The jobs white folk won't do

One of the great myths of our age, one repeated constantly in every white Western nation, is that immigrants do the jobs which natives of the particular nation, in our case, the English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish, will not do. As such, the implication is given, is that immigrants are essential to the continued well being of the host  nation.

What must things have been like before we lazy, work shy, Brits opened our doors and started ushering all these millions of willing dirty job doers in?

Here in Britain, of course, the older readers amongst us will doubtless recall how difficult and unpleasant it was to walk down the pavement during the great street sweeper shortage of 1964. Their parents before them lived for years without tasting a gooseberry or a Cox's pippin during the fruit picker famine in the 1930's 

Of course in the early 1950's, most families lost poorly loved ones when thousands of hospital patients died unnecessarily from starvation and neglect, just because there were no nurses to take care of them before the immigrants arrived.

Another thing which I find completely amazing is that there were so many more public toilets in our cities back in the days when nobody was prepared to clean them! Gosh life must have been unpleasant when our grandfathers got caught short!

Of course, as we all know the “jobs white folk won't do” claim is another of the huge lies like “the economic benefits of immigration” and “only white people can be racist” which the promoters of multiculturalism have managed  to insert into our folklore.

The fact is that, for a short while after they arrive, some immigrants are forced to do the jobs which:

a) employers don't want to pay a living wage for
b) nobody can afford to do at the salary offered unless they are prepared to live nine people to a bedsit. (or moonlight at Uncle Raj's convenience store)
      
The other claim, of course, is that immigrants bring skills which the locals don't have. This is an even more dubious claim and often quite a dangerous one, particularly when it comes to the health service, where political correctness requires that we pretend to treat medical qualifications obtained in Kampala or Islamabad as if they are worth more than a diploma in woodwork. Meanwhile the government save money by not having to train our own doctors, as its  ministers quietly pay their BUPA subscription, and pray they never get treated by a doctor who qualified in Kampala.

Some of the claims have more merit, such as in relation to the indisputably invaluable Polish plumbers. However, this is only because they possess skills which we have given up teaching our  own youngsters.  A situation which could be turned round in a year if the government wanted to do so.

As for Indian trained IT workers being better qualified than their UK counterparts is concerned, as anyone who has spent an hour on the phone to Bangalore attempting to solve a Broadband problem knows, that's a joke, they're just  a lot cheaper.

In any event as mass immigration has shown us, soon after arrival, far from doing the jobs English workers wont do, immigrants quickly end up doing the vast majority of the new jobs which the growing numbers of Unemployed UK workers would dearly love to do!
  

The progressive destruction of “Change”

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 has 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 have 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 the 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 that lies has 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 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 that's all 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.               

More dishonest "politically correct" casting

Click here to read "Dolphin Tale" Hollywood Hokum: Morgan Freeman Gets To Play Numinous Negro Yet Again  - Paul Kersey examines another example of Hollywood's dishonest, politically correct, "Whiteout" casting decisions

The Lies of Political Correctness

It can be almost guaranteed that any statement or belief which can be deemed to be politically correct is, by the same token, factually incorrect.

Examples can be found in almost every aspect of our society and how we are required to perceive and describe them. It is, for instance, politically correct, and all but mandatory for anyone within the media, law or politics, to insist there is no difference in the rate of street level criminal offending between the races.

As in any totalitarian society it then becomes the role of the state controlled popular media to promote the approved doctrine in the propaganda beamed into the homes of the population by means of misreported news or fictional drama bearing no resemblance to reality, with the effect that, over time, the lie becomes a universally accepted truth.

Indeed, in in their eagerness to obey their orders, the media go even further and if one were to judge by the story lines and portrayals in all popular TV and celluloid drama the vast majority of all street crime, be it mugging, robbery, assault, rape or drug dealing is perpetrated by whites, whereas non-whites more commonly appear as victims or employed in law enforcement. Progressively as people lock themselves away from the frightening reality outside, the pretend world coming in through their TV screens becomes confused with the far less appealing one outside, until it becomes the new reality.

This applies even more invidiously to the constant propaganda aimed at the most vulnerable and receptive amongst us, our children. The makers of the new US TV Childrens' adventure cartoon "Dora the Explorer" brag that their Latina heroine and politically correct plots may "Change a generation". They will, of course, be changing that generation by making it believe in lies, and what else is that but propaganda?.

This form of reverse reality extends far beyond popular entertainment the tentacles of political correctness have wound themselves throughout all levels of society, especially into government, the media and of course all government funded institutions, which now suffer from what might be termed institutional political correctness. On the face of it, this may not appear too malevolent and there is a temptation to treat the zealots of political correctness with the benign amused tolerance one might grant to an eccentric maiden aunt. That is, until one realises that they are functioning on the basis of what are, in effect a series of untruths and blatant lies and that they are imposing those lies on almost every aspect of our lives.

Gradually these lies have come to dictate official policy within so many areas which directly impact upon our current well being and the very future of our nation.

The police for instance are the organisation tasked with protecting society from criminality, yet they are not permitted to acknowledge, or in many instances even address the truth of the criminality they are confronting. Instead they are required to operate as if within a parallel universe or pantomime, playing lip service to an entirely false reality.

Who can forget when following widespread public concerns about knife attacks on London teenagers, perpetrated exclusively by non-white youths, the London Metropolitan police produced a deliberately misleading public information film featuring a white boy carrying a knife.

The false reality is even more prevalent within so called “victim support” organisations, who appear to view their role as guardians of the politically correct flame as more important than the safety of those they are supposed to support.

This is not just happening in Europe, in America in the aftermath of the Duke Lacrosse case (the ultimate would be politically correct fairy tale), I recall reading commentary on a rape crisis website based in North Carolina, which made the claim that inter-racial rape was relatively rare, but when it did occur it was predominantly perpetrated by white attackers against non-white victims. I can't link to that web-page as it has since disappeared, presumably someone involved discovered a sense of shame and took it down, however, such blatant lies are commonly made by organisations who claim that their role is to protect the victims of violence.

Clearly, those running such organisations believe it is more important to protect a politically correct fantasy than it is to actually protect women from being raped.

As with the TV shows and newspaper articles full of fictional white racists, muggers and rapists and pretend non-white victims, it is, also politically correct not to notice that what is being said or what is being portrayed is factually incorrect and indeed the exact reverse of the reality all around us.

Not noticing inconvenient facts is another fundamental requirement of political correctness.

Incompetent, under qualified or just plain bad doctors

For instance almost every week another story of medical incompetence involving a doctor who has either killed a patient by giving them totally the wrong medicine, failed to notice evidence of child abuse, such as a broken back or missed the fact that a woman had a toilet brush handle in a body orifice, doctors so incompetent they could not could not diagnose their way out of a paper bag or so corrupt they have been selling the body parts of healthy Asian peasants to wealthy, usually Asian, patients, is reported in the media. However, we are supposed to pretend we haven't noticed that, to a vastly disproportionate degree, the majority of these incompetent charlatans are of third world origin.

We are also not supposed to consider it odd when qualification free Home Office Pathologist Dr Mohmed Saeed Sulema Patel is named as “Freddy Patel” by the newspapers who then go on to refer to him as “British”, or that Nigerian incompetent Daniel Ubani, who recently failed in his legal attempts to silence the family of a man he killed, is invariably called a German. (Both stories in this week's news)

We are not supposed to notice the connection between third world standards of hygiene in our hospitals and the numbers of immigrants from the third world working in them, when we visit a hospital we must pretend not to see that at least three quarters of the queue in front of us are not of British ancestry. Yet at the same time, despite case after case after case of malpractice, criminality or incompetence by immigrant medical staff, we must agree, like obedient Stepford wives, when some brainwashed idiot or state apparatchik claims our health service would collapse without immigrants.

Cults such as Islam are, of course, major beneficiaries of reverse reality, for example who can forget when the last government renamed acts of Islamic terrorism “Anti-Islamic acts”, which is rather akin to calling murder anti-death, or indeed a bunch of fascists “anti-fascists” (more of which later). Meanwhile a vast section of the Muslim community are referred to as a “tiny minority”, whilst their warlike political dogma is called a “Religion of Peace”, it would be laughable, were it not so dangerous to laugh at such things .

Likewise, we are required to believe that militant or extremist Islam does not represent the “real moderate” Islam practised by the “vast majority of peaceful Muslims”. The truth, of course, is that it is the watered down, milksop, form of Islam, followed by some of those who have come to the West in an attempt to escape the reality of Islam, which bears little or no resemblance to the real thing.

In New York, those the opposing the building of what was initially to be called the Cordoba mosque – named after the Spanish City of Cordoba, which was at the centre of the first Islamic Caliphait in Europe for over 500 years from the time it was invaded and overthrown by Muslim armies in 711 AD, until it was taken back by the Spanish in 1236 AD - at the site of the September 2001 attacks are accused of intolerance and bigotry, whereas it is in fact those who wish to impose their triumphalist monstrosity on the place where followers of their religion caused such devastation, regardless of the offence and hurt that it will cause who are really guilty of intolerance, bigotry and, I suspect of hatred too.

Political Correctness demands that the intention to build a monument to Islam, named after a great Islamic victory over Christendom at the spot where followers of Islam achieved their greatest and most bloody attack against America must be accepted as the gesture of good will its smirking proponents claim it to be. They know its a lie, we know its a lie, but that's what political correctness is all about.

It is also de rigueur amongst the ranks of the politically correct to claim that the proposed location of the Cordoba mosque is not part of Ground Zero, indeed the ludicrous Keith Olbermann recently dedicated one of his toe curlingly embarrassing soliloquies to this claim. However, if not an outright lie, to make this dubious assertion requires the application of a significant economy to the truth. In fact the two buildings at 45–47 Park Place and Broadway, which will be demolished in order to build the Cordoba (or Park 51) Mosque were damaged by part of one of the planes during the attack on the World Trade Centre, but did not fall.

It will, therefore, be necessary to destroy buildings which survived the Islamic attack on them in order to build a monument to Islam. Some would argue that the deliberate symbolism of that act is even more malevolent.

Once again, of course, it is necessary to ignore the uncomfortable facts which do not fit the lies of political correctness. For to claim as the apologists for Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the man behind this plan, that this is a peaceful act of bridge building between Islam and the West, requires the turning of a wilfully blind ear to how it's planned construction is being described in Muslim lands.

As I stated earlier, in almost every way that it is applied, political correctness is the reverse of the truth and as such it is a lie, or more accurately a set of lies. However, it now the set of lies upon which our western societies, most of our laws and all our institutions are progressively becoming based. It is what our media report to us instead of news, it is what our politicians preach to us and use to bully us with, worse than that, it is what our schools teach our children in place of the truth.

There is some debate as to whether Churchill ever really said “In the future the true fascists will call themselves anti fascists”, but whether he did or if it was, as some claim, the prediction of the Italian Communist politician Ignazio Silone, we have unquestionably reached that future but have, in fact, gone much further. It is not only fascists which the rules of political correctness now permit to call themselves anti-fascists, as has most emphatically happened, but in so many ways what is officially described as one thing is in fact the diametric opposite of what it calls itself.

The drive to impose a homogenised mono-culture across the Western world is perversely described as multiculturalism. Our leaders claim to be the champions of diversity, but its policies and aims are entirely the opposite and, in fact, the state will crush any dissent or divergence from the imposed orthodoxy.

This is the age of the universally accepted lie. In this age, white males must, as if by diktat, be condemned as the main perpetrators of racial violence, whereas in truth they are its primary victims. The guilt for slavery must be laid exclusively at the feet of white Europe, however, in terms of world history, our involvement was briefer and certainly less cruel (King Leopold of Belgium notwithstanding) than any other race other than possibly Australian aborigines, Inuits and Melanesians. Meanwhile it was we, of European ancestry, and we alone, who ended slavery, yet now to state that truth is to be accused of hate.

Ah yes, “hate” what does that mean? Hate, in the new world, now means things which it never did before.

Love, if it is not the approved form of love is now ruled to be hatred. To be guilty of hate it is no longer necessary to bear ill will towards any other group, it is required only to love the wrong things, to love one's country, to love one's people, one's race or one's heritage has been redefined as hatred and reviled.

Within this bizarre, false dishonest world which has formed around us, lies are revered and wildly applauded, yet it is entirely possible to be prosecuted for no more than telling the truth.

At the heart of this madness, at the root of the perversion of all that is true is political correctness. To live by the rules of political correctness is to live a lie, for it exists only to distort, suppress and destroy the truth. Those who dismiss political correctness as harmless or benign eccentricity are fools and are doomed.

Our overlords impose the creed of political correctness upon us in order to achieve a political goal which they have never, and will never, dare to let us vote for. It is the blade on the wheels of the chariot leading the invading army, and its purpose is to cut down all opposition and neuter all resistance so that its masters' aims can be achieved.

When the people believe a lie then the liars can succeed, when they can be made to confuse good with evil and evil with good, it is then that evil can triumph, which I fear it almost has done.

A lie is at its most dangerous either when it is falsely cloaked as kindness or when it is so entrenched you can make men fear to disbelieve it, and that is the aim of political correctness. It ranks among the most malign of political weapons ever to be devised by evil men and it is being ruthlessly used against us.

If we do not wake up to the truth of political correctness, then the lies of political correctness will destroy us all, for that is what they are designed to do.

The Myth of Diversity

By Jared Taylor
Initially published American Renaissance, July/August 1997

The idea that diversity is one of the country’s great strengths is now so firmly rooted that virtually anyone can evoke it, praise it, and wallow in it without fear of contradiction. It has become one of the great unassailably American ideas, like democracy, patriotism, the family, or Martin Luther King.

The President of the United States glories in diversity. In May 1995, in a message recognizing the Mexican holiday, Cinco de Mayo, William Clinton said, “The Fifth of May offers all of us a chance to celebrate the cultural diversity that helps to make our nation great.” A few days later, when he designated May as Asian/Pacific American Heritage Month, he said, “With the strength of our diversity and a continued commitment to the ideal of freedom, all Americans will share in the blessings of the bright future that awaits us.” In his 1996 speech accepting the nomination for President, he asked the audience to look around the hall and take heart in how varied the Democratic party was.

In his 1996 Columbus Day proclamation, he said, “The expedition that Columbus . . . began more than 500 years ago, continues today as we experience and celebrate the vibrant influences of varied civilizations, not only from Europe, but also from around the world. America is stronger because of this diversity, and the democracy we cherish flourishes in the great mosaic we have created since 1492.”

Appeals to diversity are not just for domestic consumption. In a 1996 speech before the Australian parliament, President Clinton noted that both the United States and Australia were becoming increasingly diverse, and added, And, yes, we [Australia and America] can prove that free societies can embrace the economic and social changes, and the ethnic, racial and religious diversity this new era brings and come out stronger and freer than ever.

Hillary Clinton feels the same way. In February 1995, she spoke to the students of her former high school in the Chicago suburb of Park Ridge. She noticed there were many more non-whites among the students than when she was a student, 30 years earlier. We didn’t have the wonderful diversity of people that you have here today, said Mrs. Clinton. I’m sad we didn’t have it, because it would have been a great value, as I’m sure you will discover.

Diversity has clearly become one of those orotund, high-sounding sentiments with which politicians lard their speeches. Of course, the idea that diversity at least of the kind that Mr. and Mrs. Clinton are promoting is a great advantage for America is one of the most obviously stupid propositions ever to see the light of day.

Nevertheless there is one kind of diversity that is an advantage. A contractor, for example, cannot build houses if he hires only electricians. He needs carpenters, plumbers, etc. a diverse work force. However, functional diversity of this kind is not what the Chief Executive is on about. He is talking about largely non-functional differences like race, language, age, sex, culture and sexuality. One might call this status diversity.

What advantages would a contractor get from a mixed work force of that kind? None. What are the advantages the United States gets from a racially mixed population? None.

The idea that status diversity is a strength is not merely a myth, but a particularly transparent one. Explaining why diversity is bad for a country is a little like explaining why cholera is bad for it; the trick is to understand how anyone could possibly think it was good.

Continue this very readable and intelligent article at American Resistance

The lies of frightened men

Anyone who has not spent the last few months out of radio range either in a submarine beneath the ice caps, searching for signs of global warming, or making a wild life documentary about Amazonian termites, will have noticed that for the first time which anyone not currently drawing their pensions can remember, senior politicians have actually started to talk about immigration at a time when a general election may be less than six months away.

Conservative leader David (call me Dave) Cameron has recently announced that the Tories will introduce a cap on immigration, which would reduce the number allowed in each year to “Tens of thousands”. Tens of thousands of immigrants would of course be an improvement on the current situation, (if Cameron really meant it – which he doesn't) but only in so far that, instead of allowing in numbers equivalent to the population of Newcastle each year (I say Newcastle based on “official figures” - the population of Bristol is closer to reality) we would still be “welcoming” a new Carlisle, Wigan or Grimsby year after year after year, not to forget the anchor babies they would immediately start breeding after they arrive.

It is a mark of how out of touch politicians, such as Cameron, are that he seems to think people will believe that such tinkering would even come close to solving the problem.

In the red corner, Labour Communities Secretary John Denham attempted to reassure the public by cooing disingenuously that "We don't think population is going to go to 70 million, so there is a bit of a straw man there".

Of course, most experts agree a rise to over 70 million is inevitable unless something is done to fundamentally change current policy, however, Denham continued his fairytale by adding "We have got tight immigration control - the points-based system that is now in place means that people can only come here if what they are going to give to this country is something we need."

However, Denham then argued against Cameron's cap saying, with the dishonesty which only a trained politician can achieve with a straight face: "Suppose the first person after the cap was an international heart specialist?" suggesting that Britain should act rather like the gambler who keeps buying the same lottery numbers in the hope that now and then they might win a tenner back.

According to Denhem's logic the country should continue to take in thousands upon thousands upon millions of immigrants in the hope that one or two of them might benefit the country. Has it not occurred to the pureed brained zealot that billions of pounds would be saved, and untold levels of social damage avoided, had we trained a few home grown heart specialists instead of importing millions of people in the hope of finding a few foreign trained ones among them?

Deceiving the electorate is clearly John Denham's latest brief, as he even went so far as to make a pretence of expressing concern for the white working classes, stating that, sometimes the white working classes suffered more from discrimination than many ethnic minorities, as if this was some new phenomenon, which only he had noticed.

Given NuLabour's visceral hatred and contempt for the white working class, who's interests so often conflicts with those now much preferred groups, many observers would have assumed that Denham was either making a bad joke and had forgotten the punchline, or was suffering from some catastrophic mental breakdown, had they, that is, not realised that an election is imminent.

Attempting to sooth the electorate's concern over the third world masses engulfing our boarders with a few half hearted lies, appears to be the latest wheeze plucked from the NuLabour lexicon of spin and deception, as they seem to be all at it.

Back in November, Home Secretary Alan Johnson went so far as to admit that “Labour has made mistakes on immigration” yet, against all the evidence, Johnson then went on to claim that Labour had not operated an open door immigration policy ( Ed: lets put it this way, if they occasionally closed the door, they certainly didn't lock any windows) and went so far as to say “I do believe that the UK is now far more successful at tackling immigration than most of its European and North American neighbours".

He followed this by wittering on about “the introduction of biometric visas, ID cards for foreign nationals and dealing with new asylum applications within six months, including" (yes he actually said it) “returning failed applicants”, on the apparently deluded assumption that anyone with a quota of brain cells necessary to master their remote control would believe that any of that had the slightest effect on the tsunami of immigrants which has swamped our homeland in the last thirteen years.

This was, of course, the same Home Secretary, who only months before had refused to contemplate a cap on immigration and chortled that he did not “lie awake worrying about a population of 70 million”

His arrogance and contempt for the public steaming like a newly dropped cow pat on a winter morning, Johnson actually seemed to believe that a mere admission that the government had been “maladroit” would convince the potential electorate that any administration in which he served, or, if he gets his wish, ran, had any intention of doing any better in future.

The most recent politician to come out of his corner with the “we will do something about immigration” lie was the pugnacious and aptly named Schools Minister Ed Balls who has this week been accused of campaigning in the vulnerable constituency of Morley West Yorkshire using letters, leaflets and surveys to portray Labour as tough on immigration. a proposition so ludicrous that it would be laughable were it not for the fact that there are some out there who might actually believe such twaddle.

For decades now the main parties have had an unwritten pact not to mention immigration anywhere near an elections, it has been the one subject politicians have deliberately prevented the public from voting on. There is a reason for this, were democracy to to impinge on the project, then the project might not succeed, and, therefore, democracy must be denied.

However, this time it is different, and we all know why that is. For the first time the public might just have the chance to vote about immigration, and the politicians have begun to realise the eggs they have laid over the last 40 years may soon begin to hatch and release something very dangerous indeed, dangerous to them that is.

The new strength of the BNP could mean that the men and women who have done so much to destroy this country and her people over the last half century, and particularly in the last 13 years, might get their comeuppance, and their project might fail, they will do anything in their power to prevent that.

To prevent it they, together with their apparatchiks and ideological catamites in the controlled media, are combating the threat with a two pronged approach. Firstly they slander and vilify the BNP and anyone who supports them, and secondly they will lie and lie and lie to disguise their own true policies and position.

Be under no illusion, any claim which the shower of crooks and charlatans currently in government or in the two main opposition parties make, suggesting that they will do anything to control immigration into this country or any other western nation, is a lie which will be forgotten and denied the day after the votes are counted.

For a member of any of the main political parties to promise they will do anything about about immigration is no different than a serial rapist claiming he's gone gay and can now be trusted with your daughter, their past actions expose the dishonesty and cynicism of their lie.

Their credibility of those within the LibLabCon troika died with their honour many years ago, and these promises of action are the handkerchiefs behind which they struggle to hide their gross and unappealing nudity.

These are the same multiculturalist zealots and cynical globalists who have spent decade undermining our country and our people, these are the same ideological gangsters who have stolen our history, robbed us of our land and denied our children their heritage. They hate us now no less than they ever did, they have not changed.

They lie out of fear that they may be found our and that their malevolent plans for us may be thwarted. Do not believe them, or you may have a lifetime to regret it.

Lies, deceit and treachery - the British Government and controlled media

A Report by the Home of the Green Arrow:

A VERY IMPORTANT TALE WHICH YOU MUST READ AND PASS ON:

It is a tale about censorship and why the media attack the BNP and Nick Griffin.

It is a tale about control, a tale about a plan to deceive us and to persuade us through the media.

It is a plan which is unfolding day by day as I reach into volumes of evidence and piece together sporadic disclosures by ministers and ex-govt employees.

It is a tale that tells of the dastardliest plan to break the British people and their country.

It tells a tale of intentional culture change forced upon the nation by mass uncontrolled immigration with a purpose to eradicate the indigenous people of these islands forever. It is so wicked a scheme that I am nearly weeping when I write this, but this story must be told.

It is the reason why the British media refer to Nick Griffin and our members as racists, thugs, bigots and vile. It discloses why and how and aims pointedly at this damned governments policy to place us second in our homeland. It discloses their agenda to rid Europe of its Christian heritage.

This document outlines the UK Govt's guide to media censorship along with its views of which side of the argument the media should attack. Namely, anyone who disagrees with its admitted policy to change our culture forever by means of mass immigration. It notes a massive increase in immigration occurred in the UK over the last 10 years, and should be read in conjunction with the Andrew Neather disclosure and also in conjunction with my blog "They thought they could deceive us" which outlines the same media censorship program has been adopted throughout the European Union.

Continue reading at the Home of the Green Arrow

Lies told often enough

An earlier post to the Home of the Green Arrow by Sir Percival linked to an article on the Voice Online website. The article written by the black journalist and famously anti-white racist Darkus Howe was a sneering and hate fuelled diatribe asserting the fait accompli which is how the enemies of the native British population now seek to portray the multi racial nightmare which has been forced upon our benighted nation without ever allowing the us a democratic vote.

This claim is usually made with the smug malevolence of a rapist reminding his victim of her rape, and Howe certainly stuck to tradition in this respect, as the reader could all but visualise the bile dribbling into his keyboard and mingling poisonously with the toxic residue of his earlier work as he typed.

As I pointed out in the comments section of Sir Percival's posting, I noticed the following line lurking menacingly amongst Howe's corrosive prose:

"It is clear to me that at this point in time the path out of recession can only powered by new and huge injection of immigrant labour."

Given that the huge injection of immigration has already taken place over the last ten years, during which time we have seen the most comprehensive invasion of sovereign European nation in history, and at the end of which we find ourselves in the midst of the worst recession ever recorded, my fist reaction was that Howe must have written the line as some cruel and tasteless jest. However, upon reading further, it became clear that the deluded and vengeful old fool most probably believed the piffle he composed.

Opinion is split as to whether it was Goebells or indeed Lenin who first said that a lie if repeated often enough becomes a truth, however it seems they both said something very similar, and that device forms the foundation upon which the entire argument in favour of a multicultural, multi-racial and diverse society is built.

We all know the lies, but I will mention just a few:

“Whites commit the majority of all race hate crimes”, a total fabrication of course, but it is a lie believed by the majority population because it has been told to them so often.

“Britain is a nation of immigrants”, a deeply dishonest lie, which Bonnie Greer attempted to promote on Question Time with her retelling of history, based on extremely dubious authority. In fact 75% of Native Britons can trace their genetic ancestry back to the end of the last ice age However, sadly and deliberately damagingly, it is the Greerite fairy tale which is taught in our schools.

“Foreigners are entitled to live in Britain because many of then fought for us during the war”, does that mean we, the British, can go and occupy Korea, Malaysia (as was), Kuwait and Sierra Leone because we fought for them?. Furthermore, is it okay to boot the Somalis and Eritreans out, given that most of them were on the other side?

What about the laughable old fiction that “diversity is strength”, a lie accepted by this generation alone. Every generation before ours knew that strength lies in unity whereas diversity leads to division and weakness. Diversity does not enhance, it destroys, or, at the very least, changes things irrevocably, seldom for the better. However, the claim is repeated by our leaders, over and over again, until they sound like an aviary full of one trick parrots

Then we have the lie, enshrined in Darkus Howe's snarl about the recession, that Britain's society and economy benefit from immigration, another falsehood repeated over and over again in the hope we will believe it. It is when telling this lie that politicians bleat statements such as “All parties must counter the threat from the BNP by pointing out the benefits of immigration!” yet they never quantify what they actually mean. Where, or what, exactly are these benefits?

As I stated above, and in earlier postings (although it is worth repeating) following a human landslide of these so called benefits, we are experiencing the worst recession on record, our economy is in the worst state it has ever been in during peacetime, and national debt is now so high that our children and probably our grandchildren will still be paying off in many years time. Yet, madman like Darkus Howe are calling for more of the same?! What is it that makes you think they might not have our best interests at heart?

Even if there were “benefits” to mass immigration, beyond easier access to couscous, okra and a proper curry, which have not yet been revealed to us, lets not forget that there are also health “benefits” to smoking. Up until the 1960's some doctors actually recommended that certain patients take up the habit. None do now, of course. because the down side turned out to be one hell of a lot bigger than the benefit.

In the same way, the mythical benefits of Immigration would have to be quite something to top the downside.

An article on the BNP's website estimates the cost of immigration to the British Tax payer to be around £13 billion per annum. Their figures are very well sourced, but, as they concede probably underestimate the amount which immigrants send out of the country each year (type the words “sending money home” into Google and see how many results you get – make sure you are sitting down when you do so). In addition, a report back in July revealed that foreign criminal gangs are costing Britain over £40 billion per annum, this would not be possible without immigration.

On top of a conservatively estimated annual net loss of £53 billion,we can not ignore the negative impact which immigration has on our society.

We are now in a situation were our cities are becoming segregated and balkanised, crime is out of control leading to added pressure on the police, the prison service and, of course, the public. We are seeing new and nastier types of crimes, not only are new and far more vicious types of street gangs roaming our streets, but previously unheard of crimes such as gang rapes, honour killings and even suicide bombings have been brought to Britain, and, as if that was not enough, we have, so far, had at least one muti killing

A report just last week revealed that London needs an extra 50,000 school places. Our health service, which now has third world standards of hygiene, is under such pressure that it views an eighteen week waiting list to be an achievement. Our roads are congested, our cities polluted and we can not build houses fast enough to accommodate the relentless invasion. (the environmental impact of immigration is huge but hushed up)

Previously eradicated diseases, such as tuberculosis have reappeared in Britain as a direct result of immigration, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

On top of all this we are subjected to progressively more oppressive and draconian legislation so that these enforced changes can be imposed upon us, which, in itself is a curtailment of our freedom. This is all but entirely the result of enforced multiculturalism.

Frankly, if the fanatics running this country remain unable to quantify a benefit of mass immigration which outweighs the clear and easily quantified downside of immigration, it would be fair to conclude that no such benefit exists.

Demented bigots like Darkus Howe may still believe in the myth, but any sane politician, even those most committed to mass immigration knows that there is no actual benefit to it, certainly not one which the wider public would either understand or welcome.

So why do they continue to promote this insanity when they must know that no good will come of it? Why do they continue to grant access to plane loads of pregnant women and to the sort of young males who could only be welcomed by agenda driven zealots, anarchists and that small group of white women who would not understand the concept of patriotism, honour and decency if it bit them on the backside, right next to their “Give me one Kwame” tattoo?.

Why do they follow a policy which wins approval only from sluts, freaks and fanatics unless there is an ulterior motive or, perhaps another lie?

Various possibilities spring to mind. Firstly it is quite possible that the “establishment” has been taken over by a group of totally evil people who gain a certain nihilistic pleasure out of watching the destruction of a once great civilisation.

Mad as that may seem, there is another possibility which is perhaps even madder. It is possible that they truly believe that all the cost, all the strife and all the inevitable blood-shed will be worthwhile if they can create a mono-race. It may be that they actually believe that if through forcing the races together they can produce a single race of caramel coloured people with curly hair in that shade of reddish brown which you do not see anywhere else in nature, and that will eventually lead to social harmony and what they see as fairness.

If this is what they really believe, then they are indeed truly deluded.

Believing that breeding a homogenised single race from the racial mix they have selected will lead to a better world ignores some very uncomfortable facts, in particular that amongst these particular groups the greatest level of conflict exists where there is the least ethnic difference. The Sunni Muslims hate the Shiites possibly more than they hate anyone else. One of the current greatest risks of nuclear conflict is between India and Pakistan. Meanwhile, the West Indians loath the Africans, and the Africans hate them back, it is no secret that much of the gang violence on our streets is due to conflict between African and West Indian street gangs.

The history of Europe is clear evidence that a common ethnicity does not prevent conflict and the same apples to Asia and to Africa. Inter tribal violence is amongst the most bloody, we do not have to go back to Rwanda to see evidence of that, many died in Kenya in 2007 merely for being from the wrong tribe. The so called “xenophobic” violence in South Africa continues, as recently as last week there were further attacks on Zimbabwean immigrants by members of the blood thirsty Xhosa tribe from which the allegedly peace loving Nelson Mandela originates.

When was the last time anyone in Europe set fire to an immigrant? Such acts have been horribly common in the outbreaks of sub Saharan tribal “xenophobia” despite the fact the ethnic divide is significantly less obvious.

This latest conflict has not been reported in the British Press, but that is of course the repeated lie of omission whereby suppression of the truth creates a new truth for the public to believe in.

Ending race even if it were possible will not end conflict in fact it could well make it worse.

To believe otherwise sounds like madness, but in the world of lies which our leaders inhabit who knows what they may think and what mad dreams they may dream.

Another possibility course is that they were silly teen aged idealists believing the silly things which teen aged idealists believe but they then went into politics and never grew enough to admit they were wrong, even when it became patently obvious that they were.

So, which is it? Are we ruled by the bad, the mad or just the very, very silly? To my mind, most likely it is a mixture of the three. However, the one thing which is certain is that, for whatever their reasons, they are lying to us, those lies are leading us towards the abyss and we can not allow that to continue.

_____________
Hat Tip: Dina

An inevitable consequence

Pictures of a "racist" prince

As some affirmatively assisted z-list comedian scrabbles to gain publicity by attempting to reignite the "Prince Harry is a racist" allegations, by repeating a throw away line from a brief conversation, I suggest that readers take a look at the pictures below, and contemplate as to who the real racists in our society are.

Time was that a man would be judged by his actions, in the thought police state in which we now live, it is a casual or ill chosen word which will be used against us.

Below, on the other hand, is the accuser