Police Sergeant Kimberley Munley is an exceptionally brave woman. A true heroine who put her life at risk to successfully bring a halt to Nidal Malik Hasan’s murderous rampage at Fort Hood. In doing so, she was shot twice by the gunman, but somehow managed to shoot him four times and bring him down. Many people owe her a great debt of gratitude, and I hope that she receives the honours that she so richly deserves.
References: "Investigators try to understand reasons behind Major Hasan’s rampage", The Times, 7 November 2009: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6907088.ece
"God is great: Last words of Fort Hood gunman before being shot by police heroine", David Gardner & Liz Hazelton, The Daily Mail, 7 November 2009: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1225627/Fort-Hood-shootings-Army-major-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-kills-12-injures-31-shootout-troops-army-base.html
Saturday, 7 November 2009
Friday, 6 November 2009
Nidal Malik Hasan urged US Muslims to “rise up”
The truth is out. Colleagues have revealed that the US Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan reacted gleefully to news of deaths of soldiers killed by suicide bombers and stated that his fellow US Muslims should “rise up” and attack the US for its foreign policy. In a Fox News interview Colonel Lee (one of Hasan’s colleagues) stated that Hasan had said "maybe people should strap bombs on themselves and go to Time Square."
Why was a man with such views permitted to remain in the US Army? We all know the answer: multiculturalism. Only a dyed-in-the-wool multiculturalist would not understand why Hasan – “a devout Muslim” according to a local imam – held such a deep animus towards his fellow non-Muslim American citizens. Faizul Khan, an imam who knew Hasan whilst he was resident in Washington, said of his conversations with Hasan “Mostly we were discussing religious matters, nothing too controversial, nothing like an extremist.” That’s right. Nothing like an extremist in a Quranic context of course.
Any Muslim who actively subscribes to and follows the tenets of their faith, believes that affiliation to the ummah – the global community of Muslims – trumps any affiliation to nation. To permit such a man to serve in the military, particularly at a time when the US is fighting a war against a number of Muslim majority states, highlights the folly of multiculturalism. Likewise, here in the UK, the armed forces and the police are encouraged to recruit more Muslims. Naturally, thankfully not all of them will be like Nidal Malik Hasan, but are we truly being wise when we encourage their recruitment to our military and security services? Are we not undermining their cohesion and effectiveness, as well as posing a risk to the physical safety of non-Muslim members of the armed forces?
For commentary on the Hasan case, please visit:
“Muslim army major kills 12 and injures 31 in shootout with troops at U.S. military base”, David Gardner, Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1225627/Fort-Hood-shootings-Army-major-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-kills-12-injures-31-shootout-troops-army-base.html
“Fort Hood shooting: Nidal Malik Hasan 'said Muslims should rise up'”, Philip Sherwell, Daily Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6511591/Fort-Hood-shooting-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-said-Muslims-should-rise-up.html
“Profile: Major Nidal Malik Hasan”, BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8345944.stm
“Deadly shootings at US army base”, BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8345713.stm
Why was a man with such views permitted to remain in the US Army? We all know the answer: multiculturalism. Only a dyed-in-the-wool multiculturalist would not understand why Hasan – “a devout Muslim” according to a local imam – held such a deep animus towards his fellow non-Muslim American citizens. Faizul Khan, an imam who knew Hasan whilst he was resident in Washington, said of his conversations with Hasan “Mostly we were discussing religious matters, nothing too controversial, nothing like an extremist.” That’s right. Nothing like an extremist in a Quranic context of course.
Any Muslim who actively subscribes to and follows the tenets of their faith, believes that affiliation to the ummah – the global community of Muslims – trumps any affiliation to nation. To permit such a man to serve in the military, particularly at a time when the US is fighting a war against a number of Muslim majority states, highlights the folly of multiculturalism. Likewise, here in the UK, the armed forces and the police are encouraged to recruit more Muslims. Naturally, thankfully not all of them will be like Nidal Malik Hasan, but are we truly being wise when we encourage their recruitment to our military and security services? Are we not undermining their cohesion and effectiveness, as well as posing a risk to the physical safety of non-Muslim members of the armed forces?
For commentary on the Hasan case, please visit:
“Muslim army major kills 12 and injures 31 in shootout with troops at U.S. military base”, David Gardner, Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1225627/Fort-Hood-shootings-Army-major-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-kills-12-injures-31-shootout-troops-army-base.html
“Fort Hood shooting: Nidal Malik Hasan 'said Muslims should rise up'”, Philip Sherwell, Daily Telegraph,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/6511591/Fort-Hood-shooting-Nidal-Malik-Hasan-said-Muslims-should-rise-up.html
“Profile: Major Nidal Malik Hasan”, BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8345944.stm
“Deadly shootings at US army base”, BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8345713.stm
Fort Hood Shootings: Major Nidal Malik Hasan
What a surprise. It transpires that the main perpetrator of today's atrocity at Fort Hood - Major Nidal Malik Hasan - turns out to have been a Muslim convert. Now, I wonder why a man such as Major Malik who converted to such a 'peace-loving' religion as Islam should have gone on to murder so many of his comrades? Any ideas? For further details see http://www.businessinsider.com/us-army-major-malik-nidal-hasan-identified-as-primary-shooter-at-fort-hood-2009-11
It would seem that he may have been 'inspired' by Tuesday's shooting spree by an Afghan policeman in which five British soldiers were murdered and a number of others injured. Will these two incidents prove to be the precursors to a wave of such attacks?
It would seem that he may have been 'inspired' by Tuesday's shooting spree by an Afghan policeman in which five British soldiers were murdered and a number of others injured. Will these two incidents prove to be the precursors to a wave of such attacks?
Thursday, 5 November 2009
The Lisbon Treaty: David Cameron and the Death of British Democracy
So, David Cameron will not hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. No surprise there. Did anyone really expect him to offer this to us? Come now, surely you weren’t fool enough to fall for Dave’s “finger of fudge”?
Admittedly, it would not technically make ‘sense’ to hold a referendum on a treaty that has already come into effect and reduced us to a de facto province of the EU, but there would be nothing preventing Cameron from offering us a referendum on continued EU membership following a Tory victory next year. This of course, is not strictly true, for there is something very powerful preventing him from offering us this option: his belief that our absorption into the EU fledgling superstate is a desirable end in itself. What does this betoken for the Conservative Party?
We are entering very interesting and uncharted territory in domestic politics, for the two main political parties have now adopted policies that have effectively alienated their traditional core supporters. Many Tories are naturally Eurosceptic, and Cameron’s willing acquiescence in the snuffing out of our national statehood will not endear him to them. This comes on top of his unwillingness to set a cap upon immigration; ethnic-minority favouritism, all-women shortlists and an embrace of political correctness and multiculturalism which has underpinned these shifts. The focus of contemporary Conservative economic policy, like that of the Labour and the Liberal Democratic parties, is upon unfettered globalism, with no regard for its corrosive impact upon our traditional social fabric and culture.
What therefore, can we say is truly conservative about the Conservative Party? Very little, I would suggest, for the leading lights within the parliamentary party seek to preserve little more than their own personal interests, and those of the rootless transnational capitalist elite which advocates the EU project and globalism more generally. Other than these interests, their policies favour only a tiny minority of the very wealthy within our country. It may pose as a libertarian party (which it is, compared to the Labour Party) and Cameron may employ some of the language of one-nation conservatism and state that multiculturalism is bankrupt, but all of these are but baseless soundbites designed to appeal to traditional Tories. The reality of the contemporary Conservative Party is that it is forwarding an agenda that is diametrically opposed to the objectives and interests of many of its core supporters.
The polls published on the UK Polling Report Blog (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/) show that the Conservatives have been enjoying a significant lead in the polls since Brown wavered over holding a snap General Election in the autumn of 2007, but dig a little deeper and this lead is more fragile than the headline figures would suggest. The Conservative lead is based more upon voters’ dislike of the Labour Party, rather than any positive regard for the Tories or their leadership. Now that Cameron has alienated the Eurosceptic voting public, what impact will this have upon voting patterns at next year’s General Election? Will significant numbers of Conservative voters desert Cameron for UKIP or the BNP? Could this deny the Conservatives the victory that seemed, until recently, they were almost certain to win? It is difficult to say, for the Labour Party seems to be on the same trajectory as Lloyd George’s Liberal Party: ever downwards.
Labour’s demise rests upon its loss of an animating purpose that chimes with the mood and interests of the native British people. The Labour Party has viciously turned upon the working class and the indigenous population of the British Isles (especially the English). It has vigorously pursued the privatisation agenda, and woven itself into the oligarchical nexus of globalist capitalism. It has nothing positive to offer the indigenous working and middle classes of the United Kingdom. It has pursued policies that have attacked the cultural, ethnic and economic fabric of our country. It is bankrupt, both literally and ideologically. Consequently, chunks of its traditional support have sheared off.
Many Labour supporters amongst the professional middle classes have been wooed by the Cameroons, the Liberal Democrats or the Greens, whilst significant numbers of the dejected English working class have turned to the BNP: “the Labour Party your grandparents used to vote for.” Very large numbers of traditional Labour voters have simply stayed at home and given up on voting. I see nothing in the direction of Labour policy that will cause people (other than of course its imported pool of voters from Pakistan, Bangladesh and elsewhere) to actively support it at the polls in 2010. Those who have traditionally voted Labour but have in recent years given up on voting would be, in my opinion, open to voting for the BNP if only they knew what its policies were.
So, our two main political parties, used to taking turns in governing our country, find themselves in the peculiar position of having alienated their respective core constituencies. Both back the anti-democratic EU oligarchical project, so is it any wonder that people are switched off by mainstream politics, and think that their votes count for nothing? Which of the two main parties will lose most support: Labour or Conservative? One thing is for certain: the party that forms the government of the United Kingdom in 2010 will lack an effective democratic mandate, for it will not in any meaningful respect represent the will of the indigenous people of this country.
In the longer term, both Conservative and Labour parties are finished unless one or the other embraces nationalism. If they do not, another party will step out of the shadows to take its rightful place in Westminster.
Admittedly, it would not technically make ‘sense’ to hold a referendum on a treaty that has already come into effect and reduced us to a de facto province of the EU, but there would be nothing preventing Cameron from offering us a referendum on continued EU membership following a Tory victory next year. This of course, is not strictly true, for there is something very powerful preventing him from offering us this option: his belief that our absorption into the EU fledgling superstate is a desirable end in itself. What does this betoken for the Conservative Party?
We are entering very interesting and uncharted territory in domestic politics, for the two main political parties have now adopted policies that have effectively alienated their traditional core supporters. Many Tories are naturally Eurosceptic, and Cameron’s willing acquiescence in the snuffing out of our national statehood will not endear him to them. This comes on top of his unwillingness to set a cap upon immigration; ethnic-minority favouritism, all-women shortlists and an embrace of political correctness and multiculturalism which has underpinned these shifts. The focus of contemporary Conservative economic policy, like that of the Labour and the Liberal Democratic parties, is upon unfettered globalism, with no regard for its corrosive impact upon our traditional social fabric and culture.
What therefore, can we say is truly conservative about the Conservative Party? Very little, I would suggest, for the leading lights within the parliamentary party seek to preserve little more than their own personal interests, and those of the rootless transnational capitalist elite which advocates the EU project and globalism more generally. Other than these interests, their policies favour only a tiny minority of the very wealthy within our country. It may pose as a libertarian party (which it is, compared to the Labour Party) and Cameron may employ some of the language of one-nation conservatism and state that multiculturalism is bankrupt, but all of these are but baseless soundbites designed to appeal to traditional Tories. The reality of the contemporary Conservative Party is that it is forwarding an agenda that is diametrically opposed to the objectives and interests of many of its core supporters.
The polls published on the UK Polling Report Blog (http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/) show that the Conservatives have been enjoying a significant lead in the polls since Brown wavered over holding a snap General Election in the autumn of 2007, but dig a little deeper and this lead is more fragile than the headline figures would suggest. The Conservative lead is based more upon voters’ dislike of the Labour Party, rather than any positive regard for the Tories or their leadership. Now that Cameron has alienated the Eurosceptic voting public, what impact will this have upon voting patterns at next year’s General Election? Will significant numbers of Conservative voters desert Cameron for UKIP or the BNP? Could this deny the Conservatives the victory that seemed, until recently, they were almost certain to win? It is difficult to say, for the Labour Party seems to be on the same trajectory as Lloyd George’s Liberal Party: ever downwards.
Labour’s demise rests upon its loss of an animating purpose that chimes with the mood and interests of the native British people. The Labour Party has viciously turned upon the working class and the indigenous population of the British Isles (especially the English). It has vigorously pursued the privatisation agenda, and woven itself into the oligarchical nexus of globalist capitalism. It has nothing positive to offer the indigenous working and middle classes of the United Kingdom. It has pursued policies that have attacked the cultural, ethnic and economic fabric of our country. It is bankrupt, both literally and ideologically. Consequently, chunks of its traditional support have sheared off.
Many Labour supporters amongst the professional middle classes have been wooed by the Cameroons, the Liberal Democrats or the Greens, whilst significant numbers of the dejected English working class have turned to the BNP: “the Labour Party your grandparents used to vote for.” Very large numbers of traditional Labour voters have simply stayed at home and given up on voting. I see nothing in the direction of Labour policy that will cause people (other than of course its imported pool of voters from Pakistan, Bangladesh and elsewhere) to actively support it at the polls in 2010. Those who have traditionally voted Labour but have in recent years given up on voting would be, in my opinion, open to voting for the BNP if only they knew what its policies were.
So, our two main political parties, used to taking turns in governing our country, find themselves in the peculiar position of having alienated their respective core constituencies. Both back the anti-democratic EU oligarchical project, so is it any wonder that people are switched off by mainstream politics, and think that their votes count for nothing? Which of the two main parties will lose most support: Labour or Conservative? One thing is for certain: the party that forms the government of the United Kingdom in 2010 will lack an effective democratic mandate, for it will not in any meaningful respect represent the will of the indigenous people of this country.
In the longer term, both Conservative and Labour parties are finished unless one or the other embraces nationalism. If they do not, another party will step out of the shadows to take its rightful place in Westminster.
Sunday, 25 October 2009
ICM Poll on Immigration: News of the World puts the Cart before the Horse
In today’s News of the World, columnist Ian Kirby claims that the most recent ICM poll for the paper has issued “a shock wake-up call to politicians – with a majority declaring they share the BNP view that Britain has too many immigrants.” Does it really come as “a shock” to him that a majority of the British population know that there are “too many immigrants”? Where has this man been for the past twenty years?
Although only 54% of those sampled concurred with the reality of the UK possessing too many immigrants, we must of course remember that there are now so many immigrants or people of recent immigrant decent resident in the country, that this figure will almost certainly have underreported the proportion of indigenous Britons unhappy with the ever-growing size of the immigrant population.
Where Kirby inverts the natural order of things is in his interpretation of the poll’s findings on the attitude of the mainstream political parties towards the indigenous working class:
“But it is clear the BNP message IS getting through, with 44 per cent saying the white working class has been abandoned by the mainstream parties.”
What he should have written is “But it is clear that the 44 per cent who say the white working class has been abandoned by the mainstream parties recognise that the BNP is responding to this situation.”
Strangely, Kirby makes no mention of Andrew Neather’s revelations in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph, where he reveals that Labour under Blair deliberately planned to “open up the UK to mass immigration” with the express goal of undermining our national identity and cohesion. The report recommending this policy was written in 2000, of which the Telegraph reports him saying:
"Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural. I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."
Why is Kirby mute about this scandalous revelation, yet shocked by ICM’s findings that 54% of those polled thought that our immigrant population is too high? After all, Labour continues in making the case for unrestricted and unlimited mass immigration, as do the Liberal Democrats. Nor do the Tories have any real plans to concretely address this issue. They may well be willing to raise the question of immigration, but they will not provide any actual policies to deal with it. Only the BNP has policies that sensibly address the question of mass immigration in a moderate and humane manner.
References: “Voters issue a wake-up call to politicians”, Ian Kirby, The News of the World 24 October 2009, http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/566088/Shock-poll-shows-majority-share-BNP-views-on-immigrants.html
“Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser”, Tom Whitehead, The Daily Telegraph, 23 October 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html
Although only 54% of those sampled concurred with the reality of the UK possessing too many immigrants, we must of course remember that there are now so many immigrants or people of recent immigrant decent resident in the country, that this figure will almost certainly have underreported the proportion of indigenous Britons unhappy with the ever-growing size of the immigrant population.
Where Kirby inverts the natural order of things is in his interpretation of the poll’s findings on the attitude of the mainstream political parties towards the indigenous working class:
“But it is clear the BNP message IS getting through, with 44 per cent saying the white working class has been abandoned by the mainstream parties.”
What he should have written is “But it is clear that the 44 per cent who say the white working class has been abandoned by the mainstream parties recognise that the BNP is responding to this situation.”
Strangely, Kirby makes no mention of Andrew Neather’s revelations in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph, where he reveals that Labour under Blair deliberately planned to “open up the UK to mass immigration” with the express goal of undermining our national identity and cohesion. The report recommending this policy was written in 2000, of which the Telegraph reports him saying:
"Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural. I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."
Why is Kirby mute about this scandalous revelation, yet shocked by ICM’s findings that 54% of those polled thought that our immigrant population is too high? After all, Labour continues in making the case for unrestricted and unlimited mass immigration, as do the Liberal Democrats. Nor do the Tories have any real plans to concretely address this issue. They may well be willing to raise the question of immigration, but they will not provide any actual policies to deal with it. Only the BNP has policies that sensibly address the question of mass immigration in a moderate and humane manner.
References: “Voters issue a wake-up call to politicians”, Ian Kirby, The News of the World 24 October 2009, http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/566088/Shock-poll-shows-majority-share-BNP-views-on-immigrants.html
“Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser”, Tom Whitehead, The Daily Telegraph, 23 October 2009, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html
Wednesday, 21 October 2009
BBC blithely contemplates a UK Population of 71.6 million
Following today’s release of ONS projections suggesting that current trends will lead to a total UK population of 71.6 million by 2033, the BBC has run one of its regular television news items emphasising how we “need” mass immigration to support an ageing population. The News at Ten predictably showed footage of East European immigrants, which it almost invariably does when any potentially “sensitive” facts emerge about this issue, rather than the more representative sample of Pakistanis, Somalis, Afghans and sundry other undesirables from Africa and the Middle East who somehow manage to make it to our shores.
Cue an appearance by Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, a man who had he been living in Troy during the Trojan War would not have inconvenienced the besieging Greeks by keeping the gates shut, but would instead have invited them in to sack the city. He told the usual lies about the new governmental policy of a “points-based immigration system”, which is, as we all know, completely toothless, for not only does it have no impact upon the right to asylum granted to charlatans from way beyond our shores (if Geert Wilders ever needed asylum he would be genuine as he’s from a neighbouring country, unlike all of those who claim asylum today), but it also does nothing to constrain the flow of illegal immigrants that is facilitated by our lax border regime. Furthermore, Woolas himself and most of our political and media class (with a few notable exceptions such as Frank Field) wish to increase our population, for they can see no further than a parliament or two into the future and guaranteeing their own incomes and positions. They therefore adopt the pyramid scheme logic of importing workers to increase the size of the economy so that the elderly can be supported.
Immigrants and their descendants in turn grow old and need care. Are we then supposed to import ever more people to support them in turn? How, when we have a chronic housing shortage, our power generation, transport and other infrastructures are overloaded, are we supposed to accommodate such an influx? We are supposed to be pursuing a reduction of 80% in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, whilst simultaneously greatly increasing the population. How? Do these powerful fools who sit in Whitehall and the editorial suites of the mass media not understand, or, more likely, do they simply not care, as it won’t be their problem?
Two years ago food inflation displayed a notable spike, as a number of poor harvests in different parts of the world conjoined with a burgeoning population to cause a bottleneck in supply. The world is overpopulated, and the UK (England in particular) more so than most countries. Despite using current energy-intensive agricultural technologies and systems, we are still unable to feed ourselves. Our economic productivity is declining, and our power on many levels is declining compared to that of many other more populous nations. What then will we use to purchase food in the future, as our relative decline continues and the populations of other states continue to spiral? From where will we obtain sufficient foodstuffs?
We urgently need to adopt a policy of zero net immigration, and to ensure that the immigration that does take place, is genuinely beneficial to the UK, and thus consists of individuals and families from peoples who share our traditional indigenous British values. Cultural compatibility must be paramount, which means that Muslim immigration should be choked off completely, and for good. I would sooner work until I dropped, than have my country concreted over and occupied by hostile foreign colonists.
For the BBC's online take on this story visit http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8318010.stm
Cue an appearance by Immigration Minister Phil Woolas, a man who had he been living in Troy during the Trojan War would not have inconvenienced the besieging Greeks by keeping the gates shut, but would instead have invited them in to sack the city. He told the usual lies about the new governmental policy of a “points-based immigration system”, which is, as we all know, completely toothless, for not only does it have no impact upon the right to asylum granted to charlatans from way beyond our shores (if Geert Wilders ever needed asylum he would be genuine as he’s from a neighbouring country, unlike all of those who claim asylum today), but it also does nothing to constrain the flow of illegal immigrants that is facilitated by our lax border regime. Furthermore, Woolas himself and most of our political and media class (with a few notable exceptions such as Frank Field) wish to increase our population, for they can see no further than a parliament or two into the future and guaranteeing their own incomes and positions. They therefore adopt the pyramid scheme logic of importing workers to increase the size of the economy so that the elderly can be supported.
Immigrants and their descendants in turn grow old and need care. Are we then supposed to import ever more people to support them in turn? How, when we have a chronic housing shortage, our power generation, transport and other infrastructures are overloaded, are we supposed to accommodate such an influx? We are supposed to be pursuing a reduction of 80% in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, whilst simultaneously greatly increasing the population. How? Do these powerful fools who sit in Whitehall and the editorial suites of the mass media not understand, or, more likely, do they simply not care, as it won’t be their problem?
Two years ago food inflation displayed a notable spike, as a number of poor harvests in different parts of the world conjoined with a burgeoning population to cause a bottleneck in supply. The world is overpopulated, and the UK (England in particular) more so than most countries. Despite using current energy-intensive agricultural technologies and systems, we are still unable to feed ourselves. Our economic productivity is declining, and our power on many levels is declining compared to that of many other more populous nations. What then will we use to purchase food in the future, as our relative decline continues and the populations of other states continue to spiral? From where will we obtain sufficient foodstuffs?
We urgently need to adopt a policy of zero net immigration, and to ensure that the immigration that does take place, is genuinely beneficial to the UK, and thus consists of individuals and families from peoples who share our traditional indigenous British values. Cultural compatibility must be paramount, which means that Muslim immigration should be choked off completely, and for good. I would sooner work until I dropped, than have my country concreted over and occupied by hostile foreign colonists.
For the BBC's online take on this story visit http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8318010.stm
Thursday, 15 October 2009
Islam4UK March: Muslims Prove Yourselves!
So, the kufr-hating Anjem-Choudery and his acolytes wish to stage a march in London, a “Halloween spectacular” if you will, demanding that all we non-Muslims submit to Shariah within our shores? Not so much “trick or treat” as “submit or die”. Will he turn up with a tiny band of vocal fanatics, or backed by considerable numbers of Muslim youths with a “grievance”? Whether they are few in number or many, one would think that this offers a spectacularly golden opportunity for those who claim to be ‘moderate’ Muslims to turn up and counter-demonstrate.
I hereby issue a challenge to you self-declared ‘moderate’ Muslims: if you truly are ‘moderate’, I expect to see you turn up in your thousands with “not in our name” banners and clearly stating your opposition to Shariah as a barbarous dark-age law code. I want to see you denounce stoning, decapitation, amputation and crucifixion, and to speak out for the rights of apostates, atheists and homosexuals, and pledge your allegiance to secular English Common Law. I want to see and hear you state that your aim is to trash Shariah because it is a backward social evil that has no place in civilised 21st-century society.
Can’t you see what an incredible opportunity this presents to you?! If you turn out in your thousands condemning Choudery and Shariah, we will know that you are truly moderate, and not fifth columnists practising taqiyya and kitman. Prove to me that your intentions are good, and that like Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists you are peaceable people with love in your hearts for your fellow citizens of other faiths and none.
If, as seems likely, you do nothing but mouth a few platitudes about Islam being “a religion of peace” (sic) and condemn Choudery and his ilk as being “unrepresentative of Muslims in the UK”, I and everyone else will know you for what you are: liars. Liars biding your time until your demographic weight is sufficient enough to challenge us for political dominance in our own homeland. Choudery has presented you with a rare opportunity to prove that you harbour no ill will for we native Britons and those who abide amongst us peaceably. Will you rise to that challenge, or will you cleave to the message of hatred that the Qur’an demands you follow?
I hereby issue a challenge to you self-declared ‘moderate’ Muslims: if you truly are ‘moderate’, I expect to see you turn up in your thousands with “not in our name” banners and clearly stating your opposition to Shariah as a barbarous dark-age law code. I want to see you denounce stoning, decapitation, amputation and crucifixion, and to speak out for the rights of apostates, atheists and homosexuals, and pledge your allegiance to secular English Common Law. I want to see and hear you state that your aim is to trash Shariah because it is a backward social evil that has no place in civilised 21st-century society.
Can’t you see what an incredible opportunity this presents to you?! If you turn out in your thousands condemning Choudery and Shariah, we will know that you are truly moderate, and not fifth columnists practising taqiyya and kitman. Prove to me that your intentions are good, and that like Jews, Sikhs, Hindus and Buddhists you are peaceable people with love in your hearts for your fellow citizens of other faiths and none.
If, as seems likely, you do nothing but mouth a few platitudes about Islam being “a religion of peace” (sic) and condemn Choudery and his ilk as being “unrepresentative of Muslims in the UK”, I and everyone else will know you for what you are: liars. Liars biding your time until your demographic weight is sufficient enough to challenge us for political dominance in our own homeland. Choudery has presented you with a rare opportunity to prove that you harbour no ill will for we native Britons and those who abide amongst us peaceably. Will you rise to that challenge, or will you cleave to the message of hatred that the Qur’an demands you follow?
Friday, 11 September 2009
Harrow Mosque: Violent Muslim Mob Whipped into Frenzy of Hate by UAF Thugs
According to media reports, more than 1,000 hyped-up Muslims and soi-disant anti-fascist protestors descended upon Harrow Central Mosque today to attack a Stop the Islamisation of Europe protest. The SIOE protest was being held to object to the Mosque’s planned extension and construction of 40-metre high minarets. Other groups such as the English Defence League planned to gather outside the Mosque at 5pm today, and had notified the police of their intentions in advance. However, at 6.33pm, the following three paragraphs were posted on the SIOE homepage (spelling mistakes and grammatical errors preserved from the original):
“In this moment Stephen Gash is being told by a senior sergent of the police to call off the demonstration in Harrow. He has been arrested to prevent a breach of the peace…
More than 1000 mainly muslims are gathered infront of the SIOE demonstration and they stop people to attend the demonstration.
If you are on your way to the demo, don’t go, it’s being called off right now. The police can’t handle the muslim counter demonstraters. The senior sergent said that he doesn’t want any of his policemen killed.” [1]
As you can see, the police were understandably concerned that a major breach of public order was underway, but the fact of the matter is that violence was neither planned nor initiated by the protesters. Unite Against Fascism (UAF) had teamed up with thugs within the Islamic population in an attempt to crush dissent and stigmatise the protestors as “far-right” and “fascist”, which are the standard labels that it employs to try and dehumanise anyone who disagrees with their Islamo-Marxist agenda. Naturally, the mainstream media organs have colluded in this misrepresentation, so one has to read current reports of this situation with caution. It is probable that as I write, unrest continues on the streets of Harrow.
Wherever the UAF turns up, it initiates and incites violence, as today’s events sadly attest. UAF still subscribes to the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of violent class struggle, and its membership labour under the misapprehension that by allying with hyper-reactionary Islamist elements and undermining our society through mass immigration, they can create a violent revolutionary situation via which they will usher in their Socialist/Communist Millennium. In reality, if pushed far enough this will lead to a miserable civil war which will benefit nobody, other than the violent sadists who cloak their hatred in the language of fraternal love, whether it be that of the Ummah, or of the Proletariat. Paradoxically, it is people such as these, possessed of a rigid Manichaean cast of mind who cannot cope with the complexities of reality and history, who 70 years ago would have been attracted to Nazism had they been born in Germany. They are votaries of violence masquerading as progressives.
The BBC has reported that 8 people have been arrested, none of them being anti-Islamist demonstrators: “Seven people were arrested for possession of offensive weapons including a hammer, a chisel and bottles of bleach. . . . Another person was arrested to prevent a breach of the peace.” [2] As well as attempting to attack the peaceful demonstrators, the Islamist/UAF mob vented its irrational hatred on the police, with the Guardian and BBC reporting that officers were hit by bricks and bottles. As in Luton where another Islamist mob recently attacked the police, a number of fireworks were also thrown.
Members of the mob had been drawn from far afield. One 17-year old Islamist youth by the name of Mahmood Abdullah who had travelled from Morden told the Independent: "We don't want to start a fight but we're willing to defend our brothers and sisters if we have to . . . We want to show them that for every protestor they bring, we'll bring ten." [3]
Abdullah’s comment is telling. It shows us that we are no longer able to criticize Islam in the UK without being threatened with violence. As Enoch Powell predicted, we have in effect become strangers in our own land. It is time to take our country back, and time for our European neighbours in Holland, France, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Sweden and elsewhere to take theirs back too. We need to tackle the Islamist menace that grows more aggressive and assertive by the year. This can only be done peacefully and via political means. And believe me, it can be done. All that it takes is an act of will. Millions of acts of individual will which together will provide the assertiveness necessary to reassert our sovereignty and sense of collective national identities.
Of course, absolutely every political party and individual in Europe that questions the madness of the demographic and cultural Islamic colonisation of our countries is branded as “far-right.” We have reached a peculiar tipping point in our history, where the indigenous peoples of Europe can choose either to commit collective suicide in the face of an implacable alien threat that calls itself the “religion of peace” (sic), or to reassert themselves through implementing moderate nationalist policies. The EU superstate and its multiculturalist elite stands in our way, and wishes to entrench Islamisation through expanding its borders to take in Turkey, and then to later admit states from the southern shores of the Mediterranean. This must never be allowed.
We now stand in a position of being pilloried as “far-right”, “fascist” and “racist” simply for opposing the deliberate dismantling and destruction not only of our indigenous cultures, but of our liberties too. There is no liberty under Islam, only slavery. If you think that standing up for traditional English liberties and free speech is “far-right”, then I stand guilty as charged. If you are a dogmatic Leftist, let me state clearly and emphatically that the Holocaust did take place and that it was a great evil, no more nor less so than the other terrible acts of mass murder of untold millions committed by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, all men of “the Left.” “Left” and “Right” have lost their meaning. They do not fit our contemporary political, social, economic or ecological realities. They belong to another era, as does the notion that the UAF, Searchlight, Antifa and the trade union movement are fighting a recrudescence of fascism in the UK. This is pure propagandist nonsense. If we truly wish to avoid bloodshed and the mistakes of history, let us not give in to the bloody ideologies of Islamic expansionism and Marxist class struggle.
Once again, I urge supporters of the EDL and kindred groups such as SIOE to back the formation of a moderate and assertive nationalist politics in the UK that rejects completely the claims of Islam within our shores. As in my initial posting of 5 September, I ask you to support the British National Party at the ballot box, and to join it if your livelihood is not currently threatened by doing so. There is no other political party in the UK that is guaranteed to take an assertive stand against Islamisation.
Protests such as those held today serve only to hinder our cause. The Labour Party has distorted your actions and will continue to do so, and is likely to use your protests as a pretext to push through draconian legislation further eroding our right not only to protest, but also to intellectual dissent. Witness for example this quote from John Denham in today’s Guardian: "I think that the English Defence League and other organisations are not actually large numbers of people. . . They clearly, though, have among them people who know what exactly they're doing. If you look at the types of demonstrations they've organised … it looks pretty clear that it's a tactic designed to provoke and to get a response and hopefully create violence." [4]
UAF’s paymasters are in power. Remember that, and act in a circumspect manner.
Sources:
[1] SIOE website. Can be accessed from my Sites of Interest section.
[2] “Eight arrested in mosque protest”, BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8251598.stm See also “Rightwing and anti-fascist protesters riot in London”, The Guardian, 11 September 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/11/rightwing-anti-fascist-protesters-riot
[3] “Right-wing protestors target Harrow mosque”, The Independent, 11 September 2009
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rightwing-protestors-target-harrow-mosque-1785797.html
[4] “Minister warns of 1930s-style fascists on Britain’s streets”, The Guardian, 11 September 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/11/minister-warns-facists-streets
“In this moment Stephen Gash is being told by a senior sergent of the police to call off the demonstration in Harrow. He has been arrested to prevent a breach of the peace…
More than 1000 mainly muslims are gathered infront of the SIOE demonstration and they stop people to attend the demonstration.
If you are on your way to the demo, don’t go, it’s being called off right now. The police can’t handle the muslim counter demonstraters. The senior sergent said that he doesn’t want any of his policemen killed.” [1]
As you can see, the police were understandably concerned that a major breach of public order was underway, but the fact of the matter is that violence was neither planned nor initiated by the protesters. Unite Against Fascism (UAF) had teamed up with thugs within the Islamic population in an attempt to crush dissent and stigmatise the protestors as “far-right” and “fascist”, which are the standard labels that it employs to try and dehumanise anyone who disagrees with their Islamo-Marxist agenda. Naturally, the mainstream media organs have colluded in this misrepresentation, so one has to read current reports of this situation with caution. It is probable that as I write, unrest continues on the streets of Harrow.
Wherever the UAF turns up, it initiates and incites violence, as today’s events sadly attest. UAF still subscribes to the Marxist-Leninist doctrine of violent class struggle, and its membership labour under the misapprehension that by allying with hyper-reactionary Islamist elements and undermining our society through mass immigration, they can create a violent revolutionary situation via which they will usher in their Socialist/Communist Millennium. In reality, if pushed far enough this will lead to a miserable civil war which will benefit nobody, other than the violent sadists who cloak their hatred in the language of fraternal love, whether it be that of the Ummah, or of the Proletariat. Paradoxically, it is people such as these, possessed of a rigid Manichaean cast of mind who cannot cope with the complexities of reality and history, who 70 years ago would have been attracted to Nazism had they been born in Germany. They are votaries of violence masquerading as progressives.
The BBC has reported that 8 people have been arrested, none of them being anti-Islamist demonstrators: “Seven people were arrested for possession of offensive weapons including a hammer, a chisel and bottles of bleach. . . . Another person was arrested to prevent a breach of the peace.” [2] As well as attempting to attack the peaceful demonstrators, the Islamist/UAF mob vented its irrational hatred on the police, with the Guardian and BBC reporting that officers were hit by bricks and bottles. As in Luton where another Islamist mob recently attacked the police, a number of fireworks were also thrown.
Members of the mob had been drawn from far afield. One 17-year old Islamist youth by the name of Mahmood Abdullah who had travelled from Morden told the Independent: "We don't want to start a fight but we're willing to defend our brothers and sisters if we have to . . . We want to show them that for every protestor they bring, we'll bring ten." [3]
Abdullah’s comment is telling. It shows us that we are no longer able to criticize Islam in the UK without being threatened with violence. As Enoch Powell predicted, we have in effect become strangers in our own land. It is time to take our country back, and time for our European neighbours in Holland, France, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Sweden and elsewhere to take theirs back too. We need to tackle the Islamist menace that grows more aggressive and assertive by the year. This can only be done peacefully and via political means. And believe me, it can be done. All that it takes is an act of will. Millions of acts of individual will which together will provide the assertiveness necessary to reassert our sovereignty and sense of collective national identities.
Of course, absolutely every political party and individual in Europe that questions the madness of the demographic and cultural Islamic colonisation of our countries is branded as “far-right.” We have reached a peculiar tipping point in our history, where the indigenous peoples of Europe can choose either to commit collective suicide in the face of an implacable alien threat that calls itself the “religion of peace” (sic), or to reassert themselves through implementing moderate nationalist policies. The EU superstate and its multiculturalist elite stands in our way, and wishes to entrench Islamisation through expanding its borders to take in Turkey, and then to later admit states from the southern shores of the Mediterranean. This must never be allowed.
We now stand in a position of being pilloried as “far-right”, “fascist” and “racist” simply for opposing the deliberate dismantling and destruction not only of our indigenous cultures, but of our liberties too. There is no liberty under Islam, only slavery. If you think that standing up for traditional English liberties and free speech is “far-right”, then I stand guilty as charged. If you are a dogmatic Leftist, let me state clearly and emphatically that the Holocaust did take place and that it was a great evil, no more nor less so than the other terrible acts of mass murder of untold millions committed by Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, all men of “the Left.” “Left” and “Right” have lost their meaning. They do not fit our contemporary political, social, economic or ecological realities. They belong to another era, as does the notion that the UAF, Searchlight, Antifa and the trade union movement are fighting a recrudescence of fascism in the UK. This is pure propagandist nonsense. If we truly wish to avoid bloodshed and the mistakes of history, let us not give in to the bloody ideologies of Islamic expansionism and Marxist class struggle.
Once again, I urge supporters of the EDL and kindred groups such as SIOE to back the formation of a moderate and assertive nationalist politics in the UK that rejects completely the claims of Islam within our shores. As in my initial posting of 5 September, I ask you to support the British National Party at the ballot box, and to join it if your livelihood is not currently threatened by doing so. There is no other political party in the UK that is guaranteed to take an assertive stand against Islamisation.
Protests such as those held today serve only to hinder our cause. The Labour Party has distorted your actions and will continue to do so, and is likely to use your protests as a pretext to push through draconian legislation further eroding our right not only to protest, but also to intellectual dissent. Witness for example this quote from John Denham in today’s Guardian: "I think that the English Defence League and other organisations are not actually large numbers of people. . . They clearly, though, have among them people who know what exactly they're doing. If you look at the types of demonstrations they've organised … it looks pretty clear that it's a tactic designed to provoke and to get a response and hopefully create violence." [4]
UAF’s paymasters are in power. Remember that, and act in a circumspect manner.
Sources:
[1] SIOE website. Can be accessed from my Sites of Interest section.
[2] “Eight arrested in mosque protest”, BBC News, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8251598.stm See also “Rightwing and anti-fascist protesters riot in London”, The Guardian, 11 September 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/11/rightwing-anti-fascist-protesters-riot
[3] “Right-wing protestors target Harrow mosque”, The Independent, 11 September 2009
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rightwing-protestors-target-harrow-mosque-1785797.html
[4] “Minister warns of 1930s-style fascists on Britain’s streets”, The Guardian, 11 September 2009 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/11/minister-warns-facists-streets
Sunday, 6 September 2009
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
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV7W7GEa1kE&feature=player_embedded
Saturday, 5 September 2009
Doncaster English Democrat Mayor in Ignorant Taliban Outburst
When Peter Davies stood as mayoral candidate for the English Democrats in Doncaster earlier this year, he presumably did so with the professed intent of promoting traditional English values and democracy. It is therefore astonishing to read that he has this week made favourable remarks concerning the Taliban, a movement of extremist thugs who in their treatment of women make your average Stalinist or Nazi appear to be exemplars of beneficent humanitarianism.
Yes, some elements of society in Doncaster suffer from woeful problems exacerbated by familial breakdown, but to drag in the example of the Taliban to make some kind of specious assertion about Islamic family values is way off the mark. He is quoted by the Telegraph as stating "The one thing to be said about the Taliban is that they do have an ordered society of some sort and that they don't have hundreds of cases of children under threat of abuse from violent parents, as we have in Doncaster." [1]
Well, if one adopts Mr Davies’s topsy-turvy logic, there is some sense to what he says. However, looking at it objectively, he omits to mention the fact that the lives of all women are seriously constrained and blighted by living under the Taliban. I do not see anything to admire in the barbarous manner in which they are treated as mere chattles; second-class citizens who may be beaten at will by their menfolk and denied the basic rights of free association, gaining an education, a job, and dressing as they please. The Taliban advocate throwing acid into the faces of women who do not cover them in public, and demand the murder (formally classed as execution) of women who have sexual relations outside of marriage, just as prescribed by the sharia law code which Rowan Williams is happy to see creep into the United Kingdom.
Not only women are repressed under Taliban rule of course: atheists, homosexuals and apostates can be killed with a sense of righteous moral fervour, and the creative impulse is snuffed out in the arts and sciences alike. Granted, you might not happen upon quite so many single-parent problem households under the Taliban, but then again, the whole of society is under the heel of murderous psychotic barbarism. Whereas in Doncaster the violence may be restricted to psychotic families, the whole of society is rendered violent and psychotic under the Taliban.
Our armed forces have been waging a thankless struggle for years in Afghanistan, with many a life and limb lost, and many many more individuals traumatised by the stress of operations. It is an unwinnable war which has ostensibly been waged, at least in part, to secure decent treatment for Afghan women (despite the Karzai regime’s incorporation of repressive elements of sharia into the current penal code). Is this something that Mr Davies has forgotten? What his comments do show is that if other members of his political party share his views, they should neither be considered English nor democratic. With views like this it can be said with certainty that they cannot be considered to be a nationalist party in any meaningful sense of the term. The English love and respect their women Mr Davies, and do not (with a few criminal exceptions) view them as slaves to be beaten and abused.
References: [1] cited in ‘Britain “could learn from Taliban values’, says Doncaster Mayor’, Stephen Adams, Daily Telegraph 4 September 2009 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6132928/Britain-could-learn-from-Taliban-family-values-says-Doncasters-mayor.html
See also ‘New mayor tells town: “We could all learn something about family values from the Taliban”’, Luke Salkeld, The Daily Mail, 5 September 2009 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211233/Outspoken-mayor-claiming-learn-family-values-Taliban.html
Yes, some elements of society in Doncaster suffer from woeful problems exacerbated by familial breakdown, but to drag in the example of the Taliban to make some kind of specious assertion about Islamic family values is way off the mark. He is quoted by the Telegraph as stating "The one thing to be said about the Taliban is that they do have an ordered society of some sort and that they don't have hundreds of cases of children under threat of abuse from violent parents, as we have in Doncaster." [1]
Well, if one adopts Mr Davies’s topsy-turvy logic, there is some sense to what he says. However, looking at it objectively, he omits to mention the fact that the lives of all women are seriously constrained and blighted by living under the Taliban. I do not see anything to admire in the barbarous manner in which they are treated as mere chattles; second-class citizens who may be beaten at will by their menfolk and denied the basic rights of free association, gaining an education, a job, and dressing as they please. The Taliban advocate throwing acid into the faces of women who do not cover them in public, and demand the murder (formally classed as execution) of women who have sexual relations outside of marriage, just as prescribed by the sharia law code which Rowan Williams is happy to see creep into the United Kingdom.
Not only women are repressed under Taliban rule of course: atheists, homosexuals and apostates can be killed with a sense of righteous moral fervour, and the creative impulse is snuffed out in the arts and sciences alike. Granted, you might not happen upon quite so many single-parent problem households under the Taliban, but then again, the whole of society is under the heel of murderous psychotic barbarism. Whereas in Doncaster the violence may be restricted to psychotic families, the whole of society is rendered violent and psychotic under the Taliban.
Our armed forces have been waging a thankless struggle for years in Afghanistan, with many a life and limb lost, and many many more individuals traumatised by the stress of operations. It is an unwinnable war which has ostensibly been waged, at least in part, to secure decent treatment for Afghan women (despite the Karzai regime’s incorporation of repressive elements of sharia into the current penal code). Is this something that Mr Davies has forgotten? What his comments do show is that if other members of his political party share his views, they should neither be considered English nor democratic. With views like this it can be said with certainty that they cannot be considered to be a nationalist party in any meaningful sense of the term. The English love and respect their women Mr Davies, and do not (with a few criminal exceptions) view them as slaves to be beaten and abused.
References: [1] cited in ‘Britain “could learn from Taliban values’, says Doncaster Mayor’, Stephen Adams, Daily Telegraph 4 September 2009 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6132928/Britain-could-learn-from-Taliban-family-values-says-Doncasters-mayor.html
See also ‘New mayor tells town: “We could all learn something about family values from the Taliban”’, Luke Salkeld, The Daily Mail, 5 September 2009 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211233/Outspoken-mayor-claiming-learn-family-values-Taliban.html
Militant Islam, the English Defence League and the BNP
I am as against the Islamification of the United Kingdom and Europe as anyone, and thus understand the genuine frustrations that have given birth to the English Defence League. In a situation where our mainstream political parties are actively courting the Muslim bloc vote and aiding and abetting the process of Islamification, it is unsurprising that some people will turn to public protest as a means of expressing discontent. However, there is opposition and there is opposition. It is my opinion that there are better and more effective ways of tackling this problem than creating situations where protesters lay themselves open to accusations of inciting and perpetrating violence, no matter how ill founded these may be.
The few protests that the EDL have staged thus far have been relatively small scale and have generated a predictably violent response from hotheads within the Muslim population and their allies within Unite Against Fascism and the Socialist Workers’ Party. All three of these elements share a commitment to violence to achieve their respective goals of: entrenching Islamic territorialism within the UK; destroying free thought and subverting social order as a means of ushering in a mythical revolutionary millennium which will deliver designated victim groups from the chains of global capitalism. I shall leave discussion of the dynamics of this unholy alliance for a later occasion. Do not be goaded into responding with violence, for that is what they want.
The recent Muslim unrest in Luton’s Bury Park area in which police were attacked with fireworks attests to the fact that significant elements within our Islamic colonising population are so eager to unleash violence upon us (i.e. native Britons and our non-Muslim civic compatriots) that they will use any pretext to do so. Our response should be calm and measured. Your MP may well be an Islamic lickspittle, but write to him or her expressing your concern about the increasing concessions made to Islam in our country, underscoring that far from increasing social cohesion, their policies are sowing the seeds of civil strife and will ultimately lead to a protracted low-intensity civil conflict if not reversed.
Emphasise that you do not wish to see Britain become another Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that as a deeply concerned citizen you believe that the principle of one law for all must be applied, without opt-outs for Islam. Demand the abolition of halal slaughter; sharia-compliant finance and mortgages; Islamic faith schools and charitable status for Islamic foundations and projects. Demand an end to the cultural imperialist programme of mosque building which has become a visible sign of our de facto subjugation to Islam in so many or our urban areas. Baldly state that you are not “far right” and that if they choose to see you as expressing “far-right” sentiments, then point out that they have thus stigmatised majority opinion amongst the indigenous peoples of the UK. If your MP reacts negatively, or does not respond, you will know that they prefer to rule over an electorate comprised of Somalis, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and mentally unbalanced converts to Islam (for there is no other kind of Islamic convert in a free society).
It is most likely that your MP will ignore you, accuse you of racism or simply give a half-hearted response addressing one or two of the issues. Anything less than a wholehearted backing of the above demands should be unacceptable for us. So, if and when you receive a negative response from your MP, whom should you vote for? The Labour, Liberal-Democrat and Conservative parties are all globalist multiculturalist parties which advocate appeasing Islam. Each will contain a handful of individuals who deviate from this diktat, but they are in no position and never will be in a position to influence policy. Your vote should therefore go elsewhere. Let us mobilise our families and friends against the appeasers of Islam.
UKIP are civic nationalists who take no position on Islam. Likewise, the English Democrats are in the same mould, and have no policy position on Islamisation. Both therefore, like Plaid Cymru and the SNP, are false nationalist parties. Islam has no roots amongst the indigenous peoples of our isles, and neither does it possess such roots in the lands of our continental neighbours. Our struggle against Islam can only succeed if we lend our support to a true nationalist party which has at its core a commitment to the right of self-determination for the indigenous peoples of the United Kingdom (i.e. the English, the Welsh, the Scots, the Irish and the Cornish). Hitherto, many people have been debarred from nationalist political campaigning by legislation preventing members of the British National Party from working in certain fields owing to it having been dubbed a “racist” organisation. Similarly, expressions of open support for the BNP have been muted through fear of being stigmatised and victimised.
All is about to change. As the BNP is unable to afford the legal fees to fight the Commission for Equality and Human Rights allegation that its membership criteria are in contravention of the Race Relations Act, it is about to open up membership to sympathetic ethnic minority British citizens. When this occurs, its opponents will no longer be able to declare it a “racist” party, and the Government will have to remove its ban on public sector workers being members of the BNP, otherwise it would have to abolish the Black Police Association and other such bodies promoting ethnic/racial special interests.
Whereas the CEHR action was designed to blow the BNP out of the water, it has in fact provided it for the first time ever with the possibility of becoming a serious mass political party with prospects in Westminster. There is a huge amount of pent-up public frustration linked to enforced mass immigration, multiculturalism and Islamisation, but people have previously felt inhibited about voting for the BNP because of the constant barrage of smears from the mainstream media, pressure groups and political rivals. Now, with the BNP’s changed membership criteria, the BBC and other broadcasters will have to give the BNP airtime, so the fabric of lies built up about the Party will eventually be torn apart. Moreover, the BNP will be able to attract professional people of talent who will be able to smooth out its rough edges and make it more electable.
There thus now exists for the first time in generations a real nationalist political option which will enable us to achieve our objectives in regaining our national autonomy and rights. Our goal must be to peacefully reverse the demographic, cultural and legal changes which together comprise the process of Islamisation/Islamification. We must steel ourselves for the tough political fight ahead, and remove any self-doubt with respect to the rightness of our cause. Our enemies possess no doubts, therefore we should be unwavering in our opposition to Islam within our shores. As for affairs elsewhere across the globe, we should keep out of them, for we are but a small country with declining power and influence. Our task should be first and foremost to secure our way of life and liberties within our own homeland, for ourselves, and those yet to be born.
Many of our fellow citizens who have been able to live lives insulated from contact with the burgeoning Islamic colonies across the UK lack direct experience of the latter’s negative social and economic impact, and currently often know no better than to swallow the lies fed to them by the mainstream media. They will for some time at least, continue to view us as in some ways less than fully human, owing to the standard repertoire of unjust insults deployed by the globalist multiculturalists in their battle to maintain cultural hegemony. Despite the heavy-handed attempts to indoctrinate the population through the introduction of compulsory “diversity training” and associated employment legislation, many can see through this fabric of wilful lies and discern the lineaments of an ugly truth.
I call upon the EDL to reconsider its tactics. Street protests are likely to discredit the anti-Islamist and nationalist causes in general. Don’t get angry, get even. We are now in a position where we can achieve our peaceful and moderate objectives through the electoral process. Please do not risk jeopardising the chances of a very real political breakthrough by giving vent to your frustrations on the street. This will only serve to give our opponents more ammunition to limit civil liberties and free expression. If you are truly against Islamisation, support the BNP.
The few protests that the EDL have staged thus far have been relatively small scale and have generated a predictably violent response from hotheads within the Muslim population and their allies within Unite Against Fascism and the Socialist Workers’ Party. All three of these elements share a commitment to violence to achieve their respective goals of: entrenching Islamic territorialism within the UK; destroying free thought and subverting social order as a means of ushering in a mythical revolutionary millennium which will deliver designated victim groups from the chains of global capitalism. I shall leave discussion of the dynamics of this unholy alliance for a later occasion. Do not be goaded into responding with violence, for that is what they want.
The recent Muslim unrest in Luton’s Bury Park area in which police were attacked with fireworks attests to the fact that significant elements within our Islamic colonising population are so eager to unleash violence upon us (i.e. native Britons and our non-Muslim civic compatriots) that they will use any pretext to do so. Our response should be calm and measured. Your MP may well be an Islamic lickspittle, but write to him or her expressing your concern about the increasing concessions made to Islam in our country, underscoring that far from increasing social cohesion, their policies are sowing the seeds of civil strife and will ultimately lead to a protracted low-intensity civil conflict if not reversed.
Emphasise that you do not wish to see Britain become another Bosnia-Herzegovina, and that as a deeply concerned citizen you believe that the principle of one law for all must be applied, without opt-outs for Islam. Demand the abolition of halal slaughter; sharia-compliant finance and mortgages; Islamic faith schools and charitable status for Islamic foundations and projects. Demand an end to the cultural imperialist programme of mosque building which has become a visible sign of our de facto subjugation to Islam in so many or our urban areas. Baldly state that you are not “far right” and that if they choose to see you as expressing “far-right” sentiments, then point out that they have thus stigmatised majority opinion amongst the indigenous peoples of the UK. If your MP reacts negatively, or does not respond, you will know that they prefer to rule over an electorate comprised of Somalis, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and mentally unbalanced converts to Islam (for there is no other kind of Islamic convert in a free society).
It is most likely that your MP will ignore you, accuse you of racism or simply give a half-hearted response addressing one or two of the issues. Anything less than a wholehearted backing of the above demands should be unacceptable for us. So, if and when you receive a negative response from your MP, whom should you vote for? The Labour, Liberal-Democrat and Conservative parties are all globalist multiculturalist parties which advocate appeasing Islam. Each will contain a handful of individuals who deviate from this diktat, but they are in no position and never will be in a position to influence policy. Your vote should therefore go elsewhere. Let us mobilise our families and friends against the appeasers of Islam.
UKIP are civic nationalists who take no position on Islam. Likewise, the English Democrats are in the same mould, and have no policy position on Islamisation. Both therefore, like Plaid Cymru and the SNP, are false nationalist parties. Islam has no roots amongst the indigenous peoples of our isles, and neither does it possess such roots in the lands of our continental neighbours. Our struggle against Islam can only succeed if we lend our support to a true nationalist party which has at its core a commitment to the right of self-determination for the indigenous peoples of the United Kingdom (i.e. the English, the Welsh, the Scots, the Irish and the Cornish). Hitherto, many people have been debarred from nationalist political campaigning by legislation preventing members of the British National Party from working in certain fields owing to it having been dubbed a “racist” organisation. Similarly, expressions of open support for the BNP have been muted through fear of being stigmatised and victimised.
All is about to change. As the BNP is unable to afford the legal fees to fight the Commission for Equality and Human Rights allegation that its membership criteria are in contravention of the Race Relations Act, it is about to open up membership to sympathetic ethnic minority British citizens. When this occurs, its opponents will no longer be able to declare it a “racist” party, and the Government will have to remove its ban on public sector workers being members of the BNP, otherwise it would have to abolish the Black Police Association and other such bodies promoting ethnic/racial special interests.
Whereas the CEHR action was designed to blow the BNP out of the water, it has in fact provided it for the first time ever with the possibility of becoming a serious mass political party with prospects in Westminster. There is a huge amount of pent-up public frustration linked to enforced mass immigration, multiculturalism and Islamisation, but people have previously felt inhibited about voting for the BNP because of the constant barrage of smears from the mainstream media, pressure groups and political rivals. Now, with the BNP’s changed membership criteria, the BBC and other broadcasters will have to give the BNP airtime, so the fabric of lies built up about the Party will eventually be torn apart. Moreover, the BNP will be able to attract professional people of talent who will be able to smooth out its rough edges and make it more electable.
There thus now exists for the first time in generations a real nationalist political option which will enable us to achieve our objectives in regaining our national autonomy and rights. Our goal must be to peacefully reverse the demographic, cultural and legal changes which together comprise the process of Islamisation/Islamification. We must steel ourselves for the tough political fight ahead, and remove any self-doubt with respect to the rightness of our cause. Our enemies possess no doubts, therefore we should be unwavering in our opposition to Islam within our shores. As for affairs elsewhere across the globe, we should keep out of them, for we are but a small country with declining power and influence. Our task should be first and foremost to secure our way of life and liberties within our own homeland, for ourselves, and those yet to be born.
Many of our fellow citizens who have been able to live lives insulated from contact with the burgeoning Islamic colonies across the UK lack direct experience of the latter’s negative social and economic impact, and currently often know no better than to swallow the lies fed to them by the mainstream media. They will for some time at least, continue to view us as in some ways less than fully human, owing to the standard repertoire of unjust insults deployed by the globalist multiculturalists in their battle to maintain cultural hegemony. Despite the heavy-handed attempts to indoctrinate the population through the introduction of compulsory “diversity training” and associated employment legislation, many can see through this fabric of wilful lies and discern the lineaments of an ugly truth.
I call upon the EDL to reconsider its tactics. Street protests are likely to discredit the anti-Islamist and nationalist causes in general. Don’t get angry, get even. We are now in a position where we can achieve our peaceful and moderate objectives through the electoral process. Please do not risk jeopardising the chances of a very real political breakthrough by giving vent to your frustrations on the street. This will only serve to give our opponents more ammunition to limit civil liberties and free expression. If you are truly against Islamisation, support the BNP.
Saturday, 4 July 2009
English Defence League Protest
This afternoon the English Defence League, a new group whose formation was precipitated by the Islamist barracking of troops in Luton earlier this year, is planning two protests against the Islamisation of the UK. One is scheduled to take place at 3pm at the Bullring in Birmingham, the other in Wood Green, London.
The Lionheart blogger Paul Ray has provided an interesting insight into the experience of the small band of protesters who marched through Whitechapel on 27 June in the second outing of the English Defence League (the first being in Luton). The Metropolitan Police appear to have been well informed of plans and thus turned up in force. They behaved in an exceptionally intimidating manner, individually photographing and interviewing all participants before telling them that they had to leave London within the hour and not set foot within the M25 for the next 24 hours.
I hope that the protests planned for today pass off peacefully, and wish those brave enough to attend the best of luck in making a public stand against Islamisation. It takes a hardy and brave spirit to stand against the combined might of the state, the mainstream media and the race relations industry, for they will seek to paint you in the blackest and most dehumanising of terms.
The English Defence League has just created its own website which can be accessed from my “Sites of Interest” section. Below is the verbatim text of the League’s homepage:
We are the "English Defence League".
We've originated from the concern's of normal people about the growing threat to our country from militant islam and our aim is to protest and march against islamic militant's operating in our land and the islamification of Great Britain.
Following several protest's against our brave returning soldier's from combat zone's our group has set out to protest against these militant's wherever they appear as our government is too scared and gutless to do anything about it in the fear of being racist.
We have no political preferences and anyone can follow us but i think we can all agree Labour have totally destroyed our country favouring anyone but us, The English working class.
We have marched in Luton and have plan's to march again shortly and recently in london with more march's planned this is only the beginning.
As a new group everything is under construction but shortly there will be no place in Great Britain were islamic militant's and muslim's preaching hatred can go unopposed.
With the Welsh Defence League already up and running plan's for Scotland and Northern Ireland groups at an advanced stage the fightback has now began.
This is not about race or colour it's about having the piss taken out of us.
Check back for update's in the following week's.
The Lionheart blogger Paul Ray has provided an interesting insight into the experience of the small band of protesters who marched through Whitechapel on 27 June in the second outing of the English Defence League (the first being in Luton). The Metropolitan Police appear to have been well informed of plans and thus turned up in force. They behaved in an exceptionally intimidating manner, individually photographing and interviewing all participants before telling them that they had to leave London within the hour and not set foot within the M25 for the next 24 hours.
I hope that the protests planned for today pass off peacefully, and wish those brave enough to attend the best of luck in making a public stand against Islamisation. It takes a hardy and brave spirit to stand against the combined might of the state, the mainstream media and the race relations industry, for they will seek to paint you in the blackest and most dehumanising of terms.
The English Defence League has just created its own website which can be accessed from my “Sites of Interest” section. Below is the verbatim text of the League’s homepage:
We are the "English Defence League".
We've originated from the concern's of normal people about the growing threat to our country from militant islam and our aim is to protest and march against islamic militant's operating in our land and the islamification of Great Britain.
Following several protest's against our brave returning soldier's from combat zone's our group has set out to protest against these militant's wherever they appear as our government is too scared and gutless to do anything about it in the fear of being racist.
We have no political preferences and anyone can follow us but i think we can all agree Labour have totally destroyed our country favouring anyone but us, The English working class.
We have marched in Luton and have plan's to march again shortly and recently in london with more march's planned this is only the beginning.
As a new group everything is under construction but shortly there will be no place in Great Britain were islamic militant's and muslim's preaching hatred can go unopposed.
With the Welsh Defence League already up and running plan's for Scotland and Northern Ireland groups at an advanced stage the fightback has now began.
This is not about race or colour it's about having the piss taken out of us.
Check back for update's in the following week's.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)