Campaign Islam Channel: not exactly scintillating Viewing

Another day and another expression of Islamic supremacism. The Loganswarning blog has drawn attention to the emergence of yet another Islamist propagandist vehicle in the UK calling itself Campaign Islam. This Youtube channel makes quite clear its hatred for us, our culture and way of life. It calls upon the Ummah to unite against the kuffar. The first of the following videos is a brief introduction to Campaign Islam, whereas the second features a burqa-clad female droning on about how the Ummah needs to pull together to confront an increasingly united array of kuffar opponents. A further video concerning an upcoming women-only conference debating the role of the burqa can be accessed here. When will they learn that they should just go away and leave us in peace? They’re not happy here, and they’re making us miserable too. Let’s get a divorce.

England: an Anatomy of the Counterjihad and Lessons from France

To date the activity of the anti-Islamisation and counterjihad movement in England has concentrated on marches, static demonstrations and public speeches. In terms of electoral politics, those wishing to vote against Islamisation have been limited for choice, for Labour, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens are all keen advocates of Islamisation. If you happen to live in Scotland or Wales, the Scottish National Party (SNP) and Plaid Cymru are both fully paid-up supporters of Islamisation.

The party with the most robust attitude towards tackling Islamisation is the British National Party (BNP). Next comes the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), as Lord Pearson is certainly aware that Islamisation is a problem that needs to be tackled, but the snag is that last autumn he offered to dissolve his party if Cameron would agree to hold a referendum on EU membership. Given that Cameron and the majority of the parliamentary Conservative party advocate Islamisation and support Unite Against Fascism (UAF), I therefore think that whatever Pearson’s personal beliefs UKIP are an unreliable proposition. That’s not to say that the BNP doesn’t have problems, what with seemingly interminable infighting and an unwillingness to adopt the measures that I have previously outlined as necessary for its survival and emergence as a credible moderate nationalist party. It’s a sad state of affairs, but the BNP needs to reform itself otherwise it is heading nowhere other than the penumbra of British politics where it will continue to attract the bilious outpourings of the occasional NUJ hack but little else.

We need to act quickly to stem and then seek to reverse the process of Islamisation. Underpinning its rapid advance are four primary factors: a Muslim demographic explosion predicated upon high differential birth-rates and mass immigration; a lack of awareness amongst influential sections of our indigenous population as to the true nature of Islam (i.e. the misplaced belief that it is just a religion like any other); a pro-Islam political establishment and official media broadcaster (the BBC) which share an ideological commitment to multiculturalism and a practical desire to pander to target voters and audiences in the hunt for votes in marginal seats or market share, and finally, a legislative framework that protects and privileges Islam as well as Muslim immigrants (legal or otherwise).

What can we practically do? The first step, which both you the reader (unless you happen to be a Muslim or someone with pro-Muslim sympathies) and I the writer have undertaken is to acquaint ourselves with the reality of our ideological enemy and how it operates. Awaken friends, family and the general public (if you happen to blog) to the reality of Islam, but be careful not to become a monomaniacal bore on this subject lest you run the risk of turning people off. Drip feed information over a protracted period so that you manage to effect a gradual alteration in people’s consciousness and attitudes. Ensure that you challenge your interlocutor’s use of vocabulary whenever they use the following terms routinely employed in an attempt to stigmatise us: “Islamophobia” (and all the variations thereof); “racist”; “far-right”; “fascist”; “extremist”. Get them to define what they mean when they use these words and deconstruct their definitions, showing up the logical absurdities of the manner in which they have been applied to the critics of Islam. Then point out that these very terms “extremist”, “far-right” and “reactionary” apply to Islam and not to those who oppose it. Unless they’re a member of the Socialist Workers' Party or some kindred leftist sect, the scales ought to fall from their eyes.

So much for what can be done on the personal level, but what can be done beyond this? People have come to the counterjihad movement from a variety of ideological perspectives which have manifested themselves in a number of different organisations and campaigns. Putting aside the party political opposition to Islamisation found in the BNP and UKIP, we have the following main movements and campaigns in England: the English Defence League (EDL); One Law for All (OLFA) and Stop the Islamisation of Europe (SIOE). Each of these attracts a different type of membership and support, although these do to a certain extent overlap and possess complementary agendas. In terms of broad ideological orientation we can characterise these groups as follows: EDL – English nationalist; OLFA – traditional universalist progressive left/Marxist-Leninist; SIOE – Classical Liberal/Libertarian/Western Culturalist.

The EDL’s base of support is drawn predominantly from the English working class who have been increasingly politically marginalised in recent decades. Understandably, it draws upon the one spontaneous popular manifestation of working-class culture that has not been taken over and controlled by the middle classes: football hooligan firms. The EDL has undoubtedly been successful in mobilising large numbers of supporters in acts of popular protest up and down the country, whereas its sister organisations the Welsh Defence League (WDL) and Scottish Defence League (SDL) have exerted less appeal in their spheres of operation. This is due to the fact that it is England that has experienced the brunt of Islamisation, whereas Wales and Scotland have to date largely escaped its impact. The focus of the EDL is very much upon dealing with Islamisation in England, and thus forms the core of its popular moderate nationalist stance. However, it expresses solidarity with the counterjihad movement in other countries and with Israel.

OLFA is co-ordinated by Maryam Namazie, an Iranian émigré and Spokesperson for the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain as well as a Central Committee member of the Worker Communist Party of Iran (WCPI). It draws together a disparate range of organisations and individuals, receiving support from the National Secular Society, British Humanist Association, women’s rights and gay activists. Notable figures who have supported OLFA rallies include the philosopher AC Grayling and the human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell. Its focus has been narrowly channelled at opposing the introduction of sharia into the UK, as well as opposition to sharia in other states, particularly Iran owing to the significant presence of WCPI members within the organisation. It lacks the mass presence and support of the EDL, but is seen by the media as the (barely) acceptable face of the anti-Islamisation movement (although the media do not use this term). It is internationalist and cosmopolitan in orientation and predominantly middle class.

Lastly but not least we have SIOE, which grew out of the furore surrounding the publication of the Mohammed cartoons by Jyllands-Posten in the autumn of 2005 and the attempts by Muslims across the globe to get them banned. SIOE was thus founded by those seeking to uphold the most precious values of Western civilisation: freedom of speech and freedom of expression. SIOE recognises that Islam is completely incompatible with these values and is thus implacably opposed to our way of life and must be removed from our societies. In this respect, SIOE is the most ideologically purist of the strands of counterjihad present in the UK today. Its stance can be characterised as robustly civic nationalist and culturist in the countries within which it has a presence, but it also recognises the essential need of moderate nationalists in different states to work together to oppose Islamisation.

SIOE may be comprised of a comparatively small number of intellectual activists, but its clout and international networks that reach beyond Europe help to shape and define the direction of the counterjihad movement. Unlike OLFA, SIOE is willing to team up with the EDL where their agendas are complementary. European parties to which it possesses close ideological affinities are the PVV, Vlaams Belang and the Sweden Democrats. In the UK there could be said to be some ties to the English Democrats and UKIP. SIOE like the EDL is a proscribed organisation for BNP members. The SIOE’s main presence is in cyberspace through its network of counterjihad bloggers.

As you can see, the counterjihad movement in England and the UK more widely is fragmented but growing. It has displayed a diverse range of tactics including marches, rallies, speeches, petitioning, blogging and international conferences. However, the EDL, OLFA and SIOE have all been meeting increasingly vociferous and violent opposition from Islamists and their leftist confederates in UAF and the SWP. Although the existence of the EDL is now quite widely known of amongst the general public, the NUJ have deployed their arsenal of pejorative terms in order to try and place it beyond the pale of respectability. OLFA has attained a certain profile with a particular type of Radio 4 listener, but SIOE remains practically invisible for most of the public and misunderstood and deliberately misreported by the mass media.

So, returning to the question of what more can be done to counter Islamisation, I would like to draw your attention to some imaginative initiatives in France. Most recently we had the apero geant pork sausage and wine party/protest in Paris organised by Sylvie François, Bloc Identitaire, Riposte Laique and a coalition of assorted political groups and bloggers. Although the prefecture banned the protest from taking place in the Goutte d’Or as originally intended, over 1,000 people turned up for a good-natured protest in central Paris. This demonstrated the power of social networking, in this instance using Facebook, to arrange a novel mode of protest that captured the popular imagination and drew the French public’s attention to the fact that certain areas of Paris are now de facto and de jure no-go zones for non-Muslims.

Here in England we have witnessed an increasing number of businesses making themselves halal-compliant by phasing out pork products and introducing items produced using cruel halal slaughter techniques. This has led to calls for boycotts of KFC, Asda and Tesco amongst others. These have had a limited degree of success, but KFC has at least had to conduct a superficial PR exercise by abandoning its halal-only menu in a small number of its outlets, so it is to a certain extent sensitive to the loss of public reputation and trade that such boycotts can bring about. In France earlier this year, protesters in Lyon organised by Rebeyne! Les Jeunes Identitaires Lyonnais reacted to the introduction of halal-only menus at one of their fast-food outlets – Quick – by turning up en masse at a local branch of Quick wearing pig masks, singing songs and chanting “we are all pork eaters” (it probably loses some resonance in translation!). See what happened in the video below:



Now, I am not suggesting that here in England we should carry out carbon copies of these French examples, but what they illustrate is an imaginative way of promoting the anti-Islamisation message. Given that people with dogs, including the blind, have been told that they cannot get onto buses or into taxis because either the driver or one of the passengers is a Muslim (see this story from the Daily Telegraph) how about organising a protest involving dogs? The British are renowned as a nation of dog lovers, so a mass dogwalk in a park that has been Islamised would be one way of reclaiming our public space in a good-natured fashion. Let guide-dogs lead the way! If we could combine this with an alcoholic tipple and sausages and bacon, so much the better.

We need to continue spreading our message and to gain a momentum that becomes unstoppable. The advocates of Islamisation are already mounting a risible effort to persuade us that Islam is wholesome and benign through the Inspired by Muhammad campaign, and only today the BBC devoted a good proportion of its Sunday morning programme The Big Questions to debating the question “does Islam need better PR?” This is unsurprising given that the BBC’s controller of religious programming is a Muslim, and the programme audience and panel had been selected to reflect a pro-Islam bias. Disgustingly, the New Statesman and Guardian journalist Mehdi Hassan was on hand to proselytise for the Islamic cause (for his dehumanising views on us atheists listen to the clip below).



We must not cease in our unwavering campaign of awareness raising to ensure that the gains that Islam has made within our shores are ultimately uprooted and that the process of Islamisation is thrown into firm reverse. Nothing in history is inevitable. We can be the makers of our own destiny should we choose to fashion a better future. In our societies we can turn Islam into what it should be: a historical footnote.

Raising the Retirement Age and Immigration

This week it was announced by the Condems that plans to increase the state retirement age to 66 had been brought forward to 2016, and they have stressed that in the years beyond this will need to be raised further, possibly to 70. The reasons underpinning this move are obvious, for our indigenous population is ageing and people generally now live for a considerable number of years beyond 65. Given that our economy is not producing vast amounts of additional wealth and our per capita productivity can hardly be said to be surging, the natural corollary to this is that the retirement age has to increase to balance the budget.

The BBC of course has a different take on this and wasted no time in deploying one of its favourite arguments whenever the question of an ageing population arises: we ‘need’ mass immigration. In his wisdom, that most sage member of the BBC commentariat Nick Robinson opined on Radio 4 that if we allowed large numbers of young immigrants into the country then the raising of the retirement age to 66 and beyond could be avoided. Does this man seem to think that all of these young immigrants possess some sort of terminator gene that means they will all drop dead before reaching the age of 65, or is he simply not bothered about the fact that when such people do retire it won’t be his problem as he’ll be dead?

England is bursting at the seams. We are the most densely populated country in Europe. We have a housing shortage, and that which is available is grossly overpriced owing to the pressure of population and new-builds are too small for the same reason. Our roads are clogged almost to the state of gridlock. Despite the fact that England receives plenty of rainfall, our water-supply system is put under strain in many areas whenever we experience a protracted dry spell owing to the sheer number of people requiring water. Our children’s education suffers as their classrooms are swamped by non-English speakers and teachers have to devote more attention to the needs of the children of immigrants and of the immigrant-descended population. Although we have not been self-sufficient in food production for many years, our country has far surpassed its natural carrying capacity for population, and as global overpopulation continues to accelerate and the prices of foodstuffs and commodities rocket, we will find ourselves in a very vulnerable position. Why are these factors never given any consideration by the BBC and largely ignored by our short-termist governments, whether they be Labour, Conservative or Condem?

Naturally, besides the very tangible negative impacts of mass immigration and a growing population outlined above, there is also the question of cultural compatibility. The inability on the part of many immigrants to speak English is problematic, but even worse than this is the fact that a very large number of them are Muslims. Muslims never integrate and always seek to take over. Our country has too many of them already, and we should encourage as many as possible to leave rather than allow more to settle here.

Some people may have been fooled into voting Conservative at the recent election in the belief that the Tories would be tough on immigration. However, an article in today’s Daily Mail should blow away that misconception, for it reveals that the Conservatives are already backtracking on their demand that all immigrants should be able to speak English. Although the presence of the Liberal Democrats as coalition partners will have significantly influenced this latest policy announcement, the Cameroons will certainly have been favourably predisposed towards it. The Mail states:

However, a little-noticed Commons written reply last week said: ‘The new language requirement will not apply to dependants of refugees and people granted humanitarian protection in the UK.’  

The Government granted the exemption after being warned that forcing refugees’ dependants to learn English breaks Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives everyone ‘the right to a family life’.

Lawyers say a refugee could argue that as they cannot return to their country, they can gain their ‘right to family life’ only by having it allowed in the UK – whether or not they speak English. Britons whose foreign spouses cannot speak English could get their right by emigrating.

A Home Office spokesman said: ‘In compelling circumstances where a refusal of leave would amount to a breach of Article 8, we will consider granting discretionary leave outside the immigration rules.’

About 20,000 people a year apply for asylum in Britain.

Taking into account the number of potential dependents that each of these people could have, the numbers that will enter the country will continue to be staggering. A large proportion of these will be Muslim, which will be pouring petrol onto the fire. Islamisation must be stopped and reversed which means that all immigration of Muslims must be stopped and reversed. If Nick Robinson thinks that such people will pay for the retirement of non-believers such as myself, he is utterly deluded. If I had the option, I'd sooner work until I dropped than let in these hostile hordes.

Is Barack Obama a Muslim? Video Evidence

Hat tip to Pastorius of Infidel Blogger's Alliance for posting the following compilation of Obama's many favourable words spoken in praise of Islam. So, the question is: is he or isn't he a Muslim?

England: Islamisation steps up a Gear?

Looking at the events of the past fortnight it would seem that an argument could be made for us having reached a turning point with respect to the Islamisation process in England. I put aside the cases of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, for the demographic processes unfolding in these other constituent nations of the United Kingdom are somewhat distinct from those in England, insofar as they are not so far advanced. What England experiences today, the others will within the next decade if current policies are not reversed. The Muslim malady that is so keenly afflicting England thus seems less relevant and pressing elsewhere, where it can to a certain extent be ignored.

In urban England however, the process of Islamisation cannot be ignored, and even some of our smaller towns outside of those situated in the urban belts of Lancashire and Yorkshire where Muslim colonies are well established are now beginning to experience the first symptoms of this disease. Mosques are proliferating as the demographic composition of entire areas changes, and the world of work, particularly in the public sector, becomes increasingly unpleasant as demands for Islamic exceptionalism are articulated through compulsory ‘diversity training’. What the followers of Islam do not understand is this one simple fact: respect can only be earned, it cannot be demanded. Nonetheless, demand it they do.

The SWP, UAF, Hope Against Hate, mainstream politicians and the mass media all chant the same meaningless mantras: Islam is a religion of peace; we are one community; anyone who criticises Islam or claims that a process of Islamisation is underway and that this is not desirable is “racist”, “far-right” and “fascist”. Meaningless verbiage. Utterly vacuous accusations without foundation.

Is Islam a “religion of peace”? Decide for yourself. The history is there to read should you care to consult it; the Qur’an, the hadith and the sunnah are all freely available (not that I’d recommend ploughing through this turgid, tedious inhumane garbage); and there is a cacophony of Islamic voices to which you can listen. There is also the example of current affairs and recent history and Islam’s interaction with other religions, cultures and philosophical systems. To make its way in the world Islam would render the seas incarnadine sooner than ocean green.

My observation that we may be witnessing a turning point in the articulation of Islamism within England rests upon what appears to be a ramping up of Islamist efforts to forward their political agenda in the UK. On a purely propagandist front, the 'Inspired by Mohammed' campaign has been launched in an attempt to persuade non-Muslims that Islam is benign, whilst in the world of street politics there have been fresh developments. A new group, very much in the mould of Islam4UK – Muslims against the Crusades (MAC) – has sprung up, and not only has demonstrated against the Royal Anglian Regiment’s homecoming parade in Barking, but also against the One Law for All demonstration against sharia law in Whitehall less than a week later. On that second date, we also witnessed some members of the EDL turning up to protest against MAC, only for an exclusively Muslim contingent of the UAF to turn up from Tower Hamlets chanting “Allahu akbar!”

On Sunday 20 June we also saw George Galloway and assorted UAF members addressing an almost exclusively Muslim audience, circa 5,000 in number in Tower Hamlets, and appealing to explicitly Muslim sensitivities which gave rise once again to cries of “Allahu akbar!” and spawned both the splinter group that marched on Whitehall and the 300-strong crowd which ran amok in the East End that evening. Significant sections of the Muslim population in England are acquiring a dangerous collective psychology which combines a sense of moral superiority derived from their religious beliefs with a misplaced sense of victimhood, which is a theme constantly articulated by those of a politically correct multiculturalist disposition. Furthermore, their sense of collective belonging rests with the ummah, not with the fellow citizens of the nation where they reside. Many of them see us as the enemy, and they are increasingly telling us that this is what they think of us.

There needs to be a radical change in the thinking of our politicians and mass media which leads to a rejection of Muslim special pleading and says once and for all: your faith is not compatible with our society, either abandon it or leave. It is time for a peaceful parting of the ways, for otherwise I fear that Islamist radicals will launch a wave of attacks against we non-Muslims. They have come to view our land as their land, and the fact that MAC are now flying the black flag of Islamic jihad within our shores, shows that they view themselves as being in a state of war with us as a people and as a political unit. They have started the struggle to wrest control of our homeland from our grasp.

In the following compilation video there is footage additional to that already featured on this blog’s reports into the various demonstrations of the past couple of weeks. Importantly, at about four minutes into the video note the numbers of supporters with MAC for their second protest which was against the One Law for All demonstration. Their numbers were considerably larger than in Barking. It seems that the Trotskyists have been willing to try and harness Islamism for their own cause, but the latter has now taken on its own independent dynamic and instead of chanting “black and white unite” UAF members chant “Allahu akbar!” There could be no more vivid testimony to the reality of the process of Islamisation than this significant shift in rhetoric.

Eiffel Tower Islamist Terror Plot

The following news report (hat tip to Eeyore at the Vlad Tepes blog) announces the discovery of a plot involving fourteen Islamists to unleash a lethal poison gas attack on the Eiffel Tower using a helicopter. Plans relating to the manufacture of poison gases have been discovered, and two members of the group have been placed under interrogation. One of them, an Algerian, had previously been convicted for an attack at the Ruer Station in Paris in 1995 which harmed 30 people.

We can only be thankful that this has been intercepted, but how many more such plots are afoot?

Blackburn blighted by new Islamic Indoctrination Centre

Whilst in recent months the residents of Pendle managed to prevent a Muslim mega school from being opened in their town and the EDL helped to force the cancellation of a planned mega mosque in Dudley, the inhabitants of Blackburn have had no such luck, for yesterday they bore witness to the opening of the largest mosque in Lancashire. It is not as if the county has a shortage of mosques, for they have sprouted like so many poisonous fungi in this part of the world. Nonetheless, the Qatari royal family stumped up a contribution of £1.5 million towards the construction of the Masjid e Tauheedul mosque in Bicknell Street, with the remaining £2 million of funding having been raised locally.

In terms of capacity, the new mosque will be able to accommodate 1500 worshippers, and stands alongside the government-funded Tauheedul Islam Girls High School. The Lancashire Telegraph quotes  Lord Adam Patel (who led the project) as saying

This opening will be long remembered across the land. . . . We should accept this Masjid as a centre of lifelong learning, a place of social welfare for generations and generations to come.

The mosque will devote considerable efforts to the Islamic indoctrination of children thus entrenching and continuing the cultural segregation that is symbolically embodied in the physical presence of the mosque and adjacent school. The children who are processed through its system of instruction will come to view themselves as superior to non-Muslims, and to see seventh-century norms and codes of behaviour as exemplars to be emulated. I have nothing positive to say about the construction of this mosque or its function. That its influence will be negative was reinforced by the announcement that the mosque would be holding a reception for the Saudi Arabian Prince Turki this Sunday. Saudi ideological influence is poisonous, and the warm celebration planned to honour his visit illustrates the ideological affinity between the mosque's patrons and Wahhabism. Yesterday was a sad day for Blackburn.

KFC Halal Menu Experiment Continues

I shall start today’s blogging with some tentative good news but with a major caveat attached: according to the Daily Mail KFC has been forced to backtrack at a number of its halal trial outlets and reintroduce non-halal items including bacon. This change of tack is attributed to a lack of demand for halal-only menus, but this news will come as a positive surprise for those who joined the No Halal at Colne KFC Facebook group and others who called for a boycott of KFC following its introduction of its halal trial stores. There is no reason why in the current century we should allow a lower standard of animal welfare in slaughter practices simply because the followers of a cruel seventh-century fanatic state that their religion dictates that this is a necessity. We should ban the production and importation of all halal animal products.

A handful of KFC stores participating in the halal trial will revert to their full menus on 19 July. These include: Accrington, Lancashire, Old Kent Road, London, Hyde Road (Manchester), Burton and Colne. However, this means that the overwhelming majority of the outlets involved in the halal trial (there were originally 74, although some reports say 95) will continue with an exclusively halal menu. I therefore call upon all non-Muslim KFC clients to continue the boycott until all halal products are removed from every KFC in the UK. It seems to me that KFC decided to revert to normal menus in a handful of its halal outlets simply to generate headlines in papers such as the Daily Mail implying that they have abandoned their halal experiment when in truth they have not. KFC has been forced to change policy in a few stores, now ramp up the pressure to ensure that halal is removed once and for all.

Children's Sick Song of 'Martyrdom'

Blazing Cat Fur should be commended for bringing this video to our attention. It's one of the sickest pieces of propagandist exploitation of children that I've seen. If the Palestinians had the state that they crave for, would this be the sort of stuff that they'd like to enter for Eurovision if they were allowed to participate in the contest? Watch the innocents sing of becoming a martyr for Allah's cause:

George Galloway rides the Islamist Tiger

Gandalf at the Up Pompeii blog posted the following video showing a number of speakers at Sunday’s rally/march against the EDL in London’s Tower Hamlets district. Amongst them was George Galloway, former Respect MP and onetime admirer of Saddam Hussain. With a pedigree such as this, it will come as no surprise to learn that the manner in which Galloway addressed the crowd was designed to appeal to the baser instincts of his overwhelmingly Muslim audience. I shall not pre-empt his words. Listen to them yourself and ask yourself the question: were the words employed by this man and the tone in which he deployed them designed to calm the crowd or to whip up an atmosphere of hatred against the non-Muslim population of the United Kingdom?

Whether Galloway is a closet Muslim convert or simply a deluded leftist (probably both) who thinks that he can channel religious ethno-communalism to his own advantage, I do not profess to know. However, he is most certainly no friend of the English people and their ancient liberties which have been placed under such a sustained assault in recent years. Might not Galloway’s words have had a role to play in the violence later perpetrated that evening by a large gang of Muslim youths (according to the BBC up to 300 strong) as they went on to attack the police and an innocent passer-by?

Galloway and his fellow speakers implied that Muslims were above the law and untouchable, and a significant number of hotheads who had heard these speeches appear to have believed them. George Galloway has chosen to wake and ride the Islamist tiger, and owing to the inflammatory nature of the language that he employed, I hold him responsible for any violence that ensues in the East End.

Muslims Against Crusades, EDL, One Law for All and UAF Clash

As can be seen from the following report from Russia Today, yesterday's anti-sharia One Law for All demonstration in London found itself subject to an unpleasant and highly vociferous counter-demonstration from Islamists. Once again, it was said to have been carried out by the new group Muslims Against Crusades. The EDL arrived to counter MAC, and then later a contingent of Muslim UAF demonstrators arrived from their leftist anti-EDL hatefest which had been held in Tower Hamlets. This was a very complicated situation which must have caused the Metropolitan Police a headache.

For years I have been warning that the policies being followed by our mainstream politicians - promoting multiculturalism, Islamisation and practically unrestricted immigration from the Muslim world - would have unpleasant consequences. In Britain, we are now seeing Islamists flex their muscles as they have been emboldened by their growing numbers and our weakness. Our politicians like Cameron, Simon Hughes and Gordon Brown have all displayed the most repellent sycophancy in deferring to Islam. Perhaps, if I were feeling charitable, I would say that they have done so with the best of intentions; but if this is the case, they have been painfully naïve. They have sown the dragon's teeth and are now beginning to reap a predictable harvest.

Tower Hamlets Anti-EDL Demo Video Footage

The following video footage (hat tip to Eeyore at Vlad Tepes blog) was shot at today’s anti-EDL demo in the Tower Hamlets district of London’s East End. Note that almost all of the demonstrators are local Muslims and male. Contrary to what the so-called anti-racism trade union speakers said at today’s event, they are not our people and they do not share our values. Most of the indigenous inhabitants have over the years fled this area. It is a pattern repeated across Britain, but is particularly pronounced in England in towns and cities such as Birmingham, Luton, Bradford, Leicester, Dewsbury and Burnley to name but a few examples. Now however, we are beginning to run out of affordable areas to retreat to, and the Mohammedan population is growing fast owing to a combination of a high birth-rate, chain migration and our lax immigration and asylum policies.

Tower Hamlets Anti-EDL 'March against Racism' (sic)

Following the EDL’s success in forcing the cancellation of an Islamist conference in Stepney that was due to take place today, a coalition of the SWP, UAF and trade unionists decided to hold a self-styled ‘march against racism’ in Tower Hamlets. According to the SWP, some 5,000 people turned up, and as can be seen from one of the photographs below (taken from the SWP site) the numbers were significant. Then again, looking at the pictures this is hardly surprising as the marchers were predominantly local Muslims. Note also the near complete absence of women. These photographs bear eloquent testimony to the complete Islamisation of this area of London and the ethnic displacement of the indigenous population.

The rhetoric employed by the protesters consisted of the same old clichés designed to stigmatise opponents of Islamisation. Weyman Bennett, Joint Secretary of UAF and a familiar figure at such gatherings barked at the crowd:

We say to the EDL: you are not marching in Tower Hamlets, Barking, Bradford or anywhere. We keep hearing EDL [are] worried about good versus bad Muslims. But it’s not up to the racists to decide who is good or bad. They are Nazis. An attack on [the] Muslim community is an attack on us all.

I must differ with Mr Bennett, for I do not think that Guramit Singh is a Nazi. Neither do I think that other members and supporters of the EDL are Nazis. Neither do I believe the EDL to be a ‘racist’ movement. Other speakers however, continued in this formulaic vein, fighting a phantasmagorical fascism that has sprung from their own fevered imaginations:

We will not let the EDL divide us and we will not let them divide us and attack us. The East End united will never be defeated.

These were the words of John McLoughlin, Tower Hamlets Unison Branch Secretary. “[D]ivide us and attack us”? What does he mean: “divide”? There is no unity at all. What you see in these pictures is a population of cohesive colonists that possesses no cultural commonality with the indigenous people of England nor sympathy for them. No. Islam divides us. The Trotskyists may not wish to admit to themselves that this is the case, but it is. They are deluded.

Congratulations to the EDL on managing to force the cancellation of the Islamist conference in Stepney. Keep up the good work.

London: ‘One Law for All’ Protest 20 June

Between 2pm and 4pm this afternoon a rally against sharia and other religious laws is being held in London at the Richmond Terrace junction with Whitehall. The first report that I posted on this blog concerned the inaugural One Law for All protest which took place in Trafalgar Square in March 2009, and although I attended that event, I shall not be attending today’s. Why? Simply because its organiser – Maryam Namazie (pictured above speaking to one of her Worker-Communist Party of Iran colleagues) – has chosen to stigmatise most people participating in the counterjihad movement in the UK as “far-right”. I am not “far-right” and I’m fed up to the back teeth of this term being used to attack dissenting voices and positions in our society which are critical of Islam and multiculturalist dogma.

In connection with today’s rally Namazie has written:

whilst racist and far Right groups like the English Defence League and the British Nationalist Party blame ‘Muslim immigration’ for Sharia law in order to further their inhuman agenda, it is people living under Islamic laws or the many who have fled Sharia and sought refuge here who are the principal victims of Islamism, and in the forefront of the struggle against it.

Furthermore, she also states that there is “an affinity between the far right and the Islamists”, that “[w]e will have nothing to do with the English Defence League” and that “[t]he right to asylum is a basic human right”.

She also links the campaign against sharia in the UK to a campaign against sharia in Iran. Much as I dislike Islam and its legal code, have we not already borne sufficient witness to the fact that we should not meddle in the affairs of Muslim states or go to war with them when our own political and cultural elites are capitulating to Islam in our home countries? We need to deal with Islamisation here in the UK and elsewhere in the non-Muslim world. Namazie’s position simply propels us in the direction of World War III at a time when our people are confused, weak in spirit and (rightly) cleave to life, whereas their opponents in the Muslim world see a ‘martyr’s death’ in jihad (which is what they would term such a conflict) as something to aspire to rather than fear. As matters stand, we would lose such a struggle because our leaders lack the requisite will to take whatever measures would be necessary.

Namazie’s stance on the much-abused concept of ‘asylum’ and immigration actually fuels our Islamisation. So, why is she advocating actions that will actually intensify conflict with Islam and undermine our rapidly vanishing demographic solidarity? Why is she fond of using the tactic of stigmatization exemplified in her ready resort to the use of “far-right” and “racist”? The answer is quite straightforward: because she is a hard-line doctrinaire Marxist-Leninist, a member of the Central Committee of the Worker-Communist Party of Iran. She therefore views the prospect of violent conflict as something very much 'inherent in the system' (as Marxists are wont to say) for she suffers from the Marxist delusion that such conflict would usher in a new era of global peace, prosperity and equality. It would not. It would usher in an age of death, misery, poverty and human decline.

In a reply to an EDL member who left a comment on her One Law for All website rebutting Namazie’s allegation that the EDL are ‘racist’ and ‘far-right’ Namazie shows her formulaic Marxist-Leninist logic kicking in (spelling and grammatical errors preserved):

Sorry we are not in total agreement.

Again the numbers of Black people someone knows is neither here nor there. I know a footballer – does that make me one or even mean I like football… not sure why this argument is being used as the main argument in defence of EDL – either there isn’t much more to defend or poor logic has taken hold of supporters.

You have Black people in the EDL – as you have white people in Islamist organisations. Not sure what that says about the organisations in question… 

More importantly, you make a mistake comparing EDL with Muslims. Of course most Muslims are not terrorists and most British are not racists. But the EDL and polical Islam are rightwing political movements and ideologies that are inhuman and reactionary.

Finally, you should be very uncomfortable about the EDL rather than apologizing for it if you aren’t racist, which I am sure is the case. No other alternative – of course there is – you should be standing with us against both racism and Islamism.

The EDL supporters remind of the pathetic excuse of a European left that stand with Islamism because their enemey’s enemy is their friend. I think a lot of people are falling for this very poor logic in defending the EDL. Having said that though, I think people fall for organisations they have some affinity to.

There you have it. Namazie is no friend of those in the UK who seek to resist Islamisation via the only real means possible: moderate nationalism. We moderate nationalists are in Maryam’s words “inhuman and reactionary”, unlike the humane mass murderer Lenin of course! That is why I won’t be taking part in this afternoon’s protest.

Video Footage of Paris Counter-Islamisation Demonstration

Initial reports suggested that only 300-400 people turned out for last night’s anti-Islamisation demonstration in Paris. However, as can be seen from the footage below, numbers seem to have been in excess of this estimate. Although falling somewhat short of its 7,000 Facebook supporters, Le Parisien (which typically branded the protest “far-right”) estimates that there were perhaps 800 people present. This seems more realistic. Given that the banning of the event had been widely publicised and that it had had to relocate from its original location of the Goutte d’Or, this number is perhaps not as disappointing as it initially appears.

As can be seen, the crowd were in good spirits. Sylvie François, Bloc Identitaire, Riposte Laïque and the many other supporters of this protest must be congratulated upon an imaginative riposte to Islamisation. I hope to see many more such protests and not only in France. Perhaps such an approach could be adopted here in Britain with a mass dogwalk with “seeing-eye dogs” leading the way in parks which have become effective no-go zones for native Britons because of Islamisation.

The third video below shows the Friday phenomenon which prompted this protest.

Parisian Wine and Sausage Protest

It was hoped that some 7,000 people would attend this evening’s anti-Islamisation pork and wine party in Paris which was relocated to the Champs-Elysees Avenue following a ban on it taking place in the Islamised Goutte d’Or district where Muslims have been flouting the law for sometime by blocking the streets with their Friday prayers. The Christian Science Monitor reveals that:

The idea to gather at the Arc de Triomphe is described by Identity Block as symbolic, since it was where 2,000 schoolboys defied a Nazi ban on protest and marched against the occupying forces some 70 years ago.

Furthermore, today also marked the 70th anniversary of General de Gaulle's appeal to the French people to resist the Nazi occupation following his exile to the United Kingdom. In the end, the Washington Post reports that some 300-400 protesters turned up this evening.

A Gaul enjoying a Sausage

Although the numbers are considerably less than what was hoped for, perhaps some of those patriotic French who would have turned up may have put historical animosities aside for the evening in the hope of seeing Algeria trounced by England in the World Cup. Alas, this was not to be, with England managing a dull and lacklustre 0-0 draw.

This apero geant saucisson et pinard event passed off peacefully. Although Sylvie François was the woman who originated the idea and generated a significant following on Facebook, it was also supported by a considerable range of French patriotic and secular groups and bloggers listed below (information taken from Bloc Identitaire website):

Actions Sita (Sensibilisation à l'Islam Tous Azimuts)

• Bivouac-ID, principal « blog d'information sur l'islam et ses dangers »

• le Bloc identitaire, parti politique reconnu comme tel et appelant au « réveil des identités »

• Cercle d’étude de réformes féministes (Cerf), association ayant pour « la défense des intérêts des femmes, l'étude et la promotion de réformes féministe »

• Comité Lépante, « observatoire de l'islamisation des sociétés européennes »

• Debout la République-Paris, fédération de Paris (présidée par Dominique Mahé) de DLR présidé par Nicolas Dupont-Aignan

• Debout les Jeunes-Paris, fédération de Paris du mouvement de jeunes de DLR

• La Droite libre, « mouvement libéral-conservateur associé à l'UMP »

• François De Souche, blog ayant pour but « d’extraire de l’actualité les informations qui relèvent de l’identité, de l’immigration et de l’idéologie “multi-culturelle” »

• Free World Academy, « think tank » de « diffusion d'études, d'essais et de concepts destinés aux décideurs et aux intellectuels du monde libre »

• Institut Européen de Socialisation et d'Education (I.E.S.E), association d"éducation populaire ayant pour but de « promouvoir les attitudes, les comportements, les compétences et les pratiques pro-sociales »

• les Jeunes Pour la France (JPF), mouvement de jeunes du Mouvement pour la France (MPF) de Philippe de Villiers

• Novopress, agence de presse en ligne

• l'Observatoire de l'Islamisation, « plateforme de données sur Internet recensant les faits marquants de l’avancée de l’Islam en Europe et plus particulièrement en France », dirigé par le chercheur indépendant Joachim Véliocas

• le Parti de l'In-nocence, fondé et présidé par l'écrivain Renaud Camus

• Le Projet Apache, organisation des jeunes identitaires franciliens

• Rassemblement pour l’indépendance de la France (RIF), présidé par Paul-Marie Coûteaux, ancien député au Parlement européen

• Résilience TV, site de l'Observatoire international des libertés

• Résistance républicaine, organisation de « défense de la République et de ses fondamentaux hérités de l´histoire et des lumières », présidée par Christine Tasin

• Riposte laïque, « journal des esprits libres, pour l'égalité hommes-femmes, pour la République sociale », dirigé par Pierre Cassen

• Union des athées

• l'Union gaulliste, association ayant pour but de « de redonner vie à la démocratie en réaffirmant que celle-ci n'a de sens que si elle s'incarne dans la souveraineté du peuple, dans la solidarité du peuple, dans la solidarité de la Nation, et dans les valeurs républicaines »

• Vérité Valeurs & Démocratie, association ayant pour but de défendre « la démocratie, la laïcité et les droits de l’Homme »

A Song of the Contemporary French Resistance

Here follows a musical interlude courtesy of Riposte Laïque in which the singer calls upon the French people to rise up and resist Islamisation. Detailing a story familiar to all across urban Britain the singer narrates how amongst other things churches have become mosques, bacon has been banned from school canteens and replaced by halal menus, burkas have proliferated and women-only swimming sessions have been introduced at public pools. Enjoy.

No Party for Sylvie François, Bloc Identitaire and Riposte Laïque?

Shamefully, the French police have spoilt the party by banning Sylvie François’ planned Parisian celebration of French pork sausage and wine in the Goutte d’Or arrondissement this Friday. Resident Muslims had reacted in somewhat prickly fashion to this gastronomic rebuttal to Islamisation, but are reported to have planned a halal counter-party of their own. This too has been banned. So, it remains to be seen how many French gastronomes will flaunt the ban on Friday. If these bons vivants do turn up in any number, what will happen to them? Whatever the case, I shall prepare a suitable pork dish this Friday evening in solidarity with our Gallic cousins and sink an ale rather than a glass of wine. How about holding a Friday hog roast and beer festival here in England? There are plenty of places (unfortunately) which would be suitable for such an event: Bradford, Burnley, Dewsbury, Birmingham and Tower Hamlets to name but a few. Take your pick.

Below are a couple of cartoons taken from the Riposte Laïque blog which along with Bloc Identitaire supports the protest. The first depicts one of the Mohammedan critics of this imaginative and humorous protest who predictably made the false claim that it was "racist".

Barking EDL/Muslims Against Crusades Video Footage

As can be seen from the following footage, tempers were running high in Barking today when the Muslims Against Crusades group took to the streets to curse the return of the Royal Anglian Regiment. Still, it is heartening to see that support for the troops far outweighed the disparagement that was forthcoming from this nasty group of Mohammedan loudmouths.

Barking: 'Muslims Against Crusades' Incite Anger

Looking like a group of extras who have walked off of the set of the 1968 film Planet of the Apes, a bunch of Muslims naming themselves Muslims Against Crusades today turned up in Barking to hurl insults at soldiers from the Royal Anglian Regiment as they marched through the borough in a homecoming parade. Their aim of course was to arouse the ire of the British public, and this they succeeded in doing. They had already offered a primer in souring the public mood through their recent fly-posting of posters promoting their demonstration on a local war memorial.

Some EDL members were on hand to shower the protesters with beer and unflattering epithets. The bearded black-flag wavers then scurried away to seek police protection which was promptly provided. It was just such a protest in Luton last year that precipitated the formation of the EDL, and although once again the number of simian-brained Islamists was comparatively small in number (circa 40), the anti-British Islamo-supremacist sentiments to which they give voice are all too widespread amongst concentrations of Muslim population in the UK.

Is this a race issue? No, of course not. Is Communism a race? No. Is Nazism a race? No. Is Christianity a race? No. Is Islam a race? No. Moreover, you can see amongst the protesters one of the worst kinds of Islamic extremist: the indigenous convert (ginger beard) who freely chose to reject his country and civilisation. Islam is a particularly unpleasant ideology which should be no more immune to criticism than any other.

Unsurprisingly, the London Evening Post described the EDL and other unnamed groups who opposed the protest as ‘far-right’ (sic). Then again, the journalist who composed the piece is named Rashid Razaq, so you would hardly expect such a man to be objective would you? Typically, his piece was accompanied by the photograph below which shows some angry white people, rather than the other pictures which I have borrowed from the Shield Wall blog. Razaq’s piece of course sought to portray the protesters and the counter-protesters as being morally equivalent in their respective ‘extremisms’. To whom did he accord the last word in his piece? Any guesses? Here it is:

Muslim councillor Manzour Hussain said: “Muslims Against Crusades do not represent the vast majority of law abiding, peaceful Muslim members of our society who respect Britain's armed forces. They certainly do not represent the views of the Muslim community of Barking and Dagenham.”

That’s right, they never do represent Muslims or Islam do they? Just as Mohammed’s slaving, genocide, torture, rape and paedophilia don’t inform Islam (so they tell us, although they never actually deny that these things took place), even though all Muslims state that he is the paragon of all humanity and for eternity beyond any criticism. The truth is this: those Muslims who practise their faith and actually believe in it, rather than those unfortunates who happen to have been born into it and are not permitted either to leave it or refute it, tell us whatever is expedient to further their agenda. Granted, Muslims Against Crusades don’t represent “law abiding, peaceful Muslim[s]”, but they do represent those who subscribe to the words of the Qur’an and the deeds of Mohammed.

Video Footage of Demonstrators (courtesy of The Iconoclast, New English Review)

Sylvie François and Bloc Identitaire: Armed with Wine and Pork Sausage

Well, we are all familiar with the sad state of decay, colonisation and Islamisation that characterise London today, but our Gallic cousins in Paris are faring no better for the self-same processes are also evident in this once glorious city. However, thanks to the initiative of Sylvie François, Bloc Identitaire will be making a stand against Islamisation in a quintessentially French manner at 7pm on 18 June through celebrating two great French loves: wine and fine pork sausage.

Sylvie has set up a Facebook group calling for supporters to gather for the pork and wine party in the Goutte D’or arrondissement of Paris which although once a traditional working class district has long since fallen to colonisation by Muslim Arab and African immigrants. The video below shows footage and photographs from the Goutte D’or taken in the twentieth and nineteenth centuries, contrasting them with the scenes today which show how it has effectively ceased to be part of France.

This enjoyable and humorous gastronomic riposte to Islamisation has drawn flak from a predictable quarter: SOS Racisme and the French Communist Party. The AFP reports a statement from the latter which reads: "this disgusting joke seeks to exacerbate the differences that make for the richness of the 18th arrondissement (district)." Oh dear - “richness” – it would seem that French leftists also view colonisation and ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population as ‘enrichment’.

So, not so different from over here in blighty, eh? Anti-racist groups and Communists uniting to protect and promote Islamisation, stigmatising ordinary French people who don’t want their culture and way of life destroyed. Well, I would like to wish Sylvie, Bloc Identitaire and their supporters on Facebook bonnes chances et bons appetits!

'Inspired by Muhammad' Campaign. Who? Killers and Paedophiles?

The blogger Dowlish today wrote a piece about the ‘Inspired by Muhammad’ campaign and its associated website which appears to have been put together by Yougov following a poll which revealed that the majority of people in the UK understandably possessed a negative (i.e. the correct) opinion about Islam. Like me, you may already have seen posters put up by this campaign at stations or on buses. The messages they disseminate are lies designed to try and counteract our true impression of the inherently violent nature of Islamic doctrine.

Who funds the campaign? Ostensibly an organisation called the Exploring Islam Foundation which is said to be reliant upon private donations (how much Saudi money is being channelled through this I wonder?). It states:

The Exploring Islam Foundation (EIF) specialises in authoring, publishing and marketing high quality resources which creatively explore the numerous aspects of Islam. EIF was established fulfil the following aims:  

· Challenge misconceptions surrounding Islam and Muslims 

· Raise awareness about the belief, practice, history, and cultures of Islam 

· Collaborate with organisations on humanitarian issues 

· Highlight the contribution of Muslims to society

Our vision is of establishing a Foundation that challenges the damaging stereotypes about Islam through the medium of creative resources. These information packages will provide a comprehensive insight to the faith. We envisage working across the spectrum of media outlets, from traditional print media to innovative e-media. EIF’s initial focus is on promoting understanding in the spiritual, cultural and historical aspects of Islam, and EIF has pioneered a number of groundbreaking publications and multimedia products achieve that vision. 

The ‘Inspired by Muhammad’ site truly is a very nasty piece of work. The homepage of the campaign features photographs of one man and two women with alleged quotes (obviously written by marketing people) which read respectively:

• “I believe in social justice. So did Muhammad.”
• “I believe in women’s rights. So did Muhammad.” 
• “I believe in protecting the environment. So did Muhammad.”  

Strangely, despite the words employed in these ‘quotes’, it is the facial expressions and body language of the three case studies which betray the real message of Islam.

Social justice-loving bloke number one displays an exemplary facial expression in this respect: filled with typical Muslim hauteur and contempt for the dhimmi onlooker. The second, a woman largely covered in cloth, black and white like her unyielding view of the world that demands death, maiming and flagellation for any poor soul who falls foul of the Islamic conception of ‘justice’, also gazes at the onlooker in a self-assured contemptuous fashion. Her arms are folded: “Back off kafir!” You can guarantee that the only legal cases she’ll be interested in relate to immigration, human rights (never has a concept been so debased, corrupted and perverted as this one) and ‘racism’ (sic) directed at Muslims.

Finally, case study number three is a wretched creature, for she should know better: this pretty, gullible woman provides the smiling face of the Western European convert; her photograph displays a woman with a vacant expression (as well as vacant head) with her arms limply hanging by her sides in a defenceless position of submission. She may as well be saying, “I have submitted to Islam. So should you.”

There is also a section entitled ‘Who are Muslims?’ that features an image of three innocent blue-eyed blonde schoolgirls wearing Muslim caps which is deeply chilling. What were their parents thinking, or were they forced to wear this headgear as part of a compulsory school ‘interfaith’ visit?

Hopefully we shall witness the daubing of some witty and accurate graffiti on these wretched campaign posters. Before signing off, I’d just like to say “I believe that Islam is an intolerant, totalitarian, misogynistic innately violent faith. So did Muhammad.”

Alternative 'Inspired by Muhammad' Posters (from Proud Kaffir at Vlad Tepes blog)

Labour Leadership Hopefuls: a Comparison

Well, the aspirant candidates for the Labour leadership are now busy setting out their stalls and I for one must confess to being deeply underwhelmed by the entire process. Why? It’s the policy stupid (or should I say, lack of it).

So, given that nobody else has bothered to prepare a guide to Labour leadership contenders for British nationalists, I thought that I’d devise one of my own, comparing the stances of the candidates on a range of key issues of concern. Are you excited? Me neither.

Anyway, so who are the contending 'colossi' of the bogus flat-cap, abandoned whippet, prawn cocktail munching, ‘Allahu akbar’ appeasing, globalist, warmongering, British betraying Labour Party? They are: Diane Abbott, Ed Balls, Andy Burnham, David Miliband and Ed Miliband. Four of these have held ministerial portfolios and they were all dreadful at their jobs. However, I would like to start this ‘analysis’ by ditching any concern for policy and having a straightforward snipe at personalities. We take can look at the ‘substance’ of policy ‘differences’ later.

Diane Abbott, as you know, is black and a woman to boot. This obviously qualifies her to be leader in the eyes of the majority of Labourites because none of her opponents are black or a woman. If she lost, the Labour Party would be ‘racist’ as well as 'sexist' wouldn’t it, which couldn’t possibly be right, right?

Two of the contenders have peculiar untrustworthy eyes. There is something of the goldfish about Ed Balls and his bulging ocular orbits, whereas Andy Burnham for some reason brings to mind a soft toy with his wide lachrymose eyes. I’m not convinced that ‘Tiny Tears’ Burnham is altogether human, and it’s probably the case that he was fabricated from plastic in a dodgy Chinese mannequin plant: “squeeze me and I cry.” Both Balls and Burnham are rumoured to be English, but they would probably go the extra mile to deny this fact.

Then we have the Miliband brothers, scions of leading Marxist Ralph, writer of The State in Capitalist Society which used to be (and probably still is) compulsory reading on undergraduate sociology and politics courses. Just for fun, I’m going to borrow a piece of nasty yet appropriate jargon from the period of high Stalinism: these two are what jovial Uncle Joe would have referred to as “rootless cosmopolitans”. True to “rootless cosmopolitan” form, the elder Miliband brother was a disaster as Foreign Secretary and seemed to view his task as being the dismantling of any concept of the national interest that remained rather than its furtherance.

Anyway, let’s move on to boring old policy. I say “boring” because none of these Labour droids will actually possess any policy differences, and the line that they take will be uniformly anti-national. Still, let’s check and take a look at their stances on the following: Islamisation, mass immigration, the EU, multiculturalism, political correctness and globalisation. Having carried out an exhaustive analysis of their respective positions I can tell you that each and every one of them is rabidly in favour of every single one of these. Oh hang on, it does seem that I may have rushed to a precipitate judgement, for ‘Tiny Tears’ Burnham dissented from one of these positions when the Archbishop of Canterbury made his idiotic statement in favour of Sharia. Burnham is quoted as saying:

This isn't a path down which we should go... the British legal system should apply to everybody equally. You cannot run two systems of law alongside each other. That would, in my view, be a recipe for chaos, social chaos.

Still, he like Balls and Abbott has only been whingeing about white Eastern European immigration, so his policy position would continue to fan the flames of Islamisation as immigration from the Muslim world would in effect be unimpeded.

So, there you have it: Labour of our grandparents RIP. A plague on all their houses. I don’t give a hoot who becomes the new leader of the Labour Party: same old Labour, same old lies.

Geert Wilders addresses Jubilant Supporters

In the following address Geert Wilders is quite rightly in buoyant mood following the PVV's surge from fifth to third largest party in the Dutch Parliament, taking circa 15.5% of the vote compared to 5.9% in 2006. Most commentators had predicted that the PVV would win 18 seats, but the 24 secured today show that the party's message against Islamisation and mass immigration and for the Dutch people and European values resonated strongly with the electorate. Hopefully this will provide Wilders with at the very least a clear chance to communicate his message far more effectively to the public and possibly to enter a coalition government.

Following this strong result there is no reason to suppose that the PVV will not be capable of becoming the largest parliamentary party when the country next goes to the polls. Congratulations to Geert and all of his party members and supporters! Celebrate tonight, and prepare to help build a better future for the Netherlands. You have provided inspiration and hope for nationalists across Europe. 

Geert Wilders the Kingmaker?

Geert Wilders's PVV did well in yesterday's parliamentary election, more than doubling its number of seats from 9 to 24 making the party the third largest in the 150-seat chamber. Although the results will not be finalised until later today, it is clear that Wilders will be placed in a strong position following the Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie (VVD) emerging as the largest party with 31 seats, just edging ahead of the social-democratic Partij van de Arbeid, PvdA which secured 30.

It is clear that no party will have an overall majority and that left-leaning parties will not have sufficient seats to create a coalition on their own. Importantly, according to Deutsche Welle, Mark Rutte, leader of the VVD, has indicated that he would not rule out the possibility of forming a coalition with the PVV and has described the PVV results as impressive. The PVV and the VVD have strengthened their positions considerably since the last election in 2006, taking their number of seats from 22 to 31 and 9 to 24 respectively.

We can but hope that Wilders emerges as the power broker in the new government and secures a position for his party and policy platform. Wilders's strong showing demonstrates that all is not yet lost for native Europeans in their ancestral homelands. This is the positive side to the story, but there is however a negative one, for the PVV's strong showing may generate another pulse of Muslim emigration from the Netherlands to the UK, so prepare yourselves for another bout of 'enrichment' which will be falsely reported as 'European' migration.

Prescott and Goldsmith in Garden Tiff

John Prescott, a man whom I suspect would rather see his garden either buried beneath decking or paved over for ease maintenance, had a verbal set-to with Zac Goldsmith, the Conservative Party’s very own Green Man, on this morning’s Today Programme. Not unsurprisingly, I wasn’t altogether sure what Prescott was trying to say (was he?), although amidst his incoherent ill-tempered ramblings I did catch phrases such as “same old Tories”, something or the other “for the privileged few” and “need more houses” (I’d hate to be the old buffoon’s ghostwriter).

Well, one of the most striking features of home ‘architecture’ in recent years, particularly under Tony and Gordon, has been the fact that as many people like Mr (oh dear, where are my manners, I meant to say “Lord” (sic)) Prescott have experienced a significant enhancement in their girth, homes have grown smaller. Such homes may be fit for people of diminutive stature, but for you and I (not that you or I are fat of course) they must surely be viewed as nothing better than desperate halfway houses between renting and real home-ownership. Nobody surely aspires to live in one of these high-density dwellings that to my mind bear all of the aesthetic appeal of a battery farm or a prison.

Goldsmith, naturally, can afford to be Green with a capital ‘G’, and enjoy a garden which I suspect may be as large as Richmond Park (maybe Richmond Park is his garden?), but he is nonetheless correct to highlight the fact that in recent years many property developers have engaged in the ruse of building on gardens and passing off such homes as having been built on ‘brownfield sites’. Where this has taken place the quality of the local environment has suffered and developers have heaved a sigh of relief that they have not had the rather less enviable task of developing genuine brownfield sites. Why clear up derelict industrial land when you can build on large gardens? Well, such is their rationale, but it is not mine, for I am all in favour of preserving gardens. The well-tended garden is after all one of the characteristics of English life, and it is a shame that so many of these delightful urban havens of birdsong have now been lost beneath Prescott’s barracks-style houses.

Goldsmith rightly stated that developers should build on genuine brownfield sites and that gardens should therefore be reclassified and protected from the predation of the property developer. Prescott, au contraire, ranted in a rambling fashion about this being a class issue (I think that was the gist of it, despite the fact that this confused portly gentleman has long since become a member of and apologist for the plutocracy) and there being a need to build everywhere because of the chronic housing shortage. Housing shortage? Yes, there is one. Why’s that then? It couldn’t have anything to do with the skyrocketing population brought about by deliberately-engineered mass immigration could it? Surely not?! I’d sooner have gardens than sheds in Slough containing Somalis, Afghans and Pakistanis. Sheds are for pottering and raising seedlings, not for nurturing suicide bombers.

Whilst on the theme of the urbanite’s desire to maintain a link with the soil and the country I thought that you might appreciate listening to the Kinks in wistful bucolic mood. Here follows their song Village Green taken from their much underrated album The Kinks are the Village Green Preservation Society.

Ed Balls on Immigration and Turkey

Labour leadership candidate Ed Balls appeared on today's Politics Show and as in a piece in today's Observer claimed that he was concerned about immigration, although what he meant to say was that he was concerned that his constituents might not vote for him if he does not pay lip service to their views on immigration. As for lip service, his was about as mealy-mouthed as you can get.

Once again Balls used the Poles as the whipping boys in expressing his putative concern over the immigration issue, whilst simultaneously paying mandatory dhimmi tribute to Muslims by citing the distress caused to Muslim constituents in locations such as Dewsbury by immigration from Eastern Europe. When pressed by the interviewer to clarify his position on Turkey's entry to the EU, the necessary freedom of labour mobility and the influx of Muslim immigrants that this would entail and whether he though that this would cause problems for indigenous (although this word was not used) voters he refused to answer. He was specifically asked what he thought about the "socio-cultural (code for Islamic) implications" of such immigration, but once again refused to even acknowledge the question by claiming that this was not a 'race' (sic) issue and returning to an attack on the Poles.

In sum, reading between the lines, this is what Balls would have said in his interview with the Politics Show had he been speaking honestly:

• I am pro-globalisation, mass immigration and the UK's absorption into the EU
• I am going to talk about immigration so that the headlines will say that I am addressing the issue. To the unobservant eye of the casual reader this will equate to me thinking that mass immigration should be curbed and acting to curb it, although I aim to do precisely the opposite
• I like Muslims because they vote Labour
• I don't like Poles because they're white Europeans with traditional values. However, having said that, they're really useful in driving down domestic wages and increasing the profits of my rich chums in the business world
• Turkey's accession to the EU will generate a massive influx of Labour-voting Muslim immigrants into the UK and help to destroy the country's sense of identity

Ed Balls is another self-seeking careerist who cares not one jot for the well-being of the people of this country. Ed, I would like to award you with the title of Dhimmi Traitor on this special day - 6 June 2010 - to commemorate the betrayal of the values for which so many of our brave men died on the beaches of Normandy on this day 66 years ago.