Tuesday 27 September 2011

The left is re-writing Britain's immigration History

Click here to read Philip Johnston on how Labour is trying to hide the truth about the explosion in non-EU immigration following the 1997 election.

Please circulate the link

Monday 26 September 2011

Young South African Farmer (father of two) stabbed to death

30-year-old Wesley Wood was stabbed to death on his farm in Doringkop just outside KwaDukuza South Africa on Sunday September 18.

It is believed that he had been living back in South Africa for a few years, after spending time in the UK where he met his wife.

Wood and his British wife, together with their two little children aged one and three, had just arrived back home from the beach late on Sunday afternoon when the incident occurred.

Mr Wood's wife Sara was confronted by two black males, she ran into the house and attempted to prevent the men from entering.  On hearing the commotion Mr Wood Rushed to the aid of his wife and children  but was stabbed to death by the assailants.

The suspects then fled on foot.

Police say the motive for the attack is unknown as the suspects didn’t take anything from the scene.

News report at Farm Tracker

Sunday 25 September 2011

The Moment of Tip Over

By August Pointneuf

The web pages below reflect a point of tip-over.  Contesting the threat to European national cultural values has begun to move from the secret to outward objections.

These tiny cracks presage an irreversible shift. It is now commonplace to hear expressed previous anathema – such as criticism of Nelson Mandela or quoting (and admiring) Enoch Powell.

Academics have refined the term “racism”. In the past this was a “catchall” term, convenient for those who wished to use it as a tool to lever emotions. But escaping this suffocating potion is beginning to be possible. The term “racism” is being liberated. It is becoming recognised that the word “racism” has many interpretations as well as positive values. A new terminology of racism is developing (although confusingly manifold): now some of the components of the term "racism", such as its application to national pride, are no longer pejorative. It is being accepted that racism is not necessarily a denigrator terminology. The word racism is being adopted and returned to polite vocabulary. The meaning is being introverted, and can now denote pride-in-self and an acclamation of communal, national and racial pride. Racism is beginning to be acceptable.


http://waeshael.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/muslim-halal-food-sales-supporting-terrorism/       (France)

(Swiss) MP Oskar Fresysinger.


It is a historical truism that attempts by authoritarian regimes to “suppress” populations, and by that is meant the prohibition of intuitive responses, have always failed, ultimately. The longer it takes the population to escape suppression, the greater the stress and tension build- up within that society. The longer the escape from suppression is delayed so progressively more violent reactions occur as it ends. The “British Spring” is bound to arrive, sooner or later.

It is still a quiet revolution. Therefore the opportunity must be grasped now to steer these revolutionary changes towards a soft landing. In the past, governments in Europe worked hard to intimidate their populations into subservient acceptance of aliens. Once released from these constraints the reactions will not be muted.

The present trajectory of European government policy towards cultural aliens will unswervingly terminate in catastrophe.

When the beaker finally cracks large swathes of the population will begin venting anger. This anger will build, at first, unobserved and subliminal. It will pivot on many types of collateral stresses, some real some imagined. Many of these precipitating stresses – such as joblessness, alien-associated crime, reduced social benefits and increased taxation – can be predicted to surface collaterally,. Intuitive reactions will slowly emerge from these forced suppressions: they will often be outward reactions to seemingly trivial triggers, such as cross-racial flirting and cohabitation, as well as the flaunting of distinctive alien cultural patterns.

Once some display anti-alien behaviour then others will follow promptly. A positive feedback cascade of triumphalism will accelerate matters further. Once that stage is reached there will be a vicious alien counter reaction, multiplying the cascade of aggression and then rapid counter aggression. Ultimately this will likely be so widespread that any attempt to curb it will be un-enforceable.

So widespread will the reaction be that there will be an effective anarchy, characterized by excessive violence using firearms and explosives. Northern Ireland’s past anarchy will pale by comparison.

Governments, of whatever denomination, need to act immediately to mitigate the calamity which they have forced on their populations. Let them not replace their past catastrophic errors with the even worse error of dithering.

Anti-alien parties, now existing, should recognise that they, also, have inherited an obligation to soften the counter-revolution.

Softening the counter-revolution will need humility of governments, to backtrack, and invert previously strongly held views. There will have to be much “tough love”, both from government and population, to reduce bloodshed and shredding of society further. It will take a war-room mentality and steeliness of purpose.

The British and European native populations will need to be actively appeased before the apocalyptic apogee. How can this be done?

It is now mandatory that the British government offer its native populations affirmative acts of substance. These should be directed solely to the benefit of native, Cultural Britons.

Freedom of speech must be reinstated in Britain. If this does not occur then much tension which could have been diluted on the surface will become an aggressive anger underground. The population must be once again permitted to make known their intuitive feelings about the aliens verbally. It will result in anger, fighting and deaths. But it will, at least, allow the native European to perceive that control of expected behaviour has reverted to the level of Everyman. It will act as damage control. It will be a tolerable trade-off against a more brutal war.

A dramatically different immigration policy will be necessary to assuage the British natives’ fear of being outnumbered, and to repair the cultural fragmentation. This will be the only way in which the Britons’ fears of being progressively outnumbered and outvoted can be appeased.

Affirmative actions should be designed to attract Cultural Britons back into Britain. School teachers, health-carers, entrepreneurs and skilled artisans of British cultural decent are now actively excluded from returning to Britain. Britons abroad, of similar background and culture, must be attracted into Britain from the Diaspora. At present there is specific, and legislated, exclusion of Cultural Britons, living in all corners of the earth. Unimaginable to some, but this is the case at present: highly trained whites from the Commonwealth are refused entry because of their area of domicile.

The Irish, with the support of the Irish Department of the Interior, have developed a Certificate of Irish Origin. This is not a passport, but a way of reclaiming an allegiance to and from the Irish Diaspora. An English Certificate of Origin will be an essential tool of this racial re-harmonizing.

Boycotting should cause alien business enterprises to forsake some of their control. This will allow the native British to feel that their world of commerce is no longer being slowly confiscated from them. It will allow that which was so important in past parochial societies to be regained, concepts like the British village postmistress. And of course it will allow the native British to feel that an employment hierarchy is being reopened to them.

Refusal by native British to deal with alien businesses will put a brake on further immigration into Britain. If there are fewer prospects of fortunes, fewer aliens will arrive. This will also gently persuade some aliens to emigrate, and put a brake on what has been an almost entirely one-way flood from failed countries into those European countries which protect their populations by social support mechanisms. It will allow redistribution of social benefits back to the children of the children of the children who made Britain great and prosperous for the very reason of protecting their progeny.

Harsh? Yes, very harsh, but a cruelty to be kind. It is harsh for those aliens who intruded, as immigrants, into a foreign land hoping to escape the failures of their own societies. But they ran the risks of all those who adventure. This has been the risk of all those who have intruded into foreign lands. It is the risk incurred by transgressing into firmly established and different societies, with sophisticated economic-cultural patterns. It is most particularly a hazard wrought by those who attempt to meddle with the long-standing social equilibrium of their destination.

Consider how small were the racial, cultural, behavioural and heritage differences between the German and the Britain. Yet even these minuscule differences, when forced into polarization, precipitated the gore and exsanguinations of horrific proportion and unparalleled self-destruction.
Unless this growing social climate-change is arrested now the portends are a world-wide cataclysm of similar proportion.

For the sake of Universal God, your nation and your people, governments of Britain, do not potter and shuffle and tiptoe now. Have the courage to reverse your arrogant and misguided attempts to engineer your native people, forthwith.

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

Saturday 24 September 2011

The racial divide, and who is really crossing it

Despite the intelligent and highly eloquent defence recently presented here by Frank Ellis, I have to admit that I was very ambivalent as to the value of  LSE professor Dr Satoshi Kanazawa's controversial research, published earlier this year, into race and attractiveness, and his purported findings that black women were generally found less attractive than women from other racial groups.  

Whereas I am a passionate believer in free speech, (as evidenced by the extraordinary length of time I continued to tolerate one particular commentator at this blog) as well as the freedom of academic research, and was outraged by the attacks on Kanazawa and the calls for his dismissal, I failed to see the point of this research and what it had actually achieved.

Research into behavioural issues and the propensities of certain races towards violent crime or irresponsibility in matters of sexual health have merit, as they can be addressed and they inform debate on vital topics such as immigration, justice, health care and, of course the decisions people make in order to protect themselves. 

However, research which establishes that one group is less desirable than another seems to me to be rather pointless, after all what can be done with these finding which could be of benefit to anyone?

I suppose, if it were allowed any official credibility, the research could act as a counterbalance to all the contrary research which claims to find that non-whites have a superior ability to whites in in various areas, (such as the bizarre insistence that running is the most skilful of  all Olympic sports on account  of the fact that blacks are generally rather good at running) however, beyond its “tit for tat” application, and with all due respect to Dr. Kanazawa, what merit there is to his research in this respect continues to escape me.

However, I was reminded of the explosion of outrage which greeted the decision by Psychology Today to publish Dr Kanazawa's findings back in May (since cringingly withdrawn) when I read an article on the American black network site “News One” which declared that there were only '3 “Good” black men for every 100 black women' .  The article bemoaned the fact that only around 3% of black men met the criteria which would make them a suitable prospect as a romantic partner for black women.  The remaining 97% failed to make the grade for a variety of reasons including lack of education or success and the fact that so many were either in prison, between periods of incarceration, or had fathered a number of children by other woman.

Another significant group of black men were viewed as unsuitable by black women on account of the fact that they are either exclusively or primarily attracted to white women.

In fact the number of black men who effectively reject their own race in favour of white women is becoming a matter of some concern and resentment within the black community in America and is also causing  some negative comment amongst the black community in Britain.  If one looks at the figures what is happening is quite significant, but not in the way which the media, with its determination to undermine and mock white men, would have us believe.

The  common claim within the media and popular culture is that the number of interracial relationships indicates that white women find black men sexually attractive, however, that claim ignores the racial demographic as it still stands in the west, and the sizes of the respective ethnic groups in Western nations. In fact the figures actually reveal something very different than that which the media would like to have us believe.

In America, 8.5% of black men are married to white women, however, given that black males account for around 6% of the US population, whereas white women make up almost 38%, the far less widely publicised statistic is that less than 1% of white women are married to black men.  This is a relatively insignificant number, especially considering the amount of propaganda which white women are subjected to.  (in fact according to Wikipedia, who are, if anything, likely to exaggerate the figure, only 2.1% of white women are in any form of mixed race marriage, slightly less than white men at 2.3% - this is not the picture we see on TV is it?)

Statistically, it is black men, not white women, who are most enthusiastically spurning their own.  So why is this happening? 

There is no need to ask why the white woman involved do it, with the exception of a few committed liberal multiculturalists, the vast majority tend to be of the type which would sleep with anything provided it has a pulse or a battery, and in any event, as a percentage of their demographic, they are actually relatively insignificant.     

It is when one asks why black men are crossing the racial divide in statistically far more significant numbers that the answer becomes less favourable to the advocates or racial integration, and, sadly, somewhat unflattering to black women.

Popular mythology would have us believe that white women are rushing to embrace multiculturalism, however, in fact only a very small group are doing so, a truer picture is that an embarrassingly large number of black men are rejecting their own race.

Whatever one may think of  Satoshi Kanazawa's much condemned research paper, it would seem that by their politically incorrect actions many black men are adding credibility to the most controversial aspects of his findings.
It is also encouraging to know that the situation is not quite as depressing, for white people, as it sometimes appears.

Wednesday 21 September 2011

Genocide Watch raises South Africa's Genocide risk status to level 6

Genocide Watch has explained its reason for raising the genocide risk level to Stage six out of eight potential risk levels.  Stage six "Preparation for Genocide" being just one stage below "Extermination".

For the last ten years, since Genocide Watch raised the South African risk level to level 5, the organisation has been particularly concerned by the level of violence and hate crimes perpetrated against the white population in particular the Afrikaner farming community.  Since 1994 between 30,000 and 40,000 whites have been murdered in South Africa, over 3,100 of these are farmers, making being a white farmer in South Africa statistically the most dangerous occupation on Earth.

However, Genocide Watch have now raised the level because of clear evidence that the violence against the white community is being deliberately incited. In this respect, they refer to the actions of Julius Malema, president of the African National Congress Youth League, who was recently convicted of hate speech folloing his repeated singing of the ANC song "Kill the Boer".

Click here to read Genocide Watch's explanation for the change to the South African status.

Don't expect to see any mention of this in the western press any time soon.

Hat Tip Censor Bugbear Reports ....

Saturday 17 September 2011


"Right now we can't even deal with the 2.5 million people in this city. I think it is more important to take care of people now before we start bringing in more people. There's going to be a million more people, according to the official plan (which I did not support) over the next ten years coming into the city.
We can't even deal with the 2.5 million people. How are we going to welcome another million people in? It is going to be chaotic. We can't even deal with the chaos we have now. I think we have to say enough's enough."

  • Mayor of Toronto, Rob Ford

It’s more reasonable and manageable for Canada to accept less people each year and from more culturally compatible countries. There simply isn’t enough qualitypositions created for all these people.

Canada takes in about a quarter of a million immigrants each year. Add in aquarter of a million guest workers and about forty thousand refugees. About 75% of allnew Canadians head for Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. About 28% of all best sellingauthors are foreign born and Canada has some of the most interesting eateries the worldover. However, upon closer inspection of Canada’s source countries, there is major causefor concern.

In 2009, Canada only took in a paltry 90,648 citizens from democratic countries.Canada took in 29,049 citizens from the people’s republic of China. Mara Hvistendahl isa Beijing – based correspondent for Science Magazine. There is a very high premium placed on having a son. Demographers have calculated that there are 163 million women missing from Asia. Basically, they were purposely killed off before being born.

These trends are also showing up in North America and Europe in these ethniccommunities. There is zero democracy in the People’s Republic, no human rights, rampant organ harvesting against peaceful Fal Gong practitioners and absolutely no freedom of the press. Canada should not be getting the majority of new Canadians from this country.

Canada took in 9,566 from the U.K (where Canada got the Magna Carta for it’s constitution from), 7,300 from France (the birthplace of the modern renaissance) and only 9,723 Yanks (the recognized leader of the free world). This equaled 26,589. The Philippines is Canada’s 2nd highest source of new Canadians in 2009 at 27,277. There is a break away insurgency in the south. The government is run by
a military dictatorship and man’s best friend is also on some restaurant menus. This isillegal in Canada. However, since multiculturalism instructs us to value all cultures as the same, I guess it’s ok to eat Fido.

In 2009, Canada took in only 4,080 came from the economic powerhouse of the E.U, Germany. Canada admitted 6,214 citizens from the terrorist state of Pakistan.

Suicide bombers kill tens of people thousands each year. The minority Hindu and Christian population are routinely targeted for kidnapping, rape and murder. The government lives off of U.S foreign aid. Honor killing are also common.

Acqa Parvez’s father and brother wanted to preserve their Pakistani culture. She wanted to wear her own clothes and hold down a job. Since multiculturalism instructs us to value all cultures as the same, they figured it was ok to kill their daughter when she got out of line. Stephen Harper recently amended Canada’s Discover Canada:

The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizenship booklet by including that:

Canada’s openness and generosity do not extend to barbaric practices that toleratespousal abuse, ‘honour killings,’ female genital mutilation, or other gender – based violence. Those guilty of these crimes are severely punished under Canada’s criminal laws.He also cut immigration levels by 25%, refugee levels by 25% and family reunification levels by 40%. Why did he do all this?

Canada spent a cool $600M in 2010 on ESL and language training centers. This was up from $200M in 2005. Canada spends approximately $4 billion a year on the refugee program. Studies estimate that there are about 1.4 million people living in public housing. The Toronto Community Housing Corporation is now officially Canada’s largest tenant.

Does Canada simply create millions of great paying jobs each and every single year? CIBC’s Chief Economist Benjamin Tal explained in a detailed report why this simply isn’t even close to the reality. He wrote:

the softening in the monthly pace of job creation from an average of 31,000 in 2010 to 20,000 in 2011 will single-handedly slow growth in personal spending by more than 0.4 percentage points,”. Therefore, in 2010, 372,000 new jobs were created (31,000 X 12 months). In 2011, Canada is expected to create about 240,000 (20,000 X 12 months) new jobs. That’s a 35% plunge in what is shaping up to be Canada’s worst recession ever.

There is a very good reason that Lowell Green entitled his new book on Canada’sdisastrous immigration system “Mayday Mayday”. The jobless rate in 2002 of eight percent about 520,000 people might have seemed high, but eight years later, it actuallyappeared rather low.

According to Statistics Canada, as of May 2010, 1,498,300 people were unemployed in Canada. Yes, you are reading it right. Figures for May 2010 show that one million. Four hundred and ninety – eight thousand, three hundred people were looking for jobs in this country.Which surely begs the question: Why in the world are we importing another 250,000 immigrants, to say nothing of 30,000 or 40,000 thousand refugees, a quarter of a million temporary workers, and 79,000 foreign students every year?

If immigration were stopped completely; it would take approximately six years for Canada to reach zero unemployment. Meanwhile, corporations are bestowed with an excess supply of cheap graduates in which to hire and fire within a two year period. No raises, just hire another junior worker. Professor George Borjas of Harvard University, is the world’s leading authority on the impact of immigration on local economies. He invented a formula to estimate the immigration surplus in any free-market economy. How much money does mass immigration actually cost Canadian workers?

Applied to Canada, the Borjas formula reveals a loss to native workers of $30.7 billion annually.

It’s better if Canada went back to the intake of 1989 of 84,000 new citizens. It’s more manageable and less costly. It also helps if 80% come from first world countries with strong democracies. It’s also a good idea that they speak one of Canada’s two main languages, either English or French. Paper routes and coffee shop jobs should be for students. It sucks to get a degree or diploma and then not get anything of value for it. It costs lots of money to buy a house and start a family.

Here’s What Canada’s New Immigration Should Look Like

Suggested total yearly immigrant intake: 80,000
Job Creation Numbers For 2010: 372,000 (both figures from Benjamin Tal, CIBC)
Projected Job Creation Numbers 2011: 240,000 (a 35% decrease from 2010)
Unemployed As of May 2010: 1,498,300(Statisics Canada)
United States 5000 Belgium 4000
Australia 4000 Switzerland 4000
Ukraine 4000 Portugal 2000
Ireland 4000 Austria 4000 South Korea 2000
Japan 4000 Germany 5000 Greece 2000
Singapore 4000 France 4000 Israel 2000
Ghana 4000 The U. K 4000 India 2000
Netherlands 4000 Italy 4000
Poland 4000
Hungary 4000

That’s 69,000 people a year or 76.66% of all new Canadians from Anglo Saxon countries. The rest are places with strong democracies. Japan, South Korea, Israel, Ghana, Singapore and India. There is absolutely no logical reason to become an ethnic minority in the lands of our forfathers. English and the Christian religion should be preserved at all costs. It’s Canada’s cultural tradition and forms our identity.Canadians should be proud Canadians. No apologies for being a Canack. Let’s keep hockey and European traditions by loving ourselves first and not hating who we are. Canada is a white country(84% accordiong to the 2009 Canada yearbook) just as China is a majority yellow nation and Jaimaica is a majority black nation and India is a majority brown country just as Thailand is a Buddist nation and Egypt a majority Islamic nation and Israel is a Jewish state.

Hobby: Canadian History, Culture, Immigration & Financial Research.
Website www.endoffees.ca  email shawn@endoffees.ca
Email shawndalton@hotmail.com

Thursday 15 September 2011

Life in the Sharia Zone

Click here to read a first hand account of a Sharia zone in Denmark

EDL - A Question for the Metropolitan Police

Hat Tip: Mister Fox


By August Pointneuf

The inherently benign noun "diversity" has been politically manipulated. It is now a term of aggression. For many it is emotionally impregnated.

This is because the term has become a powerful political instrument in Europe. It is a key contributor to an entire philosophy upon which the survival of the race and civilization teeters. 

In the 20th C, the early stages of the political engineering, the populations of Europe were characterized by a bizarre and perverted form of gerrymandering: European political groups persuaded their populations that immigration was essential for the benefit of those populations. It was marketed as a necessity for their future welfare. The rhetoric, strongly implied but often overt, was that the "integration" of foreigners would occur spontaneously. The population was told that the incoming aliens would assimilate rapidly, creating an essential workforce. This was promised as a necessity to produce a powerful economy, one which would compete successfully against the rest of the world. This immigration, so it was said, would allow Europe and Britain in particular, to become more successful and dominant global economies. But the unparalleled perfidy and surreptitiousness of these politicians kept the population from knowing and understanding that these machinations were designed, by the politicians, primarily to be self serving, and to keep themselves in employment.

At that time many recognised the conceptual fallacy and its failure was seen as certain.

The extraordinary empires of the Europeans, particularly the British, had bred administrators who were experts in dealing with mixed populations. These Europeans had been exposed to manifold communities which varied by race, culture, geography, history and much more. These one-time expatriates were the supreme authorities on the difficulties of harmonizing the relationships between variegated peoples. Once back in Britain these experts were appalled and astonished that the politicians intended allowing immigrants from failed countries to flood into a nation which was aiming to become a socialized state. Amongst the opponents of the doomed policies, were some who were outstanding as intellectually supreme. And yet these people – some elected into government – with their unique intellects and insights - were over-ridden, denigrated and vilified.

Eventually it became clear that “integration” and “assimilation” would not, could not, occur. By the time this was obvious to all, the alien presence was (at least politically) irreversible. There was therefore a shift in political policy. The word “diversity” was now used in a pitiful exercise of political face-saving. The future of Europe was now projected by political spin to become one of “diversity”.
This word, “diversity”, became the banner of a new political crusade.

It is therefore worth inspecting the meaning of the word. It is derived from and bears a relationship to “diverse" which means varied and sometimes discreet and separate: a distinct separation of the elements

When “diverse” is applied to humans it connotes also the complex penumbra of human contextual variance.

It is inescapable, when considering humans, that “diversity” implies separation of humans into distinct groups, together with separating their array of contextual paraphernalia such as culture, language, behavioural rituals, attitudes, foibles, fidelities, inclinations and expectations.

However the forceful, nay obligatory, political assertion today is that the populations of Europe must “homogenise”.  This is despite the diversity caused by alien ingress, and their inescapable differences.

Varieties of humans are therefore ordered, compelled to live together harmoniously by edict.

It is now written into law in Europe that any distinctiveness (i.e. “diversity”) must be ignored. Any expression of, or references to, evident differences in behaviour, appearance, culture, or economic and integrative potential are expressly and specifically prohibited. Severe penalties are imposed for any who disincline.

The result is the most extraordinary attempt to universally ablate inherent human spontaneity that any "government" has ever imposed upon its electorate.

What muddles of the mind have allowed this oxymoronic thinking!

One never needs his wit so much as when he argues with a fool. Chinese proverb.

Tuesday 13 September 2011

The Muslim-British Race War – Encouraged by the State

Islamic Protestors :Picture from the New English Review 

The British authorities are in league with Muslims against their own people.

The constant appeasement of Muslims encourages them to do what they like. Birmingham police and Broad Street Marshalls allow Muslim taxi drivers to park in bus lanes, block double-yellow lines, make three-point turns and U turns in the middle of busy and over the central reservations on Broad Street with impunity.  Members of the public constantly complain but the police ignore law abiding citizens and cover-up for Muslim law breakers.

They do not just keep small things like that from the public: they suppress serious activities like the news of terrorist training camps near Birmingham.  The editors of the Birmingham's three local papers also kept it from the public. 

In Birmingham and London trainees learnt hand-to-hand combat and survival skills. For further training they were sent for military training in Yemen and Afghanistan. After the London bombings, The Times reported that “a dozen members” of British Muslim group Al-Muhajiroun “have taken part in suicide bombings or have become close to Al-Qaeda and its support network.”

In January 2007 the group's leader Omar Bakri revealed that Islamist extremists were infiltrating the police and other public sector organisations. The Daily Mail exposed eight members of al-Qaeda in the police.

RAF Nimrod planes have picked-up Birmingham accents in Afghanistan and Taliban fighters.  One Taliban fighter had an Aston Villa tattoo. (1) There is no excuse for the political, academic and media elites allowing a race war to develop in Britain.

As far back as 4 May 2003, The Sunday Telegraph’s Alasdair Palmer wrote: “Britain has become the headquarters of choice for extremist Islamic preachers, who now have a network of organisations dedicated to sowing pure hatred: hatred of the West, of democracy, and of the values of tolerance and freedom — the very values that give them the freedom to operate here: ‘Your task against the infidel,’ says one video, ‘is to kill their children, take their women, destroy their homes.’”

What is behind the security services allowing Muslim extremists to weapon train and develop networks here? Here is a clue: former Italian President Francesco Cossiga admitted in the Italian paper Corriere della Sera in 2008, that in the 1970s, the Italian government allowed Arab terrorist groups freedom of movement in the country in exchange for immunity from attacks.

The government of Prime Minister Aldo Moro reached a “secret non-belligerence pact between the Italian state and Palestinian resistance organisations, including terrorist groups. Moro designed the terms of the agreement with Arab terrorists, Cossiga said. “The terms of the agreement were that the Palestinian organisations could even maintain armed bases of operation in the country, and they had freedom of entry and exit without being subject to normal police controls, because they were ‘handled’ by the secret services.”

The security services have operated a similar deal in Britain. On 22 August 1998, the newspaper Al Sharq Al Awsat quoted Omar Bakri: “I work here in accordance with the covenant of peace which I made with the British government when I got Asylum.”

This covenant allowed Muslim extremists to plan attacks abroad and develop terror networks here. In 1999 it was reported that each year approximately 2,000 Muslims were trained about Holy War at camps in Britain run by Al-Muhajiroun. The police, security services and the Home Secretary Theresa May are still operating this Covenant with Muslim extremists and potential terrorists as we will see towards the end of this essay when we look at the recent ceremony for the victims of 9/11 outside the American Embassy in Grosvenor Square.

In Blackpool the police refuse to warn parents about Muslims who groom and rape their daughters so parents are unable to protect their daughters.  Everywhere you look in small things as well as large, you see the police and other authorities siding with Muslims against the British people. The evils and injustices done to innocent British people by our rulers are some of the worst inhuman history yet they blame us if anything goes wrong because they will not accept responsibility themselves. (2)

Even during growing and obvious hostility between Muslims and Britons the Government imports more Muslims to augment their street armies: U.K. Muslim Population Grows 10 Times Faster Than the Rest of the Nation. The Muslim population in the U.K. has grown by more than 500,000 to 2.4 million in four short years. Muslims multiplied 10 times faster than the rest of the Nation, the research by the Office for National Statistics reveals. These figures were up to 2008 so I suspect in 2011 you could almost double this. Here is some figures from 20045 The total number of Muslims in Great Britain: 2004: 1,087,000 2005: 2,017,000

A ludicrous aspect is that we have our money misappropriated to pay for our own destruction. On 12th September The Telegraph reported:

“The “coping classes” increasingly are struggling with the responsibility of looking after two generations, the equality watchdog says.
This is in a 700-page report that forms the first comprehensive survey of disadvantage and discrimination across Britain. “While the country today is more tolerant than in 1970, society is still not fair for many people, it says. The economic crisis and the Government’s proposed spending cuts threaten to make inequality worse, it says. The report, How Fair is Britain?

Unemployment among ethnic minorities costs the economy almost £8.6 billion a year in benefits and lost revenue from taxes. Half of Muslim men and three quarters of Muslim women are unemployed.
The country has a strong sense of tolerance and fair play. However, racism and religious prejudice are increasing, while hostility towards immigration has grown.”  

That is a clear statement of official bias in favour of Muslims. You see the Elites have brought this situation about but rather than face their own culpability use the connative term “racism” and “religious prejudice” which only apply to Whites to make us scapegoats.  Are they saying invading Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq is not religious prejudice and racism?

On 7 July 2005  52 victims of Third World immigration were blown up in London. There have been other outrages since, like the one on 29 June 2007, in London when two carbombs were planted but disabled before they could be detonated. The first was left near the Tiger Tiger nightclub in Haymarket  at about 1:30 am. and another  in nearby Cockspur Street.

The first was reported to the police by an ambulance crew attending an incident at Tiger Tiger when they noticed suspicious fumes; around an hour later, the second was found when the car was given a ticket for parking, and then an hour later, transported to the car pound at Park Lane where staff smelt a strong smell of petrol. When they heard about the first bomb attempt they reported the vehicle to police. A link established to the attempt at Glasgow International Airport. Bilal Abdullah was arrested and sentenced  to 32 years in prison for conspiracy to commit murder in both incidents. The important point is they should not be here to murder and maim us as we should not be invading their countries for the now.  There was an attempt to behead a Muslim soldier for serving in the British army. 

The Sunday Times of June 11, 2006 reported that Rear Admiral Chris Parry, one of Britain’s most senior military strategists warned that western civilisation faces a threat on a par with the barbarian invasions that destroyed the Roman empire.

He said future migrations would be comparable to the Goths and Vandals while north African “Barbary” pirates could be attacking yachts and beaches in the Mediterranean within 10 years.
Europe, including Britain, could be undermined by large immigrant groups with little allegiance to their host countries—a “reverse colonisation”. These groups would stay connected to their homelands by the internet and cheap flight.

Enoch told Southall Chamber of Commerce on 4th November 1971: “Yet it is more truly when he looks into the eyes of Asia that the Englishman comes face to face with those who will dispute with him possession of his native land.”

These Muslims are right in their grouse that our corrupt  leaders are waging a war against their homelands and people; but we are right in our grouse that they are importing Muslims into our homelands to destroy our way of life, our countries and us as a people. It will take proper international organisation one day to return them to their homelands, and for us to stop bombing them in theirs.  For Cameron to send the RAF out to bomb Arab civilians including women and children is despicable; but to invite aggrieved Muslims from these countries when they are full of hatred for us is sick. We must make it clear to Muslims that we mean them no harm it is our now rulers who are waging war on them but we can not co-exist together in the our countries.

A memorial service for the 67 British victims of the 9/11 terror attack was held in the US Embassy gardens with the families of the victims. It was televised and when it began there was loud shouting through megaphones from the Muslims Against Crusades who the police had allowed to disrupt the ceremony and it was clearly heard by the guests and broadcast to the world. The US flag was burnt in “honour" of the "Martyrs of 9/11" across the road from the American Embassy while the political police stood watching.

Some of the drips in attendance were:  Prince Charles and Camilla, David Cameron, the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, Labour leader Ed Miliband, U.S. ambassador to the UK Louis Susman and London mayor Boris Johnson and his wife who were attacked by Muslims on their way to the ceremony.  The chants which were clear to these appeasers will not make an impression on their minds as they are living in a fantasy: Prince Charles will continue promoting Muslim causes including saying that the world needs to follow Islam for peace  and Cameron will make no attempt to stop immigration even if the EU would let him which they will not.  Western elites have brought race war into our countries and bear the responsibility and the guilt. (3)

These promoters of the idea that Islam is a religion of peace stood and listened as the two-minute silence was disrupted by Muslim protesters chanting and waving placards as well as burning the flag.  Tellingly, the police moved on a group of English Defence League protesters, who had gathered to oppose the demonstration, to make way for the MAC supporters. Then the political police stood and watched as the American flag was burned.  Once again we have been humiliated in front of the world.

The EDL attempt to prevent this insult to American and British victims of 9/11 was prevented by the police and resulted in two good members being stabbed, running battles on Oxford Street, Hyde Park-Speakers Corner, Edgeware Road, and around  the American Embassy.

A disgusting senior police officer read the riot Act to decent British people then allowed Muslims to humiliate us in front of the world.  I have more respect for malaria than that four-eyed tit. It is time to withhold the portion of council tax that funds this police oppression of legitimate British activities like paying respects to the dead of 9/11.(4) It is clear that the police are being used against us, and it is disappointing that they obey these orders.

The police moved the EDL along so the Muslims could protest and burn the American flag.  But even more sinister, Home Secretary Theresa May who allowed the Muslims to protest against the ceremony routinely bans EDL protests against Muslim extremists.  So Theresa May you encourage Muslim extremism on our streets?  They were wearing war clothing but you know that don't you?

The government are culpable because they have regular security briefings from the Security Services, MI5, MI6 and Special Branch so they knowingly allowed Muslim extremists to humiliate us and insult our American allies.  The police favourtism to Muslim extremists and oppression of honourable British people trying to pay their respects to the victims of 9/11 would have been on Home Office instructions through briefings

There were two EDL supporters stabbed later by Muslim extremists but the media routinely suppress that sort of thing.  We must pretend how wonderful and successful multi-racialism is.  In July 2010, totalitarian  MP for Stourbridge Margot James urged Home Office ministers Nick Herbert MP (police) and James Brokenshire MP (crime prevention) to strengthen the law giving police powers to ban rallies likely to pose a risk to public order. She was referring to EDL demos not Notting Hill Carnival or Muslim demos.

The Muslim demonstraters wore terrorists headgear and brandished the Muslim black flag of war.  These were street soldiers, a war party, and the police took their side against honourable British people.

The media are also withholding news of EDL leader Tommy Robinson's hunger strike in Bedford prison.  (5)The prison where John Bunyan languished 350 years ago. These corrupt and inadequate fools we have running this Britain have turned this country into a third-world shithole and, even worse, in many areas a warzone.  Welcome to Enoch's racial civil war courtesy of our New World Order Western elites.


(1)  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/5538176/Taliban-fighter-found-with-Aston-Villa-tattoo.html




(2)  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1374443/Police-hid-abuse-60-girls-Asian-takeaway

(3)  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSvT2t4Atkc

(4)  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwY-IrG0J2M
(5)   http://www.bedfordshire-news.co.uk/News/Protesters-campaign-for-release-of-EDL-leader-10092011.htm


Sunday 11 September 2011

Will Immigration bring down the EU?

An intelligent analysis can be read at the Alternative Right, by CLICKING HERE.

Hat Tip: Mister Fox

Saturday 10 September 2011

Friday 9 September 2011

"Dead Men Risen" a review by Dr. Frank Ellis

 Toby Harnden, Dead Men Risen: The Welsh Guards and the Real Story of Britain’s War in Afghanistan, Quercus, London, 2011, xxviii + pp.512, Notes, Bibliography, Maps, Index, ISBN 978 1 84916 421 4

But the man who can most truly be accounted brave is he who best knows the meaning of what is sweet in life and of what is terrible, and then goes out undeterred to meet what is to come.

Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War

Dead Men Risen covers the tour of duty of the Welsh Guards in Afghanistan between April – October 2009. In the introduction Harnden points out that his manuscript was subjected to pre-publication review by the Ministry of Defence (MoD). Though parts of the book are blacked out, it is clear that a major consideration for the MoD was the prevention of any leakage into the public domain whatsoever of information pertaining to operational security, and, above all, to the electronic counter measures adopted by the British Army to neutralise Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). No author can complain about that.

In any case, the MoD censors inflict no damage on the book. Dead Men Risen is clearly written and the author pulls no punches about human weakness, fear, psychological collapse, life and death in the Welsh Guards. The book also abounds in inspirational examples of pure courage and leadership and that priceless staple of any good regiment: humour. Interwoven with the personalities and characters of the Welsh Guards are detailed accounts of the many distinct and specific phases of counter-insurgency operations in Helmand: mine clearing, often very slow because of the need to use prodders to detect IEDs with low or no metal content; patrolling; the use of air power; the devastating effect of British snipers; and the dangers of resupply convoys. It was during one such convoy that the Commanding Officer, Lieutenant Colonel Rupert Thorneloe MBE, was killed when his vehicle, travelling along the edge of the Shamalan Canal, detonated an IED.

The truly shocking revelations of Dead Men Risen are not to be found in the seemingly endless lists of casualties, killed and wounded, and families shattered forever but in the fact that the men and officers of the Welsh Guards - and the same must be true of other regiments as well - have been sent to fight a campaign without sufficient amounts of the proper equipment (the lack of helicopter support is obscene). This is the ‘real story’ and the blame rests squarely with the malevolent, greasy and mendacious do-goodery of Blair, his successors, and senior military officers who grossly, even grotesquely, underestimated the difficulties of any such campaign. Harnden provides other examples of poor and sloppy planning: a naval commander giving a briefing about language requirements was not even aware that the main language in Helmand was Pashto not Dari; and the detailed planning documents for Operation Panther’s Claw contained no proper terrain analysis of the road alongside the Shamalan Canal.

Far worse, in my opinion, since it exerts a paralysing effect on command and control, is the intellectual and moral confusion that informs the British effort. This has undoubtedly led to large numbers of British soldiers being killed, wounded and maimed for no obviously good cause. For example, central to the propaganda that justifies the British mission in Afghanistan is the assertion that the security of what is nominally still the United Kingdom depends on the presence of British troops. This assertion is endlessly made without clear evidence to support it. The absence of any convincing arguments for the presence of British troops in Afghanistan is compelling evidence against the need for their presence. One obvious response to this deception – so obvious in fact that it has been missed - is to point out that British troops in Afghanistan are part of a NATO deployment not an exclusively British one. Canadian, Danish, Australian, Estonian, German and American troops are not fighting and dying in Afghanistan in order to prevent Islamic terrorists - militants in BBC-speak - from murdering the white indigenous population in the United Kingdom.

In the first instance, security in the United Kingdom mandates the following measures: an immediate end to all Muslim immigration; the hunting down, rounding up and deportation of all illegal immigrants; strict entry and exit controls involving racial and cultural profiling; the closing down of mosques with any involvement in terrorism; those persons found to have had any involvement with terrorism are to be stripped of their British passports and deported. None of these measures requires risking British lives in Afghanistan. Nor are worries over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, Iran’s nuclear ambitions or oil good reasons for our being in Afghanistan. If Cameron thinks they are, spell it out and make the case. Men who are being sent to risk their lives are entitled to know the truth. Taxpayers would like to know the truth as well.

Dead Men Risen provides clear evidence that the same kind of dangerously sentimental and intellectually incoherent assumptions underpinning multiculturalism in the West are being applied to Afghanistan. Major Rob Gallimore who was responsible for training the Afghan National Army (ANA) found himself agonizing over the fate of some Taliban IED layers caught by soldiers of the ANA with whom he was working. All the evidence is that the captured Taliban were subjected to Afghan justice by their captors (three were summarily executed). In Britain and in the USA it is a staple of multicultural propaganda that cultural and racial diversity are strengths; that no one culture is ‘better’ than another. Yet here we have a Welsh Guards officer agonizing about the attitudes and practice of ANA justice. One cannot claim, as Western multiculturalists do, that Western notions of the rule of law enjoy no special status; that they merely represent one way of seeing and dispensing justice and then assert that the execution of Taliban terrorist insurgents by members of the ANA is not right. If, as xenophiles claim, no one culture or view of the world is better than another, fine, let us demonstrate our commitment to diversity in justice by supporting ANA/Taliban standards of justice. If we are too squeamish to fire the control shot then our ANA colleagues can do the necessary and dirty work on our behalf and we can wash our hands with rainbow-coloured soap and look the other way.

A wilful refusal to face up to the profoundly different nature of the social structure is also evident. Fundamental to Pashtuns is Pashtunwali (the way of the Pashtun): renegades must be offered safety and protection; hospitality must be offered at all times; and an affront must be avenged. Even among tribal opponents and enemies the code is honoured. How can a people such as the Pashtuns whose primary loyalty is to other Pashtuns ever be expected to support abstract notions of liberal democracy and the rule of law imposed by outsiders? Western-style elections might as well be from Mars. Worse still, as Harnden notes: ‘In 1980, the American anthropologist Richard Scott identified 25 different tribal groups in Nad-e Ali district alone. This made it all but impossible for Soviet and later British and American troops to understand the local dynamics’ (DMR, p.34).

The outcome of the presidential elections in 2009, totally undermined by corruption, was another brutal reminder of the cultural and psychological divide separating Afghanistan from its NATO occupiers. That 3,400 voted in the Welsh Guards Battle Group Area out of a total of 50,000 eligible to vote can only be seen as a victory for Taliban intimidation. It is all well and good claiming a victory because the polling stations remained open but if those eligible to vote did not vote out of fear of Taliban retribution this is a victory for the Taliban not NATO. Peter Galbraith, a UN representative in Afghanistan, realised that the corrupt election was a disaster, ‘a foreseeable train wreck’ (DMR, p.448) and a massive propaganda victory for the Taliban.

Much of the confusion of British policy, often with deadly consequences for its practitioners, arises from what purports to be new insights into waging counter insurgency, so-called ‘courageous restraint’ (or as I would rename it ‘negligent incomprehensible restraint’). Even the Commanding Officer of the Welsh Guards seems to have succumbed. To quote Harnden: ‘Thorneloe had told his company commanders that “killing 20 Taliban cannot bring us victory but killing one local national can bring us defeat” ’(DMR, p.204). I admire Lieutenant Colonel Thorneloe but I am compelled to disagree with him since I regard his assertion as deeply flawed. Killing 20 Taliban who are attacking a patrol base will assuredly not bring victory in Afghanistan but it would be a highly desirable outcome for the NATO soldiers under attack. High concentrations of NATO troops armed with all kinds of weaponry and supported by fast air and gunships mean that the death of local nationals is guaranteed at some stage. If killing one local national can bring defeat, a rather strange claim in any case, and one that lacks any empirical support, then the logical outcome is to cease all military operations and not use any weapons at all in order to avert this possibility. Moreover, the failure to use NATO technology to kill the Taliban for fear of bringing about this supposed catastrophic outcome will not pass unnoticed by the Taliban. It will embolden them. Fear of killing local nationals – note the implicit Western assumption that all life is precious an assumption demonstrably rejected by the Taliban – can only exert a paralyzing effect on the conduct of military operations.

In fact it is also a clear psychological victory for the Taliban who, having perceived NATO’s aversion to risking civilian casualties (for whatever reasons), have successfully exploited it for military ends. Compelling your enemy (NATO) not to use his superior weapons because you know that he thinks all life is precious and is worried by adverse propaganda is an astonishing victory, a brilliant example of insurgent judo. In the calculus of counter-insurgency killing one has to reckon with civilian deaths. They are unavoidable; they may even be necessary as a demonstration of ruthlessness. In every counterinsurgency campaign, despite the propaganda for domestic audiences there is an acceptable range of killing. These killing parameters cannot be determined in Western capitals but are determined by the specific circumstances of each insurgency. Those waging a counterinsurgency cannot be bound by limitations on killing set by the squeamishness of politicians and domestic audiences. Publicly they must state and disseminate doctrines such as ‘hearts and mind’ or ‘courageous restraint’ in order to propitiate politicians and human rights’ activists but hiding behind the doctrine they must pursue the extermination of the enemy, his accomplices, those who provide him with succour, with all necessary measures. Displays of one’s commitment to the rights of man might well earn the plaudits of the Guardian but they will earn the contempt of your Taliban enemy who has been bred to respect ruthlessness. Pity is the real enemy: so stamp on the viper when you cannot be seen.

At the heart of every infantryman’s training is the will to kill. Weakening the will to kill by appeals to ‘courageous restraint’ puts our soldiers’ lives at risk: it blunts their healthy desire to kill people, the enemy. Lance-Sergeant Peek exemplifies the will to kill and regrets that he never had the chance to stick a bayonet in some Taliban insurgent: ‘You have to be willing to put that bayonet in a place where it’s not going to be pretty for him’ (DMR, p.151). Good for you. How does a platoon commander explain to his men that the battalion’s snipers were not permitted to kill the Taliban IED team after an IED has ripped the legs off from two young men clearing a road? The sole conclusion that can be drawn from this reluctance to kill the enemy is that our soldiers’ lives do not matter; that in the grand scheme they are expendable. Harnden has picked this up as well: ‘The guardsmen had begun to fear they were viewed as expendable IED fodder’ (DMR, p.219).

The thoughts of the American commander, General McChrystal, confirm the doctrine’s essential incoherence and reckless disregard for the lives of NATO soldiers:

Charlie [acting Lieutenant Colonel Antelme, appointed after Thorneloe’s death FE] got it absolutely right with courageous restraint,’ McChrystal says. ‘You don’t need to be secured away from the people. You need to be secured by the people so that, as you win their support, it’s in their interests to secure you, to report IEDs. But it does take courageous restraint, it takes them understanding that you’re willing to take some risk to not put them at risk’ […] ‘If we respond with overwhelming fire to limited small arms fire from a compound we do protect ourselves but we destroy their livelihood and potentially the people. When we run around in armoured vehicles or personal armour we often send an unintended message that we’re more important than the people’ (DMR, pp.417-418).

A population - the people - that oscillates between support for the Taliban and support for NATO cannot be trusted. You surely need to be secured from the people or at least insulated from them such that the lives of your men are not exposed to needless risk (local nationals who engage in intelligence gathering activities while pretending friendship and cooperation pose a serious threat). Responsibility for security cannot rely on a fickle people who are clearly subject to Taliban intimidation: responsibility for security rests first and foremost with NATO commanders. Judgements about what constitutes ‘overwhelming fire’ and ‘limited small arms fire from a compound’ cannot be made at a distance; they have to be made on the ground. Surely NATO troops are more important than the people. Why should any soldier expect his commander to put the interests of ‘the people’ before him? It may well be that McChrystal’s incoherent doctrine is simply a propaganda ploy designed for domestic audiences in the West, yet it is not an inspiring message for some 19-year old Welsh Guardsman.

I salute the Welsh Guards and especially Lieutenant Colonel Thorneloe, an officer who embodied physical and moral courage. His decision to place himself in a position of great danger so as to inspire his soldiers was a truly magnificent example of leadership. This was a man above other men. I would have followed him anywhere. Dead Men Risen also reminds us that war is the widow maker, the cruel beast that works with indefatigable and dark purpose. Any woman who marries a soldier must reckon with the possibility that her husband will not come home. Even so, that knock on the door is a terrible blow; almost a second killing. When a good man dies, his soul is cleansed by the tears of a good woman. She has waited, now she is broken-hearted and alone, she must soldier on. So spare a thought for the women keeping home and hearth together, the mothers, the wives and the girl friends: God bless them.