Uncomfortable in their own Skin

Friday’s attempt to break the world record for mass participation dance should have been spectacle enough in itself, yet the sight that beheld Plymothians proved to be jaw-dropping for quite another reason. According to The Plymouth Herald, children from a number of local schools took part in The Big Dance overseen by Plymouth Dance, with more than 200 participating in the city’s Piazza, whilst a further thousand danced elsewhere across the city. This therefore was no ordinary Saturday, but what was it that proved to be so visually arresting and unusual about the group of dancers in the city centre?

For some bizarre reason, three of the boys leading the group had been made to don black masks. Why? It was not, to the best of my knowledge, some homage to The Black and White Minstrel Show, so just what was going on here? Why were these children compelled to black up? Who made them do this? What underpinning rationale was offered? Does anybody know? Do you know?

Unlike many of our cities, Plymouth possesses a generally relaxed atmosphere and remains essentially English. Like anywhere, it has its problems of course, and Union Street at night can get a little unruly, but the sense of edgy unease that is palpable in many of our ethnically fragmented urban areas is lacking here. It would seem perhaps that the decision to compel the boys to black up was taken precisely because Plymouth, and Devon more widely, are English. The English, like other closely-related northern European peoples, are of course white. Why this should be perceived to be in any way problematic or contentious is beyond me, but for some people of a globalist inclination it clearly is. Were the black masks supposed to embody the racially dubious assertion that blacks possess natural rhythm whereas whites do not? Were they supposed to make the crowd of dancers look, to borrow Greg Dyke’s dreadful phrase, less ‘hideously white’? Whatever the reason underpinning the use of these peculiar props, what impact must they have had upon the psychology of the boys wearing them, upon their fellow dancers and those who saw them? Were they not used to make them feel, quite literally, uncomfortable in their own skins? Was it any more legitimate than forcing young Nigerians in Lagos to dance ballet wearing white masks, or for Zulus studying science to white up? Such would seem to be the absurd message implicit in yesterday’s display.

Devon is a beautiful county which largely retains its distinctive character, yet it would seem that for some this distinctiveness and the rootedness of its population is in itself something to feel ashamed of, as exemplified in Emma Thompson’s ugly outburst at Exeter University in 2010, when she stated that the city and Devon were too white. How strange. How insulting. Has anyone ever heard this woman aver that Nigeria is too black; Japan too yellow, or Pakistan too brown? I have not heard her call for these countries to be made more white, or state that she finds it odd that their populations are drawn predominantly from their native ethnic and racial groups. The ethnic and racial masochism displayed by Thompson would appear to have been what bubbled to the surface and found expression once again on Friday in Plymouth. The propagation of this misplaced sense of white racial guilt and self-loathing must be stopped. My message to those children who took part would be this: ignore what your teachers tell you about race; there is no reason to feel guilty about being white. Feel comfortable in your own skin, and don’t feel that you have to wear a black one to be able to dance. 

Plymouth Boys forced to black up 

Nicolas Sarkozy: erase the French; respect the Arabs

Nicolas Sarkozy has talked tough on the question of immigration and on dealing with rioters (coincidentally mainly of Maghrebian origin) on a number of occasions, whilst serving either as French Prime Minister or President, whilst repeatedly not matching his words with action. As the presidential race is now effectively underway, the BBC reports that he is now stating that there are too many foreigners in France, and that the country’s system for integrating them is increasingly failing. Thus, offering the French people a message somewhat familiar to British voters from the ‘promise’ of David Cameron to reduce our mass immigration to the “tens of thousands” per annum, Sarkozy has stated that he wishes to reduce immigration from circa 180,000 to 100,000 a year.

Clearly, Sarkozy is making a cynical ploy to undercut support for rival candidate Marine Le Pen of the Front National, who is enjoying a degree of popularity with French electors, but is unlikely to win the presidential race. The issue of mass immigration is becoming increasingly acute for the French because of the serious Islamisation that it is now being inflicted upon French society, for last month it was revealed that all Parisian abattoirs used only halal slaughter. This fact has rightly shocked the native French.

Sarkozy however, is no friend of the French. His ethnic roots of course are not French, so it should come as no surprise that he is a keen advocate of an attenuated and insipid civic version of French national identity. Indeed, if you have not seen it, the video below should give an insight into the true thoughts of Nicolas Sarkozy. Here he can be seen calling for obligatory “métissage”, that is, the interbreeding of the French with non-Europeans, whilst at the same time calling for obeisance to be displayed towards the Saudis and other Arabs. Clearly, Sarkozy is not fit to lead the French people, whom in reality he wishes to see wiped from the pages of history. Hopefully, French electors will realise this, and will not cast their ballots for him in the forthcoming presidential election.

Danny O'Shea: Victim of Race Hate Crime

Stephen Lawrence’s murder was used as a pretext to put the whole of indigenous British society in the dock with a view to implementing a pre-existing far-left social engineering project designed to turn whites into second-class citizens in their own country and to privilege ethnic minorities. The Macpherson Report created the fictitious catch-all concept of ‘institutional racism’, and having insisted upon the facticity of this spurious invention, legislation was then pushed through ensuring that every organisation in the public and then the private sectors had to favour ethnic minorities over the indigenous population when it came to appointments and promotions. The murder of one young black man was used as an excuse to cow the entire white population and to create an atmosphere of fear in the workplace, where the word of anyone belonging to an ethnic minority trumped that of anyone who did not. White English males became the new pariahs in this world turned upside down.

‘Diversity and equality’ was the slogan under which this iniquitous inversion of natural rights was bulldozered through. Everywhere it has become mandatory for our indigenous people to internalise an artificial sense of ethnic, racial and post-colonial ‘guilt’. From whence springs this ‘guilt’? Who amongst you has ever owned slaves or advocated slavery? Who amongst you has been a colonialist or advocated colonialism? None of you! The fact is, we ended slavery earlier than virtually any other country, intercepting slave ships from 1808 onwards and putting an end to this dreadful phenomenon across the Empire in 1833. On the other hand, slavery is condoned by Islam and still practised today by some Arab states. Our consciences are, or should be, clear.

If the murder of one young black man occasioned such a seismic shift in our society and in our laws, why will we not see such a shift brought about by the brutal butchery of young Danny O’Shea, hunted down by a gang of black males to have his throat slashed upon the threshold of his parental home? We will not see such a shift because our state and our media adjudge that a white life is not as valuable as a black or a brown one. A young Englishman’s life counts for less than that of an African or a Pakistani it would seem, for there is a an all-pervasive institutional racism in our country today, and it is an anti-white anti-indigenous racism. This anti-white racism is not unique to our country, but seems to be globally pervasive, with the level of anti-white hate emanating from many immigrants being startling, as illustrated by the open call for anti-white genocide in an infamous video shot on a Parisian tram. Such murders alas, are not unique, for witness the stabbing of 16-year-old English boy Nicholas Pearton by a seven-strong black gang in Sydenham, for which the latter received a range of custodial sentences this September.

Will the BBC report Danny O’Shea’s death as a ‘hate crime’? Will the Guardian enter into a decade and a half of agonised breast-beating and soul searching because of his death, forever highlighting the innate racism of blacks and the need for collective black guilt and the promotion of a white history month? Does that last sentence sound shocking and outlandish? If you are a Guardian reader, it shouldn’t seem strange, for that is exactly how it has treated whites, specifically Englishmen, since the death of Stephen Lawrence.

Taking Liberties: No Future in England’s Dreaming

It has been a strange and disconcerting week. As the managed collapse in living standards and the implosion of our hollow debt-based economy continues, pensions are slashed and millions of us are told that we will have to work a year longer to receive our state pension, it is not this process of gradual and deliberate mass immiseration that has caused outrage in the media, but comments by two individuals: Emma West and Jeremy Clarkson. This is a revealing moment, for it demonstrates that the media and dominant political class have lost all sense of proportion, and are now completely out of touch with the concerns of ordinary people. It should also be a matter for deep concern, as this reaction has laid bare the limits of what it is deemed permissible to say in public in Britain today, and how far the state and media are willing to go to gag free speech.

Emma West may have caused offence to individuals during her rant on a tram, and her language was certainly inappropriate, particularly given that she was holding her own child at the time and other children were present, but behaving in such a way should not have been grounds for her being remanded in custody on a charge of ‘racial harassment’. She appeared to be under the influence of alcohol, and although I would not condone her verbally lashing out at her fellow passengers, the frustrated sentiments to which she was giving vent with respect to untrammelled mass immigration and the deliberate displacement and political marginalisation of English people, are matters of concern for a significant swathe of the British public. Her observations were, after all, in line with those of a number of celebrities who have already made statements on this issue. We are, in many parts of the country, already aliens in our own land, and this situation has been deliberately engineered.

Interestingly, another video of an individual ranting on a tram has recently come to light, but this time in France. Although perhaps a French citizen, the person concerned is of African extraction, and voices nothing but contempt for his fellow passengers; in fact, he displays something rather stronger than contempt, for he calls for their genocide. Emma West neither called for genocide nor for any form of violence; all she did was give voice, albeit in a not very eloquent fashion, to her sense of estrangement from life in her own country, owing to its rapid transformation into something altogether culturally and humanly alien. The footage from France evidently depicts someone who has chosen to make France his home, yet he expresses his wholehearted hatred not only of the French, but of white people in general. Whereas Emma West has been prosecuted and had her children taken away from her, this man, having called for the mass murder of whites simply because they are white, walked away from his journey without let or hindrance. The second video was also shot in France, and shows a group of Muslims on public transport calling for the death of non-Muslim men. Compare the content of these to the video of Emma West, then read on.

Emma West of course, is not the only individual to have found herself in hot water for saying the ‘wrong’ thing this week. Englishman Jeremy Clarkson was upbraided for having made a flippant remark about having public sector workers shot for striking on Wednesday. The humourless leadership of the giant union Unison then promptly called for the BBC to sack him, displaying an autistic literalism with respect to the words that he uttered on Wednesday evening’s One Show. Jeremy Clarkson is neither Heinrich Himmler nor Lavrenti Beria; he is rather, a well-paid television presenter who is well known for holding politically incorrect views and giving voice to them onscreen and in print. For anyone to have thought that he really meant that striking public sector workers should be summarily executed demonstrates an incredible failure of humour on the part of those who objected and called for his dismissal. It betrayed the totalitarian instincts of the self-appointed priggish moral guardians who head Unison. They revealed themselves to be, whatever their protestations to the contrary, enemies of liberty and free expression.

Public sector workers had the right to strike on Wednesday, and many of them did so. I support their right to strike. What I do not support however, is the call of some union leaders to silence freedom of speech. In their calling for Clarkson’s sacking we witnessed union leaders displaying the ugly mentality of a fatwa-issuing ayatollah, a commissar, or one of the ‘godly’ members of Cromwell’s Barebones Parliament: self-righteous prigs convinced of the moral superiority of their cause. This is also what we saw at play with the arrest of Emma West.

Such attitudes provide the fertile soil from which tyranny and a reign of terror may spring. Blaise Pascal’s observation that  "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" can be equally applied to those acting out of a political conviction which they believe to be rooted in morality and the concept of “the good”. Witness the outpouring of hatred which greeted West’s arrest, with many calling for her to have her child taken from her; for her to be gang raped, and for her to be knifed to death or shot. Those expressing these sentiments in their tweets were not, like Clarkson, being humorous, but giving vent to a dark violent intent, lent intensity through being sanctioned by the dominant multiculturalist ideology.

For all of the frivolous talk about our society being “free”, “open” and “tolerant”, this outpouring should serve to illustrate that we live in a country that is nothing of the sort. Whereas the standard media line is that the ‘transgressive’ and the ‘shocking’ are to be celebrated, the reality is that anyone or anything that genuinely challenges the hegemonic and false discursive reality of the multiculturalist status quo, risks not only being subjected to the full force of the repressive apparatus of the state, but to the baying bloodlust of the mob unleashed by a media-directed Two Minutes Hate. Our self-loathing society is perfectly willing and able to issue its own equivalent of fatwas, resulting in the ostracism and professional destruction of anyone who challenges this ideology, and this is what Emma West fell foul of this week.

The question is: how many of our compatriots will recognise this as the watershed moment that it should be? If she can be arrested for airing such sentiments in public, do not be surprised if in the near future voicing criticism of mass immigration and the displacement of the native population, or indeed subscribing to the concept of a native population, becomes criminalized or reclassified as a psychiatric disorder. We are, I am afraid, now perilously close to such a denouement. Is this not so much “England’s dreaming” as England’s nightmare? Whether there is to be a future for us or not, very much depends upon how many of our people wake up to what is happening and draw the requisite political conclusions. Let us hope, that we are not to be the last of England.

The Last of England by Ford Madox Brown

“No, I want to go to Europe”

So responded a man to a Radio 4 interviewer who asked him whether he wished to remain in Libya or go to Europe. From the manner in which the question was framed and the response received, one could be forgiven for thinking that the interviewee was a native of the named continent, for why else would the interviewer pose the question in the form of a choice between Libya or ‘Europe’ (by which one assumes he meant the EU)? In fact, that proved not to be the case, for the man was a migrant worker from Nigeria. Knowing this to be so, why did not the interviewer instead enquire “Do you and other migrant workers intend to stay in Libya, or return home?”

That the interviewer should have posed the question in this way displays, yet again, the wearisome bias of BBC journalists, who appear intent upon reducing England to an ethnically and culturally balkanised ‘global village’ in miniature, populated predominantly by non-indigenes. Although such an eventuality may be viewed in indulgent soft-focus by BBC staff and the multiculturalists of our main political parties, this represents an emergent dystopian rather than utopian future, although of course, it would literally result in England becoming a ‘utopia’, that is, a ‘nowhere’.  The human lineaments of this ‘nowhere’ are already becoming clearly defined in what was once London. It is up to you, dear reader, to help ensure that in future we do not wistfully refer to what was once England.

The thousands of sub-Saharan migrants who worked in Libya under Gaddafi did so in a variety of capacities, many working for the regime during its dying days as mercenaries. Some of the latter have been implicated in atrocities; others of course, will have been entirely innocent of such wrongdoing. Irrespective of the roles that these migrants fulfilled, for ill or for good, they are no longer welcome in Libya. Where they will head has already been indicated, and as a good proportion of them hail from Anglophone states such as Nigeria, we must expect a surge in ‘asylum’ applications and illegal immigration from this source, which will be accompanied by hard lobbying from various advocacy groups in the UK.

One of the most vocal groups will consist of their ethnic kin who have already established settlements in England in areas such as Peckham, who not unnaturally seek to augment their number within our shores. These will find support from specialist ‘human rights’ and ‘refugee’ organisations as well as from the BBC, the three main political parties and significant sections of the press. David Cameron and William Hague, having abused their control of the RAF to repeatedly bomb Libya, will no doubt seek to allow the ingress of these ‘refugees’ (in reality economic migrants) as a means of expiating their war guilt, which will be projected outwards onto the British people as a whole. “We”, they shall say, “have a duty to these people”. No, we do not.

Those who wish to see the death of England, and of European nations and peoples more generally, will welcome the influx of these sub-Saharan economic migrants, many of whom, by dint of their role in Libya, will be innately violent. Most of us however, will not, for we do not share the ethnically submissive lachrymose sentiments of the interviewer on this morning’s Today Programme. For us, the Libyan tragedy is not yet over, for its long-term repercussions have yet to be fully felt at home; repercussions moreover, which could be avoided altogether if only we had a government which adhered to what governments are supposed to do: to place the interests of those whom it purports to represent foremost.  

Safeguarding the Future of the English: Your Children and Grandchildren

Headlines come and headlines go, but one of the many negative themes that recurs time and again is the demographic decline of the English and the native British more generally in the United Kingdom, when compared to the burgeoning immigrant and immigrant-descended population. Today’s story in the Daily Express, revealing a 40% increase in the country’s non-white population in just 8 years, taking it from 6.6 million in 2001 to 9.1 million in 2009 (and that’s just taking legal immigrants and births to the settled non-white population into account) should serve as a salutary warning to those native Britons who view this process with a blasé indifference. The report goes on to note “that British whites will become a minority in Leicester, Birmingham, Bradford and Oldham “perhaps by 2016”.”

Why should this be a matter for concern you may ask yourself; after all, isn’t it ‘racist’ to object to such a transformation? Well, if you are English, Scottish, Welsh or Irish, why would you wish to place yourself, as well as your children and their descendents, at a comparative disadvantage in your own homeland in the labour and property markets? Why would you proffer legal and material advantages to immigrants and what is currently the ethnic minority population over the interests of yourself and your own flesh and blood? Are you comfortable with the real prospect of your children and grandchildren becoming an ethnic minority in their own country? Well, our ‘equalities’, ‘diversity’ and 'human rights' legislation ensures that such discrimination does take place, and that minority status will await the English if nothing is done to remove these harmful laws.

The Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties introduced these unjust laws that discriminate against the indigenous population, particularly indigenous males, and they will rabidly defend and extend the sphere of their operation to the detriment of their own people whom they purport to represent. As they will not defend us, and as yet there is no political party standing in the wings with the imminent prospect of power, we must do what we can to combat and reverse this negative process of the displacement of our indigenous rights and interests.

The first step to take, which all native Britons should be willing to sign up to irrespective of any other political differences that they might hold, is to recognise that the English, Welsh, Scots and Irish are the indigenous peoples of their respective homelands, and that as such, their interests should take primacy within these historically constituted territories. This of course can only be achieved if we gain legal recognition of ourselves as being the native peoples of these islands, and for us to achieve this, we must unceasingly demolish the officially promoted myth that the English, the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish do not exist as distinct ethnic groups and nations. To do this of course, we must bring about a change in the consciousness of our peoples so that the official lie of our non-existence is rejected. We must therefore start a campaign for the recognition of our peoples as indigenous, and for this status to be enshrined in national and international law. Moreover, this campaign for indigenous rights must involve our neighbouring European cousins, so that the French, Dutch, Germans, Norwegians, Poles, etc, are all recognised as the indigenous peoples of their respective nation-states and accorded a concomitant right to determine their own futures. The interests of indigenous peoples everywhere should serve as the bedrock of all policy making.

The colonisation of our countries, our demographic displacement and the destruction of our national cultures and cohesion must be rejected. We need to start a campaign for the recognition of the English as the indigenous people of England, and thus should launch a carefully worded petition which we can spread via Facebook, email and other online platforms to ensure that policy makers and the mainstream mass media are compelled to sit up, listen and act.

Behold the Hydra’s Head!

Behold the head of the hydra! Osama bin Laden is dead! Which heads will now sprout in its place? What will happen to his vast wealth, which has helped to fund al-Qaeda’s operations around the globe? Answers to these questions are unlikely to become known for quite some time, but whilst there is some cause today for celebration, we must remember that this is the death of only one man, albeit a symbolically very significant one. Al-Qaeda will not cease to operate and, more importantly, neither will the Islamisation of Western nations.

The greatest threat to the well being of our country emanates not from Islamist terrorists, for such people can be readily rooted out and eliminated should we choose to rid ourselves of them, but from the ideologies of globalism, cultural relativism, ethnic and racial ‘guilt’ and their attendant ideological policing mechanism of political correctness. These ideologies are of course propagated by the nascent transnational oligarchy to which our leading politicians and members of our media class belong. They formulate the attendant policies and messages which are then transmitted to the public through the legal and educational systems and the mainstream mass media organs of television, radio, the press and online rolling news. These policies and messages bludgeon our native populations, and seek to inculcate a sense of guilt and subservience in the face of the exotic ‘other’, none being more exotic and alien than the figure of the Muslim.

Without the cankered ideology of our ruling class - in effect a masochistic creed of anti-White race hate masquerading as ‘tolerance’ - our futures would not be in jeopardy, for the UK, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Sweden and every other European nation (I exclude Albania and Thracian Turkey from my definition of European, for they are Muslim) would not therefore choose to allow mass immigration to take place. We would not be allowing the propagation of Islam within our borders, just as we would not be allowing the propagation of Muslims themselves through chain migration and the acceptance of aggressive colonists from Africa and the Middle East risibly posing as ‘refugees’.

If our peoples chose to ditch multiculturalism and its associated ethnic and racial self-loathing, then the question of the Islamisation of our nations would be decided in an instant, and this process thrown into firm and permanent reverse. Islamisation would be but a dark historical episode to be held up to future generations as an admonitory example of what can go wrong with a society when it chooses to allow barbarism an equal footing with civilisation, and to denigrate the latter as being in some sense culpable for the ills of mankind. This misplaced sense of collective guilt is but a hangover from the Christian past of the European peoples, and we would do well to expunge ourselves of this.

Yes, rejoice for Osama bin Laden is dead, but we must be unflinching in our efforts to ensure that doctrinaire Islam and its exponents are removed from all European nations and their daughter societies forever. We have yet to defeat the greatest twin threats to our national futures: globalism and the demographic jihad waged through the womb and by migration. On these two fronts, we currently have nothing to celebrate, for we are losing. It is up to us however, to ensure that a day of celebration on this score will occur, and that it will happen in our lifetimes. If it does not, there is little likelihood that it will happen at all.

My Brother the Islamist: the Tears of a loving Mother

In watching BBC3’s ‘My Brother the Islamist’ this evening, I was deeply moved. Not by the story of the filmmaker getting back in touch with his Islamist convert brother and trying to understand his motivations, but by the love of a mother for her son. For most of us, the Dorset town of Weymouth will forever hold happy associations, and what we saw this evening will not, thankfully, displace those positive sentiments. Such a place, idyllic as it is, and largely removed from those negative changes that have so blighted urban England in recent decades, has not, so it seems, managed to insulate itself entirely from the malign influence of Islam.

Robb Leech made this film largely in an attempt to try and comprehend what it was that had motivated his half brother – Rich – to convert to Islam and join with Anjem Choudary’s band of anti-English anti-rationalist Islamist malcontents. The fact that the two had grown up together in what appeared to be a happy and conventional middle-class background in an English seaside town, gives lie to the claims that jihadists are motivated to attack our society because of relative deprivation and ‘racism’: what was driving Rich – now the self-styled Salahuddin – to hate his family and his country was one thing and one thing only: the poisonous ideology of Islam.

At the time of the documentary’s inception, Rich was a recent Muslim convert who had moved to London two years earlier, and converted to Islam only six months before filming began. Since moving away and converting, Rich had come to hate and denounce everything that his family and native society stand for. Strangely, in the short period that he had lived in London, he had lost all trace of a Dorset or conventional English accent, and had acquired instead the peculiar pretentious lilt of the East London (Bangladeshi?) Muslim. This was not touched upon in the documentary, but I suspect that he was not always possessed of such a manner of speaking. He had come to fall in with Anjem Choudary’s jihadist group, which had recently rebranded itself as ‘Muslims Against Crusades’, and had taken part in two provocative demonstrations in 2010: one in Barking, and the other outside of the American Embassy in London. At the age of 27, Rich, now the self-styled Salahuddin, had become an advocate of global jihad and would only speak to his brother and allow the documentary to be made for the sake of Dawah. The fact that he would only shake hands with his brother using the hand that he used to clean his backside was something which, not unnaturally, caused his brother a degree of angry irritation.

It must be hugely upsetting for Rich’s parents to have seen their son undergo what appears to be a mental breakdown, and to have experienced his purposeful estrangement from them. He seems however, to be a lost cause. Worryingly, a seemingly likeable Weymouth lad named Ben, a mere 17 years old, had allowed something rather more sinister than death metal or the latest youth subculture to take a hold on his tractable young mind, for he had instead chosen to convert to Islam. This is the aspect of the documentary that I found the most worrying, for it seemed as if Robb Leech had actively introduced Ben to his elder brother, taking him to London to meet and stay with members of Muslims Against Crusades. As a consequence, Ben became less likeable as the programme progressed, as it became evident that this change of milieu served to solidify and intensify his sense of estrangement from English culture and his mother, whilst strongly reinforcing his self-identification as a Muslim; so much so, that he had his foreskin removed at the East London Mosque. Perhaps Robb Leech hadn’t given this introduction much thought at the time, but I do not think that this was an ethical thing to have done with an evidently highly impressionable teenager.

Ben’s mother – Maggie – struck me as a loving, supportive and very worried mother. Her upset was palpable, and as her son spoke in front of her, repeatedly stating his belief in the superiority of the Islamic doctrine of hate and misogyny, tears welled up in her eyes. As her tears flowed, so too did mine. How must she feel? How would you feel, if one of your children embraced the evil of Islam and turned against you? Every word he said must have smarted and stung. Evidently not wanting to lose him, and deep down hoping that one day he will grow out of this highly damaging and negative phase, she did her best to put a brave face on the situation. Maggie, I hope for your sake and for everyone else’s, that your Ben awakens from this nightmare soon, and comes to see what he has gone through as an uncharacteristic aberration, rather than continuing in his current vein and doing something dangerously stupid.

Why is this happening in our society? Islam has no place here. The fault lies with the education system and the mass media which indoctrinate our children into ethnic self-hatred, whilst elevating other peoples and cultures above our own, and deeming it only permissible to say positive things (i.e. lies) about Islam. Why is Islam finding converts? Because our political class cares not for the well-being of the indigenous people of this country and allows Islam to flourish. Our elite would sooner treat with sordid Saudis for petrodollar kickbacks and agree to their funding the Islamisation of England through mosques, madrassahs and ‘interfaith’ (sic) dialogue, than preserve our culture, way of life and identity. This was evident in last night’s documentary, which showed the police allowing Muslims Against Crusades to practise Dawah on the streets of Weymouth, whilst arresting a local man for voicing his objection. Why should they have the right to spread their lies and hate upon our streets and thereby seek to undermine us and deceive our people, whereas we are subject to arrest for so-called ‘hate speech’ or ‘religious hatred’ if we object to this? They are the agents of hate and our self-declared enemies, and as such, we should seek to make it known to them that they are unwelcome and should leave. Show them the slightest kindness or weakness, and they’ll mercilessly exploit it.

The fact that our media and our mainstream politicians continue to defend Islam and enable its spread provides reason enough to share the tears of a loving mother. It is now up to the EDL, to help wipe those tears away.

Voting Labour, Conservative or Liberal Democrat? Don't!

Thinking of voting for Labour, the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats? Why would you wish to vote for these clone parties? Watch this and think again. If you are an indigenous Briton and have any self respect, how could you bring yourself to vote for them when it means your self-abasement and submission before Islam and other races? Do you really hate yourself and your own people so much? Wake up! They care not for you, and they'll deliver us into a state of servitude in our own land if you let them. For the sake of your children and your grandchildren if not for yourself: vote nationalist. Vote BNP.