL ELECTION...

Tony Blair is no Joseph Stalin, but HIS PREDILECTION FOR SUCKING UP TO DESPOTS HAS ONE WONDERING WHETHER HE MIGHT BE KNOCKING ON THE DOOR OF ‘UNCLE JOE’ FOR COSY CHATS IF HE WERE STILL AROUND.”

No doubt about it, Mark.

The greatest traitor in all British history has a thing about the darkly powerful and it would be difficult to get any darker than Uncle Joe, the second greatest mass-murderer in all human history.

Mao-Tse Tung was King of the genocide merchants. Interesting that they were both Marxist Communists, don’t you think? As a former editor of Tribune, you would surely be onside with Marxism and, I would guess, during your time as boss of that far-left rag, you would not have been overly critical of these two butcher grotesques. Which, if I'm right in my estimation, wouldn’t say much for the moral content of your own character.

Never mind, you illuminated the self-serving and deeply creepy nature of our dear former leader quite nicely here. And the ‘knocking on the door of Uncle Joe’ thing was spot on.



On 20 September 2011, The Guardian quoted Tony Blair thus:

"Freedom of Information Act. Three harmless words. I look at those words as I write them, and feel like shaking my head 'til it drops off. YOU IDIOT. YOU NAIVE, FOOLISH, IRRESPONSIBLE NINCOMPOOP. THERE IS REALLY NO DESCRIPTION OF STUPIDITY, NO MATTER HOW VIVID, THAT IS ADEQUATE. I quake at the imbecility of it."

The Guardian added:

“Thus Tony Blair records in his memoirs what he believes to have been one of his greatest mistakes while in office: introducing legislation intended TO SHED LIGHT ON GOVERNMENT IN A MANNER THAT EMPOWERED PEOPLE.

‘IT IS A DANGEROUS ACT,’ he went on, because governments need to be able to debate and decide issues in confidence.

In opposition, Blair had said he believed such an act would ‘signal a new relationship between government and people: A RELATIONSHIP WHICH SEES THE PUBLIC AS LEGITIMATE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE RUNNING OF THE COUNTRY’. As prime minister, he saw it as a law that was ‘UTTERLY UNDERMINING OF SENSIBLE GOVERNMENT’…

The reluctance of some in government to comply with the act became apparent even before its introduction in January 2005, almost 40 years after a similar law was passed in the US. THE CABINET OFFICE TOLD STAFF TO DESTROY MILLIONS OF EMAILS AHEAD OF THE ACT, WHILE OTHER GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS DOUBLED THE NUMBER OF FILES THEY WERE SHREDDING.There seems little doubt that the material destroyed would have contained information of considerable public interest.

According to a report last year from Robert Hazell (pdf), a former civil servant who is now a politics professor at University College London, and Dr Ben Worthy, the FoI act has… had the effect of reducing trust. ‘This is because of the media's predominantly negative reporting, EXACERBATED BY GOVERNMENT RESISTANCE TO MEDIA REQUESTS, AND PRE-EXISTING LOW LEVELS OF TRUST.”



In the 2011 biography, Just Boris, by his former deputy, Sonia Purnell, Pierre Rolin poses the question:

"How could Boris (Johnson) take £80,000 off a Tory donor after sleeping with his live-in partner of three years and possibly father[ing] her child. HE HAS NO MORAL COMPASS WHATSOEVER! Despite my donation, I have not been asked to any Olympic event, under Boris’s instructions, but he has also never returned the money.”

He could take £80,000 off you and impregnate your girlfriend, Pierre, because, beneath the affable exterior, he a grasping Tory tw*t with, as you correctly, put it, ‘no moral compass whatsover.’



On 19 September 2011, Leo McKinstry said this in The Daily Express:

“Never has any political organisation more badly misnamed than the Liberal Democrats. THE PARTY BELIEVES IN NEITHER LIBERTY NOR DEMOCRACY. INSTEAD, CLINGING TO THE RIGID DOGMA OF THE LEFT, IT WORSHIPS THE BIG STATE… AND WELCOMES THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR NATIONHOOD THROUGH MASS IMMIGRATION. Even more tellingly, THEY GLORY IN OUR SUBJUGATION BY THE EUROPEAN UNION, ONE OF THE MOST UNDEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS IN THE MODERN WORLD.

The full scale of the Liberal Democrats’ attachment to Left-wing dogma has been on display at the party’s annual conference in Birmingham. So the delegates gave a wild ovation to the news, delivered by Treasury Chief Secretary Danny Alexander, that the coalition is to recruit another 2,250 tax inspectors.
Only a bunch of ideologues in thrall to the state machine could be moved to rapture by an announcement that the bureaucracy of Revenue and Customs is to undergo a major expansion.

Just as depressing was the boast from the party’s elder statesman Paddy Ashdown that HE WILL ‘FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL’ TO SAVE THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, THAT GROTESQUE PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH HAS BECOME A CHARTER FOR CRIMINALS, SPONGERS, AND ILLEGAL MIGRANTS TO MAKE A MOCKERY OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM. The absurdity of Ashdown’s stance is the implication that the British people had no real rights before the passage of this Act in 1998, whereas the very opposite is true. Our traditional freedoms were enshrined in laws stretching back to Magna Carta but they are now being grievously undermined by European intervention.

The same fanatical devotion to Europe was shown by Nick Clegg, who said THE WAY OUT OF THE EUROZONE FINANCIAL CRISIS IS YET MORE INTEGRATION BETWEEN THE MEMBER STATES, WHICH IN PRACTICE MEANS THE FURTHER DESTRUCTION OF DEMOCRACY BY THE BRUSSELS ELITE.

‘The Eurozone is essential,’ he declared in his typically asinine manner. Essential to whom? ONLY TO THE EU OLIGARCHS AND THEIR HYSTERICAL CHEERLEADERS LIKE CLEGG…

Many of their members still act as if they are in a Left-wing students’ union, endlessly parading their progressive credentials… In practice, Clegg and his crew have become THE ABOMINABLE NO-MEN OF THE COALITION. EVERY ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE POLITICALLY CORRECT STATUS QUO OF THE LABOUR YEARS IS BLOCKED. THEY HAVE HALTED ANY REAL ATTEMPT TO TACKLE OUR SERVILE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE EU OR UNCONTROLLED IMMIGRATION. Remember, THIS WAS THE PARTY THAT CALLED FOR AN AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS…

Their response to the riots was just more MARXIST DRIVEL; bleating about poverty, while decrying tough sentencing as ‘bonkers’… Energy Secretary CHRIS HUHNE HAD THE NERVE TO CLAIM THAT RECENT PRICE RISES WERE OUR FAULT BECAUSE WE DID NOT SHOP AROUND ENOUGH: nonsense given that all energy companies have driven up their charges.”



On 18 September 2011, Danny Alexander, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, said this at the Lib Dem Conference in Birmingham:

“As the eurozone seeks to deepen its integration, AND WE NEED IT TO DO SO MORE QUICKLY, they will need our support. AND THEY WILL GET IT… Eurosceptics on Left and Right fail to understand… that SHARING SOVEREIGNTY STRENGTHENS OUR INFLUENCE and isolation weakens us… We’ll never let the anti-European isolationists or nationalists frustrate our national interest. They are enemies of growth.”

“Sharing sovereignty” strengthens the influence of people like Alexander and his globalist/financial masters, it doesn’t strengthen ours.

Tory MP Douglas Carswell pointed out:

“If we had listened to Mr Alexander in the past, WE WOULD BE IN THE EURO AND IN A MASSIVE RECESSION AS A RESULT.”

I wonder why ALL of the politicians who get their hands on our money seem to be so adept at getting it wrong?



On 18 September 2011, The Sunday Mirror quoted the father of rogue trader, Kweku Adoboli, thus:

“MY SON IS A MAN OF INTEGRITY... I know my son. He would not do that... “We are not flamboyant. That is not how we are. We are simple people.”

Keep taking the tablets, dad.

The Mirror added:

"Adoboli is accused of losing £1.3BILLION and has been charged with making illegal trades DATING BACK TO 2008 in a case which has shocked the financial world and THREATENED THOUSANDS OF JOBS at City giant UBS... Adoboli, 31, sobbed at City of London magistrates court as he was remanded over two false accounting charges and one of fraud."



On 18 September 2011, Nick Clegg said this at the Lib Dem’s party conference:

“The Leadership Programme will be key to ending the TOO MALE AND TOO PALE image of our party… INCREASING THE DIVERSITY OF OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES IS AN ABSOLUTE PRIORITY FOR ME AND THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.”

‘Increasing diversity’ = putting the foreigner first (business as usual).

‘Too male and too pale’ = In the land that the white man made, white men are a no-no.

In just two sentences, Clegg sums up the PC agenda and fifty years of PC treachery.



On 18 September 2011, Susie Boniface said this in The Sunday Mirror:

"Women voters are deserting the Tories in their droves after being hit with a triple whammy of REDUNDANCY, CUTS AND A CHILDCARE CRISIS.

Advisers have warned PM David Cameron HIS POPULARITY HAS DROPPED MORE THAN 10 PER CENT AMONG FEMALE VOTERS SINCE HE ENTERED DOWNING STREET. Women have been hardest hit by his Government’s spending cuts. They face a big increase in childcare costs, are more likely to be caring for a relative or need social housing and are being more seriously affected by the pension changes than men.

In addition, FEMALE UNEMPLOYMENT HAS HIT A 23-YEAR-HIGH WITH 1.05 MILLION WOMEN ARE ON THE DOLE – the highest since 1988 when Margaret Thatcher was in power. The situation is being made worse by savage job cuts in the public sector, where women make up 65 per cent of the staff."



On 17 September 2011, Tony Parsons said this in The Mirror:

"It is half a lifetime since I was on the dole, but I can still remember unemployment’s sting of humiliation as if it was last week. Humiliation? That’s how it felt. As though the country had absolutely no use for me. As though I was not merely unemployed but unneeded, unwanted, unnecessary. And today THERE ARE ALMOST ONE MILLION UNEMPLOYED YOUNGSTERS BETWEEN THE AGE OF 16 AND 24 WHO PROBABLY FEEL THE SAME WAY.

THIS IS WHAT NO PAMPERED, PRIVATELY EDUCATED POLITICIAN IN WESTMINSTER WILL EVER UNDERSTAND…

The dole cuts everyone to the bone. Signing on hammers your self-esteem, drains your self-respect, batters your pride, keeps your pockets empty and makes you wake up in the middle of the night wondering what the hell is going to happen with your life. If you are middle-aged, being unemployed makes you wonder if you will ever work again. If you have a family, then you fret yourself sick about the bills that can’t be paid and what kind of Christmas your children will have this year.

But unemployment is blackest for the young. You want your life to begin. You want to prove your worth. And you want to pay your way – with your family, among your friends and out in the wider world. But the dole puts your young life on hold. Unemployment leaves you in a terrible limbo – no longer a child, and yet not a fully functioning adult bringing home a pay packet...

THE 973,000 YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE UNEMPLOYED TODAY HAVE NO GUARANTEE THAT THEY WILL EVER FIND A JOB... Historical forces are conspiring to make that one million a generation that is lost to the workforce forever – AN UNWANTED GENERATION, A GENERATION THAT THE COUNTRY HAS NO JOBS FOR, NO NEED FOR AND NO HOPE FOR.

The country is tottering on the verge of a recession. When the basket cases of Europe start going broke – as Greece will later this month because they can no longer suck any more money from Germany – we will be dragged closer to the abyss. George Osborne’s dream that the private sector would employ those thrown out of work in the public sector has turned into a living nightmare. It hasn’t happened and it never will. Meanwhile, Labour offers no real credible pathway to recovery, IT JUST SCORES POLITICAL POINTS AND PLAYS TO THE GALLERY.

We need real economic growth. WE NEED TO MAKE THINGS AGAIN. WE NEED TO GIVE OUR CHILDREN ­MEANINGFUL EDUCATION AND REAL SKILLS – not toytown training that means nothing in the real world. The banks need to start lending to small business. Employers need less red tape. We need VAT and taxes slashed across the board, so that every British high street will look a little more like that fancy shopping mall that just opened in East London and a little less like a ghost town.

And THERE IS AN ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM – STANDING AT THE FRONT OF THE DOLE QUEUE – that nobody dares mention. IMMIGRATION. To add to the woes of those unwanted youngsters, freedom of movement in the European Union means they are competing for jobs with hard-working, well-educated, highly motivated youngsters from Eastern Europe.

The Office for National Statistics says that IN THE COALITION’S FIRST YEAR, MORE THAN 92% – YES, 92% – OF THOSE WHO JOINED THE UK WORKFORCE WERE FOREIGN NATIONALS, a mind-numbing statistic that should inspire a national debate about immigration – but no politician would dare suggest it, FOR FEAR OF BEING CALLED RACIST.”



On 17 September 2011, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Norman Lamont, said this in The Telegraph:

“Facing reality has never been Europe’s strong point. The euro owes little to economics AND MUCH TO POLITICS… Today, there are only two answers to the euro crisis: cough up or break up… The eurozone’s reaction at each critical stage has been to do the minimum necessary to keep the euro alive. This has bought respite, usually for a few days, but the crisis soon reignites, with further rises in interest rates which the member states can ill afford…

The eurozone may apply so many sticking plasters, one on top of the other, that eventually the haemorrhaging will stop for a while, allowing the euro to stagger on for a little longer, possibly even a few more years. But the price will be a continued sapping of confidence and repeated crises. The timing may be uncertain, but THE ULTIMATE BREAK-UP OF THE EURO IN ITS PRESENT FORM SEEMS TO ME INEVITABLE.

The long-term threat to Europe is even more fundamental. Unless the straitjacket of the single currency is removed, citizens on its periphery will face a dismal and prolonged future of stagnant living standards. Europe’s politicians may be prepared to put their people through that, but the public will not accept it.

It is not just the euro but THE WHOLE EUROPEAN UNION THAT NEEDS RETHINKING. In a continent with such a patchwork of nation states, there is a need for some European institutions, but ones that are less intrusive. But THERE IS LITTLE LIKELIHOOD THIS WILL BE ACCEPTED IN BRUSSELS. All we will be told is that WE NEED ‘MORE EUROPE.’

The Noble Prize-winning economist Martin Feldstein argued that THE CREATION OF A SINGLE EUROPEAN CURRENCY, FAR FROM ENCOURAGING PEACE AND HARMONY, WOULD INCREASE TENSION AND CONFLICT BETWEEN NATION STATES, AND WITH OTHER GLOBAL POWERS. So far, we have seen unrest in Greece. But THERE IS LIKELY TO BE MUCH WORSE TO COME.”



On 17 September 2011, Janet Daley said this in The Telegraph:

“The EU… has had altogether too much ‘leadership, which is to say, DOMINATION FROM POLITICAL AND BUREAUCRATIC AUTHORITIES DETERMINED TO LEAD WITH AS LITTLE INTERFERENCE FROM REAL PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE. ‘CONSENSUS’ HAS BECOME COERCION. The imperatives of federalism and ever closer union have come bang up against the basic principle of democracy: that ELECTED GOVERNMENTS SHOULD BE ANSWERABLE TO THEIR OWN ELECTORATES, particularly on matters that affect the lives of ordinary citizens, such as taxation and public spending. FEDERALISM CANNOT ALLOW DEMOCRACY TO DISRUPT ITS OBJECTIVES, and democracy will not permit federalism to ignore its anger and frustration. Angela Merkel cannot do what her critics are insisting that she must do… She cannot commit herself to endless bail-outs and the under-writing of infinite Mediterranean debt…

So the choice is between abandoning the democratic principle which holds that the legitimacy of government derives from the consent of the governed, or backing down on the commitment to the euro and all the strictures that go with it. We know which side of this argument our Government has chosen. Mr Osborne reiterated last Friday his insistence that THE EU NEEDS ‘FAST-TRACK’ FISCAL INTEGRATION – AND NEVER MIND THE DEMOCRATIC SCRUPLES…

We were always told that the choice was between European solidarity AND WAR. The EU was created to eradicate the sins of nationalism… But in fact, DISCORD AND HOSTILITY ARE NOW BEING PROVOKED BY THE VERY CONSTRAINTS AND PRESSURES OF EU ENFORCEMENT.

Civil unrest and non-cooperation with government demands are exacerbated by the resentment of what are still perceived as ‘foreign’ agencies…

The rage and anxiety over this loss of national self-determination are already taking sinister forms in the rise of aggressively nationalist parties and neo-fascist movements in the most unlikely ‘liberal’ countries…

EU ministers are not, as is sometimes claimed, ‘in denial.’ They fully appreciate what Mr Osborne calls ‘the gravity of the situation.’ They are paralysed because they see clearly the full force of their dilemma. So they vacillate between the impulse to ram through ‘fiscal integration,’ and the fear of electoral consequences: between THE TOTALITARIAN IMPULSE and the democratic principle.”

In Janet Daley's essay, she uses the terms (some have been removed) "NEO-FASCIST MOVEMENTS, "AGGRESSIVELY NATIONALIST PARTIES", "SINS," "WICKED NATIONALISM" and "WAR".

Janet has a way with words, don't you think? Admittedly, she is being ironic in places but I don't think she links the desire to preserve the nation and its people with 'neo-Fascism,' 'aggressiveness,' 'sins,' 'wickedness' and 'war' accidentally.

Hey, Janet! How would it be if I linked Jewish and Israeli ethnocentrism with 'neo-Fascism,' 'aggressiveness,' 'sins,' 'wickedness' and 'war'? You being an American Jew and all? Would you have something to say about it?

Well, you will grant me the right, then, to have my say also.

Won't you?



On 16 September 2011, Graeme Archer said this in The Daily Mail:

“I have on record from a friend that his American organisation’s most senior HR leader recently contacted the entire workforce, regarding annual awards for consumer relations. These are peer-nominated awards, not selected by management: a true exercise in highlighting and rewarding talent. It had come to the HR supremo’s notice, however, that while the nominations were all excellent, there was an ‘under representation’ of African-Americans, and women. COULD EVERYONE HAVE ANOTHER THINK, AND TRY AGAIN?…

That’s all hypothetical, but this example from another friend... is not. She works in a small business and shocked me last month by saying: ‘I’ll never employ a woman of childbearing age again.’ Her company is small, but expanding, and she can no longer afford to employ someone who will take a year off to have a child, come back part-time, then take another year out for the next one. This is not some anti-feminist, anti-PC lunatic, she usually votes Labour. She’s a woman who knows what it’s like to work and raise children, who’d be as flexible as possible with her staff. SHE JUST WANTS SOME SANITY BACK…

HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF YOU LOST YOUR JOB TO A PROTECTED MINORITY? More disposed to think well of such people? Less so? Even if you lost out because you deserved to, it would require the disposition of a saint not to suspect the motives of your erstwhile employer, if all you’ve heard for the past 10 years is the importance of building a more diverse workforce. The explosion in the number of employment tribunals must surely at least partly reflect this. THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE’S SUMMARY FOR 2009-2010 SHOWS A 56 PER CENT INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF CASES OVER THE PREVIOUS YEAR, AND ALMOST DOUBLE THE NUMBER COMPARED TO 2000... WHO SUFFERS MOST FROM THE CREATION OF ALL THIS ILL-FEELING?…

The entirely predictable endpoint of all this – a mass of court cases, with more and more groups demanding the right to be ‘protected’ (Christians are the latest) – will not make a single human being more good, or more happy. THESE LAWS ARE DETESTABLE PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY ARE ANTI-HUMAN, REDUCING EACH OF US TO A SINGLE CATEGORY OF IDENTITY, SETTING US AT ONE ANOTHER’S THROATS TO DEFEND OUR LEGALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS. These are not concepts that a Tory should be pushing, Home Secretary.

Diversity is another one of those words that’s in danger of losing its meaning, I fear; it stands now for legally-sanctioned conformity. LOOK AT THE LABOUR CONFERENCE WOMEN’S DAY: SPEAKING UP FOR DIVERSITY, BY ENACTING ITS EXACT OPPOSITE.”

Gay Graeme's colleagues at The Telegraph:

"A Chinese woman, a Jewish-American man, a female Australian, a male Russian, an Indian woman." Not a non-homosexual Brit in sight. And still the diversity Nazi is moved to say:

“There aren’t any black people here.”

If Cameron gets in again, or a Clegg or a Miliband manages to slither to the very top, I predict a riot. Actually, I predict a revolution. A bloody one. One where a great many of the "anti-PC lunatic" types demonstrate their lunatic credentials with maximum ferocity and revolutionary zeal.

"Could everyone have another think, and try again?"

Before we anti-PC folk go stark, raving bonkers.



On 16 September 2011, Dr Tom Dolphin, of the British Medical Association’s junior doctors committee, was quoted thus in The Daily Mail:

“Being a doctor in Britain requires much more than just clinical expertise. It is also important to have highly developed communications skills, knowledge of UK medical ethics and culture, and an understanding of how the NHS works.”

Pretty obvious stuff you might think.

Not to our traitorous politcians, it isn’t. How many foreigners have they imported in the last 50 years? How many of them truly understood the language and the people before they arrived?

The Mail also quoted a recent GMC report which said that more than a third of doctors working here qualified overseas:

“While there are some good local schemes for supporting doctors who are new to this country, there are too many examples of new doctors undertaking clinical practice WITH LITTLE OR NO PREPARATION FOR WORKING IN THE UK.”

The Mail added:

“There is growing alarm that patient safety is being put in the hands of overseas doctors whose training is not up to scratch. There is particular concern over doctors from Europe. Unlike other overseas doctors, they cannot be tested by the GMC on their competence or even their ability to speak English because THIS WOULD BREACH EUROPEAN UNION ‘FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT OF LABOUR’ LAWS.

Earlier this year, it emerged that A NIGERIAN DOCTOR WHO QUALIFIED IN ITALY HAD BEEN ALLOWED TO WORK IN 14 ENGLISH HOSPITALS ALTHOUGH HE COULD NOT PERFORM MOUTH-TO-MOUTH RESUSCITATION AND DID NOT UNDERSTAND BASIC MEDICAL TERMS.

In 2008, pensioner David Gray died after DR DANIEL UBANI, WHO COULD BARELY SPEAK ENGLISH, GAVE HIM TEN TIMES THE DOSE OF PAINKILLER after flying in from Germany for HIS FIRST NHS SHIFT.

THE EU LAW ALSO COVERS NURSES.”



On 16 September 2011, Paul Bracchi’s essay, ‘Slavery in 2011: Vulnerable men snatched off Britain's streets by travellers, kept in squalor, their benefits seized, and forced into hard labour’, appeared in The Daily Mail.

This is it:

“It is now nearly 200 years since slavery was supposed to have been abolished and yet these horrifying stories have emerged. The victims tell their haunting tales.

Once upon a time, in a previous life, John Wild was married. They say he once served in the Royal Navy; that was before mental health problems, exacerbated by alcohol, took hold. This story, however, is not about either of those things; except to say that they made John vulnerable to exploitation, an easy target, and condemned him to the kind of wretched existence that seems barely comprehensible in 21st-century Britain.

At one time, John’s ‘home’ was a freezing export container at the bottom of a garden; THE GARDEN BELONGED TO A FAMILY OF TRAVELLERS and, it transpires, HE BELONGED TO THEM. THEY WERE HIS MASTERS AND HE WAS THEIR SLAVE IN ALL BUT NAME… HE WAS TREATED WORSE THAN A DOG…

After suffering a stroke he was no longer able to lay paving stones or tarmac so instead he fetched, carried, and skivvied. Sweeping the driveway was one of his main tasks, a duty he performed even in the pouring rain.

‘He limped and could barely walk,’ recalled one woman. ‘I also saw him picking lice off all parts of his body, so he could not have washed for months.’

The State benefits to which John was entitled, needless to say, were paid directly into the bank account of his ‘masters’ who had told the authorities they were caring for him.

You might think John Wild was one of the wretches imprisoned in that godforsaken travellers’ camp in Bedfordshire which was raided by 200 police officers last Sunday and where, it is alleged, victims were starved, beaten, and, in some cases, had their heads shaved, evoking memories of wartime concentration camps. In fact, John Wild was not among them. He lived, if that’s the right description, at another camp in Wickford, Essex, and before that with the same family at their previous base in Kent, which is perhaps an indication of HOW ENDEMIC THIS INSIDIOUS TRADE SEEMS TO HAVE BECOME IN OUR SUPPOSEDLY CIVILISED SOCIETY.

John, who is 56, but looks 76... was not the only ‘slave’ to come forward from the Hovefields encampment in Wickford. One young man told how he arrived there after being sold, for £10,000, by a group of travellers from the South Coast and how he was ‘roughed up’ for simply forgetting to feed the livestock. A second ‘slave’ managed to escape by jumping from a moving van and flagging down a passing motorist; and a third, it was reported, turned up at a local service station with facial injuries pleading: ‘Get me out of here’…

The wave of arrests at Leighton Buzzard in Bedfordshire represent a major breakthrough and come off the back of new anti-slavery laws introduced last year… The arrests follow a series of connected swoops earlier in the year in Gloucestershire, Leicestershire and Hampshire. In all, more than 100 people are believed to have been kept prisoner at these four camps alone…

Trafficking is a word normally associated with prostitution, people smuggling and organised crime, not with THE MAN WITH AN IRISH ACCENT WHO KNOCKS AT YOUR DOOR ASKING IF YOU MIGHT NEED A NEW PATIO LAID. According to the UKHTC Between April 2009 and March 20011, nearly 1,500 PEOPLE WERE WORKING AS SLAVES IN THE COUNTRY. But anti-slavery campaigners say those figures only take into account the number of people found by the police and THE TRUE SCALE OF THE PROBLEM COULD BE MUCH GREATER…

Slaves found at traveller’s sites, we now know, are recruited from the underbelly of society; tramps, drug addicts, care-home runaways, illegal immigrants, fugitives and ex-convicts.

The modus operandi is always the same, as Cyril Thomas, who used to work for a homeless charity in London, knows only too well.

‘They [the gangs of travellers] would arrive in their vans early in the morning and cart off residents from our hostels, some of whom were in their 50s, for a day’s labour for very little in return , just cans of beer and small sums of money. Sometimes they didn’t return to the hostel. One resident who went missing did eventually turn up days later. ‘He told me that he had been held against his will on a gypsy caravan site and forced to work for just food and bed,’ Mr Thomas revealed. ‘IT’S BEEN WELL-KNOWN FOR SOMETIME THAT THIS IS HOW SOME MEMBERS OF THE TRAVELLING COMMUNITY MAKE THEIR MONEY.’

NOT TO THE WIDER PUBLIC THOUGH… The sinister practice has echoes of the infamous press gangs of the 18th century, who ‘kidnapped’ any young men they came across and forced them to crew Royal Navy warships.
Graham Clark, in his 30s and homeless, has firsthand experience of a modern-day press gang, not in London, but in Derby. His ordeal began one day last year as he sat drinking by a statue in the town centre. Suddenly, he looked up and saw a 4x4 pulling up beside him.

‘There was male driver, a woman and a young child in the back. The driver shouted over and said: ‘Listen, are you interested in doing some work, cash in hand, £50 a day’. Graham needed the money so he said yes. He says he was already ‘pretty drunk’ when he got into the car but they gave him some vodka.

‘They seemed really nice,’ he admits. ‘I thought everything was great.’ About an hour later, they arrived at their destination, a ‘gated community of static caravans’ somewhere near Nottingham, he thinks.

At that point, the mood of his hosts changed. The driver punched him in the ribs, took his shoes and bundled him through the gates. His memory of the immediate aftermath is blurred. The next day though he remembers being put to work around the camp.

‘I worked from 7am until 6.30pm, doing jobs I had never done before, like being made to clean out the sewage tank. ‘I was hungry most of the time but THEY GAVE ME JUST ENOUGH FOOD TO GIVE ME THE STRENGTH AND STAMINA TO WORK. YOU WORKED OR YOU KNEW YOU WERE GOING TO GET IT. I WASN’T ALLOWED TO USE THEIR TOILET FACILITIES, it was strictly for them. I had to go outside, behind a tree. It was totally degrading.’

Graham says he was held at the site for several days. ‘They left one of the gates open and I ran away,’ he said. He flagged down a car and the driver gave him the money for his train fare back to Derby.

GRAHAM DID GO TO THE POLICE BUT BECAUSE HE COULDN’T TELL THEM WHERE THE CAMP WAS, THEY SAID THEY COULDN’T DO ANYTHING — which is precisely why vulnerable individuals like Graham Clark are targeted in the first place…

THE EVIDENCE FOR THIS GROWING SCANDAL HAS BEEN THERE FOR SOME TIME IF ANYONE CARED TO LOOK FOR IT. Take one case, for example, from a decade ago at Basildon Crown Court. A vagrant called John Williams, the court heard, was begging outside a McDonald’s in London, when he was approached by Thomas Duffy and offered labouring work.Mr Williams thought the offer of work was a lucky break. He was driven to Duffy’s home at a camp in Essex but when he arrived he ordered him to clean up the yard and took all his ID off him. Williams said:

‘When I told Tommy I had to go back to London, he said: ‘YOU’RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE. YOU’RE HERE FOR SIX MONTHS. THIS IS YOUR HOME NOW. YOU DON’T WANT TO CROSS ME. I’M A TRAVELLER AND I’LL SLIT YOUR THROAT.’

Mr Williams was then locked in a stable with barred windows, a broken heater and 2in of water on the floor on HALLOWEEN IN 1998. Eventually he was let out and put to work at a nearby house.

‘Tommy had to go and get some materials so I took my chance to escape. I ran as fast as I could for about two miles until I found this golf course. I collapsed by this greenkeeper. I was hysterical. He must have thought I was mad.’

At the hearing three years ago, Duffy, 50, and two accomplices admitted charges of false imprisonment.
Those accomplices, the court was told, were also recruits of Duffy. They lived in a squalid caravan, receiving food as payment for their work. All three were released because they had already spent seven months behind bars on remand.

Where do you think Thomas Duffy imprisoned his victim? AT CRAYS HILL, THE CAMP WHERE TRAVELLERS NOW CLAIM THEIR ‘HUMAN RIGHTS’ ARE BEING BREACHED BECAUSE THEY ARE FACING EVICTION…

Back at the Hovefields camp in Wickford, we wanted to confront Gerry McCann, patriarch of the family exposed by the Echo’s awarding-winning reporter Jon Austin. The McCanns were the family accused of keeping John Wild in an export container. McCann and his wife Catherine, it emerged, have now moved away from Essex but we managed to contact Mrs McCann on her mobile phone. Asked if Mr Wild was ever a prisoner she said: ‘Ask him if he was ever ill treated, was he ever starved or was ever beat up? And did he ever have to work?’…

Despite claims from neighbours, Mrs McCann denied John had ever lived in an export container… Asked why his benefits were paid directly to her, she replied: ‘I WAS JUST CONTROLLING HIS MONEY, but his food, everything, I was buying it all for him.’ Nor, she insisted, was her husband a ‘slave master’…

Not surprisingly, she failed to mention her husband’s dubious track record. In 2006, he tried to charge two men, both in their 80s, extortionate rates for shoddy work on their homes, for which he was hauled before the courts and fined £1,000. Preying on the elderly and vulnerable, it seems, is Gerry McCann’s stock-in-trade.

It is now nearly 200 years since slavery was supposed to have been abolished. Sadly, THE EXISTENCE OF INDIVIDUALS LIKE GERRY MCCANN IS PROOF THAT IT IS STILL THRIVING ON OUR DOORSTEP.”

This is what you vote for, ladies.

This is what you get if you vote for the Labour Party, the Lib Dems and the Tories. This is what you get if you believe the establishment when it says that those who care for you most, care the least.

The British Nationalist stands up for the British and the British nation. It says so on the tin. That’s why those who aren’t on the side of the British demonise him. The last thing those who have your worst interests at heart want is for you to find out who your real friends are. Once you do that, you see. They are finished. They will no longer be able to create a world where Englishmen are enslaved by foreigners in the land of their birth.

Remember, ladies and gentlemen, if you vote for them, you vote for the enslavement of your own by the alien. If you vote for us, you vote for freedom. Freedom for yourself, and, more importantly, your children and grandchildren.



On 16 September 2011, The Independent’s Donald Macintyre told us that Israeli “reservist NCO with extensive combat experience” was sent into the Arab village of Nabi Saleh before a “planned… demonstration… to try to quash protests before they began.”

The protests had started up “after Jewish settlers appropriated a spring on privately-owned Nabi Saleh land.”

The NCO said:

“The sun was very hot, but we had to keep our helmets on. Then SOME SOLDIERS START GETTING BORED AND START SHOOTING TEAR GAS ON PEOPLE. EVERY GUY WHO IS NOT IN HIS HOUSE OR IN THE MOSQUE IS A TARGET… We passed a grocery story with some people outside it with children. After we passed it HE JUST TURNED ROUND AND FIRED IT AT THEM…

At the base there was a mission statement signed by the Brigade Commander which said 'we need to maintain the fabric of life for the civilian population, Israelis and Palestinians.' THE BATTALION OFFICER CROSSED OUT THE WORD 'PALESTINIANS' AND ALL THE SOLDIERS AROUND STARTED LAUGHING…

It was very difficult for me. I want to be in the army to defend my country. On the other hand I saw that THE JOB I WAS DOING DID NOT HAVE ANY CONNECTION WITH DEFENDING ISRAEL."



On 15 September 2011, after the Committee on Standards in Public Life, had published its latest survey, the Committee’s Chairman, Sir Christopher Kelly, was quoted thus in The Telegraph:

"The results of this survey make stark reading. Previous surveys have shown that PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THOSE HOLDING PUBLIC OFFICE HAS BEEN ON A LONG TERM DECLINE SINCE 2004. THE 2010 RESULTS SUGGEST THAT THE RATE OF DECLINE MAY HAVE INCREASED.''

The Telegraph added:

“The Committee on Standards in Public Life published research showing a 20 PER CENT FALL IN MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO BELIEVED MOST MPS WERE DEDICATED TO DOING A GOOD JOB FOR THE PEOPLE THEY SERVED… Just 26 per cent now agreed with the proposition…

The latest survey, conducted at the end of 2010 and start of 2011, found just 26 PER CENT BELIEVED MPS WERE COMPETENT AT THEIR JOBS, a 10 per cent fall from 36 per cent in 2008.

Those who thought MPs were in touch with the public fell 14 points from 29 per cent to 15 per cent , while those who thought MPs set a good example in their private lives fell by a similar amount from 36 per cent to 22 per cent. The number who believed MPs ensured public money was being spent wisely FELL FROM 28 PER CENT TO 18 PER CENT… while those who believed they told the truth was down from 26 per cent to 20 per cent.”

20 percent still believe politicians tell the truth?

26 per cent think they are doing a good job for the people they serve? These would be the sheeple and the lemmings then. These would be those who, if Tony Blair told them would believe Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction which he could bang off in our direction in 45 minutes. These would be those who, if Margaret Thatcher said it, would believe that ‘a leaner, fitter Britain (a Britain privatised and denuded of its manufacturing sector) would, somehow, benefit British society. These would be those who, if Gordon Brown and Ed Balls insisted that cuddling up to the greediest of the greedy bankers, as Thatcher did, was a good idea, would believe them.

These would be those who, if their favourite TV celeb advised them to throw their chidren of the roof because, if they did, they would sprout wings and fly, would do so.

Alternatively, they may just be a bunch of uncaring Labour, Tory and Lib Dem jobsworths who profit from the misery of the rest of us.



On 15 September 2011, the UK Ambassador to Israel, Matthew Gould, was quoted thus by The Jerusalem Post:

“The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act... includes an important amendment to ensure that the UK’s justice system can no longer be abused for political reasons. The change will ensure that people cannot be detained when there is no realistic chance of prosecution."

The Jerusalem Post explained:

"The United Kingdom... approved an amendment to the universal jurisdiction law, WHICH WILL PREVENT THE ISSUING OF ARREST WARRANTS AGAINST SENIOR ISRAELI OFFICIALS IN BRITAIN. In a telephone call to opposition leader Tzipi Livni... Matthew Gould stated that THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND HAD SIGNED THE MEASURE INTO LAW."



On 15 September 2011, The Daily Mirror quoted London's openly gay Deputy Mayor, Richard Barnes, thus:

“Why did police put Persil in the water cannons? To stop the colours running!”

Boom! Boom!

After describing the joke as 'sick' and 'racist', The Mirror said

:

"A horrified worker complained to the Greater London Authority’s standards committee which launched an investigation into Mr Barnes, WHO IS IN CHARGE OF EQUALITY ISSUES AT THE AUTHORITY."

A 'sick', gay 'racist' in charge of equality?

Who'd have thought it?

Boris Johnson's previous Deputy Mayor, Ian Clement, was arrested and charged over his alleged misuse of his expenses.



On 15 September 2011, Douglas Carswell, MP, responded to Jose Manuel Barroso’s call for even more EU “integration” the previous day, saying:

“THIS IS A FIGHT FOR EUROPE’S FAT CATS TO CLING ON TO THEIR PRIVILEGED POSITIONS AND THEIR TAXPAYER-FUNDED FIEFDOM. IT IS NOT IN THE INTERESTS OF THE ­MILLIONS OF PEOPLE AROUND EUROPE WHO HAVE BEEN OPPRESSED BY BARROSO AND HIS ILK’S CURRENCY SCAM. THE SOONER THE EURO BREAKS UP, THE BETTER. People need a currency that works for them. And WHO VOTED FOR BARROSO TO LORD IT OVER US, ANYWAY? HE IS AN UNELECTED BUREAUCRAT WHO IS OVERSEEING A SYSTEM THAT IS FALLING APART.”



On 15 September 2011, Justice Malala quoted Julius the leader of the African National Congress's Youth League, Julius Malema, thus in The Guardian:

"We're being subjected again to white minority approval of what we must do and we cannot allow that. The oppressor has gained too much confidence... WE MUST PLACE THE OPPRESSOR WHERE HE BELONGS."

Malema said this after, in September 2011, a high court judge ruled that his favourite 'struggle' song, ‘SHOOT THE BOER,’ constituted hate speech and banned it. Malala added:

“Three years ago the final school results of… Julius Malema, were leaked on the internet… They showed that THE FIREBRAND HAD ACHIEVED A G IN WOODWORK, AND HAD PERFORMED EVEN MORE DISMALLY IN OTHER SUBJECTS. South Africa was united in its laughter… That was then. Yesterday, the ‘buffoon’ of South African politics was named as one of Africa's 10 most powerful young men by international business magazine Forbes.”

Oh yes, ladies and gents, if you’re a 'buffoon' with a G in woodwork and even less tasty grades in everything else, go to South Africa.

You’ll be a cut above the majority over there!

“Malema has come from nowhere and, in just three years since his controversial election in 2008 as ANC Youth League president, has inserted himself at the very centre of debate about South Africa's future political direction. On the two touchiest issues in South Africa – macro-economic policy and RACE RELATIONS – MALEMA IS THE CENTRAL PLAYER.”

The bloke whose favourite song is 'Kill the Boer' is the 'central player' in South African 'race relations.'

That's nice, isn't it? How the do-gooders, the PC Crowd and the get-Whitey folks must be rejoicing.

“He has faced intense media scrutiny and exposure of HIS LAVISH LIFESTYLE. HE HAS MORE THAN EIGHT KNOWN PROPERTIES, RECENTLY DEMOLISHED A 3.6M RAND (£308,000) HOUSE AND IS BUILDING A NEW ONE VALUED AT 16M RAND WITH A BUNKER, AND IS MOCKED FOR HIS FLASHY CARS AND COLLECTION OF WATCHES. THE ‘ECONOMIC FREEDOM FIGHTER’, AS HE CALLS HIMSELF, IS BEING INVESTIGATED BY THE REVENUE SERVICES, THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC PROTECTOR AND THE ELITE CRIME-FIGHTING UNIT, THE HAWKS.”

Being investigated?

What, again? Investigations don’t seem to amount to much in South Africa. Not when the top ANC folk are being investigated, anyway.

“University of Cape Town economics professor Haroon Bhorat said IN 2009 THAT SOUTH AFRICA OVERTOOK BRAZIL AS THE COUNTRY WITH THE WIDEST GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR. This explains Malema's massive popularity in shack settlements, where he is feted as a saviour of the poor.”

Pardon me?

Saint Nelson Mandela’s Rainbow Nation, the one where more than 3,150 white farmers (and their families) have been murdered by marauding black gangs since he came to power in 1994, is the country with the widest gap between rich and poor? In the land of the Marxist-Communist ANC folk?

I can hardly believe it!

“Last weekend, he drove from his home in the plush Johannesburg suburb of Sandton, known as the shopping mecca of the continent, to Alexandra township, one of the poorest places in South Africa… In the squatter camp… HE… CUT A CAKE DELIVERED IN A PORSCHE BY A CELEBRITY KNOWN FOR EATING SUSHI OFF NAKED WOMEN. THE CROWD LOVED IT...

Even as he is vilified by the press for his association with crass celebrities and the flaunting of his incredible wealth with inexplicable origins, ordinary people say ‘what's wrong with Juju making money’? IN HIM, MANY SEE THEMSELVES.”

Ah, the lovely, fluffy nature of the average South African Black.

‘Kill the Boer’, associate with ‘crass celebrities’ and flaunt your ‘incredible wealth with inexplicable origins.’

“The ANC Youth League has already made it clear that it demands ‘generational change,’ meaning that THE OLDER GENERATION OF ANC LEADERS MUST MAKE WAY FOR A YOUNGER BREED. Zuma is one of those the league wants to see replaced. If he loses this week's battle to Malema, then he has no chance of a second term and the ANC faces a radically changed future, LARGELY SCRIPTED BY A YOUNG MAN WHO CAME FROM NOWHERE... Malema's chances cannot be under-estimated. Zuma has already failed to rein him in once, when Malema shrugged off charges in 2010. LIKE ZUMA WHEN HE WAS FACING CORRUPTION CHARGES.”

Corruption charges against South Africa’s ANC elite are one thing.

The reality is something else.



On 14 September 2011, Damian Green, the Immigration Minister, spoke out about Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights at the Centre for Policy Studies, saying:

“There has been considerable public debate as to how these rights are interpreted and applied, and in particular the interpretation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the individual’s right to family life. It is my sincere HOPE that the commission will help bring some common sense back to this admittedly difficult area…

These are sensitive issues which have been ignored for far too long. We want a system that lets everyone know where they stand and what their responsibilities are. If your marriage is not genuine, if you have no interest in this country and its way of life, if you are coming here to live off benefits, DON’T COME IN THE FIRST PLACE. Our message is clear, if you cannot support your foreign spouse or partner, YOU CANNOT EXPECT THE TAXPAYER TO DO IT FOR YOU”

Your sincere hope, Damian?

You’re the bl**dy Immigration Minister, for God’s sake, you’re the f***ing boss! Don’t hope! DO! Get it sorted! Get it done!

You suggest here that your hearts in the right place, that you want what we want. Well, if that’s true, we don’t want you using fluffy, pink phrases like 'difficult area' and 'sensitive issues.' 600,000 unwanted foreigners have been piling into our country every f***ing year since the great traitors of New Labour (whom I voted for, God help me) came to power in 1997! Now get a f***ing grip, lady! This is WAR! The politician that allows such a massive alien invasion is AT WAR with the British native! Sort it out, Damian!

Or we will!

Tory MP Dominic Raab, said:

“THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT HAS UNDERMINED THE UK’S BORDER CONTROLS. IT IS CRITICAL WE REGAIN CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS.”

When you hear a politician say what everyone else regards as stone bl**ding obvious, it ought to be time for rejoicing.

Unfortunately, as Damian suggests, in our much betrayed country, at the most, it’s time only for ‘hope.’



On 14 September 2011, Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, lectured the President of the European Commission thus:

“We all know that Greece is going to default. You can’t say you weren’t warned: YOU WERE ALL TOLD THAT GREECE SHOULD NEVER HAVE JOINED THE EURO. UNLESS GREECE IS ALLOWED TO GET OUT OF THIS ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL PRISON, YOU MAY WELL SPARK A REVOLUTION IN THAT COUNTRY.”



On 14 September 2011, showing comradely solidarity with Barroso, Poland’s finance Minister, Jacek Rostowski, said this in the European Parliament:

"EUROPE IS IN DANGER. If the eurozone were to collapse or to disappear, then THE EUROPEAN UNION ITSELF MIGHT NOT SURVIVE, that is possible. With all the consequences that one can imagine… The current crisis, if it continues in such an unpredictable way, will have major repercussions. If it lasts for a year or two, we must be ready for unemployment levels that could be doubled in some countries, including the richest ones...

The current crisis, if it continues in such an unpredictable way, will have major repercussions… I recently met a friend who worked with me during the period of transformation and is now the president of a big Polish bank. He said, 'You know AFTER SUCH ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL SHOCKS, IT RARELY IS THE CASE THAT AFTER TEN YEARS, THERE WOULD BE NO CATASTROPHIC WAR.'”

Sounds like a threat to me, Jan.

The unanswerable elites routinely use such threats to frighten the sheeple into doing what they want.



On 14 September 2011, Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission, made the following speech before the European Parliament in Strasbourg:

"I want to confirm that the commission will soon present options for the introduction of euro bonds… But we must be honest: this will not bring an immediate solution for all the problems we face and it will come as an element of a comprehensive approach to FURTHER ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL INTEGRATION…

A system based purely on intergovernmental co-operation HAS NOT WORKED IN THE PAST AND WILL NOT WORK IN THE FUTURE…

Economic and monetary union cannot function properly only on the basis of decisions taken by unanimity. Because IF A EUROSCEPTIC FRINGE CAN DETERMINE THE POSITION OF ONE MEMBER STATE AND ONE MEMBER STATE CAN BLOCK DECISIONS, THE RESULT IS THAT WE ARE NOT CREDIBLE. This is not about institutional positioning or POWER. It is about efficiency and delivery…

The only right way to stop the negative cycle and to strengthen the euro is to DEEPEN INTEGRATION, namely within the Euro area, based on the Community method. This is the way to go. It is also the only way for the Euro area to really play the role THAT INVESTORS AND GLOBAL PARTNERS EXPECT IT TO PLAY.

What we need now is a new, UNIFYING impulse, ‘UN NOUVEAU MOMENT FÉDÉRATEUR’, let's not be afraid of the word, MOMENT FÉDÉRATEUR IS INDISPENSABLE

In the cacophony of criticisms, counter-criticisms, magic bullets and miracle panaceas that are proposed on a daily basis, the truth has been drowned out – that solid, feasible and concrete proposals have been made. That they have been agreed upon. But they have taken too long and have not yet been fully delivered. So my first concern is IMPLEMENTATION – IMPLEMENTATION OF WHAT WE HAVE AGREED.

Therefore I expect all Euro area Member States to make good on their promises and urge them to ratify the 21 July agreement by the end of September.

We are confronted with the most serious challenge of a generation… This is a fight for the economic AND POLITICAL FUTURE OF EUROPE. This is a fight for what Europe represents in the world. THIS IS A FIGHT FOR EUROPEAN INTEGRATION ITSELF!”



On 14 September 2011, Andrew Lilico, a member of the Shadow Monetary Policy Committee and formerly the Chief Economist of Policy Exchange, said this in The Telegraph:

“The end of the euro could mean THE END OF THE EUROPEAN UNION…

With the collapse of the euro, a number of states would be perceived as likely to enter very serious recessions, even just from the costs of euro collapse, such as the collapse of their banking systems – probably accompanied by their brief nationalisation and the introduction of martial law (in violation of a number of human rights provisions under EU Treaties). Fearing these recessions, there could be large exoduses of workers into states perceived as less likely to have recessions (e.g. Germany, Finland). The states into which people would want to go WOULD PROBABLY CLOSE THEIR BORDERS, TO AVOID SWAMPING; the states from which they were leaving would probably close their borders, to prevent their highest-value workers going in a brain drain. Thus, free movement of labour would collapse.

The large recessions associated with these events would be unevenly distributed across parts of the economy. A number of states would be very likely to respond by introducing extensive subsidies of certain industries, in violation of state aids rules. They would also almost certainly attempt to use government procurement to boost domestic suppliers AT THE EXPENSE OF FOREIGN CONTRACTORS. Such state aids and preferential procurement would constitute non-tariff barriers, destroying the free movement of goods and services…

The EU is most unlikely to continue without the euro. Sudden and disorderly collapse of the EU would induce a massive further phase of recession… It would certainly involve a recession on a scale beyond modern experience or comprehension in a Western democracy.”

“The end of the euro could mean the end of the European Union.”

Fingers crossed. Wonder what the blood-sucking trough-gobblers will do then?

Whatever it is, it will be pro-them and anti-us.

“The states into which people would want to go would probably close their borders, to avoid swamping.”

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! When the swampers have tried all the others there'll always be good, old open-house Blighty.

“They would also almost certainly attempt to use government procurement to boost domestic suppliers at the expense of foreign contractors.”

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Tell that to the Bombardier people and the blokes who DIDN'T build the Millenium Dome. Tell that to the British builders, plumbers, plasterers, bricklayers, scaffolders and carpenters that can’t get work on the Olympic site. Tell that to the workless multitudes unemployed because every shade of mainstream government would rather give ninety per cent of our jobs to foreigners.

Tell it to the marines, Andrew.

We’d love to be out from under the EU. But being out from under them doesn’t mean we’ll be out from under our own treacherous crew, now does it? The Tony, Gordon, Nick and Dave types, along with the bankers, the global elite and the PC Crowd, will still be finding ways of screwing us when the EU is a long-forgotten bad dream you only remember when your cheques bounce.



On 14 September 2011, Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was interviewed by The Washington Post.

Here are some of the things he said:

“We are happy with the downfall of Saddam Hussein… We are happy about it because he was enemy of all countries in the region. HE OBEYED THE POLICIES AND INSTRUCTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES. He attacked Iran; he attacked and occupied Kuwait. I would think that if Bush had left Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein, the situation would have been much better today… But then Bush announced that they decided to stay in Iraq… Nobody in Iraq would believe that he had any friendly intentions…

The Zionist regime is always doing the same thing. THEY DESTROY PEOPLE'S HOMES AND RAZE THEM TO THE GROUND. THEY HAVE CREATED A FEW MAJOR WARS. THEY CONTINUE TO ASSASSINATE AND TERRORIZE PEOPLE; THEY CONTINUE THEIR POLICY OF COERCION AGAINST OTHER NATIONS INCLUDING IRAN. I think an important question that must be answered is WHY DO ALL U.S. ADMINISTRATIONS ALWAYS SUPPORT THE ZIONIST REGIME?

The United States is 10,000 kilometers away from Palestine and other NATIONS IN THE REGION ARE AGAINST THE ZIONISTS BUT THE UNITED STATES AND ITS ALLIES IN EUROPE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE ZIONIST REGIME. WHY? What is the relationship between these two countries? The United States has a population of 300 million and THE WHOLE POPULATION IS GOING TO BE SACRIFICED FOR THE INTERESTS OF A FEW HUNDRED ZIONISTS. A dreadful party, a feared party, THE PARTY THAT WAS BEHIND THE FIRST WORLD WAR AND THE SECOND WORLD WAR. WHENEVER THERE IS A CONFLICT OR WAR, THIS PARTY IS BEHIND IT. The same party that made a grim picture of the United States in the world.

Are the 300 million in the United States Zionists? Have you ever had a referendum in the United States that the people support the Zionist regime? Never. I think YOU SHOULD HAVE A REFERENDUM IN THE UNITED STATES TO SEE IF THE PEOPLE WANT TO USE THEIR RESOURCES AND TAXES FOR A NUMBER OF KILLERS.”








On 14 September 2011, Kevin Maguire said this in The Daily Mirror:

"I don't object to the early release of Tory jailbirds, Lords Hanningfield and Taylor but I do baulk at the ermined expenses’ cheats resuming seats as unelected lawmakers. THERE ARE SO MANY FELONS IN THE UPPER CHAMBER IT SHOULD BE RENAMED THE HOUSE OF CRIMINALS. Barons Archer (perjury), Watson (arson) and Ahmed (dangerous driving) also spent time behind bars.

Lord Black (fraud) may rejoin them when he escapes a US penitentiary…

Packing the House of Criminals exposes Dodgy Dave’s political gerrymandering by cutting 50 MPs. The chief Con’s talking out of his backside in pretending he’s swinging the axe because Britain’s got too many politicians… DAVE’S CREATED A RECORD 123 UNELECTED POLITICIANS IN A YEAR. And what a surprise most of the 50 axed constituencies will be Labour or Lib Dem. It’s just A THINLY-VEILED PLOT TO RIG THE NEXT ELECTION.

Anyone who cares about democracy should rise up against Cam the Sham’s power grab. DON’T FIRE 50 ELECTED MPS – CHOP 827 UNELECTED PEERS.”



On 13 September 2011, The Mirror told us this:

"COMMON PAINKILLERS TRIPLE THE RISK OF KIDNEY CANCER if taken for more than 10 years.

Patients who regularly take anti-inflammatory analgesics including ibuprofen, used by millions to treat conditions such as arthritis, are 51% MORE LIKELY TO DEVELOP RENAL CELL CANCER, a study of more than 125,000 people has found.

BUT TAKING THEM FOR OVER A DECADE INCREASES THE RISK THREE TIMES...

Aspirin was the only one of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs found to be safe."



On 13 September 2011, Max Hastings, frormerly a notorious Europhile, apologised thus in The Daily Mail:

“THE EU IS IN DIRE STRAITS, UNPRECEDENTED IN ITS HISTORY. All my adult life, I have called myself a pro-European. I deplored Brussels’ follies as much as anyone, but went on hoping for better things. I believed Europe was broadly a force for good. However, TODAY, I RECANT. After much agonising and hesitation, I adopt the conclusion that many of you probably reached years ago: that THE EU IN ITS PRESENT FORM HAS BECOME A DISASTER, WHICH THREATENS THE FUTURE OF ITS MAJOR MEMBERS, UNLESS ITS TERMS AND POWERS ARE DRASTICALLY RECAST.

The eurozone is merely the most conspicuous symptom of failure. It reflects a historic policy blunder by the rich, prudent nations that linked themselves in a suicidal currency pact with the non-serious countries of Europe, Greece and Ireland foremost among them…

Some of us used to argue that Europe has been an economic success story. Those who remembered the past poverty of Spain, for instance, rejoiced to see the country apparently booming, its prosperity exemplified by Madrid’s glittering new airport. Much the same might be said about our western neighbour, the Celtic tiger. But NOW WE SEE THAT THEIR SUPPOSED SUCCESS — NOT TO MENTION THAT OF GREECE AND PORTUGAL — WAS AN ILLUSION CREATED BY SMOKE, MIRRORS, PRODIGIOUS SUBSIDY AND RECKLESS BORROWING. THE EU’S GENEROSITY ENABLED TINPOT COUNTRIES TO CREATE LAVISH WELFARE STATES UNSUSTAINABLE BY THEIR OWN REAL WEALTH… Southern Europe can regain stability and credibility only by making a rendezvous with reality involving a much reduced standard of living.

Beyond the euro, A THOUSAND OTHER, SCARCELY LESSER EURO-NONSENSES BLIGHT OUR LIVES AND PROSPERITY..

The European Commission, supposedly a driver for commerce, has become a BLIGHT on it. At a time when we face a historic challenge from Asia, THE EU MAKES IT ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO ADOPT MEASURES ESSENTIAL TO STRENGTHENING ITS MEMBERS’ COMPETITIVENESS, above all the relaxation of employment law.This has become, for practical purposes, UNEMPLOYMENT LAW. But the Business Department run by Vince Cable, a Lib Dem Euro-enthusiast, declines to resist the new EU employment directive, though it would be legally possible for Britain to do so…

As for THE DISASTROUS EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, this was brought into effect in 1953 by the Council of Europe rather than by the EU, but it is deemed legally impossible for Britain to derogate from the convention while remaining an EU member. I use the word ‘disastrous’ because its interpretation by the judges of the European Court in Strasbourg has had a host of unwelcome consequences for Britain.

The Human Rights convention no longer serves as it was intended, as a barrier to injustice. Instead, IT HAS BECOME A ROCKFALL IN THE PATH OF COMMON-SENSE IN ALMOST EVERY AREA OF HUMAN AFFAIRS. GIPSIES, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, CONVICTED TERRORISTS AND CRIMINALS HAVE BECOME ITS UNDESERVING BENEFICIARIES. FEAR OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW CAUSES EMPLOYERS, JUDGES, MINISTERS AND POLICEMEN TO COWER IN SLIT TRENCHES RATHER THAN RISK LITIGATION. IT IS HARD TO IDENTIFY THE SMALLEST ADVANTAGE FOR LAW-ABIDING BRITISH CITIZENS FROM OUR ADHERENCE TO THE CONVENTION, BUT THERE IS NO WILL IN EUROPE TO REFORM IT…

As for the European Parliament, it has shown itself toothless as a scrutinising body for the Commission’s deeds and misdeeds, and is chiefly notorious for THE EXPENSES FRAUDS OF ITS MEMBERS, FAR OUTSTRIPPING THOSE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

In its early decades, the Common Market was a benign institution set up to liberalise European trade. IT IS NO LONGER SO. At a time when our major new competitors such as India are hastening to shed regulation and bureaucracy, EUROPE IS DROWNING US IN THEM.

EUROSCEPTICS WHO WARNED OF THE DISASTROUS CONSEQUENCES OF THE DRIVE TOWARDS INTEGRATION SYMBOLISED BY THE 1991 MAASTRICHT TREATY HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE RIGHT…

THE COST OF BRUSSELS HAS BECOME INSUPPORTABLE. If we continue to burden employers and wealth generators, large and small, with its Utopian vision, only relentless decline can lie ahead…

RESOURCES SHARED BETWEEN 27 EU NATIONS ARE DISTRIBUTED WITH RECKLESS IRRESPONSIBILITY BY UNELECTED OFFICIALS. THOSE WHO OBEY THE RULES SUFFER BY COMPARISON WITH THOSE WHO BREAK THEM. France — to name but one — observes only those Brussels edicts that suits it, while Romania, Greece and Italy remain chronically corrupt.
Meanwhile, BRITAIN IS CONSTANTLY PENALISED FOR ITS RIGID ADHERENCE TO EU LAW, enforced by our judiciary and civil servants…

IT HAS BECOME ESSENTIAL TO REPATRIATE POWERS FROM BRUSSELS. This is… the economic imperative to strengthen our competitive position in the world and REPAIR OUR SOCIAL FABRIC. WE MUST REGAIN CONTROL OF BRITAIN’S BORDERS, LOSS OF WHICH HAS INFLICTED WHOLLY UNWELCOME SOCIAL CHANGE. Almost incredibly, THE LATEST NET IMMIGRATION FIGURES ARE THE HIGHEST EVER.

If the EU maintains its present path, it is hard to see the structure surviving longer than another decade. ITS FAILURE WILL BECOME EVER MORE STARKLY OBVIOUS TO THE ELECTORATES OF NORTHERN EUROPE, WHO PAY THE BILLS FOR THE CHRONIC CORRUPTION AND INCOMPETENCE OF THE SOUTH…

I feel embarrassed to have to admit I HAVE BEEN WRONG FOR SO LONG ABOUT SOMETHING SO IMPORTANT. A eurosceptic friend said recently, with some bitterness: ‘FOR YEARS, EVERYBODY, AND ESPECIALLY THE BBC, HAS TREATED PEOPLE LIKE US AS IF WE WERE LUNATICS.’ She is right…

Membership of the EU in its present form has become a blight, imposing UNACCEPTABLE SOCIAL, CULTURAL, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BURDENS AND CONSTRAINTS…

The EU will most likely stumble on in its present form, CRIPPLED AND DISCREDITED, EXERCISING ITS DEAD HAND UPON MEMBERS. But revolt among electorates is growing by the day, about THEIR POLITICIANS’ DEFIANCE OF REASON as well as popular sentiment. German as well as British voters have had enough. Their leaders will pay a heavy political price if they fail to heed public anger and frustration. The refusal of David Cameron’s government even to reject the new part-time work directive and the droit de suite reflect an indefensible infirmity of purpose…

If Britain’s government cannot find the means to retrieve some part of OUR LOST CONTROL OF VITAL NATIONAL INTERESTS, we shall find ourselves mere fellow passengers with our EU partners aboard a waterlogged hulk, while the Chinese, Indians, South Koreans and Singaporeans power past in their glittering speedboats, leaving us bobbing in the wake.”

Well said, Max.

The sinner come to repentance is often more damning of sin than the saint.

Long may it continue to be so.



On 13 September 2011, Baroness Shreela Flather, a Pakistani immigrant and the UK’s first female Asian peer, said this in the House of Lords during the second reading of the Welfare Reform Bill:

“THE MINORITY COMMUNITIES IN THIS COUNTRY, PARTICULARLY THE PAKISTANIS AND THE BANGLADESHIS, HAVE A VERY LARGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN AND THE ATTRACTION IS THE LARGE NUMBER OF BENEFITS THAT FOLLOW THE CHILD.

NOBODY LIKES TO ACCEPT THAT, NOBODY LIKES TO TALK ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE VERY POLITICALLY INCORRECT…

IT IS ABOUT TIME WE STOPPED USING CHILDREN AS A MEANS OF IMPROVING THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY RECEIVE OR GETTING A BIGGER HOUSE… In the countries of origin, of course, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis and even Indians have large families because there is no safety net. When you get old it is only your children who are going to look after you. This doesn’t apply here, every old person does have their pension and they will be looked after.”

Now if, over the course of the last forty years, your concerned Brit had said what Lady Shreela says here, we would have been called 'racists,' 'Fascists,' 'neo-Nazi' and what was that other word?

You know, the word that Gordon Brown used to describe Gillian Duffy when she said: ‘You can't say anything about the immigrants… but all these eastern European what are coming in, where are they flocking from?'

Ah yes, ‘BIGOT,’ that was it. Just last year, that’s what a Prime Minister said a 65-year-old concerned Brit was who didn’t have her tongue stuck firmly up the behind of every last immigrant.

Here are Brown’s actual words:

“SHE WAS JUST A SORT OF BIGOTED WOMAN. She said she used be Labour. I mean it's just ridiculous.”

Brown’s little sneer was caught on tape and, because Gillian was a lifelong Labour Party supporter and wasn’t a tattoed, skinhead Millwall supporter, he was hauled over the coals for what the totality of the PC Crowd in parliament and the press have been chanting in its sleep for almost fifty years now.

Even now, not one journalist has ever broken cover to clap ’disgusted’ of Tonbridge Wells, the man on the Clapham omnibus AND the British Nationalist on the back for being right on just about everything the mainstream was wrong about. Even now, they demonise and vilify us for saying what they have recently found the courage to begin saying themselves. But when the Lady Shreelas say it, they are, almost always, applauded by the same folk.

Nasty, old habits die hard in PC world, I guess.



On 13 September 2011, some of the tweets of R&B singer, Kelis, were quoted thus by the web site contactmusic.com

This is what she said:

"We just landed and I had the midget with me. We get in the passport control line and apparently p**sed this one man off cause he thought I CUT THE LINE. Which wouldn't be far fetched of me but this time I actually didn't (NOT ENTIRELY ANYWAY)...

This fat red faced sweaty 'man' (I use the word man loosely here) started calling me a slave and told me to call him sir and how I was probably a disgusting nigerian. He called me kunta kinte (central slave character in author Alex Haley's book, Roots: The Saga of an American Family) and ranted and raved some more…

The man behind the passport desk laughed, shook his head in agreement I guess, and said 'kunta kinte'. All the while the entire line full of people I just sat on a plane with for almost 3 hours. Over 50 people said nothing. I mean literally nothing. Didn't flinch. We all no I'M NO SAINT (sic), SO I RETALIATED. Not the way I wanted to or how that pig deserved…

I am in london all the time and today I'm gonna say that the RACIAL ISSUES IN THE UK ARE DISGUSTING. ITS (SIC) RACIALLY DECADES BEHIND PROGRESSION because everything is swept under the rug. People don't talk about it. People don't fight about it.

Not mentioning a problem doesn't make it go away. I bring it up now because as an american it is abundantly clear that my country has a smorgas board (sic) Of disgusting racial problems. We are the poster child for racial inequality even still with a black president But its No Secret! And that I can fight against. I can try to prepare and teach my son. Because its out there. But you can't fight for or against something no one is willing to talk about or even admit exist (sic). Everyone wants to be politically correct. But who really cares...? Maybe someone will start to talk about it from here."

I’m willing to talk about it, Kelis.

“Everyone wants to be politically correct.” Not over here, they don’t. Over here, the enlightened despise the PC Crowd to the point of hatred. Political correctness has stolen away our polite, secure and stable world and handed it to mouthy, race card-playing queue jumpers like you.

When the “fat red faced sweaty man” thought you “cut the line”, you did, didn’t you? That’s what “not entirely anyway” means, I guess. That’s why he was “pi**ed off” and “ranted and raved.” But, apparently, in your world, your original anti-societal misdemeanor counts for nothing. YOU are allowed to put yourself to the head of the queue. YOU do not have to wait your turn. YOU can be rude, self-serving and inconsiderate of others because, hey, you’re “no saint” and that’s just the way YOU are, isn’t it?

Well, Kelis, it looks like you bumped into a “pig” who was prepared to oink just the way he is too. Which, I have to admit, is unusual. Very few Brits would have said anything about you pushing in. It would have made them feel uncomfortable and angry but most would have kept their feelings to themselves. Normally, your lack of consideration for others would have been protected by the unwillingness of most Britons to “talk about or even admit" to the existence of bad behaviour even when it slaps them in the face.

But not this time. This time someone said what they felt. This time you got you’re behind smacked when you behaved badly. And what do you do thereafter? You reach immediately for the race card. If a fat, sweaty black man had spoken up and used exactly the same words, would you have twittered as you did? We don’t think so, do we?

Three cheers for the true Brit who, despite the politically correct straightjacket of the age, dares tell it how it is. And three “fat redfaced sweaty men” for every ill-mannered Yank who thinks the British are “racially decades behind progression” if they happen to voice their annoyance when Kunta Kinte pushes in.



On 13 September 2011, Jeremy Warner titled a Telegraph article, 'Europe's banks are staring into the abyss'.

I wonder, does this mean Europe's bankers are staring as well?

If so, we should sneak up from behind and give them a push.



On 12 September 2011, David Davis, former shadow Chancellor and favourite for the Tory leadership, said this in The Daily Mail:

“Liberty under the law, order, stability and security are the first requirements of good government. Twenty years ago those would have been truisms, but NEW LABOUR’S APPROACH TO LAW AND SECURITY DESTROYED THE LONGSTANDING BIPARTISAN CONVENTION IN THIS AREA… The Conservative political tradition is one of defending ancient liberties rather than manufacturing new rights.

We saw the collapse of both halves of this equation in the recent riots… We need active, visible and robust policing, NOT THE POLITICALLY CORRECT, SAFETY-FIRST VARIANT that sometimes passes for it today… It also means having a penal system that punishes and deters. If that means building more prisons, so be it…

After two decades of apparent economic plenty, we have ended up with an antiquated infrastructure and underperforming public services. IN EDUCATION, OUR SYSTEM HAS BEEN SLIPPING BACKWARDS AGAINST ITS INTERNATIONAL COMPETITORS FOR DECADES…

Britain has one of the most stratified societies in the Westernised world. This is both morally wrong and unaffordable. No nation can compete if it under-uses large parts of its population, AS BRITAIN DOES WITH THE CHILDREN OF POOR FAMILIES…

WE NEED TO BE FREE AS A NATION TO CHOOSE OUR OWN DESTINY. THIS HAS BECOME MORE DIFFICULT AS EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS HAVE BECOME MORE POWERFUL AND INTRUSIVE. OUR ABILITY TO DEREGULATE, OUR ECONOMIC POLICY, OUR IMMIGRATION AND JUSTICE POLICIES, AND MANY SOCIAL POLICIES, ARE INCREASINGLY CIRCUMSCRIBED BY EUROPEAN UNION DECISIONS. Yet THE BRITISH PEOPLE HAVE NOT BEEN CONSULTED ABOUT THE PROGRESSIVE SACRIFICE OF THEIR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS that has gradually taken place over the last 25 years. It is time they were, and WE NEED A REFERENDUM ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OUR NATION AND EUROPE.”



On 12 September 2011, DCI O’Neil, was quoted thus by The Daily Mail:

“The men we found at the site were in a poor state of physical health and the conditions they were living in were shockingly filthy and cramped. They were in sheds or old caravans. We believe that some of them had been living and working there IN A STATE OF VIRTUAL SLAVERY, some for just a few weeks and others for years. ONE PERSON, WE KNOW, HAS BEEN HERE FOR 15 YEARS… They were told by the people who had brought them here, ‘You have no family now, we are your family.’ If they wanted to leave they were threatened…

The victims still assisting the investigation include EIGHT BRITISH MEN, three Poles, a Latvian man, a Lithuanian man and two others whose nationalities are unconfirmed…

THE VICTIMS WERE MOSTLY BRITISH MEN with psychological and addiction problems. One victim was a suicidal man who had been ‘rescued’ from the edge of a bridge with promises of a better future.”

The Mail explained:

“A SLAVERY RING WHICH HELD 24 CAPTIVES IN APPALLING CONDITIONS AT A TRAVELLERS' CAMP was an organised crime group run by just one family, police believe. Yesterday about 200 officers in a dawn raid stormed the site where TWO DOZEN MEN WERE BEING KEPT IN DOG KENNELS, HORSEBOXES AND FILTHY CARAVANS…

People were lured into the camp in Little Billington, near Leighton Buzzard in Bedfordshire… The vulnerable victims, SOME WHO WERE STARVING, had been lured from soup kitchens, benefit offices and hostels with promises of paid jobs and shelter. Instead THEY BECAME SLAVES AFTER THEIR ‘MASTERS’ BEAT THEM INTO SUBMISSION, STOLE THEIR POSSESSIONS AND SHAVED THEIR HEADS…

AT LEAST ONE MAN HAD BEEN KEPT AS A SLAVE FOR 15 YEARS. Another was found with dog excrement on his clothes. Investigators are now working to uncover the true scale of the horror amid speculation that THERE MAY HAVE BEEN HUNDREDS OF VICTIMS…

Five travellers, four men and a woman, from the site were arrested for offences under anti-slavery legislation introduced last year… However police are facing searching questions over why they did not act sooner after it emerged that CLAIMS OF SLAVERY AT THE SITE WERE FIRST MADE THREE YEARS AGO. Twenty-eight men, Romanians, Poles, Russians and Britons, have come forward with such allegations since 2008.”

The Mail's Steve Doughty commented thus on the above infromation:

“The local council presumably takes seriously its duties to maintain public health and housing standards. I would bet that most businesses in Bedfordshire are fairly apprehensive of the health and safety police and take good care that no-one so much as goes up a ladder without hours of special training.

THE SLAVE-OWNERS OF THE GREEN ACRE CARAVAN SITE SEEM TO HAVE BEEN UNTOUCHED BY ANY OF THIS TRIVIAL REGULATION. THEY SEEM TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TAKE THEIR STARVING AND FILTHY CAPTIVES ABROAD TO WORK WITHOUT ANY UNDUE INTERFERENCE. In a homage to concentration camps, the were able to enforce the slave hierarchy by making their forced labourers shave their heads.

AND THEY SEEM TO HAVE GOT AWAY WITH THIS FOR A CONSIDERABLE PERIOD OF TIME.

PERHAPS IT WAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE FACT THAT GREEN ACRE WAS HOME TO IRISH TRAVELLER FAMILIES THAT PERSUADED THE POLICE TO DO NOTHING FOR THREE YEARS AFTER THE FIRST COMPLAINTS OF SLAVERY ON THE SITE.

MAYBE THE LOCAL AUTHORITY, CENTRAL BEDFORDSHIRE COUNCIL, WHICH LICENCES THE SITE, CONSIDERED THE STATUS OF TRAVELLERS AS AN OPPRESSED ETHNIC MINORITY WHEN THEY FAILED TO EXERCISE THEIR POWERS TO CHECK ON CONDITIONS IN THE CARAVANS AND SHEDS.

WHERE WAS THE GANGMASTERS LICENSING AUTHORITY, the rural workforce regulator which, as the Daily Mail revealed this summer, was so pushed for something to do that IT HAD TO MAKE UP LIES ABOUT CHILD SLAVERY ON A WORCESTERSHIRE FARM TO JUSTIFY ITS EXISTENCE?

And WHERE WERE THE SOCIAL WORKERS who might be expected to be trying to help just the kind of vulnerable and distressed individuals who ended up in the filth and horror of Green Acre?

TRAVELLER SITES, LEGAL AND ILLEGAL, HAVE BEEN NO-GO AREAS FOR YEARS. The police are afraid to go in unless in great and expensive numbers. Everyday policing does not happen. The ‘settled’ LOCAL RESIDENTS WHO COMPLAIN ABOUT CRIME AND DISTURBANCE AT TRAVELLER ENCAMPMENTS ARE OF COURSE GUILTY OF DEEP PREJUDICE, SO THEIR PROTESTS CAN BE DISMISSED.

We now know that ON AT LEAST ONE TRAVELLER SITE SOMETHING WAS HAPPENING IN THE NO-GO ZONE THAT WAS MUCH WORSE THAN BICYCLE THIEVERY, TAX EVASION AND BENEFIT FRAUD. IN THE PROTECTED VILLAGE WHERE THE ONLY RULES WERE THOSE MADE BY THE TRAVELLERS THEMSELVES, THERE WAS A HORRID TYRANNY more reminiscent of a totalitarian labour camp than what we like to think of as rural England.

Very soon now, a different local council in another part of southern England will be sending in teams of bailiffs and police to clear the illegal traveller settlement at Dale Farm. The Essex site has attracted crowds of student rebels and teenage activists to protect the rights of the unfortunate victims of eviction. TV broadcasters line up to carry out interviews with Dale Farm residents explaining their disabilities and complaining about the cruelty of eviction.

I wonder if anyone will remember Green Acre when and if the battle of Dale Farm starts? And I LOOK FORWARD TO VANESSA REDGRAVE DEFENDING THE RIGHTS OF TRAVELLERS AND POSING FOR THE CAMERAS AT THE GATES OF GREEN ACRE.”

Very well said Mr Doughty.

The media darlings are catching on.



On 12 September 2011, Ashton West, chief executive of the Motor Insurers Bureau, was quoted thus by The Daily Mail:

“We cannot stand by and let uninsured driving continue. Otherwise, THE HONEST MOTORIST WILL KEEP PAYING THE BILLS FOR THE INJURY AND DAMAGE CAUSED TO PEOPLE AND PROPERTY.”

The Daily Mail added:

"ALMOST A THIRD OF MOTORISTS ARE DRIVING WITHOUT INSURANCE IN SOME PARTS OF BRITAIN… Their reckless behaviour costs claims firms up to £500million a year and adds an average of £30 to every single annual premium…

The worst offending areas in the country… include Bordesley in Birmingham, where nearly one in three drivers is without a policy. Other insurance blackspots include parts of Essex, Manchester and West Yorkshire.

With nearly 1.4MILLION UNINSURED DRIVERS ON UK ROADS, Britain has one of the worst records in Western Europe, with about one in 25 drivers not having insurance. Around 23,000 PEOPLE ARE INJURED AND 160 KILLED BY UNINSURED AND UNTRACED DRIVERS EVERY YEAR…

Police say there is a high correlation between uninsured driving and other crimes, with offenders five times more likely to be involved in road collisions, fail to comply with traffic laws, or be engaged in criminal activity.”

Ten of the the worst offending areas for uninsured driving, by postode, are located in Birmingham; five are in Bradford; two are in Manchester and one each can be found in Halifax; Wolverhampton and Romford.

Which suggests to me that the immigrant communities will be way over-represented in the statistics. Just as they are over-represented in “road collisions,” “other crimes” and “criminal activity.”



On 11 September 2011, The Telegraph quoted Ryan Crocker, US Ambassador to Afghanistan, thus:

“Some back home have asked why we are still here. It’s been a long fight and people are tired. The reason is simple. Al-Qaeda is not here in Afghanistan and that’s because we are. We are here so that there is never again a 9/11 coming from Afghan soil... WE ARE IN THIS FOR THE LONG HAUL. We are transitioning security responsibility to Afghan forces, BUT TRANSITION DOES NOT MEAN DISENGAGEMENT.”

You got that everybody?

The boys will NOT be coming home!

No matter what you want.

Professor Richard Landes is a Jewish-American historian and an Israel apologist for whom the Chosen people can do very little wrong. In his 11 September 2011 Daily Telegraph article, ‘By reacting to 9/11 with self-recrimination, the Western elites have strengthened the hand of brutal Islamism,’ he remonstrates with the left-wing liberal elite and is, of course, right to do so.

However, his own brutish Neoconservativism, as was once expounded in the imperialist doctrine of the ‘New American Century’, is nicely summarised in this one ridiculous sentence.

“The ‘peace’ rallies of 2003 against Bush’s war in Iraq brought the pacifist Left and the Mujahidin together in common cause.”

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/richardlandes/100104166/by-reacting-to-911-with-self-recrimination-the-western-elites-have-strengthened-the-hand-of-brutal-islamism/#dsq-content

Thus does Landes, creepily conflate all of those who protested against the looming war in Iraq with “the pacificist left”, (the BNP and National Front were both dead set against the war) he lumps everyone who thought the war unnecessary and wrong with the Mujahidin-sniffer.

He concludes his crudely self-justifying article thus:

"The wellbeing of billions of people on this planet depends on our commitment to Western progressive values."

I responded thus to his conclusion:

"Western progressive values" as defined and devised by Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perl, Lewis Libby, William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer and the rest of the US-Jewish Neocons? Check out what the honest Israeli journalist, Ari Shavit, said in an April 2003, edition of the Israeli daily, 'Haaretz':

"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, MOST OF THEM JEWISH, WHO ARE PUSHING PRESIDENT BUSH TO CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY."

On your flag-waving, tub-thumping tours for Israel and the war on terror, Richard, have you ever mentioned the ethnicity of the Neocon “intellectuals” who dreamt up the war in Iraq and forced it upon the rest of us?

What do you think of ‘western progressive values’ such as globalism, political correctness, the importation of the alien millions and the creation of the get-Whitey construct that has come to be known as racism? Are you in agreement with such notions? Plenty of your kinfolk are, that’s for sure.

Would you be in favour of the values that Blair, Brown, Straw, Harman, Mandelson, Cameron, Clegg, Hollywood and the nu-BBC espouse, Richard? Would that be the way you’d like to see our world progressing in the future?

You're Jewish, Richard. You’re every bit as Jewish as Ari Shavit’s Bush-pushing Neocons.

And it shows.



On 10 September 2011, the Jewish-American journalist, Janet Daly, said this in her Telegraph article, ‘The dark day that brought out the worst in Britain’:

“The tragic events of 9/11 were immediately followed by a grotesque and shameful fusillade of anti-Americanism, which still resonates today…

Since I had spent virtually my entire adult life here and taken British nationality, I generally referred to myself as an American-born Briton… September 11 made a bonfire of that little vanity. From that day, I became an American who lives in Britain.

But it was not just the terrorist attack that had produced this resurgence of loyalty to the United States. It was the grotesque fusillade of anti-Americanism that burst immediately… onto the British scene in its wake. Anyone who claims that THE LATEST FASHIONABLE WAVE OF POLITICAL HATRED FOR THE US has been provoked by the Iraq war should look at the press coverage that sprang up in the first 48 to 72 hours after the attacks…

The Guardian led the way, of course, with a now infamous series of comment pieces which reiterated the same vengeful theme: America had got what it deserved… Then the BBC followed with an outrageous edition of Question Time, in which the audience shrieked abuse at anyone on the panel who uttered a word of sympathy for the US, and openly cheered the idea that the attacks were justified…

I am willing to predict that America's fundamental optimism is what will see it through, while Europe tears itself apart in moral confusion and historical guilt. The US is a country that (still) knows what it stands for and why it exists, and it will continue to offer that self-belief to the waves of immigrants who arrive, wanting to be free.”

“Waves of immigrants wanting to be free.”

What a noble sentiment, Janet. I’m reminded of the Emma Lazarus poem on the statue of liberty. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

If only you had put it like this: ‘Give me your asylum-seekers who want to be free of all the American bombs and bullets and self-belief,’ I’d have been less suspicious of your philosophy.

Emma Lazarus was Jewish too, Janet, did you know that? Funny how the Jews have always been on the side of the immigrant, isn't it?

I wonder.

Was it because The Guardian and the BBC were nasty to America that you and the Neocons were all for invading Iraq? A country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Between a hundred thousand and one million Iraqis perished because of a ‘fashionable wave of political hatred’ that emanated from your side of the fence. 4,404 US soldiers and 245 US "contractors" died in Iraq and 31,827 soldiers were injured on the back of a decision to invade that was made within a fortnight of 9/11. And for what? I repeat, Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Hereby hangs a tale. It's what the Yank does to the innocent, to those that haven't hurt him, that stokes up the fires of future hatred. Tony Blair, George Bush, the Neocons and media darlings sowed the seeds of many a past, present and future terrorist outrage with their brutish actions and allegiances. Just as the politicians, the media, and the military industrial complex had done before 9/11.

Those who died on 9/11 did not deserve to die. If anyone had to make up for the sins of the past it should have been the politicians et al whose behaviours, in the back yard of others, provoked the hatred of the killers. Unfortunately, those who have the power to blow the world to bits tend not to suffer from "moral confusion... self-doubt and identity crises." Such weakling psychoses are for the sheeple, not the country that, after Iraq, Afghanistan, George Bush and the Neocons, "still knows what it stands for."

In the real world, those who cause the catastrophes rarely suffer the consequences. If they did there be a lot less WWIIs, Vietnams, 9/11s, Afghanistans and Iraqs.

Once upon a time, Janet, “25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish,” pushed George Bush “to change the course of history." If you ever get to wondering why the US is not loved by all, just trace "the course of history" to its source.


On 10 September 2011, Janet Daly said this in The Telegraph:

“Since I had spent virtually my entire adult life here and taken British nationality, I generally referred to myself as an American-born Briton. September 11 made a bonfire of that little vanity. From that day, I became an American who lives in Britain. But it was not just the terrorist attack that had produced this resurgence of loyalty to the United States. It was the grotesque fusillade of anti-Americanism that burst immediately, and I mean immediately, onto the British scene in its wake.

Anyone who claims that the latest fashionable wave of political hatred for the US has been provoked by the Iraq war should look at the press coverage that sprang up in the first 48 to 72 hours after the attacks. When the invasion of Afghanistan, let alone Iraq, was only a possibility on the horizon, when the death toll was climbing into the thousands, and when people here were still desperately trying to contact American friends and family, sections of the British media were already engaged in a frenzy of vitriolic retribution.

The Guardian led the way, of course, with a now infamous series of comment pieces which reiterated the same vengeful theme: America had got what it deserved.

Its pages were filled with callous triumphalism (‘They can't see why they are hated,’ ‘A bully with a bloody nose is still a bully‘)…

Then the BBC followed with an outrageous edition of Question Time, in which the audience shrieked abuse at anyone on the panel who uttered a word of sympathy for the US, and openly cheered the idea that the attacks were justified. Some of my New York friends were rung from London within days by people they had known for years to be told: ‘You know what everybody is saying here – that America got what it deserved’…

I am willing to predict that America's fundamental optimism is what will see it through, while Europe tears itself apart in moral confusion and historical guilt. The US is a country that (still) knows what it stands for and why it exists, and it will continue to offer that self-belief to the waves of immigrants who arrive, wanting to be free."

I wonder, Janet.

Was it because The Guardian and the BBC were nasty to America that you and the Neocons were all for invading Iraq? A country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Between a hundred thousand and one million Iraqis perished because of a 'fashionable wave of political hatred' that emanated from your side of the fence. 4,404 US soldiers and 245 US 'contractors' died in Iraq (31,827 soldiers were injured); a good many more than were killed on 9/11. And for what? I repeat, Saddam and Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Hereby hangs a tale. It's what the Yank does to the innocent, to those that haven't hurt him, that stokes up the fires of future hatred. Tony Blair, George Bush, the Neocons and media darlings sowed the seeds of many a past, present and future terrorist outrages with their brutish actions and allegiances. Just as the politicians, the media, and the military industrial complex had done before 9/11.

Those who died on 9/11 did not deserve to die. If anyone had to suffer for the sins of the past it should have been the powers-that-be, whose behaviours, in the back yard of others, provoked the hatred of the killers. Unfortunately, those who have the power to blow the world to bits tend not to go for 'moral confusion... self-doubt and identity crises.' Such weakling psychoses are for the sheeple, not the country that, after Iraq, Afghanistan, George Bush and the Neocons, 'still knows what it stands for.' In the real world, those who cause the catastrophes rarely have to deal with the consequences. If they did there be a lot less WWIIs, Vietnams, 9/11s, Afghanistans and Iraqs.

PS. In April 2003, the journalist, Ari Shavit, said this in the Israeli daily, 'Haaretz':

"The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, MOST OF THEM JEWISH, WHO ARE PUSHING PRESIDENT BUSH TO CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY."

If you Jewish Janets ever get to wondering why the US is not loved by all, just trace "the course of history" to its source.

As an honest Israeli journalist did.



On 10 September 2011, ahead of the introduction of a 700-page report, titled, ’How Fair is Britain’ Trevor Phillips, Chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, was quoted thus in The Telegraph:

“One in four women and one in five men in their fifties is a carer. These are some of the most hard-pressed folk in our society.”

Can’t argue with that, Trev.

The Telegraph continued:

"THE WHITE WORKING CLASSES ARE MISSING OUT ON GOOD JOBS COMPARED WITH OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS, with Chinese and Indian men nearly twice as likely to find professional work.

UNEMPLOYMENT AMONG ETHNIC MINORITIES COSTS THE ECONOMY ALMOST £8.6 BILLION A YEAR IN BENEFITS AND LOST REVENUE FROM TAXES. HALF OF MUSLIM MEN AND THREE QUARTERS OF MUSLIM WOMEN ARE UNEMPLOYED.

Racism and religious prejudice are increasing, while hostility towards immigration has grown.”

No, “hostility towards immigration” has been ever-present since the fifties. It’s just that, now, with the politicians, the PC Crowd and the immigrant as in your face as they are, the Brits have, at last, begun to speak out.

Nice of them to tell state the facts about the white working-class and ethnic minority unemployment though.

Nice and very surprising.



On 9 August 2011, Camila Batmanghelidjh, founder of the charities The Place To Be and Kids Company, said this in The Independent:

“For those of us working at street level, we're not surprised by these events. Twitter and Facebook have kept the perverse momentum going, transmitting invitations such as:

‘Bare shops are gonna get smashed up. So come, GET SOME FREE STUFF!!!! FUCK THE FEDS WE WILL SEND THEM BACK WITH OUR RIOT! DEAD THE ENDS AND COLOUR WAR FOR NOW. So If you see a brother... SALUTE! IF YOU SEE A FED... SHOOT!’

If this is a war, THE ENEMY, on the face of it, ARE THE ‘LAWLESS,’ THE DEFENDERS ARE THE LAW-ABIDING. An absence of morality can easily be found in the rioters and looters. How, we ask, could they attack their own community with such disregard? But the young people would reply ‘EASILY,’ because they feel they don't actually belong to the community. Community, they would say, has nothing to offer them…

Working at street level in London, over a number of years, MANY OF US HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT LARGE GROUPS OF YOUNG ADULTS CREATING THEIR OWN PARALLEL ANTISOCIAL COMMUNITIES WITH DIFFERENT RULES. The individual is responsible for their own survival because the established community is perceived to provide nothing. ACQUISITION OF GOODS THROUGH VIOLENCE IS JUSTIFIED IN NEIGHBOURHOODS WHERE THE NOTION OF DOG EAT DOG PERVADES AND THE TOP DOG SURVIVES THE BEST. The drug economy facilitates a parallel subculture with THE DRUG DEALER PRODUCING MORE FISCALLY EFFICIENT SOLUTIONS THAN THE SOCIAL CARE AGENCIES who are too under-resourced to compete…

GO TO THE YOUTH CENTRE AND YOU WILL FIND THE STAFF HAVE LOCKED THEMSELVES UP IN THE OFFICE BECAUSE DISTURBED YOUNG MEN ARE DOMINATING THE SPACE WITH THEIR VIOLENT DOGS. WALK ON THE ESTATE STAIRWELLS WITH YOUR BABY IN A BUGGY MANOEUVRING PAST THE CONDOMS, THE NEEDLES, INTO THE LIFT WHERE THE BEST OUTCOME IS THAT YOU WILL SURVIVE THE URINE STENCH AND THE WORST IS THAT YOU WILL BE RAPED… British children with no legal papers have mothers surviving through prostitution...

Young, intelligent citizens of the ghetto seek an explanation for why they are at the receiving end of bleak Britain… Savagery is a possibility within us all. Some of us have been lucky enough not to have to call upon it for survival; OTHERS, exhausted from failure, CAN JUSTIFY RESORTING TO IT.

Our leaders still speak about how protecting the community is vital… The community has selected who is worthy of help and who is not. In this false moral economy where the poor are described as dysfunctional, the community fails. One dimension of this failure is being acted out in the riots; the lawlessness is, suddenly, there for all to see. Less visible is the perverse insidious violence delivered through legitimate societal structures…

The kids gave me a run-down of what had happened in Brixton. A STREET PARTY HAD BEEN INVADED BY A GROUP OF YOUNG MEN OUT TO GRAB. A FEW YEARS AGO, THE KIDS WHO CALLED ME WOULD HAVE JOINED IN, BECAUSE THEY HAD NOTHING TO LOSE. ONE HAD BEEN PERMANENTLY EXCLUDED FROM SIX SCHOOLS. WHEN HE FIRST ARRIVED AT KIDS COMPANY HE CARED SO LITTLE THAT HE WOULD SMASH HIS HEAD INTO A PANE OF GLASS AND BITE HIS OWN FLESH OFF WITH RAGE. HE'D THINK NOTHING OF HURTING OTHERS. After intensive social care and support he walked away when the riots began because he held more value in his membership of a community that has embraced him than A COMMUNITY THAT DEMANDED HIS DARK SIDE.

IT COSTS MONEY TO CARE. But it also costs money to clear up riots, savagery and antisocial behaviour. I leave it to you to do the financial and moral sums.”



On 9 September 2011, The Catholic Herald quoted Archbishop Smith, Vice President of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, who said that Human Rights Law was being wrongly applied in almost every case.

“The courts are misinterpreting the law… Why can’t Christians wear the symbol of the cross? It is absolutely part of the Gospel. Without the cross there is no salvation. It is at the heart of our faith because it is the symbol and sign of God’s unconditional love. There seems to be a prejudice against Christians or against the manifestation of the Christian faith."

The Archbishop also said that whenever there was a conflict of rights between Christians and homosexuals the courts were consistently “coming down heavily on one side and totally ignoring the other”.



On 9 August 2011, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown said this in The Independent:

“I have lived here since 1978 and such things do not happen in this lovely, green AND WONDERFULLY MIXED BOROUGH… People are upset and furious…

Why would they destroy their own neighbourhoods? Feel they can by right grab trainers and champagne, burn down homes of people who did them no harm? A minority were clearly determined lawbreakers. But many seem to have felt this impulse to give into anarchism…

They have come to expect no justice or equality and so ITS ALL ABOUT MONEY. We are among the three most unequal nations in the developed world. THEY ARE HARDENED AND EVEN PSYCHOTIC NOW. NO JOBS, NO UNDERSTANDING OF DELAYED GRATIFICATION OR THE VALUE OF EDUCATION, TOO OFTEN WITH NO PARENTING AND, YES NO MORAL SENSE...

Glib and privileged politicians, commentators and businessmen need to look at the world inhabited by these men and women - where those who have money and power get away even when they break the law, where TV programmes tell them to do whatever it takes to humiliate their competitors, WHERE THEIR DADS AND SOMETIMES MUMS BUGGER OFF AND NO ONE CARES, WHERE INDIVIDUAL GREED IS ADMIRED AND CELEBRATED. SO THEY GO GET AND THE REST OF US BE DAMNED. I hate what they did and do not justify it. But I do want to take some responsibility as a citizen of a nation that made them. So should Cameron.”



On 9 September 2011, Christina Odone wrote the following in The Telegraph:

“The riots brought out a nasty streak in thousands of looters – and in thousands of ordinary citizens too. They didn't kick in a shop window or make off with a pair of Nikes. But they gave their xenophobia free rein. While the sikhs, Turks and Poles drew praise for their efforts in defending their neighbourhoods and restoring order, HOSTILE LITTLE ENGLANDERS GAVE VENT TO THEIR PARANOIA: immigrants can't be patriots, was their mantra – and Muslims above all.

They'd do well to read the riveting study of Muslims and the Army, ‘Ties That Bind’ which Policy Exchange has just published. Author Shiraz Maher discovers not only that almost 90 per cent of Muslims here feel British, but also that 79 per cent of low-skilled Muslims would consider joining the Army and just under 48 per cent of Muslim women said they would too.

This should put paid to theories about Muslims' true allegiances… Most Muslims are ready to serve in Britain's institutions... That's something to be encouraged. Muslims who have a stake in Britain won't want to blow it up.”

So, we’ve got to give our jobs to foreigners now because, if we don’t, they’ll “blow it up?”

Nice one, Christina. I suspect you’re more right than you want to be here.

"Hostile little Englanders gave vent to their paranoia."

Ah, right. What the black folk did in Tottenham, Hackney and Croydon was just us being neurotic, was it? Pop round to Christina's place next time, lads, when her house is burning down around her ears the over-active imagination of little-England will get the blame, not you.

"Sikhs, Turks and Poles drew praise for their efforts in defending their neighbourhoods."

Not least from you, Christina. Talk about gush! And, as I pointed out at the time, they were allowed to protect their neighbourhoods. When "hostile little Englanders" tried to do the same, the keystone cops kettled them!

"90 per cent of Muslims here feel British"!

I don't know about that but, hey, if you're telling me that every last immigrant thinks the land that we made is better than the land that they and their ancestors made, well, that's why they come in the first place, isn't it?

"79 per cent of low-skilled Muslims would consider joining the Army!"

Interesting how their considerations don't translate into actually joining up, don't you think?

"Muslims' true allegiances"?

The true allegiance of all Muslims would be to Allah, Mohammed and their own folk. I don't think you'd get many Muslims disagreeing with that. Your article is disingenuous in the extreme, Christina. Most Brits, unlike the PC Crowd in parliament, have no problem with foreigners in their own lands. They can be whatever they want to be in Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Turkey and Poland. But when they pile into our country against our will and the laws get changed to suit them and screw us, and the politicians and the media darlings care more for them than they do the "little Englander", well, we're liable to get a bit upset.

"Most Muslims are ready to serve in Britain's institutions!"

We don't want Muslims to "serve in Britain's institutions," we want to serve in them ourselves! Did you not notice New Labour handing 90% of all the new jobs they created to foreigners? And, despite the election promises, the Tories carrying on doing the same? How on earth can you imagine we'd be impressed by Muslims being "ready to serve" when, by doing so, they're having it away with our jobs?

As a point of interest, I see “the riveting study” Christina speaks of was composed by one Shiraz Maher. I wonder if she knows that he used to be a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir? I wouldn’t be putting quite so much faith in the ‘Ties that Bind’ statistics if I were her, they might just be a tad self-serving.

Here’s what the cited author said in the 12 August 2007 edition of The Times:

“For almost four years I WAS ON THE FRONT LINE OF BRITISH ISLAMISM serving as a regional officer in northeast England for Hizb ut-Tahrir, AN EXTREMIST GROUP COMMITTED TO THE CREATION OF A PURITANICAL CALIPHATE…

At 21, IT WAS INTOXICATING TO ME. I EMBRACED MY NEW ISLAMIST IDENTITY AND FAMILY WITH EAGERNESS… It not only prompted me TO REJECT MY BRITISH IDENTITY but also my ethnic South Asian background. I was neither eastern, nor western; I was a Muslim, A PART OF THE GLOBAL UMMAH, WHERE IDENTITY IS DEFINED THROUGH THE FRATERNITY OF FAITH…

Bilal Abdullah and Kafeel Ahmed, the two men linked with the alleged plot to attack London and Glasgow, were among MY CLOSEST FRIENDS when I studied at Cambridge University…

I watched as London came under attack on July 7, 2005, by four British Muslims who claimed 52 innocent lives. This was THE CAULDRON OF ISLAMIST HATE BOILING OVER...

When I resigned from Hizb ut-Tahrir, the social network that had once so warmly embraced me turned bitterly cold and confrontational. THE INWARD LOVE WAS REPLACED BY THE EXTERNAL HATE.”

Ah, one gets it now.

‘Love us or we’ll hate you’ would appear to be the way it works down Hizb ut-Tahrir Way.

No, Christina, whether Shiraz has seen the light or not, such hate-filled us-and-them causes, embraced fervently at one point in the calendar, do tend to put us stiff-upper lip types off on all subsequent dates. You will excuse us little Englanders if we ignore the matey, nu-Muslim overtures of the repentant friends of Bilal Abdullah, Kafeel Ahmed and the London bombers.

The truth is, our country has been open house for every Tom, Dick and Abdul for far too long. We never wanted them here in the first place and most of us would be happier if they'd push off back to wherever it is they came from. That includes you, Christina. If the Singhs, Suleimans and Stanislaws appeal a whole lot more than Tommy Atkins and the man on the Clapham Omnibus, then perhaps you'd be happier some place where the English do not prevail.

India, Turkey or Poland, for example.

PS. When the politicians and the PC Crowd bang on about diversity, enrichment and cohesion, have you ever noticed any of them excluding the ‘love us or we’ll hate you’ crew from the equation?



On 9 September 2011, Matthew Norman said this in The Guardian:

“Another richly textured week in the crazy, crazy life of Mr Tony Blair draws to its close... and as so often when that ineradicable fungal infection in the national armpit flares up, the head is sent spinning by the man, his works and HIS GENIUS FOR SELF-DELUSION…. You could go mad – droolingly, screechingly doolally – trying to fathom what goes on in his head...

On Tuesday, we belatedly learnt of his attendance last year, ON THE BANKS OF THE JORDAN, at the christening of god-daughter Grace, now nine-year-old girl CHILD OF RUPERT AND WENDI MURDOCH. On Thursday… it emerged that HE HAS RECEIVED A ‘PEACE AWARD’ – another one! – IN TEL AVIV for his splendid IF MYSTERIOUS work SPRINKLING HARMONY ACROSS THE MIDDLE EAST. Yesterday, that cherished role as peacebringer firmly in mind, he informed us in an interview in The Times that WAR WITH IRAN IS THE WAY AHEAD.

The purpose of this patsy interview was to indulge his reflections on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and his own contribution to the ensuing martial catastrophes… He contented himself with the same mechanical generalities, self-justifications and expressions of regret for loss of life which enchanted fans of the Chilcot Inquiry, where he first banged the drum for attacking Iran. ‘Peace Through War‘, you may recall, was also a mantra of the Party in Nineteen Eighty-Four… Now me, had I been interviewing him, I’d have taken advantage of Papa Murdoch’s legendary hands-off approach to editorial content to ask about the baptism.

Why did he absent himself from the Hello! photo shoot that featured Grace and her sister, their parents and his fellow godparents Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman, all clad in the same white garments – unseen on a public figure since the Maharishi entertained the Beatles – WHICH MR TONY WORE HIMSELF?…

Was Cherie present, and if not, why not? Was the Murdoch private jet already full of Australian film stars? Or did she turn around at the Heathrow check-in on receiving a text message from a News Corp vice president that she would not, after all, be permitted to take a JCB digger to the river bank, and fill her trolley with soil later to be sold on eBay to collectors of holy relics?

The most impenetrable question, however, is this. WHO, IN BIBLICAL TERMS, DOES TONY BLAIR THINK HE IS? Palpably THERE IS A MESSIANIC COMPLEX AT WORK, as evidenced by his stewardship of that ‘Faith Foundation,’ to go with THE NARCISSISTIC PERSONAL DISORDER…

Observing Mr Blair in his myriad guises – sworn foe of media ‘feral beasts’ who doubles up as Murdoch godfather; Middle Eastern peacemaker who advocates bombing the hell out of Tehran; fearless hammer of mad tyrants who spent a decade appeasing Gordon Brown – I’m not so sure.

How could a humourless God have created Tony Blair? Of course, one sees his value to a benign deity as a human weapon of mass destruction. Those whom the gods wish to destroy (Mubarak, Gaddafi, Berlusconi, Rebekah Brooks, Rupert himself), they first curse with his friendship. But even more than as the Bizarro World Midas whose touch transforms his golden chums into toxic waste, it is as the standout global comic figure of the age that he will one day be celebrated…

Allow a few decades to dull the memory of THE UNTOLD DAMAGE MR BLAIR WROUGHT ON BRITAIN AND THE WIDER WORLD, and he will take his rightful place in the Chamber of Mirthful Horrors. In the meantime, the fungal infection will sporadically erupt, and we must scratch at it as best we may.”

Fungal infection.

A most appropriate description of the great traitor.

As regards the excellent critique, Matthew, I beg to differ in just one respect. Hopefully, "one day," we will "celebrate" the "untold damage" person, not as a "standout global comic" but as a worthy replacement for Mr Fawkes on top of the bonfire.



On 9 September 2011, Sky News reported Devid Cameon thus:

"Every year that passes without proper reform, is another year that tens of thousands of teenagers leave school without the qualifications they really need. The most important value we're bringing back to the classroom is a commitment to rigour. Rigorous subjects, tested in a rigorous way. However well students perform in their exams, WE CANNOT DENY THE REALITY OF THE PAST FEW YEARS.”

Why not?

New Labour and the PC Crowd in the teaching profession (the majority) does just that.

Cameron added:

“THE VOICES FROM BUSINESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE USEFULNESS OF SOME OF OUR EXAMS - THEY GREW LOUDER… We need parents to have a real stake in the discipline of their children, TO FACE REAL CONSEQUENCES IF THEIR CHILDREN CONTINUALLY MISBEHAVE. That's why I have asked our social policy review to look into whether we should cut the benefits of those parents whose children constantly play truant."

You’re going to “cut the benefits” of parents of children that behave badly?

Even if those parents are lovely, fluffy immigrants?

I’ll believe it when I see it.



On 9 September 2011, The Times quoted Tony Blair thus:

"REGIME CHANGE IN TEHRAN WOULD IMMEDIATELY MAKE ME SIGNIFICANTLY MORE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE WHOLE OF THE REGION.”

Yeah.

I bet it would make your Hebrew pals in Israel, the US and the UK ‘significantly more optimistic’ as well, wouldn’t it, Tony?

“If Iran were to acquire nuclear weapons capability…”

Like Israel, Tony?

Is that what you mean?

“… it would destabilise the region very, very badly.”

It would p*** off the Israelis no end, that’s for sure.

“They continue to support groups that are engaged with terrorism and the forces of reaction.”

Reaction to what, Tony?

The invasions and slaughters you and the Neocons set in train?

“In Iraq one of the main problems has been the continued intervention of Iran and likewise in Afghanistan."

Well, they do live in the region.

They were hardly going to sit back and do nothing as you rode roughshod over their neighbours, were they?

“We are a long way from getting out of this.”

We?

It’s our young lads who are ‘a long way from getting out’. You’ve been off rolling in the wages of sin with pop stars and the gangster elite ever since you left Downing Street.

“I think the thing that we came to learn later is that… the number of people who bought a certain amount of the narrative that gave rise to that extremism WAS WORRYINGLY LARGE. And, the real reason why it was difficult in Afghanistan and then in Iraq, and is difficult actually all over the region of the Middle East at the moment, is that the narrative in which religion is mixed up with politics and in which the idea that 'the West is inherently in conflict with us' – THAT IDEOLOGY, that has those ideas in it, in a very toxic way, IS FAR MORE WIDESPREAD THAN WE UNDERSTOOD AT THE TIME.”

What?

You invade another country with a completely different culture to your own and do your best to ram your own ‘ideology’ down their throats, and you never understood that the population might not be up for it? Basically, you’re telling us that you, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and co. aren’t just a bunch of warmongering trough-gobblers, you’re stupid as well. Is that right?

"The majority, as the Arab Spring shows, want what we want.”

Ah, Tony, still holding on tight to that self-approving wish-list, are we?

Still spinning your fables for the sheeple? I think “the majority” might surprise you, Tony. I think that you may “come to learn” that the Arabs want what they want, not what you and the gangster elite want.

“You can knock out – militarily – the regime, but then when you're engaged in the process of NATION BUILDING afterwards it's not like NATION BUILDING was in say the Balkans or eastern Europe. You know, you're NATION BUILDING in circumstances where there are groups of people prepared to use terrorism and in particular suicide bombing to destroy YOUR ATTEMPT TO BUILD A COUNTRY."

Iraq (Mesopotamia) was once known as “the cradle of civilisation.”

And then along comes Blair the Builder. Who proceeds to blow it to bits. Along with its people. In order, so he implies, to build something better.

A bit Messianic there, Tony. A bit of the old ‘my vision is a million or so lives superior to yours’, I’d say. Oh yes, you were playing God there, Tony. Something a second-rate actor cum Ugly Rumour type really ought not to be doing.

“So you may have the best intentions in the world in building it but they're actually viscerally opposed to THE TYPE OF NATION YOU'RE TRYING TO BUILD, which is an open and a democratic nation. And that's, I think that ideology is still very much with us."

Oh, it is.

You’d have to kill them all to be rid of their ‘ideology’. Hey, Tony! Have you ever stopped to consider how pompous and condescending you sound when you talk about building your own private Utopia in someone else’s back yard? Pompous, condescending and downright insane, in fact. Oh yes, a complete and utter fart of the first water, that’d be you, Tony.

I do hope you die horribly.

Just like so many of those you inflicted your “open and democratic... best intentions” upon.



On 8 September 2011, Prince Charles gave his first speech as President of the Worldwide Wildlife Fund at St James's Palace in London.

Here are some of the things he said:

“We are, of course, witnessing what some people call THE SIXTH GREAT EXTINCTION EVENT, the continued erosion of much of the Earth’s vital biodiversity caused by a whole host of pressures, from THE RISING DEMAND FOR LAND TO THE CORROSIVE EFFECTS OF ALL KINDS OF POLLUTION… Without the biodiversity that is so threatened, we won't be able to survive ourselves…

It may not seem to make much difference economically if the swallows, swifts and house martins no longer turn up each spring, but what would life be like if we just accepted their extinction because their habitats have been destroyed?…

History will not judge us by how much economic growth we achieve in the immediate years ahead, nor by how much we expand material consumption, but by the legacy for our grandchildren and their grandchildren… WE ARE CONSUMING WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY THEIRS BY SACRIFICING LONG-TERM PROGRESS ON THE ALTAR OF IMMEDIATE SATISFACTION. That is hardly responsible behaviour. THERE IS AN URGENT NEED FOR ALL OF US TO CONCENTRATE OUR EFFORTS ON SUSTAINING, NURTURING AND PROTECTING THE EARTH’S NATURAL CAPITAL and, moreover, reshaping our economic system so that Nature sits at the very heart of our thinking….

The issues we face are so important. None of us must be afraid to be stand up and be counted.”

The British people stood up to be counted ages ago, Charlie.

They began having fewer children so they could give them a better start in life. Then the powers-that-be, of which you wouild be one, began importing the irresponsible, fast-breeding immigrant and they ‘began consuming what is rightfully’ ours.

Why didn't you say something about it back when it might have made a difference? Why don't you aim your remarks slap, bang where they ought to be aimed right now? Why don’t you tell your mother’s Commonwealth millions that, within our island, create the ‘rising demand for land’ you speak of, to ‘concentrate’ their ‘efforts on sustaining, nurturing and protecting the Earth’s natural capital?’

Tell THEM to stop coming! Tell THEM we’re full up! TELL those already here to behave more responsibly in the childbearing department! Tell the politicians to stop putting the irresponsible immigrant in front of us who have, for so long, tried to do the right thing!

Yeah, we know. You can only tell the truths that don't get in the way of the greatest extinction of them all. The let’s-do-away-with-Whitey project. In which case, Charlie, though your words are wise and your warnings timely, in truth they count for b*gger all.



On 8 September 2011, Roger Scruton said this in The Telegraph:

"With its planning reforms, THE GOVERNMENT IS BETRAYING THE HERITAGE THAT SO MANY HAVE FOUGHT TO PRESERVE...

The Coalition’s proposals to reform the planning system, while ostensibly returning planning decisions to local communities, leave the default position not in the hands of the community, BUT IN THE HANDS OF THE DEVELOPER – THE BIG BUSINESS FROM ELSEWHERE, WHICH HAS NO INTEREST IN CONSERVING A CHERISHED HABITAT AND WHICH IS NO MORE THE FRIEND OF CIVIL SOCIETY THAN WAS THE DICTATORIAL STATE.

The astonishing success of the English in conserving their environment illustrates THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS NOW ON THE BRINK OF BETRAYING. Almost none of the work of rescuing our country from the effects of the Industrial Revolution was initiated by Parliament, and all of it depended on public-spirited citizens combining in defence of their homes…

The Government justifies its new proposals as instruments of economic growth… When people refuse to pull down a cathedral for the sake of the coal beneath it, or insist on retaining a Georgian city when it could be rebuilt as a business park, they create obstacles to economic growth. MOST FORMS OF LOVE ARE OBSTACLES TO ECONOMIC GROWTH. THANK GOD FOR OBSTACLES TO ECONOMIC GROWTH.”



When he was a barrister, Wikipedia tells us that Sir Stuart Bell represented "large multi-national companies".

Before he became Labour MP for Middlesborough in 1983, he wrote a pornographic novel called Paris Sixty-Nine and, since, 1988, has found the time to write eight more books. Tony Blair had him knighted in 2003.

On 8 September 2011, Bell said this on Radio 2’s Jeremy Vine Show:

“We've three full-time staff who answer telephone inquiries… Clearly, when my constituents have a problem we deal with it. We deal with them on a day-to-day basis. I have my surgeries by appointment.”

However, on 6 September 2011, journalist Neil Macfarlane had said this in The Teeside Evening Gazette:

“He says he meets with members of the public by appointment instead, and says people can reach him at any time by telephone. To test the claim, the Gazette has been making daily calls to Sir Stuart’s Westminster office and Middlesbrough home over the course of several months.

DESPITE MAKING A TOTAL OF 100 CALLS, NO ONE EVER ANSWERED.”

http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/2011/09/06/are-teessiders-getting-enough-from-sir-stuart-bell-84229-29370793/

McFarlane added:

“SIR STUART BELL… HAS NOT HELD A CONSTITUENCY SURGERY FOR 14 YEARS… SIR STUART DOES NOT HAVE AN OFFICE OPEN IN THE TOWN AND DOES NOT HOLD REGULAR MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS.”

Bell responded thus to the above allegations:

“I had surgeries many years ago, but I was attacked twice and the same person threatened my son. The same person is still around, he threatened me during the general election and he's still there to this day…

When I did hold surgeries I had to have a policeman there, and NOW IT'S A DIFFERENT WORLD.”

So, the excuse for not doing the job he is paid to do seems to be “I am a cowardy custard.”

He continued:

“We deal with our constituents in a way which is very effective and they don’t complain.”

Oh, really?

Here are a few of the comments Bell’s “constituents” felt moved to utter following the revelations about his behaviour:

Cannonstreetkid: “I cannot remember him commenting on anything relating to our town or ever doing anything that actually benefits the town.”

normal: “Stuart Bell and the Labour Party are a disgrace… They (Bell and the Labour Party) stopped working for this area a long time ago. Get them out.”

borocoffindodger: “'It doesn’t look to me that this guy cares about the town or its people.”

daveyparkender: “This bloke makes my blood boil. More so the people who vote for him back into position… (he) makes me want to wretch.”

Emma Boon, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said:

“Taxpayers write Sir Stuart Bell a whopping pay cheque for working as an MP, it's part of his role to meet local residents and represent them in Parliament. With this apparent poor record in responding to calls it's no surprise that some are branding him Britain's laziest MP. If he can't be bothered to do the job he's paid for then perhaps it's time for a by-election in Middlesbrough.”

Neil McFarlane’s article also told us this:

“The Gazette wrote to the Labour Party, the leader Ed Miliband, and chief whip Rosie Winterton to ask them the following question: ‘Is the Labour Party satisfied the people of Middlesbrough are getting the service they deserve from their MP?’

The party press office declined to comment, and said it was down to Sir Stuart himself to respond to our story… Miss Winterton’s office wrote back to say that it would be up to the Labour press office to comment. Mr Miliband’s office has yet to reply to our email.

The Gazette also wrote to Sir Stuart several times. More than a week has passed since we offered the Middlesbrough MP the chance to provide his side of the story, but he has not responded.”

It was only when the National newspapers got involved that Bell, Miliband and Winterton “responded.”

Now, Ed Miliband says it is “totally unacceptable” for the party's MPs to leave constituents' calls unanswered and, apparently, Middlesborough’s MP could face disciplinary proceedings.

In October 2006, the French Embassy’s web site told us this:

“The French Ambassador presented the insignia of Chevalier de la Légion d’Honneur (France’s highest civilian honour) to Sir Stuart Bell…

Sir Stuart has close links with France. Indeed, HE SITS ON THE SUPERVISORY BOARD OF THE FONDATION POUR L’INNOVATION POLITIQUE IN PARIS, HAS CHAIRED MANY IMPORTANT FRANCO-BRITISH CONFERENCES AND, SINCE JUNE LAST YEAR, HAS BEEN CHAIRMAN OF THE FRANCO-BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY RELATIONS COMMITTEE.

A CONVINCED EUROPEAN, Sir Stuart has always argued in favour of BRITAIN JOINING THE EURO AND FOR A EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION.”

http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/The-French-Ambassador-presented

Anyway, ladies and gents, that’s your Labour grandee for you.

A EU-gobbler who’d rather spend his time writing saucy novels and sucking up to the globalist gangsters than looking after the British people he was elected to represent.


Go here for more Chronological Quotations 3


.