Southend-On-Sea

2012-02-16T10:05:00.000-08:00

Is Griffin working for the State?

From about 2003 until 2009 the BNP was Britain's fastest growing political party. It peaked in 2009 when Griffin and Andrew Brons were elected to the European Parliament.

With the election of two MEPs, did the State decide that the BNP was getting too much support and it was time to pull the plug? From 2009 onwards Griffin has been engaged in destroying his own party. Did he do a deal at his race hate trial in 1998 to keep himself out of prison?

In 1998 Nick Griffin, who at the time was editor of The Rune magazine and a member of the British National Party, was tried for incitement to commit racial hatred under section 19 of the Public Order Act 1986. The subject of the prosecution was issue 12 of The Rune.

Griffin was given a 9 month prison sentence suspended for 2 years after being convicted of "publishing or distributing racially inflammatory written material." The following year he was elected leader of the BNP.

The magazine article, edited by Griffin, dismissed the Holocaust as the Holohoax. An article entitled"Inconvenient facts", claimed that Jews held positionsin the media and Hollywood vastly disproportionate to their numbers. The prosecutingcounsel, Sasha Wass, argued that this articlewould lead to resentment against Jews. At the trial Griffin sacked his legal team and, conducted his own defence, attempting to justify the material he had published.

No transcript of the hearing was made and the only records about the case are held by the Crown Prosecution Service.

In October 2009, the Guardian newspaper sent a Freedom of Information request to the CPS to obtain the court records of the trial. The request was blocked by the CPS on the grounds that releasing the information would breach Griffin's data protection rights. This seemed somewhat strange as the trial was heard in open court.

In October 2009, when the FOI request was made, the BNP were doing very well. A few months earlier the BNP had gained its first MEPs when Griffin and Andrew Brons were elected to the European Parliament. The BNP were the official opposition on Barking & Dagenham Council at that time with 12 elected councillors. They had over 60 elected councillors across Britain and the year before, in 2008, Richard Barnbrook had been elected to the GLA. The BNP were on a roll, they really were Britain's fastest growing political party. You might have thought the CPS would be more than willing to hand over the court documents to a left leaning newspaper like the Guardian so that it could use them to damage the BNP's future prospects. Apparently not.

The Guardian appealed the decision not to release the documents and 4 months later the CPS again refused to release the requested information.

CPS refuses to release details of Nick Griffin's Race Hate Trial

Determined not to give up, the Guardian then lodged a complaint with the Information Commissioner's Office, which is responsible for final decisions on FOI requests.

Did Griffin do a deal with the state in return for a suspended sentence? Halfway through the trial he sacked his legal team and conducted his own defence. This was despite all the odds being stacked against him (the jury was mixed race, including two Asian women and a woman of Chinese extraction).

Would he have done that if he hadn't known in advance that he was going to get off? The following year, Griffin became BNP leader and the party has now been well and truly wrecked.

The refusal of the CPS to release the documents due to 'privacy' concerns under the Data Protection Act is ludicrous.

This was a public case in an open court involving a politician on trial for his opinions published in a magazine sold to the public.

The idea that any of that information was 'private' is laughable. Therefore the issue is this - why did the CPS refuse to release the documents?

One reason might be that a deal had been brokered between the CPS and Griffin which meant the judge had been informed of the deal and this would be reflected in his sentence.

That information would have to be released by the CPS if it was recorded. See Lee Barnes' blog Griffin exposed as a state agent?

A detailed account of Griffin's trial can be found here Regina v Griffin

After a two and a half year delay, the CPS have finally agreed to release the court records of Griffin's trial to the Guardian newspaper.

Guardian journalist wins right to 'sensitive' court papers related to Griffin conviction

The decision was made a few days ago on February 12th.

PDF Document

From 2009 onwards, after the BNP got 2 MEPs elected, Griffin has been destroying his own party. Did the State lean on him in 2009 to repay his debt for his spared prison sentence at his race hate trial in 1998? Have the CPS now decided to release Griffin's court records because he is no longer any use to them?

The hopes of millions of people were riding on the BNP. Thanks to Griffin, it's now a poisoned chalice with £850,000 worth of debts. When he loses his seat at the EU in 2014 the BNP will become his only source of income. There is no way he will ever step down as leader.

The BNP is dead in the water, anybody who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves.

2012-02-15T06:58:00.000-08:00

England doesn't owe the Third World a living; the phenomenon of white guilt

White Guilt defined

The result of a wide spread racist propaganda campaign launched against the English by numerous leftist groups, wet liberal politicians of all political parties and Marxist teachers in Britain's schools. It is also being encouraged by various media outlets especially the BBC.

The campaign goals are to diminish any sense of pride in being English. To encourage the English to feel that they should be self-sacrificing towards non-whites and should spend the rest of their lives making atonement. History is being re-written so that white school children are forced to ignore the accomplishments and great achievements of the white race and its contributions to mankind, while instead being fed "politically correct" exaggerations of so-called black accomplishment and encouraged to celebrate black culture while neglecting their own.

The propaganda should be seen for what it is. However because of constant brainwashing, many still hold onto white guilt because it was the way they were taught in school and don't realize it is the result of a propaganda campaign. Those on a white guilt trip have lost the ability to think for themselves.

The English are being made to feel guilty about colonialism

Background

At the beginning of the Twentieth Century Britain was the most powerful nation on earth.

The country in which the Industrial Revolution had begun had become the Workshop of the World. British merchant ships carried the products of British industry to the four corners of the earth. British engineers built roads and railways from China to Peru.

On a small uninhabited island off the coast of Malaysia the East India Company created the great port and base of Singapore from jungle and swamp. Hong Kong, ceded to Britain in 1841, became a crown colony and the outlet through which a third of all China's exports passed. Gunboats of the Royal Navy, operating from Hong Kong, singapore and other Far Eastern ports cleared the sea of pirates, a centuries old scourge which, since decolonisation has reappeared in a far more menacing form.

But these are small examples for in 1900 Britain ruled the vastness of Canada, Newfoundland, the West Indies and British Guiana in the Americas: Sierre Leone, Nigeria, Egypt and the Sudan, South Africa and Rhodesia; India, Burma, the Malay States and Sarawak; Australia, New Zealand and Papua - a fifth of the world's surface and a quarter of its people.

19th Century Slogan "The sun never sets on the British empire."

Reality of colonialism

The inhabitants of more than 60 colonies who prior to British rule had known only tribal warfare, bloody massacres - often at the hands of their own chiefs - famine and disease, enjoyed for the first time efficient and benevolent government by the most devoted and corruption free colonial administrators in all history.

British officials built roads, railways, ports, dams, hospitals and clinics; established settled agricultural communities and taught the raising of rubber, coffee, tobacco and other cash crops; they fixed tribal boundaries; provided schools and free education; created police forces, replacing the arbitrary judgements of tribal chiefs with an impartial judicial system.

If we did a balance sheet comparing reasons for white guilt and white pride, we would discover that 'whites' have far more to be proud of than to be guilty of. And lets not forget all the billions of pounds in foreign aid these former colonies have had from Britain, much of which has ended up in the back pockets of their own leaders.

England does not owe the Third World a thing and we should not live the rest of our lives making atonement for some imaginary debt.

2012-02-08T10:18:00.000-08:00

MICHAEL BARNBROOK AND JOHNNY LEECH JOIN THE ENGLISH DEMOCRATS!

The experienced South East London nationalist campaigners Michael Barnbrook and Johnny Leech have decided to join the English Democrats. The English Democrats are England’s fastest growing political party and more and more seasoned nationalists are realising that it is their true political home.

At an informal meeting last night in Bexley south east London with Steve Uncles and Eddy Butler, Michael Barnbrook and Johnny Leech both decided that it was time to make a stand and speak out for England and the English.

Michael Barnbrook has stood for election many times at local and Parliamentary level. He is perhaps best known as ‘the sleazebuster’, in which capacity he has brought to book numerous politicians who have been caught ‘on the make’.

Michael Barnbrook spent 30 years in the Metropolitan Police and retired in the rank of Inspector. He then helped Greenwich Council to set up their own Parks Constabulary.

Johnny Leech has been very active in Greenwich in recent years and is a very capable political organiser. He will really boost the English Democrats in South East London.

These two key activists will both be major assets for the English Democrats. Their decision illustrates that the EDs are the only viable option for sensible and responsible nationalists.

Reference: Eddie Butler's Blog

2012-02-07T10:29:00.000-08:00

Labour's legacy to the people of Barking and Dagenham; an immigrant baby boom that takes primary schools to breaking point

The people of Barking and Dagenham were some of the most loyal Labour supporters in the country up until 2006.

From 1997 onwards, the year Labour were elected to power, the Labour government began swamping this country with unwanted Third World immigrants. By 2006 many of them were moving into Barking and Dagenham.

That was when everything changed. The BNP stood 13 candidates in the Barking and Dagenham council elections of 2006 and 12 of them were elected.

It's been said that if the BNP had stood a full slate of 51 candidates in that election, enough of them would have been elected for the BNP to take control of the council.

When all the seats came up for re-election in 2010, the BNP lost them all. Between 2006 and 2010, when the BNP were the official opposition on the council, Labour encouraged vast numbers of immigrants from other London boroughs to move into B&D. This was known as the "Africans for Essex" initiative.

This was to ensure that when the 2010 elections arrived, there would be a sufficiently large immigrant vote to stop the BNP from gaining control of the council.

The people of Barking and Dagenham only voted BNP in the first place because they objected to the large number of immigrants moving into their borough.

Rather than get to grips with immigration, the Labour Council did the opposite. Between 2006 and 2010 they stabbed their own supporters in the back by swamping the borough with even more Third World migrants to keep themselves in power.

As a result, the Borough of Barking and Dagenham is now suffering from an immigrant baby boom and B&D's primary schools are in crisis.

Ripple Primary School in Barking, East London

Such is the demand for primary school places that the council have plans to convert an empty Woolworths store into a classroom and are looking at leasing an empty MFI building.

It is also looking at "split shift sessions", where schools would take one group of pupils from 8am until 2pm and then a second from 2pm until 7pm. The shifts would double the capacity although the council concedes parents would have great difficulty accomodating the shift patterns.

Rocky Gill, Barking and Dagenham council's cabinet member for finance and education, said "detailed plans" for shifts were being drawn up. "In two years' time we will have expanded all our primary schools. So we're going to have no choice but to move into split shift education at both primary and secondary level."

Ripple primary school in Barking had 4.5 applications per place last year. The school has already expanded into a nearby council-owned office site. By 2015 it expects to have 1,200 pupils, making it one of the biggest primaries in the country.

Reference, The Guardian

The increase in the number of Black African children in B&D has been the most significant ethnic shift in recent years. Five of the top twelve languages in the borough are of African origin.

So how do teachers cope with all these foreign children who speak very little English? They communicate with their pupils by using hand gestures, drawing pictures and by having translators in the classroom at great public expense.

While all this is going on, our own children's education takes a back seat.

According to teaching unions, £30,000 per year is needed for each non-English speaking pupil. Hundreds of thousands of qualified British teachers have left the teaching profession in disgust. Those that remain are demoralised, demotivated or left-wing fanatics who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near our kids.

Since no Parliament can bind its successor, both Labour and the Tories are equally to blame for the sorry mess this country is now in.

Thanks to them, English children have no future in their own country. Our children have been betrayed by Labour, the Tories and the Liberal Democrats.

No person of sound mind would continue to vote for establishment politicians at election time. The combination of massive immigration and radical multiculturalism is a recipe for our own demise.

2012-02-05T03:46:00.000-08:00

Muslims Praying On The Streets Of London

These Bangladeshi Muslims, are praying on the streets in the area around the Brune Street Mosque in Spitalfields, East London.

If Christians were to pray on the streets, would they be moved on or charged with obstruction? Probably both. One law for the Muslims and one for the rest of us.

Not in France though. A new law recently introduced in France means that Muslims caught praying on the streets of Paris will face being arrested.

This was the scene in the Rue des Poissonniers, Paris early last year which prompted the French to clamp down on street prayers.

It follows France becoming the first country in Europe to introduce a full-scale burka ban last April, making it illegal for Muslim women to cover their faces in public.

Praying on the streets is a regular occurrence in the Spitalfields area of London and has been going on for years. Clearly these people are breaking the law by blocking a public highway and this needs to be stopped.

Reference - The Daily Mail

2012-01-31T07:08:00.000-08:00

Richard Barnbrook Denies Any Wrongdoing While Working At The GLA

"The report about me in the Standard is a wicked and defamatory smear and I am wholly innocent of any wrongdoings whatsoever. That I should find myself in a position whereby I am forced to issue a denial to allegations that are so serious and yet so untrue, is scandalous and displays a complete lack of journalistic responsibility and integrity.

I have already lodged a complaint with the Press Complaints Authority and will be consulting lawyers with a view to issuing legal proceedings for defamation of character."

The above statement is a reply to yesterday's article in the Evening Standard.

Richard Barnbrook with ex-BNP councillor Emma Colgate

From the Evening Standard -

Senior British National Party members took part in a "long-term criminal enterprise" to defraud the Greater London Authority and HM Revenue and Customs, according to court papers.

Richard Barnbrook, the £53,000-a-year member of the London Assembly, was involved in a complex fraud where bankrupt firms were allowed to continue trading, defrauding the taxman and other creditors for £1million, it is claimed.

Mr Barnbrook, former deputy to far-Right leader Nick Griffin, allegedly received cash "kickbacks" on taxpayer-funded contracts for his office costs and personal assistants at City Hall.

His employees, who were temporary workers provided by a recruitment agency, were former BNP parliamentary candidate Anthony Avery and ex-BNP councillor Emma Colgate. All three have since left the extremist party.

The allegations emerged in a High Court claim by businessman Rene Greville, 65, from Norfolk. He bought Beau Trading LLP, a bankrupt company with alleged links to the BNP, in 2009.

In the court documents, Mr Greville claims to have discovered the firm was a sham and used as a vehicle to defraud the taxman, relying on "kickbacks" to members of the BNP.

Beau Trading supplied Mr Avery and Ms Colgate as temps to Mr Barnbrook, who was kicked out of the party in 2010 but remains an Assembly member.

In the court documents, Mr Greville claims to have uncovered "evidence which proves...Beau Trading LLP acted as a source of funding for at least three top members of the British National Party at the expense of the Greater London Authority". According to his witness statement, Mr Greville has invoices and bank statements that show Mr Barnbrook and Ms Colgate received commissions on Mr Avery's payments by the GLA, which was being double-billed by so-called "phoenix" companies that did not exist.

Mr Greville's statement said: "It is quite evident that it was also agreed between all parties that 'kickbacks' on the Greater London Authority contracts...would be paid to Mr Barnbrook and Ms Colgate."

Mr Greville is suing a finance company that brokered his purchase of Beau Trading, for £197,000. Summing up, he said he had uncovered a "long-term criminal enterprise by four companies which were all under the control of the same people, and all operated from the same addresses using the same telephone and fax numbers.

"With full knowledge and participation of...high-ranking members of the BNP, these 'phoenix' companies ...stole nearly £1million from the Revenue and hundreds of small creditors over an 18-month period while defrauding the GLA and making corrupt payments to their staff."

Mr Barnbrook said: "I find all the allegations ludicrous in the extreme. None of the accusations can be substantiated. This is an issue that has arisen between two parties in a claim and counter-claim within a legal dispute. None of this has anything to do with myself or Anthony Avery." Ms Colgate said the allegations were "ludicrous and can all be proven to be so. This is obviously a failed 'businessman's' attempt to recoup his investment."

2012-01-25T23:48:00.000-08:00

The Chickens Have Come Home To Roost For The People Of Rochford

"England's housing crisis has been caused by mass immigration. When you allow half a million people into your country every year a housing crisis in inevitable."

This Green Belt land is now a development site for 600 new homes

CONTROVERSIAL plans to build 600 homes and a new primary school in Rochford have been given the go-ahead. The plans include -

600 new dwellings
A new primary school with associated playing fields
Creation of new public open space
Two principle access points from Hall Road
New pedestrian and cycle links to the Town centre

More than 100 people packed out Rochford’s council chamber as the proposals for the development on fields off Hall Road, Rochford, were discussed.

Councillors overwhelmingly voted in favour of the plans, despite passionate objections from residents.

Campaigner Brian Martin, from the West Rochford Action Group set up to oppose the plans, said the decision was a nightmare come true.

He said: “Talking to the council was like talking to a brick wall. “But we are not finished and we are not giving up the fight. “We will take it all the way to communities and local government secretary Eric Pickles.”

Reference : Southend Echo

Unfortunately for Mr Martin, Action Groups rarely work. There was an Action Group set up to oppose the expansion of Southend Airport. They failed miserably and the airport expansion went ahead as planned.

England's housing crisis has been caused by mass immigration. In 2010, 575,000 immigrants entered Britain, despite Tory promises that they would reduce immigration to the tens of thousands. When you allow half a million people into your country every year a housing crisis in inevitable.

Rochford Council is made up of 32 Tories, 5 Liberal Democrats, 1 Green Party member and 1 Rochford District Residents member. The Tories run the council just like they do in neighbouring Southend. Rochford residents need look no further than Southend to see the effects of voting Lib/Lab/Con every year.

Southend now has an immigrant population of more than 15%, 125 languages are spoken in the borough. Immigrants are encouraged to come to Southend by Southend Council who promote diversity at every available opportunity. Immigrants are handed everything on a plate.

This has been confirmed by Southend Tory Councillor Ian Robertson who told the Southend Echo that white British people are being ignored as a result of the efforts to help Southend's ethnic minorities.

Reference: In Southend, Brits are being ignored in favour of ethnic minorities

The people of Rochford have had ample opportunity in the last 5 years to support an anti-immigration party who were opposed to building on the Green Belt.

2007
BNP
English Democrats

2008
BNP
English Democrats
UKIP

2009
BNP
English Democrats

2010
BNP
English Democrats

2011
English Democrats
UKIP

Instead, the majority continued to vote for the same old parties, Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Tories.

You Get What You Vote For.

2012-01-22T07:02:00.000-08:00

The Lies and Broken Promises of
'Call me Dave' and 'Calamity Clegg'

Dave's Broken Promises

The Conservative party have broken over 30 election promises since being elected in 2010.

For Example:

* David Cameron promised to abolish the Human Rights Act and put a new British Bill of Rights in its place. As we all know to England's cost, the Human Rights Act remains very much in force and is abused daily by foreign criminals to avoid deportation.

* Throughout the 2010 General Election campaign, David Cameron repeatedly stated that his party had absolutely no plans to raise VAT. Six months later, the Tories increased VAT from 17.5% to 20%.

* David Cameron's promise to reduce immigration to tens of thousands lies in tatters. It has been revealed that the number of immigrants coming to Britain in 2010 totalled 575,000, an increase of 21% over 2009.

Remember this?

Nick Clegg in Cambridge with his pledge not to increase tuition fees during the 2010 General Election campaign.

The poster reads

I Pledge,

TO VOTE AGAINST

ANY INCREASE IN FEES

in the next parliament

and to pressure the

government to introduce

A FAIRER ALTERNATIVE

In December 2010, just 6 months after the General Election, MPs voted on whether to allow universities to increase tuition fees up to £9,000 p.a.

323 MPs voted for the increase, 302 voted against.

The rise in fees was approved by just 21 votes.

Of the Liberal Democrat MPs, 28 voted with the Government to increase fees, 21 voted against and eight abstained.

Without the support of the 28 Liberal Democrat MPs the government would have lost the vote.

The Lib-Dems lied about an EU referendum

In the run up to the 2010 General Election, the Lib-Dems called for a referendum on the EU.

Here is the petition launched by the Liberal Democrats for a referendum on EU membership.

The Liberal Democrats believe we should have a real vote on Europe – whether we should be in Europe or out.

We have been blocked from having a vote on this in Parliament, and all the Conservatives are proposing is a limited referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

However, the public back our position by a margin of 2:1: twice as many people think a referendum should be on whether we stay in Europe or not rather than only on the Lisbon Treaty.

We want that real referendum because if Britain is to stride forward confidently into the 21st century and tackle global issues like climate change and terrorism, we need to decide once and for all whether our future lies within the European Union, or outside it.

On Monday 24th October, when Parliament voted on whether to hold a referendum on Britain's membership of the EU, the only Liberal Democrat MP who supported a referendum was Adrian Sanders (Torbay).

50 Liberal Democrats including Nick Clegg opposed the motion.

The Lib-Dems have broken their promises on major policies that affect millions of people. Hundreds of thousands of cash-strapped students have seen their tuition fees trebled because the Lib-Dems backtracked on their election pledge.

When Lib-Dem MPs backtracked on a pledge to support a referendum on the EU, they sought to deny the British people a say in their own future.

The Liberal Democrats are a party who will say anything to get elected and can no longer be trusted. The only sensible option is to shun their candidates at election time.

2012-01-21T22:22:00.000-08:00

The Asylum Merry-go Round Must Stop

An APPEAL Court judge yesterday condemned the immigration ‘merry-go-round’ that allowed an asylum seeker to stay in Britain for more than a decade.

The Pakistani was allowed to make 16 appeals or new applications despite being repeatedly rejected, at a cost to taxpayers of at least £250,000.

Lord Justice Ward: ‘Here we have one of those whirligig cases where an asylum seeker goes up and down on the merry-go-round leaving one wondering when the music will ever stop. It is a typical case where asylum was refused years ago but endless fresh claims clog the process of removal.’

The 38-year-old man, whose identity was hidden by the court, arrived in Britain in August 1998. The Court of Appeal rejected his latest appeal – over the High Court’s decision to reject his demand for judicial review of a decision to remove him – and ruled he should now be returned to Pakistan.

Lord Justice Ward said: ‘It is time the music stopped and the merry-go-round stops turning.’

The Daily Mail

2012-01-20T05:16:00.000-08:00

370,000 Migrants Are On The Dole

More than 370,000 migrants who were admitted to Britain to work, study or go on holiday are now claiming out-of-work benefits, according to official figures compiled for the first time.

The migrants, who can claim unemployment, housing and incapacity benefit, are costing taxpayers billions of pounds a year.

In other countries, many would have had to return home after their visas expired or their employment ended.

But Chris Bryant, shadow immigration minister, today blamed the Government and said the situation would only get worse due to lax border controls, rising migration and increasing unemployment.

He said: "Tory ministers are resorting to rhetoric and misinformation to hide the reality of their failures on immigration and unemployment.

"Far from strengthening immigration control the Government is returning fewer illegal migrants and net migration has continued to increase. And at the same time increasing numbers of people born here and abroad are on out-of-work benefits because the government's failure on the economy has pushed unemployment up.

Ministers should get a grip of rising unemployment and weaker border controls rather than trying to hide behind questionable figures which include people who have been British citizens for many years, and don't take account of British citizens claiming benefits abroad."

The figures are likely to reopen the debate over the generosity of the welfare system amid growing concerns that the country has become a destination for “benefit tourists”.

The Daily Telegraph

There is a poll at the end of this article. At the time of writing the results are -

Should migrants be allowed to claim benefits in Britain?

Yes - They should have as much access to benefits as Britsh citizens 3.85% (199 votes)

Yes - But it should be proportionate to the amount they have paid in tax 31.76% (1,642 votes)

No - Under no circumstances 61.64% (3,187 votes)

No - But this should be reviewed when the country's finances are healthier 2.75% (142 votes)

2012-01-19T23:33:00.000-08:00

Marine Le Pen talks to the BBC

Good luck to her in this year's French Presidential elections

2012-01-16T06:00:00.000-08:00

Scottish Independence Is England's Ticket Out Of The EU

On 1st May 1707, the Kingdom of Scotland entered into a union with the Kingdom of England to form a single kingdom of Great Britain.

The term "United Kingdom", didn't come into existance until the Union of Great Britain and Ireland in 1801. This became the “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” in 1927.

A Yes vote to the Scottish Independence Referendum in 2014, would end the Kingdom of Great Britain, formed in 1707 between England and Scotland.

It is the “United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland” that joined the European Economic Community in 1973 not England.

Therefore if Scotland votes to become an independent nation, this brings to an end the Kingdom of Great Britain, and also the United Kingdom, hence this takes the UK (including England) out of the European Union.

Writing on his blog, John Redwood, the Euro-sceptic Conservative MP for Wokingham said - "The dream ticket for a modern English nationalist is a decision by Scotland to leave the UK, followed by the ending of membership of the EU because the member, the UK, no longer exists."

Given the amount of anti-EU sentiment there is in this country, it is unlikely that an English Prime Minister would have enough support to re-negotiate England joining the EU. Another factor is that all new EU members have to accept the Euro as their currency. That in itself would be unacceptable to the majority of people in this country.

Other implications

Labour currently has 41 Scottish MPs, the Tories only have 1. This means that if Scotland was to gain independence then the Labour Party would lose a large chunk of its support. This makes it very unlikely that Labour could ever again win a General Election or at least it would make it extremely hard for them to do so.

When Tony Blair allowed the Scots a referendum on devolution in 1997, he could not have foreseen that less than 20 years later, it could lead to the loss of 41 Labour MPs and confine Labour to the political wilderness.

On that basis alone Scottish independence must be a very attractive proposition for the Tories. It might also appeal to many English Nationalists as well considering it was Labour, (lead by the Scottish-born Prime Minister Tony Blair and his Scottish successor Gordon Brown), whose open border policy swamped this country with millions of unwanted Third World immigrants.

If Scotland chooses independence, perhaps all the millions of immigrants and their offspring who were let in by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, should be given Scottish passports. After all, those immigrants are no more English than they are Scottish and it was a Scottish-born PM and his Scottish successor who let them all in.

No Vote for the English

England makes up 82% of the UK so surely the English should be allowed to vote in any referendum to break up the UK. Cameron says only the Scots will be allowed to vote. Latest opinion polls show that 52% of the English want independence from Scotland.

Once again English people are treated as second class citizens. We are not allowed a view on whether we should be in the EU and now, apparently, we are not entitled to a voice on Scottish independence. This gives the Scots a higher electoral value than the English and therefore discriminates against the English.

For too long England has been shafted by Scottish MPs. It was because of labour's Scottish MPs that English students have to pay University tuition fees of up to £9,000 p.a. while Scottish students go to University free of charge. Without the support of the Scottish MPs, Tony Blair could never have got the legislation through Parliament.

English people also pay for prescription charges, hospital parking, old age care, road tolls and so on which the Scottish people do not.

England is the only nation in the UK which has never had a constitutional vote on its future, whereas, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have each had two. And now we have Cameron declaring that the Scottish have ‘the right’ to vote on independence.

2012-01-09T02:05:00.000-08:00

Say No To Kellogg's Halal Corn Flakes

This little logo can now be found on the side of your box of Kellogg's cornflakes. It may well make you question whether or not you wish to continue buying Kellogg's products any longer. The reason is that it is the mark used to certify that a food product is halal.

The company claims that using the certification mark is "due to legislation for our multi-cultural society".

The use of the certification mark identifies the product as having been approved by the Halal Food Authority as not containing any alcohol or animal derivatives.

Britain is a Christian country so why should we eat food that's been blessed in the name of Allah (the Moon God)? I wonder whether Kellogg's would consider producing packaging with the sign of the cross on the side!

As for me, I don't approve of the way that animals are killed ‘halal-style’ (with their throats cut and then bled to death, as prescribed by sharia law).

I will never buy Kellogg’s products ever again.

2012-01-09T01:29:00.000-08:00

Robin Tilbrook meets Russian Nationalists

Reference :Russian Obraz

On the 17th of November, 2011, chairman of the English Democrats Robin Tilbrook and a member of the Russian Image movement's (Russky Obraz) Executive Committee Sergey Yerzunov held a meeting in London.

At the meeting a wide range of issues were discussed and the participants came to the conclusion that both English and Russian people face similar problems - the challenge which must be taken up by us, the true patriots of our countries.

The following joint statement was released here. It is reproduced below:

What is at issue is a necessity to ensure the proper level of representation of our nations people in the legislative bodies of their own homelands. It's important to point out that the situations in our countries are not absolutely analogous, since English people already have a party - The English Democrats - which is committed to formation of a developed English parliament and which has all necessary resources to represent the interests of English people in such legislative body.

Whereas, we, in Russia, due to the complexity of Russian politics, don't so far have a registered party which will protect the Russian identity and serve the interests of native people. Nevertheless, we are going to achieve our goal, whatever it takes! Russian people will have their own party which will be represented in the Parliament, and we are sure that support and experience of the English Democrats will contribute a lot to the accomplishment of this noble mission.

Both the English Democrats and the Russky Obraz movement are committed to serve the people of our countries and protect their great cultures and heritage. It's also essential that we preserve our national environment for future generations and we will be working hard towards those objectives.

We are determined to end political correctness and stop the flow of illegal immigrants to our countries – the phenomenon which has created dangerous criminal and social problems.

We are aware that our Causes are not easy ones, but our firmness and consistency will become an unquestionable guarantee of success.

The English Democrats site

2012-01-04T02:56:00.000-08:00

Do I Scream Alone?
By Frank Ellis

Do Sufficient numbers of our English people fully grasp the terrible damage inflicted on Mother England by mass immigration legal or illegal and the vicious, anti-white racist cult of multiculturalism? Will we, as a people, find the will to act to defend ourselves from this invasion and the sickness within or will we as a people just perish in shame?

Does a nation deserve to survive if it will not take the necessary steps for its own survival? What is it about a people that were so resolute and determined to resist Hitler in the summer of the Spitfire and Hurricane yet have allowed themselves to be overrun by aliens from without and traitors from within?

There used to be men and women of honour, moral and intellectual courage in the Mother of Parliaments. What do we have now? Our political class are parasites and Quislings who have betrayed England who see no point in protecting and nurturing that which has been created and forged over the centuries. Our politicians do not serve England: they serve those who hate us and would enslave us.

My English heart beats faster, more urgently when I recall Nelson’s words before Trafalgar or Churchill’s as we bore the brunt of the Luftwaffe. Yet when I see what is happening to England I am cast into a pit of despair and loneliness. Yet in this despair and loneliness I am conscious that there is something greater than I; that England, my land, my people, my history, the shame and the glory must be defended from her violators.

The land of my birth is not a brothel for the world. She is my holy Mother. On a cold, wind-swept Yorkshire moor or in a soft Kentish meadow on a summer’s day I feel her love for me, her strength. I crave her love. I cannot live without it. I cannot bear to see her mocked, derided and treated like a whore. And through the trees and leaves, in the singing of the trout stream and in the silent frost of winter she calls out to me, her wayward son, still the little English boy, with a message for England’s men and women: “Do not abandon me to whoredom dishonour and slavery. Remember you are come of a great people. The sternest tests are still before you. So use, my sons and daughters, your hearts and minds and fight the great evil and pestilence which have fallen upon us.

And if you are true to the spirit and soul of our ancestors, victory in this struggle will be ours. God bless you”.

Note

Dr. Frank Ellis is a former lecturer in Russian and Slavonic Studies at Leeds University. He was suspended for saying that he supported the theory developed by Richard J Herrnstein and Charles Murray in their 1994 book, The Bell Curve, which claimed that white people are more intelligent than black people.

He is a former member of the Parachute Regiment and the SAS.

2012-01-03T23:55:00.000-08:00

Stephen Lawrence - Aren't you sick of him?

Written by Tim Heydon

Reference :The British Resistance

The murder of Stephen Lawrence, who in all probability was a decent enough young man minding his own business, was undoubtedly a foul crime. Two men, Gary Dobson and Davis Norris, have been found guilty of the murder and we should be glad that they have at last got their just deserts.

Nevertheless, 18 years of having this case shoved down the nation’s throats for political reasons would be enough to make any reasonable person heartily sick of the name ‘Stephen Lawrence’. The BBC devoted almost its entire early evening news and the London Area News that followed to this case, reporting it just as you would expect a Culturally Marxist organisation to report it, relishing the way, it claimed, it has transformed the police and the country.

Grounds for Appeal

It should be noted following this latest verdict that given the avalanche of adverse publicity that the ‘guilty ‘ pair got before the trial, it would have been remarkable if they had been acquitted. The Daily Mail actually went so far as to name Gary Dobson and Davis Norris February 14, 1997.

This fact will no doubt figure in any appeal that the two men might make in the future against the verdict on the grounds of the impossibility of a fair trial and might very well be enough to see them acquitted. Such circumstances have certainly been effective in other cases.

This Case was pursued for political Reasons, not for the Sake of Justice

All that said, this case has been pursued in the way it has been, not out of any particular love of justice, but because,as we know very well, it was seized on from the first by enemies of this country as a means of attacking the Metropolitan Police and by extension the native British. The Metropolitan Police, the Macpherson Report found without a shred of evidence, was ‘institutionally racist’. Such was its uncontrolled bias that it actually went so far as to recommend that ‘racist’ remarks in private should be criminalised. Just about every home outside Camden, St John’s Wood, Islington, Hampstead and suchlike places would have become a crime scene!!! Unbelievable –if one is unaware of the the witch –hunt atmosphere about ‘racism’ whipped up by the Cultural Marxists, that is.

Jack Straw – A Slimy Enemy of Britain and of the British

The Home Secretary at the time of the Macpherson Report, Jack Straw, grabbed with both hands the opportunity it presented to oppress the British peoples, primarily by extending the Race Relations Act to the whole of the public sector, including the police. Here is what the columnist Simon Heffer had to say about how Straw was instrumental in demoralising the police in the Daily Telegraph:-

‘It was in Mr Straw's four years as home secretary from 1997 to 2001 that the cancerous attitudes that have benighted our police really set in – and they were led from the Home Office. The police ceased to be a force and became a service. They ceased to be a crime-fighting operation and became instead an instrument for the imposition of political correctness. New Labour came in to power with a set of beliefs about minorities of all sorts, and sought to make the police the enforcers of that creed. The wheels fell off at that point….’

This is what the BBC and the rest of the Cultural Marxist media are celebrating with the verdict in this case and all that has gone before: The smearing of the Metropolitan Police and of all Police, their emasculation as genuine Police Forces and the trampling underfoot of the British people .

If one got all of one’s news from the BBC and the rest of the broadcast media, one would never realise that most racial attacks are by ethnic minorities on white people, not the other way around. But when you have got a nation to destroy, who cares about that?

2012-01-03T23:21:00.000-08:00

Disposable Double Jeopardy

I’ve noticed that in the UK someone has finally been convicted for the murder of Stephen Lawrence, some 18 years after the fact and after having already once been found not guilty. I don’t wish to defend the two men who’ve just been convicted – for all I know they did do it, and very conspicuously did not sue The Daily Mail when that paper came right out and accused them of the murder on the front page and challenged them to sue if it was wrong. This is one of those awkward situations where I think that someone who is probably, though not certainly, guilty has been convicted but I’m as uncomfortable as hell in the way it’s come about. In short an ancient legal protection was tossed away and then this was applied retrospectively in order to paper over the cracks of an inadequate investigation.

The law of double jeopardy meant no one could be tried twice for the same crime but that legal principle was abolished in 2005 following a series of high profile campaigns.

The Lawrence murder played a key part and Sir William Macpherson recommended the law be changed following his inquiry in to the case in 1999.

Until 2005 there was no chance of ever bringing Dobson back to court as a suspect in the murder because he was acquitted, along with Neil Acourt and Luke Knight, following a private prosecution brought by Stephen’s parents in 1996.

However, that situation changed with the 2003 Criminal Justice Act 2003, which abolished the double jeopardy rule for serious crimes and which came in to effect two years later.

Crucially, it was also retrospective meaning it did not matter whether an alleged offence had occurred before 2005.

Seriously, how can anyone be comfortable with the police getting another go when it’s believed the jury got it wrong the first time? How many people in the UK went apeshit over the EU’s practice of repeat referenda until it got the desired outcome? How many of those will now be nodding approval at the British criminal justice system doing more or less the same thing?

Let’s look at a more mundane parallel. Let’s say you’d been done for speeding and decided to fight the ticket in court, and you discovered that the device the police caught you on was supposed to be calibrated daily but in fact they’d only been doing it once a week. As a result you’re found not guilty and sent on your way. Now imagine that the law is changed so that the speed device was now allowed to be calibrated once a month and that speeding motorists who’d been acquitted by a court once could be dragged back in again, except this time they wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. Ridiculous?

Why? The law allowing the criminal justice system a second bite for murderers sets the precedent, and it’s naive to think that eventually there won’t be calls for it to be extended to those acquitted of kidnap or rape or drug dealing… and if those then why not robbery, burglary, assault, fraud, possession and even motoring offences? The principle has now been established that nobody may be tried twice for the same offence unless someone thinks it’s quite important, and that importance may be established retroactively if need be.

And in case anyone thinks that I’m an unfeeling bastard who cares nothing for the death of Stephen Lawrence, or even that I’m a racist taking the side of the white guys, it’s not that at all. Like I said, I think they’re probably, though not certainly, guilty. But the steps taken to convict them of murder open up the possibility, slender though it might be at the moment, of anyone being tried again (and who knows, maybe again) if there’s enough belief that they’re guilty. Until now the police and Crown Prosecution Service have not had the luxury of being able to put defendants in the dock again and again until one jury gets the ‘right’ verdict, which is both to protect the innocent and discourage police and prosecutors from putting up with a sloppy investigation.

This will be a popular result and might even be a just one, but really it shouldn’t please anyone, not even those close to Stephen Lawrence and certainly not those who are already hoping to see more use of disposable double jeopardy. I’ll let Sir Thomas More have the final word and explain why.

“What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? … And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you – where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s, and if you cut them down — and you’re just the man to do it — do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!”

Reference :Orphans of Liberty

2012-01-01T10:01:00.000-08:00

The only way is Essex

Michelle Dockery

Born in Romford, Essex in 1981 (age 30). Currently starring as Lady Mary Crawley in Downton Abbey.

Starred in -
Fingersmith (2005)
Dalziel and Pascoe (2007)
Heartbeat (2008)
Waking the Dead (2009)
Return to Cranford (2009)
etc

Amanda Root

Born in Chelmsford, Essex in 1963. Known for her starring role in the 1995 BBC film adaptation of Jane Austen's Persuasion

Starred in -
Catherine Cookson's, The Man Who Cried (1993) Hilda Maxwell

Foyles War, Fifty Ships (2003) Elizabeth Lewes

A Touch of Frost, Another Life (2003) Delores Delmonte

Midsomer Murders, A Talent for Life (2003) Ruth Scholey

Waking the dead, Special Relationships (2002) Lorna Gyles

etc

Greer Garson

Born in Manor Park, Essex (now part of Greater London) in 1904.

She was educated at King's College London, where she earned degrees in French and 18th century literature, and at the University of Grenoble in France. She had intended to become a teacher, but instead began working with an advertising agency, and appeared in local theatrical productions.

Louis B. Mayer discovered Garson while he was in London looking for new talent. Garson was signed to a contract with MGM in late 1937, but did not begin work on her first film, Goodbye, Mr. Chips, until late 1938.

Listed by the Motion Picture Herald as one of America's top ten box office draws in 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, and 1946.

As one of MGM's major stars of the 1940s, Garson received seven Academy Award nominations. She won the Academy Award for Best Actress in 1942 for her role as a strong British wife and mother in the middle of World War II in Mrs. Miniver.

2011-12-26T01:37:00.000-08:00

How the politicians betrayed Britain's fishermen

'Twas down where fisher-folk gather,
I wandered far from the throng,
I heard a fisher-girl singing,
And this refrain was her song .......

This is the first verse, rarely heard nowadays, of the popular song - Red Sails in the Sunset. Lyrics by Jimmy Kennedy, music by Hugh Williams - 1935

A time of plenty -

Great Yarmouth 1948, fisher-girls sort out the herring catch

When Edward Heath took Britain into the European Union in 1973, unscrupulous Tory politicians handed over Britain’s once proud fishing industry to Brussels on a plate. The Common Fisheries Policy devised by the EU, is responsible for the destruction ofBritain’s fishing industry, with the loss of thousands of jobs and billions of pounds in revenue.

For example, Britain’sannual cod catch fell from 300,000 tonnes a year when Britain joined the EU in 1973 to a low of just 7,000 tonnes in 2007. In 1973 the industry employed about 23,000 fishermen. Today there are less than 12,000 fishermen left.

Background

Britain, as you would expect of an island nation, has a fishing heritage that goes back generations. By 1970, the fishing industries of England and Scotland were among the finest in the world, in technology, efficiency, and quality of produce. Britain was producing over a million tons of fish a year, and was preparing to claim its international right to the resources of a 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) around the British Isles. This was the new law of the sea agreed by the UN in 1973.

In 1970, a rise in white fish prices and a resurgence in herring fishing was boosting the prosperity of fishermen and fishing ports. The country’s fishery future looked secure. Then came Britain’s entry into the then European Common Market in 1973, negotiated by Edward Heath.

Betrayal

Hours before Britain was to be admitted, the original six members drafted the notorious addition to the “Acquis Communautaire”. It obliged new members to surrender the control of their waters to Europe, and to agree to “equal access to a common resource” as far as fish was concerned. All new applicants for membership would have to accept the condition, and that has been the case ever since. Despite a stream of subsequent lies and deception that this was not really the case, the government had sold the fishing industry like a pawn to gain entry to Europe. The European Commission then assumed the authority to delegate shares of the fishery resource to member states.

Apart from Ireland, and the existing European maritime states that had nothing to lose and everything to gain, Britain was the only nation in the world to give up that sovereign right to its exclusive 200 mile fishing zone, and accept the principle of ‘equal access' which was made a condition for all EU members.

Years later, Spain’s full entry into the EU Common Fisheries Policy nearly doubled the size of the EU states fishing fleets, and the later entry of the Baltic states increased the size still further. The size of the English and Scottish fleets had to be seriously reduced to accommodate the others.

What had taken British seamen and merchants 300 years to develop, was systematically reduced and destroyed by the EU Common Fisheries Policy in the 35 years from 1975 when measures started to be applied. No other nation in the history of the world has given up its fishing industry to foreign interests like Britain has done.

The Herring fleet set sail, Great Yarmouth 1930s

No state outside the EU has surrendered its 200 mile exclusive fishing zone to another body. Today, the vessels that reap the benefits of the UK marine EEZ are fleets from Spain, France, Denmark, Holland, and the new EU member states of Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. In consequence, much of the fish purchased by British housewives, though caught in British waters, are from Continental fishing vessels.

The EU's Common Fisheries Policy imposes a regime of equal access for vessels from all member states in the EU's exclusive fishing zone, 200 nautical miles from its coastline.

Within this zone, member states have a 12-mile zone around their own coastlines within which their own fishing vessels have exclusive rights.

In other words, because Britain is a member of the EU our 200 mile exclusive fishing zone around the British Isles has been reduced to just 12 miles by Brussels bureaucrats. The North Sea, which once ranked amongstthe richest waters in the world was, before we joined the EU, Britain’snational fishing waters.

The EU common fisheries policy has created a situation where landlocked nations like Austria have a say in how many fish a seafaring nation like Britain are allowed to catch.

The EU Quota System

Each country in the EU is given a quota of how many tons of fish they are allowed to catch. Each fishing vessel is then handed an individual fishing quota for different types of fish based on scientific data on the health of fish stocks. This leads to millions of tons of fish being wasted every year.

A trawler, for example, may have been given a quota to land 10 tons of cod and 10 tons of haddock. A problem arises when one of those quotas is met but not the other. A trawler that has landed all the cod it is allowed to catch but only half of the haddock, will continue to fish in order to meet its haddock quota. This means any extra cod caught in pursuit of its haddock quota will have to be thrown back into the sea, dead. This damages fish stocks and wastes millions of tons of fish. Catches and landings must be recorded. If a fisherman brings home more than his quota he faces a huge fine.

Surplus fish are thrown back into the sea, dead

Non-EU countries like Iceland have retained booming fishing industries and healthy fish stocks by keeping out competitors, like the Spanish, in a way that membership of the EU’s Fisheries Policy makes impossible.

Conclusion

Devious politicians regarded Britain's fishing industry as small beer, and a pawn well worth sacrificing for other benefits they imagined the European Union would bring.

Since no Parliament can bind its successor, both Labour and the Tories are equally to blame for the sorry mess the fishing industry finds itself in at the present time. But there is no needfor us to remain under such grovelling humiliating servitude, since underthe democratic principles of our historic constitution we can end theshameful surrender of our fishing grounds, our fishing rights and fishstocks, at any time of our choosing.

Thirty five years of senseless destruction is enough.

The English Democrats will take England out of the EU and re-establish control of our 200-mile exclusive fishing zone. We will then be able to rebuild our fishing industry and ensure the proper environmental management of fish stocks.

2011-12-25T00:40:00.000-08:00

A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

From the album Symphony released in 2008

Sarah Brightman sings Attessa from Cavalleria Rusticana, an opera written by Pietro Mascagni in 1890. Performed live in St Stephen's Cathedral, Vienna

2011-12-25T00:18:00.000-08:00

DEBT-FREE MONEY

Debt-Free United States Notes Were Once Issued Under JFK. The U.S. Government Still Has The Power To Issue Debt-Free Money

Most Americans have no idea that the U.S. government once issued debt-free money directly into circulation. America once thrived under a debt-free monetary system, and we can do it again. The truth is that the United States is a sovereign nation and it does not need to borrow money from anyone.

Back in the days of JFK, Federal Reserve Notes were not the only currency in circulation. Under JFK (at at various other times), a limited number of debt-free United States Notes were issued by the U.S. Treasury and spent by the U.S. government without any new debt being created. In fact, each bill said "United States Note" right at the top.

Unfortunately, United States Notes are not being issued today. If you stop right now and pull a dollar out of your wallet, what does it say right at the top? It says "Federal Reserve Note". Normally, the way our current system works is that whenever more Federal Reserve Notes are created more debt is also created.

This debt-based monetary system is systematically destroying the wealth of this nation. But it does not have to be this way. The truth is that the U.S. government still has the power under the U.S. Constitution to issue debt-free money, and we need to educate the American people about this.

Posted below are pictures of the front and the back of a United States Note printed in 1963 while JFK was president....

Notice that there is a red seal instead of a green seal on the front, and it says "United States Note" rather than "Federal Reserve Note".

According to Wikipedia, United States Notes were issued directly into circulation by the U.S. Treasury and they were first used during the Civil War....

They were originally issued directly into circulation by the U.S. Treasury to pay expenses incurred by the Union during the American Civil War. Over the next century, the legislation governing these notes was modified many times and numerous versions have been issued by the Treasury.

So why are we using debt-based Federal Reserve Notes today instead of debt-free United States Notes?

It seems rather stupid, doesn't it?

Well, that is what Thomas Edison thought too.

Thomas Edison was once quoted in the New York Times as saying the following....

That is to say, under the old way any time we wish to add to the national wealth we are compelled to add to the national debt.

Now, that is what Henry Ford wants to prevent. He thinks it is stupid, and so do I, that for the loan of $30,000,000 of their own money the people of the United States should be compelled to pay $66,000,000 — that is what it amounts to, with interest. People who will not turn a shovelful of dirt nor contribute a pound of material will collect more money from the United States than will the people who supply the material and do the work. That is the terrible thing about interest. In all our great bond issues the interest is always greater than the principal. All of the great public works cost more than twice the actual cost, on that account. Under the present system of doing business we simply add 120 to 150 per cent, to the stated cost.

But here is the point: If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good makes the bill good.

Our current debt-based monetary system was devised by greedy bankers that wanted to make huge profits by creating money out of thin air and lending it to the U.S. government at interest.

Sadly, the vast majority of the American people have no idea how money is actually created in this nation.

In a previous article about money and debt, I explained how more government debt is created whenever the U.S. government puts more money into circulation....

When the government wants more money, the U.S. government swaps U.S. Treasury bonds for "Federal Reserve notes", thus creating more government debt. Usually the money isn't even printed up - most of the time it is just electronically credited to the government. The Federal Reserve creates these "Federal Reserve notes" out of thin air. These Federal Reserve notes are backed by nothing and have no intrinsic value of their own.

When each new Federal Reserve Note is created, the interest owed by the federal government on that new Federal Reserve Note is not also created at the same time.

So the amount of government debt that is created actually exceeds the amount of money that is created.

Isn't that a stupid system?

The U.S. Constitution says that the federal government is the one that should actually be issuing our money.

In particular, according to Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, it is the U.S. Congress that has been given the responsibility to "coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures".

So why is a private central banking cartel issuing our money?

As is the case with so many other issues, we desperately need to get back to the way the U.S. Constitution says that we should be doing things.

The debt-based Federal Reserve system is literally stealing the future from our children and our grandchildren.

Back in 1910, a couple years prior to the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, the national debt was only about $2.6 billion.

A little over 100 years later, our national debt is now more than 5000 times larger.

So why don't we just admit that this system simply does not work?

Our current debt-based monetary system also requires very high personal income taxes to pay for it.

In fact, it is no accident that the personal income tax was introduced at about the same time that the Federal Reserve system originally came into existence.

Our children, our grandchildren and many generations after that are facing a lifetime of debt slavery because of us.

As I have written about previously, if the federal government began right at this moment to repay the U.S. national debt at a rate of one dollar per second, it would take over 440,000 years to pay off the national debt.

Neither the Republicans or the Democrats are proposing any solutions to this problem. Rather, both parties are only trying to slow down the rate at which we are going into even more debt.

But the truth is that the federal government does not have to go into a single penny of additional debt.

How could this be? It is not too complicated.

If Congress took back the power over our currency and started issuing debt-free money a lot of our problems could be fixed.

A basic plan would look something like this....

#1) The U.S. Congress votes to take back all of the functions that it has delegated to the Federal Reserve and begins to issue debt-free United States Notes. These United States Notes would have the exact same value as existing Federal Reserve Notes, and over time all existing Federal Reserve Notes would be taken out of circulation.

#2) The U.S. Congress nationalizes all debt held by the Federal Reserve. That would instantly reduce the national debt by 1.6 trillion dollars. In fact, there are a few members of Congress that have already proposed this.

#3) A Constitutional amendment is passed limiting future U.S. government deficits to a reasonable percentage of GDP. Any future deficits would not be funded by borrowing. Rather, future deficits would be funded by newly created United States Notes. Therefore, the federal government would never again accumulate another penny of debt.

And it would be important to inject new money into the economy from time to time. When existing money is destroyed or when the population grows it is important to inject a certain amount of new money into the system in order to avoid deflation.

#4) The existing national debt would be very slowly paid off with newly created United States Notes. The U.S. government spent over 454 billion dollars on interest on the national debt during fiscal year 2011, and over time this expense would go to zero.

If the national debt is paid off slowly enough, it would not create too much inflation. I believe that it could be paid off gradually over 50 years without shocking the economy too much.

There are some that would object to any measure that would ever cause a small amount of inflation, but my contention is that we have created a $15 trillion dollar debt mess for future generations, and it would be absolutely criminal to pass that legacy on to them.

We created this mess, and it is our responsibility to clean it up.

While there is certainly a danger that we would have a limited amount of inflation under a debt-free monetary system such as the one described above, the reality is that we are absolutely guaranteed inflation under the Federal Reserve system.

Most Americans believe that inflation is a fact of life, but the sad truth is that the United States has only had a major, ongoing problem with inflation since the Federal Reserve was created back in 1913.

If you do not believe this, just check out this chart.

Sadly, the U.S. dollar has lost well over 95 percent of its value since the Federal Reserve was created.

So, yes, there would be a need for strict monetary discipline under a debt-free monetary system, but it would be hard to do worse than the Federal Reserve has already been doing.

And Congress could always slow down inflation using other methods. For example, raising the reserve requirements for banks (which should be done anyway) would help keep inflation in check.

If the above proposals were adopted, the end result would be something that we could all live with. The Federal Reserve system would be abolished, the national debt burden on future generations would be wiped out, the economy would not have to go through a devastating economic collapse that could last a decade or longer, and we could eventually make a fairly smooth transition to "hard money" if we wanted to after the national debt is gone.

Is there any other proposal out there that does all of those things?

There are many out there that would dispute some of the points above, and debate is good. By engaging in debate, we can hopefully help educate the American people about the nature of money.

The key is to get rid of our current debt-based Federal Reserve Notes and replace them with debt-free United States Notes.

The American people need to understand that it is a lie that the U.S. government "must" borrow money from somebody else.

When the U.S. government borrows money, it slowly transfers wealth from the American people to those that lent it.

At this point, we have created a financial nightmare for future generations that is unlike anything the world has ever seen before. We owe it to future generations to eliminate the debt problem without destroying the United States economy. Adopting debt-free money would allow us to do that.

But sadly, neither political party is even talking about debt-free money. In fact, most of the politicians in both political parties probably do not even know what debt-free money is.

So we need to get the American people educated about these things. Because if we stay on the course that we are currently on, an economic collapse is inevitable.

Reference :The Economic Collapse

2011-12-19T22:38:00.000-08:00

The Sixty year experiment

By Caratacus

Reference :Sarah's blog

Experiments on humans, animals and plants are highly regulated in civilised nations. Experimenters are bound by rules of morality and ethics. There must be agreement by the subjects. They must be carefully afforded "informed consent", with detailed descriptions of the risks and rewards.

The experimenters have the duty of declaring vested interests. Particularly they must reveal possible personal benefit from the outcome of the experiment.

Experiments are, by convention, given a restricted time frame, for review and reassessment. If it seems that the experiment is not going to be beneficial to humans, plants or animals, that experiment must be curtailed forthwith.

************************************************

Since the advent of Homo sapiens, strong biological forces have inexorably separated people into their different "types" by geographical area.

An inherent quality of biology, beyond control, has generated this distinction between humans. These separating paths have lead to the genetic, racial, biochemical and the behavioural varieties of humans.

Progressive separation of humans also drove the divergence which has created the thousands of human languages. Most are now so distant from each other to be mutually unintelligible. People will continue to form enclaves of similar genetic and language groups.

The creation of human bio-diversity has always been inevitable.

***********************************************
Sixty years ago, the governments of Western Europe began an experiment on their entire human population. It was, and remains, the largest biological experiment ever conducted.

This experimental design was to attempt to reverse human bio-diversity. To do that governments brought, and allow to remain as a breeding sub-set, people of different genes, races, cultures and languages into the geographical boundaries of Britain and Europe.

The political hypothesis was to test whether the distinctions between different varieties of humans, would progressively lessen if brought into Europe. It was guessed that ultimately these varied people (and their varied cultures) would amalgamate seamlessly, to the benefit of all.

The term “integration" was conjured.

It soon became clear that conflict was probable. Aggressive rioting between the races occurred. Integration was not going to work.

Therefore the experiment was modified to test whether intuitive human behaviour could be changed under threat of law. The native populations were ordered not to reveal that they recognised (the obvious) distinctions between the existing inhabitants and the aliens. They were ordered to curtail any discourse amongst themselves, which might emphasise these distinctions.

The term “criminal racism” was invented

Since “integration” had failed the experimental basis was changed again. Instead of integrating, could these differing groups instead function along-side one with the other?

The term "multiculturalism" was coined.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bizarrely, in an exact parallel, multiculturalism was attempted in South Africa, in an attempt to protect the cultural and genetic homogeny of resident Europeans. The description was "separate development".

The outcome was a cascade of inflamed, ruthless and hypocritical condemnation by the continental Europeans. This attempt at self-protection by a small, minority group was destroyed by bullying.
Ironically the “anti-apartheid movement” was later going to have important destructive sequelae in Europe.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Governments of Europe could have only one moral justification for this experimentation. That was to ensure the long term safety, well-being and contentment of their populations and their progeny. What mandate did the governments have to commence this experiment, which by its very design would bring disequilibrium and so fear to European Societies?

They had none. The population was not consulted.

Instead in an unbelievable arrogance and opinionated superiority these politicians, amateur scientists that they are, forced into place this massive, irreversible, naïve, rationally indefensible and highly dangerous idea.

*************************************************
Synchronous with this experiment on humans was another political experiment on a massive ecological system.

This “good idea” was to play manipulator of the living and to bring the Nile Perch into Lake Victoria Nyanza. That lake had one of the most diverse fish environments on earth.

The perch was surreptitiously introduced in 1954, and more official introductions occurred in 1962 and 1963.

The end result of that experiment was to destroy the highly refined and complex ecology of the second widest body of fresh water in the world.

The experiment so altered the freshwater ecosystem of Lake Victoria that several hundred species became extinct or near extinction. This politically engineered event was likely the largest extinction event amongst vertebrates in the 20th century

The impact on the local economy was the subject of the documentary Darwin's Nightmare.

**************************************************
The analogy between the past destruction of the East African ecosystem and the impending destruction of the European Civilisation should be clear.

Both were based on “Political Good Ideas”.

Both were philosophically and scientifically flawed from foundation.

Both were doomed.

**************************************************
Sixty years ago, the governments of Western Europe embarked on an experiment on their entire human population. It was, and remains, the largest biological experiment ever conducted.

It breaches the most fundamental guidelines of experimentation and transgresses every component of the rules and restraints experimentation.

It has been clear, from the outset that this was not going to afford the Europeans the benefit of greater contentment and greater safety.(1)

Was the population, the "experimental sample", informed of this? Were they told of the hazards and potential?

The short answer is no.

Was the experiment terminated when it became clear that it was failing?

No.

But there was a parallel subplot which allowed a small group of people, the politicians, to benefit themselves greatly. Immigration has been used to buy politicians power, and bolster their tenure.

This was scientific fraud at its worst, and by its magnitude the most despicable, condemnable and outrageous travesty of a political mandate, contrary to all understandings of democracy, morality and ethics.

This blind endeavour has as much chance of success as a king ordering the retreat of the tides.

For the sake of humanity, the survival of the European and God’s wondrous diversity, this experiment must be curtailed forthwith.
_____________________________________________

(1) The Empire Windrush docked in Tilbury on 21 June 1948 becoming a landmark in the history of migration to the UK. On the 22 June 1948 11 MPs wrote to the Prime Minister, Clement Attlee. The letter was signed by JD Murray, CF Grey, James Harrison, Frank Mcleavy, RWG Mackay, T Reid, Louis Tolley, TJ Brooks, JR Leslie, Percey Holman and Meredith F Titterington. They expressed concern that large numbers of "coloured" immigrants might "impair the harmony, strength and cohesion of our public and social life and to cause discord and unhappiness among all concerned."

2011-12-15T23:55:00.000-08:00

ELECTION NIGHT

Reference :Eddy Butler's blog

There were a couple of interesting by-elections held last night.

FELTHAM AND HESTON

The one that attracted most attention was the Parliamentary by-election in Feltham and Heston, but the media largely ignored even this contest and the turn-out was very low. There was little interest as it is a fairly safe Labour seat. Having said that the Conservatives controlled it for a period in the mid 1980s, although the demographics have changed since then.

In the 2010 General Election the BNP contested this seat and obtained 3.5% of the poll and 1,714 votes. At that time there would have been a good chance of a saved deposit in Feltham and Heston had Nick Griffin not stabbed the Party in the back by running off to the police and the world’s media like a cur dog with his phoney tale of threats to kill him.

This was the result in the by-election:

Labour - 12, 639 votes (54.4%)
Conservative – 6,436 votes (27.7%)
Liberal Democrats – 1,364 votes (5.9%)
UKIP – 1,276 votes (5.5%)
BNP – 540 votes (2.3%)
Green – 426 votes (1.8%)
English Democrats (Roger Cooper) – 322 votes (1.4%)
London People Before Profit – 128 votes (0.6%)
Bus-Pass Elvis Party – 93 votes (0.4%)

The BNP vote collapsed by over 50% in percentage terms, despite (or perhaps partly due to) putting great store in having its dilapidated ‘Truth Truck’ chug around the constituency for nearly a week.

I believe the BNP are patting themselves on their backs because they got about 40% more votes than the English Democrats.

This is the first time the EDs have contested this seat and put minimal resources into the campaign - just to get the name out there. The ED result isn’t too bad at all bearing this in mind.

In a campaign where the ability of a minor party to ‘sell itself’ is minimal, it is obvious that a party with greater name recognition, even a terribly tarnished and toxic name, will tend to get more votes than an unknown quantity. In this election the EDs were an unknown quantity. In such contests the BNP’s name recognition will carry it through. The BNP should have got at least three or four times the EDs vote here, not just 40% more.

However the BNP has no ability to garner greater levels of support from the silent majority even if it had the nous or ability to campaign thoroughly. Its image is irredeemably broken. It is stuck in a rut.

The only reason the BNP were mentioned at all in the news following the declaration of this result was to draw attention to the fact that UKIP had overtaken them. This result will have ratcheted down the residual BNP hard core support base. They have developed the reputation with the public as being losers.

This result also amply demonstrates, as if it were necessary, that the BNP has absolutely no chance whatsoever of getting anyone elected to the GLA next year.

The BNP are the past.

Their predicament reminds me of the words of that Rolling Stones song (memorably covered by Chris Farlowe), ‘Out of Time’:

You don't know what's going on
You've been away for far too long
You can't come back and think you are still mine
You're out of touch, my baby
My poor discarded baby
I said, baby, baby, baby, you're out of time

You thought you were a clever girl
Giving up your social whirl
But you can't come back and be the first in line, oh no
You're obsolete my baby
My poor old-fashioned baby
I said baby, baby, baby you're out of time

Obsolete sums it up.

BILLERICAY

The last time the BNP contested an election in Basildon, was in July 2010, when they obtained only 4% in Nethermayne ward. In May 2010 the BNP had obtained 9% in this ward and 16% in 2008.

Everywhere the BNP vote is going in one direction –down.

Within Basildon, Billericay has always been difficult territory. For example in Billericay West the BNP polled just 3% in 2010 and 7% in 2008.

Basildon Branch of the BNP (which no longer exists) was very hard working at a time when the Eastern Region of the BNP was working like one of those well oiled machines. In September 2009 it contested a by-election for Billericay South West ward in Billericay Town Council. This is about half of the Basildon District Council Billericay West ward.

The result was curious as the Conservatives did not contest the election and this is a very strong area for the Conservatives. UKIP actually won as follows:

UK Independence Party – 480 votes (57%)
Labour – 266 votes (32%)
British National Party – 95 votes (11%)

Yesterday there was another by-election in Billericay South West Ward. This time the result was:

Conservatives - 365 votes (59.2%)
UKIP – 202 votes (32.7%)
English Democrats (Tony Gladwin) – 50 votes (8.1%)

The English Democrats at their first outing in this area did better than the BNP in 2008 and 2010. It was not far behind the BNP result in 2009 when the Conservatives did not contest the seat. Furthermore UKIP are entrenched there now as they have a local councillor.

The BNP local election results since the 2010 election have never been better than previous results. They have all been worse. Only the EDs have been able to buck this trend.

The Billericay result is quite interesting and shows what can be done with a little work. The local English Democrat activists did not run a super sophisticated campaign - it just consisted of a couple of leaflet drops. It shows that if the English Democrats manage to establish a bit of local identity then they can get reasonable votes. In fact this EDs result compares very favourably with that obtained by the BNP at its height. There is an overlap between those who voted for the BNP when it had a degree of popularity with those who would potentially vote for the EDs.

These two by-elections illustrate what I have been saying for some time.

In many ways the Billericay result tells us much more than Feltham and Heston. Local grassroots politics is the way ahead. The EDs can make real impact in that arena through implementing more sophisticated local tactics and it can make its distinctive brand of nationalism incredibly popular. By developing from the bottom up the EDs profile and name recognition will be steadily enhanced until in short order it will really start to take off.

The EDs are the future.

2011-12-14T03:16:00.000-08:00

Israel Boots Out All Its Illegal Immigrants

Reference:Jerusalem Post

Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, is to travel to Africa to coordinate the return of migrants to their native countries;

"Illegal immigration is a national calamity."

The cabinet approved on Sunday afternoon Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's plan to deal with growing illegal immigration to Israel.

According to the new program, all government offices will contribute to a NIS 630 million budget that will be used towards strict enforcement of laws seeking to curb illegal infiltration.

The new program allowed for a NIS 75,000 fine for the employing of illegal immigrants, and in some cases, the closing of offending businesses.

Additionally, remand of arrested illegal immigrants was extended from 60 days to three years.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that the infiltration of the migrants into Israel is a "national calamity in all fields - the economy, state security," Israel Radio reported.

Saying that Israel has no obligation to advance illegal immigration into its borders, he explained that "if we do not act to stop the flood, we'll be washed away with it."

Netanyahu announced on Sunday that he will travel to Africa in an attempt to coordinate with state leaders the return of illegal African immigrants in Israel to their native countries.

The prime minister was expected to bring to a vote on Sunday legislative and security measures that would help curb the influx of African migrants.

A fence along the Israeli-Egyptian border, set to be completed next year, is expected to de-accelerate the infiltration as well.

Also on Sunday, Interior Minister Eli Yishai warned that the illegal immigration is an existential threat to the state and said that he would work to preserve the Jewish majority in Israel.

According to Yishai, only a very small number of African migrants in Israel are actually refugees. The rest, he contended, have come immigrated in order to improve their economic conditions.

The minister added that eight or nine planes have already carried illegal infiltrators back to their native lands. The immigrants were sent back with grants of five hundred dollars each.

Note -

Israel belongs to the Israelis, they have the right to preserve a Jewish majority in Israel.

In the same way, England belongs to the English. The English have the right to do whatever is necessary to ensure that England remains a majority English country.

There are over a million illegal immigrants in Britain. Illegality should not be rewarded by the granting of citizenship. They should all be deported without exception.

2011-12-10T04:54:00.001-08:00

Cameron finds some backbone in Europe

According to the Daily Express, Britain is close to EU exit

BRITAIN took a massive step towards quitting the EU yesterday when David Cameron defeated a bid by Brussels for more power.

In a historic stand that plunges our membership into serious doubt, he became the first British PM to veto an EU treaty.

It is a significant victory for the Daily Express Crusade for the UK to exit the European bureaucracy.

The PM declared at the end of a bitter summit row in the Belgian capital yesterday: “I think I did the right thing for Britain. We were offered a treaty that didn’t have proper safeguards for Britain and I decided it was not right to sign that treaty.”

His defiant “no” in the face of a bullying Franco-German plot won widespread applause last night. And jubilant Tories insisted that the rift with the Brussels bureaucracy now makes a referendum on our EU membership unavoidable.

Tory MPs were last night understood to be preparing a “hero’s welcome” for the Prime Minister when he returns to the Commons on Monday.

Mr Cameron said his decision to block the bid for a powerful new “economic government” in a treaty binding all 27 EU nations was essential to protect Britain’s interests.

It raised the prospect that Britain will be isolated by standing alone outside a new continental bloc dominated by the 17 eurozone nations. Embittered Eurocrats were understood last night to be plotting “revenge attacks” on Britain.

One EU official snapped: “This is going to cost the UK dearly. They have antagonised everyone.”

But Eurosceptics hope that the dramatic developments will mark the start of the unravelling of Britain’s ties to Brussels.

Senior Tory MP Mark Pritchard, secretary of the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbenchers, said: “I hope this is the beginning of a robust new Euroscepticism in the Government. This makes an EU referendum far more likely.”

Former Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: “We are seeing a new balance of power in Europe arising out of the eurozone crisis and we are also seeing how the French and Germans intend to use it – pretty forcefully in their own interests and ignoring the interests of others.

“David Cameron has to protect Britain against that, he did exactly the right thing.”

The summit collapsed in rancour in the early hours of yesterday morning after EU leaders refused to accept Mr Cameron demands for “safeguards” to protect Britain’s interests in the treaty overhaul.

Fraught negotiations at the summit in Brussels dragged on for more than 10 hours until breaking up at 4.41am.German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy had championed sweeping new powers for Brussels to help shore up the struggling euro, including penalties for countries that run up massive debts and strict Brussels scrutiny over national budgets.

Mr Cameron had offered to back the treaty changes in return for guarantees that would protect British interests such as the City of London.

But sources said the exchanges became heated as the Prime Minister repeatedly refused to surrender.

At one stage, a furious Mr Sarkozy was said to have been physically restrained by aides after losing his temper.

Mr Sarkozy said: “We were not able to accept (the British demands) because we consider quite the contrary – that a very large and substantial amount of the problems we are facing around the world are a result of lack of regulation of financial services and therefore can’t have a waiver for the United Kingdom.”

And in a swipe after the summit, Chancellor Merkel said: “I didn’t think David Cameron sat with us at the table. We had to get some sort of agreement and we couldn’t make compromises, we had to meet tough rules. But that won’t deter Europe on other issues.”

Mr Cameron insisted that he remained committed to keeping Britain in the EU. But he also made clear he was ready to consider withdrawal if our new relationship with Brussels threatens British interests.

“The membership is in our interests and I’ve always said if that’s the case I’ll support our membership,” he said. “Of course this does represent a change in our relationship. But the core of the relationship – the single market, the trade and the investment, the growth, the jobs that we want to see – that remains as it was.”

He ruled out a referendum, arguing it was unnecessary as Britain had not signed up to a new treaty. But he acknowledged it was unprecedented for a British PM to veto an EU treaty.

He admitted he had faced relentless pressure to back down from other EU leaders. “You are obviously in a room with 26 other people who are saying ‘put aside your national interest, go along with the crowd, do what will make life easy and comfortable with you there in that room’, but you say no.” Even some Labour MPs yesterday acknowledged that Mr Cameron’s refusal to surrender could ultimately spell the end for the EU.

Former Labour Europe minister Denis MacShane said: “There is now little point in Britain staying in the EU.” But London Mayor Boris Johnson, who joined the call for a referendum earlier this week, said: “David Cameron has played a blinder and he has done the only thing that it was really open to him to do.”

But Labour risked losing touch with millions of voters yesterday after leader Ed Miliband said: “It’s a terrible outcome for Britain because we are going to be excluded from key economic decisions that will affect our country in the future.”

Deputy PM Nick Clegg backed the PM’s position but many Eurofanatic Lib Dem MPs were outraged.

Reference:Daily Express

2011-12-09T00:32:00.001-08:00

The Truth About Our Liberal Elite And Race Crime

By Leo McKinstry, The Daily Express

THE dogma of political correctness is dangerously weakening Britain’s traditional concept of justice.

Our ruling elite are so deluded by the ideology of cultural diversity that they have lost the ability to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.

That is the only conclusion to be drawn from the outrageous leniency shown by a court this week towards a gang of Somalian Muslim women who savagely beat up a white woman in Leicester city centre. In a brutal, unprovoked assault, the thugs knocked Rhea Page to the ground, then repeatedly kicked her in the head while calling her a “white bitch” and “white slag”.

Ms Page, who was so traumatised by the incident that she has lost her job as a carer for people with learning disabilities, later said: “I thought they were going to kill me.”

Incredibly, despite the ferocity of the attack, the judge gave the girls only suspended sentences, even though he could have jailed them for up to five years.

His bizarre decision came after the defence told him that the Muslim assailants had been drinking and were “not used to being drunk” because of their religion.

As a cause for mitigation, this is absurd. Why on earth should Muslims be treated any differently to other offenders, simply on the grounds of their faith?

If they are so pious, so respectful of Islamic rituals, why were they drinking in the first place? And shouldn’t their drunkenness in public, an offence in itself, have added to the seriousness of their crime rather than lessened it?

Just as troubling was the failure of the authorities to charge the gang with racially-aggravated assault. For nothing could be more racially abusive than their barbaric cry of “kill the white bitch”.

We can be pretty sure that if a Somalian Muslim girl had been kicked to the ground by a group of white brutes, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Police would have taken a tougher approach.

The disgraceful message of this episode is that Muslims can get drunk and maim almost with impunity because the state is so craven about their creed.

The case makes a mockery of the idea of equality before the law - one of the cornerstones of liberal democracy.

The reluctance to imprison Ms Page’s attackers is so indicative of the supine, guilt-ridden mindset of our modern ruling class, where cowardice is dressed up as cultural sensitivity and self-loathing masquerades as tolerance.

This mentality, which is tearing apart the moral bonds of our civilisation, can be seen all around us. A classic recent example was the police’s initial paralysing feebleness towards the rioters last August because of fears about accusations of racism.

The same is true of the hesitancy in tackling so-called “honour” attacks on women in Muslim communities.

Only last week, it was revealed that the total of these appalling incidents, some of them fatal, is approaching 3,000 a year.

In a similar vein, the police and social services have long been terrified of talking openly about the growing problem of Pakistani gangs preying on white girls in northern towns.

As Detective Inspector Alan Edwards, an expert in the field, has said, “Everyone’s been too scared to address the ethnicity factor.”

In the twisted world of our civic institutions, minorities are always seen as victims.

Even the worst behaviour of some in their communities is excused by references to poverty or racism or social exclusion.

That certainly applies to the Somalian community in Britain, who are constantly presented as one of the most oppressed groups in the country.

But, in truth, the oppression can work the other way. Too many Somalians have become a burden on the British taxpayer, thanks to their welfare dependency.

Over 80 per cent of them, for instance, live in taxpayer-funded homes. Moreover Somalian gangs, most of them peddling drugs, have helped to create a climate of fear in parts of our cities through their enthusiasm for violence and contempt for the law.

As one Somalian youth from the notorious Woolwich Boys says, “We’ve come over here with one thing on our mind – money. We don’t care how we get it. The Government doesn’t stand a chance.”

Tremendous double standards are at work over race crime. Racial killings of whites are frequently downplayed or forgotten.

The name of Kriss Donald is almost unknown today, yet the circumstances of his death could hardly have been more horrific.

In March 2004, while walking through Glasgow, the 15-year-old schoolboy was kidnapped by a Pakistani gang, dragged to open land, tortured, stabbed 13 times and set on fire while he was still alive.

Fortunately the gang was caught and convicted, but this monstrous crime provoked no great outpouring of moral anguish.

Peter Fahy, one of Britain’s leading chief constables, once said that political correctness means it is “harder to get the media interested” when the victims are “young white men”.

The British establishment is guilty of nothing less than reverse racism. Their members, from judges to politicians, think they are enlightened and compassionate. But in truth they are filled with prejudice.

For often they refuse to expect the same standards of civilised behaviour from certain minorities that they demand of the indigenous population.

Such a perverted outlook is the opposite of equality. In the name of anti-racism, they have ended up in the bizarre position of promoting discrimination.

That is no way to achieve the integration and cohesion that our society so badly needs.

Reference:Daily Express

2011-12-06T23:51:00.001-08:00

British Justice Is A Joke

Compare

An English lady, Emma West, is traveling with a young child on a tram between Croydon and Addington. The tram is full of third world aliens. Many white people find being in close contact with blacks to be psychologically stressful, culturally repellent, and often feel threatened by them. Under severe stress, Emma West reaches breaking point and uses some choice language.

Emma West, comes from Croydon, a place which was virtually razed to the ground this year by ethnic gangs who rampaged for three days, indulging in an orgy of burning looting and violence.

She has seen first hand what these people are capable of.

All she did was vent her frustrations. She has been refused bail not once but twice and will spend Christmas behind bars separated from her small children who have been taken away from her!

Meanwhile, four Somalian savages who kicked a woman in the head while yelling "kill the white slag" get off virtually scot-free.

Rhea Page, a care worker, was left with a bald patch where her hair was pulled out in the attack and was left ‘black and blue’ after suffering a flurry of kicks to the head, back, arms and legs while motionless on the pavement.

The judge, Robert Brown, gave the Somalians suspended jail terms on the excuse that they had been drinking and they were not used to it. Miss Page, a care worker, called the sentence ‘disgusting’ and said the gang deserved ‘immediate custody’.

‘It’s no punishment at all,’ she said. ‘And for them to say they did it because they were not used to alcohol is no excuse. If they were not supposed to be drinking then they shouldn’t have been out in bars at that time of night.

‘Even after the police came and they all ran away, one of them came running back to kick me in the head one last time.

‘I honestly think they attacked me just because I am white. I can’t think of any other reason.’

Miss Page was treated for bruises and grazes after the attack in June last year as she walked to a taxi rank with boyfriend Lewis Moore, 23, in Leicester city centre.

At the time she worked caring for people with autism and learning difficulties but gave up the job after repeated absences because of stress and flashbacks.

She is still having counselling and suffers panic attacks.

She said: ‘We were just minding our own business but they kept shouting “white bitch” and “white slag” at me. When I turned around one of them grabbed my hair then threw me on the ground.

‘They were taking turns to kick me over and over. I thought they were going to kill me.’

English Defence League prepares to storm local elections

English Defence League to enter electoral politics after signing pact with British Freedom Party

The English Defence League plans to field candidates for the first time in local elections after an alliance is finalised between the far-right group and the British Freedom Party, which was set up by disgruntled members of the British National Party.

Paul Weston, leader of British Freedom

Senior figures said that the EDL, which has become known for its protests in English towns with Muslim populations, needed to "detoxify" its name by moving into politics with an existing party. Their new partners hope to capitalise on the EDL's ability to mobilise a large number of supporters.

Both groups will retain a measure of independence but will support each other. EDL members will be invited to join the newly affiliated political wing and stand as candidates under its name. "There is a gentleman's agreement in place, we are looking at the EDL becoming political early next year," said Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the leader of the far-right group. Mr Yaxley-Lennon, who also goes by the name Tommy Robinson, confirmed he had met the British Freedom Party leader Paul Weston and that discussions were at an advanced stage.

Mr Weston confirmed the plans and revealed he would offer Mr Yaxley-Lennon a place on the party's executive committee. He added: "We are going to say we support the principles of the EDL. We will get a lot of people who can stand in local constituencies and they will get a genuine political party in return."

The move is likely to meet with some resistance from those EDL members who want to see the group remain a "street movement". Mr Yaxley-Lennon acknowledged the issue, saying he will consult the leaders of the group's local divisions.

Dr Matthew Goodwin, a specialist on far-right politics, thought the move would receive significant support within the EDL "simply because Mr Yaxley-Lennon is the main face of the movement". He said: "It's difficult to tell at this point as the EDL has a very fluid membership structure. It is not the case, for example, that you ever really join the EDL. There are no official entrance mechanisms."

Babs Davis, an EDL member, backed the move if the leadership thought it was in the best interests of the group. "A lot of people have said that we should go political but the movement never really wanted to do it," she said. "If that is what Tommy Robinson thinks is the right thing to do, then I agree with him. I think he has done a brilliant job. The whole point of being in the EDL is to follow what the leadership says."

Dr Goodwin, who is a professor at the University of Nottingham, said: "Since the widespread defeat for the BNP in last year's general election, the far right-wing landscape of British politics has seen the emergence of several small political parties and movements, all attempting to fill the gaps left by Nick Griffin's party and exploit wider public concerns about immigration." He said at least 45 per cent of voters refused to back any of the main parties on immigration, leaving "clear potential" for a far-right group.

Dr Goodwin added: "Having passed through its embryonic stage, the EDL is now very much at a crossroads: it can either remain as a confrontational streets-based social movement, or it can attempt to transform itself into a radical right-wing political party. This shift will require members and money. "It has also developed links with far more successful radical right parties in other European states, that may pass on successful strategies and tips."

Allies on the right: The leaders

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, aka Tommy Robinson

The former BNP member is the founder and leader of the EDL. He has recently forged a strong relationship with British Freedom Party leader Paul Weston.

He is known for wearing a St George's Cross mask when making public appearances and was one of two EDL members who protested on the roof of FIFA's Zurich offices about the attempt by world football's governing body to ban England players from wearing poppies during a recent match. Earlier this month he received a 12-week sentence for assault, suspended for a year, at Preston magistrates' court.

Paul Weston

A former electoral candidate for UKIP, Mr Weston is described by Mr Yaxley-Lennon as a "charismatic public-schoolboy type".

He took over the chairmanship of the British Freedom Party two weeks ago. Like many of the party's founders, he is said to be an experienced political campaigner. He is thought to want to keep his party free from the "historical baggage associated with parties such as the BNP".

The EDL by numbers

2,000 The number of people thought to have attended an EDL march in Blackburn, at which leader Tommy Robinson head-butted a fellow member.

26,000 The number of people who "Like" the EDL on Facebook.

172 The number of EDL members arrested at the group's last march, on Whitehall in London.

Reference:The Independent

2011-11-20T22:58:00.001-08:00

Archbishop John Sentamu's Misconceptions
About The Nature Of Western Economies

An article by Dr Frank Ellis.

John Sentamu's recent article in the Yorkshire Post,
5th November 2011 in which he attacks the inequalities of wealth generated by an economic system largely based on the private ownership of the means of production, reveals him to be a woefully ignorant commentator, and one who fails to grasp the reasons for the West's astonishing intellectual and economic achievements.

The substance of Sentamu's article, such as it is, also confirms the sharp decline in the intellectual core of the Church of England's leadership.

Social, intellectual and economic inequalities that arise from hard work, self-discipline and superior IQ are everywhere to be seen. They are a natural state whereby those endowed with such qualities will rise in social status, if they so wish, and to whom the benefits of wealth will accrue.

Nature provides no evidence that all men were created equal or that all men will achieve the same things and reach the same goals. In what is still a largely white country, though mass, non-white immigration is set to reduce whites to a minority in their own country, black failure in education, employment and high levels of representation in crime, confirm that the qualities required for even modest levels of success are largely absent among blacks resident in Britain.

Is it this, I wonder, that serves to fuel Sentamu’s resentment of England? Does his apparent concern for the well-being of lower-paid workers mask a racist resentment of conspicuously successful whites? Bear in mind that Sentamu was one of those fellow-travelling, useful idiots who lent his name to the viciously anti-white racist Macpherson Report (1999).

Macpherson, Sentamu and all the others involved in the preparation of this hate tract, which had very little to do with a bungled murder inquiry and everything to do with attacking and undermining the institutions of a white nation, bear a large share of the responsibility for the degenerate behaviour of blacks that struck English cities in August 2011.

It does not occur to Sentamu that companies and businesses are founded by ambitious and private individuals whose intention is to create a successful business not a charity. Some of these companies generate huge wealth and their products have immeasurably improved the living standards of millions of people. They exist to make money and profit so that they can meet the demands of investors and so that they can reinvest capital to make more products.

A privately owned company that is conspicuously profitable and handsomely rewards its shareholders and Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) will generate envy and resentment, especially among those who regard themselves as the intellectual and moral arbiters of our society. Privately run companies do not have to answer to the outpourings of Sentamu’s poisonous envy presented as concern for the less economically successful.

Sentamu concludes that in those instances in a company where CEOs are paid 300 times more than the least well paid employees - no company is actually cited by Sentamu – that this tells these employees ‘that they are of little value’. It tells employees no such thing. However much he might like to enjoy the same salary and benefits of the CEO the security guard knows that he is incapable of running a major company.

If he is convinced that he is as good as his master he can start a business and prove it. Otherwise he must earn his living as an employee. Where large numbers of people come together, as in the workplace, inequalities between and among individuals will be apparent. No employee works to improve the position of others (or of starving Somalis and Kenyans). He strives towards his own ends and from this basic fact of human nature arises, inevitably and desirably, economic and social inequalities and the economic and intellectual progress associated therewith.

Sentamu tells us that: ‘Top pay has been found to bear little or no relation to company performance, but even if it did, isn’t the performance of a company dependent on the work and well-being of all its staff?’ It is obvious that the performance of a company depends, in part, on the work and well-being of employees. Sentamu implies without any evidence that when the gap between senior personnel and junior personnel is large or very large that the morale and well-being of junior staff in some unspecified way suffers.

I suggest it does not. It is the nature of envy to which Sentamu implicitly appeals that differences in pay and privileges are most painfully felt among workers and staff of comparable levels. The worker on the factory-floor does not envy the stratospheric pay of the CEO: he envies the slight increase in pay which his more able fellow worker enjoys by virtue of his better and more efficient work rate and ethic. That difference may only be small but it gnaws away at the less well remunerated worker’s sense of self-esteem. This is why unions attract mediocrities who wish to see all the stupid, the able, the lazy and industrious held to the same standard. None must be permitted to shine since this will make the bad and stupid workers confront their inadequacies.

Companies that pay top staff high salaries regardless of results are not necessarily wasting money. CEOs have a symbolic, propagandistic function that companies use to promote themselves. This is especially the case where senior appointments are not made on merit but on considerations of equal opportunities and affirmative action which is then used by the company to trumpet its commitment to racial and sex diversity. Such appointees will be very well paid for doing very little.

They are simply window dressing and public relations puppets. Moreover, paying the CEO a vast salary which may or may not be related to his performance signals the power and status of the company itself: it is a message of corporate dominance and power. There is no difference at all between a wealthy individual donating millions of dollars to feed the starving, AIDS-ridden hordes of Africa and a top-listed company paying a CEO a large salary. Both are gestures of power and status designed to impress.

Sentamu worries about the effects of high levels of CEO pay on the morale of lower paid employees. He should ask himself what it must be like for a high-IQ and capable white employee in a top-rated Western company to be passed over for promotion in favour of a low-IQ incompetent black, all done in the name of the false god of diversity.

Moreover, if Sentamu is indeed concerned by the lack of any link between pay for CEOs and performance he might like to consider the beam in his own eye. Where, pray tell, is the link between the performance of the Church of England’s leadership, its CEOs, as it were, and the salaries, fringe benefits and pensions that Rowan Williams and Sentamu enjoy? It is quite clear to me, sinner and lover of money that I am that the Church of England has succumbed to heresy.

The Church of England openly promotes homosexuality and the ordination of women priests. It does not accept the teachings of Christ and has, on so many indicators, succumbed to the Satanic creed of “do what thou will shall be the whole of the law”. When the Church of England teaches that there are no privileged perspectives it destroys its own authority.

If there are no privileged perspectives then sin cannot be condemned, the sinners cannot be punished; there is nothing to worry about when Christians are persecuted by all those nice Muslims or when Muslims try to establish no-go areas in England. Why should any Englishman accept anything said in the name of the Church of England when the church itself rejects Holy Scripture and openly colludes with its enemies and the enemies of England?

Again, and given Sentamu’s concern for what he considers to be the high pay enjoyed by CEOs, I find it strange that he has nothing to say about the grotesque mismatch between the rates of pay enjoyed by senior figures in the public sector and their generally shoddy performance: university vice-chancellors are overpaid bureaucrats and have inflicted long-term damage on their institutions by permitting reckless expansion; social services consistently fail to protect little boys and girls from sub-human perverts and the violently retarded; those charged with securing our borders let criminals and illegal immigrants come and go at their will; and the police are too frightened to act against non-white criminals; NHS hospitals resemble death camps where the old, weak and vulnerable are subjected to selections based on indifference, where they are abused, starved, mocked, dehydrated and, where, far too often, they are exposed to the not so tender mercies of Third Worlders masquerading as doctors and nurses.

Local government is yet another example of public sector incompetence. The monopoly enjoyed by local government means that these bodies can impose confiscatory and rapacious levels of council tax regardless of their sub-standard performance and, of course, these councils pay themselves all kinds of bonuses for meeting spurious government targets.

If thousands of welfare parasites and immigrants who live on the backs of others live in a particular local authority there is very little chance that those in work and who pay for the flat-screen televisions and trainers coveted by the feckless can change this state of affairs through the ballot box: parasites simply outnumber the responsible hosts; indigenous whites – who supposedly do not exist - have effectively been disenfranchised by immigration.

One of the worst examples of overpaid public employees is the BBC. As a body funded by a license fee, a viewing tax, and one that can levy a tax even if you do not watch the BBC, there is an exceptionally powerful case for mandating that the full salary, privileges, pension provisions and any other benefits enjoyed by its senior personnel be published in full every year. Were the BBC a privately funded entity there would be no grounds for such disclosure.

Sentamu’s exploitation of poverty to attack successful companies is the standard method used by Marxist agitators and those who are determined to ignore human nature. People who choose not to eat properly, who smoke, who consider a subscription to satellite television to be an essential item of expenditure rather than proper clothing for their children, women who have child after child to different fathers, who buy expensive consumer trash on a credit card, do not live in poverty: they are stupid, feckless and incompetent. They know that no matter how depraved and reckless their behaviour that welfare payments paid by people in work will secure them a roof over their heads and the misguided sympathy from people like Sentamu.

The person who is quite able to survive on a modest income but cannot afford a Mercedes or a long-haul holiday is not poor. It is not a matter of any moral, social or religious concern that that he must do without high-status and conspicuous consumption which others can afford.

Third-World immigrants who have entered Britain and who exploit the welfare generosity of this country are not poor. In this country they enjoy a standard of living which would be impossible in the failed Third-World states whence they come. This is why they come here of course. Sentamu, an African, is well aware of this state of affairs. Rather than attacking British companies he should turn his attention to the race war being waged by his fellow Africans against whites in South Africa. Why does the Church of England remain so silent about this genocide by stealthy instalments?

In a still relatively free country, such as England, inequalities of income and social status are inevitable and desirable. Those who have the talents to succeed have a good chance of succeeding. This is why Sentamu hates the Western free market economies since it rewards some and ignores others, highlighting these innate differences. In this world opportunities are never equal and never can be. People who are differentiated by innately superior and inferior levels of intelligence, knowledge and the all-important work ethic will not produce the same outcomes.

The more conditions are rendered equal the greater the role played by innate factors. Social mobility cannot be open to all since not all will be able to exploit the available opportunities. Those that can enjoy greater socio-economic status will achieve the rewards which go with such status. Divisions by class and status are normal. If Sentamu wishes to remove these differentiated outcomes he must be party to the destruction of a society which rewards individual achievement.

Sentamu’s vision of a more caring and equal society is one of compulsory equality and even higher levels of taxation to support an ever growing welfare parasite class. I take it for granted that Sentamu’s hideous vision for my country means that immigration controls shall be formally abolished so that millions more indigent and unemployable Africans can overwhelm us. Naturally the indigenous population shall be expected to care for these immigrants and make them feel needed and place them on an equal footing with the English. If we English do not make them feel welcome then obviously we are somehow evil, racist and so on, (→ ∞).

Sentamu states that: ‘Great wealth has for so long been seen as a mark of status’ and that we have to change this state of affairs. To this end, Sentamu proposes two changes. First, those who in his words ‘who have already rewarded themselves most handsomely’ would not be acknowledged in the Queen’s Honours List. Second, he suggest that in order to put a stop to tax avoidance people should be encouraged to tick a box on their tax returns indicating that they have no objection to having the amount they have paid in tax made public.

Sentamu’s first proposal confirms his pitiful understanding of wealth and wealth creation. Wealth creation is inextricably linked to innovation and technological success. It is right and proper that we recognise and reward innovation. Why should a highly successful inventor – there are no highly successful inventors in Uganda – who makes vast sums of money be excluded from being honoured by my Queen?

The second proposal has nothing to do with tax avoidance (Sentamu does not seem to grasp the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion) and everything to do with arousing envy and resentment against those who are successful. Were Sentamu’s proposals to be taken seriously they would lead to a society in which all innovation would cease, or all the innovators would be driven away, and one which would regress to social and economic stagnation and thence to decline. The green pus of envy, the resentment of the successful, which is the hallmark of the social leveller, oozes from Sentamu’s proposals. Sentamu should begin his quest inside the institution that employs him.

If he is so concerned about the connection between wealth and status what does he propose to do to reduce the wealth of the Church of England and its drive to maintain its undeserved status, a status based on its loyalty to England which it has now cast aside? Sentamu, the Ugandan, should bear in mind that the Church of England is a Church of England and a Church for England. The Church of England was not intended to minister to the spiritual needs, whatever they are, of the Third World. In any case, Africans prefer sangomas, muti, killing albinos and cannibalism. If that suits them, fine. Just stay in Africa where they and their mumbo-jumbo belong.

Instead of berating his white hosts for their success and wealth, I suggest that Sentamu returns to his native Africa and preaches the gospel of wealth creation to his fellow Africans instructing them that it is a sin to live as international-aid parasites on the donations of the white man.

Africans must learn to stand alone or perish. Sentamu should also lecture his fellow Africans that they must put a stop to their selfish and destructive breeding otherwise they will all starve to death. The time will come when even the white man’s agricultural prowess will not be able to feed the billions of clamouring, voracious, black mouths never mind the seething masses of India, Pakistan, China, Central and South America. Sentamu should also start to lecture Mugabe and his fellow Marxist savages, Mandela et al, that dispossessing and murdering successful white farmers is not a very smart move in a continent threatened by the spectre of mass starvation.

Frank Ellis, 13th November 2011

Reference:Sarah's Blog

2011-11-19T07:06:00.001-08:00

90% of immigrants to the UK live
in England, say Migration-Watch

More than 90% of immigrants to the UK live in England, meaning increased problems with overcrowding, new research has claimed.

Migration Watch UK said it had completed a study of immigration and found that, of the 7.1 million foreign-born people in Britain, 6.6 million of them live in England - 93% of the group. Scotland is home to 326,000 foreigners, while there are 150,000 immigrants in Wales and 100,000 in Northern Ireland.

The campaign group said its research had also shown England is already one of the most crowded countries in the world. Migration Watch UK said ONS figures suggested the English population is set to grow by another 4.3 million immigrants over the next 16 years.

The group's chairman Sir Andrew Green said: "The immigration lobby like to talk about the UK, obscuring the fact that England is six times as crowded as Scotland.

"Since the vast majority of immigrants come to England, it is England's place in the league table that counts. Leaving aside city states and small islands, England lies sixth among the most crowded countries in the world.

"As people sit in traffic jams or squeeze onto their morning trains it will be clearly ridiculous to claim that their eyes are deceiving them and there is not a problem simply because places like the Maldives or Mayotte have higher population densities than England."

2011-11-15T04:50:00.001-08:00

The Rayleigh Central By-election

There is to be a by-election on the 1st of December 2011, for the Rayleigh Central ward on Rochford District Council.

These are the candidates -

John Hayter, English Democrats

Elena Black, Liberal Democrats

Cheryl Roe, Conservative

Elena Black is standing for the Liberal Democrats. A party that has lost all its credibility with the electorate.

1. The Lib-Dems lied about University Tuition Fees

Remember this?

Nick Clegg in Cambridge with his pledge not to increase tuition fees during last year's election campaign.

The poster reads

I Pledge,

TO VOTE AGAINST

ANY INCREASE IN FEES

in the next parliament

and to pressure the

government to introduce

A FAIRER ALTERNATIVE

In December last year, just 6 months after the General Election, MPs voted on whether to allow universities to increase tuition fees up to £9,000 p.a.

323 MPs voted for the increase, 302 voted against.

The rise in fees was approved by just 21 votes.

Of the Liberal Democrat MPs, 28 voted with the Government to increase fees, 21 voted against and eight abstained.

Without the support of the 28 Liberal Democrat MPs the government would have lost the vote.

2. The Lib-Dems lied about an EU referendum

In the run up to last year's General Election, the Lib-Dems called for a referendum on the EU.

Here is the petition launched by the Liberal Democrats for a referendum on EU membership.

The Liberal Democrats believe we should have a real vote on Europe – whether we should be in Europe or out.

We have been blocked from having a vote on this in Parliament, and all the Conservatives are proposing is a limited referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

However, the public back our position by a margin of 2:1: twice as many people think a referendum should be on whether we stay in Europe or not rather than only on the Lisbon Treaty.

We want that real referendum because if Britain is to stride forward confidently into the 21st century and tackle global issues like climate change and terrorism, we need to decide once and for all whether our future lies within the European Union, or outside it.

50 Liberal Democrats including Nick Clegg opposed the motion.

The Lib-Dems have broken their promises on major policies that affect millions of people. Hundreds of thousands of cash-strapped students have seen their tuition fees trebled because the Lib-Dems backtracked on their election pledge.

When Lib-Dem MPs backtracked on a pledge to support a referendum on the EU, they sought to deny the British people a say in their own future.

The Liberal Democrats are a party who will say anything to get elected and can no longer be trusted. The only sensible option is to shun their candidates at election time. The Rayleigh Central by-election is a good place to start.

2011-11-14T23:19:00.001-08:00

In Southend, Brits are being ignored in favour of ethnic minorities

Ethnic minorities now make up 15%
of the population of Southend-On-Sea

An outspoken councillor claims white British people are being ignored as a result of the efforts to help Southend's ethnic minorities.

Ian Robertson, a Tory councillor for Chalkwell, fears "ghettos" will be created due to the emphasis on aiding ethnic groups.

He made his point after hearing a talk by community activist John Barber, at the latest meeting of the Chalkwell Ward Residents' Association.

Mr Barber from Southend Community in Harmony, revealed how ethnic minority groups had more than doubled in Southend since 2001 - and these communities needed more help and guidance.

He said: "I have worked for Turning Tides which helps the disadvantaged in wards like Milton, Kursaal and Victoria.

"We tried to energise and lift up the community. One thing we realised was we need a more powerful Zimbabwe community association in the town to address issues they face.

"Some are asylum seekers and some are economic migrants.

They face issues of cultural adaptation and issues of trauma. We encourage them so they can find the appropriate means of rectifying these situations."

He added how a study looking at the ethnicity of school children strongly suggested numbers from overseas were "growing year on year."

However Mr Robertson questioned whether groups, such as Mr Barber's, were actually doing enough to help the indigenous population - and they could in fact be making matters worse by isolating ethnic minorities.

He said: "You haven't once mentioned the British community.

"I am concerned we have to be very careful not to create little ghettos. I am concerned we are going to lose focus on the British community."

Mr Barber replied by saying the majority of homeless people in Southend were white British who received just as much help from community groups.

He added "The Zimbabwean community very much wants to engage in all society, and in fact, they want to help and support us, not the other way round."

Earlier Mr Barber had told the meeting how a latest study estimated that in 2001 just 7% of the Southend population was ethnic, compared to between 14 and 16 per cent now.

He said "What we are finding in recent years is the population in Southend is increasing because of an influx of Eastern Europeans, particularly the Polish who could number as many as 2,000 along with other Europeans.

"We also have a Fillipino population. many of whom were recruited by Southend Hospital and besides them we also have people from every part of Africa, particularly Zimbabwe."

Reference:Southend Echo

Is Councillor Ian Robertson Right?

Of course he is. Southend Council is one of the most politically correct councils in the country.

Southend council encourages immigrants to come to Southend by offering them everything on a plate. Diversity is being promoted at every available opportunity.

This statement on Southend Council's website tells you all you need to know about Southend council.

"Our vision is to 'create a better Southend' by placing equality and diversity at the heart of everything we do, and in doing so deliver excellent public services".

The council website boasts that there are now 125 languages spoken in Southend as if it's something to be proud of. It's not, this is England not an outpost of the United Nations.

For the long suffering tax payers of the borough, it means millions of pounds of their taxes are being diverted to provide translation services for ungrateful migrants, when the money could be put to better use elsewhere.

Southend Council's love affair with diversity has been a disaster for Southend.

* Immigration has swelled the ranks of the unemployed. There are now 25 applicants applying for every job vacancy in Southend. Southend is now the worst place in the whole of South England in which to find a job.

* Southend's primary schools are in crisis due to high immigrant birth rates. Most schools in the borough are at bursting point, forcing the council to divert millions of pounds of taxpayer's money into a massive schools expansion programme. Some schools in Southend have reached the tipping point where the number of foreign children outnumber English children.

* Immigration has placed a huge strain on Southend's social housing stock. Planning laws are being relaxed by the Tory government to make it easier for developers to build on Green Belt land. This will result in the destruction and the concreting of the countryside around Southend in order to build housing estates for newly arrived immigrant populations?

The good news is that Southend's deranged Lib-Lab-Con councillors are gradually being booted out of office by the voting public. The electorate have started to show a preference for Independent councillors over the Lib-Lab-Con community wreckers and diversity freaks. There are now eight Independent councillors sitting on Southend council.

Hopefully, the growing support for the English Democrats in Southend will also play a part in getting rid of more of Southend's disastrous establishment politicians.

2011-11-13T00:55:00.001-08:00

Southend English Democrats lay a wreath at

the Remembrance Day service in Southend

2011-11-06T00:52:00.000-07:00

Southend's Primary Schools Are In
Crisis Due To Rising Birth Rates

The birth rate for English people in England has for many decades been below replacement level. By English it is meant the indigenous or ethnic English.

Therefore,:rising birthrates are in large measure a result of recent immigration, officials accept that around 70 per cent of the population increase is down to migrants.

Immigration raised the number of women of childbearing age by around 300,000 between 2002 and 2007. Latest records shows that one in four babies is born to a mother who was born outside Britain.

According to Southend Council's website, more than 10% of Southend's population is now made up of ethnic minorities and there are 125 languages spoken in the borough. As a result, Southend is now experiencing an immigrant baby boom which has caused a crisis in Southend's primary schools.

Most schools in the borough are at bursting point, forcing the council to divert millions of pounds of taxpayer's money into a massive schools expansion programme. This is money which could have been better spent elsewhere, such as on front-line services for the sick and the elderly.

This rise in birth rates in Southend has been reported in the Southend Echo but they carefully avoid any mention of it being fuelled by immigration.

The following article is from the:Southend Echo

School's £370k bonus to take in extra pupils

St Mary's, Prittlewell

A school will be handed up to £370,000 to expand and deal with the anticipated shortfall of school places in Prittlewell.

Southend Council has agreed to pour cash into the coffers of St Mary's Church of England Primary School in Boston Avenue.

The school which is already at bursting point, needs to expand in 2013 to cope with the rising birth rates in its catchment area.

Council chiefs envisage the money being used to buy some of the neighbouring Boston Lofts flats in Sweyne Avenue if, and when, they come on to the market.

The homes will then either be demolished or reworked to create the additional space for new school buildings.

Sue Hadley, the council's head of children's commissioning and learning infrastructure, said: "The council has been looking at ways in which the St Mary's school site can be expanded to provide extra provision due to the increasing local birth rate.

"Money has been set aside for this purpose, and one option which has been explored is the possibility of purchasing the flats adjacent to the school."

In November last year, Southend council bosses revealed a massive expansion programme was neded at primary schools.

Birth rates in the borough have risen in recent years, from 1,914 in 2004/2005 to 2,232 in 2009/10.

By cramming extra pupils into existing schools, which will be given extra cash to cope with the influx, the authority hopes to find enough spaces for all youngsters next September.

But the situation is predicted to reach crisis point the following year, when several schools will be required to increase the number of pupils they accept.

As well as St Mary's, council chiefs plan to expand another six schools - Blenheim Primary and Darlinghurst primary in Leigh, Milton Hall and Westborough in Westcliff, and Hamstel Infant and Junior and Porters Grange in Southend.

All will be required to take at least 30 extra pupils every year. Council chiefs plan to spend about £2.3million in total to fund the extensions, which may include new buildings or a reworking of school layouts.

No properties in Sweyne Avenue are believed to be on the market at present, and the school is not thought to have made any offers.

According to its website, St Mary's has 60 places for children in each year group, and can admit anyone who applies up to this limit.

However, as the only aided Church of England foundation school in the borough, when over subscribed it may allocate places in accordance with an admissions policy based on its Christian principles.

This policy gives priority to children from families who worship at St Mary's Church, Prittlewell.

No one from the school was available for comment.

2011-11-05T06:46:00.000-07:00

SIGN THE MIGRATION WATCH PETITION!

Migration watch have launched a petition, the aim of which is to force a debate in the House of Commons about the shocking levels of immigration into this country.

100,000 signatures are required for an e-petition to be sent to a Back Bench Committee to be considered for a debate in Parliament.

83,676 people have signed at the time of this article.

Quote -

No to 70 million

Responsible department: Home Office

Over the past ten years the government has permitted mass immigration despite very strong public opposition reflected in numerous opinion polls. We express our deep concern that, according to official figures, the population of the UK is expected to reach 70 million within 20 years with two thirds of the increase due to immigration. While we recognise the benefits that properly controlled immigration could bring to our economy and society, this population increase, which is the equivalent of building seven cities the size of Birmingham, will have a huge impact both on our quality of life and on our public services yet the public has never been consulted. So we call on the government to take all necessary steps to get immigration down to a level that will stabilise our population as close to the present level as possible and, certainly, well below 70 million."

The Petition can be signed:Here

2011-11-05T02:57:00.000-07:00

Ethnically Cleansing the English
An article by Paul Weston

“A West which has not yet understood that whites, in a world become too small for its inhabitants, are now a minority and that the proliferation of other races dooms our race, my race, irretrievably to extinction in the century to come, if we hold fast to our present moral principles”

Jean Raspail, 1982, The Camp Of The Saints

It is understandable that the vast majority of the heavily propagandised English populace remain unaware of the continental shift in immigrant demographics and birth rates that will relegate the indigenous population of England under the age of 40 to ethnic minority status in their homeland within twenty years.

Understandable, admittedly, but if these recipients of a progressive education and 24/7 cradle-to-grave state-sponsored brainwashing could remove their liberal blinkers and gaze in horror at their surroundings through the eyes of their grandparents, then they could only have themselves to blame, because their dispossession was carried out in full view of those that would not see, and in retrospect how could there be any other outcome than gradual extinction when one considers exactly what out socialist rulers have carried out over the last few decades?

1.		Identified a small yet wealthy country populated by a rapidly declining indigenous race representing less than 1% of the global population, and whose territorial homeland makes up less than 1% of global habitable area.
2.		Established a Welfare State with a legal requirement to provide free housing, food, education, health, translation services and pin money to those in need, with the most needy being judged solely on the number of children they have.
3.		Thrown open the doors of this tiny country to the teeming billions of the poverty-stricken third world, whilst making sure the multiple wives of Muslim males fully understood that the more children they produced, the bigger the house and welfare cheque they would receive from the State, even though polygamy is illegal in England.
4.		Encouraged the new arrivals to take pride in the culture and religion of the third-world country they had escaped from and “educated” them into developing an unhealthy animosity toward their host country’s imperialist and oppressive past.
5.		Demonised the ancient and indigenous population as institutionally racist from the age of five and enacted “hate” laws which are then predominately used to criminalise and silence the indigenous people who speak out against their territorial and cultural dispossession.
6.		Praised multiculturalism as a positive and Islam as a religion of peace, then sat back to watch the results of their social experiment — what could possibly go wrong?

Liberal progressives residing in fine mansions on Hampstead Heath will tell you nothing could go wrong; that mass immigration is nothing other than a positive boon, an unarguable and incontrovertible truth that must be patiently and condescendingly explained to the uneducated and the unwashed, even as the Arabella Allendes and Montmorency Guevaras over-glamorise and under-pay the scurrying, forelock tugging, cute little brown people whose multi-hued efforts in tending to the gardens, kitchen, laundry and children of the servant owning socialist class enable the latter to do the more important things in life, such as denouncing capitalism in between producing money making yet soul-destroying reality TV shows.

For the white working class, however, those long-forgotten stalwarts of the country who failed to play their designated role in the long term plans of Mr Marx and Mr Engels, thereby earning the enduring hatred of the cuckolded intellectuals, it means nothing other than population replacement, or in the cruder yet more honest language of the betrayed working man rarely encountered at progressive Hampstead dinner parties, ethnic cleansing.

Is this too strong a description? Patricia Morgan of The Salisbury Review doesn’t think so. In 2006 she wrote an article entitled Ethnic Cleansing in East London which focussed primarily on Tower Hamlets and the dispossession of white working-class Londoners who, having survived Adolf Hitler and the Luftwaffe, subsequently failed to hold back the tidal wave of Socialism and multiculturalism so avidly promoted by the British Labour Party.

Ms Morgan recounts a conversation with a left-wing friend who was slowly becoming aware of the results of Socialisms warped multicultural ideology:
- - - - - - - - -

When one of my old Labour Party acquaintances expressed anxiety over Islamic terrorism, I asked him why he had always been so keen on getting as many immigrants here as possible. He told me that he had been ‘trying to make the revolution‘. So, while it had not been possible to storm Buckingham Palace and set up Soviets in Westminster, you could still change the population and supplant the hated ‘other’.

But as with all Socialist policies, the anti-Midas touch of the Liberal/Left duly performed as it has always performed, and the hated “other” turned out not be the bowler-hatted bourgeoisie, but the cloth-capped working class English themselves, whose naïve belief in Socialism’s promise of a Brave New World failed to understand the chosen people were not white but brown, not Christian but Islamic, and not English but members of any third-world race whose culture was irredeemably at odds with that of the host culture.

Patricia Morgan goes on to describe the accelerating displacement of the indigenous East-Enders, as the new arrivals from Bangladesh went straight to the head of the housing queue by dint of their family size, averaging in good Muslim tradition seven children per wife. You will note I do not say per couple, because many Muslim men in Tower Hamlets routinely have four wives each, all “legally” supported by the British State in order they may father up to twenty-eight children in a literal tsunami of polygamous demographic warfare imported from one-well villages in Bangladesh to the streets of our forefathers via Heathrow Terminal 1.

Frank Dobson, a Labour MP and traitor who attained Ministerial rank in Tony Blair’s cabinet, was on hand to astutely encourage the displacement of his party’s historical core vote. Speaking to a Bangladeshi audience in Tower Hamlets a few years ago, he encouraged them to help themselves to everything on offer from the State; nothing was too much, and no matter how much was taken, it could never fully recompense the oppressed of the non-white world for the misery and depredations they had historically suffered under the boot of the racialist-imperialist-oppressor that was Britain.

And today we live with the results of this treason and betrayal. Tower Hamlets is now called “Banglatown” where, with the exception of a few vicars otherwise known as clerical punch bags, there are virtually no whites left, just as there are very few whites in many other areas of London where the non-white population now amounts to 42% with a full one-third of all “Londoners” born outside the UK.

If you think words such as colonisation, population replacement and ethnic cleansing are a tad too strong, or perhaps even xenophobic, then please take a look at this video of cultural enrichment shot in the streets of Wembley, yet another area of London which the indigenous race has quietly vacated in a wave of white flight that in 2007 saw 340,000 Londoners celebrate diversity by foot, train, boat and plane.

And England’s other cities are going precisely the same way in precisely the same manner. The non-indigenous birth rate now averages an extraordinary 35% nationally, which realistically means 60-70% in the cities alone, thus consigning indigenous English children in Birmingham, Bradford, Oldham, London, Luton and Leicester to an ethnic minority in their own land where up to 150 different languages are spoken in their schools; a fate awaiting English children in all our cities and towns within a decade, and the entire country before 2030.

Tracking ethnic demographics is not an exact science, but it is generally recognised that the ethnic minority population of Britain is approximately 15% which equates to 9 million out of a population of 60 million.

However, the indigenous British population contains many old people, leaving only 50% of the population under 40 years of age, whilst the non-indigenous population tend to be much younger by dint of their higher birth rate, with 75% typically representing those aged under 40.

If we use these statistics, the population of Great Britain under the age of 40 looks like this:

Indigenous Population 2009: 25.5 million
Non-Indigenous Population 2009: 6.75 million

But the current birth rate differentials cause the indigenous population to decline by 25% per generation whilst the non-indigenous population has historically doubled per generation, with the Muslim population growing ten times faster than the rest of society.

If we project this data forward to 2030, the figures look like this:

Indigenous Population 2030:		19 million
Non-Indigenous Population 2030:		13.5 million

On top of this we need to take the following into account:

Approximately 200,000 Brits emigrate every year.

Approximately 200,000 legal immigrants arrive every year.

Approximately 300,000 illegal immigrants enter England every year in order to reach government productivity targets.

If we project this data forward to 2030, the figures look like this:

Indigenous Population 2030:		15 million
Non-Indigenous Population 2030:		23.5 million

To become an ethnic minority in your own country over just a few decades suggests that government policy, as has recently been revealed, was indeed to ethnically cleanse the English from their homeland, although the multiculturalists who committed this wicked act of treason and betrayal never couched it in quite such plain language, preferring instead to frame mass immigration as a means of achieving social objectives.

These figures are not hysterical, nor are they the obtained from the research of paranoid periodicals. In 2007 The Guardian reported that Britain was heading toward a population of 70 million by 2031, but did not mention that the addition of an extra 10 million people whilst the indigenous population was simultaneously declining and emigrating required the importation of an awful lot more than just an extra 10 million immigrants.

Indeed, the liberals and the leftists are only too aware the indigenous population is being ethnically cleansed. In 2000 The Guardian predicted a white minority Britain by 2100, therefore tacitly admitting acceptance of population replacement, but erring only on the time frame necessary to achieve racial cleanliness.

The card-carrying NUJ journalist who penned the article was no doubt loath to take into account the racial and cultural dispossession of his contemporaries under the age of 40, nor could he foresee the massive increase in immigration since 2000, nor indeed the unmentioned and rather curious instance of population replacement taking place in England alone — Scotland and Wales having escaped the fate Scottish politicians have inflicted on the Auld Enemy.

Another fact rarely mentioned but no less pertinent is that Socialists always lie. The figures used for this article are sourced from a government that has a vested interest in keeping the real horror of what they have been up to from the voters. Only a handful of marginally honest Labour politicians will actually admit the numbers are far higher than official figures suggest, yet they still deny any knowledge as to the real numbers of foreigners in the country.

The Independent suggested the population could already be as high as 80 million, based on supermarket food sales, a figure borne out by the number of National Insurance cards in existence, which are essential if you wish to work or draw benefits. Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis tells us there are 76 million NI cards equating to 29 million over and above eligible British citizens.

One only has to walk around our towns and cities to realise that population replacement is a substantive and rapidly accelerating fact. British MP Ann Cryer, who represents Keighley, a town near Bradford, estimates that 1 million Pakistanis came to Britain over the last four years to work, study or marry, with imported wives making up 80% of all marriages in her area, where local police chiefs describe community cohesion between the indigenous and the non-indigenous tribes as “nerve-jangling.”

The anger amongst the indigenous working classes is palpable, and it is growing. As the working class EDL take to the streets stentoriously chanting “We want our country back, we want our culture back” and the middle class socialist students who joined the Islamist-infiltrated UAF — as a sop to their inability to score with either a football or a member of the opposite sex — respond with girlishly high pitched squeals of “Nazi scum off our streets”, then I see no reason to defer my prediction of European civil war by 2025.

British Home Secretary Alan Johnson does not share my apocalyptic vision of potential civil unrest, claiming he did not lie awake at night worrying about the prospect of a 70 million British population and that he enjoyed living in a multicultural society; but now we know this is just a lie to facilitate a far greater evil. Perhaps Mr Johnson’s attention should be drawn to the UN’s definition of genocide:

Article 2: In the present convention genocide means any of the acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or religious group, as such:
[…]
2c: Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part…

Although the UN did not really draw up their charters with the best interests of white people in mind, that does not mean they can be ignored. When Bonnie Greer, a foreign, feisty feminist of colour had the effrontery to tell an outnumbered and visibly intimidated Nick Griffin on “Question Time” that there was no such thing as the indigenous English people, she was greeted with wild applause by the baying audience of hand-picked BBC rent-a-mob impartiality, but was she aware that her denial of a nationality and culture to whites that was afforded to all non-whites was covered by another UN Declaration?

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states the following:

Article 6: Every indigenous individual has a right to a nationality.
Article 8.1: Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
Article 8.2: States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.

Bearing in mind the European Union wishes to import another twenty million migrants from Asia and Africa into the EU, when our children are not only rapidly approaching an ethnically cleansed and ethnic minority status, but are also brainwashed into accepting the dispossession of their nationality, their territory and their culture, then perhaps a Hampstead Thinker could explain to me why it is “racist” to resist such a genocidal political policy, and why various UN Declarations quoted with enormous reverence when applied to the Palestinians and various other pets of the socialist elite are deemed inapplicable when it is the indigenous English who are the genuine victims of ethnic cleansing.

But England of course is just a microcosm of what is a global phenomenon. The third world is booming and exporting its youth bulge to the first world, bringing with it a religion and a culture unsuited to democracy and peaceful co-existence. This can only lead to catastrophe for the indigenous populations. We have seen what happened after the Islamic takeover of majority Christian Lebanon; a 15 year religious civil war that took the lives of close to 10% of the population and wounded 33% — half of whom suffered from lifetime disabilities. So what exactly is the rationale behind importing Islam to the West?

Liberals tell us colonialism was evil, so why is the colonisation of white countries by non-white peoples — in far greater numbers than whites were ever sent to non-white countries — a matter of celebration? In 2050 the streets of Pakistani and Bangladeshi cities will be thronged with Pakistanis and Bangladeshis; there will be no white people there, just as there will be no white people on the streets of London, Luton, Paris, Rotterdam, Brussels, Malmö, etc. etc.

The Jean Raspail quote at the beginning of this article should not be taken lightly. Whites made up almost 30% of the global population in 1950, but by 2050 they will be down to single digits, and producing just 5% of the new-born. For a race of people with such a tenuous grasp of life on this unfriendly planet, to be forced into a minority within your own homeland, which is your only point of defence, is an act of criminality without precedence.

Reference:Paul Weston

2011-11-02T03:06:00.000-07:00

Robots or Immigrants?

Japan, like many other countries, is facing huge challenges in caring for its aging population. In Japan 21% of the population is over 65. This will increase to 40% by 2055.

Hospitals in Japan are stretched to the limit because there are not enough nurses to cope.

Japan's low birth rate means foreign health workers will need to be recruited but there is a widespread opposition to immigration in the country as many Japanese value an ethnically homogeneous society.

In fact, Japanese people are more willing to let a friendly Japanese machine care for their elderly than a foreign nurse. The Japanese birthrate is the lowest in the world at just 1.3 babies per woman and has gone negative, more people dying than being born.

Japan has several options, increase the birthrate, recruit foreign workers or develop robots who will do the work of humans.

Research and development of assistive robotic technologies has been going on for decades in Japan. It's now beginning to show results.

This nurse robot was developed by Kokoro Co Ltd and ATR

The skin is composed of silicone and appears highly realistic

If Japan chooses to use robots instead of flooding their country with immigrants, then in 50 years time, Japan will still belong to the Japanese. An ethnically homogeneous country that will have preserved its culture and way of life and honored the sacrifices made by those who have fought for Japan throughout history.

It will not suffer the devastating effects of mass immigration that England has to put up with, such as -

* Massive housing shortages.
* Spiraling crime rates.
* Riots.
* A resurgence of diseases like TB which had long been eradicated.
* Christianity under threat from Islam.
* Churches being converted into mosques.
* Our culture being replaced by alien cultures.

* Schools full of foreign children who can't speak English.

* Overcrowded roads and the additional pollution associated with it.

* Many inner city areas which are now no-go areas for whites.
* People fleeing from their hometowns to escape the colonisation.
* Our own people leaving the country in droves to get away from
"multi cultural" Britain.
* Destruction of local communities.
* Increased racial tensions.
* Lowered wages.
* Higher taxes.
* Loss of common language.
* Depletion of natural resources.
* Environmental degradation.
* Vote fraud.
* Higher auto insurance premiums.
* A sub-standard NHS where foreign nurses can't speak English.
* Social conflict.
* Destruction of the Green belt to build homes for immigrants.
* Barbaric halal slaughter.

Even the cemeteries are running out of space, some cemeteries in England have now started to reuse old graves.

Reference:BBC

Robotic Nurse Development in Japan

2011-10-31T01:55:00.000-07:00

BANKRUPT NASTY PEOPLE

THE British National Party is set to face allegations this week that it is a dangerous, bankrupt and fraudulent organisation.

An unfair dismissal case brought by a disgruntled ex-employee could put the final nail in the coffin of the crumbling party.

The far-right organisation’s head Nick Griffin is expected to give evidence at the hearing in Belfast this week which has allegations of theft and kidnapping hanging over it.

Griffin is expected to be surrounded by strong security when he makes his Belfast trip.

It comes as furious creditors claim they are owed up to £700,000 by the party. A claim denied by the BNP.

Former administrator Marian Thomas says she was sacked after she raised concerns over allegedly fraudulent claims made by the BNP.

She alleges that she was instructed by the party’s treasurer to alter invoices and stamp an outstanding invoice as “paid”. This is denied by the treasurer.

She says the invoices were submitted to the Electoral Commission and had been altered in order for it to appear that the BNP had complied with the law on election spending.

Thomas claimed on BBC’s Panorama earlier this month that she was held against her will by BNP “heavies” demanding she hand over incriminating documents.

The hearing comes as the BNP, which has been rocked by savage infighting, holds its annual conference in a secret venue believed to be in Liverpool this weekend.

The party is under investigation by the European Union and the Met Police for alleged fraud and breaches of electoral law.

Simon Cressy, from the anti- fascist group Hope Not Hate, says time is running out for the BNP. He said: “We’ve been saying for ages the BNP is as financially bankrupt as it is morally.”

Last month Griffin’s Skoda was repossessed by bailiffs acting on a court order.

Weeks earlier BNP manager Adam Walker was ordered to pay £25,000 to a former employee after a judge ruled senior officials could be held responsible for the party debt.

A number of small businesses in Northern Ireland, where the BNP had offices until last Christmas, say they are owed large sums of money.

Belfast-based businessman and anti-abortion campaigner Jim Dowson, the BNP’s former financial guru, claims he is owed more than £160,000 by the party, which he has left.

It has also been alleged that families of senior BNP members were visited by “Ulster heavies” looking for cash.

Nine people in Belfast and two in England were arrested on suspicion of blackmail but charges were later dropped.

Cressy said: “The BNP is in a desperate mess. After a disaster at the 2010 General and council elections it has turned in on itself.

“Membership has shrunk to below 7,000 and not even the party’s two MEPs talk to each other, preferring to fight a bitter war of words over the internet and Twitter.

“It is tearing the party apart.”

Griffin has refuted the kidnap allegations.

He said: “Ms Thomas was made redundant by the party and has made a claim to an employment tribunal. Curiously, she has made no mention of this in her ET1 form. Nor am I aware of any complaint ever having been made to the police.

“She has never complained to me. If such a complaint was made, it seems bizarre that no one was ever approached about it.”

Reference:Daily Star

2011-10-31T01:32:00.000-07:00

The Liberal Democrats Exposed:
A party of hypocrites who lied to the voters

In the run up to last year's General Election, the Lib-Dems called for a referendum on the EU.

Here is the petition launched by the Liberal Democrats for a referendum on EU membership. MPs from that party might want to remind themselves of what they promised in the run-up to the general election:

The Liberal Democrats believe we should have a real vote on Europe – whether we should be in Europe or out.

We have been blocked from having a vote on this in Parliament, and all the Conservatives are proposing is a limited referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

However, the public back our position by a margin of 2:1: twice as many people think a referendum should be on whether we stay in Europe or not rather than only on the Lisbon Treaty.

We want that real referendum because if Britain is to stride forward confidently into the 21st century and tackle global issues like climate change and terrorism, we need to decide once and for all whether our future lies within the European Union, or outside it.

50 Liberal Democrats including Nick Clegg opposed the motion:

Danny Alexander (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey), Norman Baker (Lewes), Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed), Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington), Annette Brooke (Dorset Mid & Poole North), Jeremy Browne (Taunton Deane), Malcolm Bruce (Gordon), Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam), Lorely Burt (Solihull), Vincent Cable (Twickenham), Sir Menzies Campbell (Fife North East), Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland), Nick Clegg (Sheffield Hallam), Michael Crockart (Edinburgh West), Edward Davey (Kingston & Surbiton), Tim Farron (Westmorland & Lonsdale), Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green), Andrew George (St Ives), Stephen Gilbert (St Austell & Newquay), Duncan Hames (Chippenham), Nick Harvey (Devon North), David Heath (Somerton & Frome), John Hemming (Birmingham Yardley), Martin Horwood (Cheltenham), Simon Hughes (Bermondsey & Old Southwark), Chris Huhne (Eastleigh), Mark Hunter (Cheadle), Julian Huppert (Cambridge), Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye & Lochaber), Norman Lamb (Norfolk North), David Laws (Yeovil), John Leech (Manchester Withington), Stephen Lloyd (Eastbourne), Tessa Munt (Wells), Alan Reid (Argyll & Bute), Dan Rogerson (Cornwall North), Bob Russell (Colchester), Sir Robert Smith (Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine), Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove), Ian Swales (Redcar), Jo Swinson (Dunbartonshire East), Sarah Teather (Brent Central), John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross), David Ward (Bradford East), Steve Webb (Thornbury & Yate), Mark Williams (Ceredigion), Roger Williams (Brecon & Radnorshire), Stephen Williams (Bristol West), Jenny Willott (Cardiff Central), Simon Wright (Norwich South).

The Lib-Dems are a party of lying scumbags and should never be trusted again.

2011-10-25T08:55:00.000-07:00

Five Essex MPs back referendum on Europe

FIVE Essex MPs defied David Cameron and voted in favour of a referendum on Europe.

They were -

John Baron (Basildon & Billericay), Douglas Carswell (Clacton), Bernard Jenkin (Harwich & Essex North), Priti Patel (Witham), John Whittingdale (Maldon).

MPs who opposed the motion calling for a referendum -

Simon Burns (Chelmsford), Jackie Doyle-Price (Thurrock), James Duddridge (Rochford & Southend East), Mark Francois (Rayleigh & Wickford), Robert Halfon (Harlow), Rebecca Harris (Castle Point), Sir Alan Haselhurst (Saffron Walden), Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest), Stephen Metcalfe (Basildon South & Thurrock East), Brooks Newmark (Braintree), Eric Pickles (Brentwood & Ongar), Bob Russell (Colchester).

David Amess, Conservative MP for Southend West was not on any list of MPs voting in the debate.

In an assault on the Prime Minister's authority, junior members of the Government quit to join the hordes of backbenchers voting for a national poll on EU membership.

As well as the 79 rebels, two Tory MPs abstained - by walking through both voting chambers - and a further two were discounted from the vote by acting as tellers.

High-profile rebels included Graham Brady, chairman of the influential backbench 1922 committee, and its secretary Mark Pritchard.

Select committee chairman also voted against the government, including John Whittingdale, Culture, Media and Sport, and Northern Ireland committee chairman Laurence Robertson.

Despite the rebellion, the referendum bid was overwhelmingly rejected by a majority of 372 but the result will provide minimal comfort for the stricken premier.

He held a round of last minute face-to-face meetings with eurosceptics in an attempt to talk them round and made a direct plea in the Commons for support.

But the calls failed to persuade many normally loyal MPs.

The previous largest Tory rebellion over Europe was in 1993, when 41 MPs defied John Major on the Maastricht Treaty, leaving a legacy that divided the party.

Reference:Southend Standard

Come the next General Election, remember that Southend's two Tory MPs do not respect the wishes of the electorate and do not deserve your vote.

Named and shamed -

James Duddridge, Conservative (Rochford & Southend East)

David Amess, Conservative (Southend West)

2011-10-23T01:25:00.000-07:00

75% Say 'Quit The EU Now'

AN OVERWHELMING 75 per cent of Britons would vote in a referendum to quit the EU or renegotiate the terms, a poll published exclusively by the Daily Express reveals today.

Given a choice to stay in or get out – without the option to renegotiate – 52 per cent would quit, 31 per cent would stay in, while the rest are “don’t knows”.

The findings mirror the massive support for the Daily Express crusade, Get Us Out Of The EU. The survey comes ahead of Monday’s Commons vote.

Prime Minister David Cameron and Labour leader Ed Miliband are both ordering a three-line whip to force MPs to vote against the motion – although at least 60 Tory rebels have signed in defiance.

The YouGov survey, commissioned by the Vote UK Out Of EU campaign, makes it clear what people want their elected representatives to do.

Jon Gaunt, chief executive of the campaign, said: “Our poll backs up what the brilliant Daily Express crusade has been saying for months.

“The great British public want a referendum and want out of the EU.

“This crusade started with one brave newspaper but now it has the backing of millions and millions of Britons and our voice will be heard and we will get our country back.

“We are all making history. Our poll is clearly a slap in the face for the political elite in general and David Cameron in particular.

“The British public want their MPs to vote with their conscience and represent their views and not slavishly follow David Cameron’s or Ed Miliband’s whips. Cameron talks about the big society. Perhaps he should listen to them on this big issue?

“In football terms, this is the equivalent of a failing manager ‘losing the dressing room’ – although in the Prime Minister’s case it would appear he has lost the dressing room, the board room and even his most loyal supporters behind his own goal.”

The poll found that more than two-thirds of all voters – 67 per cent – would like their MPs to vote in favour of the motion. In a stark warning to all three main party leaders, they include 78 per cent of Tory supporters, 59 per cent of Labour voters and 57 per cent of the traditionally pro-EU Lib Dems.

Nearly three-quarters of all voters want their MP to vote according to his or her personal view, and not be bowed by the party whips.

And although the result will not be legally binding, the same percentage think the Government should commit to taking the necessary action if a majority of MPs backed the motion by Conservative MP David Nuttall.

Mr Nuttall, whose motion had gained almost 80 signatures from both sides of the House, including at least 60 Tory rebels, said: “This poll shows how out of touch the leadership of all political parties are with the public on this issue.”

His motion gives MPs three choices – to stay in the EU, leave, or renegotiate terms to create a new trade-based relationship.

In the poll, 15 per cent would vote for the status quo, 28 per cent would vote to leave the EU and 47 per cent would vote to renegotiate membership terms.

The detailed findings also starkly illustrated the public’s frustration with the EU’s interference with huge areas of British life. More than half of those polled said they want more control over immigration, justice, employment, foreign affairs, economic development and defence.

Immigration was the biggest issue, with two-thirds of all voters, including 81 per cent of Tories and nearly 60 per cent of Labour supporters, saying this was the issue that would encourage them to vote Britain out of the EU.

Mr Cameron could be facing the biggest revolt of his 18 months in power. Mark Pritchard, secretary of the 1922 committee of Tory backbenchers, urged him to implement a non-binding, single-line whip on Monday. Without it, he forecast the Tory revolt could top 85 MPs.

Reference:The Express

2011-10-21T02:25:00.000-07:00

Italians Protect Their Culture

Italian town bans any new kebab shops or other 'ethnic food'

One of Italy's most upmarket coastal resorts has slapped a ban on the opening of kebab shops, chinese takeaways, Indian restaurants and other purveyors of "ethnic food".

Forte dei Marmi, a leafy beachfront retreat for politicians, artists and writers on the Tuscan coast, has rebutted accusations that the prohibition is xenophobic and small-minded.

The town's council, which passed the decree unanimously this week, said the ban also applied to more familiar "foreign" establishments such as burger joints and English-style pubs.

The move is the latest expression of a culinary nationalism that is sweeping the country, as Italians struggle to hold onto centuries-old culinary traditions in the face of globalisation and immigration.

"This measure has nothing to do with xenophobia – it is about protecting and valuing our culture," said Umberto Buratti, the centre-Left mayor of the town. "We would also say no to American hamburger chains." The ban is aimed at encouraging the survival of Tuscan and Italian cuisine, although existing "ethnic" restaurants will not be closed down.

"There's a sushi takeaway, although it's not in the town centre," said the mayor. "You will still be able to eat ethnic food, we just want to limit the number of outlets." Forte dei Marmi has become popular in recent years with rich Russian tourists and a restaurant serving Russian food opened recently.

But despite the millions of pounds that Russian holidaymakers pump into the economy each summer, no more will be allowed.

The ban on foreign food appears to have won resounding support from locals.

"Bravo for having the balls to stop the tide of foreign food invading Italy.

I wish my town would do the same," a Tuscan man wrote on the website of a local newspaper.

Notwithstanding a growing population of immigrants from Asia, Africa and Latin America, the majority of Italians are extremely conservative in their attitude towards unfamiliar food, preferring to stick to pizza, pasta and polenta.

More than 40 per cent have never eaten foreign offerings such as sushi, curries and kebabs, according to a survey released this week by Coldiretti, the national agricultural association.

"Notwithstanding the rapid spread of restaurants offering ethnic food, only seven per cent of Italians eat on a regular basis in a foreign takeaway and only five per cent in a foreign restaurant," the report said.

Forte dei Marmi is not the first Italian town to ban ethnic restaurants – the nearby town of Lucca, famous for its medieval city walls and historic churches, attracted accusations of racism when it did the same thing in 2009.

Reference:The Telegraph

Note - Doner kebabs contain 'shocking' levels of fat, salt and even pork, some contain 1,990 calories, 70g of fat and 16.5g of salt

Reference:The Guardian

2011-10-21T01:51:00.000-07:00

Travellers at Dale Farm evicted at last

How It All Started

1960s Small numbers of travellers begin to settle alongside the Dale Farm site, part of which was authorised as a scrapyard.

1990s The site has grown to 37 plots authorised by Basildon Council.

2001 Dale Farm traveller families began to set up pitches illegally on green belt land. It has taken 10 years to finally evict them.

THE Dale Farm eviction began with ugly clashes between protesters and police.

Twenty three people were arrested for violent disorder, public order and obstruction, while a caravan was blown up sending thick black smoke 40-feet into the air.

Protesters set fire to a caravan

After 10 years and endless rounds of legal battles the eviction started at 7am following a surprise assault on the camp by police who had previously said they would only be there to keep order on both sides.

However, following intelligence there were flammable liquids on site and heavy objects would be hurled at bailiffs, police initially took over the operation.

Electricity was cut as Essex Police sent officers into the illegal site at the opposite end to the scaffold barricade where protestors had expected them to arrive.

Police force their way through barricades

The surprise operation has led to claims of heavy handedness from travellers and their supporters following reports two protesters were taken out with taser stun guns at just after 7am.

Police fire Taser guns at protesters

Relations between travellers and police had already thawed with officers banned from the camp three days before the eviction.

Candy Sheridan, a traveller campaigner complained 48-hours notice should have been given, while site spokeswoman Kathleen McCarthy said they had been duped into thinking it would be peaceful.

Police defended the actions after some of the around 150 police in full riot gear were stoned with bricks, bottles and fluids.

Protesters throw bricks at riot police

Supt Trevor Roe said: "The tactic was to take early control of the site. Where we have intelligence there is likely to be violence we need to protect members of the public including bailiffs, police officers, travellers and protestors from injury.”

Council leader Tony Ball, said: "I am absolutely clear that after 10 years of negotiation to try and find a peaceful solution to this that actually what we are doing is the right thing.”

At least seven people were treated by the ambulance service.

The scaffold tower built by protesters at Dale Farm

A protester urinates on police

After trying to convince people to come down from the scaffold tower, the last protester was finally removed from the top at 5.20pm.

For much of the day travellers just watched in disbelief from their pitches while protesters tried to hold up the bailiffs.

However, at just before 6pm there were further scenes of violence. Order was restored within about 10 minutes. A number of masked protesters again hurled bricks at police from close range.

MEP Richard Howitt was removed from the site after he "tricked" his way in to the media compound earlier today, a Basildon Council spokesman said.

The spokesman said the East of England MEP, who has publicly backed those facing eviction, had been warned both verbally and in writing that he could not enter the site for security reasons and was told he could visit tomorrow.

He said: "We are extremely disappointed that he chose to completely ignore our communications and tricked his way into the compound, which was a security breach.

"He was subsequently removed from the compound and will not be allowed back."

Stephen Horgan, deputy leader of the council, told BBC Essex: "Where has Mr Howitt been for the last ten years and during his time as a member of the European Parliament?

"He could have had significant clout when the Labour Government was in power to help this situation, but was nowhere to be seen - it is only now at the end of the process and with major media interest in the site clearance that he has appeared on various outlets offering negotiation and so called solutions to the problem."

References:Basildon Recorder and the:Daily Mail

2011-10-17T22:32:00.000-07:00

Response to Cameron's October
(2011) Immigration Speech

Reference:Sarah's Blog

Written by Frank Ellis

Thursday, 13 October 2011 20:05

From: Dr Frank Ellis

To: Mr David Cameron, Prime Minister MP

Date: 12th October 2011 A.D.

Re: The Prime Minister’s Speech on Immigration delivered to the Institute of Government 10th October 2011

Dear Mr Cameron

Mass immigration is not a natural disaster akin to some tsunami, drought or earthquake that periodically and unpredictably overwhelms a country. Mass immigration is a purely man-made phenomenon which is encouraged openly or covertly by people who benefit from it economically or by people who for ideological reasons wish to see England looking like some failed Third-World state, Pakistan, for example.

Mass immigration, especially mass non-white immigration, poses real dangers for the future of England. The idea that England can survive the mass, continual influx of hundreds of thousands of non-white immigrants is hideously naïve. As the white indigenous people of England are relentlessly displaced by the rapid and aggressive breeding of non-whites, the whole texture and nature of our towns and cities will be changed forever, is already changing, and, in some places, Bradford, Birmingham, whole swathes of London, have already changed for the worse.

I do not regard these huge, unprecedented changes, changes which were imposed on the white indigenous English without any consultation or any regard for England’s future, with no regard for the links to our past and heritage, as in any way beneficial. In every possible regard they are disastrous. As I have made clear to you before the changes brought about by mass, non-white immigration represent the racial, cultural, physical and psychological dispossession of the white indigenous English.

In what way, pray tell, do the indigenous English, especially those left in London, benefit from having their capital, my capital, overrun with non-whites? The short answer is that they do not benefit from being overrun by non-whites. They suffer from overcrowding, reduced quality in public services, noise, freakish behaviour, poor education provision as a consequence of schools overrun with immigrants, exceptionally high levels of crime and corruption and high taxes to pay for foreigners.

Moreover, they are daily bombarded with BBC and other state-sponsored propaganda that they should actually be grateful for all these non-white immigrants being here. Furthermore, should the white indigenous English protest about what is happening to their country, they will be vilified as something monstrous when in fact their opposition to being dispossessed is entirely rational and moral, in every way normal. What is not normal, what is perverse, what is most decidedly unnatural is that white politicians such as you Mr Cameron are actively encouraging hordes of non-whites currently resident in England, and others swarming across our borders, to overwhelm our country. Mass, non-white immigration has not delivered a single benefit at all to the white indigenous English.

Your portrayal of the immigration debate as one dominated by extremes is itself extreme (and wrong) and designed to show you as the conciliator, the moderate with sensible proposals when in fact you have a long record of colluding with those who have sponsored mass non-white immigration. Some form of immigration subject to exceptionally tough controls is acceptable but the numbers involved should be very small indeed and it should be made clear that employment in England does not in any way imply a right to permanent residence. There are absolutely no benefits to be derived from the mass influx of unemployable Third-World immigrants. One of the main problems, especially with regard to Indian and Pakistani immigrants is the reliability of any qualifications. In the NHS this can literally be a matter of life and death or lead to operations which are bungled because they are carried out by incompetents. Remember Daniel Ubani, the Nigerian with a German passport? Ever heard of the Indian, Manjit Bhamra?

One of the weak links in your immigration proposal is that you show no understanding of the race factor. Race and race differences matter and they cannot be made not to matter by government diktat. Nor can endless race relations laws and amendments deny the basic consequences of race and race differences. Large numbers of non-whites in a white country will always be a permanent source of tension and very often violence. We see the evidence for this all over the world. That for most of her history our England has been racially homogenous has been a great blessing. Racial diversity is a curse. As the number of non-whites increases, as it has done grotesquely over the last 30 years, so the racial, social and economic stresses become ever harder to hide or to deny. Blacks engaging in looting and rapine are just obvious and visible examples of how mass, non-white immigration has failed and how the white population bears the costs, economic, cultural and psychological.

Immigration is not just about the on-going immigrant threat to England it must also face the problem of those who have come here in large numbers and who have managed to secure a British passport. They have come here and wish to stay because they enjoy a standard of living in a First-World economy that would be impossible in Pakistan or Africa. If the numbers involved were exiguous and all further non-white immigration was almost impossible except for a highly-qualified and suitable few then all the legitimate fears and worries about immigration would disappear.

That the rational, logical, healthy and morally reasonable fears of the white English indigenous people with regard to mass, non-white immigration show no sign whatsoever of abating is because the problems associated with mass, non-white immigration – crime, corruption, child abuse, depraved honour killings and forced marriages violence, physical dispossession and overcrowding/overpopulation – are getting worse. On these trends the English will be reduced to a racial minority in their own country some time in this century. Do you really want that outcome for your children Mr Cameron? Immigration policy must therefore deal with two problems: one immediate; the other long term.

The threat posed to England by mass, non-white immigration is largely a consequence of immigrants exploiting legal instruments which oblige us to accept them. The obvious first step is to rescind all legislation that prevents or hinders the expulsion of immigrants. Your view, Mr Cameron, that ‘Britain will always be open to those who are seeking asylum from persecution’ is an outrageous proposition and one that has done so much to make it possible for immigrants to enter England under false pretences. It leaves us permanently vulnerable to events in other parts of the world over which we have no control but which when they lead to political collapse mean that we are obliged to permit hordes of so-called asylum seekers (criminals and illegal immigrants) to enter England and “enrich” us. This is something that must change if we are to have any chance of saving England. Leaving the EU must also be a very high priority.

The immediate problem is to prevent all further immigration. It must be a matter of the highest priority to hunt down, round up and to deport all illegal immigrants. If they have assets these can be seized to cover the costs of deportation. The next step is make it clear to non-whites currently resident in this country, especially blacks, that they shall not be permitted to enjoy any special status merely because they are non-whites. If large numbers of blacks are incarcerated, having been subjected to the due process of English law then that must be seen as an indication of a black predisposition to commit crime not some insidious racist plot as in the Marxist slander of institutional racism. Again, black educational failure reflects low mean black IQ – well documented – not a white conspiracy. Blacks will have to learn to live with their limitations. Whites are not responsible for black failure and the psychological terror aimed at whites, often by other whites, to make white society feel guilty for black failure should be dismissed out of hand.

The next step is to recognise that the welfare state has created a massive parasitic underclass. People who refuse to provide services in return for welfare handouts should be denied any money at all and housed in government hostels where they will receive basic survival provision and no more. This means a bed, basic food and a roof. For those who show willing there will be firmness but fairness and maybe at times some warmth. Those that riot can expect ruthless counter measures to restore order and discipline. Respect, dignity, status, self-esteem, a sense of achievement cannot be donated by charity: they have to be earned. The only politician in England who grasps these facts of life is Frank Field, a very honourable and decent man.

Other measures some of which I noted earlier this year can also be taken. First, long term, every effort must be made to encourage large numbers of non-whites to return to their own countries. Generous financial benefits and inducements can be made to encourage repatriation. Second, under no circumstances must there ever be an amnesty for illegal immigrants. Third, under no circumstances will the creation of an independent Islamic/Muslim state ever be permitted within the territory of the United Kingdom. Fourth, the provisions of Sharia are grossly incompatible with the legal, political and cultural traditions of England and shall not be permitted. Fifth, family migration cannot be used as an excuse to bring relatives to this country. People who cannot bear to be separated from their families should not separate themselves from their wife (wives) in Pakistan. That these individuals are allegedly in search of a better life is an irrelevance, an emotional red herring, and imposes no obligation, moral or legal, on England to end this self-induced separation.

When you say - ‘immigration is not just about people coming to live here for a while. Some will want to settle and then join us as fellow British citizens…’- you ignore one very important consideration. Do I, as a white Englishman, want these people to join me? What happens when I emphatically do not want these people to join me? How can millions of non-white immigrants just ‘join me’? The answer is they cannot and they must not be encouraged to believe that they are welcome to ‘join us’. I do not want to have to endure the psychologically distressing sight of English cities overrun with immigrants. And it is not just the cities that face invasion.

The next attack wave to hit white England, currently being planned by your government, is the calculated destruction and concreting of the countryside, including the Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) and National Parks. The aim here is to impose thousands of non-white immigrants on areas which have so far escaped them. And when your party has managed to tear up the planning laws – not a perfect legal instrument by any means – and given the red light to rapacious developers, what will be the result?

The result will be hundreds of thousands of shoddy, high-density, anti-social housing units in the countryside. For the first time there is now the real risk that mosques, hitherto confined to cities, will appear in the countryside. It is a truly dreadful thought. The long term problems will be racial tension, soaring council taxes, more crime, certainly more violent crime and Third-World squalor in England’s ancient shires. And when hordes of blacks imported to Ludlow, Ripon, and why not Witney, as part of government policy, start to engage in a bit of looting and violence, because that is what they do in the hood, the liberals will explain this degenerate behaviour as arising from a lack of opportunities for ‘young black people’ in a market town: the rioters were alienated and misunderstood; it’s not the fault of the ‘young black people’. The final result of permitting the developers to run riot and to build these shanty towns will be the destruction of a priceless asset.

So Mr Cameron: it really is time to stop the talking, posing, the endless consulting and act.

Yours sincerely

Frank Ellis

2011-10-14T04:51:00.000-07:00

Southend English Democrats Branch Meeting

The second meeting of the newly formed Southend branch of the English Democrats took place on Wednesday 12th October.

The meeting was ably chaired by ED member Tony Gladwin

The first speaker was Stuart Freeman, the branch organiser

Stuart announced that 14 people have now come forward to stand as candidates for the party in next year's Southend Council elections. With 7 months still to go, he expects to be able to field a full slate of 17 candidates.

There was a lively discussion on the news that a black conservative councillor in Southend, Blaine Robin, has been suspended by his local branch for attending an EDL meeting on Southend sea front.

The English Democrats believe in freedom of association. There was general agreement that Blaine Robin, or anybody else for that matter, should be free to associate with whoever they like in their own time and should not be penalised for it.

After a short break, it was time to introduce our guest speaker, Steve Uncles, the English Democrats South East Chairman and Events Organiser.

Steve Uncles centre, with Tony Gladwin and Stuart Freeman

Steve gave an interesting talk on England's political history followed by a brief history of the English Democrats party.

We were told that the Kingdom of England, which included Wales, was a sovereign state until 1 May 1707, when a political union with the Kingdom of Scotland created the Kingdom of Great Britain.

England, which makes up about 83% of the UK, has been without its own Parliament since 1707. The English Democrats are leading the campaign to re-establish the English Parliament.

Steve continued with a brief history of the English Democrats party.

The party started off as the English National Party in 1998. It was started in response to the 1998 Scotland Act which established the devolved Scottish Parliament. The party was re-launched as the English Democrats in 2002 after merging with several other small political parties.

From 2002 onwards, the party has made steady progress.

The English Democrats' first national election campaign was the 2004 EU Election. This was the campaign which introduced the slogan, "Not right, Not Left, Just English!". ED candidates won 130,056 votes in total.

In October 2004, the English Democrats merged with the Reform UK Party, which Peter Davies was a member of. This was a small splinter group from UKIP. Peter Davies became the English Democrats Mayor of Doncaster in 2009.

The London mayoral election of 2008 saw the first English Democrats "Bill Boards" go up and the first English Democrats Party Election Broadcast.

The party currently has 1 County Councillor, 5 Borough Councillors and an elected Mayor in Doncaster. There may also be a number of Parish Councillors.

Some much needed funds were raised at the meeting to help finance our election campaigns.

2011-10-12T01:24:00.000-07:00

BBC Smear on the BNP? - not this time

Reference:Digital Journal

Monday night, the BBC broadcast a half hour programme exposing corruption within the British National Party. For once, the Beeb didn't rely on smears and innuendo; for once, it didn't have to.

It is fair to say that since its inception, the British National Party has been the target of smears, innuendo, and at times hysteria of Salem witchcraft proportions. All manner of political opportunists and racial agitators have built careers on hating and mobilising against the BNP with the hysterical mantras of “fight racism”, “smash the racists”, “Nazis out”, and so on, including people who have had no qualms about turning a blind eye to or even supporting the oppression of the Palestinians, the bombing of Iraq, and the torture and mass murder of innocent civilians.

The rise of the Internet as well as some limited success at the ballot box has made it impossible to totally suppress the BNP, and the lies and smears have at times been so blatant that they have actually assisted recruitment. Just when it looked as though the party might make some sort of breakthrough, its leaders have been caught with their hands in the till.

Monday night's BBC Panorama programme can currently be found here, but if you can't access it, look out for it on YouTube in the near future. Normally, BBC and similar smears on the BNP and other “far right” organisations rely on professional hatemongers and smear merchants like Gerry Gable, not this time.

Apart from technical commentators, last night's programme used disgruntled former party members, activists and staff, and there are plenty of them, indeed there is enough material on the Griffinwatch blog and similar sites to produce a three or four hour programme had the Beeb been so inclined. The bottom line is that party leader Nick Griffin has used the BNP as a vehicle for his personal financial aggrandisement. The allegations made were strong, but no one least of all Griffin will be suing for libel at the end of the day. How did it all go so wrong?

The late Chris Tame, who was Britain's leading Libertarian until his death, could have formed a Libertarian Party but rejected the idea because at the end of the day, it is the dissemination of ideas that brings about political change, be it for good or bad. Even without the blatant financial corruption, parties like the BNP are doomed to failure, because the establishment rather than the street thugs and opportunists of the loony left will never allow them to obtain even a simulacrum of power. Organisations such as the BNP would do better to disband - at least as political parties - and concentrate on publishing, lobbying, and so on.

Leaving aside its racial policies - real and imagined, the BNP is or was one of the few political parties in Britain that recognise(d) the need for serious financial reform, in particular taking the power away from the banks. Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons were elected to the European Parliament in 2009, but instead of lobbying to bring about this necessary change they have been content to sit quietly in the chamber and collect their fat salaries augmented at times by some extremely creative expenses.

For years, decades, Griffin and his inner circle have complained about the financial corruption of the mainstream political parties; now these protests are exposed for what they were, not righteous indignation, but envy.

Article 2:		In the present convention genocide means any of the acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or religious group, as such:
		[…]
	2c:	Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part…

Article 6:		Every indigenous individual has a right to a nationality.
Article 8.1:		Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.
Article 8.2:		States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:
	(a)	Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;
	(b)	Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;
	(d)	Any form of forced assimilation or integration;
	(e)	Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.