UK Resistance - Working Class Action intends to apply a new purist approach to the defence and salvation of this country and our way of life. The defence of foreign realms or alien ideologies will not feature in our plans. UK Resistance was formed by working class people, and will be a working class movement run by the working class for the working class.
The Afghan government has announced that two Muslim delegations have met with NATO officials, and that NATO has "promised to meet Afghan nation’s demand of bringing to justice, through an open trial, those responsible for the incident . . ."
Yes, Americans are going to stand trial for burning Qur'ans that were used to spread messages among terrorists.
In other words, NATO has agreed to enforce Sharia.
We might as well give Karzai our lunch money while we're at it.
Joint Statement by the Delegations Assigned to Probe Bagram Incident
In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate.
Following the insulting and shameful act of burning Quran in Bagram airbase that injured the religious sentiments of the Islamic world and particularly of the Afghan Muslim nation, two delegations comprising of representatives from government, the National Council of Ulemma and the National Assembly were assigned and dispatched to investigate the circumstances and causes that have led to the inhumane incident.
The delegations, while deeply touched by the religious sentiments shown by the Afghan Muslim and Mujahid nation, inform our citizens of the following:
1. In view of the particular security situation in the country, we call on all our Muslim citizens of Afghanistan to exercise self-restraint and extra vigilance in dealing with the issue and avoid resorting to protests and demonstrations that may provide ground for the enemy to take advantage of the situation.
2. After the shameful incident by the US soldiers stationed in Bagram, senior NATO and American officials expressed their deep apologies to the Muslim nation of Afghanistan and assured that such incidents will not happen again.
3. NATO officials promised to meet Afghan nation’s demand of bringing to justice, through an open trial, those responsible for the incident and it was agreed that the perpetrators of the crime be brought to justice as soon as possible.
4. The assigned delegations demand from the government of Afghanistan to take over from the Americans the authority of the Bagram prison so no such incidents can recur and calls on the US government to fully and comprehensively cooperate to this end.
5. The delegations also want from the Afghan government to formally praise those brave Afghan army soldiers and all others who showed feelings against the disrespectful act by preventing more religious books and Quran copies from burning, so that the pure Muslim sentiments of our honored Mujahid nation can remain alive.
This is the Azad Ali who once suggested that the killing of British troops in Iraq was justified.
He he praised Abdullah Azzam, Osama Bin Laden’s mentor.
He described the late Azzam as one of the ‘few Muslims who promote the understanding of the term Jihad in its comprehensive glory’. He then quoted Azzam’s son as saying: ‘If I saw an American or British man wearing a soldier’s uniform inside Iraq I would kill him because that is my obligation. If I saw the same soldier in Jordan I wouldn’t touch him. In Iraq he is a fighter and an occupier – here he is not. I respect this as the main instruction in my religion for Jihad.’ Just to recap:
Azad Ali opposes democracy “if it means at the expense of not implementing the sharia”
Azad Ali sued the Daily Mail for suggesting that comments on his blog showed that he was “a hardline Islamic extremist who supports the killing of British and American soldiers in Iraq by fellow Muslims as justified”. He lost.
Azad Ali used to attend talks by the spiritual leader of Al Qaeda in Europe: Abu Qatada.
Azad Ali wants Ismail Haniyeh – leader of the genocidal antisemitic terrorist organisation, Hamas – to be the Caliph of the next Caliphate.
Azad Ali admired the Al Qaeda and recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki and had this to say about him on the Islamic Forum of Europe’s blog: “I really do love him for the sake of Allah, he has an uncanny way of explaining things to people which is endearing.”
Azad Ali’s show on the Islam Channel was sanctioned by OFCOM for its failure to maintain due impartiality in its coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict, including in relation to comments on Mahmoud Abbas. That’s because he’s a Hamas supporter.
When an undercover reporter for Dispatches exposed Azad Ali’s political views, he threatened them on his radio show, saying: “We’ve got a picture of you and a lot more than you thought we had. We’ve tracked you down to different places. And if people are gonna turn what I’ve just said into a threat, that’s their fault, innit?”
This is just a fraction of the evidence against Azad Ali. I’m not proposing to recap the links between the Islamic Forum Europe and the far Right South Asian party, Jamaat-e-Islami. Nor will I list the ongoing parade of hate preachers, racists and bigots who are paraded through the East London Mosque/London Muslim Centre. There’s no need to. All of this information is very well known.
The appointment of Azad Ali as Vice Chair of Unite Against Fascism is the lowest point of this organisation, so far.
Below is one of the strangest stories in financial history, one involving the US government lying about hundreds of thousands of tons of imaginary gold, illegal wire transfers and loans totalling $15 trillion.
The video, from the House of Lords, is amazing in itself. What it doesn’t express is where the money came from though Lord James of Blackheath proves conclusively that an effort was made to say it came from a gold reserve in Brunei that, in fact, never existed.
At surface, it appears we have stumbled upon the largest terrorist organization in the world and have found original documents tracing its funding to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, two of the top financial officers in the US.
A cursory review of terrorism statues in the US indicate that all transactions we will learn about are, in fact, to be assumed “terrorist money laundering” and that the only thing preventing the immediate arrest of hundreds of top financial officials is their political connections alone.
We will be able to offer an alternative, more insights, some hard intelligence and some very valuable background that we hope will offer insightful and realistic perspectives on this amazing story.
On February 16, 2012, Lord James of Blackheath, member of Britain’s House of Lords presented evidence of an illegal scheme begun, he has thus discovered, in 2009.
His documents including originals signed by Alan Greenspan and Timothy Geithner, show the illegal “off the books” transfer by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York of $15 trillion to, initially, HSBC (Hong Kong Shanghai Banking Corporation) London and then to the Bank of Scotland.
The Bank of Scotland, under royal charter but restricted from involvement in any such transactions, simply “gave” the money to 20 European banks to use in a highly profitable scheme of co-trading “fresh cut” MTN’s (mid-term notes), generating trillions of dollars in profits over 3 years, none of which is shown on books, none has been taxed or has benefitted shareholders in those banks.
As Blackheath outlines, the “deception and cover” for this transfer is the imaginary seizure of 750,000 tons of gold by agents of an unspoken entity (confirmed by the highest official sources as the Bush family and CIA), the listed “source” of the money.
The government of Indonesia confirms this to be an utter fabrication and that the individual named had 700 tons of gold (about half of what Gaddafi was holding), not 750,000. It is noted that only 1,500 tons of gold have ever been traded in world history, as stated in the House of Lords.
The issues that are initially brought out, issues inconsistent with international convention and starting the reader on what is only the surface discovery of two decades of crimes involving dozens of governments are as follows:
At no time has the Federal Reserve Bank of New York been authorized to hold the funds indicated
However, documents held by Lord Blackheath prove, conclusively that they did hold such funds and transfer them in a manner as to obscure their origin by using HSBC and the Bank of Scotland. This process, seemingly involving Alan Greenspan, Timothy Geithner and others would appear to be “money laundering” until some other explanation were found. None has been offered.
The “collateralization” of these funds, being 750,000 tons of gold, is proven to be fantasy. These funds then, in no way or manner, are related to Brunei. The presentation of this false transaction has been conclusively proven to be a “cover and deception” project such as an intelligence organization would use.
The transfer of these funds, all done without any authorizations, governmental or otherwise, particularly without agreements, payment of interest to the United States and without knowledge and approval of congress makes every aspect of this criminal in nature, a violation of innumerable statues.
The receipt and use of these funds by the 20 banks, two of which are Wall Street’s largest, and the use of these funds to generate profits while the funds themselves are held “off the books” and the profits hidden and laundered, themselves the earnings of funds received through criminal acts makes any and all involved part of a criminal enterprise.
WHERE DID THE MONEY COME FROM
There is no record of the Federal Reserve being authorized to “create” $15 trillion, equal to the entire national debt of the United States.
There is, however, proof that funds that totalled, at one time, $27 trillion had been earned surreptitiously, disposed of as part of an intelligence operation against the Soviet Union and then later stolen with accusations made against George H. W. Bush as being the perpetrator.
I have spoken with two individuals, one President Reagan’s intelligence coordinator and the other Chief Legal Cousel for the Central Intelligence Agency regarding these funds.
Both have indicated that former President Bush had asked that these funds, totalling $27 trillion, be transferred to his control, that threats were made by Bush and that many involved in this operation suffered, issues including murder, illegal arrest, torture and detention among them.
The individuals I am speaking of repreatedly met with President Bush over these funds, disputed his claim to them, and indicate that the majority of the funds are the property of the people of the United States.
These funds are the mysterious “Wanta” funds, monies earned through years of currency trading aimed at collapsing the Soviet Union, a plan originated by President Ronald Reagan, then White House Intelligence Coordinator Lee Wanta and CIA Director William Casey. I have been told that, while this operation went forward under President Reagan, he had ordered that his successor, George H. W. Bush not be “briefed” out of “mistrust” for Bush.
The funds themselves were earned through a scheme of trading Soviet roubles at enormous profit, a practice that eventually collapsed their government.
A portion of the profits are subject to current litigation in the Federal Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, Judge Lee presiding. I have over 2,000 pages of documents on this case which shows a remainder of the original funds had been transferred to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond by the Bank of China, a party to the rouble trading practice, in 2006 and is claimed as totally owned by Ameritrust Corporation.
That amount was $4.5 trillion of which we hold the SWIFT transfer documents.
The other monies, which “likely” make up from the unspent portion of the missing $27 trillion, may well constitute all that is recoverable.
Wanta, sole shareholder in Ameritrust, has offered his companies share, valued by the court now at $7.2 trillion, entirely to the American people as intended by President Reagan.
The origin of the additional funds, issued by the Federal Reserve during the 80s and 90s, totalling nearly $8 trillion is unknown. High ranking sources within the US government indicate that this can only be either the remainder of funds Wanta raised or profits made from them after the majority of funds were stolen.
Stories, some quite good actually, and personal interviews plus my own review of documents would place the theft or conversion of these funds initially with:
The Bush family
The “P2,” a Masonic lodge operating out of Switzerland involved in dozens of terror bombings tied to “Operation Gladio”
People around Wanta himself including the CIA
What is lacking is a source for half of these funds. Technically, they don’t exist as there is no record of them being originated by nor transferred to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York though there are clear and discernible records of them being transferred out of that institution which never possessed them, according to their 2010 audit, in the first place.
WANTA MONEY
The transfer of Wanta funds, they can be assumed to have no other origin as they track into the Federal Reserve banking system while in escrow and are currently awaiting payment based on the orders of President Obama in accordance with findings of the federal court, is complicated by the Scottish transfer.
Either Wanta has claim to the entire amount or it is the property of the US government. That no effort has been made to secure the funds or enforce criminal and civil remedies to recover enough money to pay the entire US national debt and more, as with earnings, we are nearing well over $30 trillion by this time, is an indication that a criminal conspiracy with enough influence to overrule our own government is involved. Whether that “conspiracy is, as noted, the Bush family, rouge sections of the CIA or a secret society such as P2, one we can prove or others we only suspect exist, is another story.
The lack of action, here or as requested by Lord James in Britain, is, in itself, proof of both the seriousness and actuality of these events and the powers that can prevent any inquiry when irrefutable documents such as SWIFT transfers are available.
In fact, Lord James has offered a wealth of documents which, when combined with the 2000 pages of Wanta “discovery” from the Federal Court, constitutes more than prima facia evidence of money laundering, conversion, terrorism or worse.
Thus, the inaction in the face of overwheming and unquestioned proof is inexplicable.
FLOOD OF WANTA LITIGATION AND INDICTMENTS COMING
Currently, Wanta’s legal status is as technical conservator and owner of $7.2 trillion. However, as nearly half that is owed in taxes and the court settlement required Wanta to purchase $1 trillion in treasury bonds, the federal government should show positive interest other than President Obama and a few others.
More are being obstructionist with the payout and exercise of $3 trillion in US debt reduction.
This is, not only illegal but an indication of conspiracy.
In addition, Russian Prime Minister Putin has communicated that he awaits the agreed upon 3% payment of Russian taxes, initially on the $7.2 trillion. Will Putin want to be paid on the entire $15 trillion plus interest and will Russia and/or the US have interest in why the Bank of Scotland transferred these funds to 20 European banks to trade in MTN’s (mid term notes) without any authorization or agreement, any participation or sharing of profits.
As the funds, at least the half which the US government can claim ownership of, combined with the interest and earnings of, would quickly put the US “in the black,” again we look at, not just the press blackout on the Wanta litigation of the last 6 years but the press blackout on Lord James of Blackheath and the wealth of damning documentation he submitted to Parliament.
Nothing has been done since, it is as though the proof submitted was so dangerous that those moments in time have been erased by a mysterious g-dlike power.
What makes Wanta dangerous is that he has begun to distribute funds, some to government entities, counties and states, law enforcement agencies, giving them standing, not just in recovering funds intended for their use but in helping prosecute anyone involved in interfering with or attempting to divert funds.
One grand jury is being formed to investigate diversion of Wanta funds even at this early date. It is likely that Wanta/Ameritrust funds earmarked for border protection could lead to the indictment of high ranking US officials. This is only the beginning.
If the Royal Bank of Scotland doesn’t think it should be expecting the biggest chargeback in the history of the world, they are in for a shock.
This story really shows how far gone we are. Note the Muslim guard wasn't even present when he made his remark but the man was forcibly detained until he apologised to the Muslim!
As David Jones arrived at the security gates at Gatwick airport, he was looking forward to getting through swiftly so he could enjoy lunch with his daughters before their flight.
Placing his belongings, including a scarf, into a tray to pass through the X-ray scanner he spotted a Muslim woman in hijab pass through the area without showing her face.
In a light-hearted aside to a security official who had been assisting him, he said: “If I was wearing this scarf over my face, I wonder what would happen.”
The quip proved to be a mistake. After passing through the gates, he was confronted by staff and accused of racism.
As his daughters, who had passed through security, waited in the departure lounge wondering where he was, he was subjected to a one hour stand-off as officials tried to force him to apologise.
Mr Jones, 67, who is the creator of the popular children’s character Fireman Sam, said: “Something like George Orwell’s 1984 now seems to have arrived in Gatwick airport.
"I feel that my rights as an individual have been violated. What I underwent amounts to intimidation and detention. I was humiliated and degraded in full public view.
"I am a 67-year-old pensioner and have lived my life within the law. I do not have even one point on my driving licence.”
He said that when he made his initial remark the security guard had appeared to agree with him, saying: “I know what you mean, but we have our rules, and you aren’t allowed to say that.”
As he went through the metal detecting arch, his artificial hip set off the alarm, prompting a full search from a guard. It was after this, and as he prepared to rejoin his two grown-up daughters, that he was confronted by another guard who said he was being detained because he had made an offensive remark.
“I repeated to her what I had said and told her that I had said nothing racist,” he said. “She took my passport and boarding pass and I was then escorted back through the security zone into the outer area. Here the female security guard proceeded to question me further, inferring many things that I had not said.
“It was impossible to get her to listen to reason. We were then joined by a second female security guard who stated that she was Muslim and was deeply distressed by my comment.
“I again stated that I had not made a racist remark but purely an observation that we were in a maximum security situation being searched thoroughly whilst a woman with her face covered walked through. I made no reference to race or religion. I did not swear or raise my voice.”
According to Mr Jones, who was due to board a British Airways flight to Portugal, where he now lives and runs a restaurant on the Algarve, the British Airways duty manager was then called in and sided with the security staff.
He continued: “I had now been detained for some time and my daughters were worried, calling me on my phone asking what was happening. We were going around in circles. I maintained that I had said nothing offensive and the security guard was continuing to accuse me. This had taken about 15-20 minutes and looked as though it was not going to be resolved.
“I asked the security guard if she was going to charge me to which she said no but I could not leave until I had apologised to the Muslim guard.
“At this point I asked for the attendance of a police officer. After some time he arrived but it was also plainly evident that he was keeping to the politically correct code. I told him that if there was a case then he should arrest me.
“I was told that we now live in a different time and some things are not to be said. They decided again that I would only be allowed to continue on my journey if I were to apologise to the Muslim guard. My reply was that as I had not made a racist remark it would be impossible for me to apologise.”
Mr Jones, a former member of the Household Cavalry and retired fireman, added: “I felt that I made a logical observation. That while everyone was being subjected to an invasive search it was illogical that someone should be let through with their face covered. I am not opposed to having this level of security but it must be equal for all.”
Eventually, Mr Jones said, the BA manager suggested that he should agree that what he had said “could” be considered offensive by a Muslim guard.
With his flight departure time now fast approaching Mr Jones agreed to the compromise.
Escorted by the police officer, he was taken through security where he was again subjected to a full search after his hip replacement set off the metal detector alarms.
Mr Jones said he intended to complain formally to the Gatwick airport authorities and British Airways about the incident last Sunday.
Department for Transport rules do not prevent people covering their faces at UK airports for religious reasons.
However, all passengers must show their faces to UK Borders officials when they pass through passport control. Muslim women who wear hijabs can request that their identity is checked by a female immigration officer and they can also ask that they be taken to a private room before they remove their head wear.
A spokesman for Gatwick airport said: “The security team are examining the incident to ensure that the issue was managed in the right way.
"They are talking to the people involved to understand what the issue was and how it came to have the police involved.”
Islamist fighters in Somalia last night warned of deadly reprisals on Britain's streets if the West mounted military action in the war-torn east African state.
As a conference on Somalia's future closed in London, the country's President appealed for bombing raids on the positions of al-Shabaab, which recently merged with al-Qa'ida. Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed said he would welcome air strikes against the "menace" of the insurgents, warning: "This isn't a Somali problem, it has to be addressed globally."
David Cameron left open the option of authorising action against al-Shabaab, which controls much of Somalia, but he made clear his preference for a lasting political settlement.
Last night the spokesman for the Islamist group, Sheikh Ali Dhere, warned it could launch terror attacks in the West if countries such as Britain and the US intervened in Somalia. "Your peace depends upon us being left alone," he told Channel 4 News. "If you do not let us live in peace, you will not enjoy peace either."
Al Shabaab was not invited to yesterday's conference, but Mr Cameron insisted its fighters could be brought into the tentative political process if they laid down their weapons and genuinely renounced violence.
Several dozen Britons are thought to be fighting for Al Shabaab and the fear in intelligence circles is that they could return to this country on UK passports with the expertise and motivation to launch terror attacks. The UK believes that Somalia, Yemen and Pakistan are now the world's main breeding grounds for Islamist terrorism.
Representatives of the 55 governments and international organisations at the conference included the United Nations secretary general Ban Ki-moon and the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. They signed a final communiqué calling for renewed action to disrupt terrorists travelling to and from Somalia and urging countries in the region to tackle money laundering and the financing of militant groups. They also backed a fresh attempt to catch the pirates operating with near impunity off the Somali coast and to find and prosecute the "kingpins" behind them.
The power vacuum in the country has allowed pirates to disrupt important shipping lanes and kidnap several western tourists. The British woman, Judith Tebbutt, is still missing after being seized five months ago from a Kenyan resort near the Somali border. Tanzania has agreed to detain and try suspected pirates captured by the Royal Navy, with Mauritius expected to follow suit.
Britain will lead an international taskforce that will attempt to identify the figures behind the pirate trade and to agree a common declaration that ransoms will never be paid. Somali pirates are estimated to have earned about £110m from ransoms last year.
The conference also called for "new momentum" to be injected into the political process, agreeing that a permanent government should replace Somalia's temporary regime by August.
Terror threat: Who are Al-Shabaab?
The group exercises control over vast swathes of the south, where it imposes its own version of Sharia, and until recently had fought African Union forces for control of Mogadishu. In August 2011, Al-Shabaab began pulling fighters out of Mogadishu, raising hopes that humanitarian groups would be able to step up aid deliveries. Its fighters come from Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Gulf region, as well as the United States and Britain.
Last month, the group's leadership announced that Al-Shabaab would be joining forces with Al Q'aida – with whom it had previously shared ideological ties.
THE colossal scale of mass immigration in recent years represents a savage betrayal of the British people by our governing elite.
No one ever voted for Britain to be transformed from a cohesive nation into a fractured multicultural society. Yet just such a revolution has been brought about by the ideological trashing of our national identity and the wilful collapse of our borders, with the influx of foreign arrivals now running at almost 600,000 a year, most from Africa and Asia.
What we are witnessing is the systematic destruction of a once-proud country. As the pace of change accelerates Britain is fast becoming a place without any mutual sense of belonging or any shared heritage or even a common language.
The very concept of our British national identity is sinking into irrelevancy. In large swathes of our cities, amid the burkas and babble of foreign tongues, too many indigenous Britons now feel like aliens in their own land.
The revolutionary impact of mass immigration has been reinforced this week by astonishing figures that show two-thirds of all babies born in London have foreign parents.
In just six of the 32 boroughs in the capital were British parents in the majority, while in Newham, part of the East End, an incredible 84.1 per cent of births were to migrants, most from India, Pakistan or Poland.
Across London’s schools white pupils are now in the minority. N or is London alone in this trend. In the East Midlands’ city of Leicester, where just 44 per cent of school pupils are white, it seems likely that the majority of the overall Asian-dominated population could be non-white as early as 2015, making it the first urban conurbation in Britain to achieve that landmark.
Given the huge levels of immigration and high migrant birth rate several other cities will quickly follow.
In January 2010 Birmingham Council announced that Asian children outnumbered white pupils in local primary schools and it is probable that the city will have a non-white majority before the end of the decade.
The same is true of Oldham and Bradford. According to one study by Oxford University, white Britons will be in a minority across the whole of the United Kingdom by 2066, little more than half a century from now.
In modern history no country has ever gone through such rapid social upheaval without being conquered by an enemy power.
If this kind of enforced revolution were taking place elsewhere Left-wingers would be outraged. Fulminating about the rights of the indigenous population they would portray the change as a colonialist takeover.
But when Britain’s own nationhood is under threat they celebrate because they are the architects of this change. In government from 1997 to 2010 Labour cynically used mass immigration as a vast tool of social engineering to restructure Britain.
The impression sometimes given is that uncontrolled immigration has been an accident, supposedly the result of administrative incompetence.
This outlook was largely adopted over the latest fiasco at the UK Border Agency, which was castigated in an official report this week over its failure to maintain proper checks.
As a result of this condemnation Home Secretary Theresa May announced on Tuesday that she is to split the UK Border Force from the agency to improve efficiency.
Yet the truth is that the Border Agency failed so dramatically in its work because Labour politicians wanted it to. They loathed the idea of a tough approach to immigration.
A free-for-all is precisely what they desired to refashion Britain. As Tony Blair’s aide Andrew Neather famously admitted, Labour sought to “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”.
That is why they eagerly allowed the immigration rate to rocket by relaxing controls and dishing out passports, work permits and student visas like confetti.
If Labour had really wished to crack down on immigration they could easily have done so. But the integrity of our position was destroyed from within by Labour’s wreckers, who were filled with loathing for the traditions of our country, obsessed with the dogma of racial diversity and eager to expand their inner city client vote.
Their revolution was implemented against the will of the people through repression, whereby open debate was stifled through hysterical accusations of racism and through remorseless propaganda about the benefits of immigration, especially supposed economic growth and the “cultural enrichment of ourcommunities”.
We can now see how hollow all that propaganda was. Mass immigration has brought falling living standards as millions of working-class Britons have been thrown on the economic scrap heap.
The burdens on our infrastructure have become intolerable from the costs of welfare benefits for migrants to the pressure on schools and housing.
Contrary to all the upbeat rhetoric about diversity, immigration has also brought social dislocation, urban crime and gangland violence.
Even Trevor Phillips, head of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, recently admitted that “some districts are on their way to becoming fully fledged ghettoes”.
Moreover alien practices have been imported into our once well-ordered society, such as mass voter fraud, sharia law or exploitation of vulnerable white teenage girls.
It is tragic to see Britain’s continuing decline. The only way the process can be halted is by a government tough enough to bring back real immigration controls.
The English language and Christian faith will be restored to the centre of public life, ministers pledged today.
Communities Secretary Eric Pickles heralded the end of state-sponsored multiculturalism by vowing to stand up for 'mainstream' values by strengthening national identity. He said the government will celebrate what people in England have in common, rather than what divides them.
And he called for local communities to use events such as the Big Lunch or the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee and inter-faith activities to bring together people of different backgrounds.
Mr Pickles said there will be a strategy on community cohesion and integration which calls for people to come together around shared values.
He accused the previous Labour administration, and its equalities minister Harriet Harman, of taking the country down 'the wrong path' by encouraging different communities to live separate lives.
Migrants will be required to speak English, the number of official documents translated into other languages will be reduced and councils will be allowed to hold prayers at the start of meetings.
New education standards will bar schools from teaching which 'undermines fundamental British values', said today’s document from his Department for Communities and Local Government.
But he also confirmed his commitment to tolerance, insisting that the Government will remain vigilant to hate crimes directed at Muslims and Jews. 'We are rightly proud of our strong history of successful integration and the benefits that it’s brought,' said Mr Pickles.
'Britain is a place where the vast majority of people from all walks of life get on well with each other. Events such as the Royal Wedding and the Big Lunch show that community spirit is thriving.
Banner: Mr Pickles said that events such as the Olympics and Diamond Jubilee who be used to fly the flag with pride
'I welcome the contribution of everyone but those who advocate separate lives are wrong. It is time to concentrate on the things that unite the British people.' Today’s paper said that, despite Britain’s tradition of tolerance, the past decade has seen growing concern over race relations, as incoming migrants in some areas have shown themselves 'unable or unwilling to integrate'.
Last summer’s unrest in English cities highlighted some of the challenges caused by the swift pace of change, but should not be seen as 'race riots'. People of all backgrounds were involved in the violence, but also in the efforts to clear up afterwards.
The paper, entitled Creating the Conditions for Integration, argued that problems have been made worse by top-down government action, which has encouraged communities to resort to the law to settle their disputes and assert their rights.
'It is only common sense to support integration,' it said.
Attack: Mr Pickles said Harriet Harman was leading the country down the wrong path and that Labour had 'encourage people to lead separate lives'
'In the past, integration challenges have been met in part with legal rights and obligations around equalities, discrimination and hate crime.
'This has not solved the problem and, where it has encouraged a focus on single issues and specific groups, may in some cases have exacerbated it.
'There are too many people still left outside, or choosing to remain outside, mainstream society.'
And it added: 'Today, integration requires changes to society, not changes to the law.
'This means that building a more integrated society is not just a job for government. It requires collective action across a wide range of issues, at national and local levels, by public bodies, private companies, and above all, civic society at large.
'Our first question must always be, “How can people contribute to building an integrated England?”.’
Mr Pickles made clear that the Government wants local communities to take a lead in finding ways of encouraging people of different backgrounds to find 'common ground' with one another.
But he said the state will be ready to step in to 'promote mainstream British liberal values' - for example by banning marches which could cause racial tension.
The Government will 'robustly challenge behaviours and views which run counter to our shared values, such as democracy, rule of law, equality of opportunity and treatment, freedom of speech and the rights of all men and women to live free from persecution of any kind', said his paper. Speaking ahead of the announcement today, Mr Pickles told the Daily Mail the Coalition celebrated Britain’s tradition as a nation of 'tolerance' and insisted he was proud to celebrate the special customs and practices that make communities unique.
'But it’s sad to see how, in recent years, the idea of tolerance has become twisted,' Mr Pickles added.
'A few people, a handful of activists, have insisted that it isn’t enough simply to celebrate the beliefs of minority communities; they want to disown the traditions and heritage of the majority, including the Christian faith and the English language.
'In recent years we’ve seen public bodies bending over backwards to translate documents up to and including their annual report into a variety of foreign languages.
'We’ve seen men and women disciplined for wearing modest symbols of Christian faith at work, and we’ve seen legal challenges to councils opening their proceedings with prayers, a tradition that goes back generations, brings comfort to many and hurts no one. This is the politics of division.'
Communities minister Andrew Stunell said: 'We have many balanced and successful communities but we know this is not the case everywhere and there are still enduring problems in many neighbourhoods.
'The coalition is determined to give everyone the ability and aspiration to prosper, breaking down barriers to social mobility. Every community is different and we need local diversity, not central prescription, if we are to grow prosperous and productive communities.'
Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said Mr Pickles’ strategy would fuel sectarianism.
'While we agree that there should be some common values to live by - a shared language and respect for human rights - there cannot be a religious hierarchy that discounts the feelings of those who don’t share in that faith,' said Mr Sanderson. 'It is a recipe for conflict between communities that already eye each other with suspicion. 'We see all over the world that when religion is given power, conflict follows. We have managed to some extent to keep this kind of sectarianism out of our policy making; now Mr Pickles intends to restore it in a big way.
'The Government is going in completely the wrong direction with this and it is bad news for all of us.'
Andrew Copson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association, said: 'The vast majority of people in Britain are not members of any local church, religious group or community, and so to lay such emphasis on religious identities as being the ones most important for encouraging voluntary work or community building is misguided.'
Rob Berkeley, director of the Runnymede Trust race equality think-tank, said Mr Pickles’ announcement marked 'a dangerous and ill-advised reversion to assimilationist policy where all differences of ethnicity and heritage are subsumed into a majoritarian "mainstream" '.
Dr Berkeley added: 'The Secretary of State appears to have completely misunderstood the problems we face in building a successful multi-ethnic society, and the solutions proposed as a result simply miss the point.'
In some inner-city areas more than three-quarters of infants are now being born into immigrant families.
However British-born parents are still in the majority in a handful of suburban boroughs.
Campaigners say the figures, disclosed by the Office for National Statistics in a parliamentary written answer, make an integrated society more difficult to achieve.
They want ministers to honour their pledge to reduce net migration “from hundreds of thousands to tens of thousands” by the next election.
Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migration Watch UK, said: “These extraordinary figures illustrate the huge and rapid change that is taking place in our capital city.
“They illustrate the way in which London is being changed beyond recognition and on a scale and at a speed that makes successful integration so much more difficult.
“It is a stark reminder to the government to stick to their promise to get net migration down to the tens of thousands by the end of this Parliament.”
Overall about a quarter of births in England and Wales were to mothers born overseas.
But in London, for centuries home to new arrivals in the country, the proportion is far higher.
The new figures, released following a question tabled by the Tory MP Nicholas Soames, show that in 2010 there were 86,111 births where one or both parents were foreign-born – 64.7 per cent of the total.
The highest proportion (84.1) was in the east London borough of Newham, a traditionally poor area that will be the site of much of the Olympic Games.
More than three-quarters of babies also had foreign-born parents in Westminster (81.2 per cent of the total) and Brent (81.9).
The lowest proportions of births to foreign families were recorded in Havering (24.4 per cent) which borders Essex in the north east of London, and the more affluent south-eastern borough of Bromley (33.3 per cent).
Revelations of just how easy it was for illegal immigrants to enter Britain have made disturbing reading. To learn from yesterday’s official report that border controls have been even more lax than was assumed is profoundly depressing.
Truly, it is a litany of incompetence. Half a million people travelling by Eurostar let in without being checked against a list of murderers and terrorists...
Countless students waved through without having visas examined... officials suspending vital security programmes without ministers’ approval... hugely expensive biometric passport machinery turned off on 15,000 occasions...
Abandoned: The official report into border controls has revealed the full extent to which immigration checks have been neglected
The public has every right to feel betrayed by such failure and complacency.
Meanwhile, to add financial insult to injury, we have all been made to pay huge sums for state-of-the-art passport security chips and Orwellian databases which UK Border Agency officials do not even bother to use!
But the suspicion must be that the UKBA is not just incompetent: the very ethos of the organisation is rotten.
Challenge: Home Secretary Theresa May
It’s stuffed with liberal officials appointed when New Labour – in clear defiance of the public’s wishes – operated an open-door immigration system to fuel the economic boom and, cynics argue, increase Labour’s future core vote.
And, when the government changed, they simply carried on with their reckless policies as before.
Theresa May, the Home Secretary, has now decided that UKBA (formed in 2008 out of the wreckage of an Immigration Directorate labelled ‘not fit for purpose’ by one of her predecessors, John Reid) is simply too broken to mend.
From next month, it will be split in two, with a new UK Border Force – headed, at long last, by a chief constable – in charge of who enters and leaves the country. What remains of UKBA will spend its time processing casework.
Nobody should underestimate the challenge faced by Mrs May in implementing these changes.
If she fails, however, the Tory Party - elected almost two years ago on a promise to bring some sanity to our borders – is unlikely to be forgiven.
May admits 500,000 entered UK without full security checks
The British government is in the process of developing a scheme whereby all phone companies and broadband internet providers will be required to store customer transaction data for a year and hand it over to security services upon request.
The databases would also include Facebook communications, Twitter posts — including direct messages between subscribers — and even communications between players in online video games.
According to the Telegraph, the Communications Capabilities Development Programme (CCDP) is already being attacked by privacy advocates as offering a license for abuse and as raising the “Big Brother” potential for universal surveillance. The British government, however, views it as a “vital” tool against terrorism and serious crime, and the legislation to put it into effect is expected to be proposed in May.
The information to be stored would not include the content of calls or emails but would consist of phone numbers and email addresses. These would would who was communicating with whom on what occasions and could also make it easy for police to track the movements of cellphone and computer users.
The plan has aroused concerns not only over civil liberties but also because hackers could potentially exploit the massive databases, which would be maintained by the companies and not by the government itself.
“This will be ripe for hacking” Gus Hosein of Privacy International stated. “Every hacker, every malicious threat, every foreign government is going to want access to this.”
“The internet companies will be told to store who you are friends with and interact with,” he added. “While this may appear innocuous it requires the active interception of every single communication you make, and this has never been done in a democratic society.”
There are also fears that service providers might use the information as a basis for directing targeted advertising to computers and mobile phones.
A similar scheme was proposed by the Labour government in 2009 but withdrawn due to public opposition. At that time, the Conservatives accused Labour of being “reckless” with regard to privacy, but now the Conservative government itself has revived the scheme, allegedly after the security services lobbied Home Secretary Theresa May.
The Open Rights Group has an anti-CCDP petition at its website, which describes the plan as “pointless,” “expensive,” and “illegal” and expresses the intention of forming a mass movement to oppose it.
The word ‘Orwellian’ has become over-used to the point of cliche. Yet there is really no other way to describe the deeply sinister, upside-down onslaught upon common sense that has extended even into the school playgrounds of politically correct Britain. The aim was originally to create a kinder, gentler world — with a commitment to eradicating racial or any other type of prejudice.
Supporters of these beliefs profess to loathe and detest bullying, with teachers instigating school playground patrols and ‘anti-bullying weeks’ to stamp out this hateful practice.
Orwellian: Elliott Dearlove, left, merely asked a five-year-old boy if he was 'brown because he was from Africa' but the school tried to make his mother Hayley sign a form admitting he was racist
And yet, in pursuance of these aims, we have witnessed the rise of the widespread State-sponsored bullying of children.
The latest example was the experience of a seven-year-old boy from Hull, whose mother was astounded to be told by his primary school to sign a form admitting he was racist. So what was the heinous act this child had committed to cause him to be branded in this way? Why, merely to have asked a five-year-old boy in the playground whether he was ‘brown because he was from Africa’.
What on earth is racist about that question? It does not express a hateful dislike of, or racial superiority over, another person on account of the colour of their skin. It merely wonders, in a child-like way, about the reason for that colour.
It is thus a perfectly inoffensive question from a curious child. The reason for the five-year-old’s brown skin is, indeed, that his ancestry lies in another continent. So how can a correct assumption constitute a prejudice? The school’s gross over-reaction suggests that racism is being redefined to include not only hateful references to someone’s colour, but any reference to it at all.
Real racial prejudice is, indeed, a horrible thing. But such wildly inappropriate labelling is to trivialise and thus effectively deny the harm done by truly vile attitudes.
State-sponsored bullying of children: Griffin Primary School in Hull, where the harmless question was asked
What’s more, it is particularly odious to hang the label of racist round a child’s neck. Witch-hunts are bad enough in themselves; but to make a child their target is really quite obscene.
Because of their immaturity, children cannot be held to account for their behaviour in the same way as adults. When the young killers of toddler James Bulger were tried for his murder, there was uproar among progressive folk over the fact they were being made to stand trial because they were just children themselves.
Yet it would seem that those whose collective heart bleeds for child killers are nevertheless intent upon branding seven-year-olds as enemies of the people — just for displaying an attitude that some bureaucratic Big Brother wannabe deems to be beyond the pale. The seven-year-old from Hull was by no means an isolated example. The extent of such state-sponsored bullying amounts to a kind of playground Inquisition.
Last year, it was revealed that teachers were branding thousands of children as racist or ‘homophobic’ following what were merely playground squabbles.
In total, 34,000 nursery, primary and secondary pupils — including more than 20,000 pupils aged 11 or younger — were effectively classed as bigots for so-called ‘hate speech’.
George Orwell, left, created his fictional ‘thought police’ as an attack on Stalinism and its attempt to re-configure human psychology itself
One child was called a racist for calling a boy ‘broccoli head’ (on the basis the vegetable looks a bit like Afro hair); another was said to be homophobic for telling a teacher: ‘This work is gay.’
A six-year-old was said to have been reported by his school to the local authority after telling an ethnic minority friend: ‘Your skin is the colour of poo.’
A ten-year-old child was arrested and brought before a judge for having allegedly called an 11-year-old boy a ‘Paki’ and ‘Bin Laden’ during a playground argument in which the other boy had called him ‘a skunk’ and a ‘Teletubby’.
Back in 2006, after a 14-year-old schoolgirl asked a teacher if she could sit with a different group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu, her teacher actually called the police.
The girl was arrested and taken to a police station, where she was fingerprinted, photographed and placed in a bare cell for more than three hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence, and then released without charge.
Ludicrous, or what? Yet this over-reaction is actually mandated by law. Under the 2000 Race Relations Act, teachers are obliged to report any incident that is perceived to be racist by the victim or anyone else as ‘hate speech’ — even if it is committed by a child.
Of course, it is not just children who are being subjected to such vilification on the grounds of offending some interest group or other. Last week, Channel 4’s advertising campaign for the sequel to its hit show My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding was attacked as racist for saying it was ‘Bigger. Fatter. Gypsier.’
What on earth is offensive about ‘gypsier’? If a sequel to the film My Big Fat Greek Wedding was advertised as ‘Bigger. Fatter. More Greek’, would that be said to be racist? Of course not.
This witch-hunt is going on all the time. Last year, a beach bar singer on the Isle of Wight was arrested for performing the song Kung Fu Fighting after a complaint to the police by a man said to be of Chinese origin.
On another occasion, following a complaint that he was inciting hatred against homosexuals, police interrogated a Christian cafe owner and reportedly threatened him with arrest for repeatedly playing on a small flat-screen TV a 26-hour-long DVD in which a narrator reads the whole of the New Testament. After an outcry, the police backed down and apologised.
And who can forget the experience ten years ago of farmer and writer Robin Page, who was arrested on suspicion of stirring up racial hatred after making a speech at a pro-hunting rally that began: ‘If there is a black, vegetarian, Muslim, asylum-seeking, one-legged, lesbian lorry driver present, I want the same rights as you.’
Such reaction by the police and other officials in responding to trumped-up claims of ‘hate speech’ is the kind of behaviour we associate with Eastern Europe under communism.
So how on earth has Britain, the historic cradle of liberty, got itself to the point where it conducts witch-hunts against children for expressing ‘forbidden’ views? It all stems from the collapse of socialism, after which Left-wingers shifted their focus from economics to issues of group identity.
Instead of attacking the capitalist West for oppressing the workers, they attack mainstream society for oppressing marginalised or minority groups that were held to be victims of the majority.
Hugely aided by human rights law, such groups then became immune from criticism and were encouraged to complain about their treatment.
Moreover, how people felt became much more important than anything they actually did. So if such a victim group claimed to have been insulted, that was regarded as proof that an insult had actually occurred.
This replacement of objective reality by subjective feelings was a recipe for turning truth and justice inside out.
When George Orwell created his fictional ‘thought police’ and ‘Ministry of Truth’, he was attacking Stalinism and its attempt to re-configure human psychology itself.
Incredible as it may seem, that’s what we have in Britain with ‘political correctness’, which should more properly be called cultural Stalinism — a regime of oppression and intimidation in which even innocent children are being branded as bigots.
A kinder, gentler world? No, this is where freedom dies with a boot stamping on its face.
Eastern European criminals were responsible for more than 11,000 crimes in London last year.
Nationals of Poland, Romania and Lithuania are most likely of all foreigners to be prosecuted by the police, an investigation has revealed.
Overall, foreigners are accused of one in four of all crimes committed in London. Astonishingly, they make up nine out of ten drug suspects and are responsible for more than one in three sex offences.
Opportunity: Foreigners commit a quarter of all crimes in the capital, according to the latest statistics
The figures will give force to warnings of a growing ‘immigrant crime wave’. Four years ago, foreign nationals were found to commit one in five crimes.
A string of horrendous attacks carried out by Eastern European criminals in recent months has raised concerns over the lack of checks on new arrivals.
Earlier this week a Polish burglar was jailed for at least 34 years for the murder of an elderly couple in their home – just one week after he arrived in the UK.
Ireneusz Bartnowski, 22, stabbed and battered to death grandparents Guiseppe and Caterina Massaro in Wolverhampton.
He lay in wait in their bedroom and attacked them with a knife and a hammer, the court heard. The Metropolitan Police statistics were unearthed by the London section of BBC Politics.
They show the nationality of criminals ‘proceeded against’ – either charged and taken to court, fined or cautioned – by the force over a year and the nature of the crime.
From September 2010 to August 31 last year, the Met proceeded against 195,714 alleged criminals. Of those, 46,588 were foreign nationals – or 24 per cent of the total. The remaining 149,126 individuals were British.
Seven of the top ten offender nationalities were European. Poland came top with 4,742 alleged offenders, ahead of Romania with 3,952 and Lithuania with 2,561. Police processed 436 Australians. The programme makers spoke to one Polish ex-offender who said the British legal system was weak.
Polish criminals thought British prisons were like being in ‘a spa’, he said, adding they would ‘think twice’ if they thought they would be sent home to serve time.
Last month, Lithuanian Rimvydas Liorancas hanged himself in prison while on remand for the double murder of Carole and Avtar Kolar at their home in Birmingham.
After his death, it emerged Liorancas got into Britain despite a conviction for armed robbery.
Earlier this month, a senior judge demanded to know why a Lithuanian child-rapist, Victor Akulic, was let into Britain, where he went on to beat and rape a woman. He had been jailed for nine years in his homeland after raping a seven-year-old.
Critics say Britain’s open borders with other EU members make it impossible to control who comes and goes. In many cases, Brussels regulations make it impossible to stop criminals from entering even if we know of their convictions.
EU laws also restrict the Government’s ability to send criminals back home after prison. More than 11,000 foreign national offenders are behind bars in England and Wales.
A UK Border Agency spokesman said: ‘Any foreign national offender sentenced to more than 12 months in prison is automatically recommended for deportation.’
UK Resistance – Working Class Action supports Dr John Sentamu.
We condemn without reservation the abusive and racist emails (as reported in the Daily Mail 7 February 2012) sent to 'Honest John' Sentamu in response to his comments regarding gay marriage and the Church.
There may be some justification for the gay-rights lobby which descended on York Minster following his comments, people have the right to peacefully oppose anything they see fit in a free society, and we wish those gay-rights groups well when they visit the places of worship of other denominations or faiths in the UK which also bar homosexual union.
Honest John Sentamu is no stranger to standing up for what is right against immoral dictatorships, after all he took on the infamous Idi Amin by refusing to bow to his interference in the Ugandan judicial system and was jailed, a true prisoner of conscience. After his experience with the brutal and amoral, dictatorial Ugandan regime, we have no doubt that Honest John will not be troubled too much by the liberal fascists who now target him, however, as working class patriots we have a duty to defend someone in authority who speaks out on our behalf.
Of course, as stated earlier, the people who now target Honest John would be standing outside other institutions of faith if they were true to their convictions. The liberal fascists who seek to impose their will, their way of life upon the British people are targeting the Church of England because (a) it represents the status quo which they seek to displace and replace with their covert revolution and (b) because it is seen as an easy touch.
Therefore in response to these attacks on a truly great man, UK Resistance – Working Class Action now intends to peacefully oppose any further demonstration aimed at Honest John Sentamu or the Church of England.
Archbishop John Sentamu receives racist emails after saying ministers should not allow same sex marriage
The Archbishop of York has been sent several ‘abusive and threatening’ racist emails after speaking out against gay marriage.
The malicious messages to Dr John Sentamu have prompted a police investigation, it was revealed yesterday.
In an interview last month, the senior Church of England cleric said that marriage must remain a union between a man and a woman.
He argued that the Prime Minister would be acting like a ‘dictator’ if he allowed homosexuals to wed, rather than just have civil partnerships as is the case at present.
Yesterday a spokesman for Ugandan-born Dr Sentamu said the Archbishop received a ‘large quantity’ of correspondence following the interview, adding: ‘Amongst many positive emails that he has received, there have been a small number of abusive and threatening emails of a racist nature which North Yorkshire Police are investigating as hate crimes.’
In the interview Dr Sentamu said: ‘Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. I don’t think it is the role of the state to define what marriage is. It is set in tradition and history and you can’t just [change it] overnight, no matter how powerful you are.
‘We’ve seen dictators do it in different contexts and I don’t want to redefine very clear social structures that have been in existence for a long time and then overnight the state believes it could go in a particular way.’
The Government will open a consultation on the issue of same-sex marriages next month.
Dr Sentamu said bishops in the House of Lords had not tried to stop civil partnership laws introduced by the previous Labour government, but predicted widespread opposition to plans to legalise gay marriage.
‘The rebellion is going to come not only from the bishops,’ he said. ‘You’re going to get it from across the benches and in the Commons.
‘If you genuinely would like the registration of civil partnerships to happen in a more general way, most people will say they can see the drift. But if you begin to call those “marriage”, you’re trying to change the English language.
‘That does not mean you diminish, condemn, criticise, patronise any same-sex relationships because that is not what the debate is about.’
Last week, while Dr Sentamu was abroad, about 70 protesters staged a demonstration outside York Minster, the cathedral where he serves.
They denounced Dr Sentamu’s comments and accused him of homophobia.
The University of York’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) group, which organised the demonstration, said Dr Sentamu was opposing equality.
A spokesman for North Yorkshire Police said of the emails: ‘We can confirm that a complaint has been received from the office of Archbishop John Sentamu, following the receipt of emails containing racially offensive statements.
‘The emails are being investigated as a hate crime.’
This report presents evidence which suggests the emergence of a new kind of Anglo-British identity in which the English component is increasingly the primary source of attachment for English people. It also suggests that English identity is becoming more politicised: that is, the more English a person feels, the more likely they are to believe that the current structure of the UK is unfair and to support a particularly English dimension to the governance of England.
It has long been predicted that devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland would provoke an English ‘backlash’ against the anomalies and apparent territorial inequities of a devolved UK state. The evidence presented here suggests the emergence of what might be called an ‘English political community’, one marked by notable concerns within England about the seeming privileges of Scotland in particular and a growing questioning of the capacity of the current UK-level political institutions to pursue and defend English interests, and one underpinned by a deepening sense of English identity.
This report presents the findings of the Future of England (FoE) survey, which represents one of the most comprehensive examinations of English attitudes to questions of identity, nationhood and governance to date – and the only major survey in this area conducted in England since both the formation of a coalition government at Westminster and the election of a majority SNP administration in Holyrood.
On the 6 February 2012, UKR - WORKING CLASS ACTION intends to demonstrate outside the meeting of the Church of England General Synod.
The General Synod is the national assembly of the Church of England. It is the only body with powers delegated from parliament to pass so-called "measures" which are incorporated into English law. They have the full force and effect of an act of parliament and can apply to any Church-related matter. MPs and peers can vote to agree or reject a measure, but cannot amend it. Once agreed by both houses of parliament, it goes for Royal Assent and becomes law. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7238456.stm
The liberal wing, led by the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, and the traditional wing represented by Bishop of London Richard Chartres, are divided over the anti-capitalist protest.
The liberal wing of the Church, led by the Archbishop, is sympathetic to the issues raised by Occupy London's anti-banking cause. Dr Williams yesterday backed the protesters and said he sympathised with the "urgent larger issues" they raised.
However, the orthodox side, led by Dr Chartres, believes the tent city should be encouraged to close.
The Bishop of London said at the weekend that a legal move to evict the "Occupy London" movement was a "sensible precautionary measure".
Dr Chartres is also thought to be a contender to replace Dr Williams when he steps down sometime in the next two years.
Dr Williams was co-founder of a Left-wing Christian group during his student days at Oxford University. He wrote the original manifesto for the Jubilee Group that claimed capitalism was in its death throes and "threatens to inflict even greater violence on mankind than it has done before".
The aim is to get publicity for the working class who have been deserted by their traditional supporters, one of which is the CofE.
We have a Ugandan and a Pakistani as the only two people in the church who have spoken out against Islamification and the abandonment of British culture etc. It's full of middle class commies.
Williams was investigated as a communist agitator at university, Marxists, they're athiests, we believe Williams is a commie plant.
They won't expect a patriotic group to broaden the struggle like this, we hit them on issues they can't repudiate, why aren't they speaking out about our elderly, education, loss of employment etc etc, they always used to, explain that is why they have falling attendances, because they have abandoned their key support.
Now is a time for a credible, non-reactionary working class resistance before it is too late, now is our time. We ask for any disciplined and sober patriots who can make it to give us their support, we dont need quanity, we need quality, as working class people we need a platform and this demo will go some way to achieve that. It will be a small, respectful and well behaved gathering of working class patriots, no more, no less, our strength is in our quality and discipline.
Now we are awake and thinking, it is just a matter of time.
This nine-minute video, hosted by Christine Tasin, appears at Riposte Laïque. It is a warning about the proposed plan to criminalize on a world-wide basis any criticism of Islam or sharia. The video is in sections, with text or commentary from Christine in French. There is also an English-language segment. Throughout part of the video you will hear in the background the air "Va, Pensiero"
I have put in italics those passages that appear as text in the video, and I have divided my translation into thirteen sections for convenience.Several sections are adaptations or condensations of the original.
1 - Christine Tasin:The European countries have agreed to host, in July, the next meeting of the Istanbul Process, the project to criminalize any criticism of Islam. The place and date are not yet known.But the news is troubling.
2 - (Written text)"The Istanbul Process is directed by the OCI (Organization of Islamic Cooperation), headquartered in Saudi Arabia, an intergovernmental organization created on September 25, 1969 under the name of Organization of the Islamic Conference. It groups together fifty-seven member States and possesses a permanent delegation to the U.N. It changed its name on June 28, 2011 and is the only international organization on a supra-national level that is religious in nature."
3 - Christine Tasin's voice is heard over the Riposte Laïque banner featuring an article by Bernard Dick entitled The OCI Exerts Pressure to Turn Defamation of a Religion into a Crime.
Christine Tasin:The goal of the Istanbul Process is to write into international law a ban of all criticism of Islam and sharia.
The OCI has already had a vote in this direction, referring to the notorious 16/18 resolution of the United Nations Council on Human Rights that calls on all countries to fight against the stigmatization of religions. In order for this resolution to be implemented the Western nations have to follow it. Until now this has not been the case. Yet two important steps have been taken. First Washington hosted in December 2011 a meeting of the Istanbul Process. Agreeing to host this meeting means agreeing to the idea that Islamophobia should be suppressed. It means legitimizing the OCI and its fight against freedom of speech. It means agreeing that blasphemy should again be made a crime
4 - (Written text)"To know more about the OCI, the Istanbul Process and what the U.S.A. and Brussels are devising. A world worse than 1984. The disappearance, pure and simple, of freedom of speech, and religion imposed on everybody. Will they succeed in turning us into silent trembling slaves?"
5 - (Written text by Bernard Dick) "To say that jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings while encouraging violence in order to impose the supremacy of Islam and sharia is liable to become a crime. The complicity of the United States and Western governments on this question is a betrayal of our values and a submission to political Islam, a submission to moneyed Islamic organizations."
6 - (Written text translated from the Arabic by Bernard Dick)"In the course of the months to come, the American capital, Washington, will host a coordinating committee to discuss with the OCI the modalities of application of the 16/18 decision on the defamation of religions, the ban on stereotyped images of religions and their followers, as well as the spread of religious tolerance, which was adopted last March by the Human Rights Council (of the United Nations) with the approval of the Western nations. This resolution had been adopted after long discussions between the OIC and the countries where the phenomenon of Islamophobia is known."
7 - (Written text translated from the Arabic by Bernard Dick)"The same sources say that the next meetings have as their goal to provide a legal basis for the decision of the Council on Human Rights of the United Nations and to allow those States affected by this problem to legislate, and even more: to enact international laws that would prevent inciting to hatred resulting from defamation of religions."
8 - Christine Tasin:We have no illusions about Obama who has defended Islam.
(Written text)"Obama has made Islam a religion of the United States"
(Written text from Obama's Cairo speech, 2009) "In the same way, it is important that Western countries avoid preventing Muslims from practicing their religion as they wish, for example, by dictating what Muslim women must wear. In a word, we cannot disguise hostility toward religion under the cover of liberalism."
(Written text)"Obama: 'The United States Will Never Be At War with Islam'
The American president gave a speech in Cairo in the form of a reconciliation with the Muslim world. He gave his support to the creation of a Palestinian State and asked that Israeli colonization cease."
9 - This part is in English. Republican Congressman Dan Lungren questions Paul N. Stockton, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Defense. Notice that besides arguing about Islam they each have a different pronunciation for al-Qaeda.
10 - Christine Tasin points out the importance of the United States that serves as a model for other countries.
(Written text, Obama's speech)"Well-versed in history, I know too the debt that civilization owes to Islam. And all through history, Islam has proved, in words and in deeds, the possibilities of religious tolerance and of racial equality." (Applause) "I know too that Islam has always been a part of American History."
11 - Christine Tasin:We know the litany of oppressive measures, torture and intimidation endured by those in Islamic countries who contravene the Islamic laws: death sentences, stoning, amputation, flagellation are the lot of hundreds of people every day. The United States has no problem with this, the United States is doing all it can to make Islamic law world law. We know the lot of women in Islamic countries and the hell they live in from childhood. What are our elite doing that they are willing to host such a conference? We cannot, we must not allow this to happen. We must protest, we must rise up, we must say to all our representatives, all our deputies that we do not want this. There must be a movement that rises up against this abomination.
12 - The French flag is the backdrop for a pop-style patriotic song:
"People of France, the time has come for you to break the silence and have your voice heard, People of France do not resign yourselves, Resist the enemy of your laws."
13 - Christine Tasin:We have no illusions. The European Commission, like Obama, works secretly to prevent us from criticizing Islam. Proof? The Commission has created a network to sensitize people about the radical reaction following the massacre in Norway. I quote Le Monde, 09/09/2011, regarding the killer Anders Breivik:
"We are afraid (…) that his act becomes, in the future, a source of inspiration for other extremists, because the ideas of groups hostile to Islam have spread considerably since 2001. 'They dispose of a vast potential for recruitment, superior to that of the neo-nazis obsessed with the Jewish question. They benefit from a feeling of skepticism with regard to Muslims that is widespread in our societies,' he explained."
Christine Tasin:We cannot say that we didn't know. It is urgent to get out of the European Union. And it is urgent that the ruling elite change their national and international policies.Vive la République! Vive la France!
There is an English-language article on this topic at the New York Post. link
