BBC Criminality: Questions from the Licence Payer

BBC Criminality:

Questions from the Licence Payer

Dear Mr MacIntyre,

I would appreciate your early response to the questions below:

1. The BBC and violence

BBC "MacIntyre Undercover" Journalist James Raven

20 Aug 2004 – Found guilty of the murder of a man tortured to death in front of his children.

During the BBC man's trial, it emerged that the £40k-a-year journalist had tortured his victim to death in Cheshire, having tied up his children and forced them to watch. Brian Waters was beaten, whipped, burned and attacked with an industrial staple gun. He died after being hung upside down and sexually assaulted with a metal bar.

BBC Panorama Presenter and Reporter Raphael Rowe

Rowe was himself convicted of murder and spent 12 years behind bars before being cleared after the Appeal Court ruled his conviction was unsafe.

Rowe has a string of other convictions for robbery and theft, including one for malicious wounding.

Soon after being released from prison, Rowe began training as a BBC journalist, and in September 2001 landed a job as an investigative reporter for Radio 4's Today programme.

BBC TV and BBC Radio Four Broadcaster Laurence Westgaph

The 34-year-old BBC expert flew into a rage, repeatedly punching his love rival in the face and fracturing his eye socket, a court was told. At one point, it was even thought he had bitten the other man's ear off.

Westgaph has appeared on TV and radio discussing the slave trade.

In September 2009 Westgaph was convicted of grievous bodily harm and given a nine-month jail sentence, suspended for two years.

In 2000 he was given a community order after being found to have had sex with an underage girl.

BBC TV News Presenter Ashley Blake, "Inside Out"

In September 2009 he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment after being convicted of assault.

Blake scarred a 17-year-old for life after inflicting serious facial injuries with a wooden pole. As a result of the wounding trial, Blake's previous criminal record was revealed. He had been convicted of theft on six occasions (twice in 1986, three times in 1987 and once in 1993) and handling stolen goods in 1988. In 1988, Blake was found guilty of altering documents following a traffic collision, resulting in him being disqualified from driving, a ban he broke in 1990.

Question: Was the BBC aware of the serious criminal background of those it employed or is the BBC's investigative journalism department incapable of investigating its own staff?

Question: Do you think the BBC in general and BBC Panorama in particular are in any position to distort and sensationalise relatively minor criminal convictions of small numbers of individuals in other organisations?

2. The BBC and illegal drugs

BBC Radio One DJ Grooverider, real name Raymond Bingham

Jailed for four years in Dubai after smuggling drugs into the United Arab Emirates in February 2008.

BBC "999 Lifesavers" star Natasha Collins and BBC Presenter Mark Speight

Natasha Collins was found dead in a bath in 2008 due to a massive cocaine overdose. Boyfriend Mark Speight, a BBC presenter, was initially arrested on suspicion of murder and supplying class A drugs.

A few months later, Speight was reported missing and was found to have committed suicide by hanging himself near Paddington Station.

BBC Europe Correspondent Jonny Dymond

March 2008 – The 38-year-old was detained by transport police at Vilnius Airport, in Lithuania, after illegal drugs were found in his bag.

Dymond, a radio and TV news reporter, is understood to have been on holiday alone in Lithuania. He was checking in for a flight to London, when he was arrested.

At a court hearing in the capital Vilnius, he pleaded guilty to carrying drugs and was fined £230 for possession.

He told the court he bought them in a nightclub when he was drunk.

A BBC spokesman said: "We are aware of the incident, which happened in his own time. He recognises that he has been foolish."

A BBC insider said it was not a sackable offence. "It's likely that the BBC will speak to him about this but it probably won't go any further.”

BBC Children's TV Presenter Richard Bacon

Admitted to using class A drugs after a Sunday newspaper described him as a "cocaine-snorting sneak”. Currently working for BBC Radio Five.

BBC TV star John Alford, "Casualty"

Convicted of supplying class A drugs to the News of the World undercover reporter Mazher Mahmood, and subsequently jailed for nine months.

BBC Reporter Peter Lloyd

18 July 2008 – Lloyd was arrested in Singapore, and the local police charged him with drug-related offences. Police had alleged that Lloyd was found in possession of a small quantity of the drug 'ice', one improvised smoking pipe, and six syringes.

The Singaporean police said that his urine tested positive for amphetamines and he was being investigated for trafficking a controlled drug. Lloyd was released on bail of SGD 60 000, posted by his lover Mohamed Mazlee bin Abdul Malik.

In November 2008, Singapore's Attorney-General dropped the harsher trafficking charge against Lloyd, leaving him to face four lesser charges. On 2 December 2008, Lloyd was sentenced to ten months in jail after pleading guilty to three of the charges.

Question: Considering the culture of drug abuse seemingly epidemic at senior and middle levels of BBC staff, what drug testing measures are employed by the Corporation?

Question: Has the BBC ever tested the toilet cubicles in its own buildings for evidence of cocaine use?

Question: Do you consider that the vital role that BBC staff play in imparting information to the British public makes it particularly important that BBC staff are not stupefied by narcotics whilst on duty?

Question: How many other BBC staff have drug-related criminal convictions?

Question: Does the BBC have a moral obligation to ensure high standards amongst staff, especially in the light that their salaries and expenses are paid directly by the public?

3. The BBC and sexual depravity

BBC Presenter Peter Rowell

On 22 April 2011, Avon and Somerset Police announced that Rowell had been charged with four counts of indecent assault, dating back to the 1990s, and had been remanded in custody.

In May 2011, Rowell was charged with seven counts of possessing and making indecent images of children along with seven counts of indecent assault against girls under the age of 16.

On 9 June 2011, it was announced that Mr Rowell would stand to face charges relating to a fifth victim, including rape of a minor. He appeared in North Avon Magistrates' Court to face three new charges: two of indecent assault and one of rape against a 16-year-old victim.

He was released on bail, having had a curfew imposed by the courts. He was also ordered to surrender his passport. He returned to court on June 24 for a plea hearing on these latest charges and was released on bail with conditions attached until October 2011.

BBC Radio Bristol managing editor Tim Pemberton said: "Peter has worked for Radio Bristol for about a year now. His colleagues here respect and like him and the audience have responded very well to him."

BBC Producer Benjamin Wilkins

March 2010 – Secretly taped a series of sexual liaisons with TV and radio presenters using a hidden camera. He hid the CCTV device in a smoke alarm directly above his bed to record his encounters with a succession of ten lovers. Another camera was hidden in a 'moveable ornament' in his bathroom.

The "cool and calculating" broadcaster took the women back to his flat where he recorded them having sex with him.

Many of them hold senior positions in television and radio – both presenting and in production roles – but cannot be named for legal reasons.

One of his victims said he had left her feeling "violated, sick and dirty".

He was jailed for eight months and was ordered to sign the Sex Offender Register for ten years after admitting 11 counts of voyeurism, including filming five women and setting up the cameras.

BBC Radio Producer Andrew Brennand

September 2010 – Admitted seven counts of exposure and two of sexual assault. Describing him as a 'sexual predator' from whom 'no female in Burnley was safe', Judge Beverley Lunt sentenced Brennand to a three-year community order with supervision.

He must also attend a sex offender programme and receive psychological treatment.

His nine victims, some of them dog walkers, were aged between 15 and 60 and were said to have been 'left shocked, scared and very upset by his actions'.

BBC Sports Producer Martyn Smith, "Match of the Day"

2009 London Southwark Court – Smith pleaded guilty to 14 sample counts of making indecent photographs of a child on or before 2 April 2009.

Sentencing Judge Andrew Goymer said some of the material was "quite unspeakable... and repulsive in the extreme".

"It involves serious sexual activity by adults with very young children indeed and any decent person would be appalled by it."

The court heard one of the victims was a baby under 12 months old being subjected to "penetrative sex". Another was two years old.

All the images were of boys. He was given an eight-month prison sentence suspended for two years and ordered to take part in an internet sex offenders' treatment programme.

During the trial the judge was handed a sheaf of character references, including some from "fairly well-known names".

Question: Can you reveal the "fairly well-known names" within the BBC who offered to defend a man convicted of crimes involving the sexual abuse of a baby under 12 months old?

Question: Considering the access to children and vulnerable people that BBC staff enjoy, what checks do they make to insure the safety of the public? How many BBC staff are currently on the sex offenders register or have been convicted of crimes of a sexual nature?

4. BBC Panorama and the missing millions

June 2009 BBC Panorama: IVF Undercover – £900,000

Top IVF doctor, who is said to have helped mothers give birth to 2,300 babies in seven years, accuses BBC Panorama programme of making defamatory allegations.

The BBC came to a settlement with the Egyptian-born doctor, with the Corporation paying both sides' legal bills estimated to be £900,000.

October 2006 BBC Panorama: The Price of Blood - £1,000,000

Reported on an unsuccessful prosecution in Italy of Paolo and Guelfo Marcucci, the owners of the Marcucci group of companies which included, at the time, the biopharmaceutical company Sclavo SpA.

The programme alleged that the Marcuccis had sold or distributed blood-derivative products that were infected with HIV and Hepatitis C, or which were likely to be infected.

During a High Court hearing, the BBC accepted that the allegations were untrue and expressed regret that any impression was given to the contrary. The BBC apologised to the Marcuccis and agreed to pay substantial damages and their legal costs.

May 1994 BBC Panorama: The Halcion Nightmare – £4,000,000

The BBC lost another Panorama libel case against American drug company Upjohn. In his decision Mr Justice May stated, "The seriousness of the libels against Upjohn is in my judgement obvious and great."

The multi-party action over the sleeping pill Halcion took 65 days and is estimated to have generated total costs of £4m. Last week one of the law chambers involved had to call in removal men to clear part of the paperwork.

The programme was edited by current BBC Director General Mark Thompson.

October 1984 BBC Panorama : Maggie's Militant Tendency - £1,000,000

The programme alleged that two Conservative party figures were secret extremist Nazi supporters and was met with libel action against the BBC.

The BBC capitulated on 21 October and paid the pair's legal costs from the publicly funded licence fee. Both were awarded £20,000 each, and in the next edition of Panorama on 27 October, the BBC made an unreserved apology to both. The total cost of the trial, including the remedy awarded to the claimants, reached £1 million.

Question: According to the BBC's charter it must represent the interests of licence fee payers and exercise rigorous stewardship of public money. Do you think that BBC Panorama complies with this regulation?

5. The BBC deception and fabrication of evidence

June 2009 BBC Panorama: "Young Gunmen"

BBC investigated by Merseyside Police after allegations were made in Liverpool Crown Court that a teenager was paid money to pose with guns and ammunition for the programme. The cost of the investigation in terms of money and wasted police time remains unknown.

February 2010 BBC Panorama: "What Next for Craig?"

A Panorama programme 'distorted' some known facts in a report on research into the treatment of children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), the BBC Trust announced. The BBC Trust's Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) partially upheld an appeal over a complaint about BBC1's flagship current affairs show, titled What Next for Craig?, which aired on 12 November 2007. An apology was broadcast during a future edition of Panorama, and the BBC's deputy director general Mark Byford met with the committee to ensure the breaches of the editorial guidelines are not repeated.

October 2009 BBC Panorama: "Why Hate Ryanair?"

Ryanair spokesman Stephen McNamara: "Panorama has repeatedly refused Ryanair's offer of an unedited interview, either live or pre-recorded, because they know these false claims are rubbish and they don't stand up to scrutiny.

"Ryanair calls on the BBC to explain why Panorama refuses to provide balance in its programming and why licence payers are funding such rubbish-filled investigations which don't stand up to scrutiny."

Question: We couldn’t have put it better ourselves, and note that Ryanair used the same defence mechanism that we adopted! Why does Panorama persist in refusing to allow its victims the right to unedited interviews in which the record could be put straight?

December 2007 BBC Panorama: "Wi-Fi: A Warning Signal"

The BBC upheld complaints from viewers that the programme makers exaggerated the evidence for concerns about wireless technology.

Another complainant said the documentary, which was screened last May, was unbalanced. The BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit (ECU) was called in and said the programme "gave a misleading impression of the state of scientific opinion on the issue".

November 2007 BBC Panorama: "The Mystery of Madeleine McCann"

A producer quit a BBC programme about Madeleine McCann as he felt the documentary verged "on the dishonest".

David Mills, who was the original producer on the Panorama special on the disappearance, walked out after an angry row with the programme's editor and then wrote a stinging email to the BBC, attacking it for losing its journalistic passion.

He said: "So far as I can see, investigative journalism at the BBC is over."

June 2011 BBC Panorama: "Primark: On the Rack"

The BBC handed back a prestigious award it won for a Panorama programme after an investigation found it "more likely than not" included faked footage of child labour.

The corporation won the Current Affairs Home Prize at the Royal Television Society awards for its show Primark: On the Rack, which was broadcast in June 2008.

It apologised to fashion chain Primark after a report by the BBC Trust's editorial standards committee found a 45-second-long clip should not have been included.

A BBC spokesman said today: "The BBC has apologised for including a short section of film which could not be authenticated in the Panorama programme Primark – On the Rack.

"We acknowledge that a serious error was made and therefore it would be inappropriate to keep the RTS award."

As well as apologising on BBC1, the corporation was forced to display an apology on the Panorama website for a week and was told the footage can never be repeated or sold abroad.

The BBC could still be hit with a fine for breaching broadcasting as the media regulator Ofcom has said it will consider any complaint made to it by Primark.

From the BBC's Editorial Guidelines:

"The BBC is committed to achieving due accuracy. This commitment is fundamental

to our reputation and the trust of audiences, which is the foundation of the BBC.

It is also a requirement under the Agreement accompanying the BBC Charter."

Question: Do you consider BBC Panorama to be complying with this?

6. The BBC Secret Agent trial collapse cost and apology to Nick Griffin and his family

In July 2004 after months of bugging and covert recording, BBC Panorama's "Secret Agent" programme was broadcast on BBC One. The programme used highly selective extracts from several speeches made by Mr Griffin. The following morning on BBC Breakfast News, the producer Karen Wightman stated that she hoped that the CPS would press charges, using the secretly recorded footage.

Subsequently, British National Party Chairman Nick Griffin was arrested early one morning at his home and tried twice at Leeds Crown Court in 2006. He was cleared of all charges by the two juries, who, significantly, saw his recorded speeches in full, rather than the edited clips used by Panorama to give a false impression of his message to voters at the meetings in question.

Mr Griffin had been accused of inciting racial hatred by warning that home-grown Muslim extremists would commit acts of terrorism in the UK, including blowing up tube trains and buses in London, and that gangs of Muslim men were engaged in sexual predation against English children.

On the morning of Thursday 7 July 2005, four terrorists detonated four bombs, three in quick succession aboard London Underground trains across the city and, later, a fourth on a double-decker bus in Tavistock Square. Fifty-two people, as well as the four bombers, were killed in the attacks, and over 700 more were injured.

Subsequently, newspaper reports have revealed an epidemic of rape, drugging and prostitution of British children by Muslim men. Several trials have recently taken place illustrating the scale of the problem.

Question: Can you tell me the amount of public money employed by the BBC in the production of the "Secret Agent"? Further to this, can you tell me how much public money was spent on the two failed court cases arising from the programme?

Question: Has anyone from the BBC ever apologised to Mr Griffin and his family?

Question: Has Panorama any plans to make future programmes dealing with the problems of sexual grooming by Muslim men of children from other communities, or about the links between the heroin epidemic and gangs from the Muslim community?

7. BBC Panorama duty of balance and impartiality

This is the third Panorama programme to focus on the British National Party in just ten years.

Question: Considering the BBC's duty towards impartiality and balance, can you explain why a BBC Panorama investigation has never been conducted into the subversive and violent activities of the far left?

Question: Further to this, how does BBC Panorama defend commissioning Gerry Gable and Nick Lowles of the communist front group "Searchlight" to assist with its programmes, particularly in view of the extensive criminal records of key figures within the Searchlight operation and their long-term associates?

8. BBC Panorama investigation into the BBC

Question: Considering the extensive evidence of violent and serious criminal convictions, drug abuse and sexual depravity, coupled with details of financial mismanagement and breaches of its charter, would Panorama consider an investigation into the BBC itself?

Question: Has such an investigative exposé ever been considered, and if not, why not?

9. BBC Panorama journalistic integrity

Question: The BBC has a legal obligation to operate within the terms of its charter. Failure to do so constitutes a criminal offence.

Examining the rudimentary details here, detailing extremely serious shortcomings within the BBC in general and BBC Panorama in particular, as a journalist bound by the code of truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability, will you be handing this evidence to the police?

Thank you.

Take action against the BBC now

As a TV Licence holder, you are the employer of the BBC.

Register your disgust at the bias and hypocrisy of the BBC by emailing these questions to the addresses below and firmly but politely demanding answers:

ask@bbc.co.uk

mark.thompson@bbc.co.uk

Call Darragh MacIntyre on 07736 021 181 and put these questions to him directly

darragh.macintyre@bbc.co.uk

BBC: Make a complaint:

Phone: 03700 100 222 or Textphone: 03700 100 212

Email: https://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/forms/

Post:

BBC Complaints

PO Box 1922

Darlington

DL3 0UR

Tintin aux Pays totalitaires , Or Tin Tin On Trial !

Tintin aux Pays totalitaires

Posted at BNP Ideas

By Dave Yorkshire. Tintin is on trial at the moment. Yes I do mean Hergé’s famous creation Tintin and no I am not joking. No one, it seems, can escape the laws regarding thought criminality devised by the Eurocrats of Brussels – not even if one is a cartoon character.

The offending item is the comic book Tintin au Congo, the complaint, as ever, is that of ‘racism’.

Let us just remind ourselves of where this word came from and why. The word was devised by a homosexual Jewish Trotskyite called Magnus Hirschfeld in 1930 as a means to destroy Western homogeneity and therefore Occidental society in general.

He knew that encouraging non-white immigration into the West while simultaneously rendering Caucasian man intellectually defenceless through a series of psychological complexes brought about by supercharging emotions of guilt and pity via neo-Marxist ‘critical thought’ would ensure his downfall, along with the civilization he created, leaving a vacuum for the emergence of a global, Communist, totalitarian super-state.

‘Racism’ then, as many have pointed out, is merely an attack on native Europeans and is therefore in itself ‘racist’. As ever with Marxist semantics, the word is used to mean the opposite of the real desired effect (one thinks also of such words as ‘tolerance’ or ‘diversity’).

The other side of discourse on ‘racism’, again utilising the stereotype (racist again!) of the white man as the eternal oppressor is also engineered to antagonise non-whites against whites through the rewriting of history, the Caucasian becoming a hate figure.

This legitimates any means – through the media, violence, legal process and alteration, academia, the education system – of denigrating, subjugating and ethnically and culturally cleansing Europids in their own homelands.

As ‘racism’ is a Trotskyite invention, laws regarding it are Communist in nature and ensure that Caucasians are unable to define themselves as themselves either to the exclusion of, or in contradistinction to other races in their own homelands – unless that contradistinction is in and of itself a debasement of Caucasians.

It is because of this that the Africa Mbutu Mondondo Bienvenu, aided and abetted by his Arab solicitor Ahmed L’Hedim, have brought about the current legal case against a positive white male role model for adolescents. Tintin is characterised by his intelligence, guile and spirit of adventure. Apparently, Mr Bienvenu is offended by the positive characterisation of Tintin, coupled with supposedly less than flattering portrayals of blacks.

Ironically, Mr Bienvenu is behaving in the way Hergé portrays the Congolese. In the extract I have given, Tintin is blamed for the destruction of the Congolese’s dilapidated train (left over from the days of empire) and is racially abused.

At this point, the ordinarily diplomatic Tintin ceases to apologise and rounds on the Congolese, ordering them to push the train back onto its tracks. As Tintin shows his anger, the Congolese are pacified and accede to his wishes – despite their antagonism to work.

Mbutu Mondondo Bienvenu, like the Congolese in the book, is aggressive because we, as a race, have become apologetic towards other races who have then sensed the weakness in us.

A century and more ago, back when white Europe controlled huge swathes of the planet, rule was only maintained through the open display of power, as any of the native tribes would soon take advantage of any weakness. Perhaps the last mainstream author to assert this was Evelyn Waugh, which goes to show how long cultural Marxism has been in place.

Indeed, any literature not conforming to the parameters set by today’s neo-Marxist dogma will be instantly rejected by publishing houses, while the ‘politically incorrect’ literature of yesteryear is either being made to disappear into obscurity through a mixture of refusal to republish and refusal to incorporate it into school and university curricula, or, such as with Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, being bowdlerised into conformity.

Ironically, the chattering left-liberals, who follow such dogma with an almost religious fervour, have nothing to say about this. It is ironic because in the 1960s, these same left-liberals were screaming like harpies about freedom of speech and how ridiculous it was to expurgate and censor works of art as though we were all children.

Indeed, it was no coincidence that the 1960s opened with the famous ‘Lady Chatterley’ trial, which saw the full D H Lawrence novel made available in Britain thirty-two years after it was written. The leftist satirical magazine Oz was also the subject of indecency and obscenity trials in 1964 and 1971, the latter being turned into a circus by Marty Feldman. Its editor, Richard Neville has been turned into an iconic figure for the extreme left and a film about him entitled Hippie Hippie Shake is due for release this year.

The point is that either speech is free or not, but free speech was never the intention of these trials in the 1960s; the intention was to nullify laws regarding taste in order to get extreme leftist dogma into the mainstream.

That being done, the next stage would be to push the old mainstream ideas out and make sure they stayed out by reintroducing similar laws that had kept out the extreme left.

This was made perfectly clear in the opening to the Frankfurt-School neo-Marxist Herbert Marcuse’s 1965 essay Repressive Tolerance:

“This essay examines the idea of tolerance in our advanced industrial society. The conclusion reached is that the realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed.”

I have no doubt that Messrs Bienvenu and L’Hedim will get what they want in court and obtain at the very least a disclaimer about the views represented in Tintin, which will be the first step towards expurgation and then proscription.

So far, Alain Berenboom, representing the trust Moulinsart, which is custodian of Hergé’s works, has remained unmoved.

“Demanding a disclaimer at a tribunal is a form of censorship, he stated.

Quite, and I wish him luck in defending the freedom for Caucasians to read their own cultural works without being confronted by a notice stating that the work and, by extension, the affirmation of Caucasian identity, is evil.

Such a notice is, in itself, anti-white and therefore ‘racist’.

WHY?

Why?

Written by Shaunantijihad

October 2011

In a recent article here, Sarah Albion asked where the changes the Left talk about will lead? She correctly concludes that: “…the only purpose of [the changes they want] is to replace what was already there, nothing more. That any good should come from that process was never the plan.” I think it may be instructive to deconstruct why the fascist Left want to destroy the West to see what kind of world it will be like if we let them win. The Marxists have been convinced, or convinced themselves, that the nation State is the cause of all evil and war in the world, that it was the cause of Africa’s impoverishment, the persecution of Jews, and that the white man is primarily responsible for the nation State. This indictment is the false premise from which these conclusions follow: - Therefore the nation State must be destroyed - Therefore the white male must be destroyed Hence, to effect these ends, mass Negro and Muslim immigration and Internationalism is the policy of all 3 main Parties and is promoted as being good for Britain when it’s actual purpose is to destroy the nation State and the white male that built it. They just tell the average white, working voter a bunch of lies whilst they actually implement this policy. The “Equality Act” is an example of this. Opposed by the Conservative Party in “opposition”, they passed the “Equality Act” as soon as they were elected. It is only by understanding the goals of the fascist Left can we then begin to understand why they would pass legislation preventing white males from gaining employment if any equally qualified non-white males are available. It serves the goal of destroying the white male, and thus the nation State. Can white females not see that this policy inevitably leads to the destruction of white women and white children too? There has never been a discussion by the fascist Left of what kind of Europe the white male has, by his historic presence, prevented from coming into existence. But by asking this pertinent question, we can see what Europe will indeed become like if the changes they want to implement and are implementing come to fruition. So, in order to understand what Europe will be like when the white male is destroyed, we must ask, "Without the white male, what would Europe have been like in the past?" Inevitably, given our geographical location, we would have been overrun by a Moorish, Arab, Negro, Islamic people. What would that world have been like? Women would wear burkhas, and never leave the house without a male relative. They would have the legal status afforded by the Sharia. They would be stoned for being raped. They would have their clitorises cut out. They would be legal property, to be bought or sold, or cast aside when no longer required. Is this a world women want to live in? Inter-Islamic war would rage not only between Shia and Sunni, but between those who tried to moderate the insanity of the Islamic Theocracy and those who wanted ever closer conformity to the Sharia and the model left by Mohammad. Rich men would have 4 wives, and thus many poor men would have no hope of marriage and sex unless they invaded a non-Islamic country, buggered little boys or animals or paid for “temporary marriage” with women cast out of their homes for younger versions, as is the case in many Islamic nations today. So war would have continued anyway, but as a never ending Islamic version of it, against differing Islamic sects and nations at some times, and against moderate Muslims and women at all times. And that Europe, once 100% Islamic, would cycle down in violence to ever closer conformity to Sharia or world war to implement the world Caliphate. Is this a world men and children want to live in? Israel would never have been formed and the Khazars, who believe they are Jews, would have been wiped out by the Muslims. A pan-European policy of extermination of Jews would be enacted to enable the return of the last Imam. Torture and slavery of Jews would be commonplace until they were destroyed. Today, Afghanistan is down to one remaining male Jew. This would be replicated everywhere. Is this a world Jews want to live in? Africa would have continued in poverty as it always has and always will due to the low mean IQ of the Negro human, but without overseas aid, and without the infrastructure now enjoyed, such as trains and wells, put there by the white man. Muslims would use Africa for a slave pool, as instructed by the Koran. In Arabic, the word for black man is the same world for slave. Is this an Africa Negroes want to live in? There would be no medicine, engines, lightbulbs, electricity, modern agriculture, cheap clothing, washing machines, cheap, mass produced goods of all kinds etc, as the "evil white male" would not have been there to invent them. And that "evil white male" has indeed invented the vast majority of things we take for granted. There would have been no Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Schubert or Brahms, or even Rock or Pop, as music, dance and art were declared Haram. Is this a world anyone wants to live in? North and South America would have continued in endless inter-tribal wars and slavery and human sacrifice, just as it was when the white man landed there. In other words, had Europe not consisted of a white Britain, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, etc. then Europe would have been made up of Islamic nations similar to Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Somalia. Is that a preferable history to the one we do have, even dotted as it is by a few stupid wars? If you say, “No!”, then you must be against making this awful alternative history our inevitable future. And that means you must join us. And thus, in conclusion, whilst we should regret the stupid wars that we have waged, and still continue to wage, as it happens, under the rule of the fascist Left, the answer is not to turn us into a Negro or Islamic Continent. The answer is not to destroy the white male or the nation State. On the contrary, we must oppose and reverse this. But now that the fascist Left have made the demographic changes that have put us on a course that inevitably leads to a semi-black-Arab-Pak-white Islamic people, the only way to prevent this is to undo what has been done. It inevitably will not be 100% peaceful. Resisting tyranny never is. But that is the fault of the fascist Left, not ours. But we shall remember those who support us, and those who don’t, and deal with each accordingly. We have the right to defend ourselves, our nations, and most importantly, our genetic heritage, our Caucasian genes and our Caucasian breeding territory, and for our part, the British isles. For my part, I ask that if the coming BNP conference does not deliver something tangible that our people can believe in, that we collectively make a petition to ask Dr Frank Ellis to form a Conservative Constitution Party, for we desperately need an eloquent leader. To ourselves and our posterity, We the people…

The Great British Nurse and Midwife Exodus

The Great Nurse and Midwife Exodus

By Southwest Nationalist.

Fresh from the realms of you couldn’t make it up comes news that around 4,200 nurses and midwives have left the UK – to go and work in foreign hospitals.

The exodus comes as many leave ahead of ConDem taking an axe to the NHS, and head for sunny climes such as Australia or the Middle East.

What’s so bizarre about the whole situation?

Back in January of this year we had David Nicholson, NHS Chief Executive, warn that the UK was facing a shortfall of 4,500 midwives.

We also learned that British aid money is being used to fund the training of new midwives in numerous countries, including Ethiopia, Kenya, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, and India.

The situation is ludicrous.

We’re losing midwives and nurses as they flee abroad ahead of the heavy round of job losses which will be inflicted on the NHS due to ConDems austerity measures – there isn’t enough money it seems.

We’re already short of midwives as it is, this can only make the entire situation worse.

And, to top it all off, we’re funding the training of midwives in multiple countries. There is plenty of money for that it seems.

Britain is short of midwives, is losing midwives due to a supposed lack of money, and is busy funding midwives for nearly everyone else on the planet.

Anyone else notice the insanity and contradictions there?

We in Britain are left watching as our essential services crumble, and the politicians who should be maintaining them hand over huge amounts of our money to foreign nations.

First World Britain and every third world nation on earth will meet in standards at some point – in the middle as our standards decline whilst we spend all our money on improving their standard

GOODBYE WORDSWORTH

GOODBYE WORDSWORTH

Written by shaunantijihad

October 2011

Well Britons, you did not give a damn about the IslamoNazi colonisation of Bradford, Keighley, Burnley, Preston, Bolton, Blackburn, Nelson etc. Will you care when you lose the Lake District? For the sublime landscapes that inspired Wordsworth, Coleridge and Shelley are now seeing the next phase of the Religion of Arabic and Paki Colonisation. Now that the Muslims have many of the major cities of the North it will be easy pickings to colonise the surrounding small towns and villages, some only a few hundred or thousand souls strong, for the complete victory over Lancashire, Yorkshire, and now beloved Cumbria. With families of 8.1 subsidised children per subsidised wife this will be a small matter, and it will happen in a single generation. After my depressing visit to Leeds market on Friday, which confirmed the Muslim takeover of Leeds is growing strongly, I thought I would relieve my weary spirit to visit one of the inspirations of Wordsworth, a fairly short drive from the Islamic Caliphate of Bradford, and what a beautiful drive it still is past many a small market town, pub and church, for now. With the best first days of Autumn in many a decade I was so happy to get away for the day from my home town, surrendered as it is without a shot being fired to the King of the Arabs and his stone age cult, and on into Windermere. Upon entry to the first car park, 3 people carriers simply parked in the entrance road, stopping all exit and entry, as all the spaces were taken. A small army if jihadis and their ghoulish, burkha clad, vulture like mothers exited the vehicles, and had I not shouted for them to move the bloody cars they intended to leave them right there, blocking the way of all. So they went to the next car park, and I behind, whereupon they stopped their cars to get their tickets before parking, holding everyone behind for the 10 minutes they took. After all, the hated, cowardly kuffar are only despised dhimmies. During a boat ride watching the Autumn leaves in weather that could only be described as a good day even for Spain, I began reluctantly to think more of the great El Cid than Wordsworth as the sound of Arab or Paki invaders spitting into our once undefiled Lakeland waters behind me forced itself into earshot. After queuing behind an army of spitting invaders in Ambleside for a coffee and ice cream, I was forced to walk a gauntlet of alien invaders smoking some giant bong like they were in some shithole Turkish bazaar, probably marijuana for all I know, or it was just very smelly tobacco. I took a chance to watch my people walk by, many with a typical one or two children in tow, who will be outnumbered soon and many probably sold into the sex slavery cattle markets of Arabia, when the black flag flies above Buckingham Palace, if it doesn’t already, least not in the weak mind of the Protector of the Faiths. Whilst the majority of our people looked sound and healthy, the majority were old and beyond either fighting or procreating, and there were too many girls sporting horrible, masculine or tarty tattoos. As I pondered on the damage done to our communal body by the Khazars, Marxists and FemiNazis, two white, shaven-haired lesbians ambled by hand-in-hand in Ambleside, tattooed to the hilt, and one of them pregnant. Poor child. Upon leaving the car park, again with a heavy heart, a unit of some 20 mozlem males, in full battle dress, took over the car park, laid down the prayer mats, and began the call of prayer to their capital city in Mecca, and thanked Allah, asses in the air, shouting out the war cry in the language of the Arabian paedophile, for giving them such a well cultivated land, not only without a fight but actually with the full financial assistance of the dhimmi Marxists and the Khazar Jews. If they weren’t convinced Allah was with them before, they are now. As I returned to the land that once was British Bradford, to the skyline dominated by some 80 plus mosques, the forward military bases of the invited enemy, I closed Wordsworth’s beautiful “Lines Written a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey” (down on Wye), and considered more the example of El Cid. Where is El Cid Ingles?

Labour And The progressive destruction of “Change”

The progressive destruction of “Change”

Written by Sarah Albion

October 2011

There he was on stage this week, that rather geeky little man with the disturbing stare who now leads the Labour Party, and he was chanting the same mantra they all keep repeating “I'm up for the fight to change Britain” he hooted in the unattractive nasal way he does, “Britain needs to change”. They are all so addicted to that little word “change” aren’t they, they flourish it at every juncture and scatter it liberally through any speech, but what do they mean by it? Look to the definitions of change in any dictionary and what will you find? – “alter, amend, transform, make different, transfer, substitute, replace” – not one of those words guarantees anything good will come from the process, just that it will not be the same when its done. Death brings change, disease and bad luck bring change, America's flawed Messiah promised “change” and that benighted nation is drowning in those changes as I write. For two generations or more Western politicians have promised change, indeed many have brought change, and how many of those changes are we any better for? Count the good ones on your hand and you'll find you still have fingers to spare. Is it not true that the real “change” we need is the means of reversing all the ill thought through and many truly malevolent “changes” which have been forced upon us in recent decades. Another word they all adore is “progressive”. Politicians of all shades, red, yellow, green and blue all claim to be “progressive” and our media murmur the word as if with reverence, but has the “progress” they have brought been for good or ill? Cancer is progressive, so is syphilis, woodworm, dry rot and dementia, and all of them bring friendlier changes than have the “progressive” politicians and reformers of our age. But those people never were our friends. Like the Communist revolutionaries and Frankfurt school plotters who came before them, the malevolent old men who came of age in the 1960's and 1970's and who rule us now, remain fixated with changing the world, and my God they have done so, although not for the better. Our betterment never was their plan. They have brought change in the form only of destruction, and that was, and remains, the whole point. What should replace that which they destroy is less relevant to them, in fact I doubt they even care, they remain obsessed with their all consuming hatred of the once great and powerful West, and that leaves little room for anything else. It is a strange hatred these old men and women and their unattractive spawn feel for the history of the West inspired as it is by iconoclasm, a desire for anarchy and a deep self-loathing death wish. It is a hatred based on the myths, lies and calumny they have repeated so often they perhaps now even believe it themselves. As the ugliest girl might hate the prettiest, not for her sins but for her beauty and her grace, they hate us not for our flaws but for our achievements. We achieved what others could not, and in the eyes of the aging 60's revolutionaries that in itself means we are an evil they must destroy. Theirs is a hatred entirely misplaced. The West, and those of European, particularly Nordic and Anglo Saxon origin, have brought more benefit to humanity than any other group in the history of the world, in fact, by comparison with our contribution that of any other group is reduced to insignificance, assuming they indeed made any contribution at all. If you look to the origins of any development or movement which has improved the general well being of mankind, you will almost certainly find at its core a white European male, or a white male of European ancestry, the same would not apply to any other group you may wish to name. Those who hate the West point to the evil we have done, but by any standards the evil is minor when set against the good. For every weapon which white men created they have made and distributed a million pills which have cured more diseases and saved more lives than died in all the wars in history. For every slave which the white race once owned we were instrumental in the freedom of a hundred others, and every act of brutality we committed has been compensated for by a thousand acts of charity and benevolence. No other group can even start to claim the same To an overwhelming degree, white Westerners, especially white western males, have historically been a greater force for good than any other group. However, it is white westerners, especially white men, who have been primarily undermined by the changes imposed upon our societies by, so called, progressives. It is they, who have given so much, whom the progressives most hate. Lesser men are marked for what they destroy, not for what they create, for more than half a century lesser men have ruled the West, and we see the trail of their destruction all around us. The liars in the media tell us that Western Society is flawed and failing, yet it is not western society but its enemies which has brought us to where we are, our fault, if any, is our refusal to confront them or to call them on their lies. And what lies they told us. We were told that opening our borders to mass third world immigration would boost our economies and protect our pensions, how those lies have been exposed as the exact reverse has come to pass. Our economies are collapsing, they are in the worst state they have ever been and our once guaranteed pensions have become a fading and distant illusion. Our services would collapse without immigration they told us, whereas in truth they are now collapsing beneath the ravenous influx which devours them. We may, some of us feel briefly better off, but that is just an illusion, a temporary high bought on credit, money we borrowed, or which our government did, and its all about to fall around our ears. If you own nothing but debt, you own nothing. The fabled benefits of immigration have been exposed for the lies they always were, and in the most devastating way. Yet our borders are still open, and still they come. Meanwhile, other states, the real and only beneficiaries of globalization, and the net exporters of immigrants, rather than importers, states like Brazil, China and India boom and thrive at our expense. We are the “racists” if we resist they chided, whilst they set about producing a hundred thousand books, movies, and TV shows depicting us as vile and filled with hate, yet it is we who are the victims of race hate, we who are the main victims of race hate crimes and we who are being driven from our towns and cities, many, such as our capital, we have already all but surrendered. It is we who are being ethnically cleansed. The single greatest “change” they have brought about is the way they have forced us to give up our homelands to a massive third world invasion, and it is this, above all else, which is destroying us. A few short decades ago all the great powers of this planet were Western powers, we now face a situation whereby it is expected that within twenty to thirty years only 25% of the planet's wealth will be held by the West. That is a great result if you believe in egalitarianism irrespective of merit, but not if you care about the future of the West, or indeed the future of our planet. The great achievement of the egalitarian lobby will be to have placed 75% of the world's wealth in the hands of totalitarian governments and immensely rich third world plutocrats, for whom human rights is an alien and ludicrous concept. This is a politically manufactured outcome achieved through the “changes” our leaders have forced down our unwilling throats and by their special brand of “progress” which they beguiled us into believing would improve our lot. As the west crumbles and declines, how can they still claim that mass third immigration brings us benefit when clear evidence to the contrary is all around us. Yet they still claim it, and crazy as it seems, there are some who still believe it. It's a lie, and, in most respects, it always was. The super rich achieve a short term benefit from mass immigration because it depresses the wages they have to pay, a few politicians benefit by virtue of the votes which their imported constituency bring. However, beyond that small and unattractive coterie of corruption and contempt, nobody else benefits in any way. There is no widespread benefit from mass immigration, it is a vehicle for change, and that's all it was intended for. But of a change which only brings destruction, and the only purpose of which is to replace what was already there, nothing more. That any good should come from that process was never the plan.

If the European Union Were A Horse, It Would Be Shot!

oct 2011 by BNP Ideas

By Peter Mills. It is perfectly legitimate historical observation to compare the European Union with Hitler’s Nazi empire (or, come to that, with Emperor Napoleon’s overactive egomania, but this is not so fresh in people’s memories).

I am not, of course, suggesting that there is any correspondence in today’s Europe with Nazi atrocities and racial edicts; indeed, the European Superstate has gone vastly too far in the opposite direction, encouraging – even demanding – European cultural homelands to be flooded with ethnic invaders who are even now busily replacing fifty thousand years or so of European evolution and cultural progress with African and Middle-Eastern flotsam and jetsam who were unable to contribute anything constructive to their own slums and are now being given the chance to drag all Europe down into that same gutter level (and in the UK will probably soon be given the Queen’s Award for Industry for accomplishing this so thoroughly).

No, my comparison is abstractly drawn from the unavoidable structuring of any multi-national empire. Forgetting the politics and nature of the regimes themselves, the Nazis at their height, the old Soviet Union, the present European Union, the United States of America up to and during its Civil War period and beyond, even the old British Empire – all of these “patchwork quilts” of different regional, ethnic, social and racial mixtures have one very significant thing in common, and this is today becoming increasingly evident in the case of Europe.

What all of these multicultural “empires” share is their own unavoidable internal instability. This instability is not so noticeable during the times of expansion and success, when everyone is riding high on the crest of a wave. However, there inevitably comes a critical point when a cascade collapse begins. A huge avalanche can start with a single loose pebble.

The lands of Napoleon, Hitler, the USSR and all other historical empires, even ancient Rome, can be shown by history to function brilliantly for as long as the leadership, or the ruling body, managed to achieve success after success. However, all of them without exception had the same inbuilt weakness, and the present European Empire is no exception to this fact. This weakness is, simply, that no empire’s progression from success to success can possibly continue indefinitely. And the bigger the empire, the bigger its fall.

Hitler’s empire came to grief when the odds assembled against him reached a critical point and success after success was suddenly replaced by failure after failure until the Nazi Empire was extinct.

The USSR came to grief when its population realized that the Western world was vastly better at just about everything than the Soviet Union, and the success after success proclaimed by the Soviet government was revealed almost overnight to actually be failure after failure.

The USA came to grief when the Government’s success overreached itself and alienated huge swathes of the Southern States, who resigned from the Nation and a dreadful civil war became that government’s greatest ever failure, echoes of which continued well into the 1960s – a century afterwards – when the unresolved issues of the Civil War were still producing race riots and mass deaths in Alabama and other southern areas.

Ancient Rome came to grief after it had conquered an immense empire with success after success and then collapsed from internal corruption and weakness and was destroyed by hordes of savage incoming invaders.

All of these historical precedents amply demonstrate the true fact that there is a very big difference between creating an empire successfully, and running it successfully.

Now – hopefully – we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the dreadful European Union from the same kind of underlying causes. Like all those other empires, today’s European State has been accomplishing success after success until, now, it has stumbled badly and is unable to keep the momentum of success moving forward. As the history of all other empires has proven, once the period of successive success ends, it is simply not possible for the huge, unwieldy structure to remain intact by just “treading water”.

An empire, by its very nature, can only do one of two things. It can continue in the march of success, or it can fail and collapse. It cannot for very long balance like an acrobat on the top of the pyramid. If it cannot keep on rising, it has only one direction left – plunging. Or, like a tightrope walker, as long as an empire can place one foot in front of the other, it can go forward and maintain its balance. If, on the other hand, it has to stop walking, even for a short time, it loses its balance and falls.

The European Union may not yet have completely stopped walking; but it is certainly stumbling, and there is little evidence that it can ever regain its previous successful state of balance. With any luck, future history will record the European Union as the shortest-lived empire of all, with the possible exception of the Nazi Empire which only lasted from 1933 until 1945. But then again, if the European Union is second only to the Nazi Empire, what does that say about the European Union?

The primary cause of the European Union’s stumbling is not simply the world financial meltdown. It is, rather, that in the face of this global currency crisis, the European Union is hopelessly out of its depth to cope with it in any meaningful way. The very structure, organization and administrative octopus of the EU which previously gave the union success after success is now acting against its ability even to face up to the catastrophic financial problems, let alone cobble together some kind of plan which stands a snowball’s chance in Hell of working. In a very real way, too many cooks are spoiling the broth!

Seventeen countries have joined what is called the Eurozone. That is, they have accepted the euro as their single legal tender and, consequently, their economy is no longer a national economy dependent upon the strength of the monetary condition of the individual country. Instead, the economic condition of all seventeen countries is irretrievably tied together in one great scheme within which each country is but a component part.

Joining the Eurozone, therefore, is an immense gamble, where one country is obliged to depend for its financial existence – and therefore for the well-being and continued future of its entire population – upon the success of other countries over whose industry and monetary abilities it has no input, no direct control, and no administrative representation.

Although a consortium of finance ministers – and if considered necessary in emergency situations, also presidents and prime-ministers – from each country jointly exercise the power of making political decisions upon financial matters within the Eurozone countries, forming what has become known as the “Euro Group,” the actual financial policy of the Eurozone is handled and established not by any democratically elected political body, but by the European Central Bank which is under the control of an (unelected by voters) bank president and an (unelected by voters) board comprising the chiefs of the national banks of member states.

This arrangement means that the Eurozone as an economic entity – a “financial super-state” – has no agreed and democratic financial representation, common authority, fiscal policy or single control mechanism, merely a group of politicians who decide what they would like to happen, and a separate group of professional bank governors who may or may not choose to comply with the particular political direction of the moment.

In effect, this chaotic and divided “management” structure means that each individual country in the Eurozone has placed the well being, livelihood, future development and standard of living of its own people entirely upon a giant roulette wheel being spun by dozens of hands divided broadly into two camps, politicians and bank managers, who frequently do not agree on how the roulette wheel should be spun, or how much should be placed as a gamble on each bet.

The nearest the European Union has so far managed to get towards running the “single currency” by a single intelligent system is in allowing a “peer review” whereby other member states may give their opinions – and only their opinions – on each other’s national budgets. The management of the entire European single financial system is therefore, at best, shambolic by nature.

This, unfortunately, also has a knock-on effect on countries outside the Eurozone, which includes Great Britain. The field of influence of the Euro has a ragged and largely uncontrolled boundary (for example, even the USA is affected by the threat of a Eurozone collapse). There are countries who use the Euro as their principle currency, but who have not contracted to make it their sole legal tender and thus remain outside the Eurozone, preferring to also retain their original national currency alongside the Euro. Some, like the Vatican (an independent country in its own right) and San Marino (like the Vatican, an independent state entirely surrounded by Italy) have achieved agreement with the European Union to tie themselves to the Euro, but to continue minting their own unique coinage and banknotes.

There are also ten other countries (Great Britain, Denmark, Sweden, Lithuania, Latvia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria) who, although members of the European Union, are not included in the Eurozone – that is, their national economies have not accepted the Euro as the single legal tender (for instance, Britain still retains the pound sterling as an independent currency). In Britain’s case, this fortunate circumstance came about through our resignation from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) as the result of what is now called “Black Wednesday” in 1992.

Although Britain had sensibly originally refused to join the ERM when it was established in 1979, in October 1990 the Chancellor of the Exchequer (later Prime Minister) John Major and Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd persuaded the government that it would be a wonderfully good idea if Britain joined the European ERM. One year and eleven months later on 16th September 1990 the government was obliged to extract the country from the ERM because we could not afford to raise the value of sterling, which due to disastrous economic policies had fallen below the minimum requirement of the ERM.

The cost of this whole episode to the country has been reliably given as £3.3 billion by a Freedom of Information request. Just one man alone – financial market dealer George Soros – made over US$1 billion quite legally by “short selling” British sterling, a complex process involving borrowing money from investors and speculators to buy huge amounts of a currency expected to fail and then selling it back to its national bank when its value has dropped, enabling the dealer to pay back the borrowed capital and keep the immense difference for their profit.

If further evidence of government’s inability to properly handle a national economy were needed, it has been shown that if the British (Tory) government at the time of the ERM debacle had been as savvy as financial trader George Soros, the treasury could have kept back some $24 billion of foreign currency reserves and, when the pound collapsed, could have actually ended up making a profit of £2.4 billion. Instead, the government chose to spend the reserves in a vain attempt to bolster the value of the pound.

Although these events are now history, they are a history of British government’s general desire to rush in to situations where even fools fear to tread, providing the sinking ship our politicians want us all to leap onto bears the sacred magic word “European”. They are a history of British government’s general incompetence in handling our national economy. With a track record such as this, they have, like the fabled Pied Piper, led the British population on a grotesque dance to national ruination. Are our politicians the fools – or are we the fools for continually electing such proven abject buffoons into power over us?

The British government is entranced and enraptured by anything which bears the glittering magic brand name “European”. If it is “European” it can do no wrong and the peasants must not be allowed to vote on it, in case we reject the glorious European Promised Land which has become the fanatical religion of parliament. Let us, then, look at the Europe into which our politicians are frogmarching the entire population of our once-independent country, in blinkered oblivion to all the horrific warning signs flashing red before us with the message legend places over the doors of Hell – “Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here!”

In case you may accuse me of exaggerating, here are the specific figures which can be verified by looking at the “international debt clock” which can be found here, where one may alarmingly see the figure increasing in real time.

The debts of Greece amount to around £297 BILLION. With a population (as at 2008) of 11,262,000, this means that in order for the Greek economy merely to reach a zero balance, every taxpayer in the country must pay about £27,000 – and this only applies providing the debt figure does not increase. In Italy, the national debt figure needing to be repaid is actually more, £27,262 per person. In Spain the debt per citizen is £11,924. In France the figure per person is £22,509. In Germany it is £20,168. In the Netherlands it is£19,105. In Ireland it is£20,905. In Portugal it is £12,075.

In Britain, our national debt per person is already £17,378. Instead of leading us into the Promised Land, our European-loving politicians are leading us ever further into the Great European Swamp. If you remember Jack Lemmon as “Professor Fate” in the 1965 comedy film “The Great Race”, when the main cast are marooned on an iceberg, you may recall him being told by Tony Curtis not to worry the others by telling them the iceberg is melting. Perhaps, as we sink ever further into the Great European Bog, our politicians will give us the same answer that Professor Fate gave; “When the water reaches my bottom lip, I’m going to tell somebody!”

If the European Union were a horse, it would be shot! If the people of Britain had any sense at all, at the next general election they would vote for a party that will take us OUT of Europe, turn the economy around by ceasing all foreign aid, stopping waste on useless government spending (£12.7 billion wasted on the NHS computer system which is being scrapped – as the Daily Mail says, enough money to pay over 60,000 new nurses for 10 years!), by stopping paying Muslim fathers benefits for multiple wives and multiple offspring, by halting unrestricted immigration…

In short, the most truthful ever political slogan is: “Vote Nationalist to Save Britain!” This is the life-giving message we must hammer home to the British people in time for the next general election.

Andrew Brons MEP Exposes More EU Nonsense on Globalisation

Andrew Brons Exposes More EU Nonsense on Globalisation

Posted at BNP Ideas

The European Union’s attempts to deal with the effects of globalisation are doomed to failure because they fail to address the core of the problem, Andrew Brons MEP has said.

Speaking during a debate in the European Parliament yesterday on developments in the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, Mr Brons said there were two fundamental problems that fund faced:

“It provides the European Union with a responsibility that member states could much more appropriately fulfil themselves; and it recognises that Globalisation wreaks havoc with people’s livelihoods but the EU does nothing to address the cause of the problem, which is Globalisation itself.

“Globalisation moves manufacturing from high labour-cost countries to low labour-cost countries and floods the West with goods from those countries, destroying our manufacturing bases and taking the jobs of our workers,” Mr Brons said.

“It would be very difficult to compete with low wage economies without reducing our wage rates to the levels in those countries.

“We might hope to use technology in an attempt to compete but our technology is often exported to countries that compete with us or it is bought and copied infringing the Western manufacturer’s patent rights.

“The countries of Europe must, individually or collectively (I would prefer individually) protect their industries and peoples from ruin and impoverishment” he concluded.

* The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) was set up by the European Union in 2006 with the ostensible aim of “supporting workers” who have been made redundant as a result of “trade liberalisation.”

In effect this means an EU-wide dole-system, designed to take tax money from those nations with higher employment levels and spend it is other EU member states for “counselling, job search and mobility allowances; new ICT skills and other forms of training; entrepreneurial support, including micro-credits.”

The EGF has spent €68 million since 2007 to help over 15,000 workers in eight Member States to find new jobs. The workers supported so far had been previously employed in the manufacture of vehicles, or mobile phones, or textiles and clothing.

Welcome to Eurabia - As Muslim population mushrooms, we may be seeing last days of Europe

Welcome to Eurabia - As Muslim population mushrooms, we may be seeing last days of Europe as we know it

http://www.ynetnews.com/

---

We are living through the self-extinction of the European civilization that shaped the age we live in. In his new bestselling book “Civilization,” renowned Harvard historian Niall Ferguson writes: “If the Muslim population of the UK were to continue growing at an annual rate of 6.7% (as it did between 2004 and 2008,) its share of the total UK population would rise from just under 4% in 2008 to 8% in 2020, to 15% in 2030 and to 28% in 2040, finally passing 50%in 2050.”

Ferguson is not alone in using the term “Eurabia” to describe an Islamicized, senescent European continent. Historian Bat Ye'or spent her career studying the phenomenon and Professor Bernard Lewis told German daily Die Welt that “Europe will have Muslim majorities at the latest by the end of the 21st Century.”

The global number of Muslims is expected to jump by 35% in the next 20 years, growing twice as fast as the non-Muslim population, according not to these “Eurabia mongers,” but to the famous US Pew Forum, which published projections Muslim population growth between 2010 and 2030.

The most frightening figures are in Europe. Some of the biggest increases in Europe’s Muslim population in absolute numbers over the next 20 years are expected to occur in the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Germany. The Muslim populations in Italy and Sweden are projected to “more than double in size.” Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco, President of the Italian Episcopal Conference, warned about Italy’s “slow demographic suicide” and Italian Father Piero Gheddo, a doyen of Vatican’s missionaries, warned that "Europe will be dominated by Islam in the space of a few generations."

A low European fertility rate, massive immigration from Muslim countries and a confident Islamist minority are turning the cradle of Western civilization into its grave. As historian Walter Laqueur has warned, these are “the last days of Europe.”

Losing precious gifts

All over Europe, the number of births has dropped in comparison to the number of deaths year after year. For a stable population a nation needs a fertility rate of 2.1 live births per woman. That’s roughly the case in what America. Israel has a significant 2.6 rate. Meanwhile, Italy shows one of the world’s lowest levels of fertility: 1.3. Canadian journalist Mark Steyn, author of “America Alone,” has warned that at the end of the 21st Century there may “still be a geographical area on the map marked as Italy,” but this will “merely be designation for real estate.”

While, Austria was 90% Catholic in the 20th Century, Islam could make up the majority religion among Austrians under 15 years of age by 2050, says American journalist Christopher Caldwel. In the four largest cities of the Netherlands – Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht – Mohammed, with the variations of Mohamed and Muhammad, is the leading name among newborns. The same is true for the European Union’s capital, Brussels.

Elsewhere, only 3.2% of Spain’s population was foreign-born in 1998. Now it’s more than 15%. According to the Pew Forum, France’s Muslim population will increase from the current 4.7 million to 6.9 million in 2030. Indeed, demography is changing all European cities: The populations of Amsterdam, Brussels and Marseille is between 20 and 25% of Muslim; Birmingham, Cologne, Copenhagen, London, Paris, Rotterdam, Stockholm, Strasbourg and The Hague are between 10 and 20% Muslim; Berlin, Hamburg and Vienna are between 5 and 10%.

The problem is that the fastest-breeding demographic group in Europe is also the most religious and the one most resistant to the pieties of a liberal democracy. It’s not difficult to imagine how this confrontation between a European atheistic apathy and an Islamist theological turmoil will end.

The Muslim Brotherhood runs most European mosques. Its front groups are courted by Western governments and media. Europe is one of their priorities. They call it “dar al shaadi”, the land of mission. Yusuf al Qaradawi, the most famous guru of the Brotherhood, spoke clearly: “Islam will return to Europe, not by the sword, but with proselytism.”

Europe risks losing all its precious gifts: Human dignity, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of expression, rule of law, separation of state and mosque. Across Europe there are dozens of journalists, cartoonists and writers who are living under terrorist threats.

The latest WikiLeaks files revealed that at least 35 Guantanamo terrorists were radicalized in London mosques before being sent to fight the West.In the UK there are 80 sharia courts operating like a legal apartheid within common law. These courts are based on the rejection of the principle of inviolability of human rights. The courts formalize the “talaq,” the repudiation of the wife by the husband, polygamy, the right to “rebuke” the wives and the prevention of intermarriages.

Jews a barometer of tolerance

Holland - with all of its rules against discrimination - is already a segregated society. The biggest mosques in Europe frame the vibrant green, luxuriant, wooded, watery Dutch countryside. At the Zuidplein Theatre, one of the most prestigious in Rotterdam, an entire balcony was reserved for Muslim women. This is not happening in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, but in the city where the Founding Fathers set out for the United States.

The Economist, a publication far from anti-Islamic ideas, spoke of Rotterdam as a “Eurabian nightmare.” This nightmare is threatening the Jews too. Anti-Semitism in Western Europe last year was “the worst since World War II", according to the Jewish Agency. It will only worsen in the future. Books such as Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are prominently displayed bestsellers in Muslim stores on Edgware Road in the heart of London.

Let's not forget Ilan Halimi, a young Jewish man from Paris, kidnapped and tortured without anyone intervening in the surrounding apartments of the housing projects from. Residents heard Halimi’s screams but didn’t say a word.

In Sweden, a country described by The Guardian as “the greatest success the world has known,” Jews are leaving large cities such as Malmo due to security reasons and anti-Semitic attacks. Dutch liberal guru Frits Bolkestein just sparked an uproar in the Netherlands by saying that Jews have “no future here and should immigrate to the US or Israel.”

The famous Holland of Baruch Spinoza, the shelter of the Spanish and Portuguese Jews who fled the Inquisition, is making way for a realm of fear, intimidation and subjugation. Jews are also fleeing Antwerp, the city once proudly called “the Northern Jerusalem.”

Anti-Semitism is an eruption of barbarism into our civilization and the Jews have always been a barometer of tolerance. When the Jews will be gone from Amsterdam and Antwerp, nothing will be the same in Europe. We should not be surprised if one day, under the Eurabian banner, these new Europeans will try to expel the descendants of the Holocaust from the land of Israel. This second Shoah will be called "Peace and Justice for Palestine."

The Labour party councilor’s school homework.

by labour25

Another Labour Party and Primary School Governor gets caught Downloading Child Pornography. ONCE AGAIN.. Labour Councillors seek jobs near children.

Labour25 Listed Labour Paedophile Councillor and School Governor Darren Pedley.

Labour25 listed Darren Pedley a Councillor in the Balderstone and Kirkholt district of Rochdale, has been caught downloading sickening images of child sex abuse and distributing them over the internet. Labour25 Darren Pedley has been charged with 12 counts of making the images of children being abused.

Labour Party Darren Pedley also saught a job around Toddlers and Children as young as 4 years old Sandbrook Primary School. Labour25 Darren Pedley took it upon himslef to be the School Governor.

Once again…. A Labour Councillor gets the job of being near little children and goes home to his computer with the intentions of downloading sickening images of children because he has been near children all day and it has aroused him sexualy.

Evil Labour25 Child Pornography Labour party pervert Darren Pedley was slung into Rochdale Magistrates Court and has been bailed until the 14th of November.

Labour25 paedophile child sex porn beast Darren Peddley has been banned from using the internet, un supervised visits with children and must remain in his house in Kirkholt. there have been stacks of Labour Councillors who have taken jobs near children as school governors or in the NSPCC or Barnardos ( Peter Tuffley ) or Board of School directors ( Keith Potts ) And once again the Labour25 investigation Team stresses..

NEVER LET A LABOUR PARTY COUNCILLOR, MAYOR, MP OR ACTIVIST OR CARD CARRYING MEMBER NEAR YOUR CHILDREN OR YOUR SCHOOL. CHECK AT YOUR SCHOOL MEETING AND RAISE THE ISSUE AND GET THE LABOUR PERSON REMOVED !

WHY DO YOU THINK WE HAVE SEX EDUCATION FOR 6 YEAR OLD CHILDREN? BECAUSE THE LABOUR PARTY EDUCATION MINISTER GOT HOLD OF THE NATIONAL CURRICULUM AND SEXUALISED OR LITTLE ONES. WHY DOES A CHILD NEED TO HAVE CONDOM DEMONSTRATION PUT TO HIM OR HER?

The Labour Party is the Paedophile Party.. ‘LABOUR25′

Follow us on twitter – Labour25 twitter

Margaret Hodge ,Immigration Lies, Deceit and Hypocrisy

Margaret Hodge (née Oppenheimer): Lies, Deceit and Hypocrisy

September 2011 by Carlos Cortiglia.

Within 24 hours, we have seen the Leader of the Labour Party and the Shadow Home Secretary criticizing the Labour government for its stance on immigration and now… we see none other than multibillionaire Margaret Hodge coming out with guns blazing criticizing Labour’s stance on immigration and taking the clothes of the British National Party. I don’t assume that Margaret Hodge could have said what she is saying now when she campaigned in Barking and Dagenham.

She says now “I think Labour should stop talking numbers. We should set up a system that allows a fairer allocation of limited resources because we have to have some form of rationing. There needs to be a system that gives some recognition to the length of time that someone has lived in the community when it comes to resources such as housing.”

Well, Margaret Hodge, welcome to the British National Party Manifesto. Should we remind Margaret Hodge who were the people that lived in Barking and Dagenham for the longer length of time before her political party opened the floodgates of immigration?

She then somehow contradicts herself and says ‘immigrant numbers are simply a result of globalisation and people will come here, one way or another’. Bitte, Frau Oppenheimer. Das ist nicht richtig! Wir sagen “it is up to the British people to decide who lives in Britain and who doesn’t. Don’t use Globalisation as an excuse to implement your policies of colonisation. It is up to the British people to decide who comes here and who doesn’t.

Has Margaret Hodge also forgotten how she managed to win the 2010 Barking and Dagenham Election? There is a BBC recording where we heard her saying something like ‘if they win, they will carry you on airplanes and throw you into the sea’. I don’t remember any of the so called free media or any member of the so called mainstream political parties or of the so called politically correct society criticizing what she said that in my view is nothing less than gross incitement to violence.

She goes even further and says ‘the amount of support I received from people in my constituency was extraordinary. The amount of open support I received from Westminster was zilch’. Well, what kind of support she was talking about? Did she need any support?

In terms of financial support, I don’t think Margaret Hodge needs any more money than the money she already has. In terms of political support, she had several para-political organizations, including the BBC, working for her. In terms of constituent numbers the woman that said that she didn’t need any white working class had more than enough non-white working class to help her, facilitated by flood immigration that started as soon as the Labour party became government in 1997.

Phoney candidate Margaret Hodge now criticizes both the Labour Party and the Conservative Party saying that they had a phoney war about numbers. She only mentioned housing and she conveniently forgot to mention the Welfare State that is the main attraction for Globalised mass migration.

As Baroness Shreela Flather denounced just a few days ago, immigration is a business for unscrupulous Pakistanis and Bangladeshis and others that use Polygamy as an excuse to milk the welfare state by having several wives claiming benefits and housing as single mothers. We should find out about Barking and Dagenham and about many of Margaret Hodge’s constituents.

I wouldn’t call ethnic cleansing ‘a result fo Globalisation’. I would call it a result of organized crime committed by a Labour government that used the Welfare State for its own political ends. Those who have lived in Britain for longer have been persecuted and called ‘racists, nazis, fascists and bigots’ simply because they have tried to stand up for their own rights.

Labour brought in the so called ‘Positive Discrimination’ and as a consequence of ‘Positive Discrimination’ entire communities have been decimated and more than 80 per cent of all jobs created in Britain in recent years have ended up in foreign hands. So, what? Has Frau Oppenheimer suddenly seen the light?

Stemcor, her family company, was the world’s largest privately owned steel-trading corporation with an annual turnover of £6.28 billion in 2008. When the Labour Party was in the red, she could have lifted the Labour Party out of debt single-handedly and it would have been pocket money for her. Did she? No, she didn’t. She pursued her own interests in ‘business dealings’ in Barking and Dagenham and elsewhere. Eine grosse Scheiße diese Frau ist!

Carlos Cortiglia

The politics of youth

The politics of youth

Written by The Pilgrim

One of many good things about The Bible is the fact that it does not pander to the whims of young people. It is true that The Bible recognises youth as a time of life associated with energy and enthusiasm, but it also recognises a link between youth and immaturity. You can probably guess where this is leading. One of the big news stories right now is the fact that a schoolboy called Rory Weal has made a speech at the Labour Party conference. His speech was contemptuous of the Conservative-led government, and nationalists can allow themselves the rare indulgence of agreeing with Melanie Phillips. Rory Weal is a young lad who cannot afford to go to school, although it seems that he can afford to travel to Liverpool for the conference, and that’s no mean journey given that he lives in Kent. Like many teenage politicians, he obsesses about issues revolving around young people. That is only to be expected, and I was pretty much the same when I first took an interest in politics. However in my own defence I can honestly say that I did occasionally look beyond my own blinkered horizons and consider other people. He bleats on about the abolition of the Educational Maintenance Allowance. My question to him is that if the EMA is to be brought back, then how should it be funded? Higher taxes are not the answer, as they tend to cause resentment among the people upon whom the higher taxes fall. Bringing the troops home from Afghanistan would save a few billion each year – easily enough to resurrect the EMA – but of course bringing the troops home is not Labour Party policy. If I were Prime Minister, then I would not hesitate to bring the troops, home, but I would hesitate to spend any of the money saved on handouts to teenagers. That would be way down my list of priorities. Does Rory Weal really believe that his subsidised year twelve is more important than lifting elderly people out of fuel poverty? I expect a lot of visitors to this site will sympathise with Rory Weal in his desire to improve himself through study, but I cannot bring myself to be enthusiastic. If he is short of money, then has he considered a part time job? When I was a teenager it was common for sixth formers to have Saturday jobs, and that was in a time of high unemployment. Britain needs talent if it is to succeed in the future, but I wonder to what extent that talent will be nurtured by masses of teenagers studying subjects such as English literature, geography, politics and history – the subjects Weal is taking at AS Level. What career options do these subjects open up for him? Apart from being a researcher for the Labour Party I mean. Okay, geography could lead into a career in town planning, but not every year twelve pupil is going to grow up to become a town planner. The talent that Britain needs is often not academic. Is A Level politics a good induction to working in a factory? Some of you may be thinking that apprenticeships are a good alternative, and in theory they are. I feel bound to observe, however, that I recently met a young lad who had taken two apprenticeships (in road maintenance and carpentry) but had not sought a career in either of those fields because he said they were boring. I cannot help but wonder if apprenticeships are not wasted on the young. Might it not make more sense to reserve apprenticeships for older people who already have some employment history behind them? Young people mature and change as they get older, and in many cases this involves them changing their political views. In ten years from now, Rory Weal might be a rising star at Labour Party HQ, or he might be cringing at the recollection of his teenage conference speech. I believe that politicians should seek to reach out to the youth vote, but without pandering to the whims of the more outspoken among them. There are many sixteen year olds in Britain who are not in further education, and who are either in full time work or else looking for full time work. For some reason they tend to receive far less attention from politicians than the likes of Rory Weal. I would be grateful if anyone could explain this.

Labour’s Immigration Idiocy to be Laid Bare

By Southwest Nationalist.

A previously-hidden collection of five studies on immigration, commissioned by the Labour Party, are finally to see the light of day which will reveal the truth about Britain’s colonisation and the myth of “economic benefits.”

The reports, already leaked to the Telegraph, the snippets which they have published are already a savage indictment of let ‘em all in Labours abject failings on immigration, and raise many questions about why they chose to conceal the truth from us.

Among revelations in the documents aired by the Telegraph, we find the conclusion that immigrants to Britain are more likely to be out of work than the native population, and far less likely to engage in any form of “civic participation”.

Also, more than one third of London’s population has been born outside of the UK. One third of those living in our capital! And the politicians have the gall to tell us that we are not being colonised?

Migrants from Bulgaria and Romania are shown to be more likely to have four or more children – colonisation by the cradle again, placing huge strain on education, NHS, and the welfare state.

As with recent figures which have shown Poland’s population decline whilst the number of Poles in Britain increase, the reports show that the population of both Bulgaria and Romania also declined between 2004 to 2010. Need we tell you that at the same time the number of Bulgarians and Romanians in the UK increased astronomically?

Unsurprisingly, the obvious also happened – unemployment levels in Bulgaria and Romania fell, whereas in the UK they increased. Who could have guessed that is what will happen when you have too many people chasing too few jobs?

On which note, also shown by the reports, is the fact that Bulgarians and Romanians were more likely to claim unemployment benefits than either native Brits or other migrants groups in Britain.

And, what is the best that Labour can manage to say on the issue? Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper admits that Labour “got things wrong” on immigration.

Admitting you “got things wrong” is all fine and dandy, even though it is a huge understatement and does absolutely nothing to repair the damage which has been done to Britain.

Saying you should have done it differently, great help to us.

What are the Labour party going to do in order to undo and reverse the nightmare of mass immigration and overpopulation, along with the burdens that places on all of our critical services and national infrastructure?

Nothing, that’s what. You got it wrong, and we’re expected to live with it for ever more.

Many believe that Labour didn’t get it wrong by accident, there was design there. Whatever the truth, the Labour legacy is an overcrowded nation flooded with immigrants, and it is a legacy which – despite Cameron’s tough talking – ConDem has carried on.

Getting it wrong just doesn’t cut it one bit, politicians seem to get it wrong all too often, and it is always us and Britain left paying the price.

Instead of just holding up hands with a weak “we got it wrong” and not even the decency to offer a true apology, how about admitting to the full extent of just how you got it wrong, the damage which that has caused, and then actually doing something that will put it right for once?

No, of course not, your wrongs are something the rest of us will be paying the price of for a long time, and you’ll just expect us to lump it and accept a half hearted semi apology in the way of penitence.

Our society has been changed forever as a result of your getting it wrong, and the process of change is ongoing – and it isn’t change for the better.

Labour was, and is, a disaster for Britain – and sadly, as we are finding out currently, Tory and Liberal are no better.

Not only have all of them got it wrong, they all continue to get it wrong. We can see with our own eyes that Britain and Britain’s future is not safe in any of their hands.

Whichever of them is in power Britain will continues its journey towards overpopulated and colonised land, and by way of an excuse we’ll get no more than a “we got things wrong” from the lot of them.

Many times we don’t even get that feeble excuse though, normally it’s point at one of the other parties and tell us that “they got it wrong”.

As they make excuses and trade blame, and do nothing in the way of fixing things, the colonisation of our Britain continues.