‘Make Britain Great Again’


– Introduce a comprehensive ban on the religion of “Islam” within the United Kingdom. This ban will include the prohibition of halal slaughter, sharia courts, religious publications (such as the Koran, Hadiths), the operation of mosques, madrasas and “cultural centres” and the public preaching and / or teaching of Islamic scriptures and doctrines.

– Introduce a prohibition on the use of Islamic face coverings in public, such as the Burka.

– Anyone found to be promoting the ideology of Islam will be subject to deportation or imprisonment.

Britain First’s policy on Islam


The BBC likes to promote the idea that the Far-Right are a serious threat to Britain, equivalent or worse than the Islamist threat.  Complete nonsense of course.  They point to the murder of Jo Cox as evidence of the seriousness of the threat and yet forget the stabbing of Stephen Timms MP by a Muslim and naturally forget all the Muslim terrorism that has happened preferring instead to try and alarm us about the Far-Right on Twitter or Facebook….so dangerous.

Of course Twitter has banned ‘Britain First’ and Youtube looks to have tried to limit access to its videos

In response to user reports, we have disabled some features, such as comments, sharing and suggested videos, because this video contains content that may be inappropriate or offensive to some audiences.

But just how much of a threat or even growing presence is the Far-Right or groups so defined by the BBC?  Britain has been famously immune and resistent to ideologies either from the far-left or the far-right and despite fringe elements fanatically promoting them they have not prospered.  That changes of course when you import people who don’t have the same values and attitudes as British people and who are from birth inculcated with the ideology that they then carry with them and profess diligently throughout their lives wherever they are.  There are now millions of people, and growing in number, who adhere to an ideolgy that is intrinsically and radically opposed to western liberal values and beliefs…and yet the BBC shows absolutely no concern about that, and actually promotes it, and instead paints an alarmist picture of Europe turning into a Nazi plaything all over again.

Look at some ‘Far-right’ youtube videos and look at the views…hardly any.  This is the video that Jayda Fransen from Britain First was once again arrested for…..


Just over 2,000 views…look at the views Muslim attacks on her get.…nearly a million….and yet she is the threat to Britain?  Britain First certainly has strong view on what should be done to stop the Islamisation of Britain…but if you think Islam is a genuine and serious threat to British culture and society then that is the logical conclusion….which is why politicians, the BBC and even the security services refuse to say that there might be a problem with the growth of an ideology so radically opposed to British values….admit it and they would have to do something about it….what?  The very tough proposals of Britain First?  Never ever happen.

The Telegraph tells us of the truth about the Establishment response…

People in MI5 tell me that denying the connection between Islamism and terrorism derives from the belief that if you accept it, there’s no hope for a multicultural society in Britain: we would just have to recognise that part of the population is permanently liable to become terrorists.

Maybe some are more onboard with Britain First than they’d like to admit….

7/7 Met police chief calls for extremists to be locked up in INTERNMENT camps as he says MI5 and police cannot keep track of 3,000 terror suspects

And note, for the record, it is ‘Britain First’ not ‘Whites First’….they may be anti-Muslim but not racially prejudiced as the BBC likes to tell us…..the BBC’s positive discrimination beneficiary [surely!] Nihal today telling us that Britain First’s views were ‘repugnant’…but failed to spell out exactly what and why.

The BBC tells us that their message is ‘so dangerous that the authorities are trying to shut them down’…note the BBC trying to imply that Britain First is violent as it cuts to a clip of Britian First actually warning of conflicts that they say are likely to be the consequence of the political indulgence of Islam…not a surprise nor controversial as the Islamist threat to Britain is constantly in the headlines…and indeed four more terrrorists arrested today…but just what is ‘so dangerous’ about their message?  The BBC are quite happy to warn us that the Far Right are taking us back to the Thirties with all that entails…and yet Britain First’s warning about Islam is ‘so dangerous’….why is the BBC’s message not ‘so dangerous’?  Note the BBC suggest that there are only 100 or so followers of Britain First on this march….and EDL ‘rallies’ are now pretty miserable affairs by all accounts, barely getting into double figures…so that massive ‘far-right’ threat, where is it really?  Just the Establishment’s counter-propaganda narrative designed to build up the threat of the far-right so as to lessen the perception of threat from Islamism….the far-right threat is just as bad as the Islamist one thus we mustn’t be too critical of Muslim terrorism.


Why is it permissible to attack political ideologies but something like Islam, which is more political than spiritual, and which the establishment of which has serious consequences for British society, is off limits?  Why does Jayda Fransen get arrested when the police refused to arrest those Muslims exposed by Dispatches’ ‘Undercover Mosque’ programme….the police in fact outrageously trying to prosecute C4?


However ‘repugnant’ [©Nihal] Britain First’s message might be how is it that they are treated so vastly differently than those who promote the Isamist message which may be equally, or more, ‘repugnant’?

Why are Charles Moore and Boris not ‘so dangerous’…their messages pretty similar to Britain First’s…

Charles Moore:

Nothing has changed in 25 years to ease my concerns about Islam

It seemed to me that most Muslim leaders saw their role not in integrating Muslims in Britain, but in asserting difference and increasing their muscle. Many favoured sharia law trumping British law. They would not support Muslim membership of the Armed Forces if those forces were deployed against Muslim countries. They wanted it to be illegal to attack Islam, let alone denigrate its prophet; and they waged constant “lawfare” to try to silence their critics. They tended, I thought, to see the advance of their cause as a zero-sum game in which the authorities had to cede more ground (sometimes it is literally a matter of territory) to Muslims.

Boris Johnson:

To any non-Muslim reader of the Koran, Islamophobia – fear of Islam – seems a natural reaction, and, indeed, exactly what that text is intended to provoke. Judged purely on its scripture – to say nothing of what is preached in the mosques – it is the most viciously sectarian of all religions in its heartlessness towards unbelievers. As the killer of Theo Van Gogh told his victim’s mother this week in a Dutch courtroom, he could not care for her, could not sympathise, because she was not a Muslim.

The trouble with this disgusting arrogance and condescension is that it is widely supported in Koranic texts, and we look in vain for the enlightened Islamic teachers and preachers who will begin the process of reform. What is going on in these mosques and madrasas? When is someone going to get 18th century on Islam’s medieval ass?

It is time that we started to insist that the Muslim Council of Great Britain, and all the preachers in all the mosques, extremist or moderate, began to acculturate themselves more closely to what we think of as British values. We can’t force it on them, but we should begin to demand change in a way that is both friendly and outspoken.


Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to ‘Make Britain Great Again’

  1. Pounce says:

    The bBC which prostates itself before those who wish to subjugate the entire world to their cause has aired this article for all to see


    This from the very same bBC which prefixes the word Prophet before the name of the Islamic founder, which refuses to admit that his name from 3% of the population is the most popular name in the UK. Which refuses to class people who murder,death kill in which to terrorise others to their way of life as Terrorists. Which refuses to class men who like to rape little girls as..pedophiles. Which airs a feel good story about Islam every friday. Which promotes the view that Muslims can only be victims in the UK. Which goes out of its way in which to cover up any act of violence carried out by Muslims. Is now asking if Stockholm syndrome exists.

    Anybody else see the irony.


  2. Rick Bradford says:

    If polite and rational public discussion of the Muslim presence in England is prohibited (which it is) the more extreme anti-Muslim elements will naturally grow in strength.

    If it’s a debate we’re not allowed to have (which we’re not), then people whose voices are being suppressed will grow angrier to the point of violent rhetoric and more.

    The BBC and its ideological fellow-travellers are therefore partly responsible for the rise in right-wing extremism, at its current level, and in the future when it will be worse.

    Whether this is intentional or not, I don’t know. I suspect it’s just “progressive” ideological blindness.


    • joeadamsmith says:

      Look on the bright side, if there is one, racism was not debated in the UK which led to an increase in support for BNP and their councillers being elected. The result of THAT policy, in my opinion, is that UKIP, eventually, received a higher coverage. So, quite possibly, we might get a voice heard BEFORE it comes to throwing bricks.


  3. Oaknash says:

    For our callow and lazy politicians – led by the left wing/globalist/Common Purpose infected BBC. “Shooting the messenger” will always be far easier than “shooting” our enemies.
    And since both main political parties (through MSM cajoling and coercing) now appear to abase themselves at the alter of multykulturalism I can see little change any time soon.
    Unfortunately significant policy change will now only take place when people en masse get fed up with their daughters being abused and their culture being dismantled in favour of an Islamic one. I suspect only flying bricks will make any real difference to policy – and until that time we can expect more of the same.
    No one will do much until enough people have felt the full advantages of cultural “enrichment” and at only then – will there be enough of a critical mass formed to actually do something about it.

    You only have to look at what has happened in other countries (with regard to inter communal violence) to realise what could also happen here. There is nothing special about UK, we are just a very patient people (despite what Aunty tells us) But I think that that patience is now starting to wear very thin.


  4. Pounce says:

    I see the folks at the bBC who love to slurp on what their Mullah unzips have amended their article about how that stupid cunt in Israel was apparently arrested for simply slapping a soldier. Now it really does like the Jews were heavy handed with this poor little girl, who according to the plastic Muslims at the beeb is a national hero. Yup poor little girl.

    The bBC, the propaganda arm for anybody who wants to murder the jew.


  5. MarkyMark says:

    How do you integrate a culture that wants religion to be the centre of all things including running the country and one that separates religion and state. This simple statement needs to be answered by every politician and imam now!

    0. Islam asks you to have zero thought about it’s origins and practices. And make zero comparisons with successful cultures.

    1. Islam asks for one simple thing. Islam asks for everything – finance, religion, police, morals, schools, law, food, science, clothes, art and your body to be Islamic.

    2. Islam only has two problems – Muhammed and Mohammed. Once the first problem has been solved then the second one can be solved easily.

    3. Islam offers three things. In the Koran it offers Peace, War and then a Continuation of War. In your life Islam wants you to subjugate yourself, subjugate your family and then subjugate everyone else.


  6. Thoughtful says:

    A naïve wishful post which of course can never happen even if the people wanted it to. The vast majority of Muslims haven’t got a clue what their religion teaches because they learn to recite it in classical Arabic, which they cannot understand and refuse to read their holy books in translation. They therefore rely on the teachings of an Imam who is in the same position they are, in turn relying on other Imams who taught him.

    ALL of the problems you outline are the work of the Salafists who intimidate and terrorise the other Muslims with the protection of the odious morally bankrupt Labour party. Tale the case of Labour councillor Amina Lone who highlighted hard line Muslim intimidation of Muslims in Manchester, the first immediate reaction of the local Labour party was the suspend, and then remove her party membership on some spurious reason which couldn’t be challenged.

    20 different countries, all of the Muslim have banned Salafism, wearing the face veil in some carries a possible prison sentence of 25 years ! Every single terrorist Jihadi attack in Europe has been motivated by Salafism. ISIS which the BBC lies has nothing to do with Islam is motivated by Salafism – they could not make the accusation of ‘islamofauxbia’ if it genuinely has nothing to do with Islam could they?

    The main problem is however that Salafism is the widely practiced sect of the oil rich Middle East which is bribing Western leaders to promote its values, and is therefore being given not only free rein but state protection in European countries.

    We do not need to deal with Muslims as a whole, just the Salafists, and they certainly should be barred and deported if they refuse to change.


    • vesnadog says:

      “The vast majority of Muslims haven’t got a clue what their religion teaches because they learn to recite it in classical Arabic, which they cannot understand and refuse to read their holy books in translation. They therefore rely on the teachings of an Imam”

      Sadly, in the above quote. If you put “”Roman Catholic” where “Muslim” is. And “Priest” where “Imam” is and then “Latin” where “Arabic” is then you have the exact same scenario.


      • pertelote says:

        You say “you have the exact same scenario”. No, that’s total bullcrap!
        You are saying that Catholics ” refuse to read their holy books in translation”?

        BTW..go and learn some basic rules of punctuation – “Sadly, in the above quote. If you put..”
        I wish there was a thumbs down voting icon.


        • David R says:

          In fact the modern RC church uses very little Latin.


        • vesnadog says:

          “You are saying that Catholics ” refuse to read their holy books in translation”?”

          Most of the time refuse! Other times are advised by their Priest!:

          “Yet today, nearly a half-century later, 44 percent of American Catholics “rarely or never” read the Bible, and only 7 percent read it on a daily basis. How can this be?”


          “Another part of the answer is the sacramentalism of the Catholic Church: To save your soul, it is more important to participate in the sacraments than to read the Bible. But a third part of the answer is, alas, that the leadership of the Church (I mean its bishops and priests) have not stressed the importance of Bible-reading for shaping the Christian mind and heart.”



          • pertelote says:

            “The vast majority of Muslims” – “44 percent of American Catholics” – “you have the exact same scenario”

            Spot the difference?..your maths aren’t much good either.


        • vesnadog says:

          “BTW..go and learn some basic rules of punctuation – “Sadly, in the above quote. If you put..”

          It pleases me that this is your main grumble. I can live with that.


          • pertelote says:

            it was not my main grumble..as in BTW (by the way)


            • vesnadog says:

              I would be grumbling if my vicar told me to treat The Holy Scriptures in this way:

              “the leadership of the Church (I mean its bishops and priests) have not stressed the importance of Bible-reading for shaping the Christian mind and heart.”


      • Lucy Pevensey says:

        The original languages of the Biblical texts were not Latin. It was all translated into Latin ( The Latin Vulgate) from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. There are quite a few good modern English translations directly from Hebrew and Greek which haven’r passed through a Latin filter.


        • vesnadog says:

          So the 7 percent doesn’t means nothing?


        • vesnadog says:

          “The original languages of the Biblical texts were not Latin.”

          Yes, I’m very well aware of that!

          So when every English, American, Italian Priest says mass in Latin every worshiper in the congregation understands every Dot and Title of the Latin that the priest tells them before, during and after mass? I assume you are encouraged to pick up your Bibles and read from it while the Priest gives the sermon?


      • Thoughtful says:

        vesnadog, you know nothing of British history nor its laws! It is illegal to hold a Church service in anything other than the vernacular. It might well have been the case that in our history the people knew only what the church wanted them to know when Latin was used, but we put a stop to that by outlawing it.

        That’s called the progress of civilisation.
        When I talk about this to Fascists and mention that equality demands that ALL religious services are held in the vernacular and not just Christianity they recoil in horror that their brown eyed boys might have to do something they don’t want to do. Some are obviously more equal than others!

        In retrospect though, we are much safer as a result of the Muslims NOT knowing what their (un) holy books teach as they’d be murdering lying cheating & raping ALL the time instead of just some of it.


    • Broadcasting-on-Behalf-of-the-Caliphate says:

      Hi Thoughtful, have you read the Qur’an? Can you explain Islam’s rapid expansion during the first two centuries of its founding? Can you explain the history whereby Islam tried to take over France (following its conquest of Spain), and whereby it tried to enter Europe through Austria? Are you not underestimating the issue?

      Is your argument Thoughtful, that the majority of Muslims don’t know what Islam is about in terms of scripture and so they can make it up to be anything they want including the Religion of Peace? But in an Information Age – is this really possible?


  7. Holly Selassie says:

    Islam has many virtues as the poster at the top of the blog reveals. They do not as a matter of course fuss over OFSTED and its transgender values, it loathes the patronising and overpaid BBC.
    (Taqqiyya excepted)
    It does NOT let its kids sell drugs or commit rape within the House of Islam, nor does its kids wander round Cardiff city centre on Mad Friday with its knickers round its ankles as the useless street pastors dole out Savlon and flip flops.
    If WE had only set out to prevent the state grooming our kids, insisted that they be taught religious values that have long sustained our culture-and had we used lawfare re tuition fees, smoking bans in prison and psychiatric hospital, and spurious godless health issues like bariatrics and septicaemia from infected drug or tattoo paraphernalia?
    Then maybe Islam would have shrivelled under its own barbaric and incoherent theologies . But we think a life without a God or a Jesus is far preferable to one with them.
    And so we have a faith that won`t allow you those options on the rise.
    Not saying its inevitable or deserved in all cases. But God gives a plan on how to live-we screw it up-and maybe the new plans He`s giving will cost more, hurt more.
    Nut we had free will, and still do.
    “Nobodys Fault But Mine” as Led Zeppelin once sang.


    • Thoughtful says:

      “It does NOT let its kids sell drugs” Oh yes it does ! The Muslim who caused the crash in the Birmingham underpass was a convicted drug dealer, and the one the Police shot dead in Yorkshire was a prolific dealer as well. They’re as happy to peddle their drugs to fellow Muslims as to non Muslims as well.

      “or commit rape within the House of Islam” Not true either as they are quite happy raping their relatives kids safe in the knowledge it won’t be talked about or reported to authorities.

      Check out the immigration levels under the Thatcher government, no one knew what the BLiar regime were going to do because Britain is not a democratic country, and does not legally require political parties to state the policies they intend to enact in their manifestos. No one knows what they are voting for in the UK, and although people voting for leftie Dave thought he would put a stop to it, he didn’t.

      Promises made not kept, unpleasant things the public wouldn’t want hidden from them. Not a democracy at all.


      • StewGreen says:

        @Thoughtful This is how they see it
        Ethnic Muslim does something good – That’s cos of Islam
        Ethnic Muslim does something bad – That’s the influence of British culture on him/her
        …. when a girl is abused, it’s cos of the British culture of short skirts etc.


    • TruthSeeker says:

      Holly Selassie
      “Islam has many virtues”
      Unfortunately, in accordance with General Relativity, the Virtuous Islam is in a region of four dimensional space-time forever inaccessible to us.
      We are stuck with the other Islam, the one that has no virtues whatsoever, unlesss being creative at mass murder for the longest period in recorded history is a virtue.
      Unless having enslaved more people than any other organisation in recorded history is a virtue.
      Unless . . . . . than any other organisation in recorded history is a virtue.
      Plenty more where those came from, fill in the dots.
      “Islam has many virtues” I think that horse will be left at the start on this website.


  8. NCBBC says:

    what is wrong with “Britain First” as a policy objective all parties?


  9. NCBBC says:

    7/7 Met police chief calls for extremists to be locked up in INTERNMENT camps as he says MI5 and police cannot keep track of 3,000 terror suspects

    This call comes from a Muslim police chief.

    As I’ve stated oft, Jihadis are not the main threat. They can be dealt with by normal police methods. The real threat is the demographic one. Muslim population in Britain is likely to be around 10%. In less then 40 years Britain will be an Islamic country.

    Surely a police chief would know this. I have to conclude therefore that the Muslim police chief is carrying out a Kitman manoeuvre. That is, deception to transfer our attention away from the real threat.


  10. StewGreen says:

    There’s an amazing double standard going on here.
    So one gang has a couple of physically harmed victims per year
    Whilst the other gang has thousands
    Yet it’s the first gang that we are supposed to regard as a bigger threat ?

    Apparently the “far right” look over at an entire group of people, apply a label then classify them all as evil”
    Yet that is what the lib mob does by applying the label “far right”

    You have one gang the purple-skins made up of a variety of people who share a perfectly legal ideology.
    And a few of their individual affiliates have stepped over the line and committed crimes, usually facilitated by their own mental problems NOT the structure of an organisation.
    There are a total of say 5 or 10 physically harmed victims over the years
    (like an idiot driving at a mosque)

    Then in the Islam-skinned gang made up of a variety of people who share a kind of legal ideology*.
    And quite a lot of their individual affiliates have stepped over the line and committed crimes,
    often facilitated by the structure of the ideology
    ..say FGM, honour crimes
    + Other crimes whose prosecution is hindered by the structure of the ideology and political correctness
    say 5,000 groom/rape gang offences
    + other crimes like terror often facilitated by a formal group ISIS/AlQuaeda
    and well as a hand full of offences facilitated by their own mental problems.

    * Since the Koran specifies inequality man/woman.. and Muslims vs People of the book vs the rest.
    as well as punishments/marital practices at odds with UK law
    ..then I’m not sure it classes as “perfectly legal”.


    • StewGreen says:

      – How many physical victims would we save if there was no Far-right gang ?
      – How many physical victims would we save if there was no Islam-ideology gang ?
      Seems like the ratio is … 1 : 4,000


      • tamimisledus says:

        We would also be making a great step towards improving the future of all humanity.
        Even the muslims would benefit (by leaving islam), if they could but understand it!


  11. Lucy Pevensey says:

    And why is the Islam-ideology gang NOT labelled Far Right?


  12. s.trubble says:

    IS it Islamophobic to expect our Leaders to agree a counter narrative which is passed through the Islamic community that
    a return to their cultural and hereditary countries is seen as an imperative to all muslims. In fact it is their duty.

    It seems like the inevitable and somewhat disappointing truth is that our tolerance is met by their increasing intolerance.

    A recipe for disaster unless people get their heads out the sand.