EDL Bristol Demo 14 July 2012: the Background

Bristol, to the best of my knowledge, has not previously hosted an EDL demonstration. In years gone by, the idea that Bristol would come to host a large Muslim population was unthinkable, but today that situation has sadly changed. In Totterdown a mosque has appeared, its minaret dominating the local skyline like a missile aimed at the heart of the city. The largest resident Muslim population is Somali. Estimates that have frequently appeared in the media claim that the Somalis could number some 30,000, whereas a Bristol City Council document published in November 2010 was of the opinion that the range was more likely to be between 6,600 and 10,000. Whichever figure is selected, it is too high a number. What benefit accrues from their presence in Bristol? Why are they there, rather than in Somalia? If current trends continue, the Somali share of the population will grow rapidly, for in 2009 it was reported that 3.8% of Bristol schoolchildren were Somali, or one out of every 25. In 2001, the equivalent figure was only one in every 500. This growth has been fed both by immigration and high Somali fertility.

Totterdown Mosque (courtesy of Nicksarebi)

It comes as a surprise that there is a Council of Bristol Mosques, to which five mosques are affiliated, which nonetheless seems rather modest given estimated Muslim numbers. The first data from the 2011 Census will not be published until 16 July, but strangely, this will not contain any information on religion or ethnicity. It is therefore difficult to provide an accurate estimate of the size of Bristol's resident Muslim population, but one site propagandising Islam with the assistance of the BBC, using public funds provided by the local authority and Government Office South West, claims that there are 35,000 Muslims in the city. For those of us who knew Bristol 20 or 30 years ago, the emergence of such a population is staggering, as it has seemingly sprung out of nowhere.

What is the protest about?

Whereas elsewhere the EDL has generally used specific events that have occurred within a given locality as grounds for a demonstration, this does not seem to be the case in Bristol. The EDL explain their decision to hold a protest in the city on 14 July 2012 as follows:

The EDL are going to Bristol.  We are going to Bristol because we wish to draw public attention to Islamic grooming, the refusal of Muslims to integrate into British society and the increasing attacks by Muslims on non-Muslim Britons.

We are coming to Bristol to raise awareness of these problems and to call for a unified country under one democratic government, one law and one society grounded in British culture and traditions.

We want to call attention to the creeping Islamisation of Britain, with the increased use of halal meat whether non-Muslims want it or not.

We want to make people aware that our way of life and our culture are under threat from people who don’t care for our culture, country or humanity. They don’t care for our religions, politics, way of life, culture or traditions. They want to recreate 7th Century Arabia in Britain and they will lie, subvert and even kill to do it.

Given the experience of many other English towns and cities, as well as the general process of demographic Islamisation unfolding across the country, drawing attention to what has happened elsewhere and this general phenomenon could be adjudged to be worthwhile. However, it would perhaps be more effective were the EDL to highlight the deficits of multiculturalism and immigration policy, for without multiculturalist policies combined with mass immigration there would be no problem with Islamisation in this country, because the conditions that allow it would be removed at a stroke. Certainly, Stephen Lennon’s own statements regarding multiculturalism have been unclear, for on a number of occasions he has described the EDL as “multicultural”, whilst at other times criticising “multiculturalism”. It seems that he sometimes conflates “multiculturalism” and “multiracialism”, for the EDL is certainly multiracial, although predominantly English. The two are related, yet distinct.

The EDL's Opponents in Bristol

Although the EDL gives expression to many of the general public’s officially repressed suspicions and concerns relating to Islamic issues in England today, the EDL has no friends in high places, and has to confront three primary sources of opposition emanating from: 1) mainstream politicians and the mass media; 2) the self-styled ‘anti-fascist’ movement encompassing the trades unions and a range of far-left fringe groups and campaigns: UAF, Hope Not Hate, Searchlight, Love Music Hate Racism, various ‘unity’ front groups for the SWP and sundry independent anarchist groups; 3) Islamists and the wider Muslim population. All three forms of opposition intersect, with each attempting to make parasitic political capital out of the EDL. None of the EDL’s opponents are interested in portraying what the EDL really is, and the ‘anti-fascist’ propagandists of the second group enjoy the uncritical attention of the media. All however are united in their mutually profitable desire to manufacture the sense of a ‘far-right’ threat, whilst ignoring and facilitating the spread of the real ultra-reactionary ‘far-right’ in the form of Islamism.

Returning to the specifics of the Bristol demo on 14 July, the opposition from the first group enumerated has already been not-so-subtly voiced by the BBC, which stated in a story run on 14 June:

A security operation costing up to £1m and involving 700 police officers is being organised ahead of an English Defence League (EDL) march in Bristol.

Why did it open this story referring to the cost of the demo? How many BBC reports about forthcoming demonstrations, involving trades unions for example, are prefaced with such information, particularly citing such large figures? Although the article makes reference to the counterdemonstrators who oppose the EDL, it does not make clear that police concerns over public disorder arise largely from likely attempts by the Trotskyist SWP and anarchist-related self-styled ‘antifascist’ groups to provoke a violent clash with the EDL. Why did it choose to omit this information? Of course, there have been violent incidents at previous EDL demonstrations involving their supporters, and these cannot be justified, but a far larger number of their opponents have been arrested for public disorder and assault. Although the BBC did on this occasion refrain from describing the EDL as ‘far-right’ (a very rare honour for the broadcaster to withhold this slur), its reporting of the forthcoming march has in no way been balanced.

However, in the video below taken from an episode of the BBC’s Sunday Politics West, the EDL is repeatedly described as ‘far-right’, although the additional policing costs are cited as £500,000 rather than the £1 million stated on the website.

The opposition of the second group, which can be subsumed under the heading of ‘antifascists’, has manifested itself in a number of ways. An online petition has been set up, calling for the EDL demo to be banned. As of the evening of 25 June, this had attracted 1,970 signatures. The SWP-dominated UAF has also set up a front campaign named We are Bristol which is supported by leading members of a number of trades unions including: the CWU, FBU, NUJ, NUT, PCS, RMT and Unison. Other supporting bodies include the Bristol Labour Party; Bristol Anarchist Federation, Bristol Antifascists and Bristol Queercafe. Representatives from this SWP front group met on 11 June to discuss tactics for opposing the EDL’s demonstration. In support of this, they have produced various pieces of inflammatory campaign literature that I have reproduced below to give the reader a flavour of the far-from-peaceful mindset of these so-called ‘antifascists’.

The first below displays a very ugly and angry figure wielding a baton of some sort, smashing a swastika which presumably is supposed to represent the EDL. Hardly, you would think, an image produced to encourage peaceful counter-protest. The second image once again employs the hackneyed and inappropriate image of a swastika, this time being smashed by a rather beefy fist. Peaceful? If you believe that black is white and that white is black then I suppose you could construe it as ‘peaceful’, yes. Unintentionally amusing? Well, perhaps, given that it states “This is a no go area for all fascists, racists, sexists and homophobes”. In that case, why do they wish to demonstrate against the EDL? Surely their statement is far more applicable to Islamists? Still, there’s no reasoning to be had with these antifa types. The last two images below are of an antifa leaflet produced in the city. Although not as crude in style as the first two, they contain misinformation and the absurd insinuation that the EDL is some sort of “street army” being used by big business to distract the public’s attention from the evils of the capitalist crash. Utterly fantastical, there is about as much substance to these antifa allegations as there is to David Icke’s humanoid lizard conspiracy theory. 

UPDATE 9 July: The SWP front group 'We are Bristol' has been very successful in spreading its message, as although the city's council leader - Simon Cook - has declined to participate in the anti-EDL demonstration, he has stated: "We have made absolutely clear that we do not agree with their extremist views and do not want them in Bristol." However, unlike the SWP and UAF he added: "They are not a proscribed organisation and have a right to march." The 'This is Bristol' website which ran the story once again quoted the alleged £500,000 price tag for policing the EDL demo. Cook's even-handed position has upset both Islamophobia Watch and MPACUK.

Bristol's Antifa Propaganda Gallery

Somalia: an Antidote to Somali Alienation

So seemed to suggest a Channel 4 report this evening, and with such a conclusion, I do not beg to differ. According to the Office for National Statistics, there were some 108,000 immigrants born in Somalia resident in the UK in the 2011. This figure of course excludes second or third generation Somalis, so the actual and much higher total of Somalis resident here is not publicly available.

The arrival of such a large volume of Somalis has led to the emergence of identifiable and notable Somali clusters in cities such as London, Sheffield, Bristol and Leicester amongst others, and together with the UK’s officially promoted ideology of multiculturalism, this weight of numbers has allowed Somalis to maintain their insular identity, whilst at the same time creating a sense of cleft identity amongst many Somalis born in the United Kingdom who are cut off from the direct experience of their ancestral motherland. The latter do not in many respects therefore feel traditionally Somali, yet often simultaneously bear an antipathy towards British and more widely Western culture; culturally ambiguous and uncertain, many British-born Somalis thus find themselves in a deracinated anomic state in which criminality can flourish.

To a significant extent, the fault for this situation lies squarely with Whitehall policymakers and their prescriptions for what they see as the utopian ideal of a ‘new’ Britain, in which anyone and everyone from around the world may be perceived to be, and as accepted as being, as British as anyone whose ancestors have been present here since time immemorial. This naïve vision has resulted in the overgenerous granting of citizenship and the promotion of social Balkanisation championed by the ideology of ‘diversity’, legitimised through reference to a policy tool labelled ‘anti-racism’ which rests to a significant extent upon the fatally flawed and anti-rational Macpherson Report. The unwillingness of the British state and its agencies to either acknowledge what should be the transient status of Somali residents, or to compel them to adopt the most fundamental of our basic practices such as speaking English and not practising genital mutilation upon their daughters, has of course allowed Somalis to feel sufficiently comfortable to stay, whilst not identifying with the host society and culture. Thus do we witness remarkable levels of Somali unemployment – 31.4% for Somali men and 84.2% for Somali women in the three months to June 2008 – and a notable statistical overrepresentation of young Somali males in criminality.

Returning to this evening’s Channel 4 News report, it focused upon a small group of young Somalis who had left England to reconnect with their roots in line with their parents’ wishes, with the latter concerned either that their children were becoming excessively westernised or were at risk of falling into lives of crime. The report followed them to Somaliland, the most peaceful region of Somalia, its relative prosperity standing in stark contrast to the war-blasted images of the country’s capital Mogadishu. Here, the return of hundreds of such Somalis to their ancestral homeland has become increasingly familiar, with the locals even coining a term for such returnees: dhaqan selis (“the rehabilitation community”). This term, unsurprisingly, possesses a somewhat pejorative air, but the returnees have found that they feel more at ease in Somalia than in Britain, although the lack of traditional goat herding skills, admittedly difficult to acquire in Sheffield, London or Bristol, served as cause for embarrassment for the young Somali men featured in the report. Nonetheless, these young men were quite happy to remain in Somalia, whereas a young Somali woman named Laila found the restrictions upon Somali women somewhat oppressive and wished to return to England.

Now that peace has returned to at least one area of Somalia, it would seem to make sense for those Somalis who do not fully embrace our way of life to return to their homeland where they naturally feel at ease. This is a positive step for all concerned, and offers a solution to the sense of estrangement from and hostility towards British culture and society experienced by many Somali residents. Somaliland offers them a chance of return, where they can reconnect with their ancestral culture and people, removing the sense of alienation and social awkwardness that characterises their lives here. If some, such as Laila, might see some worth in our society, and particularly in our attitudes towards women, then perhaps such a return could have a very beneficial impact upon Somalia, one day perhaps leading to the cruel practice of female genital mutilation being forever banished from that country.   

RUSI Report on Somalia

One quarter of foreign fighters in Somalia - some 50 - are according to the BBC said to be 'British' (i.e. they hold UK passports; in reality they will be ethnic Somalis or Muslims of other non-indigenous ethnic stock). The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) warns that this number is set to increase as those convicted for Islamist terror-related offences in recent years are released in the near future. This fact serves to underscore the predominantly negative impact of the settlement of Somalis in Britain in cities such as Sheffield and Bristol. How many of these violent Islamists will return to Britain and participate in plots to undermine our peace and security? These potential 'lone wolves' constitute a real extremist threat to our country, not the phantom 'far right' as the BBC would have you believe. 

Nonetheless, the RUSI report dutifully contained, to the delight of the BBC, an obligatory politically correct counterfactual statement complaining that the Government's anti-radicalisation strategy "only pays lip service to the threat from extreme far-right terrorism". Moreover, the BBC notes that "The committee cited the growth of far-right groups with links to similar organisations in Europe" as evidence of this 'threat'. As I wrote yesterday, such statements are unadulterated malicious fiction: there is no 'far-right terrorism'. The reality is that the forces of the so-called 'far right' currently embody the only emergent ideology which clearly opposes globalisation and the powerful economic elites that favour and further this anti-democratic process. Why are we who oppose transnational debt slavery 'extremists'? We wish harm to no-one. It is not nationalists who have pushed for wars against Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, but globalists and our so-called 'moderate' Westminster politicians who figure amongst their number. Nationalists desire peace and national security, not war. 

Given that our Government and Civil Service are such fervent advocates of globalisation, it is no wonder that they and their think tanks seek to deploy every technique of black propaganda at their disposal to undermine the reputations of nationalists and patriots, invoking the canard of 'far-right violence' and 'terrorism'. The statement of a Home Office spokesman that "National security is the first duty of any government" thus has a very hollow ring, for there are no greater threats to our national wellbeing and survival than our very own globalist politicians and policy mandarins within the senior Civil Service. RUSI constitutes part of this official propagandist apparatus, but there are certain to be people within the Institute who are acutely aware of the reality that they are obliged to blot out with their pro-globalist spin.

Abu Qatada will surely look upon this situation, as well as the absurdities of the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights, with some satisfaction.

Justice for Rhea Page: EDL National Demo

The Casuals United blog has announced that there will be an EDL protest against the scandalously lenient non-custodial sentence handed out to the four Somalian women who carried out a vicious unprovoked race attack against Rhea Page. On Saturday 21 January 2012, the EDL will be holding a national demo, but the location is yet to be announced; given the scene of the incident, it may well be in Leicester. Let’s hope that there is an excellent turnout for the protest, and that the judiciary is compelled to re-examine this case. The English public must make clear that it is no longer willing to put up with the institutional anti-white racism promoted by ‘diversity’ and ‘equality’ legislation. This legislation must be repealed! 

Staggeringly, as of 07:45 on the morning of Thursday 8 December, the BBC News website still has not covered the Rhea Page story. Its editiorial staff cannot but fail to be aware of what has happened, and must therefore have made the deliberate decision not to cover this miscarriage of justice. Why will it not cover this story? The BBC is our main public service broadcaster, and it is in the public interest that this case should be brought to the attention of its viewers, listeners and readers. It should be the BBC's duty to highlight such a blatant miscarriage of justice and example of  anti-white institutional racism. Evidently, it has chosen not to do so as this does not fit into its warped narrative that insists that only white people, particularly English ones, can be guilty of 'racism'; that we are a particularly nasty subset of humanity, and that our country is 'institutionally racist' against blacks and Muslims [sic]. After all, the BBC doesn't want to deflect public attention from whom it thinks should be a scapegoat for the ills of our increasingly ethnically fragmented and tense country: Emma West.  

We gave them a Home. They gave Rhea Page a Kicking

“White bitch!” “White slag!” “Kill the white slag!” A rain of punches and kicks followed, as young Englishwoman Rhea Page was set upon by four Somali Muslim females in a brutal racially motivated attack on a Leicester street some seventeen months ago. Her boyfriend Lewis leapt to her defence, but it was only once the police arrived that the support worker was rescued from this savage and unprovoked assault. Had they not have intervened, this ugly story could have had a worse ending still. Rhea, who worked with people suffering from autism and other learning difficulties, lost her job shortly afterwards, so traumatised was she by the attack.

Rhea Page with Boyfriend Lewis (picture from Daily Mail)

 

Yet today, a judge handed down sentences which were an insult to this young woman, so lenient were they considering the violence of the attack. None of the four Somalis received a custodial sentence, although the Daily Mail highlights that a five-year prison sentence could have been imposed for the actual bodily harm inflicted. Why then was the judge so lenient? Quite simply, because the victim was a white Englishwoman and the perpetrators were black Muslims, and the rights of the latter are viewed as more precious than those of the native English in this topsy-turvy judicial nightmare that we now find ourselves. Emma West after all, who neither committed nor threatened violence during her recent anti-immigrant rant on a tram, has been taken into custody and had her children removed from her by the state.

By showing leniency to the attackers in the Somali gang case because ‘they weren’t used to drinking because they’re Muslims’, Judge Robert Brown decided to send out a clear message to those who wish to perpetrate anti-indigenous violence: you may do so with impunity. You may beat, assault and scream racial abuse, and you will be punished with a formal rap over the knuckles, and if you are Muslim and have had a whiff of alcohol, you can do more or less what you wish without fear of sanction. It is time to repeal all race and religious ‘hatred’ legislation to enable justice to be restored. These four women should all have been deported without right of readmission, for they are Somali Muslims who quite plainly hate our people. Hibo Maxamed requires dialysis three times a week. Does she deserve it? She should seek it in Somalia with the rest of her family. If the attackers had been white and the victim Somali, how do you think the judge would have reacted to such an assault accompanied by cries such as "Black Muslim bitch!" "Black Muslim slag!" "Kill the Black Muslim slag!"? Do you think that four white attackers would have been let off with community service?

The ethno-masochistic sickness shown in today's judgement is also displayed by the BBC website's treatment of this story: it hasn't covered it. Instead, it is obsessing about the 'evils' of Emma West. A Google search for 'Rhea' and 'BBC' revealed a story about the discovery of a tenuous atmosphere surrounding the Saturnine moon of the same name, but nothing indicating that the BBC had discovered this vicious anti-white race attack. The EDL will be protesting against the judiciary's handling of the Rhea Page case and anti-white racism in Leicester on 4 February 2012. A promotional video for the demonstration drawing attention to other notorious cases of anti-white attacks can be viewed here.

Lampedusa’s Muslim Immigrant Nightmare Worsens

The Muslim demographic invasion of Europe is now well underway, with thousands more immigrants heading for the Italian island of Lampedusa and ruining the lives of the locals. Several successive waves have now brought circa 19,000 immigrants to Lampedusa in recent weeks, with 3,460 having arrived in the last three days alone. From Tunisia, Libya and even further afield they come (even some from sub-Saharan Africa).This must be stopped. We must make it known to our politicians that these people are completely unwelcome in Italy, France, the UK or any other European nation.

Almost all of the arrivals are Muslim male economic migrants. They must all be returned immediately, and not permitted to set foot upon the soil of any European state beyond the Lampedusan holding facility. Their intent is hostile: they come for our land, our jobs, our homes and our benefits. Somalis are amongst their number. If you live in Sheffield, how do you feel about the burgeoning Somali population being augmented still further? The prospect turns my stomach.

European nations have not been under such threat from hostile outsiders since the last gasp of Ottoman expansionism in 1683, although the current human wave more closely resembles the movement of peoples which helped to precipitate the collapse of the Western Roman Empire.

The Associated Press reports that exasperated Lampedusan fisherman have taken a number of the migrants’ boats, and symbolically blocked the entrance to their harbour, although sadly, this is not likely to stop the ingress of the Muslim hordes. Local townspeople nonetheless cheered this action. I feel sorry for them. It is the Lampedusans who are suffering, not the hostile colonists from the southern shores of the Mediterranean. Hostile arrivals should be treated with hostility, and not given a beneficent welcome. We really can take no more. The only way to stop more coming is not to take a single one of these people. Send them back. If their states won’t take them, then they’ll have to seek 'asylum' in Neptune’s realm.

The BBC of course takes a sickeningly biased line as usual, describing these colonists as ‘refugees’ and demanding that European nations accept them. What’s British about the BBC other than the money extracted from licence-fee payers? Nothing! It would be more honest to entitle it the Anti-British Broadcasting Corporation. If you would like a sneak preview of your new neighbours, take a look at the following video of the latest North African colonists to arrive in Lampedusa.

Jussi Halla-aho Interview

Tundra Tabloids recently posted this video in which the Finnish Councillor and eminent scholar of Slavonic languages Jussi Halla-aho provides an insight into his recent trial. This was essentially a show trial in which Halla-aho was charged for drawing public attention to the fact that it is officially sanctioned to make derogatory statements about Finns as an ethnic and national group, but not about Somalis. The verdict of the trial should be forthcoming within the next week or so. If this man is found guilty, it will be a sad indictment of the state of the Finnish judicial and political system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV7W7GEa1kE&feature=player_embedded