Biased BBC reader Keith has made this interesting contribution on a most topical aspect of BBC output….
“After watching the sickening “Woolwich: The Untold Story:, I feel that a number of issues need to be raised. It has been asserted that the Security Services tried to recruit Michael Adebolajo, on the bases of an allegation made by a close friend of the convicted murder, Abu Nusaybah, who also happens to be a member of al-Muhajiron.
It has been further implied that Drummer Rigby’s death could have been prevented, but because of funding being stopped by the Coalition Government to the charity Streets, even though apparently it failed to prevent the radicalization of Adebolajo in 2008. It was cut in 2011.
How did Peter Taylor arrive at hat conclusion, and why didn’t he enquire why the funding was stopped? The TV show clearly implied that this was to do with the Government spending-but there could be other reasons why the funding was cut.
But sloppy journalism aside, what should be of higher concern is the BBC own role in propagating the views of Choudary- whom over the years the BBC has allowed extensive airtime.
This Guardian report however highlights a number of interesting facts concerning the broadcast by both the BBC and C4:
1.How did C4 and the BBC know of the links WITHIN HOURS of the murder, that one of the suspects was “very relevant” because he “knew one of the suspects and helped radicalise him”?
2.How did the BBC know of his travels in Kenya, yet according to Peter Taylor, British Intelligence was not aware of his movements.
3.That during an interview with Omar Bakri Muhammed, that Bakri received a telephone from Choudary , who was fully aware that the BBC was in town.
What relationship does the BBC have with Islam4UK? How come they knew he was involved in recruiting of Islamic radicals, yet have given him airtime. How did they arrive at the narration that this was Britain’s fault, and seemingly airbrushed over other key issues regarding islamic radicalization.
It seems that the BBC knew Choudry, knew his reputation, yet although banned in France, and of interest to the security forces, seems able to escape the attentions of the BBC-an organization which can doorstep everybody else, but a well known radical.
This was motivated by spite, to try and set the agenda against the Security Service, while deflecting their own involvement with al-Muhajiroun and latterly Islam4UK.”
Choudray was on Radio 4 again this morning.
Humphrys was all over him like a rash, no ?
Er….no.
Michael Coren & Robert Spencer Sun News
The conviction of Lee Rigby’s murderers and the ludicrous and twisted denial of some that it wasn t completely inspired by Islam.
That means not on Cameron s, BBC s, Willy Vague, CH4s anytime soon, watch list.
http://youtu.be/_dwedR8Ry9k
I often worry that because the media and the government refuse to call muslim atrocities anything but that, the likes of Adebelajo etc get more and more frustrated that their ‘message’ isn’t getting through…………he could not have been clearer about his justifications for his actions ensuring that no-one had any doubt at all what he had done and why he had done it, and yet not a single media outlet or politician called this exactly what it was.
If the government and the media told the reality, that the large scale presence of Muslims in Infidel lands will inevitably lead to what has happened in such situations, and is happening in Syria, then it begs the question, why was this allowed to happen.
Why did the last Labour government open the gates, making a civil war in the UK, an almost certainty.
There is no precedent in history where a government, trusted by the people to look after their interests, has opened the gates to a historic enemy, that has been trying to forcibly enter Christian Europe for over a 1000 years.
Meanwhile
Jihad on Jesus: Militants Firebomb New Christ Statue and Ancient Monastery, Syria
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/jihad-on-jesus-militants-firebomb-new-christ-statue-and-ancient-monastery-syria/
There are only two logical outcomes from what we are currently enduring; either all muslims convert to Christianity or they will have to be driven out of our lands. I don’t see how islam is compatible with any form of our understanding of civilisation.
John
Sadly you are right. It is unfortunate that this so. The political elite have placed the UK, and Europe in a position where we are going to be damned either way.
You wrote: There are only two logical outcomes from what we are currently enduring; either all muslims convert to Christianity or they will have to be driven out of our lands.
Each option has disadvantages.
1. Conversion to Christianity.
a) Almost all churches will reject such conversions
b) It is quite likely that as Taqqiya would be in operation, many conversions will be false. In fact Islam condones such “conversions” to protect Islam, till the time is right for them to come out.
The above will entail that the state will have to test which conversions are false. This is just the Inquisition, and for the same reasons. It will never fly.
2. Driving out
a) This will be condemned outright by many, as ethnic cleansing.
It just wont fly.
So what have we left?
What our elite have done is to put us on the road to Iraq or Syria.
The reporting agenda and actions taken on this are a direct parallel, to the paedostani Muslim child rape gangs, the only difference …
Its not the police/social services along with our broadcaster this time, its higher government agencies.
denial of the obvious, deliberate obfuscation.
Woolwich Muslim killer brother.
He told Al Jazeera his brother was not radicalised, despite associations with radical preachers and the now disbanded group al Muhajiroun.
He said: ‘It’s a very tidy narrative to assume that we have this young Christian boy who was radicalised by these bogeymen-like figures – Anjem Choudary, Omar Bakri Muhammad – and while he went on this conveyor belt, as it were, of radicalisation and then the events of Woolwich happened. It’s just not true.’
just a minute … but, but, but … he was a “devout” Muslim?
He said he was copying his erm “prophet”?, obeying
the will of Allah? , quoted the verses, sat with Quran in front of him at all times, kissed it when sentenced.
not a trumped up bogeyman? … oh dear!
a far more dangerous, brainwashing, and insidious instigator?
‘Jihad Watch’:-
“Brother of UK jihad murderer: ‘Just not true’ that killer was ‘radicalized by these bogeymen-like figures'”
[Opening excerpt]:-
“Jeremiah Adebolajo is assuming that there is a war between Islam and the West, and that Muslims in the West are not on the side of the countries in which they live, but on the side of Islam. No one, however, will examine the implications of his statements.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/12/brother-of-uk-jihad-murderer-just-not-true-that-killer-was-radicalized-by-these-bogeymen-like-figure.html
Video: Robert Spencer on why Christians are persecuted in the Middle East
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/12/video-robert-spencer-on-why-christians-are-persecuted-in-the-middle-east.html
The coverage on 5 live (stuck in the car so channel cruising) was already in full Local Muslims as victims – increased police patrols around local mosque – local community in fear although of course they fully condemn the actions of the murderers who do not relect islam …. yaddah, yaddah.
Again calls for more money to help prevent such attrocities recurring – got me to thinking that jizya is already being paid in the form of grants to specific minority interest groups, multiple benefits etc etc but that it will never be enough when will the BBC look at where the money goes?
The Charity Commission is only too eager to register mosques, compared to other religious institutions. It’s a little concerned about inclusivity, but not much.
http://britain-today.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/double-standards-in-religion.html
Ian, I went to your site and checked out that post. The link at the end of the sentence
“Unsurprisingly perhaps some still are”
which is:
http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/Library/
About_us/p_brief_mosques.pdf
is ‘not found’. Should I suspect a cover-up, of sorts?
Hmm…
I think they’re being a bit shifty – the URL is now at an odd location –
http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/About_us/Contacting_us/p_brief_mosques.aspx
Have now altered my blog post accordingly. Ta.
Yes very worrying development (under Cameron) who we thought – if elected – would put a STOP to corruption of English cultural institutions. It was Andrew Hinde (he of the former BBC World service) that changed Charity law (under Labour) to what we have now in 2008) See ‘Value-for-money’ post:
My contention is that this was a TREASONABLE (as it was done without parliamantary knowledge – and in secret under Gordon Brown at the Treasurey). What we have as ‘Charities’ now are almost unrecognisable to the Parliament that created the original charitable acts of 1601.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charitable_Uses_Act_1601
Brown and Hinde have between them removed all ‘public benefit’ and created a monster of over x2,000 state run NGO’s that all require public funds to operate. In addition, many of them can run as a ‘business’ as well as a charity which makes Labour a ‘stakeholder’ investor in exploiting ‘benefits’ of being doner and state funded ‘lobby groups’.
Anything Labour ‘promotes’ is made into a Charitable institution with tax free benefits. Many of which are headed by Labour grandees on generous saleries.
See:
http://fakecharities.org/
So a person on the Panorama programme says that HE could have stopped the murderers if only the government funding to his organisation wasn’t cut. Therefore its the Government’s fault.
Does he not realise how insulting that is to the Drummer’s family and also any other normal person. Use someones murder to complain about funding? Really? Shame an unknown word in your vocabulary, is it?
So what did you do with your other money? Did you not think that it would have been better spent stopping the murderers than, say, ANY other expenditure that your vast mind came up with? What did you spend your money on? Could you not have just forwarded your information to the relevant authorities if you did not have the required resources?
Surely if you were truly interested in stopping them you would have done that rather than keep schtum and then bleat to the BBC how the nasty people had not given you your slice of the pie. How about joining together with another group and pool your resources? Not desperate enough to get to the perpetrators to resort to that? How about getting funding from any of the Mosques? Tricky was it?
How about your funding was cut because you and your organisation was incapable of stopping anyone from doing anything and it was realised by the authorities who then stopped your personal tax backed gravy train. What was more likely? You were a useless drain on resources and were found out or the authorities shamelessly denied funds to UK’s best hope for community cohesion blindly?
Talk about brass neck….
Not heard from Nick Clegg; maybe he is still looking for another passage from the Koran to quote, I hope this time he gets the right one and not one that actually refers to jews.
What I don’t understand is why are we being bombarded by Muslim representatives etc when we have bee told time and time again this atrocity has nothing to do with Islam.
Thank you very much Mr Vance for printing my post.
Just as a follow up, the nature of this attack, is not the first instance of this type of modus operandi committed by Islamic terrorists. The murder of Theo Van Gogh in Amsterdam by Mohammed Bouyeri on 2 November 2004, featured all the same hallmarks of this type of attack.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_B
Mohammed Bouyeri and the Hofstad Network were also under investigation from the AIVD (Dutch Security Service). They also used the trial as a platform to propagate their world view.
The difference of course is that Mr Van Gogh was not a soldier in the Dutch Army, but an outspoken critic of Islam.
Apparently Peter Taylor, an expert in terrorism, and the BBC research team, couldn’t find any connects to this fact. The question is why?
Because it does not fit in to the narration that it is British social and foreign policy that is to blame.
Furthermore in the Guardian article as mentioned above also sheds some interesting light on the sort of circles that Michael Adebolajo was involved in.
According to an ITV broadcast made on the 23rd May 2013, Adebolajo spoke at a demonstration against the English Defence League and Stop Islamisation of Europe organised by Unite Against Fascism at Harrow Central Mosque in 2009.
Apparently Islamic fascism is not a fascist organization, but a misunderstood minority.
Let us look who is involved in the UAF-
Honorary president – Doreen Lawrence
Chair – Steve Hart, political officer, Unite
Vice chair – Christine Blower, general secretary, NUT
Vice chair – Hugh Lanning, deputy general secretary, PCS
Vice chair – Azad Ali
Vice chair – Jennifer Moses, national official for equality and training, NASUWT
Treasurer – Tony Kearns, deputy general secretary, CWU
Joint secretary – Weyman Bennett
Joint secretary – Sabby Dhalu
Assistant secretary – Martin Smith
Assistant secretary – Jude Woodward
Parliamentary Officer – Peter Hain MP
European officer – Claude Moraes MEP
No wonder the Guardian and the BBC had heads up on Mr Choudry antics, and it would be interesting to see how many other meetings of the UAF Islam4UK has attended? Is it any wonder that the Met Police is taking an interest in some of the activities of the UAF.
This leads to other serious questions. Why didn’t the UAF report their concerns to the Security Services? Why wasn’t there the proper oversight applied by the UAF? What links do the UAF have with Islam4UK? And if the Security Services could have prevented the Woolwich Attack,, would that not also apply to groups like the ANL, UAF and other political groups-or for that matter the BBC and C4?
Its up to us to demand these answers, because if radical Islam is being protected by an unaccountable clique within the Left (as exposed by Nick Cohen and Harry’s Place) then isn’t it time these people were brought to account?
Let’s look at what Abu Rumaysah (one of Choudary’s henchmen and author of the website “The Shariah project”) has to say on his vision for Britain and the help they get from the “Anti Fascist” left, via his Youtube channel “TheIslamicNews”….
======================================
theislamicnews has sent you a message
You can reply to this message by visiting your inbox.
Good, the british should have not join America in their invasion of muslims. The relationship between the muslims and the american government is long, history did not start on 9/11.
I disagree, the invasion of muslim land by the british is an unjust invasion, which means every single person who has been murdered in Afghanistan by a british soldier, is a crime! Joining the army and committing crime cannot be justified due to ones financial state. Very much like myself, I cannot sell class A drugs and ruin the lives of many just because I have financial difficulties. Also, yes, we cannot take our anger out on general british public, which I do not. I never held anything against general non muslims, they did not take part in the war unlike the british soldiers.
The event which you are referring to, it was an event which was addressing muslims. Majority of the shops which sell alcohol in brick lane are run by so called muslims. The event was arranged to advise these muslims who are disobedient.
Ok. Yes, we do want it both way. I will not lie like the members from quilliam foundation. I will say it straight, our islamic beliefs are that we will rule the whole world one day. We speak against occupation of “muslim land” and also seek to call for islam wherever we are. I also agree that the uaf and hope not hate make it really easy for us because they fight our opposition making it easy for us to do as we like.
However, I will like to pick you brains for a moment, iv made it clear that our islamic beliefs state we will rule the whole world one day, so we completely reject any other law and order. However, Im just wondering, why does America and Britain stand for Freedom, Democracy, but then have their fingers in Muslim lands?
There is no us against them, we do no claim to be pious. These public events are acts of worship which brings us closer to purity. However we are far from being pious.
We believe there is no compulsion in religion as in, no one can force you to become a muslim but pointing a gun to you head. However the laws of islam, i.e alcohol, drugs, prostitution, usury being forbidden must be obeyed by muslims and non muslims.
Reading the list of names above, not to mention the people in high office with whom they have contact, I now begin to understand why the UAF and satellite organizations seem to be able to move untouched. Whereas, if you are a member of say UKIP and you are at a meeting, you can expect a visit from them.
The problem is actually much more subtle and problematic that that.
A significant section of the political and media class has invested so much political capital and ego into upholding policies like Multiculturalism, and cultural diversity, that for them to let go and admit they were wrong, would take a breaking of the faith that they are simply incapable of.
They are a generation of highly educated, ‘clever people’ who having been told all their lives how great they are, and have little of the ‘real world’ experience needed to understand the world, that they are unable to understand that the likes of Al-Shabaab or al-Qaeda are engaged in an war, not only against the West, but within Islam, and like a death cult, will not cease until either we or they will win.
But let’s not fool ourselves into think that UKiP or the BNP have any better answers, all we would do is revert back to the old European policy of war a genocide, and with the demographic balance as it is, ‘Christian Europe’ can not be certain that they would win either.
It seems to me that sooner or later we have to decide whether to actually do something radical or give up and surrender to our Islamic fate.
If we do decide on a radical solution we need to start with the political elites responsible. The trouble is ‘we’ are not a coherent force.
Missing from the list of UAF people is David Cameron MP – a founding supporter.
I asked my (Tory) MP to explain such partisan support in light of clearly recorded actions.
He could not.
A good man I think, but shackled to a doomed wagon.
At least he and his party will be made aware of my assessment of their value come the next election.
The BBC however will persist regardless, if shackled to a worse wagon & knackered nag still.
Turbulent times ahead.
Actually the UAF honorary presidents are Ken Livingstone and Doreen Lawrence.
Previously it had all party support when it was founded in 2003, however since 2005 there have been growing concerns regarding the SWP in a takeover of the organization, as documented by the likes of Nick Cohen and Harry’s Place.
In 2005, the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight disaffiliated from UAF.
So I think you are clutching at straws to think the DC is involved with a far left organization, what ever your misgivings of his policies.
“Searchlight disaffiliated from UAF.”
But Cameron hasn’t ? Some straw
Neither has Teddy Taylor-hardly a man known for his left wing views, as former Chairman of the Monday Club, and leading Eurosceptic, and an advocate of Capital Punishment.
A man in his dotage who has been out of politics for god knows how long, Not he current Conservative Prime Minister
Keith – tx for chipping in.
Stewart has ably made the main points in counter well, so I’ll merely add my tuppenyworth.
I’ve never heard of Mr. Taylor. But I do know he is not the Prime Minister of this country.
So this rather bizarre attempt at justification by (failed dis-)association I fear rather returns the straw-clutching to your court.
However, as actual associations do send messages, and failures to distance can create political anchors, Mr. Cameron’s initial, ongoing and as far as I am aware continued links with an outfit with the evidenced activities of the UAF for me makes him a political liability for any party seeking my endorsement.
It’s a personal quirk, but also a democracy thing I hold rather dear.
If Mr. Cameron has found himself in awkward company and distanced himself, he has kept it rather quiet, and I’d suggest may see value in being more clear and overt in why he has done so.
How Mrs. Lawrence, Ken and indeed the BBC may react will of course be interesting.
With a fair collection of others, he remains a founding signatory, as Llareggub initially mentioned:
http://uaf.org.uk/about/founding-signatories/
And the UAF seems happy to promote this. Your strawman attempt to pointing at Presidents is noted and interesting of course, if irrelevant.
I can in a brief google search see no mention of the PM and UAF parting ways in any form.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_Against_Fascism
‘Unite Against Fascism is an anti-fascist pressure group in the United Kingdom, with support from MPs of all mainstream UK political parties, including the current Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron
However about the UAF, still bearing his name in what can only be deemed support, I do find much that raises concern at any official connection, such as (perhaps relevantly) this:
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3703/if_only_33_000_people_knew_the_truth
Thank you for your reply.
Let me state my position clearly. I am not a fan of David Cameron, and dislike the Coalition for its failure to carry out a centre-right, pro-British agenda.
But this issue is not about the people who signed up for this nonsense, but about the activists, who are working towards an agenda.
http://uaf.org.uk/about/founding-signatories/
The people on the left of the list, with the exception of the two names on the top, are nothing more than names of the establishment, who are only interested in one thing: furthering their own careers.They are in the main, simple craven politicians.
The ‘brand’ Unite against Fascism sounds to most people a reasonable thing to the vast majority, so people who support the idea of being against fascism are going to sign up and forget about it.
But its the people on the right of the list, they are the more dangerous ones. They are involved because they are the activists who are ideologically motivated, and are working towards a political agenda. It is they who have the real influence, who operate under the radar, and who weld the real power in the organization.
People like Jeremy Dear, John Haylett, Leroy Logan, Dr. Siddiqui, George Anthony and Maggie Bowden are the ones we should be concerned with. Not only do the have links with the media, or other large public bodies. It is they who set the policy, and it is they who ensure that the post are filled with fellow travellers.
The names on the right, they are the dumb fools who now provide the cover for Far Left groups like the SWP to operate. Most of them are not even in office. It just their luck that one of the people who signed up for this, now happens to be the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland………
I suggest having a look at the tactic of entryism, Its how the Militant Tendency operated within the Labour Party in the 1980’s (and to a certain today), and that is why an organization like the UAF is under the control of the Far Left.
This is what we are struggling against, and this is what I would suggest start to really take an interest in, because these are the people who really run the show in the likes of the BBC.
‘Thank you for your reply’
No problem. You are responsible for an interesting thread being started and seem to be contributing significantly to debate it has inspired.
It has moved on a lot overnight, and as the aspect we are in exchange on is not really on BBC performance (that said, symbolic stands, endorsements, U-turns or other such often DO exercise the BBC a lot, for a long time, so with this one must presume they are oddly still comfortable) I don’t want to labour matters, but we differ on what is or is not. You have your view, fine, but mine is not the same, so I feel it necessary to restate too.
‘But this issue is not about the people who signed up for this nonsense, but about the activists, who are working towards an agenda’
They may not to you be significant or even relevant, but they remain so to me.
When I sign a cheque or a petition, I am providing my endorsement.
This confers a measure more of power to the person getting it. Big name… more power, especially to solicit the cumulative heft of those who can be swayed by their presence alone.
‘The people on the left of the list, with the exception of the two names on the top, are nothing more than names of the establishment, who are only interested in one thing: furthering their own careers.They are in the main, simple craven politicians.’
No argument on possible motivations and probable status. But ‘names of the establishment’ still matter. Especially if things (such as the UAF’s intentions, reputation, etc) have moved on, yet these folk have remained passive and mute since the point they signed up. I can imagine a few areas of precedent where the scrabble to dis-associate would be quick, loud and unseemly, but would most certainly happen. Why not here? Tacit approval still? If so… a concern. Questions to be asked (as I did). And no answers cranks up the concern a bit more. Why not here and why so coy still?
These are professional politicians seeking people to follow their lead. Hence they simply can’t afford to ‘forget’ about something they signed up for. Won’t wash. With me, anyway. My MP was cornered and he knew it. Couldn’t diss the boss so he weaseled out. Big mistake.
‘But its the people on the right of the list, they are the more dangerous ones. They are involved because they are the activists who are ideologically motivated, and are working towards a political agenda. It is they who have the real influence, who operate under the radar, and who weld the real power in the organization
I take the totally reverse view.
They are dangerous all right, but at least we know them for who and what they are. It’s the ones who are astoundingly uncurious and/or market rate grade forgetful when it suits that I actually worry about more.
Keep enemies close; those who would claim to be friends under even greater observation. Especially with stuff like this. It’s the betrayal from behind that can blindside and fatally wound.
And where the BBC is concerned, the politico-legal establishment is very low on my trust totem too.
http://tv-licensing.blogspot.com/2013/12/despicable-tv-licensing-goons-executing.html
The role of the police in not knowing points of law in this episode is not encouraging. ‘Friendly policemen’ who seem to have a bit of an issue with ‘like-minded people’ who are concerned with inaccurate official abuse of legal process: ‘The only reason I can think of is that you are guilty as sin’. Some other comments, especially by the police, with all these folk packing out the rooms like a organised crime bust, are beyond comprehension. Some of their wheedling attempts at conning the family into complying are frankly astounding. And if shown to be wrong, the only penalty will be a ‘whoops, sorry’ and on to the next.
The police need to provide a full explanation for this intimidation and the tactics employed. On screen, they have made misleading claims and assertions that would seem to be incorrect to force self-incrimination.
Maybe Panorama can do an investigation?
I draw my very learned friends attention to this in comments of commentator article not only as confirmation of my own experience previously posted here , but also as an addendum to ‘dazed and confused’s ‘ post below
Paula Lanes
• 6 months ago
−
⚑
“I was in the SWP in 2000 in 2001 John Rees gave a speech . The speech was focused on why we need to stand firm with the muslim community. John Rees argued that the muslim community offer us the biggest hope of revolution in this country.
The far left/Islamis coalition has one aim and that is Revolution. The left I feel are playing a very dangerous game. Ger Francis and Lynsey German argued after the revolution muslims would join the socialist ideals and we would be united.”
The hard left are men riding a tiger – to red ruin
Indeed, they are still playing the same old game as they were in the 70’s and 80’s.
Except instead of East German’s, its now Al Qaeda in Europe. Had they read up on Communist history, they might have come to realize that its usually the Islamist’s that come out on top. Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Somalia, and Egypt (to name a few) are littered with the bodies of Comrades from the trade union movement or indigenous Communist party members.
Put it another way, I don’t fancy Mark Steel or Alex Callinicos, chances in a fight with members of the Al-Nusra Front……..
Most Marxists want other people to do all the dirty work for them but want all the glory.
They all have one thing in common, they are all cowards.
Searchlight disaffiliated from UAF because Gerry Gable (the owner of Searchlight) is a Zionist and he found himself not welcome, when the UAF and their newly signed up Islamist friends decided to march through London claiming that they were “all Hezbollah now”……Surprisingly enough In around 2005
Cameron is also aware of this, but put the question to him about his UAF signatory and you’ll get a “lily livered” response from one of his press officers…
Many have queried…
Indeed- that the whole point of the list, so we all worry about Cameron.
But there may well be a more subtle game being played:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/undercover-with-paul-lewis-and-rob-evans/2013/jun/23/doreen-lawrence-met-police-undercover
Imagine how decisive if the jackboots of Special Branch went wading in to shut down the UAF?
I am only speculating, but I am sure that the security establishment is well aware of some of the figures involved with far left and right groups. The Guardian might howl foul play, but they too are well aware that there are some, including members of their own staff, who are not motivated by a sense of ‘social justice’ but by a more radical reorganization of society.
I am sure Mr Cameron, who I assume reads his JIC briefings, would in no doubt be aware of the political intentions of those within the UAF.
But while they remain ‘locked in’ to the democratic process, and as the Cold War has taught us with the regard to the CPGB, its better that these goons operate in plane sight, than go underground.
Mmm Maybe
Cameron, if that’s who you mean by DC, is one of the founding signatories of the UAF! And has never broken that link, wanker!
Interesting stuff, Keith, particularly the question about whether or not Tory Cutz™ are to blame for the murder. Is there anything budget cuts can’t do? UAF seems to have a lot to answer for as well. This whole thing just convinces me even more that the BBC is making a show of going after Choudray to suit their own purposes, which will include the wrong reasons.
Even if the BBC can eventually somehow claim to have had a hand in “bringing him to justice” (as the police woman said on Today), it won’t benefit anything or anyone except the BBC’s reputation. That’s what this is about. They all know Choudray’s bad news. The Beeboids may be detached from reality, achingly PC, and so morally twisted on some things that it’s a wonder they don’t tie their shoes with their back teeth, but they’re not that stupid. Well, most of them aren’t, anyway.
But they know that if the BBC can be seen in some way to have given Choudray a hard time and perhaps even have a claim to his scalp, it will do wonders to rehabilitate the BBC’s public reputation. Can’t call them dhimmis or supporters of radical Islam if they challenged him and helped get him arrested, right?
Bonus: just as we heard from Lord Carlyle (sp?), they can also feel as if they’ve convinced the public that Choudray’s an extreme fringe figure, represents no one but himself; the vast majority of Mohammedans in Britain condemn all violent jihad, don’t want Shariah; all the problems are due to an extremely microscopic Tiny Minority™, etc. Job done, Social Cohesion remit met in spades, dogmatic devotion to multiculturalism intact.
And the BBC will continue to get away with it because even Telegraph fools like Tom Chivers are half way to their position already.
Thank you David.
You are right of course. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work out that the BBC is under massive political pressure, and was looking for a card to play, so sacrificing a loon like Choudry is a gift to the BBC.
But this is the BBC, and if there is one thing we can rely on, is the BBC to cock things up.
Firstly, all the ‘in depth research’ is no more than a summary of what we already know. A brief glance through Wikipedia would have better informed a moderatly intelligent viewer.
Secondly, the complete mishandling of the Today show, has won them no friends, and I am sure tonight a private war of words is raging across the left.
This is the Left’s problem. Privately many, even within the broadcast media establishment, would like to become more hard line.
However while the Left is dominated is dominated by the likes of Sunny Hundal, Deborah Orr, Tariq Ali, Andrew Murray, Lindsey German, and others, to break ranks risks more than just a verbal bashing.
Look at the careers of people on the centre-left like Tony Blair, Jack Straw, Charles Clark, Nick Cohen, Oliver Kamm, David Aronovich, Christopher Hitchens, Mel Phillips (she started in the Guardian and New Statesman), and how they have become figures of hate for the Left.
No wonder they are more welcome now days at Cato or Heritage Foundation.
Meanwhile the Islamic machine will keep grinding on, with more shadowy groups like Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah coming to the fore. Expect ‘moderates’ like Abu Yahya, Abu Izzadeen and Abu Uzair to be part of your morning breakfast on Sunday…….
Michael Adebolajo addresses UAF protest (riot)
INBBC CASCIANI’s empathetic profile of Lee Rigby’s jihadist murderers.
Casciani’s long tale is sympathetic about the two Islamic jihadist murderers, and misunderstanding about the nature of Islam.
Casciani continues the deception that the practices of e.g. Al Qaeda are separate from the tenets of Islam.
So, Casciani’s following paragraph applies to BOTH the tenets of Islam and to Al Qaeda, but Casciani misleadingly says otherwise-
Casciani’s deception-
“Al-Qaeda-inspired jihadists believe that Muslims cannot be at peace in the West because the West is at war with Muslim lands. The logical endpoint of that thinking is that adherents must either migrate to Islamic lands – or resort to violence because there is no ‘covenant of security’ protecting them and their people.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25424290
Society needs to come together to realise the stepping stones (and some very short steps indeed) between Islam and the extreme ideology preached by some Imams in some msques in Britain.
It is no good the BBC tryint to omit the important words from reports because it makes it more difficult to address. By not using the word “Muslim” or “Islam” the problem doesn’t magically disappear. It does, however, give many people a false sense of security and false contentment when they shy away from analysing suspicious activities in local mosques.
For INBBC’s Casciani and co:-
“ISLAM 101”
by Gregory M. Davis.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html
Comment from a 5live reporter yeasterday “Lee Rigby was in the wrong place at the wrong time”
what a crock of shit.
Sorry I clicked the wrong “button”.
If Lee Rigby was not there some other poor bugger would have been killed.
“Lee Rigby was in the wrong place at the wrong time”
What place and time would be ‘right’? Did he mean a white Englishman in S.E. London in 2013?
As was Rhys Jones as he cycled past Norris Green in an Everton shirt in 2007.
As soon as you hear THAT trope…you know that the police, the criminal classes and the media are all in cahoots…yet pretend to despair, to want to be doing something or to understand.
It`s those Nigerian pondlife that were in the wrong place-they should have been wiping Qatari arses as the Allhic slaves they purport to be.
What the hell Britain was doing with them was “incubating them”…and like Choudhury, as long as we do this, Sharia is the likely result.
Gutless BBC types need to be send to Mecca and not allowed to get off the road for Muslims only…and let`s see how the Religion of Peace treats them.
F888 Off BBC…wish I had a wittier closing remark, but let`s not humour these craven creeps.
I can only add my disgust at that inane and very wrong statement. That reporter should be fired.
Certainly raises questions of professional competency to attempt to describe criminal premeditation and specific targeting of a victim in such a way.
If that statement is recorded somewhere it would be worth preserving.
We are living in times when people think they have no responsibility to highlight extremist preachers and groups to the authorities. Everything should be paid for by an all-seeing intelligence service.
After all, we don’t want to be branded as Islamophobes if we get it wrong, do we (and possibly, too, if we get it right)?
I think it is time the gloves come off. As distasteful as it may be, I think the entire family trees for the two Jihadists should be deported. If Nigeria and Somalia refuse to take them, cease all diplomatic links and cancel all work visas for these nations.
This policy is obviously unfair collective punishment. If a jihadist is prepared to die, they need to know that they still have ‘something to lose’ – knowing their entire families would suffer the consequences of their actions, might make them think twice.
The Israelis do something similar by bulldozing the terrorist’s families home. It does not work.
On this one, I am afraid we have to accept that the genie is out of the bottle on this one. :o(
But one possible solution to the problem is to name, shame and shun those who either support, or do not condemn such actions. Stop pretending that radical Islam is some wayward off-shoot of their faith. Make it known that tolerance such behavior disgusts us, which it does. Those that give these people a voice to justify or make themselves to be victims, treated the same way. If these people will not integrate, then we should be prepared to ostracize them.
I think that universal condemnation could work. Think of how Nazism has been virtually eradicated by this tactic.
The media (not least the BBC) ,the education system and the law are united in their absolute repudiation of Hitler and his ideology and no one suggests that it is unfair to Germans.
A similar unequivocal and systematic denouncement of the ideology of Islam (not Muslims) and its author, by those same institutions would result in its marginalisation to the status of crack pot cult, at least in the west. (what other cultures choose to do is entirely and rightly their affair)
The first step would be for the BBC making a series of honest historical documentaries about the founding and spread of Islam. In exactly the same way they have about Hitler and the Nazis
If the west still had leaders like Franco or Pinochet I bet they’d have a bloody good go at putting the genie back in the bottle.
I hardly think that Franco is a good example, seeing how under his rule, Spain became a backward agrarian country, with a with a bloated state sucking the life out of its economy……
Since I am on a roll this morning, I thought B-BBC readers would be interested in the views of a ‘moderate’ spokesperson of the Islamic Community, namely one Mo Ansar. He is a regular guest on shows like ‘Would You Believe’ and ‘The Big Questions’
According to Mr Ansar, the Coalition Government is propagating ‘The Ethnic Cleansing of Our Streets’:
http://moansar.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/ethnic-cleansing-of-our-streets.html
“The coalition government intends to bring into being a new strategy on Housing Benefits; and these changes are going to crush ethnic minority families and force them out of the cities into ghettos.”
“What flows eerily naturally too often, is high crime, social disorder and marginalisation from mainstream society. There is no question we are pushing out the great unwashed, the breeding minorities, out-out-out, and into what must, by any definition, be called ghettos. Modern day workhouses where Britain will learn to compete on a levelled global playing field where cheap labour is the new black. Or where black…
As frightening as a thought as it must be, can we afford not to draw parallels with conditions in the 1930s. We saw the treatment of the Jews in Europe in the early part of the 20th century. At that time, the only way the world was able to stimulate its way out of the economic crisis was through extraordinary and extortionate funding for WW2. Every major economist tells us that no federal or governmental stimulus has ever been shown to work in a great systemic economic crisis. Watch out Iran.”
So according to him, Government forces are surrounding Tower Hamlets, that ‘the poor’ are being raped and beaten, and South Wales is now Vukovar?
Of course this is the OTT language of the Hard Left. His selective use of information from the MCB/TUC to support his assertions is dodgy to say the least.
But it not just welfare reform that offends Mr Asnar, the British Legion is nothing more than than ultra nationalists perverting the ‘true meaning’ of Remembrance Sunday.
http://moansar.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/poppy-fascism.html
“Remembrance should be an act which promotes peace in the world, a cessation of hostilities and commemoration of all loss of life regardless of race, colour or creed. Sadly, this is not what the Royal British Legion’s current Poppy Appeal is about.”
“The focus of the Poppy Appeal appeal has shifted in recent years to include an active and current supporting role in what can arguably termed illegal wars of aggression; it no longer solely serves veterans and families from the two World Wars. Regardless of our personal view or religious disposition, we certainly have a responsibility to recognise the real facts surrounding the allocation of funds raised on behalf of an organisation such as the Royal British Foreign Legion – for example £50m expenditure on supporting personnel in theatres of conflict today. Yes, one might just consider this to be politically or philosophically controversial. ”
So providing community support to former and current servicemen is tantamount to Ingsoc, fascism and warmongering?
As for the hapless Baroness Warsi, she is nothing more than an EDL stooge pandering to islamophobes:
“Baroness Warsi should be respected for her achievements; however on the grooming cases, she is dangerously wrong.”
Its easy to see how this guy, a pillar of the moderate Islamic community, has had the Red Carpet treatment at the BBC. While he is certainly not a card carrying member of Al-Shabaab, he does represent a left wing world view of victimhood, a view well entrenched in the media class, and whom as a key member of ‘inter faith’ groups, is well placed to further propagate anti British/Western views, although from a more traditional Marxist viewpoint.
As conservative commentator Dr Thomas Sowell points out “the last thing community activists are interested in, is community cohesion”.
Maybe the next time Mr Ansar denigrates the Security Forces and Coalition Government, he might remember that it is they that prevent Al-Shabaab from turning him into the next Drummer Rigby……….
“Prominent UK Muslims under police protection after al-Shabaab threats”
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/17/al-shabaab-uk-muslims-police-protection
“Anjem Choudary’s Today Programme Appearance After Lee Rigby Trial Sparks Backlash”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/12/20/anjem-choudary-today-prog_n_4477996.html?
Do you mean this … Mo Ansar? Keith
who you might know, if you watch or listen to the BBC.
“Go to guy”, darling of SML/Big-Qs/Your Call/R4 Today
mate of N Campbell, debated D Murray on the BBC
A bandwagon jumper who attempted to grab the erm … “credit”, and dictate airtime when Mr Lennon left the EDL
R Spencer – This morning I had this exchange with the prominent British Muslim spokesman Mohammed Ansar on Twitter
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/12/the-inadequate-and-deceptive-fatwa-on-terrorism-and-suicide-bombings.html
While Islam Not BBC (INBBC) propagandises for jihad-supporting Choudary, INBBC shows no interest whatsoever in the freedom of speech of Americans Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer who are still banned from the U.K.
I’d love to see these vile Islamist scum hung from the nearest lamppost.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2526868/Why-BBC-giving-man-platform-Backlash-hate-preacher-Anjem-Choudry-invited-Radio-4-two-Muslim-converts-guilty-hacking-soldier-death.html
The BBC prefer Ronnie Biggs to Jack Mills…Anjem Choudhury to Lee Rigby.
For one type of scum give them their lifeblood and their expenses…the other type of victim are mere beige civilians and drabs…not worth a hoot, unless it scorns Tebbit or UKIP en route.
The BBC are the very enemy and the evil heart of what is corroding Britain…they have got go-burn the f***ers off like leeches.
Savile is the very face of the BBC…as is Brand, Ross and the like.
They hate us-yet we fund them to do so.
Time to shut them up once and for all, before their lavender goon squads give Islam the firelighters to burn the rest of us.
Wake up Britain…the Beeb are Andrew Ridgely without the talent…time to consign them to the racing track and stables…before sending them all to Al Jazerera on a one-way helicopter!
One thing that you can take for granted is when a Muslim is found guilty of a hideous crime, the bBC will ply us all with stories of how Muslims can only be victims, so less than 24 hours after 2 Muslims were found guilty of beheading a British soldier on the streets of London we have:
Ex-soldiers jailed for mosque attack
Torture case against UK rejected
What makes a beautiful camel?
Palestinian killed in northern Gaza
Hezbollah warns Israel over killing
Two Palestinians die in W Bank raids
Floods, blockade and political rifts deepen Gaza misery
Meanwhile a number of men have been found guilty of child abuse in Rochdale and jailed. See if you can find that story on the bBC website without having to really go look for it.
The bBC, the apologist for intolerant Islam in the Uk
How true.
That awful Woolwich show last night could not go three sentences without telling us all about “moderate Muslims”, about extremists not behaving as true Muslims and all possible word jumblies that said the same thing.
Utter craven crap-sneering at Kenyan police, security in shopping malls, and our effete border police letting the scum slide between countries.
Now imagine if they HAD intercepted or prevented the scum from heading out-Glenn Griswald and the like would have crowed about us being racist or racially profiling vulnerable black youngsters on safari.
Oh F888 Off BBC!….and the point remains about how come the BBC can find Bakri, but Mossad can`t.
Why it`s as if the BBC and Islamic scummers are two cheeks of the same arse!
Time to give `em both a sound sharia lite flogging if you ask me!
Just how bad does it have to get before there is any honest appraisal of the impact of mass immigration over the last few decades.
Even the issues and reasons behind mass child rape and British soldiers beheaded in broad daylight do not get any examination. Nobody asks ‘How did we get here?’.
Instead the mainstream media, especially the BBC, seek to divert attention at every opportunity. Then as soon as they can it’s back to the usual propaganda of how wonderful mass immigration is and what a tremendous benefit it has been.
There is a huge deceit being inflicted upon the British public. Immigration policy is decided on the basis of a massive lie, and everybody knows its a lie. Without an appraisal based on the truth we’re heading for disaster.
” We’re heading for disaster.”
No, I think we already have a disaster. The demographic time bomb has already exploded.
Since the end of the war, Europe (including us) decided, through ‘progressive’ legislation, to stop having children. However in order to continue the vast expenditure on the modern welfare state, Europe settled on a policy to import the children that we couldn’t be bothered having, to pay for this system.
This was done way back in the 1960’s
In exchange for long holidays, state pensions and the other trinkets that are provided by the state, we collectively imported large numbers of Pakistani, Turkish, North African migrants to be our future tax base.
Yes, large numbers of Eastern European’s have migrated to the West, but generally we broadly share thew same common culture.
The problem isn’t these people in a general sense, because historically Eastern European have moved on mass before, usually when there is a pogrom, or an outbreak of ethic violence.
The problem now is second and third generation Muslim British. They are British, so we can’t “send them back” to use that terrible phrase, but after years of woeful comprehensive education, where all ‘must win prizes’, and they have been taught that playing the victim card and to hate your country, we now have a white sub-class with little or no aspiration, fed on a diet of fecklessness and the nanny state, and an class from an ethnic background, organized and motivated by ‘community activism’, filled with paranoid conspiracy theories on how the world operates.
Both have good reason to be resentful towards the baby boom generation, who have spent all the money, and left nothing behind.
This is why I feel UKiP fails to even grasp the seriousness of the problem. Leaving the EU does nothing to resolve these fundamental problems, because if by 2030 25% of the population no longer feels ‘British’ or ‘European’, then they are not going to be loyal to the British democratic system either.
As Bin Laden rightly pointed out, “the West has all the watches, and we have all the time….”
Thank you Keith for that analysis, err…..is leaving The EU the ONLY Ukip policy?
Is it all about the EU.?
I dunno, but it seems to be what UKiP broadly stand for, as well as tighter immigration.
Great, makes sense, but how do you solve a problem like Sharia when implimented by second or third gen British Muslims, some of whom have received a new education in the Yeman, Syria or Somalia?
Nigel-nice bloke to have a drink with (and I have) but not so sparky when you put that one to him…….
What you do Keith is recognise and deal with the problem in it’s current magnitude. A magnitude far larger than we would desire, but nevertheless manageable. Then what?
Stop any more of the problems flooding in. What’s that? We cant do without all those foreign doctors, nurses, etc? The fuck we cant.
We will do just fine.
Close the borders, lock the gates, close the airports to them. Pardon? Lots of Brits want to move out? Tough, but if we put OUR country right they may want to stay.
The EU is not the solution its the problem.
If the disgruntled folk are 3rd or 4 th generation immigrants, theres not much we can do, but FFS stop adding to the problem.
So, pull up the drawbridge, repel boarders, and deal with the internal problem. You’d be surprised how that dissent would shrink if those disaffected folk had no support from outside.
Ukip is the only party that is NOT intent on some self imposed dhimitude.
It has to stop somewhere.
Maybe, but sorry to burst you bubble, but UKIP is currently worried about immigration from Eastern Europe, and last time I looked, Eastern Europe is mainly Christian.
They are not the problem, not in the context of trying to establish a Caliphate anyway, radical Islam is the problem.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/5994047/Muslim-Europe-the-demographic-time-bomb-transforming-our-continent.html
“The study for the US Air Force by Leon Perkowski in 2006 found that there were at least 15 million Muslims in the EU, and possibly as many as 23 million. They are not uniformly distributed, of course. According to the US’s Migration Policy Institute, residents of Muslim faith will account for more than 20 per cent of the EU population by 2050 but already do so in a number of cities. Whites will be in a minority in Birmingham by 2026, says Christopher Caldwell, an American journalist, and even sooner in Leicester. Another forecast holds that Muslims could outnumber non-Muslims in France and perhaps in all of western Europe by mid-century. Austria was 90 per cent Catholic in the 20th century but Islam could be the majority religion among Austrians aged under 15 by 2050, says Mr Caldwell.”
Have you been to Antwerp or Rotterdam recently?
Even if you do what you suggest, by 2030 significant centre’s of population will see minority indiginous populations.
And to cheer you up further, what about a country like Russia? By 2016-20, 50% of her army will have Muslim men, because the ethic Russian population is in a death spiral due to poor health outcomes, AIDS, drugs and drink.
Russia is nuclear armed btw.
Now you understand why Putin he trying to make deals with the likes of Iran, Syria, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Don’t expect the US to come riding to the rescue either-while it has healthy demographics, $17 Trillion debt (and climbing) and China owning most of your bonds, makes it less likely that America will be the global policeman.
Like I said, Nigel is a nice guy, but its a little too late to be worrying about closing the door after the horse has bolted.
So what are YOU gonna do mate, roll over and surrender?
Like I said put up the shutters, keep the bastards out. Deal with internal problems, and if Russia goes that way? WTF are WE going to do about it?
Defend the island borders we have, act as a nation, not as Dhimitude personified and plan our future.
The percentage is not yet unmanageable, with immigrants. Don’t sleep until it becomes so.
And you may see ukip as Eu centric, I dont.
Me? I am just an office worker, trying to get by.
I’ve taken up too much of this thread with my rant. There are far more articulate people like Thomas Sowell, , Hayek, Milton Friedman,Victor Davis Hanson, Clarence Thomas, Allen West, Jonah Goldberg, Michelle Malkin, William F Buckley, Margret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, Roger Scruton, Mark Steyn, Douglas Murray, or think tanks like the Hoover Institution, Heritage Foundation, or publications like National Review online, to get some idea what I think.
Its about reading history, not the counter-factual garbage that passes for it. Its about going to museums, churches and art galleries and realizing what is it we are fight for.
Ultimately it is free markets, free people of different creeds colours, shapes and sizes. and strength in our convictions that we will triumph. Its about acknowledging the problems of the real world, and not populist platitudes.
We beat the Communism, National Socialism and Japanese Militarism. Its about being on the front foot, and not hiding under the beds. It about winning people to our side.
Like I said, what do I know.
National Socialism, fighting the Japanese in WW2 were MILITARY conflicts. We knew who the enemy was, they were one side, we were the other.
In the UK it is not a military conflict (at this time) but a case of numbers, and numbers growing very quickly through immigration and birth rates. If the UK government stopped giving out benefits, housing allowances, sweeteners for ethnic groups etc they would fall apart.
The British government protects the enemy of the descendants of this countries ancestors and allows them to grow and is more than happy to appease their demands because the oxbridge toffs and other race traitors fell that the UK and Western Europe should be home to 10’s of millions of the third world who have a deep RESENTMENT of us. They are against us
Not too sure about the USA having “healthy demographics”. More and more latino immigrants – ok they’re Christians, but many bring a druggy and violent culture with them too. Then there’s the rapidly growing moslem population in the States. One example is Dearborn, Michigan, which is a little Mecca now, and I don’t mean a Bingo hall – wearing miniskirts there is not such a good idea (especially if you’re a bloke).
I think you would find that the fastest growing state is Utah-which is Mormon.
I share many of your reservations about UKIP I am not even totally Europhobic but I will still be voting for them for this reason. A good result for UKIP (seats in parliament however few) will be a good result for democracy. The left know this which is why the UAF and ‘hope not hate’ have rounded on them. Their greatest fear is that that that good result will make many voters (especially those who don’t vote) feel that they have ‘permission ‘ to vote for more right wing parties .
And that is probably so, but unlike the leftist (bourgeois or hard) I trust my fellow citizens not order up the cattle trucks on day 1
The ultimate result ,I believe, will be to make the existing parties more afraid of the electorate than they are of liberal inquisition ( most notably in the form of the BBC)
In any case the alternative is to continue with the same old, same old, for ever and ever amen.
That’s a logical position to take, and I am certainly not suggesting that people shouldn’t vote for any political party.
I am worried that they will probably disappoint many however, because the problems are deep and complex, and require solutions from the ‘Left’ and ‘Right’.
I am a neo-conservative (yikes!!!!), or more correctly a ‘liberal mugged by reality’. I share the pragmatism of my conservative counterparts, and the idealism of the left, so I now tend to look towards American Conservatism (although some are deluded-like Ron Paul and his foreign policies, as well as the dreadful pro-Franco Pat Buchanan.) for political answers.
So to me, isolationism is a dangerous tendency, that has never prevented conflict coming to these shores.
Take Syria.
While I accept that the time for intervention has now passed, what we now have is a major regional war between Iran and its proxies, and Saudi Arabia and her proxies. We’ve already seen how far the both sides are prepared to go, and to kid ourselves into thinking that this conflict will not be played out in British or European streets is just wishful thinking.
This is already making the Invasion of Iraq look like a kids party. While at the moment British lives (with one exception) are not being lost-that will change in the future.
Again I am not sure if UkiP, or anybody for that matter,has any answers, so I will stick to what I know and vote Tory-in the hope that people like Michael Gove, Liam Fox or even Gisela Stuart (if Labour win) can gain more influence in policy making
I couldn’t directly reply to ‘Stewart’ (Reply button not available) so will do here.
The UAF and ‘Hope not Hate’ are the foot soldiers of the labour party. Like nearly all lefty organisation they present themselves wanting a better future when in reality UAF are akin . MSM present the EDL etc as causing the violence when in reality it is UAF who attack the protesters at planned points. The police get their orders from the top so do little in the way of stopping the UAF but when the EDL defend themselves the police are in there making EDL arrests. UAF attackers are let off and the only UAF protesters arrested are the ones that ignore the informal rules of the UAF & police relationship that once the police come in fall back and claim that you were a victim.
‘Hope not hate’ is about destroying the lives of any white people who say anything not PC online. It will claim to be making a better UK but it is just about scaring anyone from speaking out (and the police are more than happy to make example of any white people doing so).
http://boltonbnp.blogspot.com/2013/07/43-year-old-edl-member-john-green-takes.html
Committed suicide from ‘Hope not Hate’ smear campaign.
Liberals smile. Muslims Celebrate. Know your enemy.
Reading the posts on the demographics I can but agree. It is too late to prevent large scale population replacement. However further immigration could be stopped completely and disengagement from the Muslim world could be initiated. For their sake as much as ours. After all much is made of Western interference in Muslim lands by those seeking to justify Islamist attacks.
Realistically this will not happen. Liberalism has so corrupted the West that it is now unable to defend it’s values and culture.
It’s leaders both political and cultural make much of Western values. But they are the values of what exactly?
A distorted view of reality that has no base or steel in it’s make up. That wants a world of self gratification it cannot have or has ever been able to have. A culture that accepts the destruction of it’s unborn young in the pursuit of personal gratification is always going to fail. It is inevitable in this world as it should be.
Knowing my country well sometimes I look at the map of Britain and envisage where the frontiers of a balkanised land will run. That I should do this is the greatest indictmernt of a governing class I can think of. They disgust me along with their tame spokesman and women. They have stolen my grandchildren’s future and land and for what?
I owe them no loyalty. My loyalty is to my country and my friends. alone.
” After all much is made of Western interference in Muslim lands by those seeking to justify Islamist attacks.”
Hate to burst your bubble Dave, but according to Islamic author and thinker Sayyid Qutb-the inspiration for violent groups such as Al Qaeda.
” True Islam would transform every aspect of society, eliminating everything non-Muslim. True Muslims could look forward to lives of “poverty, difficulty, frustration, torment and sacrifice.” Jahili ersatz-Muslims, Jews and Westerners would all fight and conspire against Islam and the elimination of jahiliyyah.”
I was not clear. Those who justify are Westerners and other apologists trying to find an explanation which they can accept. I am aware of the uncompromising nature of the thought behind Al Qaeda.
Hence I suggest the doctrine of complete disengagment which covers all commerce, travel ,cultural and other contact. Contact to be at a very basic diplomatic level. Very difficult to achieve but what is the alternative?
“Fury as BBC gives airtime to extremist cleric who refuses to condemn Lee Rigby killing.”
“BBC chiefs sparked fury yesterday by giving a prime-time broadcast platform to an extremist Islamist preacher who refuses to condemn the brutal killing of Drummer Lee Rigby.”
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/449892/Fury-as-BBC-gives-airtime-to-extremist-cleric-who-refuses-to-condemn-Lee-Rigby-killing
This article only proves my point about what the BBC set out to do, and the underlying problems which caused this incident.
For INBBC:-
“THE MOSQUE BEHIND THE JIHAD MURDERERS OF BRITISH SOLDIER
LEE RIGBY”
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/12/the-mosque-behind-the-jihad-murderers-of-british-soldier-lee-rigby.html
Islam is against western society
The government supports Islam
The media supports Islam
The only thing that is stopping Islam is the British who conveniently the politicians are helping make us an ever smaller number in the interests of ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘diversity’. Don’t ignore this. Unite and save Western Society I beg of you.
There is 0 difference between moderate Islam and Extremist Islam. All have one goal, Muslim domination.
They don’t achieve it because they are all to busy turning any country they inhabit . Do no stop Islam and civil war will come to this country.
Wheres the BBC reporting this?
http://thelambethwalk.blogspot.de/2009/11/entire-streets-controlled-by-muslim.html
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4d2_1374014410&comments=1
Oh yes, he’s white and the attackers were from the religion of peace. But according to the BBC no muslims are violent (except those that follow the Quran in killing infidels…they’re conviently not muslims)
WAKE UP PEOPLE
This was an amusing read. Biased BBC is nothing if not completley bonkers.