"While dictators rage and statesmen talk, all Europe dances — to The Lambeth Walk."

Friday, 30 October 2009

Interview with Lord Pearson

Lord Pearson, the UKIP peer who invited Geert Wilders to speak and show Fitna in the UK, is seen here being interviewed by the Canadian branch of the International Free Press Society.

In the video he explains just why he invited Mr Wilders to Britain, and makes some very harsh predictions about the future of England and Britain should the current trend of Islamisation and mass immigration continue:

Lord Pearson is one of the very few politicians unafraid to speak out on these issues, and for that he is to be commended. He is also part of a drive to take UKIP away from being a 'one issue party' which solely focuses on Europe to one which is noted for its opposition to mass immigration and Islamisation.

Everyone should see this video - especially any British people toying with the idea of marching for our freedom and our future tomorrow. Hopefully this will make up your mind either way.

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes.

Tuesday, 20 October 2009

Geert Wilders Ambushed by the BBC

Vlad Tepes has made a video using the audio from the BBC radio interview with Geert Wilders I mentioned yesterday, coupled with images of the Muslim protests against Mr Wilders' presence in London a few days later, and other Muslim riots in Europe.

Link: BBC ambush Geert Wilders

Monday, 19 October 2009

The Insanity of Modern Britain

I remember watching the film Johnny English with a good friend of mine several years ago.

As we left the cinema, he commented that the film was "realistic, but only if you accept the premise that the monarch has the power to turn the entire country into a giant prison camp."

As it turns out, that was not a particularly realistic prediction of our future (and I realise it wasn't intended to be, yes) - what we actually should have feared was the government turning the entire country into a giant mental asylum.

Does that sound like cliched hyperbole? Well, maybe it does, but cliched or not the term does adequately sum up what is being done to Britain.

Take the following story (hat tip: Irish Savant):
Police are hunting an elderly letter writer responsible for sending more than 50 racially abusive letters to people across the country, including the prime minister.

The letters, some sexually explicit in content, have been sent to schools, hospitals, mosques, universities, doctors' surgeries and private individuals, leaving some recipients "extremely distressed".

According to Hampshire police, which is heading the investigation, the letters are all pro-English in content and racially inflammatory, with many appearing to have been sent in response to Daily Mail articles. All the letters are offensive and racist against a wide variety of nationalities and cultures.

The outrageous, pro-English scoundrel didn't stop there, however:

The letters regularly express anti-BBC views and accuse the corporation of racial bias, with the Scottish parliament and system also a regular target for abuse.

Commonly used phrases in the text include "English parliament", "Exit Europe", "repatriation" and "BBC shutdown".

Clippings from the Daily Mail have been included in many envelopes, which often also include cartoon drawings.

The Guardian must think Winterval has come early - a chance to slag off the Daily Mail, the "pro-English" and anyone who dares to think the BBC might be in any way biased, all within a few lines.

The person who sent these letters sounds a little disturbed, and I certainly don't condone such behaviour. But in truth, shouldn't we all be a little disturbed that one person sending letters which are "pro-English" and express non-PC views is genuinely worthy of being national news?

After all, it's not as if we live in a paradise free of crime and wrongdoing. In fact, violent crime is soaring, and most people have never felt less safe. Yet still, several police forces are investigating this "elderly letter writer", with one detective describing how hundreds of statements have been taken in an attempt to catch him.

Not to mention the hundreds of hours of man hour and hundreds of thousands of pounds it cost, I'm sure.

Meanwhile, it's business as usual on Britain's streets.

A woman was brutally attacked by a stranger whilst travelling on a London train in May 2008. Instead of taking this as evidence that Britain is now a violent, often lawless place, where people have absolutely no respect for each other and will turn nasty over the most piffling of trivialities without fear of the consequences, she is attempting to create yet another officially sanctioned victim group:
A woman who claims to have been beaten up because she is overweight is campaigning to see discrimination against fat people outlawed.

Marsha Coupe, 53 was attacked on a train by a woman who began verbally abusing her for her size.

‘I was returning home one night on a train and a woman sat across from me started kicking me and said, Hey fattie! You should not be on the train, you need two seats, she said.

Mrs Coupe, a marketing manager, was left shaken and badly bruised after the attack in May last year.

‘I had probably 30 to 40 bruises over my chest and my neck. I was terrified I was going to lose my eye.

‘London prides itself on being diverse yet there is almost a zero-tolerance on anyone of size. You cannot walk the streets without being verbally or physically assaulted.

The American who now lives in Hayes, Kent and weighs 22 stone was travelling home from London late at night in May last year when she was set upon.

She has now joined forces with a group of other women to lobby mayor Boris Johnson to make the capital more fat friendly.

This is the culture we have created. It doesn't occur to this lady that perhaps the young woman was simply looking for an excuse to attack her. It doesn't seem to bother her that no one should be treated like this by a criminal yob, for any reason or under any circumstances.

No - all that matters is creating another group it is illegal to 'discriminate' against. Does she seriously think that yet more tiresome legislation would have saved her from a beating?

Most of these thugs fear nothing and no one - they know they won't be caught, and even if they are the consequences will be negligable.

But that isn't the point; if someone is violently attacked, should the first question the authorities ask be "does the victim belong to a special victim class?"

Everyone must be equal in the eyes of the law.

We saw something similar to this a while back, when Fiona Pilkington killed herself and her disabled daughter after a gang of yobs made their lives unbearable. Despite the fact that they complained to the police a total of 32 times, nothing was done:

Although much of the abuse centred on the taunts about the children's disabilities, police failed to recognise it as a hate crime rather than simple antisocial behaviour, which would have made it a far higher priority.

The inquest heard that at the time of Pilkington's death, Leicestershire police had not implemented the Home Office guidance on hate crimes issued two years earlier.

Hinckley and Bosworth council's community officers visited Pilkington but never learned until after she was dead that anyone in the family was disabled.

Simple anti-social behaviour. That's what The Guardian calls it when someone who isn't part of a favoured victim class created for political reasons is hounded to death.

My question is, what happens to those of us who can't be part of such a group?

Geert Wilders in Britain

On Friday, Dutch politician Geert Wilders visited the United Kingdom after successfully getting the ban on his entry overturned.

His legal team managed to argue that the restrictions placed on his freedom of movement, guaranteed under European law, were arbitrary and politically motivated.

The huge Muslim protests and violence which former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith allegedly feared, and figures such as Nazir Ahmed promised and revelled in, failed to materialise - which I suppose calls her judgment even further into question.

Despite this, between 20 and 40 hardcore extremists picketed Parliament, calling for Sharia law in The Netherlands and Britain, as well as for Mr Wilders to be tried under Islamic law for "insulting the prophet".

Mr Wilders called his visit, once again at the invitation of the UKIP peer Lord Pearson, "a victory for freedom of speech".

He wished to meet the press outside in front of the Houses of Parliament, but security officers apparently advised him that his tendency to provoke adherents of the Religion of Peace meant this was most unwise - they couldn't guarantee his safety, in other words, in the middle of London and the alleged centre of Britain's democracy.

It's very important that we recognise just who the violent extremists are in all this. Wilders was being victimised not because of his own behaviour, but because of the potential for others to commit widescale violence as a result of their disagreement with certain opinions:

However, on Tuesday the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ruled there was no evidence to suggest he represented a real and serious threat to the "fundamental interest" of society.

The judges said that even if there had been evidence, it would still have been wrong to turn him away because in the event of any trouble the police would have been able to deal with it.

The Home Office said Mr Wilders' statements and behaviour during his visit "will inevitably impact on any future decisions to admit him".

Officials say his case differs from that of a larger number of individuals - including Islamic extremists and white supremacists - who are on a list of people excluded from Britain for "unacceptable behaviour".

The power to impose such exclusions was introduced in 2005, following the London bombings, and applies predominantly to non-EU nationals who would seek to "foster hatred or promote terrorism".

Yes, it's a shame that the behaviour and views of those Islamic protesters isn't enough to kick them out - but, as usual, their right to commit sedition or treason trumps our right to live in a safe society.

Here is one of these poor oppressed lambs inciting murder against Mr Wilders, and celebrating the violent deaths of other notable critics of Islam such as Theo van Gogh - it's a shame the police were watching for Mr Wilders to slip up so very closely, because otherwise they might have caught this:

I will be forwarding this video to the Metropolitan Police, and I would encourage any like-minded readers to do the same.

The day before his arrival in Britain, Mr Wilders appeared on BBC Radio 5 Live, where host Victoria Derbyshire took the opportunity to make sure he was shouted down by Muslims.

All the callers had what Al Murray would call "good British names": Shaz, Mohammed, Mahmood...

Obviously no actual British people wished to take the opportunity to interact with Mr Wilders - question him, congratulate him, criticise him, and there are a lot of angry and confused Muslims out there who aren't used to not getting their own way.

Callers often shouted over and interrupted Mr Wilders, accused him of saying things which he has not, and treated us to many lengthy diatribes about how Islam is tolerant, logical, practical, scientific, and generally equal to the Judeo-Christian West - despite the fact all of them choose to live here, of course.

You can listen to the clip here (second segment, about 38 minutes in), but it expires in two days - if anyone can record and YouTube it, please let me know.

Finally, here is Mr Wilders' Friday press conference from the House of Lords: