| Written by Frank Ellis | |
| From: Dr Frank Ellis To: An Open Letter to the Prime Minister, Mr David Cameron MP Date: 15th April 2011 A.D. Re: The Prime Minister’s Speech on Immigration to Conservative Party Members in Hampshire, 14th April 2011 Dear Mr Cameron Once again I am compelled to write to you on the subject of immigration and the related ills which are gnawing away at the fabric of British society and destroying us. Having read your speech, I can say that there are parts which show some awareness of the immigration threat, for example, the connection with the welfare state. Whether of course you act is another matter. The long-suffering, white indigenous population has heard the cry of “It’s time to get tough on immigration” so many times before and on each occasion nothing has happened. Once any election is out of the way the immigration assault on our way life continues its relentless path. Nothing is done to stop the invasion. Whole neighbourhoods are taken over by immigrants and we whites are supposed to pretend that we are being blessed when in fact we are being dispossessed. You begin your speech by pointing out that last year we were in the middle of a general election campaign. The highlight of that election campaign directly pertains to your Hampshire speech. Let me refresh your memory. When Gordon Brown took part in a choreographed visit to Rochdale last year he, thinking his microphone was switched off, referred to a life-long Labour Party activist as a “bigot” because she had earlier complained about high levels of immigration to Britain. Brown’s grovelling after his remarks were broadcast did him no good at all. His cowardice and disgusting duplicity were there for all to see and hear. His private response to a perfectly honourable concern about mass immigration reveals not just his horrible, cynical dishonesty but the huge gulf that separates the professional political caste in this country from the electorate. It confirms my suspicion that you and your politician colleagues despise people like me and others who object to mass immigration. You despise us because we categorically reject your hideous multiracial fantasy; you hate us because we see through your lies; you seek to punish us and humiliate us because we resist the Lie; and you long for the day when we are overwhelmed by immigrants and reduced to a cowed racial minority in our ancient lands. You note the following: Now, immigration is a hugely emotive subject and it’s a debate too often in the past shaped by assertions rather than substantive arguments. We’ve all heard them. The assertion that mass immigration is unalloyed good and that controlling it is economic madness, the view that Britain is a soft touch and immigrants are out to take whatever they can get. I believe the role of politicians is to cut through the extremes of this debate and approach the subject sensibly and reasonably. The reason that ‘immigration is a hugely emotive subject’ is because any attempt to criticize mass immigration has been portrayed by the political caste to which you belong, the BBC, the Guardian-reading classes, the universities and what is erroneously referred to as the teaching profession, as something too dreadful even to contemplate. The implicit, often quite explicit, assumption has been that any person who criticizes the level of immigration or who resents the changes that have been imposed on Britain without the consent of the indigenous population, is some kind of Nazi, hell bent on mass murder. Those of us who have attacked the insane levels of immigration have not just made assertions: we have offered compelling arguments to which the BBC, to take just one example, has responded with hysteria and vitriol. Your party has contributed to ‘the extremes of the debate’ by denying Conservative MPs the opportunity to resist. When Patrick Mercer pointed out, please note, pointed out, some obvious home truths about race and the British Army you removed his shadow defence portfolio in order to be able to grandstand and make a display of your commitment to “anti-racism”. William Hague accepted the findings of the viciously, anti-white, racist Macpherson Report without so much of a high-pitched squeak and attacked the East Yorkshire MP John Townend in the 2001 election campaign merely because Townend sympathised with the concerns of his constituents regarding mass immigration. The filters of BBC censorship and of other monopoly stream media outlets through which anything to do with race, multiculturalism, immigration and crimes carried out by immigrants must pass before anything is broadcast or put in print mean that the grim truth is never fully placed in the public domain or only hinted at, as for example when the BBC reports violent black behaviour in London. You say that public debate was affected because public discussion was closed down and that: ‘It created the space for extremist parties to flourish, as they could tell people that mainstream politicians weren’t listening to their concerns or doing anything about them’. What are you trying to say here, Mr Cameron and what are you trying not to say, to acknowledge? So the last Labour government with the support of your party demonised any individual or individuals who pointed out the failures of multiculturalism. It was left to small parties such as the BNP and non-affiliated individuals to state that ‘mainstream politicians are not listening to your concerns or doing anything about them’ for the simple, painfully obvious reason, Mr Cameron, that mainstream politicians were not listening to our concerns or doing anything about them. In other words, Mr Cameron, when the silence of cowardly, careerist politicians was broken by some lone voices, you denigrate them as the mouth pieces of extremist parties whose arguments are not to be heard, even when these supposed extremist parties and individuals are telling the truth and articulating the justified fears of a large majority. And you expect me to trust you and your call for a sensible and reasonable debate on this subject? You want this debate to be on the basis of your ideological assumptions; primarily that multiculturalism and mass non-white immigration are inherently beneficial. Those who object are cast as ‘extremists’, as somehow incorrigibly wicked. Again, you say that you want ‘to starve extremist parties of the oxygen of public anxiety they thrive on and extinguish them once and for all’. You acknowledge the public anxiety over the immigration issue so what exactly are these extremist parties doing or saying that is wrong and which warrants their being called ‘extremist’? If there is massive anxiety about immigration (more accurately fear, loathing and disgust), why does it exist? Who or what is to blame? The answer Mr Cameron is: cowardly and lying politicians x cowardly and lying politicians x cowardly and lying politicians = masses of cowardly and lying politicians. Ever since 1948 immigration has been an issue in Britain, punctuated by race riots and culminating in the Islamic terrorist attacks of Thursday 7th July 2005. Successive governments have tried to ram race-is-a fiction, we-are-the-world and multiculturalism down our throats and when we have retched and vomited this poison out of our bodies, politicians have then resorted to legal and administrative sanctions against us; they have indoctrinated our children to hate their country, its heroes, its past; they have turned children against their parents; they preach hatred of whites; they encourage immigrants to mock us and to take over our towns, cities and neighbourhoods; and our men returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are spat at and reviled by immigrants as war criminals. And in the UN-sponsored world view of multiculturalism which you seem to have totally internalised, we, the white indigenous population, are somehow reduced to the level of extremists because we have had enough of being lied to and because we resent our country being overrun by aliens. You say that you want ‘to get the policy right: good immigration, not mass immigration’. To begin with you need to deal, as matter of national priority, with the vast numbers of illegal immigrants currently in the United Kingdom. There must be absolutely no amnesty. Your mission is straightforward: hunt them down, round them up and deport them. What stops you from acting? When the indigenous electorate actually sees wailing illegals being deported, along with all the wives and hordes of other dependents; when the indigenous electorate starts to see that its neighbourhoods are being reclaimed, you might merit some trust: but not before since your credit is exhausted. As for what you call ‘good immigration’ you claim – politicians always do – that ‘Our country has benefitted immeasurably from immigration’. That is news to me. When I go through large parts of Britain – Bradford, Slough, Leicester, Birmingham, Leeds and whole swathes of London - I am assailed by sights and sounds that might be appropriate in the Third World but do not belong in England. Third World immigrants recreate the Third World in First World countries. When I go to large parts of England I do not wish to see masses of black and brown faces, bizarre clothing, hordes of immigrant children, freakish behaviour, to hear the invasive cacophony of non-European languages and to see whole streets that look as if they belong in Islamabad or Mogadishu. I do not feel enriched by “diversity” or multiculturalism. My reactions are fear, disgust and a horrible nausea. I am course angry at people like you who have done nothing to prevent this from happening, even when warned of what would happen. What are people from Uganda, India and Pakistan doing in large numbers in British hospitals? Britain is quiet capable of providing enough staff from the indigenous population. Our training is superior as well. The countries you mention are not exactly known for high standards and good training. The Indian examination system is corrupt and riddled with cheating such that fake degrees and other professional qualifications are easily obtainable at the right price. Pakistan is a Third World slum whose sole export to this country has been terrorism, welfare parasitism and immigrant invaders. Uganda is a sub-Saharan, Third World basket case. Do you really expect me to believe that any training such as it is in Uganda meets First World standards and that lives are not being put at risk by employing Africans? The case of Daniel Ubani, the Nigerian with a German passport, is just one horrifying example of what can happen when First World standards are jettisoned in the name of multiculturalism and ‘good immigration’. One Primary Care Trust rejected Ubani because his command of English was so weak. Eventually he secured – somehow – a post and on his first day managed to kill one patient and nearly killed another. The chances are this Nigerian could not read or not very well and that he simply did not understand the correct doses of drugs required. Shortly thereafter he fled back to his ‘native’ Germany. The presence in small numbers of highly qualified immigrants form Europe in intellectually demanding jobs is not the problem (please note that Daniel Ubani is not European). However, if the numbers rose dramatically it would become a problem. The real problem is the mass influx of poorly or dubiously qualified or unqualified Indians, Pakistanis, sub-Saharan Africans, Somalis and Turks and others whose sole contribution is to overpopulate Britain and whose customs, religion and high levels of welfare dependency represent a massive drain on the public purse. When one takes into account the social, economic and displacement costs borne by the white indigenous population and the huge emotional and psychological stress inflicted on whites by the presence of large numbers of non-white aliens in their country, there are no substantial benefits at all from mass immigration, especially from India, Pakistan, Sub-Saharan Africa, Somalia and the Middle East. Mass, non-white immigration is a curse. Your admission that the last government allowed the mass invasion of immigrants into Britain comes far too late: so much damage has already been done. Why did the Conservative Party not highlight this invasion when in opposition? You had every opportunity. Why during this period was it left to non-affiliated individuals and so-called extremists to highlight the dreadful consequences of mass, non-white immigration? By staying silent on the mass immigration invasion between 1997 and 2010 your party colluded with the Labour Party’s policy of allowing mass immigration. The Conservative Party therefore bears a great deal of responsibility for what has happened. Too many of your cowardly MPs who knew perfectly well what was happening, failed to stand up and be counted. This is why the Conservative Party can no longer be trusted on anything to do with immigration. You say that ‘real communities aren’t just collections of public service users living in the same space’ and that ‘Real communities are bound by common experiences, forged by friendships and conversation, knitted together by all the rituals of the neighbourhood, from the school run to the chat down the pub. And these bonds can take time. So real integration takes time’. When you say that ‘real communities aren’t just collections of public service users living in the same space’ whom exactly are you trying to deceive? Your point is so obvious (it has been recognised for a long time) and your reasons for stating it so patently insincere that I am at a loss to identify the target audience. This is just cynical and utterly insincere posturing on your part. The only community that matters Mr Cameron is the nation, in my case the English nation, not the fantasy multiracial communities which you have in mind. The common experiences of the English nation cannot be open to all. You say that ‘real integration takes time’. In America they have been trying since 1865 and they have still failed. Large numbers of different racial groups in the same territory is a design for strife, violence, unhappiness, discord and the destruction of individual freedom. For how much longer are you and Trevor Phillips going to tell us that more time is needed so that integration can work or should I say be made to work at the expense of the white, indigenous population? Integration can never work because most of us have a healthy and wholesome sense of who we are and what we cannot be or become. The natural resistance we manifest frustrates the ambition of the diversophiles, so harsh and repressive legislation must be enacted so that opposition can be bullied and intimidated into silence. In opposition your party, Mr Cameron, raised no substantial objections to the recommendations of The Macpherson Report (1999), Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and all the other rules and restrictions on intellectual freedom that the last Labour government sought to impose on the white, indigenous population. At every opportunity your party has connived and colluded with the Labour Party and the emissaries of the European Union in order to silence, to humiliate and to crush dissenters from multiracial orthodoxy. And now you plead for more time so that the hellish designs of multiracialism can be brought to fruition. Our membership of the European Union is a huge obstacle to preventing and then reducing the levels of legal/illegal immigration. We are also extremely vulnerable to fraudulent claims submitted under various pieces of human rights laws and codes. All and any legislation which prevents us from deporting immigrants and imposing strict border controls must be rescinded. You mention forced marriages yet I find no mention of Pakistan or other Third World states. In what sense are these girls who are forced into marriages by Pakistani immigrants ‘British’? They may have acquired a British passport but then as you have conceded they and their families cannot speak ‘the same language as those living there’ and do not want to integrate. By what measure can these people be properly considered to be British? I note that you say that these immigrants do not speak ‘the same language as those living there’. There is something evasive about this, a deliberate lack of clarity. You avoid saying that these immigrants are unable to speak English confining yourself to the fact that they are unable to speak ‘the same language as those living there’. Your failure to identify English as the critical language which these immigrants must learn leaves open the possibility that the language spoken by the people ‘living there’ might not be English but some language from the Indian sub-continent which the new batch of immigrants from, say, Somalia, cannot speak. This is yet another reason why multiracialism is so disastrous: it creates barriers and suspicion; it destroys any sense of community. There is an insuperable problem for your multiracial utopia, or rather a series of problems that very few people will state publicly and that will bedevil your plans. I speak for myself here – so others may disagree with me – though I suspect that many people will share my views. You want openness. Here it is: I do not want to live in a community where I am confronted with hordes of black and brown faces on the streets of our towns and cities; I do not want to socialise with non-white immigrants; if by mistake I walked into a pub full of non-whites, I would leave immediately; I do not want to have to work with these people if it can be avoided; I avoid non-white immigrants at every possible opportunity (if dealing with them is unavoidable, I am polite no more no less); I do not want my children to have to endure the presence of huge numbers of non-white immigrants in their schools; I do not want to be preached to by diversity propagandists, telling me against all the evidence and the screams of my soul that diversity is some kind of blessing (it is nothing of the sort). Diversity is bestial, hateful and loathsome: it is a psychological weapon of war which has been deployed against the white peoples of the world in order to undermine their natural sense of racial and cultural separation, their identity, their natural and proper sense of superiority across the entire spectrum of human endeavour. Diversity is a collectivist refuge for the failure, the loser, the envious and the nation hater-killers. God bless England, Ireland (both sides of the border), Scotland and Wales. Yours sincerely Frank Ellis |
Freedom News Freedom News writes and shares posts that are of Interest to a broad demographic . Articles are to be taken on a individual basis and not under the assumption that different Authors and content providers and Horwich Nationalist as well share the same opinions. Articles copied are fully attributed to Authors under international fair use acts. .
Saturday, 16 April 2011
An Open Letter to the Prime Minister, Mr David Cameron MP ,ref The Prime Minister’s Speech on Immigration to Conservative Party Members in Hampshire, 14th April 2011
David Cameron speech further legitimised the British National Party
The Wolf Is Back in Sheep’s Clothing
By Jennifer Matthys –
David Cameron further legitimised the British National Party and our position in politics today when he admitted that Britain has been torn apart by the biggest influx of immigrants in history.
He said that immigration has been “too high” for many years and has created “discomfort and disjointedness” across the country.
Cameron spelt out a number of steps that he claims the Government is going to be taking in order to bring down the numbers of immigrants, including limits on the number of skilled workers coming from outside Europe, a minimum age of 21 for spouses coming to the UK and limits on “health tourism” and illegal workers claiming benefits.
Further to this, Cameron pointed out that around 75 per cent of the 2.5 million jobs created since 1997 have gone to foreign-born workers because the labour market has been left wide open by a welfare system that for years has paid British people not to work.
Responding to the news earlier today, Nick Griffin has said that Mr Cameron “lacks the right-wing credibility to own this issue. The whole establishment has conspired to turn our country into a foreign place. They don't want to change that now! This new speech, just weeks before the local elections, is nothing but cynical opportunism.
"Our political masters have been ruthlessly totalitarian, and totalitarianisms are always most vulnerable when forced to give ground and concede mistakes and promise reform. The whole of liberal Western Europe smells like the Soviet Bloc in 1989. Looking at the small print for this speech, it promised to cut net immigration. That means that for every Brit that flees from the tax-grabbing, crime-ridden place our once Great country has become, they will replace us with another Somali."
As with previous policies of ours that our political masters have stolen, including British Jobs for British Workers, when we say it, we mean it. Cameron and his desperately failing coalition government only say these things because they need to win votes, and they know that the British people like what we say, agree with what we say, and believe us when we say it.
Of course, the same cannot be said for Cameron, and he knows it – this last-minute vote-grabbing gamble is not going to pay off for him.
Cameron finished by saying that he is willing to be judged by the British people on this new policy. I hope that the British people do judge him, as the bare-faced, lying, policy-stealing "politician" that he is. On May the 5th I hope the British people kick Cameron where it hurts the most... in the ballot box!
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.
David Cameron further legitimised the British National Party and our position in politics today when he admitted that Britain has been torn apart by the biggest influx of immigrants in history.
He said that immigration has been “too high” for many years and has created “discomfort and disjointedness” across the country.Cameron spelt out a number of steps that he claims the Government is going to be taking in order to bring down the numbers of immigrants, including limits on the number of skilled workers coming from outside Europe, a minimum age of 21 for spouses coming to the UK and limits on “health tourism” and illegal workers claiming benefits.
Further to this, Cameron pointed out that around 75 per cent of the 2.5 million jobs created since 1997 have gone to foreign-born workers because the labour market has been left wide open by a welfare system that for years has paid British people not to work.
Responding to the news earlier today, Nick Griffin has said that Mr Cameron “lacks the right-wing credibility to own this issue. The whole establishment has conspired to turn our country into a foreign place. They don't want to change that now! This new speech, just weeks before the local elections, is nothing but cynical opportunism.
"Our political masters have been ruthlessly totalitarian, and totalitarianisms are always most vulnerable when forced to give ground and concede mistakes and promise reform. The whole of liberal Western Europe smells like the Soviet Bloc in 1989. Looking at the small print for this speech, it promised to cut net immigration. That means that for every Brit that flees from the tax-grabbing, crime-ridden place our once Great country has become, they will replace us with another Somali."
As with previous policies of ours that our political masters have stolen, including British Jobs for British Workers, when we say it, we mean it. Cameron and his desperately failing coalition government only say these things because they need to win votes, and they know that the British people like what we say, agree with what we say, and believe us when we say it.
Of course, the same cannot be said for Cameron, and he knows it – this last-minute vote-grabbing gamble is not going to pay off for him.
Cameron finished by saying that he is willing to be judged by the British people on this new policy. I hope that the British people do judge him, as the bare-faced, lying, policy-stealing "politician" that he is. On May the 5th I hope the British people kick Cameron where it hurts the most... in the ballot box!
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.
Friday, 15 April 2011
China Takes Up Key British National Party Energy Policy
We’re Right Yet Again – China Takes Up Key British National Party Energy Policy
By Nick Griffin –
Far-sighted economic super-power China has announced that it is going to address the looming global energy shortfall by building a safer, cleaner, and ultimately cheaper network of nuclear reactors based on thorium molten salt technology.
FLiBe, a molten salt reactor coolantThe extensive development and use of this ultra-safe alternative to uranium-based nuclear power was adopted as British National Party policy more than five years ago, following an energy policy review we conducted in connection with our grasp of the Peak Oil problem.
China’s much more recent decision was noted by well-informed Telegraph analyst Ambrose Evans-Pritchard on 20th March 2011. Explaining concisely how the well-established but hitherto unused technology works, the journalist commented that:
“It may mark the passage of strategic leadership in energy policy from an inert and status-quo West to a rising technological power willing to break the mould.
“If China’s dash for thorium power succeeds, it will vastly alter the global energy landscape and may avert a calamitous conflict over resources as Asia’s industrial revolutions clash head-on with the West’s entrenched consumption.”
Explaining the decision of China’s Academy of Sciences to use a thorium-based molten salt reactor system, Chinese scientists pointed out that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster.
Thorium is a silvery metal named after the Norse god of thunder. According to Professor Robert Cywinski from Huddersfield University, thorium must be bombarded with neutrons to drive the fission process. “There is no chain reaction. Fission dies the moment you switch off the photon beam. There are not enough neutrons for it continue of its own accord,” he said, explaining why the technology is so inherently safe.
Dr Cywinski, who heads a UK-wide thorium team, said the residual heat left behind in a crisis would be “orders of magnitude less” than in a uranium reactor.
A further huge advantage of thorium is that, while an expansion of uranium-based nuclear power would rapidly exhaust the Earth’s limited supplies of uranium, thorium is as common as lead. America has buried tons as a waste product of rare earth metals mining. Norway has so much that thorium is already envisaged powering the country in the Post-Oil Age. Britain has seams in Wales and Cornwall. Almost all the mineral is usable as fuel, compared to only 0.7pc of uranium. There is enough to power civilization for thousands of years.
The UK team based at Huddersfield University has been developing an accelerator-driven sub-critical reactor for thorium. This world-leading cutting-edge project needs £300m of public money for the next phase, and £1.5bn of commercial investment to produce the first working plant. Thereafter, economies of scale kick in fast, with completely practical plans in place to build. The idea is to make pint-size 600MW reactors.
Yet while the ConDem Coalition can afford wars in Afghanistan and Libya, and a huge increase in the foreign aid budget, there is no money for this project.
So, as is so often the case, China will develop British technology and, in due course, sell it back to us – if bankrupt Britain has got any money left with which to buy it. Yet again, the visionary British National Party has been ahead of the game, only to be ignored by the criminally incompetent political elite. Yet again, they are wrong, and we are right.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.
Far-sighted economic super-power China has announced that it is going to address the looming global energy shortfall by building a safer, cleaner, and ultimately cheaper network of nuclear reactors based on thorium molten salt technology.
FLiBe, a molten salt reactor coolantThe extensive development and use of this ultra-safe alternative to uranium-based nuclear power was adopted as British National Party policy more than five years ago, following an energy policy review we conducted in connection with our grasp of the Peak Oil problem.China’s much more recent decision was noted by well-informed Telegraph analyst Ambrose Evans-Pritchard on 20th March 2011. Explaining concisely how the well-established but hitherto unused technology works, the journalist commented that:
“It may mark the passage of strategic leadership in energy policy from an inert and status-quo West to a rising technological power willing to break the mould.
“If China’s dash for thorium power succeeds, it will vastly alter the global energy landscape and may avert a calamitous conflict over resources as Asia’s industrial revolutions clash head-on with the West’s entrenched consumption.”
Explaining the decision of China’s Academy of Sciences to use a thorium-based molten salt reactor system, Chinese scientists pointed out that hazardous waste will be a thousand times less than with uranium. The system is inherently less prone to disaster.
Thorium is a silvery metal named after the Norse god of thunder. According to Professor Robert Cywinski from Huddersfield University, thorium must be bombarded with neutrons to drive the fission process. “There is no chain reaction. Fission dies the moment you switch off the photon beam. There are not enough neutrons for it continue of its own accord,” he said, explaining why the technology is so inherently safe.
Dr Cywinski, who heads a UK-wide thorium team, said the residual heat left behind in a crisis would be “orders of magnitude less” than in a uranium reactor.
A further huge advantage of thorium is that, while an expansion of uranium-based nuclear power would rapidly exhaust the Earth’s limited supplies of uranium, thorium is as common as lead. America has buried tons as a waste product of rare earth metals mining. Norway has so much that thorium is already envisaged powering the country in the Post-Oil Age. Britain has seams in Wales and Cornwall. Almost all the mineral is usable as fuel, compared to only 0.7pc of uranium. There is enough to power civilization for thousands of years.
The UK team based at Huddersfield University has been developing an accelerator-driven sub-critical reactor for thorium. This world-leading cutting-edge project needs £300m of public money for the next phase, and £1.5bn of commercial investment to produce the first working plant. Thereafter, economies of scale kick in fast, with completely practical plans in place to build. The idea is to make pint-size 600MW reactors.
Yet while the ConDem Coalition can afford wars in Afghanistan and Libya, and a huge increase in the foreign aid budget, there is no money for this project.
So, as is so often the case, China will develop British technology and, in due course, sell it back to us – if bankrupt Britain has got any money left with which to buy it. Yet again, the visionary British National Party has been ahead of the game, only to be ignored by the criminally incompetent political elite. Yet again, they are wrong, and we are right.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.
Thursday, 14 April 2011
Safeguarding the use of 'cash' in the UK
Safeguarding the use of 'cash'
April 2011: Nick Griffin struck a blow for Britain's older generation when he signed Written Declaration 1/2011 calling for “Free Choice in Means of Payment”.
The declaration is an attempt to resist the push to an all credit card system of payment and safeguard the use of 'cash' in purchasing.
In the current financial crisis it is vital to ensure that everyone has the freedom to choose and access the means of payment best suited to their needs.
It may look like a technical issue, but in reality it affects millions of people across Europe and the Western World.
The most vulnerable groups in society should not be forced to use the most expensive means of payment.
Cash is currently the only available means of payment that is both free for the user and universal, while most card-based and electronic means of payment are restrictive.
"Governments are currently being lobbied by the banks to make the use of cash increasingly difficult or impossible," says Nick.
"This will lead to social and financial exclusion on a massive scale of our older generation, who prefer the use of cash, as well as the less well off who have difficulty in gaining access to credit card facilities.
"This is why I have supported the Written Declaration
Monday, 11 April 2011
David Cameron is more politically correct than Tony Blair | Christian News on Christian Today
David Cameron is more politically correct than Tony Blair | Christian News on Christian Today
That is manifest from his public support for a judicial decision that brands traditional biblical teaching on sexual ethics, believed by many millions of Christians around the world including the Pope, as an ideological disease from which children must be protected by the State.
Commenting on the decision by the High Court to uphold Derby City Council’s refusal to allow Owen and Eunice Johns to foster children aged 5-8 because, if asked, they would refuse to endorse practising homosexuality, Mr Cameron said: “This matter was decided by a court in the appropriate way and I think we should rest with the judgement that was made. I think Christians should be tolerant and welcoming and broad-minded.”
Tony Blair championed gay rights as an aspect of progressive politics. He wanted to achieve wider social acceptance of same-sex relationships through the introduction of Civil Partnerships and end what he perceived as discrimination through measures such as the Sexual Orientation Regulations and the Equality Act.
Though very personally committed to 'modernising' social attitudes towards homosexuality, Mr Blair never demanded that orthodox Christians change the way they think or declared that traditional Christian belief should be perceived as a thought crime.
By demanding that Christian opponents of the High Court judgement against the Johns become 'broad-minded', Mr Cameron effectively has brought the issue into the realm of Orwellian thought crime. In this he outstrips Mr Blair in his zeal for the purity of politically-correct ideology.
In evaluating the political benefits of the Conservative leader's commitment to the new morality, it is worth reflecting that unlike Mr Blair Mr Cameron is not an election winner.
One wonders whether the Conservative Party that failed to achieve a working majority under Mr Cameron would have been more electorally successful if it worked harder at cleansing itself of its association with privileged elitism and also worked harder at being more coherent on law and order and anti-social behaviour. For all his focus-group-induced zeal for aspects of political correctness, Mr Cameron did not appear to do anything about that which made the Conservative Party unpopular whilst failing to play to traditional Conservative strengths.
Recently several panes of glass on our church windows were cracked by 15-year-old youths throwing sticks and stones. This follows an incident before Christmas when our parish centre boiler house door was kicked in.
The youths responsible for these incidents attend a local secondary school where a pupil had it placed on his school record that he had made a homophobic remark against two lesbian pupils embracing in the corridor. It was apparently a rather crass comment effectively criticising the decision by the Labour Government led by Harold Wilson in the 1960s to legalise homosexuality. But it was not personally vicious. He simply stated a legal opinion. Putting it on his school record was an act of politically-corrrect institutional viciousness worthy of the Stasi.
One would hope that a Conservative Government would take steps against both of these manifestations of moral disintegration in British society. But unfortunately under the heir-to-Blair Conservatives it looks like it will not be long before a young disciple of Jesus Christ is refused a university place simply for upholding in a citizenship class his or her Lord's teaching on the sanctity of heterosexual marriage.
Julian Mann is Anglican vicar of the Parish Church of the Ascension, Oughtibridge, South Yorkshire
Opinion
David Cameron is more politically correct than Tony Blair
David Cameron is more dogmatically in favour of political correctness than his hero Tony Blair.
by Julian MannPosted: Wednesday, March 30, 2011, 8:50 (BST)
Commenting on the decision by the High Court to uphold Derby City Council’s refusal to allow Owen and Eunice Johns to foster children aged 5-8 because, if asked, they would refuse to endorse practising homosexuality, Mr Cameron said: “This matter was decided by a court in the appropriate way and I think we should rest with the judgement that was made. I think Christians should be tolerant and welcoming and broad-minded.”
Tony Blair championed gay rights as an aspect of progressive politics. He wanted to achieve wider social acceptance of same-sex relationships through the introduction of Civil Partnerships and end what he perceived as discrimination through measures such as the Sexual Orientation Regulations and the Equality Act.
Though very personally committed to 'modernising' social attitudes towards homosexuality, Mr Blair never demanded that orthodox Christians change the way they think or declared that traditional Christian belief should be perceived as a thought crime.
By demanding that Christian opponents of the High Court judgement against the Johns become 'broad-minded', Mr Cameron effectively has brought the issue into the realm of Orwellian thought crime. In this he outstrips Mr Blair in his zeal for the purity of politically-correct ideology.
In evaluating the political benefits of the Conservative leader's commitment to the new morality, it is worth reflecting that unlike Mr Blair Mr Cameron is not an election winner.
One wonders whether the Conservative Party that failed to achieve a working majority under Mr Cameron would have been more electorally successful if it worked harder at cleansing itself of its association with privileged elitism and also worked harder at being more coherent on law and order and anti-social behaviour. For all his focus-group-induced zeal for aspects of political correctness, Mr Cameron did not appear to do anything about that which made the Conservative Party unpopular whilst failing to play to traditional Conservative strengths.
Recently several panes of glass on our church windows were cracked by 15-year-old youths throwing sticks and stones. This follows an incident before Christmas when our parish centre boiler house door was kicked in.
The youths responsible for these incidents attend a local secondary school where a pupil had it placed on his school record that he had made a homophobic remark against two lesbian pupils embracing in the corridor. It was apparently a rather crass comment effectively criticising the decision by the Labour Government led by Harold Wilson in the 1960s to legalise homosexuality. But it was not personally vicious. He simply stated a legal opinion. Putting it on his school record was an act of politically-corrrect institutional viciousness worthy of the Stasi.
One would hope that a Conservative Government would take steps against both of these manifestations of moral disintegration in British society. But unfortunately under the heir-to-Blair Conservatives it looks like it will not be long before a young disciple of Jesus Christ is refused a university place simply for upholding in a citizenship class his or her Lord's teaching on the sanctity of heterosexual marriage.
Julian Mann is Anglican vicar of the Parish Church of the Ascension, Oughtibridge, South Yorkshire
Sunday, 10 April 2011
Police Hid More Muslim Paedophile Abuse in Blackpool because of Political Correctness
Police Hid More Muslim Paedophile Abusebecause of Political Correctness
By Stephen Palmer
A police report that revealed the Muslim grooming of 60 white girls went unpublished due to fears of offending the Islamic community, it has been reported.
The report identified eleven takeaway shops in Blackpool that Muslim workers used as "honey pots", where the Asian men preyed on and sexually assaulted young white schoolgirls as young as eleven.
The unpublished report was commissioned after the disappearance of fourteen-year-old Charlene Downes in 2003, for which two Middle Eastern takeaway owners were acquitted in 2007.
The same men still run a kebab shop in Blackpool, which was also linked to Paige Chivers, a fifteen-year-old girl who went missing in 2007. Detectives believe she was killed like Charlene, whose body has never been found.
Details released of recent court cases in thirteen towns showed that out of 56 men convicted of multiple offences of grooming girls for sex, 50 were Muslim, and most were Pakistani.
Former Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell warned that research into the problem was hampered by “political correctness and concerns about upsetting community cohesion”.
However, despite the cover-up, local police and council workers still maintained a politically correct front.
Lancashire Assistant Chief Constable Andy Rhodes said his officers were making significant progress in such cases “regardless of the background of the culprits” and would only say that the number of “Asian” offenders is “disproportionate to the population”.
David Lund, Blackpool's Director of Children, Adult and Family Services, even made the outrageous claim that “children in Blackpool are now safer than they’ve ever been” due to the town’s Awaken Project, which was set up supposedly to deal with exploitation of children, one year after Charlene’s disappearance.
He said: "It was identified that children were potentially at risk from sexual exploitation, which led to Blackpool Council and Lancashire Constabulary pledging to tackle the problem head on by establishing the Awaken Project.
“The project has received national acclaim and is now a model which other authorities have adopted."
Of course, of the scant information available on the Awaken Project from either Blackpool Council or Lancashire Police, none of it features any reference to Asians, Muslims, Middle Easterners, Pakistanis, or anyone other than white people.
In fact, one of the very few documents available online, a PowerPoint presentation given by Awaken staff, only makes mention to “white males” being the main perpetrators of sexual crime and doesn’t mention any other races. Far from “tackling the problem head on”, all this information does is confirm the police and council’s commitment to political correctness and cowardly racist cover-ups.
Charlene Downes's mother Karen said she was shocked by the report: "It's absolutely terrible. I think something should have been done before the Awaken Project, it is a shame something wasn't done beforehand."
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.
A police report that revealed the Muslim grooming of 60 white girls went unpublished due to fears of offending the Islamic community, it has been reported.
The report identified eleven takeaway shops in Blackpool that Muslim workers used as "honey pots", where the Asian men preyed on and sexually assaulted young white schoolgirls as young as eleven.The unpublished report was commissioned after the disappearance of fourteen-year-old Charlene Downes in 2003, for which two Middle Eastern takeaway owners were acquitted in 2007.
The same men still run a kebab shop in Blackpool, which was also linked to Paige Chivers, a fifteen-year-old girl who went missing in 2007. Detectives believe she was killed like Charlene, whose body has never been found.
Details released of recent court cases in thirteen towns showed that out of 56 men convicted of multiple offences of grooming girls for sex, 50 were Muslim, and most were Pakistani.
Former Detective Superintendent Mick Gradwell warned that research into the problem was hampered by “political correctness and concerns about upsetting community cohesion”.
However, despite the cover-up, local police and council workers still maintained a politically correct front.
Lancashire Assistant Chief Constable Andy Rhodes said his officers were making significant progress in such cases “regardless of the background of the culprits” and would only say that the number of “Asian” offenders is “disproportionate to the population”.
David Lund, Blackpool's Director of Children, Adult and Family Services, even made the outrageous claim that “children in Blackpool are now safer than they’ve ever been” due to the town’s Awaken Project, which was set up supposedly to deal with exploitation of children, one year after Charlene’s disappearance.
He said: "It was identified that children were potentially at risk from sexual exploitation, which led to Blackpool Council and Lancashire Constabulary pledging to tackle the problem head on by establishing the Awaken Project.
“The project has received national acclaim and is now a model which other authorities have adopted."
Of course, of the scant information available on the Awaken Project from either Blackpool Council or Lancashire Police, none of it features any reference to Asians, Muslims, Middle Easterners, Pakistanis, or anyone other than white people.
In fact, one of the very few documents available online, a PowerPoint presentation given by Awaken staff, only makes mention to “white males” being the main perpetrators of sexual crime and doesn’t mention any other races. Far from “tackling the problem head on”, all this information does is confirm the police and council’s commitment to political correctness and cowardly racist cover-ups.
Charlene Downes's mother Karen said she was shocked by the report: "It's absolutely terrible. I think something should have been done before the Awaken Project, it is a shame something wasn't done beforehand."
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.
EU Countries inc UK Increase Foreign Aid to £47 Billion Despite Economic Turmoil
EU Countries Increase Foreign Aid to £47 Billion Despite Economic Turmoil
By Stephen Palmer at http://www.bnp.org.uk/Despite Europe’s dire financial condition, the EU has proudly announced its member states’ highest ever aid contribution to foreign countries, totalling £47 billion for 2010.
The sum spent by the EU’s 27 member states increased by £4 billion compared with 2009 and accounted for more than half of the global amount of aid.Unsurprisingly, the United Kingdom was one of the largest donors, giving £8.4 billion away in foreign aid last year, an amount that is set to increase year on year despite huge cuts to domestic services.
The UK was among just eight member states who met last year’s target of donating 0.56% of their Gross National Income (GNI). The others were Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Sweden.
However, ten countries, including Italy and Greece, spent less on aid than in 2009. Portugal, which is now seeking a £3-billion bailout from other EU countries, also rather foolishly increased its contribution, from 0.23% to 0.29%.
Despite the huge amount given away, EU commissioners still bemoaned states for not meeting their targets. According to Commissioner for Development Andris Piebalgs, “a substantial collective effort is still needed in order to achieve the goal of 0.7% [of GNI] by 2015”.
Tellingly, Piebalgs also complained that aid budgets “still represent less than 1% of national GNI” and “must be increased”, revealing that the 0.7% target is only an initial step.
The UK’s foreign aid budget is set to rise to £8.7bn this year, becoming £9.1bn in 2012, £12bn in 2013, and £12.6bn by 2014. The 2013 figure will account for 0.7 per cent of the UK’s (GNI), the United Nations “target” set for all EU members to achieve by 2015.
Based on these figures, the UK will hold the dubious distinction of becoming the first country to hit the UN goal.
According to Chancellor George Osborne, giving away yet more of taxpayers’ money to foreign countries when frontline public services are slashed at home will allow Britons to “hold their heads up high” and “honour their promise”.
Last year, the biggest beneficiary of UK foreign aid was India, a country with the fourth-largest economy in the world and its own space programme, which got £295 million of UK aid.
Other top recipients include Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Sudan, Tanzania, Afghanistan, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and, of course, Pakistan, which will now receive a staggering £650m in foreign aid.
The Department for International Development (DFID) is the only British ministry not suffering cuts of up to 50 per cent. Instead, a new quango has been set up to “monitor” its spending, further increasing its drain on the taxpayer.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again
Saturday, 9 April 2011
EU's own globalist greed machine will bring about its downfall
EU's own global greed machine will bring about its downfall
April 2011: The full extent of the utter disaster inflicted on the Irish economy and people by a combination of membership of the euro and of the global market finance speculation racket of which the euro is a part is only now becoming clear.
It has now emerged that the 67.5 billion euros (£59 billion) the Irish got in a bail-out from the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund is only the surface film on the deep abyss of debt from which Ireland must be pulled by Europe’s taxpayers.
Regulators at the Irish central bank have conducted a review of how much extra capital - as a buffer against future losses - is required by the rescued banks, Bank of Ireland, Allied Irish Bank, EBS and Irish Life and Permanent. This is where the bailout money is going. It appears this will be will be a bit less than 35bn euros - including 8bn euros that was supposed to be injected into them at the end of February, but was postponed because the reaction of the Irish people to first bailout package brought down the Irish Government.
So it now appears the Irish Government will need to be bailed out to the tune of at least 75 billion euros. That is over half the size of the entire Irish economy!
But that’s not the worst of it. Apart from bailing out the Irish Government so it could bail out its banks, the European Central Bank has had to bail out those banks directs. Because they are light-years down in debt to other banks (mostly German) and sundry international financial institutions and speculators who are frantically demanding their money back lest they go bust themselves.
The European Central Bank has lent these banks direct 117billion euros so far. Whilst the Central Bank of Ireland has lent them a further 71bn euros. So that's 188bn euros of loans from the eurozone's taxpayers to Ireland's banks - which makes the 67.5bn euros lent directly by the eurozone and IMF to the Irish government look like peanuts.
This means EU taxpayers have lent 208bn euros to Ireland's banks. That means Ireland is in debt to the tune of 154% of its GDP. It owes taxpayers over one and a half times the total value of its economy.
If Ireland was a person, the bailiffs would be kicking in its doors and it would go bankrupt.
The total debt burden beneath which Ireland lies crushed is huge. And it will all end up being borne by the Irish people, not the global banks and financial institutions who got Ireland’s banks into this mess. Because the Irish Government has to keep up the repayments to them – if they think they won’t they’ll demand all they are owed back at once, collapsing what is left of the Irish economy.
There is worse for the poor Irish taxpayer. The money they've been lent by the IMF and eurozone carries an interest rate of 5.8% on average. This is higher than the Irish economy can hope to grow, so every year Ireland gets deeper and deeper into debt. Forcing an endless cycle of more Government spending cuts and tax hikes which makes the economy grow even slower, making the debt burden higher and so forcing even more cuts and tax hikes, slowing growth even more making the debt deeper.
Ireland and its people are being sucked by their membership of the euro and the global financial/banking system ever deeper into a black hole of poverty and debt.
The money for the endless ever higher bailout loans is currently coming from German and to a lesser degree French taxpayers, who are getting fed up and starting to vote for alternatives real – the FN in France – or imagined – the Greens in Germany.
This in turn worries the Governments there, who are starting to demand that non-euro nations – notably Britain – do their share as “good Europeans” to keep the floundering euro afloat. That means our taxes will go up to bail out their common currency.
In the longer run, this cannot go on. One of the victim economies will collapse completely under the strain, forcing its people, if they have not wearied before then of impoverishing themselves paying the debts of billionaire bankers and speculators, to arise and throw off the shackles of International Finance and the Euro. They have to do both – it is impossible, without a ruinous run on your economy, to withdraw from the Euro without at the same time taking back control of exchange rates and money movements from the global markets, contrary to IMF and EU rules.
This sovereign default – even if it doesn’t trigger all the other euro-victim countries to follow suit at once - will almost certainly collapse the European Central Bank, as international institutions drive it to implode, and as a result the euro if not with a bit of luck the whole EU.
It will be ironic if the EU perishes at the hands of the very global greed money machine it was set up to serve.
More Surrendering to rule from Brussels and Berlin
Surrendering to rule from Brussels and Berlin
April 2011:The EU has responded to the growing crisis threatening the future of the euro by demanding even more power, not only from the countries whose economies are already being destroyed by the euro but from those who still plan to cast themselves into this abyss.
The 'Euro-Plus Pact', imposed at Germany’s behest at a meeting of eurozone ministers in Brussels on March 25th as a condition of further bailouts of the ailing euro by Berlin, commits signatories to surrender sovereignty over many areas of tax policy. The Pact imposed a Common Corporate Tax Base as a revenue neutral way forward to ensure consistency among national tax systems, according to the draft conclusions from the summit.
This will enable Berlin to force countries like Ireland to raise corporate taxes to German levels. The Irish had been attracting inward investment by offering companies lower taxes. They will no longer be allowed to do this. Also Berlin will be able to dictate higher retirement ages to the Pact member states.
Apart from the eurozone members, who have no choice, six non-euro nations also signed up to the Pact - Bulgaria, Romania, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Denmark.
As Bulgarian Prime Minister Bokyo Borissov ruefully admitted:
"If we don't back the 'euro-plus pact', there is no use of applying to become a eurozone member". All twelve countries in the EU’s 2004-2007 enlargement wave. Including Bulgaria agreed to surrender their currencies as soon as possible and join the euro.
Despite this, the Hungarians and Czechs have refused to sign on the dotted line, saying they want to keep the freedom to decide their own taxes, and the Poles are demanding more time to read the small print. Why the Danes – who are not in the euro and have no known plans to join – have signed only they know.
They signed away their sovereignty, they signed away their laws, they signed away their money and now they are being asked to sign away setting their taxes and retirement ages.
That’s what the EU wants to do to us too.
The aim of the 'European Project' – EEC, EC and EU, is – and it has never a sectret in the slightest, to merge its member states into a single European superstate. This latest grab of more independence and freedom from those members foolish enough to enter the inner circle of Eurodom is yet another step on the downward staircase to complete surrender to rule from Brussels and Berlin.
Sunday, 3 April 2011
The British Holocaust: by Jim Dowson = 7 Million Dead And Still Counting
The British Holocaust: by Jim Dowson
FACT: Every abortion stops a beating heart, kills a human being, and robs our nation of its future.
I have gathered together some interesting and non-rabid information on the thorny issue of abortion.Why? Because abortion affects our race and nation’s survival. Imagine if an enemy had slaughtered 7 million British citizens since England won the World Cup, we would be reeling in deep despair and shock at our losses.
Yet this is the number of fellow British people that have been destroyed by abortion in this country. Just imagine if we were today enriched by 7 million young vibrant Britons.
How very different our towns and cities would look and how our future would be more secure. Instead, we have been brainwashed into believing that by destroying our most precious asset – our own children – we are exercising our ‘freedom of choice’. What total madness, what destruction and what shame we have heaped upon ourselves in this suicidal folly that engulfs our people.
I am profoundly proud to be British, I love my nation with all my heart but our nation is we, the people.
It was our ancestors that built this country, it was our kin that fought to defend these shores and it was our people who suffered wars, famine, disease and hardship to make Britain truly Great.
Therefore, why, if we believe this nation to be so special, do we deny millions of our blood the right to be born and enjoy the privilege and blessing of being British? Please read the article below:
“Every aborted (dead) white child represents a small gap in the ‘Bio-spiritual Continuum’, further weakening the chain of descent and hindering us in our intended ascent toward the higher state… Abortion is racial treason in not only a physical sense, but a distinctly spiritual level as well, and the same can be said of miscegenation.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
PATRIOTS WILL NOT REJECT ABORTION UNTIL THEY HAVE SEEN ABORTION IN ACTION…
To view a shocking and highly graphical video of abortion in action please visit the following website. Warning – this video is highly graphic:- SHOCKING ABORTION VIDEO CLICK HERE
Abortion: the Hidden Holocaust
More than 7 million babies have been aborted since the Abortion Act 1967 came into force in Britain and around 85 million in the USA! There are 500 abortions every day in England and Wales and the figures show 67% of are carried out before the 10th week, and 89% before the 12th week.There are about 190,000 abortions a year in England and Wales. The official practice is that an abortion can be performed up to 24 weeks and needs the consent of two family doctors’ (in reality its abortion on request).
The woman can seek a second opinion or go private. It is usual in cases when the child is likely to be disabled or not expected to have a high quality of life, again even the slightest excuse can be used to abort right up until birth in the UK!
The debate is between liberals and feminists on rights, but is never on the woman’s duty to our posterity: the needs of our ethnic group are ignored. The two sides argue where the rights lie, couching the argument in rational terms.
But what about our natural instincts?What about our emotional bonding with our people and the consequent responsibility for one another and the continuity of our people and race?
This is part of the “Ideological Castes” war on nature and the separation of sex from procreation is instilled in sex education, which has a little bit about how to do it but is mostly about how to avoid the consequences through contraception.Abortion is the next step in this process of avoiding children, and because it is the common prejudice even women who morally object feel obliged to have abortions. The authorities could encourage acceptance of deformed people and make more help available but promote abortion.
Like other liberal causes it is always discussed as an individual matter: one that only affects individuals. It is also personalised in a feminine way:” Oh, dear how you must have suffered.”
However, it is a collective issue and concerns us as a group. It was revealed that a quarter of births in Britain are to foreign mothers and this together with the promotion of homosexuality is part of our demographic decline.
What libertarians and liberals overlook is that they who advocate individual rights does so as part of a people by history, tradition and emotional bonding, are brought up and formed in that culture and made what they are by it and are not really independent individuals. That imposes an obligation to the group not just the self. The following shows the falsity of this pretence:
Let us consider non-productive sexual activity and the dispute over the Wolfenden Report of 1963 highlights the gap between the two liberal positions involved. The report did not equate crime to sin, and morality was private, a matter of choice and free judgement for individuals.
The law should only be concerned with immorality for two purposes: to preserve public order and decency, and to protect vulnerable people from corruption or exploitation. It is separating pleasure from responsibility.
The other side of the Liberal gap was represented by Lord Justice Devlin who disputed the distinction between a private sphere of morality and the public sphere for a single sphere of morality which often conflict but “shared moral attitudes, the public morality, is an essential bond of society: if this dissolves, society dissolves.”
"It's only a fetus!" All humans, including YOU, were at some stage of development a fetus. A "fetus" is a small human, with a beating heart, a functioning brain and the ability to feel pain. The Latin word "fetus" means small or young child.
From the 1960s the New Left changed the Liberal concept of individual rights to “Group Rights” and Women’s rights are an important part of this ideology and abortion a major principle: the other justifications, “It’s a women’s right to choose” a “women can do what she likes with her own body” follow from that.
Women’s rights override inhibitions about killing the foetus even though it has been found to be more developed into a person in the womb than thought in the early 60’s since Leslie Neilson’s ultra sound pictures in the late 80’s. These abstract universal, rights do not allow for changes in awareness.
If women have no control over their pregnancy they are denied a public role. This abstract but highly emotional argument helps separate a woman from her people her community and replaces them with an artificial, abstract category of “identity” and “group rights”. The issue is not how much of a person the foetus would become but that it would become one: it would become one of our men or women to keep our people going into the future.
The National Health service is a State body for socially engineering the population and in 2005, for example, the NHS funded 84% of abortions. Of these 52% were carried out by independent Doctors on NHS contracts, and 89% were foetuses under 10 weeks.
Medical abortions were 24% and of these 1% or 1,900 were because there was a risk that the baby would be handicapped. There were 7,900 non-residents in hospitals or clinics in England and Wales.
Theoretically, The Abortion Act allows doctors and nurses with a conscience to opt out of “treatment authorized by this Act” except in emergencies, but they have to prove their “conscience” in a court of law.
The tenth report of the Social Services Committee of 17/10/1990 showed that despite the conscience clause those who dissent from the orthodoxy are penalized by having great difficulty in getting appointed or training in Obstetrics and Gynacaelogy. In practice to further their careers they have to conform to the state orthodoxy.
An MP who supported abortion, Emma Nicholson, told the House of Commons, “General Practitioners in my constituency and elsewhere tell me it is virtually impossible for a doctor to refuse an abortion under the workings of the Act.” (Commons Hansard. Cols 249-250. 24/4/1990)
There is the aspect of decadence or what Mark Steyn calls civilisational exhaustion. It works by progressives providing rationales for our moral and spiritual weakness: On the 24th of October 1963 Professor Dennis Gabor gave the Thompson Lecture and claimed that “Having large families is the one luxury civilisation cannot afford.”
Avoiding children is also part of feeling civilized and in the effete middle-class ethos it is civilized to limit the size of one’s family to maintain their comfortable standards and to be rational about one’s life. There is a sense of taming the wild nature! Several children would entail a less self-consciously controlled way of living.
Then there are school fees. There is a new but not cultured middle-class from ordinary backgrounds who want to enjoy themselves without responsibility for bringing children up. The Economy of decadence and luxury: After the destruction of our manufacturing industry people like Mrs Thatcher were telling us we were to become a service industry.
The concern about animals becoming extinct is a projection onto nature of our willing our own extinction and saves us having to face it.
The fear of overpopulation does not apply here naturally but because we are not replacing our population. The shortfall is filled by unassimilable immigrants. Our population is getting older and we are not producing a workforce.
It seems that when a civilization becomes comfortable and feels safe it ceases to strive and philosophies of ease are developed to rationalise decadence and to justify it. This entails a gradual loss of individual responsibility for the wider community and civilization as they no longer see their duty in perpetuating it.
Paradoxically, abortion is part of our modern civilized view of ourselves, but beneath this the same barbarous instincts to survive only now are justified by science or rationalism rather than religion and they come out in a different way.
We look back on certain practices of the past and regard them as utterly barbaric – human sacrifice, burning heretics, by reading, say, Thucydides and think how primitive, or we shun the Bible out of our sense of progress as a barbarian tract, but support a woman’s wish to have her babies murdered – future ages will look back on allowing women to kill their own babies in their thousands because they might be inconvenient, with the same feeling of disgust as we at former barbarian practices.
There are of course biologico-philosophical arguments about when human life starts, but it seems distinctly forced to suppose that a few hours between pre- and post-birth constitute a moral difference; and, the argument about a woman doing what she likes with her own body is another self-centred and indefensible view. Always in these arguments people think of themselves as living in bubbles without responsibility to our group and to future generations.
One faction in the liberal parameter does not regard the unborn child as a person, and on those grounds say it has no right to life. The emphasis is on whether the mother has the right to give birth or not, or what right has another to force her to give birth. To the opposing side the foetus is a person.
Their debate is between conflicting rights. We have a lack of control over our fertility and this is something to control in a rational, civilized society. Nature, and that includes us, must be tamed as we flatter ourselves that we have transcended human nature.
What about rape, incest or health problems? 1% of abortions are due to rape or incest, 6% are because of potential health problems and 93% of abortions occur because for social reasons i.e. because the child is not wanted or inconvenient. Surely this is unacceptable is any society. So, if we did keep abortion open for rape, incest or health problems only, we would drop from 190,000 abortions per year to only 13,500. This would be a pragmatic compromise most pro life activists could live with.
We have been degraded by the elites to “Partial-Birth” abortions which is up till 9 months pregnancy.
These were performed legally in the United States until banned by George Bush in 2003. It is not done just on babies who are severely deformed or dying but also on the inconvenient ones.
The method is that the abortionist is guided by ultrasound till he finds the baby’s leg and grabs it with forceps and pulls into the birth canal whence the abortionist delivers the baby’s entire body, except for the head.
Then the abortionist then rams scissors into the baby’s skull and opens the scissors to enlarge the hole, removes the scissors and inserts a suction catheter to suck the baby’s brains out, the skull collapses and the dead baby pulled out. Is that all our children are worth?
If that is not a brutal murder what is? Little wonder that these people are often obsessed with the Third Reich’s eugenics programmes. They themselves are just as evil, perhaps moreso as they do this not for ideals or because they were ordered to but for a wealthy, comfortable life for the convenience of the group-rights of women.
Proponents of abortion claim that it is rare for women to regret having had an abortion, but post-abortion services like BVA and Life receive hundreds of calls every year from women suffering deeply after abortions, sometimes years after the abortion. Post-abortion trauma is a recognized medical condition.
As abortion is often undergone to keep a pregnancy secret from husband, parents or others, there are strong reasons for denial that can worsen the effects of PAT. It is a consequence of women acting against their own instincts and brings a heavy price.
Forty two-years of prejudice in favour of abortion has led to a loss of respect for human life and an acceptance of a utilitarian approach to human life as we see in the acceptance of embryo research, passive euthanasia and the arguments now being used in favour of physicians assisting death.
There is a growing counter movement among the public as developments like 4D images have caused discomfort among about late-term abortion, but the majority of abortions are carried out during the first three months and there is less shift in public opinion on early abortion.However, the fact that junior doctors appear to be increasingly reluctant to be involved with abortion suggests that the message may be getting across to those who are directly caught up in the practice.
Abortion is part of the attitude the Establishment is enforcing. If you rebel you are oppressed, labelled negatively or punished. BBC News 29/6/2007 reported that Sarah Scott a teenage mother was prohibited from wearing an anti-abortion T-shirt to school in Aberdeenshire.
A "woman's choice"? The time to make "choices" about the life or death of a baby is BEFORE pregnancy/conception. Should any human hold the right of life or death over another innocent human being? Absolutely not. Every unborn baby is a distinct, unique, alive and growing human being, with its own DNA identity, and left alone and not slaughtered will blossom into a fully developed human being just like YOU. YOU are alive today because your mother decided NOT to abort you.
“I feel I am the one being targeted because I am anti-abortionist. Yet other pupils’ have T-shirts displaying the Playboy logo, which promotes pornography, were not threatened with exclusion.” The ploy that words cause offence is used when the authorities want to suppress dissent.
We have a duty to our ancestors when we inherit what they left us to pass it on to our posterity – ours! We cannot do that while we are aborting our children. It is the moral duty of our young people to have as many babies as possible to save our people from becoming extinct or pushed out of homes and communities by faster breeding immigrants. We might be giving our children up to servitude to Islam if we do not resist the evil intentions of our rulers.
(Majority Rights)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Conclusion by Jim Dowson
Proof that the extreme left are firmly in charge of the abortion industry is easy to find: the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) – who pull in £25 million per year from holding the unenviable position of being the UK’s largest providers of late abortions (post 20 weeks) – is run by Anne Ferudi .This woman’s husband is one of the world’s leading Frankurt School players. Frank Furedi (born 1947, in Budapest, Hungary) is professor of sociology at the University of Kent. Here , some of his protégés – like Dr Elli Lee – have openly argued (BBC moral maze) to legalize the killing of children up to the age of consciousness, perhaps 3 or 4 years of age!
A former student radical, he became involved in leftwing politics in the 1970s and emerged as founder and chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party.
Frank Furedi: Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party and leading Frankfurt School fanatic.
These are the people who fanatically promote and actually carry out the slaughter of tens of thousands of British babies every year in ‘private clinics’ across the country, and make a fortune from it.
These people are being paid to destroy our race and nation hidden under the banner of Liberalism, Women’s Rights and Equality. Millions of British children have been sacrificed on the alter of liberalism and yet most nationalists and patriots ignore the abortion issue.
Dear friends, it’s time to wake up. Our people are perishing at a rate of 500 per day in clinics like Feredi’s. No more I say, and I call upon all true patriots to defend our children from the Abortion Holocaust.
I hope the above article has been a good overview of the abortion issue, but let us be mindful that websites, ideology or fine speeches do not win wars. Young men, stout of heart, and filled with a patriotic zeal and love of their people, win wars.
In 20 years our sons will have to boldly stand shoulder to shoulder in a Holy crusade to halt the onslaught of the Mohammedans as they rampage through our Continent.
Yes, we need strong political direction, but we need strong sons and lots more of them. Remember, the secret of survival for our people, nation and culture is our women – we need virtuous women willing to bear and nurture the seed of our race if we ever hope to survive.
May God grant us young men and women willing to bring forth a generation of warriors for Britannia’s darkest hour.
If you have had an abortion and require assistance of any kind please contact Abortion Recovery Care and Helpline on 0845 603 8501.
Plan B Written by Mister Fox
| Plan B |  |  |
| Written by Mister Fox |
| Friday, 01 April 2011 18:30 |
 What see around us is a changed world and countries like China and India forging ahead while we languish, dispirited and led by corrupt and inadequate people who are prejudiced in favour of “other” ethnic groups and against their own people. This is an inversion of nature as it is natural to put your own first. Classic Liberalism was replaced by the ideas of the New Left in the 1960s who took over the title Liberalism but changed the content. For example, and this is profoundly important, the individual rights advocated by Classic Liberals became group rights. This shifted everything into totalitarian thinking because individual rights applied to individuals per se but group rights gave minority groups (victims) preferential treatment over the host population (oppressors). This is parallel with the Nazis advocacy of superior groups over inferior groups and is no more moral as it gives preference to outsiders over the indigenous people. (1) There was a shift to developing the correct attitudes instead of educating which is why education was changed so much until many at state schools don't get a proper education - little history, no grammar. It leaves them largely dysfunctional but with the right opinions. Classical Liberals believed in education and pupils expressing themselves. (2) It is eye-opening to analyse the worldview of the opinion formers. I looked at the BBC reports of the inquiry into the London bombings. The criticisms were directed at the security services for not having foreknowledge and the emergency services, particularly the ambulance service, for being incompetent. Everyone is to blame apart from those who planted the bombs! In reality this was a terrorist plot, not a natural disaster that has no human agency. This saves them having to confront 3 million Muslims and facing that there is much more than a tiny minority against us. We saw this with the Brazilian who was shot by the police. He was a legitimate cause of concert to them as he lived with a bomber. The opinion formers left that bit out and concentrated on blaming the police. They believe in their own fantasies and become very angry if one from the EDL or BNP points out reality to them because they are trying to avoid facing reality and a contradiction of their vision of the world throws them into fear and panic. Those who live in fantasy fear contradiction. They have constructed their own world which is out of touch. It is easy for them to live a fantasy because it is remote from their own lives as they themselves live in delightful villages or smart London areas. If the multi-racial experiment was actually working or if they set an example and lived in it themselves they might command respect. They are cruel, vicious, hypocrites who denounce people who have to suffer from far away in their privileged worlds. They have no compassion and no conscience and never ask themselves: "What have we done to the poor people?” They don't have to care because they dehumanise the poor: "Don't worry about them they are just racists”. They are educated and know about history and culture and are aware that a hundred years ago Europe was at its height of power and prestige. The whole world was enthralled to White man: America in the west, us in Africa and Russia in the east. The Tzar, the Kaiser and King George were cousins and looked alike. The Tzar looked like King George V. There was no rival power so they fell out amongst themselves. A hundred years on and the new elites who have inherited can see this great fall. They are trying to make amends and to ingratiate themselves with other ethnic groups. At he same time the descendants of the formerly oppressed peoples remember how the humiliation of their ancestors. The educated ones bear a grudge and see the largess of our rulers not as penitence but weakness because our rulers use taxpayers money to bribe them not their own. It is an empty gesture; while our rulers try to show how they have changed. In the past we could take what they wanted like palm oil, sugar. The ruling class had the ancestors of those who bear grudges working for us. We introduced tea into India from China. The Assam province was perfect for it as it catches the rain. The cliffs of Cherrapunji receive heavy rainfall because of Monsoon winds blowing from the Bay of Bengal and is the wettest place on earth. The rulers were in control and directed affairs. They no longer do and if they refused to trade with us there is nothing we could do. Our only superiority now is technology and China has been stealing our intellectual property. They are sending students here who take our ideas back with them. Our advantage is being exported. They also bought Rover and Indian companies own Rolls Royce and Jaguar and have all that technology. When the immigrants started coming they had to let them in because they were frightened of offending them. They also thought that as they had dominated them for so long they were culturally superior. But the ordinary people are being made to pay through taxes already mentioned and by having whole areas of their towns taken off them. The elites perception of the newcomers is not only unrealistic but immoral because their duty is to there own. They neglect this for helping Africa by using other people's money. (3) They are lying and they know they are. They do so because what they fantasised, a coffee-coloured utopia with everyone coming together, is demonstrably coming apart and to salve their consciences they present us as the problem: they scapegoat Whites for the failure of their unrealistic dreams of racial harmony. Most people did not realise what was happening as it was done by deceit: publicising false figures of immigration and covering up racial attacks on Whites. It was the former that prompted Sir Andrew Green to form Migration Watch to offer the public the real figures. A democracy can not work unless the public are given accurate information to base their views on. The public took it on trust and voted for political parties who said they would look after their interests. They could not conceive that the politicians would use them for votes but actively work against their interests apart from bribing them with welfare benefits or tax cuts to keep them passive and loyal. Even in the decline of the Roman Empire the Roman elites did not actively encourage the invasions of their own country or work to have their own people replaced while boasting that they live in a democracy where the will of the people counts, but our elites have. This is one of the most evil acts in human history – ruling elites destroying their own countries and allowing their own people to be mugged, raped and children gang-raped but take the side of the perpetrators. Enoch once said that this country is like France on the eve of the revolution because the rulers do not care how their people live. But people are now realising what is happening as we see from comments in the online versions of major newspapers. If the topic is a central issue like some aspects of immigration the editors “disable” the comments facility to avoid facing the “hollow murmuring under ground” that is the yawning gap opening between rulers, opinion formers and the public.(4) However, People are confused about what to do: some are waiting for a leader but most go out and vote for not only their usual tribal party which means the whole vote for different tribal parties which means no concerted action can follow but it is beginning to find a focus. They can not understand why elected officials don't stop it – because this what they want! The growing realisation of what is happening needs more co-ordination. At the moment the intellectual front line, bloggers and writers are operating in isolation. There is common ground in love for our country and local areas to build on, but economics would need to be less partisan – Labour bribing the working-classes, and Tories the middle-classes. The trick to suppress us was to use images of Nazi camps to tell people if you don't follow multi-racialism you know where that leads. The implication was that we would all turn into Nazis ready to operate gas chambers. But this wicked insinuation insults overlooks that we fought Nazism and many lost family in the effort. One of the great ironies of mass immigration and Europe falling to Islam is that Israel will be surrounded by hostile Muslim states; if America continues to implode, as it is under mass immigration, then Israel will be starved of money. Influential Jewish people and apostate Jews, who promote mass immigration are bringing this about. George Sorros with his open borders, David Milliband and Sarkozy with their suicidal European-Mediterranean Partnership are also bringing persecution on European Jewish communities with their myopic anti White schemes. If Jews have to flee to Israel but are surrounded by hostile Muslim states along with the problems of providing basic supplies like water and with America bankrupt, they are screwed as they aren't viable on their own. It was said that the Zionists wanted non white immigration into the US so has to make the overall population less anti Semitic but this was a great error and puts Israel in great danger. We are being decultured - it is for us to maintain our culture and pass it on from our ancestors to our descendants not let foreigners take it over because they start to reform it through their own prejudices and cultural needs. The opinion formers talk about the world in a universal way and think if we behave like ethnics we are showing respect yet the ethnics recognise the superiority of European culture - electricity, motor vehicles, welfare provisions, hot and cold running water, computers and the Internet. At the same time our ways are downgraded – bad manners, foul-mouthed vulgarity presented as working-class norm, untidiness. This is a decline from when we had pride in the country and ourselves as worthwhile and valuable things. They appreciated learning, standards of honour, manners, decorum. It was part of the fabric of our lives. Now our culture is said to be no better than anyone else's so they promote foreign things – Indian cuisine, imported music styles. They want us to have as much respect for their ways as our own traditions; this undermines us as we cease to be sustained by our cultural infrastructure like the aforementioned manners and laws. We no longer know instinctively what the right thing to do is as we are told the only value is tolerance. If tolerance is the main virtue where does it end? It is not real tolerance anyway as it is one-sided. You are supposed to tolerate what thy tell us to tolerate and be intolerant of what they don't tolerate. For example, I am tolerant of the EDL, BNP and other patriotic movements but the elites are intolerant of them. The institution as it were, sits on the top of the people, but we are being dehumanised and made a non people. We must abandon this inculcated niceness, this apologetic approach and assert our selves. We need to give our people a sense of their collective worth for the common good must abandon this inculcated niceness, this apologetic approach and assert our selves. We need to give our people a sense of their collective worth for the common good. He treats them with respect by asking questions. The next generation need to be built up to inherit the responsibility for our life and culture. At the moment the media are occupying them with what to wear, how to get their hair done and where to have a tat! It is done to get their money and is morally evil. They are being debauched by temptations and enticements. It is Global Capitalism that is doing this and weakening ideologies like those from The Frankfurt School are being used to proceed in weakening national and tribal wills and identity. The Catholic Church is a buffer against the Culture Wars but Anglican leaders here are batting for the other side. Catholicism provides a huge spiritual comfort whereas Marxist Global Capitalism is destroying people. We had a long tradition of Conserving homogeneity until Hitler and must regenerate that positive approach. Churchill had tried to have a Bill introduced to control immigration in 1955 and there is a wealth of important quotes from Disraeli, Baldwin et al. In 1601 Queen Elizabeth1 Had “Blackamores” “voided from the realm.” Another thing that has held us back are the timid Tories of the Conservative Patriotic wing. I know they have a lot to lose and their children get ostracised at posh schools but The Salisbury Review and The Quarterly Review could have done more to oppose the colonisation of Britain instead of criticising it in private but capitulating to it in public. The Monday Club meekly submitted to Conservative Central Office and allowed itself to be purged. The Traditional Britain Group have more fire but their guest speakers are tame. There are very clever and aware members of these groups who have much to offer when they realise what the real situation is. The State outwitted everyone by infiltrating the opposition parties like UKIP and the BNP which is now being destroyed from within to prevent opposition to immigration and the EU in what is effectively a one-party state. The political front line needs rebuilding but there are other things to do We need to take meaning from life, not just ideas. They do this in religion and constantly repeat the same thing and conserve the behaviour of the ritual. The religion is kept alive in attendance and in the acting out and this is not something to analyse or question but to do. We appeal to continuity as tradition embodies our collective continuity. Morality and value run down from our ancestors like threads binding us together. The Progressives are always changing, overturning preconceived ideas. Their problem is they are now the purveyors of preconceived ideas. To them the present and the future means atoning for the past in an eternal masochistic confessional. We must not allow our children to be taught about homosexuality in primary schools? Why don't parents take them out of school and form Home Schooling networks? Part of our answer is to educate children into the history of the country. It is like growing plants and food, one gets satisfaction from having grown it oneself: its a smaller version of producing children that look like oneself. By association you take a pride in it as the new rich of China are buying old Chinese vases as Russians have been buying old art works. This is nationalism being expressed by rich ones buying their nations traditional art. It is their national spirit expressing itself and there are many ways of conserving things. Why conserve these artifacts? We need to relegate the alien forms we are being inducted into like rap or jazz for our own forms of music. This could be developed organically by like-minded people renting rooms above pubs to play and, with an enthusiastic audience, they would have a community of interest to play and listen to our traditional forms. They could have Arts Labs for traditional music and poetry and add new stuff to this thread to continue traditions. The increased revenue might also save some of our community pubs that are closing. We should be forming social clubs. Having communal meals is an efficacious way of bringing people together. It paces your life and brings meaning in. We need our own commemorative days like one on the anniversary of Enoch's great “Rivers of Blood” speech. That was a very significant event because support for it was like war time support for a national leader with dockers and meat porters marching and masses of letters of support. A statue of the original campaigner against mass immigration Cyril Osborne should go on the Fourth plinth in Trafalgar square.(5) We have to manage our own affairs and form our own institutions. Become pioneers in our own country. __________________ Click here for the reference notes to accompany this article |
Saturday, 2 April 2011
Sorry No British National Party Candidate for Horwich 2011
Press Announcement,
Due to heavy work commitments last years British National Party Candidate for Horwich Ivan Cooper is unable to stand for the Horwich North east ward this year , and also due to reorganisation within the local party, no other candidates could be found in time for the borough or town council elections.
Mr Cooper has stated that " I feel awful that the people of Horwich have no true British candidate this year and are just stuck with the old traitors parties, but what with work and business commitments I could not this year devote myself exclusively to my duties as a candidate.and a replacement candidate could not be found in time. rest assured we shall be back next election full of vim and vigor with a full list of candidates for both Horwich wards"
Mr Cooper has stated that " I feel awful that the people of Horwich have no true British candidate this year and are just stuck with the old traitors parties, but what with work and business commitments I could not this year devote myself exclusively to my duties as a candidate.and a replacement candidate could not be found in time. rest assured we shall be back next election full of vim and vigor with a full list of candidates for both Horwich wards"
Paedophiles and the ‘Labour Party 25′
Paedophiles and ‘Labour 25′
A Warning to all Parents.
Parents, please warn your families and friends about the ‘Labour25′ Convicted paedophiles in the Labour Party & their agenda to ‘Groom’ our Children.
‘Labour25′ – the Labour Party’s Convicted Paedophile List.
Liam Temple – Labour Councillor and former Mayor (Halton/Cheshire), convicted of `Inciting a child under 16 to commit an act of gross indecency` after the 58-year old Labour pervert had attempted to molest a 12-year old girl.
Stewart Brown – Former Labour Mayor of Hebden Royd, Yorkshire, pleaded guilty at Leeds Crown Court to 21 offences of possessing indecent images of children and one of distributing the depraved pictures.
Sam Chaudry – Labour Councillor and Mayor-Elect (Merton/London) – Due to become Merton’s first Asian Mayor before he was arrested – tried and convicted of multiple sex attacks on young girls. One of his victims was a 5-year old.
Nicholas Green – Labour Mayor and Council Leader (Westhoughton/Lancashire)- convicted and jailed for 10 years for 3 rapes and 13 counts of indecent assault against little girls between the age of 6 and 10.
Keith Potts – Labour Party Councillor and junior School Governor
Alan Prescott – Labour Councillor (Hornchurch/Essex), also a senior magistrate, convicted and jailed for 2 years for molesting children at the East London care home where he was the superintendent.
Terry Power - Labour Party Councillor, sex attacks on boys.
Joseph Shaw – In April 2009 A former Wigan Labour councillor who downloaded child porn and had a gun and ammunition in his safe was jailed for six years. A court heard that Joseph Shaw’s offending came to light after his daughter found the indecent images on his computer. Liverpool Crown Court heard that Shaw had been a Labour councillor for Wigan West for three years and also a member of the Greater Manchester Transport Authority.
George Harding – Labour Party Councillor, indecent assault on a child.
Lee Benson – Labour Councillor (Halton/Leeds), convicted after pleading guilty on 12 counts of possession of indecent images of children, featuring youngsters between the ages of 5 and 11.
Raymond Coates – Former Labour Councillor (North Yorkshire), charged along with his son Philip Coats with child rape, using threats to procure a woman for sex and, wait for it… inciting a woman to have sex with an animal. Coates junior was sentenced to 13 years in prison for his part in the Father & Son rape and bestiality double-act, although the trial of 76-year old Raymond Coats was abandoned after the court ruled he was too ill to stand trial.
Les Sheppard – Labour Councillor (Coxhoe/Durham) – convicted on ten counts of indecent assault on young girls between the ages of 9 and 13. Jailed for 2 years, and placed on the sex offenders register for 10 years.
Martyn Locklin – Labour Councillor (Newton Aycliffe/Durham – In Tony Blair’s Sedgefield constituency), convicted on 8 counts of rape and indecent assault on teenage boys and jailed for 15 years (reduced to 12 on appeal). Locklin was a top local Party bigwig on first-name terms with Tony Blair,
Nelson Bland – Labour Councillor (Wokingham/Berkshire), convicted on 16 counts of possession and distribution of hardcore child porn.
Greg Vincent – Labour Councillor (Newham/London), Election Agent to Labour MP Tony Banks at the 2001 General Election – convicted and given a 2-year community rehabilitation order for possession of hardcore kiddie porn films
Alec Dyer Atkins – Labour Councillor (Northampton/Northamptonshire), and former School Governor, convicted and jailed for 2 years for downloading more than 42,000 pictures and films described in court as “Horrifying images of child abuse”. Dyer-Atkins was a member of an international paedophile ring called `The Shadows Brotherhood.
Keith Rogers – Labour Councillor (Westlands/Worcestershire), convicted, fined, and placed on the sex offender’s register after downloading over 2,000 hardcore child porn photos on his computer.
Paul Diggert – Labour Parliamentary candidate (Cheadle/Cheshire), subject of a 2002 police investigation into the alleged procurement of underage girls for sexual purposes via internet chatrooms. According to the `Sunday Mirror` (3/11/02), Diggert had admitted to having four underage girls that he was `grooming` for sex. In 2004 Diggert was convicted of making and distributing indecent pictures of children.
Peter Tuffley – Labour Party Official (North West England Regional Officer, and parliamentary adviser to one time Home Office Minister responsible for crime and policing, Hazel Blears), convicted and jailed for 15 months and placed on the sex offenders register for 10 years in 2006, for the sexual molestation of a 13-year old boy that he had previously `groomed` on the internet. Tuffley was described as a `rising star` within the Labour Party.
Mark Trotter - Labour Party member & super activist – child rapist with Aids
Yusef Azad - Labour Party on the Greater London Assembly. Computer seized in anti-Child Porn Operation.
Gilbert Benn – Labour Party Councillor. Molesting a boy.
David Spooner – Labour Councillor (North Lincolnshire), convicted and jailed for 1 year for masterbating in front of 2 young boys.
Mark Tann – Prominent Kent Labour Party activist (who met Tony & Cherie Blair at Party functions) convicted and jailed for 15 years in 2002 for sexually assaulting a girl of 9, and raping a 4-year old girl on 2 separate occasions.
Lestyn Tudor Davies – Labour Councillor (Bridgend/South Wales), convicted, jailed for 7 years, and placed on the sex offender’s register for life in 2005, for repeatedly raping a 9-year old girl.
Plus Two more paedophiles…
Michael Barnes – Labour Party Councillor – downloading Child Porn
On trial…
John Friary – Labour Party Councillor – Grooming a child on the internet on Facebook for Sex. She is only 13 years old.
This is the reason why paedophiles are attracted to the Labour Party. The Labour Party’s whole agenda is paedophilia with our Children.
The Labour Party Sex Education films for minors – why are our Children being ‘Groomed’ in the Classroom ?
Why did the Labour Party decide without warning to introduce Sex Education for children as young as 5 years old? One publication is called ’4you’ which included a section on masturbation. You wouldn’t allow a child to watch an X rated video, so why is it ‘acceptable’ to watch it in Schools?
Why would a child that young need to know about Sex or how to use Condoms?
Children are being asked at 10 years old about whether they are gay, lesbian, cross-dressing or straight. Why?
Why would an adult need to know this?
What is the gain for this to children?
What is the gain for this with a Paedophile ?
The Labour Party’s Hariett Harman was involved With ‘PIE’ (Paedophile Information Exchange.) wanting to ‘water-down’ Child Porn Laws. ”As long as the child is not hurt it’s ok” she said. Also, she wants to lower the age of consent to 14. She also wanted to decriminalise incest.
The Labour Party’s Hariett Harman & child killer Myra Hindley connection…
Hariett Harman’s uncle was Lord Longford ! The only person who campaigned for child killer Myra Hindley to be set free !!
And further North.
A number of Scottish Labour Party officials were/are allegedly involved in the Paedophile sex ring called ‘The Speculative Society’.
Downs Syndrome girl Hollie Greig was ritually abused by this paedophile satanic group, and the establishment is trying to hide the evidence due to the high profile of those allegedly involved. Was Holly Greig’ uncle murdered (maybe) for trying to expose the truth?
In Scotland, the Dunblane massacre uncovered a paedophile ring which involved numerous Labour party officials, the most high profile of which was the Labour Peer and former Secretary General to N.A.T.O. Lord George Robertson. The facts were ‘buried’ when an outrageous 100 year ‘gagging’ order was imposed. A 100 year gagging order is as rare as hens teeth, what was the reason for the imposition of this one?
Tim Russo, a Labour party worker who arranged the visits for Charles Clarke as home secretary, has a conviction for procuring young boys for sex.
Google ‘Labour25′, that’s the new name we have given to the Labour Party.
Only a Paedophile would put Paedophiles in power !
‘PaP’ (parents against paedophiles)
Contact us @
parentsagainstpaedophiles@msn.com
Hypocrite Archbishop of Canterbury ~ Islamic Law Protects Christians~
~UK: Archbishop of Canterbury ~ Islamic Law Protects Christians~
Now, this is exactly what I am talking about when I assert that there are FAR too many non-Muslims who are clearly supporting the ideology of the enemy. Such “sympathetic” non-Muslims are aiding in the destruction of Western Civilization. To make matters worse, some of the enablers of Islam are people in high positions of power, the UK’s Dr. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, for example. The Archbishop of Canterbury, who is the head of the Church of England. With that position, one would think that he would actually stand up for his own religion and those who are supposed to be his flock. Think again!Besides being a big supporter of the UK’s Sharia Courts, The Archbishop is now spreading false information about Sharia Law. Propagating such misinformation about Sharia is detrimental to Christians.
A truly Islamic state protects ChristiansIn your eyes, it is reasonable for the Koran to call for the dominance of Christians?
London – In the history of some countries there comes a period when political and factional murder becomes almost routine – Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, Germany and its neighbours in the early 1930s. It has invariably been the precursor of a breakdown of legal and political order and of long-term suffering for a whole population. And last week, with the killing of Shahbaz Bhatti, the Minister for Minorities, Pakistan has taken a further step down this catastrophic road.
To those who actually support such atrocities, there is little to say. They inhabit a world of fantasy, shot through with paranoid anxiety. As the shocked responses from so many Muslims in this country and elsewhere make plain, their actions are as undermining of Qur’anic ethics as they are of rational politics.
Koran verse 009.029Or, perhaps the Archbishop is only going on the word of Muslims, and he himself has never even bothered to read the Koran?
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
But to those who recognise something truly dreadful going on in their midst – to the majority in Pakistan who have elected a government that, whatever its dramatic shortcomings, is pledged to resist extremism – we have surely to say, “Do not imagine that this can be ‘managed’ or tolerated.”Define “extremism” Archbishop. Was Mohammad who called for the dominance of Christians, an “extremist”?
Muslim Hadith Book 019, Number 4366:Did you not notice the name of the country is the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.
The government of Pakistan and the great majority of its population are, in effect, being blackmailed. The widespread and deep desire for Pakistan to be what it was meant to be, for justice to be guaranteed for all, and for some of the most easily abused laws on the statute book to be reviewed is being paralysed by the threat of murder. The blasphemy case of the Pakistani Christian woman, Aasia Noreen, so prominent in the debates of recent months, and the connected murder of Salman Taseer, the Governor of the Punjab, make it crystal clear that there is a faction in Pakistan wholly uninterested in justice and due process of law, concerned only with promoting an inhuman pseudo-religious tyranny.Dr. Williams, why do you act like you speak for the Muslims of Pakistan? You do not!There is a reason that they wanted their own state, their sovereignty, and I’m pretty sure it has something to do with Islam…
Apparently, you have not read the Koran. So, now I have to ask if you have ever even glimpsed the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan? If not, I will gladly help you out by supplying it here.
PART IISounds nice, but then there is this part.
Fundamental Rights and Principles of Policy
Chapter 1. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
25. Equality of citizens.
(1) All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law.
PART IX PART IXNow we see the double-talk. Because the injunctions of Islam do affect non-Muslims.
Islamic Provisions
227. Provisions relating to the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah.
(1) All existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, in this Part referred to as the Injunctions of Islam, and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such Injunctions.
[242] [Explanation:- In the application of this clause to the personal law of any Muslim sect, the expression "Quran and Sunnah" shall mean the Quran and Sunnah as interpreted by that sect.]
(2) Effect shall be given to the provisions of clause (1) only in the manner provided in this Part.
(3) Nothing in this Part shall affect the personal laws of non- Muslim citizens or their status as citizens.
Pakistan was created by Muhammad Ali Jinnah as a consciously Muslim state in which, nonetheless, the non-Muslim enjoyed an absolute right of citizenship and the civic securities and liberties that go with it. In common with the best historical examples of Muslim governance, there was a realistic and generous recognition that plural and diverse convictions would not go away and that therefore a just Muslim state, no more and no less than a just Christian or secular state, had to provide for the rights of its minorities.Here’s a look at one of the “best historical examples of Muslim governance”.
The Christians of Najran, Medina, refused conversion to Islam in 631 A.D. and offered Mohamad to maintain their faith, accept the dominance of Muslims and pay an annual tribute (the jizya), he accepted and the pact was sealed between them.Unfortunately, the Archbishop is not done bowing to Islam…
If the state’s willingness to guarantee absolute security for minorities of every kind is a test of political maturity and durability, whatever the confessional background, Pakistan’s founding vision was a mature one. The disdain shown for that vision by Bhatti’s killers is an offence against Islam as much as against Christianity in Pakistan.Islam is an offence against Christianity. So why are you standing up for it?
What needs to change?Suicidal Westerners, like you need to change!
Most Muslim thinkers are embarrassed by supposedly “Islamic” laws in various contexts that conceal murderous oppression and bullying. Their voices are widely noted; they need to be heard more clearly in Pakistan, where part of the problem is the weakening of properly traditional Islam by the populist illiteracies of modern extremism.Name them Williams, who are these voices? I have already proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that Islamic Law is oppressive. So have some integrity and stop fabricating things as you go along!
SNIP
Bhatti died, for all practical purposes, as a martyr – let me be clear – not simply for his Christian faith, but for a vision shared between Pakistani Christians and Muslims. When he and I talked at Lambeth Palace in London last year, he was fully aware of the risks he ran. He did not allow himself to be diverted for a moment from his commitment to justice for all.What shared vision? The same one that you have about Christians being “protected” by Islamic Law? As in the remainder of his article, the Archbishop continues to make statements without any factual foundation. Well here is a FACT: Christians are “protected” under Islamic Law. They are “protected” from Muslims! in as much as they pay the jizya (extortion) and bow to Islamic dominance.
o11.9 If non-Muslim subjects of the Islamic state refuse to conform to the rules of Islam or pay the non-Muslim poll tax, than their agreement with the state has been violated. (dis: o11.11) (A: though if only one of them disobeys, it concerns him alone).Once the agreement is “violated”, under Sharia, Christians can be put to death or enslaved!
Why did The Archbishop leave out all of those pretty important facts?! Was he exhibiting ignorance or weakness? Either way, he is a no Christian leader. But, in actuality, he is a thorn in the side of Christianity!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)