Tuesday, 8 July 2008

Cash for Principles At The Guardian




Image - The Guardian pigging out on capitalist cash.












For years the Labour government have been corruptly subsidising the labour party propagandist newspaper The Guardian by placing public sector service job adverts solely in the Guardian.

This not only keeps the newspaper afloat, as without the public service sector job adverts, the Guardian would be bankrupt, but it ensures such important Servile State jobs as Transexual Lifestyle Advisers, Race Relations Officers and Asylum Seeker Workers are all on the public pay role.

The paper makes just about enough of a loss every year to stay alive.

This advert was placed in The Guardian under the terms of the contract with the GLA.

It represents the epitome of hypocrisy, in that the journalists that infest the Guardian use the paper to attack the BNP and to undermine our vote in elections.

Now it appears that because the paper needs the cash, and cannot afford to be sued for breach of contract, is running the advert linked here.

Who would ever have thought the day would come when The Guardian, because it has selled out to capitalism, has to run these types of adverts.

Oh the utter sweet irony of it all.

Are you there Melanie - how about an article on your blog about this ;


http://jobs.guardian.co.uk/job/629441/researcher-to-british-national-party-assembly-member?RSSSearch=30733349&gusrc=gu_jobs_box_Politics&link=Politics_jbx_vac



http://jobs.guardian.co.uk/job/629444/pa-to-british-national-party-assembly-member/









Add to Technorati Favorites

Monday, 7 July 2008

Hi Melanie - The CST and the Protestant Pope


















It appears I have a cyber stalker and a famous one at that. Yep Melanie Phillips has been having a good butchers at me blog again.

I call this phenomena 'Blog Wars', where one blog seeks to wage a propaganda war against another blog.

In Melanies case its a bit of a David versus Goliath situation, but hey its fun.

Anyway heres what Melanie wrote in her Spectator Blog here ;

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/820911/the-jews-of-europe-are-still-the-jews.thtml

While we’re on the subject of anti-Jew bigotry, people might be entertained by the way Lee Barnes, the legal director of the BNP, has replied to my earlier post pointing out that his anti-Jew ravings about the Jewish control of Hollywood and the ‘Zionist-controlled’ Community Security Trust (which has nothing to do with Israel) rather punctured the BNP’s assiduously created myth that its Jew-hatred is now a thing of the past. So put out is Barnes that anyone might think he is anti-Jew, he now believes that I should be deported to Israel since apparently Britain is not my own country:


The simple solution to this problem of the Islamist Lobby groups and the Zionist lobby groups fighting against each other is simple, why dont both the Zionists and the Islamists both piss off out of our country... When blood is being split on our streets by extremists in the name of their respective alien ideologies, then the time has come for the deportations to begin. The place for your insane racial, political, theological and territorial disputes is in the Middle East, not in Britain. Why dont both the Zionists and Islamists just slither back to their respective deserts and leave us to get on with our lives.


Oh dear. I think this is called ‘when in a hole, don’t just keep digging but drag in a goalpost for good measure and kick the ball into your own net’.


Just for fun lets analyse Melanies statements ;

1) The CST has nothing to do with Israel ;

a) Link Here ; http://www.cfoi.co.uk/


These are the statements of the Rt Hon William Hague MP at the CST dinner in London
in July 2008 ;

On Iran:

"The Ambassador was just talking about Iran. The Government say they're very worried about Iran but I think – and certainly Israeli Government Ministers have agreed with this assessment – the Conservative Party has been at the forefront in the whole of Europe in stating the case about the worries of Iran and about the need for Europe to carry a bigger stick in relation to Iran and follow the United States in financial sanctions before the Americans can offer some more carrots. And so we would have liked to have seen a more energetic approach by the current Government and we are critical of them. Gordon Brown announces sanctions on Iranian oil and gas last November, announces it again last week and nothing has taken place – absolutely nothing."

On Syria:

"So I also went to Syria last year and I spent a long time with President Assad and I relayed to the Israeli Government everything that he said because the possibility of lasting peace between Syria and Israel is one of the richest prize of it, is one of the absolute keys to unlocking the whole logjam in the Middle East at the moment."

On being a Zionist:

"Well, we're so well co-ordinated in the Conservative Party and I think my answer today is exactly the same as his a year ago when he said ..Yes – if a Zionist is someone who believes in the existence of Israel and its right to exist in security, safety and democracy then yes ... "

On diplomacy with the Arab world:

"We should have a long-term cross-party national plan to elevate our links with the States of the Gulf – culturally, diplomatically, economically. We must not allow ourselves to drift into a clash of civilisations. We have to strengthen our links with friendly Muslim nations of the world."

On Hamas:

"At the moment I don't think Israel can negotiate directly with Hamas or that we can do so. The Quartet principles are very clear – their renunciation of violence, the recognition of the State of Israel, the acceptance of previous agreements regarding Israel – and there's no sign of any of those things.

I know some people make the case that: Oh maybe this is like Northern Ireland – you know, that you have to talk directly - but I think that only works once people who believe only in violence have come to the view that violence is not going to succeed and I don't think we have reached that point with Hamas."

On division between the Palestinians:

"(Tony Blair's job is) much more difficult that there is that division in the Palestinian area; that Gaza is on a different / is run by a different team altogether with a totally different agenda from the West Bank. Nevertheless he is trying. He is trying to make sure that within the West Bank it is possible to show that if Palestinians can run their own security and the economic situation can be improved then there can be greater confidence on all sides to come to a peace agreement and of course we all want Hamas to accept the Quartet principles. It looks like this is going to take time but it shouldn't stop everybody else talking in the meantime.

George Osborne MP When asked about his affiliation to Israel:

"I mean the first really is an objective view of what Israel has achieved during its existence and the way it represents freedom and democracy in a part of the world that is not familiar with freedom or democracy"


Here is David Cmaeron giving a speech to the CST at the meeting above about how he has sent his pet spook to Israel ;

" That is why I have appointed Pauline Neville-Jones to my Shadow Cabinet.

As a former Chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, she brings here formidable experience in this field.

She has proposed the establishment of a National Security Council - and her idea has already been copied by the Government.

In the coming weeks she will be visiting Israel to learn first-hand how it tackles terrorism. "

It appears that David Cameron, William Hague and George Osborne felt it required to articulate their pro-Israel stance to the CST.

If the CST has nothing to do with Israel, as melanie insists, then why did the people invited to dinner by the CST all felt moved to give uncritical support to Israel ?


B) Here is the Jerusalem Post talking about the CST and saying it is part of an Israeli controlled international network called Jewish Agency with 320 centers and institutions spanning the globe, the Jewish Agency is the largest Jewish organization in the world ;

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1202742161185&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

" British Jews have set up the Community Security Trust, which provides physical security, training and advice for the protection of British Jews. CST assists victims of anti-Semitism, monitors anti-Semitic activity and represents British Jewry to the police and government. "


C) Here is the Zionist Network in its entirety as it reveals its international links which includes the CST as part of its international network alongside the Jewish Agency and the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs ;

http://www.antisemitism.org.il/eng/links/




D) Here the CST at the Salute For Israel parade in London and Manchester 2007 ;

http://www.salutetoisrael.org/about

look who also attended ;

Security

The security of the parade and safety of all the participants is something that we are taking very seriously. CST has already started discussions with the Metropolitan Police to undertake the necessary precautions so that all the participants can enjoy the day in safety and with peace of mind. CST has an extremely strong partnership with the police and they work together on numerous high-profile events throughout the year. CST draws on years of experience in communal security and draws on over 3,000 security volunteers who will be working side by side with police officers on the day.


The delivery group for Salute to Israel is made up of representatives from the Board of Deputies of British Jews, the Jewish Leadership Council, CST, UJIA, JNF UK, the Zionist Federation, Manchester Rep Council, United Synagogue, Movement for Reform Judaism and the Zionist Youth Council.

Sponsors

Salute to Israel is very grateful to our generous sponsors who are: -

UJIA
JNF
The Jewish Chronicle
The Jewish News Media Group (electronic)
SJ Berwin
Berwin Leighton Paisner
The Israel Business Club

The CST aso oganised the security for this years salute as well.


E) Here the Union of Jewish Students website links both to the CST and also links to the Jewish Agency via MASA which enables thousands of Jewish youth to spend a semester or a year in Israel in any of over 150 programs, helping them build a life-long relationship with Israel and a firm commitment to Jewish life. MASA is a joint program of the Government of Israel and the Jewish Agency for Israel ;

http://www.ujs-online.co.uk/links

http://www.jpr.org.uk/Reports/Other_Reports/COC_2000/index.htm

The CST link is hidden just under the link for the Jewish Womens Aid, very sinister by the way as they have tried to hide the link.



Yeah, thats right Melanie - the CST obviously has nothing to do with Israel and the Pope is a Protestant.

I stated in the article I wrote about the Zionists and the Islamists that all those reagrdless of race, religion or creed that put loyalty to an foreign state or an ideology that seeks the destruction of the indigenous culture and identity of the nation they reside in, such as through Sharia Law, should piss off to the foreign countries they adore or which have the Sharia Law states they want to impose on the UK.

In this country we call those people traitors.
























Add to Technorati Favorites

Liberals Declare War on Whites



















There is a sickness in our society, a poison that infects all sections of our country
and that must be resisted.

The National Childrens Bureau is a registered charity yet its reports are being used by he government to base its political policies on.

These policies are amongst the most dangerous I have ever seen, and yet this organisation is able to influence Labour goverment policy.

In this article here ; http://www.multiverse.ac.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?anchorId=247&selectedId=250&contentId=12287

The NCB state ;

" Critical Whiteness Studies (CWS) seeks to address the alleged invisibility of whiteness in racial discourse. Proponents of CWS stress the need for white people to examine and challenge their own racial identity, regarding the notion of whiteness as a socially constructed ‘fiction’ (Jay, 2005), designed to perpetuate white privilege and inequality. Jay (2005) suggests that white privilege is often unacknowledged or silenced, and views the role of CWS as exposing and making visible the history and practices of white supremacy as evidenced across all facets of society. CWS identifies the need to move away from the quintessential focus on the ‘racial other’ and examine instead the institutionalization of whiteness and the systemic factors that underscore its continued dominance (Solomon et al, 2005 p147). "


This is what Wikkipedia says about it ;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteness_studies

[edit] Race Traitor
One group of people involved in these discussions advocates a strategy they call race treason, and are grouped around articles appearing in the journal Race Traitor. The adherents' main argument is that whiteness (as a marker of a social status within the United States) is conferred upon people in exchange for an expectation of loyalty to what they consider an oppressive social order. This loyalty has taken a variety of forms over time: suppression of slave rebellions, participation in patrols for runaways, maintenance of race exclusionary unions, participation in riots, support for racist violence, and participation in acts of violence during the conquest of western North America. Like currency, the value of this privilege (for the powerful) depends on the reliability of "white skin" (or as physical anthropologists would deem this construct, the phenotype of historical North Atlantic Europeans) as a marker for social consent. With sufficient "counterfeit whites" resisting racism and capitalism, the writers in this tradition argue, the privilege will be withdrawn or will splinter, prompting an era of conflict and social redefinition. Without such a period, they argue, progress towards social justice is impossible, and thus "treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity."

In Race Traitor, the editors cite as the basis for their proposed actions a call by African American writers and activists--notably W.E.B. Du Bois and James Baldwin--for whites to break solidarity with American racism. Since that racism involves the awarding of various forms of white privilege, some have even argued that every white identity is drawn into that system of privilege. Only identities which seek to transcend or defy that privilege, they argue, are effectively anti-racist. This essential argument echoes Baldwin's declaration that, "As long as you think you are white, there's no hope for you," in an essay in which he acknowledges a variety of European cultures, a multiracial American culture, but no white culture per se which can be distinguished from the maintenance of racism.

Race Traitor advocates have sought examples of race treason by whites in American history. One historical figure consistently valorized by Race Traitor (a publication favorable to the tenets of whiteness studies) is John Brown, a Northern abolitionist of European descent who battled slavery in western territories of the United States and led a failed but dramatic raid to free slaves and create an armed anti-slavery force at Harpers Ferry, West Virginia.

Visions of praxis cited by Race Traitor writers range from anti-racist unionism (such as DRUM in Detroit), collaboration in urban uprisings, and documenting and interfering with police abuse of people of color. Joel Olson has written about a theoretical vision in his book The Abolition of White Democracy.

This is one of the articles The Point Is Not To Interpret Whiteness But To To Abolish It by Noel Ignatiev from Race Traitor ;

http://racetraitor.org/abolishthepoint.html



Note that the main founders of Critical Whiteness Theory are Ruth Frankenberg and the Marxist David Roediger ;

http://education.guardian.co.uk/obituary/story/0,,2121927,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Roediger

Note the title of Frankenbergs book here ;

http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&id=dGgiqHMs3vMC&dq=ruth+frankenberg&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=I-bnOhmPVg&sig=2G2AispyJNSZDxKWvRwQ5sev1z0&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result





Note the phrase - CRITICAL whiteness studies - in other words the intent of this rubbish is to undermine, usurp and destroy the white population, their sense of ethnic community and their culture.

This is the most pernicious load of racist bullshit I have ever had the misfortune to read.

In fact my article here reveals that contrary to the racist crap of the NCB and their facile construct of a supposed 'system of white privilege' in the UK, it is white children who are the main ethnic group failing the most at both school and in admissions to universities ;

http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/2008/06/blame-whitey-legalised-racism.html


This crap from the NCB continues page after page - here they even ADMIT that they plan to 'deconstruct' the white indigenous population itself ;

http://www.multiverse.ac.uk/Browse2.aspx?anchorId=247&selectedId=250

" A review of a journal article which proposes that anti-racist practice should encompass the deconstruction of the identities of ethnic majorities as well as ethnic minorities."

Here the NCB plan to brainwash white primary school children ;


http://www.multiverse.ac.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?anchorId=247&selectedId=262&contentId=14572


This organisation is both sinister and dangerous, and it must be resisted.











http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1032650/Children-young-reported-racism-Government-funded-group-claims.html

Children as young as three should be reported for 'racism', Government-funded group claims

By Steve Doughty

Nursery teachers should inform on youngsters such as these if there is a 'racist incident', says a Government-funded advisory group

Toddlers should be taught about racism and singled out for criticism if they have racist attitudes, a Government-funded advisory group said yesterday.

It told nursery teachers, playgroup leaders and childminders to record and report every racist incident involving children as young as three.

These could include saying 'Yuk' about unfamiliar food.

Even babies should not be ignored in the hunt for racism because they can 'recognise different people in their lives', a new guide for nurseries and child care centres said.

The instructions for staff in charge of pre-school children in day care have been produced by the National Children's Bureau, which receives £12million a year, mostly through taxpayer-funded organisations.

The NCB, which describes itself as 'an umbrella body for the children's sector', has long used its resources to campaign on controversial issues, for example in favour of a legal ban on smacking by parents.

It also runs the Sex Education Forum, a campaign for more sex education in schools.

The new 366-page guide, Young Children and Racial Justice, warned that 'racist incidents among children in early years settings-tend to be around name-calling-casual thoughtless comments, and peer group relationships'.

It said such incidents could include children using words like 'blackie', 'Pakis', 'those people' or 'they smell'.

Children might also 'react negatively to a culinary tradition other than their own by saying "yuk".'

Nursery staff are told: 'No racist incident should be ignored. When there is a clear racist intent, it is necessary to be specific in condemning the action.'

If children 'reveal negative attitudes the lack of censure may indicate to the child that there is nothing unacceptable about such attitudes'.

Nurseries are encouraged to report as many racist incidents as possible to local councils.

'Some people think that if a large number of racist incidents are reported, this will reflect badly on the institution,' it said. 'In fact, the opposite is the case.'

The guidance said that anyone who disagrees is racist themselves.

It also suggests cultivating the home languages of new immigrants - despite Government anxiety to promote the learning of English.

It said: 'English is now viewed as the major language of the world but this is not because it has any innate linguistic advantages - it is because English is the language of power in a world dominated by English-speaking peoples.'

Critics of the race programme for pre- school children labelled it 'totalitarian'.

Author and researcher on family life Patricia Morgan said: 'Stepping in to stop severe bullying is one thing, but this is interference in the lives of children. It smacks of totalitarianism.

'It is regulation of private speech and thought. They intend nursery staff to step into children's playground squabbles and then report them to the local council as race incidents. Who would ever have thought that the anti-racism crusade would go so far?'

Judge Jonathan Finestein ordered the local authority to review its decision to prosecute

A boy of ten has already been taken to court for calling a mixed race 11-year-old 'Paki' and 'Bin Laden' in a school playground argument.

The pair subsequently made up and became friends again, yet the Crown Prosecution Service decided to go ahead because the victim's mother made a complaint.

The ten- year- old eventually appeared at Salford Youth Court in 2006 where he denied a raciallymotivated offence under the Public Order Act of using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to cause another person harm or distress.

But District Judge Jonathan Finestein (pictured) ordered the authorities to review their decision to prosecute.

He said of the defendant: 'I shouldn't think he understands Bin Laden or Al Qaeda. I'm not condoning what he supposedly said but there must be other ways of dealing with this apart from criminal prosecution.'

Prosecutors later decided not to pursue the case.


2) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/education/2261307/Toddlers-who-dislike-spicy-food-racist,-say-report.html







Add to Technorati Favorites

Hollywood strikes again.
















1) Hancock - the bad guy in the film played by English actor Eddie Marsan. Film also features a 'funny' nasty scene of child abuse where a blonde , blue eyed young child, a french child, is violently thrown into the air by the 'hero' hancock.


2) Wanted - villain played by Terence Stamp english actor


4) Get Smart - villain played by english actor Terence Stamp (again)


5) Kung Fu Panda - the evil tiger villain voiced by English actor Ian McShane


6)The Incredible Hulk - the villain played by Tim Roth english actor


7) Indiana Jones and the Crystal skull - villains played by English actor Ray Winstone and Cate Blanchett



Not a bad total - of the top 10 movies in the US 6 of those films use English actors to portray the villains or have the villains as english.

But hey, this isnt typecasting or stereotyping is it.

I wonder if these actors ever wonder what the effect on young english people is when they make their careers out of playing constant parts that denigrate the english.

I suppose the money is good and they dont care.










Add to Technorati Favorites

Saturday, 5 July 2008

Melanie Phillips and the Definition of Irony



















Sometimes you just have to laugh at the chutzpah of some people, Melanie Phillips foremost amongst them.

Her recent blog article here is direct proof of how irony is absent from the Zionist Network ;

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/816311/taking-the-airbrush-to-evil.thtml


The simple solution to this problem of the Islamist Lobby groups and the Zionist lobby groups fighting against each other is simple, why dont both the Zionists and the Islamists both piss off out of our country.

Hitch up your wagons and leave.

The idea that we will allow you to fight a proxy war on our territory is one that we will not accept.

The 7/7 bombers sought to justify their crimes in the name of the Palestinian people and the War In Iraq, both of which are related to Israel.

When blood is being split on our streets by extremists in the name of their respective alien ideologies, then the time has come for the deportations to begin.

The place for your insane racial, political, theological and territorial disputes is in the Middle East, not in Britain.

Why dont both the Zionists and Islamists just slither back to their respective deserts and leave us to get on with our lives.

Melanie Phillips can clear off to live in Israel, the state she defends and so adores, and the idiots in the BMI return to whatever nations and Sharia Law states they came from that they were so happy living in.

That way we will all be happy - as you wont be here.




The comments here are so deserving of my comment I have to oblige with a response in brackets ;



From this instructive little affair we learn, among other things, the following:

The BMI believe that inveighing against ‘the Jewish lobby’ is not antisemitic.

( From Melanies recent articles it appears that any criticism of any Zionist or Jewish groups in the UK is to be labelled as anti-semitism. It appears that no logical definition of anti-semitism exists, it is just a phrase to be throw at anyone a Zionist disagrees with )

The BMI are very sensitive indeed to what is said about them.

( About as sensitive as Melanie and the Zionist groups in the UK are sensitive about what is said about them I reckon )


That is because they are accustomed to pulling the wool over the eyes of many journalists.

( Yes dear, you would know wouldnt you about the importance of pulling the wool over peoples eyes)

That is because a) some journalists are sheep. ( I couldnt agree more melanie )


b) some journalists have the bee of bigotry buzzing in their bonnet. (absolutely melanie )

c) virtually no British journalists know any Arabic. ( virtually no British journalists have the guts to investigate the Zionist lobby as they know their careers would be finished )


It is clearly very important indeed to these Islamists not to allow the false image of moderation they have so carefully constructed for themselves to be punctured at all.


( Yes Melanie my dear, you would know how important that is wouldnt you, seeing as the fascist methodology of the UK Zionists is hidden behind a facade of facile liberalism )

It is very important indeed, therefore, that it is punctured as much as possible.


(totally agree - thats what this blog is for )

Well done, Dave T and all at Harry’s Place.

( And thanks Melanie for the laughs - who said those without a sense of irony cannot be funny ! )














Add to Technorati Favorites

Sharia Law, Gandhi and India


















Superb article in The Telegraph ;

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/07/05/do0501.xml



The lesson for those that say we can reach an accomodation with Shari Law and that we should also show tolerance to the demands of those Islamists and Isamic politicians and their spokesmen in the media that push for a role for Sharia Law in our legal, political and economic systems is that of India.

Both Gandhi and Nehru preached a message of tolerance to Islam and allowed Sharia Law to exist in the Indian legal system and said that Indian society should accomodate the demands of Islam and Sharia Law.

Gandhi said that Islamic terrorism should be met only with peaceful protest.

Whilst he pranced about India in a loin cloth preaching tolerance, the Islamist terrorists and seperatists were stocking up on ammunition and rifles.

This adoption of apathy to counter terrorism led directly to the partition of India and over a million people slaughtered in the civil war that erupted, and then meant that India was torn in two and Pakistan created.

That is the lesson that history teaches us when we adopt the liberal approach to Sharia Law and Islamic terrorism - that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Surrendering to Sharia Law is the surrender of our nation, democracy and liberty.

Sharia Law must be extirpated from our nation, as the moment we tolerate the intolerable in the name of tolerance we surrender the future itself.

At the same time the ideology of Liberalism that has disarmed our society must be extirpated from our political and legal systems so that we can defend our country from the Islamist threats. Also the Zionist Networks in our society that seek to undermine the political growth of the BNP must be exposed and dismantled. The Zionists attack the BNP simply because we are British Nationalists and not subservient to the interests of Israel.

Both the power and influence of the Liberals and the Zionist Networks must be removed so that we can defend our nation.






Is cosying up to Muslim extremists the best way to defeat terrorism?
By Charles Moore


The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, was nice about sharia this week. It is not "only about mandating sanctions such as stoning, flogging, the cutting off of hands and death to those who do not comply with the law", he said. And the provisions of sharia "do not include the repression of women".

Read more by Charles Moore
Lord Phillips admitted that he did not claim "special expertise" in the field, but he had been to see some sharia chaps in Oman and they had seemed very civilised.


Lord Chief Justice embracing sharia law
Anyway, his main point was that sharia might be useful here in mediating disputes about things such as marriage.

Well, it is surely true that the customary practices of various religions can be effective ways to reach agreement. Where these are compatible with wider law, as they are in the case of Jewish religious courts, they should be valued.

And it is true that sharia is not "only" about nasty punishments. But such punishments are indeed part of sharia (40 lashes for drinking alcohol is a widely accepted tariff, for example; 100 lashes for fornication), even if they are not always applied. Lord Phillips also did not mention that sharia upholds polygamy for men, prescribes a lower compensation for injury to a Muslim woman or a non-believer than to a Muslim man, and gives less value to their testimony in court. A little bit of repression of women there, Lord Phillips?

Sharia also traditionally insists on a second-class status of citizenship for Jews and Christians. All four main schools of sharia say that the penalty for apostasy - abandoning the faith - is death.

advertisementLord Phillips was speaking at the London Muslim Centre, which is part of the East London Mosque. Dr Mohammed Abdul Bari, the head of the Muslim Council of Britain, introduced him. Dr Bari said that British judges must be "sensitive to our divine laws on personal relationships and family matters". How sensitive? Up to four wives at once allowed?

He also quoted from the Koran to show the importance of justice in Islam. I looked up the two quotations. The first appears in a chapter called "Women", which says things like: "The male shall inherit twice as much as a female". The bit about judging with fairness appears just after the following: "Those that deny Our revelations will burn with fire." The second quotation, also about judging with fairness, comes in a passage about how Jews who believe the wrong things must be punished.

Of course, you could find some blood-curdling things in Jewish and Christian scriptures, but the difference for our society today is that neither Jews nor Christians are trying to establish a state based on the political implementation of their religion. Islamists are.

It is this question of context that bedevils the way Britain tries to handle the problems of Muslim extremism. I wonder, for example, how much the Lord Chief Justice knew about his venue.

The East London Mosque is considered respectable. But if you read Ed Husain's remarkable book The Islamist, about how he embraced extremism and later rejected it, you find that it was the East London Mosque that helped him learn to hate the West. On Saturday evenings, he would listen to talks at the mosque along these lines, often inspired by the dead Islamist writer Abul Alah Mawdudi. Mawdudi incited the creation of a wholly Islamic society by "organised struggle, sparing neither life nor property for this purpose". Many leading figures in the Muslim Council of Britain are admirers of Mawdudi.

There is a similar problem with the Government's efforts against terrorism. A huge programme called Contest, with a subset called Prevent, is supposed to address the hearts and minds of young Muslims. If you read its latest strategy document, you find that its definition of "shared values" has little idea of Britishness. Its section on "grievances" implies that the root causes of extremism are Britain's own racism, inequality or foreign policy. Its proposed "structures" to prevent violent extremism are a cat's cradle of interdepartmental confusion.

If you can cut through the jungle of jargon, you find "a risk-based preventing violent extremism action plan". This risk is never explained, but it seems to mean that the groups promised the money to wean the young off violent extremism will often be pretty extremist themselves.

And so it proves. The Mosques and Imams Advisory Board, which tries to keep mosques free of baddies, includes representation of the Muslim Association of Britain, which is a British arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the oldest Islamist organisations in the world. To help purge violent extremism from universities, a new organisation has emerged called Campusalam. At its launch, it gave a platform to three Muslim Brotherhood men. Mawdudi supporters have also got state money to revise the teaching of Islam in British universities.

Later this month, Labour may well lose the by-election in Glasgow East to the Scottish National Party. Nearby, in Glasgow Central, the SNP candidate is Osama Saeed. Mr Saeed is now the adviser on Islamic matters for Alex Salmond, the First Minister. "Scotland can be the hub for the Muslim world," he says. As part of the Scottish Contest programme, he offers young Muslims "alternatives" to al-Qa'eda material on the internet. This is how he proposes to do it: "When people talk about deradicalisation, the last thing you want to do is say you must be against terrorism." At various times, Mr Saeed has told Western countries that they must change their foreign policy to avoid being blown up, praised "martyrdom operations" (suicide bombing) and called on Scottish Muslims to act "in defiance" of police inquiries about terrorism. He is the Scottish spokesman of the Muslim Brotherhood.

There is a theory behind all this. It is a sort of bastard child of the Northern Ireland peace process. It says that the West is "morally crippled" by its behaviour towards Muslims. It must reach out to all those Islamist extremists who are not actually personally involved in blowing anyone up and recognise, in the words of one of its proponents, Alistair Crooke, that Islamism is "founded on rehabilitated human values". Then it must empower them. Only they, backed with our money, the theory goes, will be able to deliver the terrorists.

Next week, a big exhibition at Olympia called Islam Expo, with stalls from delightful governments like Sudan and Iran, will give a platform to this grand coalition of Islamists under the banner of "Understanding Political Islam". And a minister, Shahid Malik, will appear on television for the anniversary of July 7, 2005 (when Muslim extremists murdered British people of all religions), to say that Muslims are "under siege like the Jews" under the Nazis.

So the solution to extremism is that extremists become the official representatives of Islam in this country. Islamist mosques, organisations and spokesmen will be treated as the true voice of Muslims (and woe betide those Muslims who disagree). Then we shall get a lot more sharia than Lord Phillips has bargained for.









Add to Technorati Favorites

Friday, 4 July 2008

Melanie Phillips and The Zionist Network

As I have written many times we in Britain do not live in a democracy, we live under The Tyranny of the Minorities.

One section of this tyranny of the minorities is the domination of our political, legal and cultural social zones by ethnic minority lobby groups.

The two most powerful ethnic minority lobby groups in history both in the UK and US has been the Jewish Zionist and also the non-Jewish Christian Zionist groups.

The article ‘A Liberal Israel Lobby’ by Gershom Gorenberg in Prospect here :

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=10119


and also the article


The Israel Lobby by John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt here ;

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

Are examples of how many Jews in the US and UK have realised that the Zionist elite that run the Jewish lobby groups are simply interested in their own power and Israels interests and not in the interests of ordinary American and British Jews.


The issue is simple enough - the leaders of those Jewish Zionist groups in the UK such as the CST, Searchlight and the Jewish Chronicle have betrayed the community interests of British Jews for their own personal, economic and political interests just as much as they have betrayed the non-Jewish British community. These Zionist groups have pushed for mass immigration, the colonisation of the UK by Islam and the undermining of indigenous British culture. This has not just damaged the interests of the indigenous British community, it has placed the entire British Jewish community in the UK at risk. Unlike the millionaires Gerald Ronson and Phillip Green etc etc ordinary British assimilated Jews do not have the financial means to flee the UK with their vast loot in the event of a clash with radical Islam in the future.

Whilst the Zionist leadership of these groups would be on the first flight to Tel Aviv, the ordinary British Jew would standing alongside us defending our cities, towns, villages, streets and houses from the Radical Islamist terrorists who will be attacking them at some point in the 21st Century.

The BNP is not anti-semitic. We are neither anti-Israel. What we are against is the power of the organised Zionist groups in the UK who put the interests of Israeland themselves before the interests of all British citizens including British Jews.


The Terrorism of the Word whereby all those that criticise the Zionist cabal that control these Jewish lobby groups are called ‘anti-semites’ has to end. At the same time the morons both from the Far Left and Far Right that still indulge in infantile anti-semitism and attack ordinary British Jews as a community must be ostracised and reviled by us all.

The BNP as a political organisation represents the interests not just of the indigenous British community but also the interests of the ordinary British Jewish community.

Melanie Phillips, the CST, Searchlight and The Board of Deputies have chosen to attack the BNP, and we are simply responding to their attacks by revealing their hypocrisy and duplicity.

By raising this issue of the power of the Zionist cabal that control so called ‘Jewish community groups’ and seeking to educate both our community and the Jewish community about the truth of how their so called ‘leaders’ have betrayed them and us, we are fulfilling our innate duty of care to both our community and the Jewish community.

If we had failed to address this issue then we would have failed the Jewish community, many of whom are realising that their interests as a community lie with the BNP and not with the Zionist clique that control the community groups that have betrayed them for decades.

This is not just an issue that the BNP are debating as the entire political spectrum both left and right have understood that the Zionists that control the Jewish community groups are out of control and need to be challenged so that they represent the interests of both the communities they live within and also the interests of their own communities before they represent the interests of Israel.


Both the Zionists and the Nazis share an interest in defining British Jewry as a monolithic entity - the Nazis in order to demonise tham and perpetuate the myth that 'the Jews run the world' and the Zionists in order to terrify their opponents into silence by the power of the myth.

The Zionists seek to perpetuate the myth that the Jews rule the world, as both the Nazis and Zionists profit from the fear such a myth creates in individuals and societies. Nazis have a scapegoat they can blame all societies ills on, and the Zionists have a myth guaranteed to terrify their opponents.

The fact is that British Jewry is not a monolithic entity. An example of this is the recent split off by a group of liberal British jews who were disgusted at the Board o Deputies uncritical support for Israel.

To say the Zionist extremists of the BOD represents the views of all British Jews is like saying Hitler represented the views of all Germans. Both are calumnys against their respective peoples.

The story of the split in the BOD when British Jews got sick of its pro-Israel Zionism is here ;

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/british-jews-break-away-from-proisraeli-board-of-deputies-435146.html

Just as many American Jews are demanding an alternative to the Pro-Israeli Zionist group AIPAC, British Jews are realising that their interests and the interests of Israel are not mutually enforcing.

To be snarled at by the attack dogs of British Zionism for saying this, is of course par for the course.

They do as they are programmed to do so.

Their power and authority is delegated to them only on the firm understanding they do so when required to protect Israel and the power of the Zionist network in the UK.

Their authority is used in orer to ensure logical analysis is replaced by fear, for their power derives solely from fear.

One of the problems living in a multi-cultural society is that all sections of society can be simultaneously coerced into submissive compliance by being terrified by the threat of being called 'racists' or 'anti-semites' by any well organised minority of political activists lobbying on behalf of specific issues, but who are able to link their ethnicity and the issues together.

At the same time any well organised minority WITHIN A MINORITY can also terrify into submission any group. A well organised cadre within a disorganised mass always has greater power simply based on their ability to organise as a group. This is how the minority of Zionists has been able to terrify the British Jewry itself into silence using its fascist methodology.

Those Jews who opposed the BOD, Searchlight and the Zionist network WITHIN British Jewry were abused, villifed, ostracised and attacked in the media. These are all classic fascist intimidation tactics.

For instance the AIPAC organisation in the US has vast power in relation to US foreign policy simply because the organisation is run by Zionist Jews and supported by Zionist Christian Fundamentalists.

These two groups, Zionist Jews and Zionist Christian Fundamentalists, are the two most powerful lobby groups in the US - simply because if you cross them they can brand you with the name 'anti-semitic' or 'anti-Christian'.

The fear of being called a racist, anti-Christian or an anti-semite is the modern equivalent of the fear that people in the Middle Ages once had of being called a witch, once you were called the name then mass hysteria drove the process of demonisation and into the bonfires you went.

Today they dont murder you, they just murder your reputation.

Once the brand has been burnt into someones good name, they become a political and social pariah.

Yet the side effect of this reign of terror is that no-one is able to calmly look at the one question that needs answering - DO THESE PRO-ISRAEL GROUPS REALLY REPRESENT JEWISH AMERICANS AND BRITISH AMERICANS ?

In the US the answer is plainly no, as the article below here confirms, yet the AIPAC group is able to weild its power precisely because it assumes the right to speak in the name of Jewish Americans.

This is the same process in the UK.

The Board of Deputies, the Jewish Chronicle, Searchlight, the CST and the mainstream Jewish groups have assumed the right to speak on behalf of the Jewish community, and at the same time demonise those they unilaterally define as 'the enemies of the Jewish community' when in reality that have NO mandate to do either.

Their right to speak in the name of anyone but themselves and their own agenda is an artifice, and those that genuflect before this artifice are in the grip of a similar hysteria as that which once afflicted the Middle Ages.

The Zionists speak only for themselves and Israel, they do not speak for patriotic, integrated and loyal British Jews. In fact they promote an agenda and policies which are positively harmful for the interests of British Jews eg supporting mass immigration into the UK, supporting the Iraq War, supporting the growth of Sharia Law in the UK.

The time has come for the age of terror imposed by groups such as Searchlight, BOD, CST and the Jewish Chronicle - with their terror of the word being applied to anyone they wish - to come to an end.

The most pernicious aspect of multi-culturalism has been how it is has created a Tyranny Of The Minorities, where organised lobby groups can punch above their power in the political and social fields and thereby usurp the democratic rights of the majority.

In order to ensure we live in a democratic society that serves the interests of the majority, and not the Tyranny of the Minorities, we must begin to confront the undue power and influence accrued by many such groups in our society - ranging from the Zionists, the Sharia Law exponents, the race relations industry, the liberal elite and the establishment itself.


http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=10119

Aipac, according to sources familiar with Capitol Hill lobbying, tries to keep US policy almost entirely on the side of security needs, of protecting an embattled Israel. That's the implication behind Aipac's credo as spelt out on its website, where it describes itself as working "to help make Israel more secure by ensuring that American support remains strong." Aipac does not come out explicitly against peace efforts. But the list of initiatives it boasts of promoting includes nothing aimed at a two-state solution, and much aimed at restricting US relations with the Palestinians and other Arab and Muslim actors. Examples include increases in aid to Israel and a House of Representatives resolution "praising the Jewish state for reunifying Jerusalem" in 1967—alongside efforts to put conditions on aid to the Palestinian authority and enable sanctions against Syria.


Aipac has reportedly created hurdles even when the Israeli government itself has tried to make peace. In 1995, for example, Aipac backed a bill in congress to move the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The legislation looked pro-Israel. But as Michael Massing argued in the New York Review of Books and elsewhere, it was actually an ambush for Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who was negotiating with the Palestinians. Moving the embassy would have thrown a spanner into the Oslo peace talks. (The bill passed, but with a loophole enabling Presidents Clinton and Bush to avoid the move to Jerusalem.)

Another of the things that a responsible researcher could say with confidence is that within US politics, Aipac does not represent the views of American Jews.

In 2004, only 24 per cent of Jews voted for Bush, according to exit polls. Yet when Bush spoke at Aipac's convention earlier that year, delegates reportedly interrupted him 67 times with ovations and chants of "Four more years!"

The liberal Jewish tilt even applies to middle east issues. The American Jewish Committee's most recent year-end survey of Jewish opinion showed a 46-43 plurality of US Jews in favour of establishing a Palestinian state. Support for the war in Iraq is consistently lower among Jews than among Americans in general. The AJC survey showed 57-35 per cent opposition among US Jews to American military action to stop Iran's nuclear programme.

Yet perhaps the most striking flaw is that Mearsheimer and Walt accept Aipac's own claims regarding its power and who it represents. "In 24 hours, we could have the signatures of 70 senators on this napkin," they quote an Aipac official telling a journalist, and they insist it is not bluster. Though they sometimes note that "the lobby" is not the same as the American Jewish community, they also cite guesstimates that Jews provide between 20 and 60 per cent of donations to the Democratic party and its presidential candidates, and explain this as basic to "the lobby's" influence.

An Aipac blessing undoubtedly matters to some Jewish donors and voters—those for whom Israel is the overwhelming political concern. But they are a small minority. In the American Jewish Committee's latest survey, only 6 per cent of respondents said that Israel would be the most important issue in choosing who to support for president this year.

Suc research is needed in the Uk to reassure British Jews that it is okay to defy the Zionists and their fascist methodology in the UK.






Add to Technorati Favorites