Riots Erupt Across Britain

The cost is already running into tens of millions, yet the Government sits on their hands.

BBC News – London riots: Violence erupts for third day

Violence has broken out for a third consecutive day in London, with riot police deployed and firefighters tackling blazes across the capital.

Since then further riots have sprung up across London and now also in Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester and Nottingham. Shops and houses are being looted and burnt to the ground, people are being robbed, beaten and even stripped of their clothing; all whilst the police stand by, seldom taking any action.

Blame Game

The blame has been placed at the feet of the police, in part for the shooting of Mark Duggan and the uncertainty surrounding the details of his death, but also because of supposed race relations failures. That’s right, the overwhelming majority of the rioters are black, ergo it is the white man’s fault.

As usual this gives those race relations experts ample ammunition to justify their own existence. The head of the Runnymede Trust has, not in the least bit surprisingly, blamed racism. It seems that the reason that these young thugs need to loot the plasma TVs, Apple Mac computers, and expensive clothing is because they have been discriminated against.

Oddly, this kind of thing didn’t happen during the Great Depression, when people faced true abject poverty, repression and staggering unemployment. But then, the likes of Rob Berkeley weren’t around back then to further fuel the victim mentality of certain sections of the community.

Entitlement

Organisations like the Runnymede Trust et al have spent decades telling young black kids and other ethnic minorities that they are in for a life of adversity, and that the Government/white man/police is against them. Then, when these disenfranchised kids hit out or just plain give up trying, they again blame racism and the Government/police/white man for promoting inequality.

Berkeley said:

“Reports earlier this year highlighted that Black men were 8 times more likely to be stopped and searched than white men.”

Not the Blitz, but the day after marauding kids ripped the heart out of Croydon.

A blatant and sickening attempt to excuse the recent violence, failing to point out that according to the prison statistics there are five times more black people in prison, i.e. criminals, than whites per percentage of the population. Indeed, 20% of the prison population is black, but only 2% of the actual population.

Therefore the police are doing their job, by searching people who are most likely to be criminals, and for that matter carry drugs, guns and knives.

Perhaps Berkeley should be asking why so many black people turn to crime, and not why so many blacks are searched. Indeed, he may well discover that he and his ilk promoting their ‘expect inequality always’ agenda, is what is causing the problems.

I would not consider myself an expert in black issues, but I am fairly sure that in modern Britain they are less discriminated against than ever before, so why such a violent and hateful reaction now?

Berkeley also went on to blame a lack of jobs and opportunities and also the schools system, claiming:

“In education there was a 20 point-gap in achievement between Black and White youth. In Haringey schools this year that gap had increased to one of 35 points.”

This seems to be in complete contrast with all the information I have seen on the subject over the past few years. According to the BBC:

BBC News – Poor pupils in struggling schools ‘lag further behind’

At secondary level, white British children in this category lagged behind most other major ethnic groups. For example, they were only half as likely to reach the GCSE target as Bangladeshi children, and also lagged behind Pakistani, Black African, Caribbean and Asian pupils

So white pupils are now the under performers, yet oddly, there are currently no predominately poor white areas rioting.

Regardless of the facts people like Berkeley will be blaming racism and rubbing their hands in glee, foreseeing huge handouts from the contrite Government to ensure that these woeful  events never arise again (at least until further budget cuts; they have to be practical). Even in his article he pointed out that in the US £600 million had been earmarked to combat inequality. So even as people’s homes are burning (and people of all colours), Berkeley is holding out the begging bowl for his cause, along with the caveat that failure to give generously enough will only lead to more such violence in the future.

As nice (and rewarding for equality campaigners) it would be to lay this at the door of racism, it is far more complex than that and frankly race itself has little to do with this.

Liberal Mentality

No, what has caused this is the liberal mentality that pervades the British political system. First we were told that the death penalty should be abolished as it was inhumane.

This was never the consensus, but rather a decision made for the voter, by the people they voted for and against popular opinion. Since then we’ve seen the murder rate increase three-fold. Next came the removal of corporal punishments in schools, in order to protect the children from violence. Then the removal of the right of parents to hit their own children ostensibly to protect children from abuse. Inevitably leading to a situation where parents cannot control their own children, relying on the schools, who also cannot control the children.

Finally there has been the steady emasculation of the justice system. Where criminals are rehabilitated, understood and hugged, rather than punished, which has resulted in our soft touch prisons being no deterrent, let alone punishment, whatsoever. This is startlingly obvious to would-be ruffians from  very young age.

Even the Police Force, or (Police Service as it is now known officially – time to rethink that perhaps) is a toothless beast. Too afraid to confront wrong doers, merely standing by whilst the miscreants steal, pillage and burn.

Once such misbehaviour would, at the very least have resulted in a good braining from the police truncheons for offender, if not the use of water cannon’s, tear gas and rubber bullets.

But that doesn’t fit with the liberal way of doing things, Theresa May, the supposed Home Secretary said:

“The way we police in Britain is not through use of water cannon. The way we police in Britain is through consent of communities.”

Seemingly confusing these riots with the rowdy behaviour of certain individuals at one of her late night garden parties. Where, after politely asking them to leave, the drunkard may make a few bawdy comments, but will eventually leave without much disruption, as they usually have to be up for a high ranking political duties in the morning.

May and the rest of the Government are unconcerned as only the peasants are suffering at this point. She also hopes to reason with them and more bizarrely, get them to consent to going home!

It seems that May is going to continue waiting for the louts, thugs and thieves to get bored and stop, rather than stopping them.

As of yet, only police dogs and horses have been deployed, it seems water cannons are only reserved for the Irish. The police have made no attempt at clearing the streets. This is not solely the fault of the police, but the liberal and ineffective politicians who cannot even carry out one of the basic functions of Government, to protect its people.

Instead, they are letting the rioters have their head, in another example of what has become common place in Britain, giving more thought and protection to the criminal, than to the victims. It seems that the Government believes that using violence on the violent is wrong, better to wait till they wear themselves out, like a toddler’s tantrum.

This has meant that for every looter that manages to get an LCD TV home, ten of his, and even now her, friends want to do the same. After all, there is literally nothing to stop them, no punishment. The police cannot even protect their own police cars, or even police stations. These young criminals may be ruffians and vandals, but they aren’t completely stupid, they are finally starting to realise that the softly softly approach actually means that there is nothing to stop them, at all.

Like a teacher cannot remove them from the classroom for being disruptive, only ask them to leave; the police cannot remove them from the streets, only ask them to leave. They can do what they want, and no one can stop them, as these girls are happy to say.

Spreading Like Wildfire

Because of this inaction the violence and disorder has now spread not only across London, but to other cities in Britain too. And the police reaction to this? A promise to release CCTV footage of the rioters to catch them later, maybe, and a request that parents call in their children.

This water cannon was used less than a month ago in Northern Ireland. It appears however that water cannon, plastic bullets and tear gas are only used against the Irish, or perhaps only against white people.

A heavy hand is needed to discourage further rioting and pillaging. Briton’s up and down the country and crying out on social networks, the internet and local news for the army, for tough measures and for swift and decisive action.

But that is not the liberal mentality, which advocates first and foremost an understanding of the brute, then placation and finally all out surrender. May and the Government have literally surrendered the streets of Britain to the thugs and are hoping that they get bored, or stay home to play on their stolen gadgets.

The Government and police force have shown themselves up to be ineffective and limp wristed. They have spent decades trying to understand criminals and make them see the error of their ways, believing them all, at their core, to have the same moral integrity as the Oxbridge political elite. And this situation is a result of that.

The Riot Act

In the old days, back when Britain used a heavy hand to deal with criminals, and unsurprisingly the crime and murder rates were very low compared to today, they used the Riot Act to clear the streets.

The rioters were read the Riot Act:

“Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the act made in the first year of King George, for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God Save the King!”

Once the Act was read, the rioters had one hour to disperse, or would be forcibly removed, either by the police or local people. The last point is an important one, the Act ensured that anyone aiding in the removal of rioters were not liable for any injuries or loss of life.

Fortunately the people of Britain, at least in some areas, retain a back bone. And there are already reports of communities heading into the streets and confronting the rioters and driving them away from their neighbourhoods.

However, as the riot act was repealed in 1973, they are literally playing Russian Roulette with their lives. Apart from possible harm they may face at the hands of the rioters, should they injure a rioter, or even kill one, defending themselves or their property, they will go to prison.

It is an inexcusable situation that the people of Britain now find themselves in, and all thanks to successive feckless Governments. The streets have been taken over by violent thugs, burning and pillaging, yet the Government and Police are incapable or unwilling to take any action.

Even now it is too late. London has a population of 8 million, yet just 30,000 police officers. If the these people want to riot throughout Britain, there is becoming less and less chance that the 150,000 police officers in the whole of the UK will be enough to contain them. The army has just 110,000 men, and many of those are abroad.

The Government should have nipped this in the bud, instead they have sat back, and wished it away.

Instead it will ultimately be left to the citizens to protect their homes, their places or work and themselves from the hooligans and people will die, but in doing so, they will inevitably be punished by the very Government that has failed them.

Cadbury Forced to Apologise to Naomi Campbell

Suggestions that the white babbles are meant to represent some of the blood diamonds Naomi Campbell received from Charles Taylor are likewise spurious

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson ‘instrumental’ in forcing Cadbury to apologise to Naomi Campbell over ‘racist’ chocolate advert | Mail Online

It has been revealed that the black rights group behind the successful push to have Cadbury publicly apologise to the supermodel received ‘instrumental’ support from the civil rights legends after writing to them,

Well, it seems that you cannot stand in the way of the African diaspora. Cadbury have been forced into a humiliating apology, or face the wrath of the black man – everywhere.

Say, that’s a nice company….

At least that is the gist of what Sharpton and Jackson were threatening. Clearly, black people are black first, national borders, common sense and fairness etc, come last, if at all. So much for multiculturalism then, the only ones who seem to stick to nationality rather than race and culture, are white people. 

This was never about race, as I said before. This was about Naomi Campbell throwing a hissy fit for her name being used in a campaign that she wasn’t paid for; Campbell is nothing if not mercenary. As for Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, they just don’t like black people being portrayed negatively, exemplified by Al Sharpton’s group stating:

“The reverend felt this was deeply offensive. Naomi is an icon and has worked very hard, so to be compared to food or an object is offensive.”

Sharpton: "Say, that's a nice company you have there, shame if something were to happen to it." Company: "Here's a $100,000." Sharpton: "Boycott called off."

Nothing racial then, just the fact that she was compared to a food or object or was it that Cadbury/Kraft were not handing out ‘donations’? Sharpton and his organisation of course being quite infamous for its ‘shakedowns’, demanding money from organisations, lest they face a black protest and be highlighted as racist. Very reminisent of a mafia don running a protection racket. Of course when a company refuses donations, his sheep like followers carry out a boycott until Sharpton’s pockets are suitably lined. 

Hypocrisy

His group then went on to state via Tamika Mallory:

“It’s yet another example of corporate insensitivity towards minorities, and proof that advertising rooms are still largely devoid of diversity..”

If we're talking confectionery, I'd liken Tamika Mallory to a Curly Wurly; nicely wrapped but twisted and full of gaping holes on the inside.

A tad bit hypocritical, considering the board of Al Sharpton’s group, National Action Network is made up entirely of black people, no whites, no hispanics, no Chinese, Asian, Korean or any other ethnicity, whatsoever. 

Call me old fashioned but I find a group, solely set up to further the interests of one race, over all others, well – racist. Also this group claims to help those suffering social of poverty, even thought the vast majority of those in poverty are white, as far as I know it doesn’t help white folks. 

In the US even fellow African Americans have labelled Al Sharpton a racial arsonist. 

The threats however clearly did the trick, as Cadbury have issued an apology for any offence caused, according to their statement:

“We have been in discussions with Naomi’s solicitors and can confirm that they have accepted our apology on her behalf as a conclusion to this issue.”

Reading between the lines it sounds as though Naomi Campbell has been suitably recompensed and Cadbury’s have learned a hard lesson. Never make mention of a black person without their express permission and suitable payment made, otherwise they will be branded racist. 

 

Naomi Campbell Causes a Storm

Suggestions that any of the clothing in this Marc Jacobs ensemble are chocolate coloured are racist and will not be entertained

Naomi Campbell in race row over Cadbury chocolate | Independent

Cadbury is facing the prospect of a black consumer boycott after it compared Naomi Campbell to a chocolate bar in a new advertising campaign. 

Well, it has been a while since the fashion industry’s favourite diva threw a wobbly and accused someone of racism – at least publicly, but the wait is over.

The last time she started screaming that everyone was racist, was back in 2008 when, having lost her bags at Heathrow, she demanded that the pilot get out and find them!

Campbell brings out the big guns

This time though, things are infinitely more serious, she has even wheeled out her mother to stand up for her, who helpfully pointed out:

“This is the 21st century, not the 1950s.”

The question is, where was she when her daugther was handing out beatings to her staff, police officers and appearing in court? She could have used her helpful observation then to point out to her daughter that we don’t treat staff like that in the 21st Century, this isn’t the 1950s! Indeed where was her mum throughout her childhood when she should have been teaching her respect for other people?

Her mother also said:

“Do these people think they can insult black people and we just take it?”

By these people she clearly means white people, who obviously didn’t taken into account her daughter’s delicate sensibilities. Ironically, on Kraft’s homepage they have a black man drinking a hot beverage, probably coffee, perhaps even hot chocolate. 

Rent an outrage

My two favourite rabble rousers are also mentioned here. Apparently the head of Operation Black Vote, an exceedingly optimistic Simon Woolly has written to Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to ask them to ‘mobilise’ the USA’s black population, something many in that country have been trying to do for years, not least Sharpton & Jackson Master Demagogues (no outrage too big, too small, or too silly). 

Suggestions that the white baubbles are meant to represent some of the blood diamonds Naomi Campbell received from Charles Taylor are likewise spurious

I can’t wait to hear Messrs Sharpton & Jackson vent their spleen on this one. 

Woolley also went on to claim:

“Racism in the playground starts with black children being called ‘chocolate bar’.”

Really Mr Woolley? You have research to back up this assertion? In my experience racism tends to start with far worse than that, and in my day, the only kid that was called a chocolate bar, was one with blond hair and glasses. 

He then bizarrely went on to add:

“The Eurocentric joke is not funny to black people.”

 Do I detect a hint of racism in that remark? The irony of someone like Woolley complaining about racism on the one hand, and then making remarks like that, all whilst running (or at least being part of) an organisation dedicated to advancing the cause of people with a particular colour skin (and only people of that colour), against those who are not of that skin colour, seems lost on him, if not on me. 

Lee Jasper, a father of nine and head of many black organisations also got in on the act, stating:

“This issue is not just about the insult to Naomi Campbell. It’s about how these companies treat black people in general. Part of the problem is that they don’t see it as offensive.”

Clearly we get to the crux of the matter, calling Naomi Campbell a diva. You see people like Jasper, can never countenance a negative portrayal of a black person. Ironic considering that Lee Jasper is infamous for not only sending lecherous and suggestive emails to a work colleague, and then resigning because of it, but was also investigated after half a million pounds went missing and as to why millions of pounds of tax payers money was spent on projects linked to Jasper’s friends (all of whom were black) whilst he was London Mayor’s head of equalities. 

These hypocrites are the kind of people that get angry at chess, because white moves first. 

Money makes Campbell’s world go round

I think what has really annoyed the ageing model Naomi Campbell, in the winter of her modelling career, when she knows that there is only so much that botox and collagen can achieve against the ravages of time, a well known company and brand has basically used her name and reputation, without suitable remuneration. I am sure that on seeing the advert her first thought was to call her lawyer to find out if she could sue and on discovering she could not, she decided to once again play the race card to get an apology and the advert pulled. 

A short call to a black activist group would have been all it would have taken to set this band wagon in motion.  

One day Naomi Campbell may be a real victim of racial discrimination, but like the boy who cried wolf, who’d believe her?

Britain is Easy Meat

Jack Straw: One of the few times he has ever spoken sense, albeit a little late.

Jack Straw sparks row with Pakistan ‘easy meat’ remark – Telegraph

Jack Straw, the former home secretary, has sparked a fierce row over his claim that some British Pakistani men regard white girls as “easy meat” for sexual abuse.

While it is gratifying at last that an MP has broken cover and spoken out about these despicable acts, and the perpetrators; the fact that the man was Home Secretary and knew full well about this problem and did nothing, takes something away from his stand. How many young girls could have been saved had he spoken out earlier, or better yet done something about this problem when he was Home Secretary?

We can criticise you, but don’t criticise us

There have been a series of these cases, and in each case the girls were predominately white and aged between 11 and 16, and the men were predominately Pakistani Muslims and it is right that Jack Straw, and many others are highlighting this problem.

Straw said:

“We need to get the Pakistani community to think much more clearly about why this is going on and to be more open about the problems that are leading to a number of Pakistani heritage men thinking it is OK to target white girls in this way.”

Khalid Mahmood: Speaks up for Muslim related issues, but little else.

As is typical however, as soon as a white man mentions Muslims or Pakistani’s or any other ethnic minority in a negative way, the usual suspects come out of the woodwork to defend the indefensible. First it was the Muslim MPs, who stand by fellow Muslims regardless of what they have done (see the endless posts on Dodgy Dizaei), trying desperately to deflect the blame. Khalid Mahmood, MP for the predominately Muslim area in which I used to live, came out first stating:

“There are Asian men who will do the same thing to Muslim and Pakistani girls. They are indiscriminate and will take the chance wherever they can.”

Yet, as far as I know, there has not been one single Muslim or Pakistani girl victim from any one of the 3+ gangs prosecuted this year. Or is he implying in some veiled way that Muslim and Pakistani girls don’t give the men that chance? He then went on to add:

“Rather than just whinging about it, he should have sorted it out by educating his community over the last 30 years while he’s been MP.”

Bizarrely mad dog Mahmood seems to be blaming Jack Straw and the community of Blackburn for the whole thing! Talk about generalisations and making sweeping statements!

Keith Vaz: For many years most Britons thought that impropriety was Vaz's middle name, but in fact it is Anthony.

Next up was Parliaments most corrupt MP, although there are some recent contenders for that title, Keith ‘backhand’ Vaz. The man who tried to stop a Judge from investigating his friend/sponsor and who told the Solicitors Regulatory Authority that they should not investigate any lawyers that were brown. Vaz said:

“I don’t think this is a cultural problem … I don’t think you can stereotype an entire community.”

Before promptly trying to sweep the whole issue under the carpet that now doubles as his loft insulation.

It is this kind of nonchalant attitude that gives the green light to the sick deviants that commit these crimes. If their own community refuses to deal with the issue and the white community dare not, what’s to stop them?

When the pot can’t call the kettle black

Mohammed Shafiq: Whilst he is one of the few Muslim leaders that do stand up and be counted, he clearly does not take criticism from outsiders, i.e. whites, well.

Another of the usual suspects that gets wheeled out for anything Muslim is one Mohammed Shafiq, head of the Ramadhan Foundation who said:

“And for Jack Straw, a former home secretary, to suggest that this somehow is ingrained within young Pakistani men, I think is quite dangerous.”

Yet this is the man who when wheeled out for a soundbite earlier in the week said:

“There is a perception that some of these young men do not see white girls as equal, as valuable, of high moral standing as they see their own daughters, and their own sisters, and I think that’s wrong. It’s a form of racism that’s abhorrent in a civilised society.”

He may not use the phrase ‘easy meat’ but he basically said the same thing as Jack Straw, so why is he now criticising him for reiterating his own views? Is it because like Mahmood and Vaz, he cannot tolerate criticism of his community from anyone white?

It is clear that their communities are rife with problems, terrorism may have gotten the headlines but these gangs of child abusers have been carrying out these acts for more than a decade, ignored because of certain liberal do-gooders turning a blind eye for fear of stirring up racist feeling, despite the obvious irony.

Unfortunately the Muslim community does not turn on its own, not for terrorism, as the police and Government have found despite massive campaigns and very large donations, and not for this. They may not openly condone it, but they will take no actions to eradicate it.

Nick Griffin: The BNP have been warning of this problem for years, and it has been falling on deaf ears all that time.

Let’s be honest, to pass around these girls, pimp them out and transport them around the country requires a lot of organisation and a lot of people to help out. This means that many people were, and still are,  turning a blind eye to this at best, at worst getting away with it. The fact is that the Muslim community isn’t too concerned, as those affected are not Muslim.

The irony of course is that the political party that first drew attention to this back in 2004, was the BNP. They were then criticised for scaremongering, racism and accused of attempting to politicise a one-off tragic case.

Grooming and our ignoble tradition of racialising crime | The Guardian

In 2004 the Channel 4 documentary Edge of the City, which explored claims that Asian men in Bradford were grooming white girls as young as 11, sexually abusing them and passing them on to their friends, was initially withdrawn from the schedules after the BNP described it as “a party political broadcast”, and the chief constable of West Yorkshire police warned that it could spark disorder.

Yet is seems that the BNP were right all along, this wasn’t a one-off but a systemic problem, either caused by, or exacerbated by, Muslim Pakistani culture. And as for race not being an issue, were a white only gang targeting only Pakistani Muslim girls, you can be sure that there would be a huge uproar, spearheaded by the likes of Khalid Mahmood, Keith Vaz and of course the Guardian, and it would most certainly be considered racially motivated.

When is a Paedophile not a Paedophile? When he’s brown

Paedophile: The sick aberrant got 11 years, the same amout of time his youngest victim had been alive.

Another shocking aspect of this case is not only the fact that prowling the streets on the look out for white only victims apparently does not make it a racially motivated crime, but that these men are apparently not considered paedophiles. Even Jack Straw goes on some bizarre defence of them targeting girls as young as 11:

“These young men are in a western society, in any event, they act like any other young men, they’re fizzing and popping with testosterone, they want some outlet for that,”

Bizarrely backtracking and implying that it isn’t their fault, but our own culture that has corrupted these poor men. Other young men don’t seek out 11 year old girls to abuse, despite testosterone fizzing and popping around their system too; apparently most young men outside of the Pakistani Muslim community are brought up better.

Amazingly these men were not viewed as paedophiles, despite grooming these girls by following them home from school, offering them presents and lifts and generally behaving like every other white paedophile gang ever convicted. Not one of the girls was over 16, yet for some reason they were not considered paedophiles, fuelling further this misguided belief that only white people can be paedophiles; for those of other ethnicities it seems that grooming and raping children is all just fun and games.

Jack Straw did this himself when he said:

“…overwhelmingly the sex offenders’ wings of prisons are full of white sex offenders…”

In a country that is 80-90% white Jack, that really shouldn’t be a surprise, what is surprising is just how high the disparity is between Asian sex offenders and white sex offenders, and that this truth has been staring police forces, MPs and Governments in the face for some time.

Mohammed Romaan Liaqat: Walleye meant that the only sex this sick pervert could get was from little girls that he'd drugged.

In Derbyshire alone, where these crimes took place just 0.5% of the population is considered to be Asian, 98.5% white, yet the sex offenders convicted in 2007/8 were 87.7% white and 5.7% Asian, so despite only 1 in every 200 people in Derbyshire being Asian, 1 in 20 sex offenders are Asian. Meaning that in Derbyshire at least, Asians are committing ten times more sex crimes than they should be responsible for, for their percentage of the population.

Even more interesting is that more than half of those (2.9%) considered themselves Pakistani, just 1% were Indian.

A troubling statistic indeed and one that doesn’t include the 13 or so men involved in this case. South Yorkshire also has a similar problem, just 2.6% of the population is Asian, yet 7.2% of sex offenders were Asian in 2007/8, compared to 95% and 82% respectively for whites. And once again almost half considered themselves to be Pakistani (3.2%) again compared to just one percent being Indian.

Nationally 6% of the population are classed as Asian, 87% white, yet nationally 8.5% of sex offenders are Asian, just 77.9% are white.

Clearly Jack Straw’s attempt at implying that whites were somehow much more likely to be sex offenders isn’t true at all indeed whites commit far fewer sexual offences than they should be for such a high proportion of the population, moreover Pakistanis are committing far more sexual offences than they should, and far more than their Indian counterparts.

We have to assume that this is some cultural problem, regardless of what the likes of Mahmood, Shafiq and Vaz would have us believe. Rather than pointing the finger at people like Jack Straw, as community leaders, they should be looking in the mirror for answers, not relying on others to resolve the problem for them. Besides, let’s be honest, Muslim communities are hardly a shining bastion of integration, on the contrary they baulk at any attempt to incorporate other cultures into their communities and scream about intolerance.

We can also assume that such people would be extremely vocal had a similar problem manifested itself within the Jewish, Polish or Sikh communities.

Culture, what culture?

Another alarming aspect of this case is that these men were not first generation immigrants who viewed white people as some alien sub-human race. These men who born here, brought up here and lived their whole lives here.

They view Western/white culture as morally bankrupt and devoid of any substance not because that is what some Imman in some backwater village in some far off nation has told them, but because of how they have been brought up and what they have seen.

I remember during my days in Perry Bar, Khalid Mahmood’s constituency, having a conversation with a Pakistani Muslim gentlemen about culture and heritage, where he pointed out to me that ‘white people have no culture’. Obviously I pointed out to him that he was being ridiculous and that he was surrounded by white culture, to which he replied:

“Really? Because when I look around I see Muslim shops and businesses, I am surrounded by Muslims wearing Muslims dress and speaking languages other than English and on the corner of this very street is a Mosque named after the leader of a Muslim nation. Even your own youths imitate others cultures, especially black culture. Where is your culture?”

At the time I didn’t really understand the significance of what he’d pointed out to me, I merely told him that he was being short sighted before we moved onto something else,  but now I realise that he was right.

When the first generation of immigrants arrived here they wanted to be part of British culture, but unfortunately they still resented British people. This resentment has been passed down through the generations and rather than arriving here and finding a wonderful culture and having it imposed on them, they found that British culture shrank away from them.

Appeasements were made in order to make them feel more welcome, at home, literally. They were told that they didn’t have to adapt, that they were the guests and that we would adapt to suit them. Moreover, the liberals and Empire apologists who were sadly in power, used this time and these immigrants as a stick to beat white Britons with.

As George Orwell stated in 1941:

“England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during ‘God save the King’ than of stealing from a poor box.”

British culture was seen as shameful, associated with too many wrongs and so carefully and deliberately supplanted.

Is it any wonder then, that when these immigrants arrived and found nothing incredible about the nation that had conquered a quarter of the globe, found them limp wristed and ashamed and devoid of any solid culture, or at least any culture that they weren’t prepared to remove or substitute to accommodate their new friends, that the immigrants then allowed their own culture to rush in and fill the void.

Their children then grew to see white people as morally bankrupt, weak and lacking in any identity and culture and as inferior.

Now we can clearly see why the likes of Mohammed Shafiq, Khalid Mahmood and Keith Vaz will not countenance any criticism of their culture or any damage to the illusion of superiority, particularly in regards to morals.

Such things may slacken the pace of the rapid rise of white converts to Islamic religion and culture.

Enoch Powell: As time goes on, it seems that many of Powell's predictions are becoming reality.

As Enoch Powell said in his Rivers of Blood speech in 1968:

“Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population.”

More than 40 years on, and despite successive generations apparently being exposed to the wonders of British culture, the divisions and differences have never been larger.

If the Muslim Pakistani community and other immigrant communities see white people and white culture as weak, inferior and merit-less, who should we blame, them, or ourselves?

Islam the illusion of respectability

Further evidence of this perception of their religion/culture being superior and commanding more respect and influence than Western culture and how ingrained it is on the minds of young Pakistani Muslims was demonstrated by the men themselves.

When they were arrested they had short hair, no beards, dressed in Western clothes and behaved like Westerners, at least outwardly. Since their arrest the men have grown beards and began dressing in Muslim clothes and giving an outward appearance of being pious and devout.

As if this, and the fact that they are married men, would somehow convey to the Judge and the jury, they were either good men corrupted by an immoral Western society, or that as devout Muslims, they could not possibly have carried out such acts. Such is the power of their culture in their own minds.

Those Crazy Iranians

Iran's First Vice-President Rahimi: Fortunately a job that involves very little other than making Ahmadinejad look slightly less like a slavering loon.

British are bunch of thick people ruled by a mafia, says Iran’s vice president | Mail Online

In a blistering diatribe against Britain, Mohammad-Reza Rahimi said: ‘They have plundered the world in the last 500 years and the young lad in charge now is even more stupid than his predecessor. It’s as if God has made this nation servants of America and Zionists.’

The only astonishing thing about this attack is Mohammad-Rezi Rahimi’s woeful ignorance and hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy

A man from Persia, a nation that rampaged across and plundered most of the known world for hundreds of years, and one of the world largest ever Empires, criticising the world’s largest ever Empire, well some would view that a tad bit hypocritical, especially as Iran still celebrates its imperial past. Before Britain landed in India, it had just been attacked and plundered by the Persians.

Although I do concede he may have a point about David Cameron and the fact that most of Britain’s foreign policy decisions are based on what the US would like us to do.

Iran’s First Vice President added: ‘England has nothing. Its inhabitants are not human, its officials are not responsible, and it doesn’t even have any natural resources. (They are) a bunch of thick people ruled by a mafia.’

OK, now back to the ignorance. England is just a province in Britain (or the UK) and hasn’t been an independent nation since about the last time that Iran did anything of any import on the world stage. As for not human, well if one of the leaders of one country, sees the entire inhabitants of another country as sub-human and inferior, then I am pretty sure that I do not want them to have nuclear weapons. Such a racist viewpoint wouldn’t ordinarily matter in such a weak and backward nation as Iran, but a nuclear weapon is a great leveller, literally.

As for not having any natural resources, again, nescient of even a basic knowledge of Britain. Britain has lots of natural resources, apart from the North Sea we have just discovered an even bigger oil field in the Falklands. Add to that our abundance of tin, coal, copper, steel and many other ‘natural resources’ and we don’t do too badly, it is just that it is cheaper to pay some backward illiterate in some far of nation like Iran to dig out their natural resources and ship them here.

As for being thick, well, we are not the nation that is based on there being some magical, mystical being who has handed down his teachings in a magical mystical book and who can only spread his word through a few, carefully and divinely chosen followers, who the rest of the population have to blindly follow in their medieval ways and beliefs. No, that is Iran.

He may have a point about the mafia though.

Britain’s Retaliatory Broadside

When Britain Had Balls: Sadly the days of Britain standing up for herself with anything other than slightly aggrieved words are gone.

Britain of course responded to this racist diatribe in customary fashion, no, not by blockaded the ports of Iran, or bombing its Palaces or oil fields, or by our own leaders lambasting Iran for its record on human rights, its treatment of women, its lack of religious (or any other kind of) freedoms. No. The British Ambassador posted a retributory Twitter post.

‘To state that the British are not human and to call them thick shows a lack of respect for human dignity and is an illogical and worthless remark,’ he wrote.

Quite right, that surely has the Iranians reeling.

Mr Gass wrote: ‘The contribution made by Britain in shaping the modern world, from invention to cultural achievements, values and respect for individual rights, has been clearly and rightly recorded in history and is respected throughout the world.’

Well put Mr Ambassador, the last worthwhile contribution that Iran made to the world was when the Parthians poured molten gold down the throat of Crassus, back in 53 BC. Coincidentally that is also around the time on which their current values and culture are based, such as stoning women, hanging women for ‘allowing’ themselves to be raped, and not allowing women to divorce their husbands, regardless of their levels of infidelity or abuse. I know in which nation I’d rather live, and it seems that I am not alone, I doubt many Pakistani, Afghan or Iraqi immigrants head there over Britain.

At least we weren’t the only ones to feel the ignorance and bitterness of this man, he also said:

He called the Australians a ‘bunch of cow herders’ and suggested that the South Koreans should be ‘smacked in the face until they become human’.

Clearly the man has issues with quite a nations. Personally I think that the Iranians should be beaten until they rejoin the human race and drag themselves into the 21st Century, but I am not going to hold my breath.