Mass immigration has created ……

‘A Lost Generation…it is really sad for British people’….so said ‘Elizabeth’ on 5Live today whose son is unemployed. (09:25)

Labour is guilty of breathtaking hypocrisy over foreign workers

A British ‘underclass’ was created on its watch – but all Labour does is blame everyone else

The BBC helped create that ‘lost generation’.  A generation of working class youth that has lost out, workless, homeless and without hope, because of the great and the good of the BBC imposing their beliefs and values upon Britain.

The hidden stories of Britain.

They are the stories that make people angry.

They are stories that politicians have ignored for too long.

They are not good for the people of Britain.

That was Ed Miliband telling us that the consequences of mass immigration are……’The hidden stories of Britain’…that make people angry…that are not good for the people of Britain.

It was the BBC, the journalists, the editors, the Head of News, who sat down and decided to hide those stories, the stories that are making people angry.

Labour’s Chris Bryant, that unscrupulous political opportunist, gave his speech on immigration today….you can’t tell from the photo but he got his underwear in a proper twist today.

The BBC covered it extensively….or rather bombarded us with shallow analysis and irrelevancies that still yet hide the true scale of the political betrayal that lay behind the immigration polices of the Labour Party.

Bryant stated that this was ‘One of the key issues in British politics’.

Labour Peer Digby Jones on R4 (13:17) stated that this was a ‘party political game’ by Bryant and Labour, it was the ‘amazing hypocrisy of the metropolitan elite’ who have failed the workers by not educating them properly….but who have delivered a welfare benefit society where the work ethic takes second place.

The BBC even chipped in…Evan Davis on Today saying ’It’s the most emotive issue in politics…Immigration’.

We were also told by the BBC that ‘Labour knows it is vulnerable on questions on immigration’.

Guess that’s why the BBC avoids those tricky questions.

Peter Hitchens in the Mail recently stated of Andrew Neather’s revelations about Labour’s immigration open door policy that : 

‘I happen to think this brief glimpse of the truth was the most important political revelation of our time.

We have been betrayed.’

Let’s get this right…immigration is ‘one of the key issues in British politics’……Andrew Neather’s admission was possibly ‘the most important political revelation of our time’…..

…and not only did the BBC deliberately refuse to cover the issues and such revelations at the time, it still does now, to this very day.

One of the key issues of British politics…and Britain’s major news broadcaster has refused to investigate and challenge Labour on its policies and the dire consequences of those policies.

Evan Davis interviewed Bryant this morning in an interview in which Bryant self destructed…..though not through anything Davis asked.

Bryant even touched on Labour’s responsibility for immigration…naturally defending Labour…Labour made mistakes but it wasn‘t deliberate!….…but Davis said nothing.

When Bryant claimed that immigration was undermining wages this was another opportunity for the BBC to jump in and challenge Labour on its policy…..and the hypocrisy of Bryant’s position…after all it was the Labour Party who deliberately imported all this cheap labour. The BBC said nothing.

I have listened for two days and not heard anyone on the BBC raise the issue of Labour’s open door policy, the sheer hypocrisy of Chris Bryant talking about ‘British jobs for British people’ when his Party created the mess and the mass unemployment in the youth sector.

Remember when Labour’s John Reid said to Andrew Neil:

“The Treasury insisted on having a free flow of labour because they thought that brought down the cost of labour….there is nothing right wing about having a controlled immigration policy”

So Labour deliberately undermined local wages….the ‘undermining‘ that Bryant is complaining about now.   So where are the BBC questions about that now?

Even when a Unite Union rep for construction, Bernard McAulay came onto 5Live and stated that importing these workers and leaving our own on the scrap heap leads to an increase in crime as the British unemployed see no future other than crime….the BBC sat silent, they didn’t want to go down that avenue….nor to look at the crime committed by immigrants.

Labour’s immigration trick was one of the most duplicitous breaches of faith, a momentous and infamous betrayal of the British People, that the reality is that the BBC knows if the full scale of that betrayal, the magnitude of its meaning were to be fully revealed and investigated not only would Labour be out of office for years but the BBC itself would be destroyed for its part in the deception.

Which is why Labour are having an easy ride from the BBC….it dabbles around the edges paying lip service…dragging in David Goodhart from Demos, he being a ‘safe’ Lefty, but it does nothing on the excoriating scale of Peter Hitchens article….see below.

Today the BBC did not look at the difference between Labour’s policies when in government and those it claims to hold now in its craven response to UKIP’s populist success….instead the BBC spent its time investigating the difference between Chris Bryant’s speech pre-released to the Press and the one he actually made.　

Labour has gone basically unchallenged over its immigration policy and the dire effects of it.  Bryant is now touring the studios on his own little spiralling journey of self destruction, unaided by the BBC it might be said, and has yet to face a rigorous, coherent grilling by that BBC.

Once again Labour is let off the hook and that ‘Lost generation’ betrayed once already, is for a second time betrayed as the BBC fails to bring them any ‘justice’ and the culprits to book.

Here are some relevant and telling facts and comments from Migration Watch, Peter Hitchens and Labourite Dan Hodges:

 From Migration Watch:

 It is not hard to see why Labour’s own apparatchiks supported the [immigration] policy. Provided that the white working class didn’t cotton on, there were votes in it.

Research into voting patterns conducted for the Electoral Commission after the 2005 general election found that 80 per cent of Caribbean and African voters had voted Labour, while only about 3 per cent had voted Conservative and roughly 8 per cent for the Liberal Democrats.

The Asian vote was split about 50 per cent for Labour, 10 per cent Conservatives and 15 per cent Liberal Democrats.

Nor should we underestimate the power of ‘community leaders’ who have strong influence in constituency Labour parties and who, of course, benefit from a growth in numbers.

Other activists, nurtured in the anti-apartheid movement of the last century, had no difficulty promoting the interests of minority groups — almost, it seems, regardless of the impact on the white working class.

From Newstime Africa, and why it paid Labour to import voters… 

Thousands of asylum seekers in the UK are to benefit from new rules set by the government to clear backlogs of about 450,000 applicants within the immigration system,

But African’s across the UK have welcomed the news and this will give a big boost to the Labour party in the forthcoming gen­eral elections as this would mean over a million family members who may not have been eli­gi­ble to vote as a result of their status would now cast their votes for the first time in the UK. We are urging all those who are set to benefit from this new rules to cast their votes for the Labour party as they have shown courage in the face of conservative adversity to make this positive move that will go down well in places as far as villages in remote areas in Africa whose loved ones have faced intolerable suffering in Britain as a result of touch immigration policies.

From now on this press would mount a ‘VOTE FOR LABOUR’ campaign in recognition and appreciation of this brilliant move by the labour government to make life much easier for African immigrants in the UK. This move is a clear indication that the Labour party is the party of the people!!

By Voting Labour you secure for yourself a bright future in the UK. The UK conservative party is not an option for immigrants; they simply don’t want to see us here!! At least the Labour government has granted 3 amnesties since they came to power.

My friend, just vote labour!!

And here is Peter Hitchens who has done the BBC’s job taking a long, hard look at the ideology behind the mass immigration policy…you can see why the BBC refuses to make similar revelations…too many of its own staff , the ‘ex’-Trots, Marxists and anarchist revolutionaries, have their finger prints all over this one.

Perhaps Evan Davis can do his own Mea Culpa one day.　

How I am partly to blame for Mass Immigration

When I was a Revolutionary Marxist, we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible.

It wasn’t because we liked immigrants, but because we didn’t like Britain. We saw immigrants – from anywhere – as allies against the staid, settled, conservative society that our country still was at the end of the Sixties.

Also, we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people – usually in the poorest parts of Britain – who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly ‘vibrant communities’.

If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.

Revolutionary students didn’t come from such ‘vibrant’ areas (we came, as far as I could tell, mostly from Surrey and the nicer parts of London).

We might live in ‘vibrant’ places for a few (usually squalid) years, amid unmown lawns and overflowing dustbins.

But we did so as irresponsible, childless transients – not as homeowners, or as parents of school-age children, or as old people hoping for a bit of serenity at the ends of their lives.

When we graduated and began to earn serious money, we generally headed for expensive London enclaves and became extremely choosy about where our children went to school, a choice we happily denied the urban poor, the ones we sneered at as ‘racists’.

What did we know, or care, of the great silent revolution which even then was beginning to transform the lives of the British poor?

To us, it meant patriotism and tradition could always be derided as ‘racist’.

The screaming, spitting intolerance comes from a pampered elite who are ashamed of their own country, despise patriotism in others and feel none themselves.

They long for a horrible borderless Utopia in which love of country has vanished, nannies are cheap and other people’s wages are low.

What a pity it is that there seems to be no way of turning these people out of their positions of power and influence.

For if there is to be any hope of harmony in these islands, then it can only come through a great effort to bring us all together, once again, in a shared love for this, the most beautiful and blessed plot of earth on the planet.

And finally Dan Hodges:

Last June Ed Miliband appeared at the IPPR think tank in London and delivered a solemn pledge on immigration. “I am not going to promise ‘British jobs for British workers,” he said. “There is nothing wrong with anyone employing Polish builders, a French chef, or a Swedish childminder.” And Miliband has been true to his word; he’s not promised British jobs for British workers. He’s sent Chris Bryant out to do it for him instead.

The Open Threads are in overdrive these days…..with Labour mouldering in opposition, the Public resistant to global warming propaganda, immigration undermining Britain and Islamic  teachings in the spotlight, the BBC itself is in overdrive to re-educate us, to sweep the bad under the carpet, to paint a glorious picture of Life as it should and could be if only we’d listen to, if only we’d co-operate with, our Betters.   They have so much to teach us.

Lynton Crosby’s alleged, by Labour, conflict of interest, was big news for the BBC, instantly becoming a major story.

Tim Yeo’s green industry conflict of interest was of no interest at all.

Remarkably nor is the alleged green industry conflict of interest of Lib-Dem Peer Lord Stephen:

Lord Stephen facing questions over wind farm ’empire’

A Liberal Democrat peer was today facing questions over his support for wind farms in the House of Lords after it was reported he is a director of 10 renewable energy companies.

Is there a pattern forming there?  If it was ‘Big Oil’ he had investments in you can be sure he’d be on the frontpage.

The Scottish Daily Express broke the story this morning, the Telegraph reported it by midday.

The BBC, the world’s most powerful broadcaster, hasn’t felt the need to comment.

It does seem that for certain communities and interests the BBC will look the other way and white wash over their failings.

Is the BBC biased? has also noticed a similar pattern when the BBC is reporting or rather, not reporting, other matters:

Breaking news

The population of Gaza is a highly political issue:

“Many who oppose Israel’s arms blockade of Gaza claim that the territory is “an open-air prison” and “the most densely populated place on earth.”

The BBC’s Jon Donnison knows this well…which is no doubt why he emphasises Gaza’s population density in a parting shot at Israel as he disappears off to Australia:

From little Gaza to chunky Australia

With its wall, watchtowers and fences, Gaza is not a place for the claustrophobic

Watchtowers and fences?  No mention of Gaza’s rocket launching terrorists, the murderous government that keeps its population in fear and poverty.  No mention that those watchtowers and fences are actually on the Israeli border…to keep out those Palestinian murderers and terrorists intent on slaughtering as many Israelis, men, women and children, as possible.

This is the BBC’s graphic:

Chosen no doubt to emphasise Gaza’s population ‘crush’.

Why didn’t the BBC choose the one at the head of this post which would show a completely different perspective on things.  Not quite so effective politically for someone pushing the Palestinian narrative.

What of the fact that Islington in London has a density of nearly 14,000 / sq. km

…and London itself a density of 4,761/sq. km

In other words little London has a greater density than Gaza.

Incredible how all those BBC employees manage to survive in London…presumably they couldn’t leave London to work in Salford because it is such a ‘open prison’ just like Gaza.

H/T to Pounce who beat me to the draw on this!  ‘Open Wound’…good one!…and comments all removed from Donnison’s piece?  Possibly all those messages of fond farewell were too emotionally overwhelming for Donnison.  Yes, sad to see him go….still, there are many stories of Australian racism towards Muslims and immigrants to explore and bring to the world’s notice….blimey cobber…the pommie bastard’s straight in there already:

Stephanie Banister: Australian Islam gaffe goes viral

By Jon Donnison

As with Gaza the BBC can be a bridge to the world for the victims of White Australian prejudice as Mark Thompson once relayed to us:

‘We provide a bridge to the world, a bridge to freedom, it is very important that the story of Gaza is told around the world.’

I imagine this is one legal immigrant that the Aussies will wish to put back on the boat asap.

Once again the BBC demonstrate a peculiarly selective way of reporting important events from around the world.

 An Aussie election candidate makes a fool of herself and the BBC are all over it, they were reporting it yesterday and remarkably it was still going strong on the news this morning:

Islam gaffe candidate Banister quits Australia election

A nothing of a story in the scale of things….unless you work for the BBC and delight in seeing a critic of Islam being dumb.

No such delight over Obama’s stream of  ‘gaffes’.

And no such delight over this story, in fact no reporting at all:

Danish Muslim leader who fuelled uproar about Prophet Muhammad cartoons now says he was WRONG and paper was RIGHT to print images

• Ahmad Akkari led protests against drawings to Lebanon, Egypt and Syria
• Dispute over caricatures of Prophet Muhammad became international crisis
• Lebanon-born Muslim leader, 35, now says the trip was ‘wrong’

Here is a story that could help prevent the radicalistion of some Muslims by countering the Jihadi narrative and defusing the anger that is artificially whipped up by these so called preachers as it would make potential recruits question such rhetoric….

…and the BBC isn’t at all interested.

It prefers to launch a petty attack, disparaging and mocking someone in a story that has little relevance to anything.  The intention of course is to try and associate this woman and her ‘foolish ideas’ with all critics of Islam…how ill-informed they are, how stupid, how prejudiced.

The BBC once again trying to manipulate the Public and impose its view of events.

Funny what priorities the world’s finest broadcaster has and who it thinks is the worst danger to world peace….the Jihadists or those who criticise the Jihadis and their ideolgy.

The BBC seem to be on the side of the Jihadis by default.

Just an impression but listening to the BBC I kind of get the idea that when the Republicans march and there is trouble it is the Loyalists fault, when the Loyalists march and there is trouble it is the Loyalists fault.

Anyone else get the same impression?

Just been listening to 5Live talking  (around 08:45…still on air just now) to Labour’s Jon Ashworth as he talked about this:

Labour accuses Tesco and Next of hiring foreign staff on the cheap

Labour will ignite a fresh row over immigration this week by naming leading companies who they claim “seem to deliberately exclude British people” from jobs

Guess what?  Not a single word from the BBC here about Labour’s immigration policy, and not a word about Mandelson’s revelation that Labour went ‘hunting’ for immigrant workers in Europe to bring back here….you might have thought Ashworth complaining about Next doing just that might have jogged the BBC interviewer’s memory…but no.

Immigrants? We sent out search parties to get them to come… and made it hard for Britons to get work, says Mandelson

• Former minister admits Labour deliberately engineered mass immigration
• Between 1997 and 2010 net migration to Britain totalled 2.2million

If ever there was a more controversial and important subject, one that would blow Labour out of the water if it was reported openly by all media sources not just the Mail & Co,  immigration and Labour’s highly destructive and secret plan to flood this country with foreigners regardless of the effect on the native workers, must be it.

Which is why the BBC won’t touch it.

Richard dawkins has stirred up a bit of a Twitterspat with a completely innocuous comment.

 Caitlin Moran decided Dawkins was declaring war on Muslims:

The Telegraph’s Tom Chivers put a but more effort into coming to the same conclusion:

Please be quiet, Richard Dawkins, I’m begging, as a fan

Dawkins may believe that he is criticising only the religion, and its effects on the people who hold it, rather than the people themselves (“don’t hate the player, hate the game”), but his gleeful hurling of rhetorical stick-bombs doesn’t make that sort of distinction. Is he being racist? Maybe not, depending on how narrowly you define it. But whatever he’s being, it’s not nice, and it certainly isn’t advancing the various causes of secularism, atheism or everyone just bloody getting along.

Richard dawkins replies:

Calm reflections after a storm in a teacup

Funny that Steven Berkoff said something very similar about ‘the Theatre’  a few days ago whilst also criticising the BBC:

‘….his criticism was not reserved for the corporation as he claimed that in the last 30 years the theatre has not produced a single actor of worth and there is more talent in street performing.’

No one seems to think he was declaring war on the Theatre loveys.

By the by, the BBC reported the Telegraph’s version of Berkoff’s comments but failed to mention that he also said this:

Berkoff also reserved criticism for the “cringing banality” of Twitter, claiming that Stephen Fry is a fan “because this man loves attention. He has a million, million and half dopes listening to the utterly crawling banality of this man’s mind.”

The BBC has so far failed to mention the row over Richard Dawkins Tweet.  I wonder why…is it like the UKIP member who wanted to introduce Sharia law and chop off hands that they also didn’t report on?….the BBC seems not to report things that don’t reflect their view that Islam is the Cradle of Civilisation from which everything good springs.

Perhaps they realise that Dawkins isn’t actually being controversial and that he speaks the truth…if so the BBC might not want to draw attention to that.

Is Dawkins speaking the truth?

What has Mehdi Hasan got to say?  I’m not sure you could accuse him of launching a war against Islam:

He states that there are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world….and between them they have a total of 10 Nobel prizes.  The Jews, with a population of 12 million have 150 Nobel prizes.  All 6 Jewish Universities are in the top 20 in a world ranking.  There are no Muslim universities in the top 200.

 He goes on to say:

We wonder why we are losing battles, we are not being out fought, we are being out thought.

We are not under armed, we are undereductaed.

We have lost the ability to think, to acquire knowledge, to advance intellectually and then we wonder why our community is in such decay.

Which is why you might wonder why Hasan has recently Tweeted this praising the pompous  Owen Jones for calling Dawkins a racist bigot because of his Tweet about Islam’s lack of Nobel prizes:

Mehdi Hasan ‏@mehdirhasan 8h  “Dawkins dresses up bigotry as non-belief – he cannot be left to represent atheists” – a superb @OwenJones84 on fire:

Hasan also quotes from this fellow , who must presumably also be considered an anti-Muslim bigot…despite, like Hasan, being a Muslim:

Pervez Hoodbhoy is professor of nuclear and high-energy physics at Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad. This article is based on a speech delivered at the Center for Inquiry International conference in Atlanta, Georgia, 2001.

Fearful of backlash, most leaders of Muslim communities in the US, Canada, and Europe have responded in predictable ways to the Twin Towers atrocity. They have proclaimed first, that Islam is a religion of peace; and second, that Islam was hijacked by fanatics on the September 11. They are wrong on both counts.
First, Islam – like Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or any other religion – is not about peace. Nor is it about war. Every religion is about absolute belief in its own superiority and its divine right to impose itself upon others. In medieval times, both the Crusades and the Jihads were soaked in blood. Today, Christian fundamentalists attack abortion clinics in the US and kill doctors; Muslim fundamentalists wage their sectarian wars against each other; Jewish settlers holding the Old Testament in one hand and Uzis in the other burn olive orchards and drive Palestinians off their ancestral land; Hindus in India demolish ancient mosques and burn down churches; Sri Lankan Buddhists slaughter Tamil separatists.
The second assertion is even further off the mark: even if Islam had in some metaphorical sense been hijacked, that event did not occur on September 11, 2001. It happened around the 13th century. Indeed, Islam has yet to recover from the trauma of those times.

In the twelfth century Muslim orthodoxy reawakened, spearheaded by the cleric Imam Al-Ghazali. Al-Ghazali championed revelation over reason, predestination over free will. He refuted the possibility of relating cause to effect, teaching that man cannot know or predict what will happen; God alone can. He damned mathematics as against Islam, an intoxicant of the mind that weakened faith.

Islam choked in the vicelike grip of orthodoxy.

It was the end of tolerance, intellect, and science in the Muslim world. The last great Muslim thinker, Abd- al Rahman ibn Khaldun, belonged to the 14th century.

For Muslims, it is time to stop wallowing in self-pity: Muslims are not helpless victims of conspiracies hatched by an all-powerful, malicious West. The fact is that the decline of Islamic greatness took place long before the age of mercantile imperialism. The causes were essentially internal. Therefore Muslims must introspect, and ask what went wrong.

Today Muslims number one billion, spread over 48 Muslim countries. None of these nations has yet evolved a stable democratic political system. In fact, all Muslim countries are dominated by self-serving corrupt elites who cynically advance their personal interests and steal resources from their people. No Muslim country has a viable educational system or a university of international stature.
Reason too has been waylaid. To take some examples from my own experience: You will seldom encounter a Muslim name as you flip through scientific journals, and if you do, chances are that this person lives in the West.

Though genuine scientific achievement is rare in the contemporary Muslim world, pseudo-science is in generous supply. A former chairman of my department has calculated the speed of Heaven: it is receding from the earth at one centimetre per second less than the speed of light. His ingenious method relies upon a verse in the Qur’an which says that worship on the night on which the Qur’an was revealed is worth a thousand nights of ordinary worship

A more public example: one of two Pakistani nuclear engineers recently arrested on suspicion of passing nuclear secrets to the Taliban had earlier proposed to solve Pakistan’s energy problems by harnessing the power of genies. The Qur’an says that God created man from clay, and angels and genies from fire; so this highly placed engineer proposed to capture the genies and extract their energy.

We have but one choice: the path of secular humanism, based upon the principles of logic and reason. This alone offers the hope of providing everybody on this globe with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Note that all important phrase: Islam choked in the vicelike grip of orthodoxy.

Orthodox Islam…in other words fundamental Islam, the real Islam.  In other words all those scientific advances  of the ‘Islamic Golden Age’ were performed under an Islam that wasn’t really ‘Islam’…it was a loose, convenient interpretation that allowed Jews and Christians a great deal of freedom which they used to further their interests in science and learning with the side effect of helping the imposed ‘Islamic’ regime.　

 The real Islam choked such advances in a ‘vicelike grip’.

 The reason people like Caitlin Moran feel able to attack Richard Dawkins and claim he is racist or anti-Muslim for his completely sensible comments is because organisations like the BBC have refused to delve into the history and meaning of Islam, the real history not the hagiographys that they produce deifying, ironically, Muhammed and glorifying Islam whilst hiding its darker side.

An example of which might be that whilst the BBC has covered extensively Stephen Fry’s comments about homophobia in Russia they refuse to acknowledge the very same thing on our own doorstep amongst certain communities as revealed by the ubiquitous Mehdi Hasan about his own homophobia as induced by Islamic teachings:

So let me be clear: yes, I’m a progressive who supports a secular society in which you don’t impose your faith on others – and in which the government, no matter how big or small, must always stay out of the bedroom. But I am also (to Richard Dawkins’s continuing disappointment) a believing Muslim. And, as a result, I really do struggle with this issue of homosexuality. As a supporter of secularism, I am willing to accept same-sex weddings in a state-sanctioned register office, on grounds of equity. As a believer in Islam, however, I insist that no mosque be forced to hold one against its wishes.

Two girls have acid thrown in their faces on a Muslim majority Island.

The BBC think this may be one of Mark Mardell’s ‘senseless tragedies’…

‘….it was the first time visitors to the island had been attacked in this way, describing the incident as “alien” to both the police investigating and the victims.

Officers had no idea as to the motive.‘

But just in case anyone should be speculating they highlight this:

 “It was not a civilised act, it is not Islam.”

Why would anyone say that if there was no idea as to the motive?

Compare the BBC’s version of events to that given in the Telegraph:

Zanzibar acid attack: finger pointed at radical Islamic group as five questioned over assault on British teenagers

Five men are being questioned by police over the acid attack on two British charity volunteers in Zanzibar as suspicion grew that a radical Islamic group may have inspired the assault.

The BBC tells us (last updated (15:07 9th Aug) the police have no idea of the motive and that this is a completely alien event.

The Telegraph tells us that there is a likely motive and that it has happened on the island before, though not to a tourist….so not such an ‘alien’ incident to the police in reality.

Blimey but time flies! This is overdue but now underway! Off you go … detail the bias!