Stormclouds over Europe:

Stormclouds over Europe: "Our time of opportunity is coming" – Nick Griffin

A financial version of the Black Death is spreading like wildfire from Greece, through Italy and Spain, and on to Britain. It will take several years before the full impact of the disaster really hits most ordinary people, but no one will escape.

The political elite have stolen £Billions from current taxpayers and future generations to bail out the banking system. In Britain as well as Europe, they've thrown everything they've got at the crisis. The banksters have grabbed a shed load more bonuses, and good money has disappeared after bad down a bottomless pit of wealth destruction.

It is already obvious that we have not heard the last of the financial plague that the Europhiles used earlier this month as an excuse to push forward with their economic and fiscal unification Project. There's a good chance that their desperate attempt to cover up a deadly currency crisis with a yellow-starred blue sticking plaster will not even survive the summer. Far worse is yet to come.

The problem for the ruling elite is that they have already used up all the ammunition in their locker staving off the deflationary spiral that followed the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008. They've got nothing left to fight the new wave of systemic collapse.

This will in due course come as a huge shock to millions of ordinary people, but our Masters have known all along that their Masters' Quantitative Easing money-printing operation would only buy time for their corrupt and fatally flawed system.

The banksters' old trick of creating credit out of nothing as an interest-bearing debt worked (on average) over the last couple of hundred years only because first coal and then oil provided an ever-increasing supply of growth-promoting cheap energy. One of the first casualties of Peak Oil was apparently unstoppable economic growth.

While the world's supply of cheap and easy energy was growing, the overall economic pattern was of long periods of growth punctuated by short periods of decline. On the downside of Hubbert's Curve, the pattern will inevitably be reversed. In the absence of a new high-density energy source miracle, the periods of decline will become the norm, punctuated by short periods of growth.

Under these new conditions, debt-based fiat money can only lead to chronic instability and wealth destruction. Two hundred years of massive overall growth through cheap energy-based finance capitalism has just come to a screeching, devastating halt. We are in the early stages of the greatest train crash of human economic, social and, in due course, political history.

Even though Joe Public hasn't yet got a clue about this, it is inconceivable that our Masters, and their Masters, didn't see the writing on the wall several years ago at least.

Which is really all one needs to know to understand why, all over Western Europe, there is a frantic campaign of 'internal' factional attacks on, and external efforts to steal the clothes of, radical nationalist parties which stand to gain hugely from the coming collapse in legitimacy of the parties of the old status quo.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. It is a matter of public record, for example, that the multi-billionaire financier George Soros is 'obsessed' by the 'threat' of a nationalist upsurge in Europe.

Up until now, analysts have connected that fact to his backing of 'Orange Revolution' organisations in Eastern Europe which seek to spread 'Western' liberal capitalism to the very borders of Russia.

Why, however, would he pump money into bringing the nations of Eastern Europe into the neo-con sphere of influence but stand idly by and watch as nationalism 'infected' the countries of Western Europe? It would be ludicrous, wouldn't it?

The moment one understands this, he sees the reason for the attempts to break up radical nationalist parties – like the Swedish National Democrats and the British National Party – and to replace them with housetrained safety valve parties.

The moment one understands this, he sees the reason for the attempts to suck slightly more-mainstream nationalist parties into the neo-con orbit. Hostility to the Islamic takeover of Europe should not logically lead to hostility to Islam in its own heartlands. What Muslims do in the Muslim world is no concern of ours, any more than is the fate of the Zionist colonial experiment in Israel.

This is not for one moment to play down the role of personal ambition, individual pride, leadership mistakes and sheer frustration in divisions within radical nationalist parties, including the British National Party.

But it is to point out that when a properly informed account of such events is ever published, then it will recognise the role of moles and agents provocateurs in Cointelpro (Google it if it's not familiar) style operations against us, both by State agencies and by their NGO counterparts as funded by the likes of Soros.

The question of 'who?' is of course open to debate, but 'if' is not a question at all. Of course we, just like our Swedish counterparts, are the victims of a massive campaign of dirty tricks, black propaganda and subversion.

We know for absolute certain that it would be very strange indeed if, at a time when our potential is so much greater, the same kind of operation had not been rolled out again.

How could it not be so, when our enemies know that the stormclouds are gathering and that the prosperity which lulled our people to sleep is at an end?

We shouldn't be surprised at such attacks. We shouldn't be dismayed by the folly of good people taken in by such attacks. But we must be determined to overcome such attacks, for our moment of opportunity is racing towards us like an express train. We need to get on board, because History doesn't stop for anybody. And we won't get a second chance.

When Tolerance Becomes National Suicide

When Tolerance Becomes Suicide

BNP Ideas

Tolerance. It’s a word we always hear about, we must tolerate this, we must be understanding of that, it’s British to accept differences, even ones that we don’t like, and be tolerant of them.

It’s always a one way street though, it’s us who are urged to be tolerant of others, never them expected to be tolerant of us. We have to tolerate, they have to carry on much as they were, and object vociferously to any lack of tolerance on our part.

A little tolerance for differences can – sometimes – be a good thing, but when does tolerance become surrender?

I have a ghastly relative or two – don’t we all – who are always trying to ‘borrow’ £5 or so here and there, and who manage to promise to pay it back seemingly without shame at the fact that both they, and I, know that they never will and that they have said the same thing a dozen times before.

Still, occasionally – very occasionally though – and even though I don’t like it, it’s tolerable in the interests of harmony. Were they complete strangers, well, different story altogether.

But, if they were asking every day? If instead of £5 it was £50, or £500, or £5,000, that I knew was going into a bottomless pit?

Well, there’s a point when tolerating that becomes suicidal, driving oneself into bankruptcy and debt for the sake of supporting an ungrateful wretch who will always want more and who will never give a damn thing back.

In short, were I to tolerate all this relatives demands, I would surrender my interests and those of my family to his. I would give until there was nothing left, he would take and be enriched at my expense.

I’d be left broken and penniless, he’d have gained much, I’d have lost everything. If I were to allow myself to end up in this situation, well, more fool me.

Yet, isn’t precisely what we are doing as a society?

We encourage tolerance for the sake of tolerance, it doesn’t matter how whatever it is we are supposed to tolerate may harm us, or may be utterly incompatible with the existing tenets of society, we are supposed to tolerate it.

We are indoctrinated that we have to be tolerant – yet we are never told that, at some point, tolerance will become self destructive.

Anything goes among others, we indigenous British are taught that we must abrogate self and identity in the interests of outsiders, that we must give whenever asked.

We must be tolerant no matter what, even if it means national and cultural suicide.

Where do my couple of ghastly relatives come in?

Well, we’re always being told by the acolytes and the priest of the multi-culti, multiracial state that we’re all one big family, all the same, strengthened by our differences.

Like my few family members above, isn’t there a point when we have to accept that tolerance is surrender, that the more we tolerate the more they will take, and that too much tolerance will only destroy ourselves?

Tolerance becomes nothing but self destruction if it is made a virtue in its own right and is not tempered with common sense and with the common good in mind.

It does me no good if my tolerance and choosing to ignore obvious truths lead to the destruction of myself and my family.

Think about it.

Exterminate! Daleks to save Earth by exterminating humanity!

Exterminate! Daleks to save Earth by exterminating humanity!

From the British Gazette

Above, a group of Daleks – beware, they are green on the inside!

Yesterday, the British Gazette reported upon the Warmists declaring that human obesity is a threat to the planet. Our commentary included a “tongue in cheek” response including the mention of our fellow Leeds resident, the delightful Nell McAndrew.

We had assumed that this piece of idiocy complied by the academics at Robert Gordon University at Aberdeen must have qualified for the Order of the Wooden Spoon for Stupidity.

It seems however our friends on the other side of the pond could not allow we Brits to hold this particular prize for long, and in the traditional spirit of transatlantic competition felt they, “….had to outdo the Limey’s……”

Well they most certainly have succeeded:

A certain Shawn Domagal-Goldman and his colleagues at Pennsylvania State University have produced a report which states upon other things; “……. Green” aliens might object to the environmental damage humans have caused on Earth and wipe us out to save the planet. This scenario gives us reason to limit our growth and reduce our impact on global ecosystems. It would be particularly important for us to limit our emissions of greenhouse gases, since atmospheric composition can be observed from other planets……”

British Gazette comment: Presumably this is why they are called, “little green men” – and we thought it had something to do with skin colour! How racist is that! Words fail us!

CONFEDERACY DEFEATED NEW WORLD ORDER BEGUN ?

CONFEDERACY DEFEATED NEW WORLD ORDER BEGUN ?
by the Horwich Nationalist

The following rousing video is taken from a website that intends to shed some light on the true reasons of the American Civil War, it exposes the myth that that was was fought over the issue of slavery. And that the true reason was the opposition to the establishment of a big centralized Government by the Lincoln Led United States of America,

The precursor to the split of the Union government that led to the Confederate States of America was an unfair tariff called the Morill Tariff that unfairly punished the Southern states . It forced many Southerners into bankruptcy allowed the tax rate to rise from 20% to 47%. And it must be realised that the Southern States only made up 30% of the population they paid more than 80% of the tax. It sounds like the emerging industrial and banking elites of America were already flexing their muscle in the Northern states were they and Lincoln held sway, sounds familiar ? In order to protect their Agrarian based Southern Industry and heritage and the original principles of the founding fathers of the American Republic the Confederate States LEGALLY ! seceded from the United States. Thus faced with a massive loss of revenue and a possible threat on their doorstep to the banking elites the only option for Lincoln and his federalist big government agenda was to take back the Confederate states by force of arms, an act that was in effect illegal. And leaving the Confederate States with no option but to defend it's self, a policy with which the Confederacy held to on a military point also.

It is a fact that at a stroke of Lincolns pen and the recognition of the Confederacy the lives of more than 600,000 American men women and children could have been saved, a death toll compared to the relative populations of 1860 USA to 1914 Europe makes the 1st world war look like a minor skirmish! In fact it would have been cheaper and at no cost in the lives of it's citizens if the North had bought every single last slave in America and then freed them. It is also a fact that many Negros were lynched in the North by a war weary populace due to Lincolns emancipation act , an act in my opinion that was merely a political maneuver to deflect attention from the real reason for the cause of the war.
In fact Lincoln is quoted as writing in a letter in1862 that
"I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. "
In effect this single tract proves all along that Lincoln was not interested in the slavery issue , and only interested in the survival of the Union and it,s special interest backed federal government. And that for many years the true history of that conflict has been covered up, I believe that the origins of the drive for the New World Order began in that conflict, and that if the Confederacy had been Victorious the drive for that order would have died at birth.
So if we come to the issue of Slavery it,s self we must ask if only 6% of the Southern population were slave holders what on earth were the other 94% fighting for. As nearly all in the South knew that the time of slavery was coming to an end both on the moral and economical front.
And it is a fact that 65.000 negro soldiers both free men and slave fought for the Confederacy and that at least 13.000 of these men actually saw action .
And that unlike the Negro soldiers of the Union who were paid less than White Northern troops, Confederate negro troops were paid the same as white troops. I strongly recommend this article called the forgotten Confederates
Which puts to bed to myth that the American war was based solely on slavery but more on the interests of big business and their political puppets an all to modern theme that we recognise today. And I believe that soon we must be faced with the only choice the Confederacy was left with even if it means that we suffer the same fate as those brave Rebs who fought for the Liberty and a true government of their homeland based on the virtues of for the people by the people, against the tyranny of a government of big vested special interests and their puppets, who run nations just as a going concern!

A Breath of Fresh Air to The UK

A Breath of Fresh Air

Written by Albion

What a great thing to be able to express a point of view, any point of view in contemporary Britain without Big Brother and its attendant vigilante thought police threatening reprisal. I almost wrote ‘Great’ Britain except it has ceased to be great for many people. One of the huge attractions of many blogger sites that abound the Internet but particularly Patriotic and Nationalist sites here in Europe and the USA is the ability to make utterances that normally would place you under arrest. I have heard it said someone in a pub made a remark that someone further down the bar found offensive, the police were called and the person was charged with one of the many exotic, rich variety of political racial crimes and crimes against government forced diversity. Here we can comment how we like, within the limits set by the moderator. I have seen comments pass the moderator that if said within earshot of a dusky colonizer would place a Prol on a very serious charge and they would feel the full force of its rigid Orwellian laws. I liken this ability to get past the stifling totalitarian socialist oppressor with the advent of clandestine radio during WW2. Years into the future history will show just how close Europe came to being a dictatorship. It is the sheer joy of absolute freedom to say what you like without the Ministry of Truth’s political storm-troopers deciding what you can or cannot say. It’s a heady, beautiful sense of exultation that rivals the aroma of spring flowers. There is little on Gods earth that rivals physical crimes against the person than removing that person’s basic right of freedom of speech and expression just to satisfy an authoritarian Socialists government’s political ideology. It must gall the New World shapers to be unable to control the Internet; in the early days they did not factor in such a wonderful invention as the Internet. The Marxist/Socialist architects via their governments and media establishments have used lies and threats and though relentless propaganda that has shaped the minds of our people and terrified a nation. Nationalists retaliated using the Internet. We know in the main our comments will be published unlike the government controlled newspapers where comments will only be published if it agrees with the strict guidelines of the New Order. The English schoolchild was told to sit a table with other children to work on a class project, after a while she asked the teacher if she could be moved as she could not understand the language of the newly arrived eastern immigrant children. The Marxist programmed teacher screamed and ranted at her she was a racist, the police were called and the school child was taken to the police station. Science fiction? No, Airstrip One, or Great Britain 2010. These comments I write of on these Internet sites would only be normally exchanged in hushed tones with like minded persons or between family members. The Ideological Police in their canary yellow costumes cradling their sub-machine guns roam the streets looking for the transgressors. They are everywhere with orders to come with all haste if the government’s political ideology is breached or is suspected of being breached. Its priority is paramount and takes precedent over any reports of the grooming of under-age English schoolgirls for sex to satisfy the carnal desires of primitive Asian immigrants, a phenomenon which we are also witnessing in Oslo with thousands of rapes being perpetrated by Immigrants, but for the Marxist overlords that is acceptable, it is collateral damage which cannot be avoided to achieve the final outcome. I would say with certainty many people who contribute to this great site I am sure who would have made a comment or written an article outside of the internet would now be in prison, home detention or had trackers placed on them and made to report to the police twice a day and most importantly attend racial and cultural diversity lectures. Crossed wires at Sunhill Police Station; Lady Policeman “Sir, Sergeant Cryer said put pink shoes on the bitch if she’s going to search the Mosque” Sergeant Cryer “Sir, I was respecting their culture, I was suggesting putting shoes on the police dog not on Monica”

David Starkey: Race, riots and censorship | ViewsHound

David Starkey: Race, riots and censorship

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. Why are some viewpoints simply unsayable?

By John Atherton -
UK, Race, censorship, London, Racism, Riots, BBC, London riots, David Starkey, rioting, The Guardian

David Starkey, arguably the most respected historian in Britain, went on television and committed what The Guardian has called in a live blog “career suicide”.

Being interviewed on the BBC’s flagship current affairs programme, Newsnight, Starkey committed the ultimate crime: he dared to suggest that race, and specifically black culture, may have played a part in the London riots of the previous week – riots started by the police shooting of a black gang member.

In this article I am not concerned with whether or not Starkey’s analysis is correct, or stands up to scrutiny: readers can use their own experiences, and the video and images of the events, to draw their own conclusions one way or the other.

What I am concerned with is something far deeper: it seems that in modern Britain there are some things that cannot be said; some observations that cannot be seen; some thoughts that cannot be thought.

George Orwell, whose classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four deals with the manipulation of thought, once wrote:

~“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

For readers who are not familiar with David Starkey, he studied at the University of Cambridge, lectured at the London School of Economics, has been a regular guest on BBC Radio 4 and has had several highly successful television series. In short, he has serious credentials as a respected thinker. As an openly gay man, he is surely no stranger to prejudice.

So when he chooses to speak, in a manner that suggests prior thought and consideration, he has earned the right to at least be heard. Yet the worrying nature of today’s political discourse is that as soon as his thoughts turn to race, he is drowned out. Other contributors on Newsnight began to shout him down, and would not let him finish his point, with no real attempt from the presenter to allow him space to reach a conclusion.

The BBC itself, after the broadcast, was falling over itself to defend the presenter. A spokesman for Newsnight said, “I think that Emily Maitlis very robustly challenged David Starkey.” This language is highly revealing. Were any other points of view “robustly challenged”? Would an interviewee suggesting that the riots were down to poverty be “robustly challenged”?

Let us not forget that these views were not those of an ignorant, uninformed man, but a learned academic with knowledge of this subject (which is presumably why he was being interviewed in the first place). When confronted with a fellow interviewee saying that black people were more likely to be stopped and searched by police, Starkey countered with facts, saying that 80% of gun crime in London is carried out by blacks. Again, this is not casual racism, but a fact-based intellectual approach.

George Orwell again:

“The most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome.”

read full article at link below.

David Starkey: Race, riots and censorship | ViewsHound

Your Freedom is Disappearing: Want to Talk About it?

Your Freedom is Disappearing: Want to Talk About it?

Written by Rev West | at the Christian Council of Britain

THIS IS THE THEME of a recently started campaign by the Freedom Association, a group of cross-party libertarians, started in the 1970s, to defend individual liberty against the encroachments of the expanding State of those days. It was deemed so “reactionary” by the KGB, the Soviet Union’s secret police that it is believed that they were behind the assassination of one of its co-founders.

The Freedom Association is certainly a group that every Christian believer can feel comfortable with, its seven principles of a free society resonating with the deeply-held beliefs of Christian political and gospel thought. These areas are as follows:

individual freedom,

personal and family responsibility,

the rule of law,

limited government,

free market economy,

national parliamentary democracy;

and strong national defences.

In its new campaign the Freedom Association declares that it does not want rule made for this country by unelected bureaucrats (Brussels’-crats?).

It successfully fought the Trade Union closed-shop, which had meant that if you lost your union membership you also lost your job.

They were the first group to oppose the Identity Card scheme of the New Labour Government, and they are currently fighting the European Union’s arrest warrant, which could see British citizens being arrested here for things which are not crimes in Britain!

The Freedom Association also believes that Britain is better off out of the European Union. They regularly hold debates, discussion, dinners and lots of other events and can be contacted at 0845 833 9626 or www.tfa.net or mail@tfa.net.

Their campaign leaflet ends on the positive note, which no genuine Christian could argue with:

“Whether you value your liberty, your freedom, or simply enjoy a healthy debate,

JOIN US and take part in our active political and social scene.”

Christians often complain about the state of the country but here is an organisation whereby you can be involved and do something about it.

Remember that all our precious views and values are based on Christianity. It would be a pity if Christians left the preservation and promotion of those views and values entirely to someone else.

© The Rev RMB West

Burning Britain and the Three-Times Treachery of Liberalism

Burning Britain and the Three-Times Treachery of Liberalism

Written by Tim Heydon

At the VBR

"People will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors" - Edmund Burke. (‘Reflections on the French Revolution’ Dent, 1955,(Everyman edition), p 31.) Edmund Burke , the great conservative political philosopher of the era of the French Revolution, has been rejected by modern Toryism, There is much in Burke which nationalists might object to or would want to modify, such as the strength of his elitism. Nevertheless, in many respects, including his rejection of ‘equality’ as against nature (‘A monstrous fiction’), his views and attitudes resonate with our own in a way that they don’t with Cameroonian Toryism and its fellow-travellers. We should claim him for ourselves as a key intellectual progenitor. Whilst a conservative, Burke’s view of society is actually more modern because more realistic than that of the social engineers. For their vision is of a rationally ordered society which functions like some great well-oiled machine. It is a vision in which the life of humanity can be structured in manufactured states like the European Union by those with the power to do so. This vision of society as mechanistic and scientifically improvable derives ultimately from Newton’s view of the universe as operating like a machine through inflexible natural laws. This view had an overwhelming influence on the thinking of the French Revolutionaries and continues with ‘progressives’ today. The State is not a Machine to be built by Leftist / Liberal Intellectuals. It is Organic Burke, though, considered society to be ‘one family, one body, one heart and soul". It was not to be thought of as something to be ordered and structured in machine-like fashion. Rather it is organic. It is a living thing in which we the individuals are merely cells. Thus while the individual may die, the larger body carries on. So we must never reject tradition because this represents the ancient wisdom of our race. It is the fruit of the empirical experience of the ages; it is what works. We should always distrust abstract reason, of the sort indulged in by the liberal /leftist ‘intellectual’ social engineers of our day, because "the individual is foolish. The multitude is foolish; but the species is wise....as a species it almost always acts right' (Works and Correspondence, vol X, (1852), p 97). Our rights are not dreamt up from some abstract principle but are inherited from our ancestors (ie are inherent in our ethnicity) and it is for us to transmit them to our posterity. ’We have," Burke said, "an inheritable crown; an inheritable peerage; and a house of commons and a people inheriting privileges, franchises, and liberties, from a long line of ancestors." Indeed, "it has been the uniform policy of our constitution to claim and assert our liberties, as an entailed inheritance derived to us from our forefathers, and to be transmitted to our posterity; as an estate specially belonging to the people of this kingdom without any reference whatever to any other more general or prior right." Burke’s organic view of the state /society fits in very nicely with a modern view of the universe as, not static in a Newtonian sense, but where even galaxies and perhaps the universe itself are born, live and die in an organic rather than in an unchanging mechanistic fashion. It is also more in keeping with a universe in which events are the result of the emerging possibilities of Quantum Physics rather than Newtonian determinism. Burke’s organic opinion of society; his view of the generations owing obligations to each other and his references to ‘the race’ as integral to society seems to assume an essentially ethnic perspective well in keeping with nationalist thinking. Remembering Burke as Britain Burns Modern society views the past as obsolete. It is an encumbrance to the future. Dynamic change must destroy the old to build the new in what Burke called "a liberal descent." He warned of "unsocial, uncivil, unconnected chaos" and demanded respect for institutions on the same grounds as for men: "on account of their age and on account of those from whom they are descended". Society is a Contract between the Living, the Dead and the Unborn. Burke affirmed that society was a contract between the living, the dead and those who are yet to be born. By this definition, Liberals including Cameroonian Tories have betrayed our past . They have betrayed our present. And they have betrayed our future. They have broken the sacred contract between the generations because they believe in nothing except the self, whilst we are faithful to that contract and believe in something greater than ourselves: our country, its people, its culture, the primacy of its traditional religion and much else besides. The Betrayal of Our Past In spite of the ludicrous historical perversions of left liberalism which lyingly try to force a multiracial history on Britain, until recently one of the most racially culturally and religiously homogenous nations ever (but which unwittingly confirm the importance of ancestry in national identity), this country was built by the ancestors of the native British. They built it, they struggled, they bled, not for the benefit of foreigners, but for themselves and for their progeny and their progeny - ourselves, their heirs. By destroying our traditions in favour of a continental –style manufactured arrangement in Europe and handing this country over to any Ahmed, Mohammed or Leroy, our present leadership has betrayed that trust and that legacy. Burke said, ‘The fair mansion of civilisation which we enjoy was not built with our hands, and our hands must refrain from polluting it. Being mere life-tenants, we have no business to cut off the entail, or to commit waste on the inheritance.’ This is what Burke explains as "one of the first and most leading principles on which the commonwealth and the laws are consecrated." To deny it is to reduce men to the condition of the "flies of a summer" The WW11 Generation would not have fought if they could have seen how their beloved Country has been polluted One of the saddest news items of recent years was the report of the sense of betrayal of those who fought the Second World War as obtained by the research for a book. ‘This isn’t the Britain we fought for,’ say the ‘unknown warriors of WW11’, read the Daily Mail headline of 21st November 2009. ‘Sarah Robinson was just at teenager when WW11 broke out. She endured the Blitz, watching for fires during Luftwaffe air raids armed with a bucket of sand. Often she would walk ten miles home from work in the blackout with bombs falling around her. As soon as she turned 18, she joined the Royal Navy to do her bit for the war effort. Hers was small part in a huge, history-making enterprise, and her contribution epitomises her generation’s sense of service and sacrifice. ‘But was it worth it? Her answer –and the answer of many of her contemporaries, now in their 80’s and 90’s -is a resounding no.’ ‘They despise what has become of the Britain they once fought to save. ‘’It’s not our country any more,’’ they say in sorrow and in anger. Sarah harks back to the days when ‘’people kept the laws and were polite and courteous. We didn’t have much money, but we were contented and happy.‘ ’People whistled and sang. There was still the United Kingdom, our country, which we fought for, our freedom , our democracy. But where is it now?’’ The Betrayal of the Present The betrayal of the past breaks the contract with it, but the present also betrays itself. For when it could have been the heir to the great tradition, the wisdom of our ancestors, it opted instead to reject it in favour of - what? Of belief in nothingness; nothing except the self and its gratifications. When it could have had ideals of service and self –sacrifice; belief in belonging to a greater whole at it heart it now has self-fulfilment in things. The results of this materialism lie in the balkanisation of our country and smoking in towns and cities across the nation - fires that Hitler would have been proud of. This is secular nihilism and liberal individualism in action. It is a nothingness which feels it owes nothing to the past except contempt. The Betrayal of the Future The burning rubble, the colonised country, the tramping underfoot of our culture, our religion and traditions in favour of those of elsewhere - these are what are a now to be bequeathed to our children and their children. The ‘me’ generation which gives not a hoot for the future because it doesn’t believe in anything, even for many in having children at all, has squandered their inheritance. Like the multicultural, multiracial slum that Britain has become, the evils of the Credit Crunch will be our children’s inheritance. They are the result of the economics of the ‘me’ generation which ran up towering debts in living for today. It is our children (if any) and their children who will pay. The widespread riots this country has seen recently, the product of Burke’s ‘liberal descent’ and the mad, French Revolutionary emphasis on an unattainable and unjustifiable ‘Equality’ which discounts ‘Liberty’ never mind ‘Fraternity’ may prove a turning point in our history when people begin to realise that Leftist Liberalism is a disaster for civilised life and begin to move away from this brand of ideology back to Burkean empiricism and the wisdom of our traditions. Let us hope so.

LEEDS GRIM PRIDE: Backside-Sex Perverts Welcomed. “Disgusting Buggers!”

LEEDS GRIM PRIDE: Backside-Sex Perverts Welcomed. “Disgusting Buggers!” says the Revd Robert West.

Written by Rev West |

A note from Leeds City Council

“Leeds City Council is pleased to be supporting Leeds Pride 2011. Leeds Pride plays a huge role in promoting the rich diversity of our city, of which we are very proud. I would like to wish the event every success.”

Undersigned by Cllr Keith Wakefield, Leader of Leeds City Council.

A response from the Revd Robert West

WHATEVER HAS POSSESSED A CITY COUNCIL TO take pride in Backside Sex, men with men, is beyond the ken of every decent and normal thinking citizen. Of course there were Lesbian perverts there too.

Normal folks do not feel the need to celebrate their sexual orientation: it is normal, after all, and there is no need to seek to justify it. Only the abnormal are so eaten-up by their perversities and inversions that they feel the need to justify themselves,

“This is a disgusting abomination and should be utterly abolished: their ‘pride’ is their disgrace.”lves, and before others. But it won’t be normal when they get aids, will it: then they will be playing the victim card and bleating like folks who need sympathy, instead of ones who have justly received the condemnation of their misdeeds which was due (Romans 1: 27).

We all reap what we sow; and that applies to them as well as to us (Gals 6: 7, 8). But they will not have it: they think they are special and that what normal people do not and cannot do, they can not only do, but grimly brag about it. How evil, perverse and pathetic. But that is the “homo-sodomite rights’ lobby” for you.

Well, what does the Holy Bible have to say about this? It is nothing new. Perversity and iniquity were rampant in the ancient world and brought it down, as it will do us. God is not mocked! God said of the homosexual cities that “…the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly” (Genesis 13:13). Later we read that as the Sun rose upon Lot, as he fled from Sodom into Zoar, that “…the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven” (Genesis 19: 24). Many centuries later the apostle Peter tells us how God turned the “…the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes… …making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly” (2 Peter 2: 6). And the apostle Paul says, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor wantons, nor buggerers…shall inherit the kingdom of God” (Geneva Version [1599] 1 Corinthians 6: 9, 10).

Well said and how appropriate for the “pride” of Councillor Keith Wakefield and the people he loves to have visit his city!

Immigration, You Know Its Gone Too Far When

You Know Its Gone Too Far When . . .

From BNP Ideas

….Even the immigrants are complaining that there’s too much immigration.

The following is quoted from an article on Reuters, relating to the riots which have torn several cities in Britain apart, and which have removed the rose tinted spectacles with which many regarded mass immigration forever:

Jay Dattani, an Asian from Tanzania, came to Britain nearly 40 years ago and runs Dalston Stationery across the road from Essuman’s taxi stand. He said London still offers the chance to make an honest living that first attracted him to the city. He kept his shop open during the riots.

“Let them come. I have weapons in the back. I can look after myself,” he said. But like many Londoners, native and foreign-born alike, he pines for simpler times.

“It was easier in the early days. It’s getting out of hand now” he said. “Too many foreigners, isn’t it. Just taking all the jobs. Taking advantage of the system.”

Try being indigenous British Mr Dattani, that statement would have drawn cries of racism from all corners, despite the fact that it is entirely true and – hysteria and accusation aside – even the most fervent supporter of mass immigration would have trouble providing a coherent argument against it.

We were told that some immigration would be good for us, that immigration would improve our society, that immigrants would integrate.

Some did, but then the influx of immigrants became so great that it was us left expected to integrate with them, immigration instead became colonisation. We became the strangers in our own land, the ones on the outside.

Even if it were possible to begin with, any form of integration that the social engineers old us upon ceased to be possible when those who were supposed to integrate exceeded the number of people they were supposed to integrate with.

Look at areas of London, there is no integration possible. Immigrants outnumber the indigenous. Instead you get isolation, separation, a cherry picking of which British things – e.g. the welfare system – immigrant groups will accept and make their own, and those which they’ll reject.

A society cannot tolerate immigration on a huge scale – look how well that worked out for many indigenous peoples across the world. After a point immigration becomes invasion, the indigenous become the alien presence, forced to surrender their identity to the coloniser or perish.

Even if we can accept that, at times in a nation’s existence, immigration is beneficial, Britain has gone too far – instead immigration and diversity has become something which is considered always to be beneficial and enriching, with no reference made to its impact upon the host society or the existing population.

You really know we’ve crossed that line big time when the immigrants themselves are waking up to how much of a mess it is causing.