Muslim Tokenism at the Science Museum

Muslim Tokenism at the Science Museum

From  BNP News

By Alan Robertson — The current exhibition of “Muslim inventions” at the South Kensington science museum is an absurd example of deception, misrepresentation and falsification of history in order to appease the ever growing Third World colonisation of our country.

Under the title “1001 Inventions — discover the Muslim heritage in our world,” the exhibition claims to reveal all the contributions which Islam has made to civilisation.

Central to the exhibition is a model of a wooden water wheel. Please forgive the pun, but is this really so revolutionary?

Then there is a picture of a stone arch originating some 2000 years BC.

Sources show that the earliest known arches did originate in Mesopotamia, which would correspond to modern day Iraq, Syria and Turkey. However, since Islam did not arrive until 570 AD, this invention is not Muslim.

An interactive display allows viewers to browse other ancient inventions from the Muslim world.

Here you will see that coffee was apparently ‘invented’ by an Arab in the ninth century. Invented? Are they serious?

Carpets first appeared in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Middle East about 2000 BC but this is again pre-Islamic. In any case, how can carpets be an invention?

Another exhibit is entitled “naming the stars.” Only, research tells us that the Arabs translated the original names for the stars from a well-known book by the Greek astrologer Ptolemy.

While the West has sent probes into deep space, are we supposed to marvel at the fact that Muslims merely renamed the stars?

In 852 AD, a Muslim holy man jumped from a tower wearing a billowy, large cloak and lived to tell the tale.

Also, in the ninth century, Abbas ibn Firnas attempted to fly using a wing frame attached to his arms, whereupon his back was seriously injured.

Muslims apparently invented the concept of the spherical earth in the ninth century. However, the earliest known records of the concept of a spherical Earth came from Pythagoras (500 BC), Aristotle (300 BC), and in 200 BC Eratosthenes made an estimate for the circumference of the Earth.

To accredit inventions to a religion is complete nonsense. Inventions are the result of ingenuity on the part of one or more people.

Do we concern ourselves with the religion of Robert Stevenson, Thomas Edison or James Watt? No. We remember what they did for science and human development. 

What is distinctly lacking in the exhibition is any modern contribution whatsoever.

In fact, what have the Arabs invented lately? The answer is not much in the last one thousand years.

Let us consider relativity, quantum mechanics, microprocessors, the television… Do any of these things come from the Arabs, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Northern Africa or Turkey? No.

This is clearly a ’feel-good’ promotion of multiculturalism and nothing more. To advertise all over the southeast with posters proclaiming the wonder of Muslim inventions is an attempt to dull the revolutionary impulse.

Electricity, flight, motor transport and space exploration are all the result of Western endeavour.

It should never be forgotten that our forefathers in Great Britain invented many of the things that civilised the world. 

In the nineteenth century, the invention of huge steam powered motors enabled us to pump fresh water to the cities, and about the same time, the sewers were developed.

The effects of our industrial revolution spread throughout Western Europe and North America during the nineteenth century, eventually affecting most of the world.

But today, many Islamic nations are stuck in the dark ages because of their corruption, religion and wars. Millions of people live in squalor with inadequate toilets and water. 

The West patents hundreds of thousands of inventions a year whereas the entire Muslim world has only a handful in its entire history.

The reason for this is plain. Islam forbids creativity. It discourages resourcefulness and promotes strict observance of religion instead.

Britain has had the incredible talents of Shakespeare, Robert Burns, the Beatles and the comic geniuses of Rowan Atkinson and Monty Python. Our inventors and engineers include Faraday, Newton, Darwin and Brunel.

The first practical telephone was invented by Alexander Graham Bell.

Frank Whittle invented the jet engine, and where would we be without Alexander Fleming, who discovered Penicillin? Possibly nowhere.

The first stored programme electronic computer called EDSAC was invented in 1949 by academics at Cambridge University. Tim Berners-Lee proposed and developed the amazing world wide web in 1990 along with Robert Cailliau.

These are just a small handful of the British contributions.

The Science Museum is publicly funded — in other words, your money is being used to propagate these lies to the public in the name of diversity.

The Advances Brought to the British National Party by the Midas Consultancy

The Advances Brought to the British National Party by the Midas Consultancy

From   BNP News

The British National Party now has at its disposal five fully equipped, staffed and paid-for offices which include a distribution centre, a call centre and an accounts office – compared to nothing two years ago and it is all due to the fundraising ability brought to the party by the Midas Consultancy, deputy leader Simon Darby has said.

simon-darbyWriting in the latest internal party bulletin, Mr Darby said that two years ago, the party had no offices, no official landline number, a handful of computers, scattered and untrained home-based staff, was financially struggling and very often unable to even pay wages on occasion.

Today, Mr Darby wrote, the party has “a substantial and stable fundraising income, rapidly growing membership, and in the last 11 months we have fought two of the largest national election campaigns in the party's history, and remain relatively debt free.

“How has the BNP achieved this? We have, through the Midas consultancy, raised millions of pounds, revamped our training programme, design department, media/communications department, administration, staff organisation, events management, IT department and reduced our costs by hundreds of thousands by using their procurement techniques,” Mr Darby wrote.

“The Labour Party has Barrack Obama's consultants 'Blue State Digital' - we have a pool of home-grown British talent who have certainly given Blue State Digital a run for their money. Well done to the hard working team at Midas.”

The bulletin also contains an overview of the contributions which the Midas Consultancy has brought to the BNP since 2007.

“It is normal practise for mainstream political parties to draw upon the expertise and skills of industry professionals in order to help and advance their cause,” the document reads.

“In late 2007 the BNP contracted the Midas Consultancy, an international practise headed by senior consultant Jim Dowson, to run our fundraising and administration operations. Here we provide a stock-take and a round-up of the Midas involvement with the BNP since 2007.

Fundraising

The primary involvement of the Midas Consultancy is to provide professional fundraising. Below we simply give the yearly figures raised by the Midas Consultancy on behalf of the Party. These figures speak for themselves:

2007 = £100,000 (December only)

2008 = £662,217

2009 = £1,608,321

Fundraising fees

As can be seen from the figures above, thanks to the expertise and efforts mainly of the Midas Consultancy, we have jumped from a donations income of approx £100,000 per year to a staggering £1.6 million in just over two years. For this service, our consultants have cost the party in professional fees:

Consultant fees etc. since 2007 = £165,000

Midas have raised £2,362,000 million

Leaving the BNP with £2,197,000 million

Midas is in reality cost negative

Although specialist consultants have cost the Party in fees etc £165,000 over two years in return for a fundraising income in excess of £1.5 million, the good news is that the Midas involvement with the BNP doesn’t actually cost us anything.

Thanks to a large range of cost cutting exercises, the Midas involvement with the BNP is actually cost negative. Here are just some of the Midas cost-cutting achievements:

Print costs (leaflets, magazines etc): £93,000

Reducing outgoings and expenses: £63,000

Total savings: £156,000

203,000 "Paper British" Created Last Year

203,000 "Paper British" Created Last Year

From BNP News

By Mercia--New figures from the Home Office have revealed that a record number of “new British” citizens were created last year, increasing by 50 percent over the previous year to an astounding 203,000 cases.

The Home Office data shows that more than half of these new “Britons” originated from the Indian sub-continent and Africa.

Bangladeshis, Indians, Pakistanis and Filipinos constituted the largest ethnic groups.

No doubt these are the "skilled" workers that Labour insists that Britain so badly needs at this time of rising mass unemployment.

Interestingly, although around 50 percent were awarded British citizenship on the basis of their length of residence in this country, a staggering 25 percent obtained their citizenship through marriage with a “British” citizen.

It is widely recognised that a significant proportion of such “marriages” are bogus, being part of a growing industry to facilitate the acquisition of much-prized British citizenship and the benefits that accrue to such.

Last year's number of applications for a British passport was the third largest since figures were first compiled in 1987.

The latest figures also illustrate the hollowness of Labour's recent “assurances” as to the scale of immigration.

Last year, some 503,000 people immigrated legally into Britain. At the same time, some 134,000 citizens left the country. This translates into a total net reduction of 13,000.

As for Labour's promises to increase the deportations of failed “asylum seekers”, they have, once again, failed miserably. The UK Border and Immigration Agency have only managed to remove some 15,000 so far this year, down five percent on the figure for the same period last year.

With both the Tories and Lib Dems determined to curry electoral favour with the huge number of migrants in Britain, it can only be a matter of time before the coalition Government formulates an amnesty of some sort.

This will pave the way for the creation of hundreds of thousands — and possibly millions — of new “paper British” citizens. 

The British National Party has already placed on record its intention to review all grants of British citizenship awarded since 1997.

BNP Crashes Through 14,000 Membership Mark – Party Larger Than UKIP

BNP Crashes Through 14,000 Membership Mark – Party Now Larger Than UKIP

From|  BNP News

The British National Party membership figures have broken the 14,000 mark for the first time in its history, according to new figures from the party’s administration department.

As of the end of May 2010, the BNP has for the first time, over 14,000 members, an increase of 3,724 since April 2009.

This figure is very impressive, especially considering that the largest formal lapsing of non-renewing members that will be actioned at any point in the year (i.e. those with a December expiry date) has already taken place.

There were 3514 members due to renew in December 2009. Of these, 2915 renewed, 599 did not renew - that's an 83% renewal rate!

Since April of last year we have issued another 565 five-year loyalty badges.

The new 'super' integrated membership system is now fully up and running, working 'hand in hand' with the fundraising and Trafalgar Club databases. This is easier to use, faster and more professional than anything we have had access to in the past, and has totally revolutionised the central database system.

Since the 1st April 2010 we have received more than 10,000 info pack requests.

Some 6,000 of these have already been processed, added into the database and been sent information packs by the Enquiries Department. The remainder are still being added into the database.

The Call Centre, another Midas innovation, has already called 3,500 of these enquirers. 876 of these enquiries have already been converted into members at a total value of £23,890 (or an average value of £27.27 per new member).

586 of these enquiries have already donated to the party  at a total value of £17,707 (or an average value of £30.22 per donor).

Where the enquirer has joined and then donated to the party, the donation average rises to £35.20 per member.

A New Dawn for British Nationalism?

A New Dawn for British Nationalism?

Posted on May 26th, 2010 by Bob Bailey

The fall out from the recent elections has not settled. There are parallels with the Icelandic volcano and its ash cloud and the constant forecasts of new eruptions. The British Government (CONLIB) of today and political landscape is new and unpredictable. All the smaller parties were squeezed during the election but none more than UKIP which had high expectations and spent a packet on their campaign. What we did see though and dramatically was the UKIP vote heading home to bring about this coalition government of ‘dumb and dumber’ and the anti-British Brigade Pro Euro Brigade. This might well have been the last throw of the dice for UKIP. Over the coming months Cameron will be working all out to ensure that the remaining Tory vote in UKIP comes home. He will buy them off and make all his false platitudes. What will the rump vote of UKIP look like? Well still dissatisfied Tories but surely they will resemble more natural BNP supporters than Tory voters. The forgotten British patriots who heavily invested in the old Tory party but now betrayed by Dave and his left wing spineless careerist fopps.
UKIP left reeling and looking for a new approach to shore itself up have approached the English Dems and Robin Tilbrook in the hope they can provide a lifeline. Robin Tilbrook who calls himself an English Nationalist but acts like a schoolboy playing politics was allegedly offered the Deputy Chairmanship of UKIP. Like a number of decisions taken recently by the leadership of UKIP and Lord Pearson it appears there was little or no membership consultation on this approach. From what I understand a number of lead UKIP members have been outraged by this proposal. I don’t know how Robin Tilbrook feels about this intended ‘marriage’ but I should imagine some of his members would welcome the opportunity of joining UKIP and perhaps getting a chance to be elected to Europe and its ever increasing gravy train.
Well all considering the BNP faired well in the elections under Nick Griffins stewardmanship. A lot of candidates were bloodied a lot of experience gained. More branches formed and campaigns fought. Nick is a wise man and has held the good ship HMS BNP on a steady course over the years. In any party there will of course be growing pains and dissenters but none could have lead this party to the success it has recently enjoyed. Nick has worked tirelessly for British Nationalism with little reward for himself. Of course there are many who sit at home be-crying everyone else’s efforts in Nationalism but failing themselves almost in every area of taking Nationalism forward.
What we are presented with now are real opportunities which I hope the BNP will capitalise on. We need to improve the central party machine we need to fight campaigns more intelligently. There needs to be greater communication and transparency. The economic catastrophe which is unfolding will present new opportunities for the BNP and it is those we must focus on now and the way it affects ordinary British families. We need to spell out what a BNP government would do differently and the benefits which would accrue from voting BNP. The BNP in my opinion will come into its own in the next few years and we will vanquish the pretenders. Onwards and Upwards.

Oxford university undergraduates decisively reject global warming

Oxford Union Debate on Climate Catastrophe

Source:  SPPI

Army of Light and Truth 135, Forces of Darkness 110

For what is believed to be the first time ever in England, an audience of university undergraduates has decisively rejected the notion that “global warming” is or could become a global crisis. The only previous defeat for climate extremism among an undergraduate audience was at St. Andrew’s University, Scotland, in the spring of 2009, when the climate extremists were defeated by three votes.
Last week, members of the historic Oxford Union Society, the world’s premier debating society, carried the motion “That this House would put economic growth before combating climate change” by 135 votes to 110. The debate was sponsored by the Science and Public Policy Institute, Washington DC.
Serious observers are interpreting this shock result as a sign that students are now impatiently rejecting the relentless extremist propaganda taught under the guise of compulsory environmental-studies classes in British schools, confirming opinion-poll findings that the voters are no longer frightened by “global warming” scare stories, if they ever were.
When the Union’s president, Laura Winwood, announced the result in the Victorian-Gothich Gladstone Room, three peers cheered with the undergraduates, and one peer drowned his sorrows in beer.
Lord Lawson of Blaby, Margaret Thatcher’s former finance minister, opened the case for the proposition by saying that the economic proposals put forward by the UN’s climate panel and its supporters did not add up. It would be better to wait and see whether the scientists had gotten it right. It was not sensible to make expensive spending commitments, particularly at a time of great economic hardship, when the effectiveness of the spending was gravely in doubt and when it might do more harm than good.
At one point, Lord Lawson was interrupted by a US student, who demanded to know what was his connection with the Science and Public Policy Institute, and what were the Institute’s sources of funding. Lord Lawson was cheered when he said he neither knew nor cared who funded the Institute.
Ms. Zara McGlone, Secretary of the Oxford Union, opposed the motion, saying that greenhouse gases had an effect [they do, but it is very small]; that the precautionary principle required immediate action, just in case and regardless of expense [but one must also bear in mind the cost of the precautions themselves, which can and often do easily exceed the cost of inaction]; that Bangladesh was sinking beneath the waves [a recent study by Prof. Niklas Moerner shows that sea level in Bangladesh has actually fallen]; that the majority of scientists believed “global warming” was a problem [she offered no evidence for this]; and that “irreversible natural destruction” would occur if we did nothing [but she did not offer any evidence].
Mr. James Delingpole, a blogger for the leading British conservative national newspaper The Daily Telegraph, seconded the proposition, saying that – politically speaking – the climate extremists had long since lost the argument. The general public simply did not buy the scare stories any more. The endless tales of Biblical disasters peddled by the alarmist faction were an unwelcome and now fortunately failed recrudescence of dull, gray Puritanism. Instead of hand-wringing and bed-wetting, we should celebrate the considerable achievements of the human race and start having fun.
Lord Whitty, a Labor peer from the trades union movement and, until recently, Labor’s Environment Minister in the Upper House, said that the world’s oil supplies were rapidly running out [in fact, record new finds have been made in the past five years]; that we needed to change our definition of economic growth to take into account the value lost when we damaged the environment [it is artificial accounting of this kind that has left Britain as bankrupt as Greece after 13 years of Labor government]; that green jobs created by governments would help to end unemployment [but Milton Friedman won his Nobel Prize for economics by demonstrating that every artificial job created at taxpayers’ expense destroys two real jobs in the wealth-producing private sector]; that humans were the cause of most of the past century’s warming [there is no evidence for that: the case is built on speculation by programmers of computer models]; that temperature today was at its highest in at least 40 million years [in fact, it was higher than today by at least 12.5 F° for most of the past 550 million years]; and that 95% of scientists believed our influence on the climate was catastrophic [no one has asked them].
Lord Monckton repeatedly interrupted Lord Whitty to ask him to give a reference in the scientific literature for his suggestion that 95% of scientists believed our influence on the climate was catastrophic. Lord Whitty was unable to provide the source for his figure, but said that everyone knew it was true. Under further pressure from Lord Monckton, Lord Whitty conceded that the figure should perhaps be 92%. Lord Monckton asked: “And your reference is?” Lord Whitty was unable to reply. Hon. Members began to join in, jeering “Your reference? Your reference?” Lord Whitty sat down looking baffled.
Lord Leach of Fairford, whom Margaret Thatcher appointed a Life Peer for his educational work, spoke third for the proposition. He said that we no longer knew whether or not there had been much “global warming” over the 20^th century, because the Climategate emails had exposed the terrestrial temperature records as defective. In any event, he said, throwing good money after bad on various alternative-energy boondoggles was unlikely to prove profitable in the long term and would ultimately do harm.
Mr. Rajesh Makwana, executive director of “Share The World’s Resources”, speaking third for the opposition, said that climate change was manmade [but he did not produce any evidence for that assertion]; that CO2 emissions were growing at 3% a year [but it is concentrations, not emissions, that may in theory affect climate, and concentrations are rising at a harmless 0.5% a year]; that the UN’s climate panel had forecast a 7 F° “global warming” for the 21^st century [it’s gotten off to a bad start, with a cooling of 0.2 F° so far]; and that the consequences of “global warming” would be dire [yet, in the audience, sat Mr. Klaus-Martin Schulte, whose landmark paper of 2008 had established that not one of 539 scientific papers on “global climate change” provided any evidence whatsoever that “global warming” would be catastrophic].
Lord Monckton, a former science advisor to Margaret Thatcher during her years as Prime Minister of the UK, concluded the case for the proposition. He drew immediate laughter and cheers when he described himself as “Christopher Walter, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, scholar, philanthropist, wit, man about town, and former chairman of the Wines and Spirits Committee of this honourable Society”. At that point his cummerbund came undone. He held it up to the audience and said, “If I asked this House how long this cummerbund is, you might telephone around all the manufacturers and ask them how many cummerbunds they made, and how long each type of cummerbund was, and put the data into a computer model run by a zitty teenager eating too many doughnuts, and the computer would make an expensive guess. Or you could take a tape-measure and” – glaring at the opposition across the despatch-box – “measure it!” [cheers].
Lord Monckton said that real-world measurements, as opposed to models, showed that the warming effect of CO2 was a tiny fraction of the estimates peddled by the UN’s climate panel. He said that he would take his lead from Lord Lawson, however, in concentrating on the economics rather than the science. He glared at the opposition again and demanded whether, since they had declared themselves to be so worried about “global warming”, they would care to tell him – to two places of decimals and one standard deviation – the UN’s central estimate of the “global warming” that might result from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration. The opposition were unable to reply. Lord Monckton told them the answer was 3.26 plus or minus 0.69 Kelvin or Celsius degrees. An Hon. Member interrupted: “And your reference is?” Lord Monckton replied: “IPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2.” [cheers]. He concluded that shutting down the entire global economy for a whole year, with all the death, destruction, disaster, disease and distress that that would cause, would forestall just 4.7 ln(390/388) = 0.024 Kelvin or Celsius degrees of “global warming”, so that total economic shutdown for 41 years would prevent just 1 K of warming. Adaptation as and if necessary would be orders of magnitude cheaper and more cost-effective.
Mr. Mike Mason, founder and managing director of “Climate Care”, concluded for the opposition. He said that the proposition were peculiar people, and that Lord Monckton was more peculiar than most, in that he was not a real Lord. Lord Monckton, on a point of order, told Mr. Mason that the proposition had avoided personalities and that if Mr. Mason were unable to argue other than ad hominem he should “get out”. [cheers] Mr. Mason then said that we had to prepare for climate risks [yes, in both directions, towards cooler as well as warmer]; and that there was a “scientific consensus” [but he offered no evidence for the existence of any such consensus, still less for the notion that science is done by consensus].
The President thanked the speakers and expressed the Society’s gratitude to the Science and Public Policy Institute for sponsoring the debate. Hon. Members filed out of the Debating Chamber, built to resemble the interior of the House of Commons, and passed either side of the brass division-pole at the main door – Ayes to the right 135, Noes to the left 110. Motion carried.
 None Dare Call It Conspiracy 
The Greening the Environmentalists Drive for Global Power, 
Call It Conspiracy 
The Greening 

Motorist told flag could be racist

If promoting England is offensive to Migrants than please leave to somewhere that doesn’t offend you or don't come in the first place! Personally we find this police officers demand very offensive!

Motorist told flag could be racist

A Teenage motorist was told to remove an England flag from his car by a police officer because it could be offensive to immigrants.

Ben Smith, 18, was driving back home to Ingram Road in Melksham on Thursday evening after filling up with petrol, when the officer stopped him on a routine patrol.

He checked the tax disc and tyres on his Vauxhall Corsa but when he noticed the flag of St George on the parcel shelf he told Mr Smith to take it down.

Mr Smith, who works for G Plan Upholsterers on Hampton Park West, said: "He saw the flag and said it was racist towards immigrants and if I refused to take it down I would get a £30 fine.

"I laughed because I thought he was joking, but then I realised he was serious so I had to take it down straight away. I thought it was silly - it's my country and I want to show my support for my country."

Mr Smith had recently installed new speakers in the parcel shelf of his car and wanted to cover them up so they did not get stolen.

He used the flag and laid it out flat on the shelf so it was not obscuring his view out of the rear window.

But it was only there a couple of days before he was stopped by the officer at about 9.30pm close to Melksham Enterprise Park and made to take it down.

He said he is used to getting stopped by the police because he is a young male driver and is often mistaken for a boy racer'.

But he thought it was "a bit strange" to be asked to take down the England flag when the officer found nothing else wrong with his car.

PC Dave Cooper, of Chippenham Road Policing Unit, said he had never come across an officer asking someone to remove an England flag from their car because it could be racist.

He added: "It all depends on the context of a stop. If they are going past a lot of Polish people, for instance, and abusing them, then we possibly would ask them to take the flag down."

He said there would be no police log of Mr Smith having been stopped with details of what was said to him, as there was nothing wrong with his car.

He added the officer could have been based anywhere around the county and just made an independent stop

 

The British boot stamping on the face of Christian belief

The British boot stamping on the face of Christian belief

Author Melanie Phillips http://www.melaniephillips.com/biography/Terrifying as this may seem, the attempt to stamp out Christianity in Britain appears to be gathering pace.
Dale McAlpine was preaching to shoppers in Workington, Cumbria, that homosexuality is a sin when he found himself carted off by the police, locked up in a cell for seven hours and charged with using abusive or insulting words or behaviour.
It appears that two police community support officers — at least one of whom was gay — claimed he had caused distress to themselves and members of the public.
Under our anti-discrimination laws, such distress is not to be permitted. And so we have the oppressive and sinister situation where a gentle, unaggressive Christian is arrested and charged simply for preaching Christian principles.
It would appear that Christianity, the normative faith of this country on which its morality, values and civilisation are based, is effectively being turned into a crime.
Surreally, this intolerant denial of freedom is being perpetrated under the rubric of promoting tolerance and equality — but only towards approved groups.
Never has George Orwell’s famous satirical observation, that some people are more equal than others, appeared more true.
The Cumbrian arrest comes hard on the heels of last week’s ruling by Lord Justice Laws in the case of Gary McFarlane, who was dismissed as a Relate counsellor because he refused to give advice to same-sex couples on sexual relationships.
The judge not only upheld Relate’s case against McFarlane but went even further, saying in terms that the law could provide no legal protection for Christians who wish to live according to their religious principles.
And how did he arrive at this remarkable conclusion that deprives Christians of their rights? By cherry-picking human rights law.
The judge said merely that this conferred upon believers the right to ‘hold or express’ religious views. In fact, the European Convention on Human Rights goes much further, giving people the right to manifest ‘freedom of thought, conscience and religion’ through ‘worship, teaching, practice and observance’.
Yet the judge chose not to mention this right to put religious beliefs into practice. Instead, he stated that giving legal protection to Christian beliefs was ‘deeply unprincipled’ and ‘on the way to a theocracy’.
You really do have to scratch your head at this. The protection of religious conscience is a fundamental principle of a liberal and free society.
To equate this protection with theocracy — or the imposition of religious law upon a society — displays a remarkable intellectual and moral confusion, and has resulted in a ruling that is frighteningly illiberal and intolerant.
Of course, you could say that this is merely the result of human rights law for which Parliament rather than the judges is responsible.
But the courts could interpret that same human rights law very differently. The problem is that the judges are refusing to strike a proper balance.
Instead of arbitrating fairly between competing rights by granting exemptions for religious believers from anti-religious laws, they are choosing to impose secular values and thus destroy the right to live and work on Christian principles.
What seems to have particularly offended Lord Justice Laws was the idea of protecting certain beliefs specifically because they were religious.
This was wrong, he said, because religious ideas were not applicable to the whole of society, since they existed only in the hearts of religious believers.
He thus appeared, totally, to miss the point — that freedom of conscience is supposedly a right for all, including minorities. It would seem that either a tin ear or, worse, an animosity towards religion drives all before it.
This was what caused the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, to protest in a statement to the court that judges were effectively damning Christianity itself as discriminatory and, therefore, bigoted.
He was so alarmed by the apparent secular prejudice of the judiciary that he suggested the establishment of a special court to deal with cases of religious discrimination composed of judges with some understanding of religious issues.
As if to prove his point, Lord Justice Laws dismissed all his arguments out of hand with the patronising observation that Lord Carey had not understood the law.
On the contrary, it is surely Lord Justice Laws who does not understand that he and his fellow judges are mistaking secularism for neutrality — confusing the secular onslaught upon religion with the need to hold the ring between competing beliefs.
There is a long and growing list of British Christians who have been harassed by the police, sacked or otherwise fallen foul of authority simply for upholding their religious beliefs.
Pensioners have found the police on their doorstep accusing them of ‘hate crime’ for objecting to their council about a gay pride march or merely asking if they could distribute Christian leaflets alongside the gay rights literature.
A preacher who went around with a placard denouncing homosexuality was prosecuted even though he was the victim of an assault by onlookers who threw soil and water over him.
In the field of employment, Christians have been suspended or sacked for refusing to officiate at civil partnership ceremonies or place children for adoption with gay couples and for wearing a cross or praying with patients for their recovery.
Many of these cases involve the issue of homosexuality since this is the principal area where orthodox Christian beliefs cannot co-exist with the law.
This is in contrast to other contentious issues such as abortion, where the law specifically provides exemptions for conscience.
This is because unlike the specific and limited issue of abortion, the militant gay rights agenda represents an attack on the entire value system of our society by destroying the very idea that any sexual behaviour is normal.
Anyone who says homosexuality is not normal is, therefore, thrown to the wolves as a bigot.
This is what recently happened to the then Conservative parliamentary candidate Philip Lardner.
He said churches should not be forced to have practising homosexual clergy and Christians should not be penalised for politely saying that homosexuality is ‘wrong’.
He also said that he would always support the rights of homosexuals to be treated fairly and to live as they wanted in private, but he would not accept that their behaviour was ‘normal’ or encourage children to indulge in it.
For this expression of traditional Christian — and, indeed, liberal — values, he was not only deselected as a Tory candidate at the speed of light on the grounds that his remarks were ‘deeply offensive and unacceptable’, but suspended from his job as a primary school teacher.
As Lardner has angrily observed, it appears that Christian views are no longer acceptable within the Conservative party.
Far from their historic role in defending the bedrock values of this society, the Tories have thus put themselves on the side of the illiberal onslaught on freedom of conscience.
Of course, true prejudice and bigotry are wrong, whether towards homosexuals or anyone else.
But the decent impulse to protect the rights of gay people is very different from trying to destroy the bedrock values of our society.
Yet, that is precisely what it has become. As a result, Britain is turning from a liberal Christian country — whose liberalism is rooted in its religious tradition — into an illiberal, oppressive secular state with no room for religious conscience.
Under the camouflage of human rights, this is the way freedom dies.

British Counter Jihad: Islam Exposed 1

British Counter Jihad: Islam Exposed 1

Author: Reconquista |

The first in a series of short pieces exposing the dirty secrets about  “The Religion Of Peace” the ruling elites and duplicitous Muslims are determined to prevent the British people from discovering.

Use them whenever Islam is discussed to educate, inform and more likely, challenge Islamic apologists without needing an extensive knowledge of either the Qur’an, the ahaddith (accounts of the life of the Islamic prophet Mohammed) or Sharia Law, the legal system all Muslims must adhere to.

1. The Elusive Obvious

As the Muslim population continues to expand and flourish in Great Britain, the ruling Marxist Lab-Con-Dem elite are engaged in aiding and abetting the devout Muslims in an attempt to fool and brainwash the British people into believing that Islam is a peaceful religion; a tolerant religion; one of the three great Abrahamic religions and a religion that makes an important contribution to modern-day Multicultural Britain.

It is way past tea for these lies and deceptions to be exposed. Let us begin the series by asking a very simple question.

What is the first year on the Islamic calendar? Is it:

A) The year the Angel Gabriel is alleged to have first revealed “the immutable word of Allah” to the Islamic Prophet Mohammed?

B) Is it the year of birth of the Islamic Prophet Mohamed?

C) Is it the year of the Hijra, the year when after being rejected as a prophet by the Jews and Christians of Mecca, Mohammed and his followers fled to the city of Medina?

The correct answer is: C, the first year being 622 A.D.

Why is this significant?
On route to Medina, Mohammed again claimed to have received the word of Allah from the Angel Gabriel. These suras (chapters) of the Qur’an are referred to as “The Medina Suras” with the suras of the first revelations being “The Mecca Suras”.

The Medina suras are regarded as the more important and they abrogate the earlier verses, referred to as “naskh” in Islam. It is in the Medina suras that we find delightful little verses such as this verse “The Verse of the Sword”:
9:05 So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

and this next one, a verse that is possibly the most important verse in the Qur’an with regard to how Muslims are to treat “the people of the book”, that is, the Jews and the Christians:

9:29 Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

This is “The verse of tribute”, a verse that is responsible for the oppression of millions of Jews and Christians in many countries throughout Islamic history, a cruel oppression that continues today. This subjugation of Jews and Christians is called “Dhimmitude” with these people relegated to the level of “dhimmis”, people who are second-class citizens who must pay their Muslim masters a tax called “Jizya”.

This begs a question:
Why is the year of the Hijra to Medina, 622, so important to Muslims it was chosen by them as the first year of the Islamic calendar? In Islam, years are noted with the term: A.H. - Anno Hegirae, indicating that the year of the hijra is indeed the first year of the Islamic calendar.

British people – and people throughout the Western world – are being told to believe that Islam - a religion that has as its first year, a year where Muslims believe the Islamic deity Allah told the Islamic prophet (and the number of the verse should be noted):

9.111 Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.

- is a “Religion of Peace”.

I say those who make this claim are liars, deceivers, malicious charlatans who should not be allowed to spread their lies without being confronted with this fact and asked to explain it.

A challenge I now make to any of them who read this. I assert this simple fact about the first year in the Islamic calendar proves beyond doubt Islam is a violent, intolerant ideology that has no place in Great Britain or any civilised country.

Prove me wrong.

Mexican Immigrant Boycott backfires In Texas

from our USA corespondent the Alabama Rose

Mexican Immigrant Boycott backfires In Texas 


Texas is introducing tough new immigrant laws and about time, I bet! but here is a interesting States side article sent to us by our Alabama based corespondent The Alabama Rose!