-(1994 - EDP.ORG.UK Official Website - JUNE -- PART 6 - 2022 )-

 JUNE  2022 - HOME - PART 1  - PART 1-PAGE 2 - - PART 2 - PART 3 - PART 4- PART 5 - PART 6

Policies-Elections- General Election 1997 and EU election 1999-Speech -1000's of Links -

IMMIGRATION FILE

 'Genocide - Eliminating The English' (pdf)

Multiculturalism As A Tool To Divide And Conquer: The Layman's ...-

Multiculturalism and the Ruling Elite

IMMIGRATION-BULLETIN FILE  ARCHIVE-  EU FILE   IMPORTED WAHHABISM-FOR ARMS  FOREIGN AID FILE

BULLETIN FILE -NOVEMBER-2021 -HOME - PART  1  - PART 1-PAGE 2  - PART 2 - PART 3 - PART 4 - PART 5 - PART 6

BULLETIN FILE - OCTOBER-2021  HOME - PART 1  - PART 1 PAGE 1  - PART 2  - PART 3  - PART 4   - PART 5  - PART 6

BULLETIN FILE - SEPTEMBER-2021    HOME - PART 1  - PART 1 PAGE 1  - PART 2  - PART 3  - PART   - PART 5  - PART 6

 

 
BROUGHT FORWARD FROM 2015

A WARNING

 

THOUGHT OF THE DAY!

 

ENGLAND

'The present must be balanced on the wings of the past and the future, and that as you stretch out the one you stretch out the other to strength.' 

 Wordsworth

'WE DO NOT KNOW WHY EMPIRES FALL AND STATES DECAY;  BUT WE CAN AT ANY RATE CONJECTURE, WITH NO LITTLE JUSTICE,   THAT A DISTURBANCE OF THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE WAS ONE GREAT CAUSE OF ITS FALL.  RIGHT LAWS AND SOUND MORALS FORM THE STRONGEST SAFEGUARD OF EVERY NATIONAL STATE; BUT A SOUND RACIAL BASIS IS ALSO NECESSARY.   A NATION MAY BE ENRICHED BY THE  VARIED CONTRIBUTIONS OF FOREIGN  IMMIGRATION; BUT IF THE STREAM OF IMMIGRATION GROWS UNCHECKED INTO THE VOLUME OF A GREAT RIVER,  A NATION MAY LOSE THE INTEGRITY OF THE SOLID CORE WHICH IS THE BASIS OF ITS TRADITION  AND THE NATION WHICH LOSES ITS TRADITIONS HAS LOST ITS VERY SELF.'

[Earnest Barker-NATIONAL CHARACTER-1927]

[THE PROOF OF THIS STATEMENT IN 2015 IS SHOWN IN MANY TOWNS AND CITIES IN OUR ONCE FAMILIAR COUNTRY OF ENGLAND BEFORE THE EU AND MASS IMMIGRATION FROM

 

FOREIGN CULTURES LEADING TO FOREIGN ENCLAVES

WITH THEIR BIRTH-RATE OF 4-1 AND MORE IMMIGRATION FROM MUSLIM COUNTRIES  AND FROM  ELSEWHERE WILL UNLESS FIRM DECISIVE ACTION IS TAKEN NOW! WILL LEAD TO A FOREIGN TAKEOVER OF OUR COUNTRY WITHIN A FEW GENERATIONS . WE HAVE SEEN SOME EXAMPLES ON HOW THEY CAPITALISE ON THEIR CUSTOMARY ELECTION TACTICS ONCE DESCRIBED BY A JUDGE INVESTIGATING ELECTION FRAUD IN A LABOUR CONSTITUENCY IN BIRMINGHAM AND WOULD FIT EVENTS RECENTLY IN

TOWER+HAMLETS

AS AN EXAMPLE OF A

BANANA REPUBLIC.  

 

THE MAKING OF LONDONISTAN

TONY BLAIR'S LEGACY-THE GHETTOSIZATION OF ENGLAND

IMMIGRATION FILE

 

Freedom 

 http://FreedomKeys.com


 Keys
a collection of amusing, 
fascinating, insightful, or 
maybe even useful information
   

Professor R. J. Rummel, who keeps track of such things, now estimates that in the 20th century

262,000,000

people were murdered by their own governments.  And all these horrors were perpetrated by collectivist governments for the alleged sake of "the proletariat," the "master race," and especially, "the greater good."

None were done by countries based

on

individualism. 

 

See:  http://tinyurl.com/RJRummel

WAR-MONGERS

[The Zionist led USA with its poodle England has illegally invaded Islamic countries for their own gain with no thought for future consequences.  Those individuals such as George Bush and Tony Blair are WAR CRIMINALS as are those who follow their despicable and illegal actions which must surely one day bring them before the INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT for 'RIGHT JUSTICE' to be delivered for their grievous WAR CRIMES.  But for Parliament's VETO! of David Cameron's attempt to send British Forces into SYRIA he too would have joined the band of war criminals above. The billions spent on illegal wars such as Kosovo and many others in the Arab world could have been used to raise the STANDARD OF LIVING of the PEOPLE instead of making the RICH even RICHER while the rest of the population are struggling to make ends meet.  We believe that we should have efficient ARMED FORCES to PROTECT our ISLAND HOME but NOT! for ILLEGAL excursions around the WORLD.

PARASITES OF THE PUBLIC PURSE

-YOUR HARD-EARNED TAXES.

 

 The PUBLIC PURSE with the growing PUBLIC SECTOR has been and still is being squandered on PUBLIC SERVANTS for far too long. The recent example of MP's receiving a £30,000 payment at the end of their term which can be repeated should the same circumstances arise is a blatant case of

 'ROBBERY of the PUBLIC PURSE'

There have been many examples of CIVIL SERVANTS-PUBLIC OFFICIALS leaving a position with a severance pay only to shortly or even immediately obtain another job with in some examples it appears like a merry-go-round of

GREED!

 to which we are sure the TAXPAYERS are none to happy with many of them finding that they must 'tighten their belts' but for those in PUBLIC SERVICE it can be a LOTTERY WIN on every occasion . The reason why this practice continues is because those making the decisions on such matters are

NOT!

INDEPENDENT PROTECTORS

OF THE PUBLIC PURSE]

STILL IN 2021

*

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]
 

ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY. ORG.UK.

FREEDOM-UNITY.

*

FOR THE RETURN

OF THE

ENGLISH PARLIAMENT

AT

WESTMINSTER

AND

 [A NEW BRITISH PARLIAMENT EQUIDISTANT FROM WALES AND SCOTLAND-YORK?]

 

*

 

 

 
 

[A REMINDER FROM NOVEMBER-2006]

 

Both sides of the Border back Scots Independence.

By

Max Hastings

*

Daily Mail

    Monday, November 27,2006

 

FRUSTRATION over Scotland's addiction to English subsidies has boiled over with a poll showing a majority in favour of ending the UNION.

For the first time, voters on both sides  of the border back Scottish independence and an end to the political merger agreed nearly three centuries ago.

 

The findings are a serious blow to Gordon Brown. The Chancellor, a Scot, is expected to succeed Tony Blair as Prime Minister next year despite pressure from campaigners who resent Scotland's influence in English affairs.

He made an impassioned appeal for the UNION on Saturday as Labour tried to Fight off a serious challenge from the Scottish National Party.

Worryingly for Mr Brown, the survey found neatly two out of three people in England believe higher public spending in Scotland is unjustified.

A long standing Treasury spending formula gives Scotland 20 per cent more to spend per head pf population than is available in England.

Mr Brown has spent months talking up his belief in 'Britishness' after Tory claims that his Scottishness will prove a turn-off for Middle England.

THE ICM survey for the Sunday Telegraph also found more than two out of three voters in England would like to see a separate

English Parliament

 

The future of the UNION is coming into sharp focus as the Government prepares to celebrate the 300th anniversary of the

Act of Union

OF

1707

[Next May]

The commemoration falls on the eve of elections for the Scottish Parliament, which Labour fears will see a

SCOTTISH NATIONAL PARTY

  VICTORY

The anniversary and the elections are also likely to coincide with the handover of power from Mr Blair to Mr Brown.

According to ICM, support for Scottish independence has reached 52per cent among SCots and even higher -59 per cent-in England.

The poll also found more than two thirds -68 per cent-of English people want their

OWN

ENGLISH PARLIAMENT

 

-an idea supported by 58 per cent of the Scots.

[WE THANK THEM FOR IT!]

Mr Blair and Mr Brown used appearances at Labour's Scottish conference over the weekend to defend the Union, with the Prime Minister warning of a 'constitutional crisis, if the SNP won control of the Scottish executive.

Earlier this month a similar ICM  poll for The Scotsman  newspaper found 51 per cent of Scots wanted to break away from England, for the first time a majority has been recorded since 1998 when Scottish Parliament was established.

Mr Brown admitted 'there is a debate to be had about the future of the [Supposed] United Kingdom' but added the countries were 'stronger together and weaker apart'.

[NONSENSE!- An Independent Scotland which would lead to an Independent England would be a great advantage with both Independent Nation States able to negotiate a stronger Act of Union of the INDEPENDENT NATION STATES OF A GREATER BRITAIN

-the aim of the EDP for over 12 years.]

 

SNP leader Alex Salmond said Scots were tired of being ruled from London and added that the English voters were 'quite rightly' resentful of the Scottish MPs in THEIR AFFAIRS.

[As the sooner Scotland obtains its NATIONHOOD so the same will apply with England - we have suggested that a contribution to SNP  funds will bring that day sooner]

*          *         *

[Font altered-bolding &underlining used -comments in brackets]

 

NOVEMBER/06

*

 

SCOTLAND -ITS PARLIAMENT -WALES-ITS ASSEMBLY-ENGLAND-STILL AWAITS ITS PARLIAMENT-WHY?

 

*

 

Home Rule for Scotland

WHY NOT

HOME RULE for ENGLAND

 

*

[All underlined individual words above - have a separate bulletin]

 

 

HOME

 
 
Dr MAX PEMBERTON

THE MIND DOCTOR

 
 Daily Mail

Monday January 31, 2022

 

TAKE it from me: seeing the same doctor saves lives.

The doctor-patient relationship is just: a relationship. And inherent to any relationship is vulnerability that trust. That's why it takes time to develop and grow. It certainly isn't formed in a one-off ten-minute consultation.

Yet, over the years, we've seen a shift that has meant we've moved away from doctors actually getting to know their patients and understanding and developing a real relationship with them, to patients never seeing the same doctor more than once.

Increasingly seeing a doctor has been reduced to sitting in front of someone who barely looks up from their keyboard before issuing you a prescription.

What a dreadful, diminished experience that is. It completely denies all the evidence that shows the extraordinary value of a trusted doctor-patient relationship.  Sure, it might be OK for an ear infection, but  what about when things are a little more complicated?

 A study was published last week that looked at patients with dementia who were regularly seen by the same doctor - and it discovered something rather surprising.

Those who were seen by a GP who knew them, and had a relationship wuith them were ten per cent less likely to be hospitalised. This wasn't because the doctors were negligent in some way: quite the opposite.

It was because the doctors who really knew their patients could see that something was wrong and treated them before things escalated and they needed a hospital admission. Those GP's were able to act proactively precisely because they knew their patient so well...

 

...Had I not known my patient so well and I had felt unable to stand my ground with her, I dread to think what would have happened.

For me, this is what being a doctor is really about: it's about a relationship with the patient as much as the medicine.

But you cannot develop this relationship when patients are increasingly being dealt with as though they are on a conveyor belt, seeing whichever doctor happens to be free.

MEDICINE ISN'T ABOUT SIGNS - SYMPTOMS AND DIAGNOSIS

 IT'S ABOUT PEOPLEM

We seem to have forgotten this, and in the process, risk losing something incredibly valuable.

.

Full Article

*  *  *

[WE WOULD ADD!-That doctors should always take their patients into their full confidence - rather than changing their medication and treatment without full consultation and agreement.]

 

[  COMMENTS and CHANGES OF FORM- CAPS.. ARE OURS ;.]

H.F.2157
 

 

Greek island on front line of Europe's refugee

 

 

route ...

 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10121891

 

 

 

· SUE REID: Ringed by a tall razor wire fence in a remote part of

 

 

the pretty Greek island of

 

 

 

Samos, this is a migrant camp with a difference. ... This week the Daily Mail was

 

 

the first British ..

 

 

A Nationality and Borders Bill is currently going through Parliament, with the same aim of helping real refugees and

weeding out the rest. It is understood that if it gets approval next year, the new camps will be high on the agenda soon

afterwards

It was then six weeks away from opening but Ms Patel looked at the floor plans, toured the site under construction and was told of the ultra-secure deportation wing, to be finished by Christmas, for incarcerating inmates rejected for asylum in Europe and with no right to stay.

 

According to Mr Axiotis, she heard how the Greek coastguard is also pushing back migrants at sea towards Turkey, a contentious policy about to be introduced by the British in the Channel using Border Force jet ski teams to nudge boats back towards northern France. The Home Office believes Samos-style camps on British soil will make the UK less alluring and reduce illegal Channel crossings.

For who would want to end up living in a camp like it? The story peddled by people-smuggling gangs to drum up their trade is that England is a soft touch, a land of milk and honey where migrants are instantly housed in four-star accommodation or a council house with no questions asked.

The prospect of being locked up in a prison-like fortress, with speedy deportations and rigorous vetting to root out those coming here to harm us, would be far less enticing for people falsely claiming asylum.

‘Camps like Samos would make Britain a safer place for everyone, including the genuine asylum seekers who deserve our help,’ Home Office sources have told us.

A Nationality and Borders Bill is currently going through Parliament, with the same aim of helping real refugees and weeding out the rest. It is understood that if it gets approval next year, the new camps will be high on the agenda soon afterwards.

In Samos, we talked to migrants about what they thought of camp life. Most were put there because they have repeatedly been refused asylum in Greece. They are mightily displeased that they have been stopped from journeying onwards to Germany, Scandinavia, the Netherlands or, favourite of all,

 England.

 

[WELL COMING TO ENGLAND IS TANTAMOUNT TO WINNING THE

 

LOTTERY OF LIFE!.]

In hut 126 in the Arab zone, we found an Iraqi Kurd family of four who, until it was pulled down in September, lived in the squalid Samos jungle camp for five years. Now they are in a two-bedroom hut with a kitchen, bathroom and never-ending hot water from the camp’s solar power system. But they are not happy with their lot.

 

 

FULL ARTICLE

 

[We advocated this manner of dealing with illegal immigrants some months ago and there can be no objection to ENGLAND following the actions of the EU. in this particular matter.]

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS - CAPS    ARE OURS!]
 
 
 
 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

Greek island on front line of Europe's refugee

 

 

route ...

 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10121891

 

 

 

· SUE REID: Ringed by a tall razor wire fence in a remote part of

 

 

the pretty Greek island of

 

 

 

Samos, this is a migrant camp with a difference. ... This week the Daily Mail was

 

 

the first British ..

 

 

A Nationality and Borders Bill is currently going through Parliament, with the same aim of helping real refugees and

weeding out the rest. It is understood that if it gets approval next year, the new camps will be high on the agenda soon

afterwards

It was then six weeks away from opening but Ms Patel looked at the floor plans, toured the site under construction and was told of the ultra-secure deportation wing, to be finished by Christmas, for incarcerating inmates rejected for asylum in Europe and with no right to stay.

 

According to Mr Axiotis, she heard how the Greek coastguard is also pushing back migrants at sea towards Turkey, a contentious policy about to be introduced by the British in the Channel using Border Force jet ski teams to nudge boats back towards northern France. The Home Office believes Samos-style camps on British soil will make the UK less alluring and reduce illegal Channel crossings.

For who would want to end up living in a camp like it? The story peddled by people-smuggling gangs to drum up their trade is that England is a soft touch, a land of milk and honey where migrants are instantly housed in four-star accommodation or a council house with no questions asked.

The prospect of being locked up in a prison-like fortress, with speedy deportations and rigorous vetting to root out those coming here to harm us, would be far less enticing for people falsely claiming asylum.

‘Camps like Samos would make Britain a safer place for everyone, including the genuine asylum seekers who deserve our help,’ Home Office sources have told us.

A Nationality and Borders Bill is currently going through Parliament, with the same aim of helping real refugees and weeding out the rest. It is understood that if it gets approval next year, the new camps will be high on the agenda soon afterwards.

In Samos, we talked to migrants about what they thought of camp life. Most were put there because they have repeatedly been refused asylum in Greece. They are mightily displeased that they have been stopped from journeying onwards to Germany, Scandinavia, the Netherlands or, favourite of all,

 England.

 

[WELL COMING TO ENGLAND IS TANTAMOUNT TO WINNING THE

 

LOTTERY OF LIFE!.]

In hut 126 in the Arab zone, we found an Iraqi Kurd family of four who, until it was pulled down in September, lived in the squalid Samos jungle camp for five years. Now they are in a two-bedroom hut with a kitchen, bathroom and never-ending hot water from the camp’s solar power system. But they are not happy with their lot.

 

 

FULL ARTICLE

 

[We advocated this manner of dealing with illegal immigrants some months ago and there can be no objection to ENGLAND following the actions of the EU. in this particular matter.]

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS - CAPS    ARE OURS!]
 
 

A FAILURE OF GOVERNMENTS FOR DECADES - WHEN WILL THEY LISTEN?

BROUGHT FORWARD FROM AUGUST 27,2005

Daily Mail

Saturday, August 27, 2005

 

James Slack-Home Affairs Correspondent

 

 

PUTTING extra police on the beat, cuts violent crime, robbery and burglary, figures showed yesterday.

 

The areas of London flooded with officers after the July terror attacks recorded a drop in such offences.

 

Experts said the data proved that increasing Bobbies on the beat deters criminals.

 

In the wake of the attacks, the Metropolitan Police put up to 4,000 officers on the streets of Central London at one time, including 3,000 who are armed.

 

Dramatic cuts in street crime and burglary were logged for these areas in July, compared to the same month last year.

 

In Camden, robbery was cut by 12.2 % and burglary by 8.2%.

 

Westminster recorded a 30.2% cut in burglary and a 6.9% drop in robbery.

 

This compared with increases in the London area as a whole, where violence was up 4.1 %, robbery up 22.8% and burglary 4.7%.

 

Crime expert David Green director of the Civitas think-tank, said the police response to the terror attacks had provided an ‘accidental experiment.’

 

He added: 

 

‘It reinforces the case for a proper policing policy’

 

Norman Brennan, of the Victims of Crime Trust, said:

 

‘The problem is that the numbers put on the streets following July7 are simply not sustainable. What we need now is a huge increase in police’ [Bobbies on the Beat]

 

Mr Brennan added that slashing police paperwork could also boost numbers on the beat.

 

Government statistics show police are spending 53% of their time on frontline duties.  The rest is spent stuck behind desks or attending court.

 

Mr Green added that the figures showed officers could not be concentrated in one area. Six outlying London boroughs had a 50 % jump in muggings in July compared with last year.

 

In Waltham Forest street robberies were up 92.7%.

 

[The above figures prove what we have been saying for many years that there is a need for the local bobbie to be returned to the beat where he CAN become familiar with his patch and prevent crime, which some Chief Constables say, is NOT possible.  But the events in London since 7/7 show a different picture.]

 

To continue:

 

-       Officers were shifted from those areas to boost police numbers in Central London.  [No Police –Greater Crime]

 

Commander Simon Foy, the Met’s head of performance, said:

 

‘After the 7 July and 21 July attacks we had a responsibility to have a huge police presence in Central London.’

 

[We ask the WHY the Metropolitan Police Chief Sir Ian Blair said after the bombings that the 3000 officers sent to Edinburgh to protect the most protected man in the world had NOT been a problem for London at the time.]

 

To continue:

 

[Commander Foy said:]

 

‘We never abandoned the suburbs and we have been determined to get the ground back’.

 

[This statement contradicts itself-if the Suburbs were NOT abandoned WHY is there NOW a DETERMINATION to GET THE GROUND BACK]

 

The Independent Police Complaints Commission announced an Independent Inquiry last night into the leaks from the Jean Charles de Menezes investigation.

 

Bill Taylor, formally Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary for Scotland, will look into how documents from the Commission’s inquiry found their way into the media.

 

It follows the publication of letters to the Home Secretary from the Police Federation calling for an inquiry into the leaks.

 

[What we are sure is far more interesting to receive will be the Report on the run-up to and aftermath of July 7 in respect of the actions or otherwise of the Metropolitan Police Chief Sir Ian Blair and others under his command.]

 

*         *        

 

Crime On My Doorstep

 

A correspondent to the Letters COLUMN Of the

 Daily Mail on September 6, 2005  from a concerned citizen in Essex.

IN HIS first statement on arriving in Office in July, our new Police Chief told criminals visiting Essex to

 

‘Bring their toothbrushes because they won’t be going home’ (Mail).

 

He ordered his officers to arrest at least 600 criminals in his first week in charge.

[JULY]

 

On Thursday, August 4, after 11pm, a young man was stabbed as he walked home.  Fleeing from his attackers, he arrived at our front door, cornered by a gang of youths. 

 

My husband managed to get him inside as his assailants kicked at our front door shattering the glass with a heavy plant top.

 

My husband was threatened through the broken window, but managed to hold the door shut.

 

Meanwhile, I relayed all this to the 999 operator, explaining that we had two young children in the house.

 

The victim was bleeding profusely from a stab wound and my husband had no doubt that had he not opened the door that night, this 17-year old boy would have been seriously injured or killed by the gang, who ran off once they realised the police had been called.

Half an hour after the incident, we had a phone call from police to say there had been a sweep of the area but no one was found.

TWENTY MINUTES later another phone call said there was ‘concern for welfare’ in Benfleet and we would have to wait longer.

A police car eventually arrived two hours after the Attack

 

By which time my husband had taken the young man to Accident & Emergency.  The two officers spoke to me briefly of ABH, GBH, even attempted murder, I pointed out possible evidence on the front door.

 

I wasn’t expecting Helen Mirren and her swarm of forensic experts

 

But I thought at least I’d hear something.

 

Weeks later no one contacted my husband and no one had been to see if there is any evidence on our front door.

*

[Sounds familiar in Blairdom –where talk and spin are the order of the day and the concern for the victim is the last think that concerns them.

 

With the LAW & ORDER in a shambles possibly the only way to improve things is to have an elected Sheriff to toughen-up Law Enforcement]

 

*          *          *

[Font altered-bolding and underlining used –comments in brackets]

SEP/05

*  *  *

 

Brought forward from September,2005

WITH BILLIONS WASTED ON ILLEGAL WARS- AND THROW AWAY FOREIGN AID AND MP'S ENJOYING THEIR  SPLENDID EXPENSES AND SALARIES - COST OF BENEFITS -NHS-HOUSING...FOR MILLIONS OF REFUGEES AND ILLEGAL MIGRANTS .     WITH A POPULATION OF OVER  51 MILLION IN ENGLAND WE NOW HEAR THAT OUR GREEN BELT WILL NOW BE BUILT ON.    LOOKING AT WHAT HAS HAPPENED OVER THE PAST DECADES IT COULD BE BETTER IF ONE JUST CHOSE ANY 600 PEOPLE (AFTER BOUNDARIES CHANGE) OFF THE STREETS TO LOOK AFTER THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS IN OUR HOUSE OF COMMONS. THEY COULD HARDLY DO ANY WORSE THAN THE SHOWER WE HAVE HAD IN PARLIAMENT-WITH FEW EXCEPTIONS. THEY STAYED TOO! LONG! A ONE TERM SERVICE BY MORE CONCERNED CITIZENS, THEY WOULD BE CHOSEN FOR THEIR PATRIOTISM AND COMMON SENSE THEY WOULD GIVE 5 YEARS SERVICE FOR THEIR COUNTRY AND THEN RETURN TO PUBLIC LIFE SO THEY ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE  OF AN INDEPENDENT MIND THAN WHAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED THESE PAST YEARS AND MORE DEMOCRATIC FOR A COUNTRY OF ENGLAND WITH ITS DEMOCRATIC CREDENTIALS GIVEN AWAY IN 1972 BY LIES AND DECEIT LEAVING OUR COUNTRY IN THE WILDERNESS OF A DEMONIC CREATION PLANNED BY HITLER IN 1943 IN ORDER FOR GERMAN DOMINATION OF EUROPE. OUR ENEMY OF TWO WORLD WARS WITH A HISTORY OF CONFLICT AND CARNAGE THROUGHOUT THE AGES!-

GERMANY

OCTOBER 17-2017

BROUGHT FORWARD FROM AUGUST 27,2005

H.F.1345

 

EU warned it faces DEATH

over legal showdown with Poland

 

By John Stevens

Deputy Political Editor

DAILY MAIL

October 20,2021

THE European Union faces a possible collapse unless it can pull Poland back in line following a major falling out, leaders were warned last night.

A bubbling row between the two sides spilled over in the European Parliament yesterday as Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki clashed with Ursula von der Leyen in a heated exchange.

Mrs von der Leyen , the European Commission President, vowed that Brussels 'will act' to rein in the Polish Government after it challenged the supremacy of EU law.

In retaliation, Mr Morawiechi accused the bloc of 'blackmail' over its threats to withhold billions in Covid recovery funding, with one minister warning that 'Europe will die' if the warring pair cannot reconcile.

The two fell out earlier this month, when the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, asked by its government, ruled that the country's laws take precedence over EU legislation, becoming the first member state to contradict its founding treaties.

The Right-wing ruling Law and Justice Party, which Mr Morawiecki leads, has been at loggerheads with Brussels over issues such as LGBT rights and judicial independence, both of which have recently been eroded in Poland.

Mrs von der Leyen told MEP's in Strasbourg yesterday that Warsaw's ruling challenges 'the unity of the European legal order.

She added: 'The rule of law is the glue that binds our union together. We cannot and will not allow our common values to be put at risk. But Mr Morawiecki dug in, arguing that his country was being intimidated and attacked by the EU. 'It is unacceptable to talk about financial penalties, ' he said. 'I will not  have EU politicians blackmail Poland.

He insisted the bloc remain a union of sovereign states unless all its members agree by special treaty to give up more of their own national powers.

'WE are now seeing a creeping revolution taking place by way of the verdicts of the EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE, he added.

The European Commission has several options to try to make Poland comply with EU law, notably by continuing to deny it access to billions of euros to help revive its economy in the wake of the COVID PANDEMIC -Warsaw has asked for £19 billion in grants and 29 billion in loans.

'We cannot and we will not allow our common values to be put at risk, 'insisted Mrs von der Leyen. 'THE COMMISSION WILL ACT'

In a letter released last night, Mr Morawiecki accused the EU of 'starving' and punishing' his country by withholding the COVID RELIEF MONEY.

And he warned against a 'dangerous phenomenon that threatens the

FUTURE OF OUR UNION'

Jean Asselborn, Luxembourg's FOREIGN AFFAIRS MINISTER, had an even starker warning: 'Europe will not digest the end of of the RULE OF LAW, 'he said. Europe will die from such a development.' The problem is bound to dominate a two-day EU summit starting tomorrow, where Mr Morawiecki will face his critics, chief among them

GERMANY and FRA iNCE

The two leading EU nations have said that disregarding its rules would come

AT A COST

'To think it is a simple piece of paper that you can tear up, from which you can choose what you like and what you don't' said France's EUROPE MINISTER Clement Beaune.

'Those are values sovereignty chosen and sovereignty shared.'

His German counterpart Michael Roth insisted it was 'very important that we send a signal to POLISH SOCIETY'

He added: We are on the side of all those who stand up for Europe, and that is the overwhelming majority of Poles.

[A referendum would decide if that were TRUE. WE have always considered that Poland would be the FIRST EXIT after the UK]

*  *  *

By John Stevens

Deputy Political Editor

DAILY MAIL

October 20,2021

[CAPS and COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

 

H.F.2154/C

 

OUR WONDERFUL NHS:NOW IT'S TERMINAL  

 

SATURDAY ESSAY

by BeL Mooney

Saturday,October 16,2021

By BEL MOONEY FOR THE DAILY MAIL

Frustrated by a GP’s receptionist blocking a face-to-face appointment for my 97-year-old mother, in June this year, I wrote a special report for this newspaper, criticising the very situation that has been the subject of the Mail’s recent, successful campaign.

It so happens that the medical attention my mother has received recently has been impeccable, and I do appreciate the pressures doctors face — with rising patient numbers due to an increasingly elderly and growing population.

Writing about the NHS must involve an understanding of complexity. You can express gratitude for good care from a family doctor or hospital consultant, but at the same time recognise that the system cannot be above criticism.

The article in question — just like this paper’s trailblazing campaign — drew a huge response from people who were equally frustrated and disappointed.

 

Appalled by long waiting lists, cancelled operations, relatives’ cancer treatment put on hold until too late, furious (as I was) that a loved one’s cause of death was routinely certified as ‘Covid’ when untrue, and face-to-face appointments with GPs were as rare as hen’s teeth, exasperated and angry citizens wrote to me and to this paper asking: ‘Why?’

Such people — the silent majority — will be relieved that due to our campaign, Health Secretary Sajid Javid has called out GPs, launched initiatives and allocated funding to improve access.

Naturally, this prompted a howl of protest from the usual suspects — most notably the British Medical Association (the doctors’ union in effect). Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt predicted the measures aimed at increasing face-to-face appointments would spark an exodus from the profession.

‘This is a burnt-out workforce running on empty because of a massive mismatch between supply and demand,’ he tweeted. ‘The only thing that will convince them not to continue retiring or opting for part-time hours in droves is a clear plan to end the unsustainable pressure they face.'

 

Royal College of General Practitioners ' chairman Professor Martin Marshall, said the critism

of GPs by politiansand the media over in-person appointments was 'demoralising and indefensible'.

The proposed support package was

 'not the answer'.

And so the battle - and the disconnect between patients and the institutions representing GPs-looks set to rage on, even as our beleaguered health service is about to under go another of its frequent 'reorganising', introducing a blizzard of new acronyms.

 

’From spring 2022, for example, the current CCGs (Clinical Commissioning Groups) and their staff will become ICSs (Integrated Care Systems. As ever, the chances are slim.

Let's cast our minds back to the early days of the NHS. Ironically, doctors were among the most vociferous objectors when it was first proposed.

 

Aneurin Bevan, the Labour politician who led the establishment of the NHS in 1948, was asked how he convinced them to take part, and he allegedly replied: ‘I stuffed their mouths with gold.’

 

Bevan recognised that to win over doctors to the world’s largest socialist experiment in healthcare, he had to appeal not so much to their morals, as to their pockets.

In the following decades, the system he created, with services free at the point of delivery, became not just the best-loved state-run body in the country but a key part of our national identity.

A good example of its totemic status came during the Olympics opening ceremony at London 2012, when nurses danced around hospital beds as a tribute to the NHS.

Against this backdrop, as many have found, if you write anything faintly critical of the NHS on social media the zealots pile in, like fundamentalists permanently on their knees to an out-dated dogma.

A few years ago, waiting with my late father for his eye appointment, I took a picture of a sign detailing the number of missed appointments that month — and what this selfishness had cost the hospital.

On Facebook, I suggested we should question whether people truly value what is free. Was it time to look again at the ‘free at the point of use’ principle? You’d have thought I had uttered the vilest blasphemy. All the nonsense about the ‘secret privatisation’ of ‘our NHS’ planned by wicked Tories was trotted out.

Similarly, when some years ago I wrote about the shocking ‘health tourism’ figures, middle-class bien-pensants with health insurance (for whom ‘waiting list’ is a foreign phrase) told me that of course the NHS should be free at the point of use, for everybody and anybody, for ever and ever, Amen.

A highly respected novelist I knew rebuked me loftily: ‘Criticism of the NHS is both ungrateful and unhelpful.’

And that is part of the problem about the future of healthcare in Britain. If members of t, it transformedhe intelligentsia can be so blinkered about what is evidently wrong with this system, what hope do we have of improving something on which so many lives depend?

 

Former Conservative chancellor Nigel Lawson's assertion that 'the NHS is the closet thing the English people have to a religion' goes some way towards explaing the outcry that follows any rational suggestion THAT THE NHS IS BROKEN AND NEEDS FIXING.

Yes, it transformed public health and wellbeing in Britain - but even before Covid it lurched from crisis to cricis, despite repeated reforms and huge investment, IT WAS LETTING US DOWN.

 

Who wouldn’t agree there are too many highly paid managers? That job adverts for ‘equality, diversity and inclusion’ managers in the NHS are obscene, when some of these roles pay more than £75,000 per year — a far healthier salary than junior doctors or nurses take home?

That there’s been a shortage of midwives for over ten years, after 3,000 promised by David Cameron didn’t appear? That our attempts to reduce stillbirths lag behind those of Poland and Estonia?

That levels of waste and profligate spending (e.g. prescribing at great cost over-the-counter painkillers, when a pack of 16 paracetamol caplets is 29p in Aldi) are a disgrace? And so on.

The NHS is not a sacred cow. Like it or not, that bitter pill has to be swallowed if we are to have any chance of making things better.

The National Health Service Act (establishing its structure) received royal assent in 1946, one month after I was born, and the NHS was founded when I was nearly two. So the bloated behemoth is as venerable and creaky as I am — and serious maintenance is essential.

That’s why all politicians should drop the dishonest sentimentality that prohibits discussing the NHS, and think of the welfare of patients instead of scoring points.

We need a new way to deliver healthcare in coming decades — when the demands will be greater even than they are now.

That was the verdict of the Institute of Economic Affairs back in 2003: ‘…the NHS was designed for the 1940s. Since then there have been three major developments which have directly affected the provision of health care. We have become an infinitely more affluent society, which means that people want, and can, afford to spend more on keeping well.

Secondly, the proportion of old people in the population has greatly increased and will continue to do so, which means that people need medical services longer.

 

‘Thirdly, there have been huge advances in treatment which have mostly, but not invariably, increased its cost, often requiring expensive equipment and drugs.’

The problems have long been predicted. Yet politicians and campaigners parrot that we have ‘the best healthcare system in the world’. This was asserted by disgraced former health secretary Matt Hancock at the NHS’s 73rd ‘birthday’ in July.

Do these people take us for fools? We are the fourth-highest spenders on healthcare in Europe, yet routinely come near the bottom in terms of outcome.

The World Health Organisation says the French health service is the best in the world. We should learn from it.

A friend has a brother with a French wife. Pregnant and suffering swollen ankles she went to their English GP, who said nothing could be done. Back in France her doctor gave her anti-water retention tablets, an appointment with a physiotherapist and good nutritional advice.

And a young British woman I know living in France, expecting her first baby, said the maternity care was efficient, caring and she was offered every possible choice. I’m afraid she had a shock when she decided to have the baby in England, to please her parents.

Anecdotal evidence is one thing, but facts cannot be denied. Percentages can become tedious, but the French have more doctors for every 100 people and more hospital beds than us. As a percentage of GDP, UK healthcare spending was 10.2 per cent in 2019, but France spent 11.1 per cent.

 

Determined defenders of the NHS seem to think the only solution is to chuck yet more money at the problem, even though our taxpayer-funded model is as burdensome as it is inefficient. The French system is paid for partially by obligatory social security contributions, usually deducted from your salary.

France offers a high level of preventative healthcare (for example, not dismissing swollen ankles). Available services include addiction prevention, regular medical check-ups and the promotion of physical activity and healthy eating. France also has the lowest rate of heart-disease mortality in Europe.

When people go to see a family doctor, or have any other kind of out-patient appointment, they pay the cost of it — a basic consultation is ¤25 Euro — but then about three-quarters of the fee is refunded by their National Health Insurance Fund. (Patients on a low-income or who are sick long-term receive 100 per cent coverage.)

Would the British be so careless about appointments they demand as a right if they had to stump up and then get most (but not all) of the money back? Would it be heinous to require a small deposit on equipment such as crutches? I think not.

 

Before you protest, remember that in France people on very low incomes or who are not insured are covered. We can boast all we like about ‘our’ flawed NHS, but the French have arguably a better way of ensuring the principle of the common good.

Remaining in Europe for a moment, under German law, everyone must pay public health insurance. As of 2019, this amounts to 14.6 per cent of each citizen’s gross income, with the individual paying half (7.3 per cent up to a maximum monthly income of €4,538) and the other half paid by their employer. Deductions from salaries are automatic.

This covers every citizen’s primary care with registered doctors, hospital care (in- and out-patient) and basic dental treatment. It works.

Covid-19 threatened the globe but we should not let the panic it caused blind us to the fact cancer is the world’s second-biggest killer. It was responsible for 9.6 million deaths in 2018 — roughly one out of six everywhere — and the leading or second-largest cause of mortality before the age of 70 in more than half of countries.

An Economist Intelligence Unit report looked at the growing menace of cancer (in all its variations) and asked whether the world is ready to face it.

 

But the graph for care delivery is far more worrying. We are joint 14th with South Korea, behind (in order) Japan, the Netherlands, Germany, Australia, Spain, France, Sweden, Italy, U.S., Brazil, Colombia, Canada and Chile.

That is far from impressive. We all know it.

Anecdotal evidence of a broken system abounds. I know a mother in her early 40s who, failing to obtain joined-up care (in a very prosperous area) for a terrible flare-up of her chronic medical condition, was driven by neglect to make four 300-mile round-trip journeys to an area where a senior anaesthetist friend ensured she got treatment from a sympathetic consultant.

That should never be necessary in a wealthy nation like ours.

Small, individual moans and cries about NHS shortcomings and failures combine into a shocking crescendo nationally.

Yet that noise, which urgently demands to be heard, is routinely shut down — silenced like a shushing in a church by the pious ones who keep their eyes tightly closed.

This cannot go on. If as a nation we wish to show pride in our healthcare system in order to bequeath it in good nick to our grandchildren, we must now (post-Covid) insist that politicians work together towards radical reform. But that would require trusting them with an enormous task — and frankly, I don’t.

We need an independent Royal Commission — an inquiry at the highest level established by the Queen at the behest of the Prime Minister — to delve deep into the problems that confront us today.

Then it should come up with a set of recommendations that will enable us to confront 21st-century challenges.

This is, after all, a matter of life and death.

H.F.2154/C
 

 

NEW AGE

OF

 INTOLERANCE

 

A.N. WILSON on the new dark age of intolerance: You must believe in gay marriage, you can't question abortion and as for transgender rights...

By A.n. Wilson For The Daily Mail

 September 30- 2017

The great French writer Voltaire famously said: 'I disapprove of what you say and would defend to the death your right to say it'. In this way, he encapsulated what it meant to be an enlightened human being — someone prepared to consider all points of view.

But in recent years the principle of freedom of speech, sacred since Voltaire's 18th century, has been lost, and this is surely one of the most sinister features of our times. It is as if we are entering a new Dark Age of Intolerance.

The irony is that this intolerance has come about as a result of what were initially good intentions. One of the things which makes me happy as I grow older is the thought that during my lifetime we have all tried to become a kinder society.

When I was a boy and a young man, for example, racist jokes were the norm on radio and TV. Now they would be unthinkable. Mockery of homosexuals, and the equation of being gay with being limp-wristed and camp, were absolute norms of comedy when I was growing up. Now no longer.

Such jokes have gone the way of boarding-houses which used to put 'NO BLACKS. NO DOGS. NO IRISH in the window'. Obviously, all civilised people feel pleased by this.

But somehow those initial good intentions — to be kinder to and more tolerant of others — have morphed into a political correctness that has had the very opposite effect.

Two notorious recent examples of this concerned the treatment of a Christian baker in Northern Ireland, and some Christian bed and breakfast owners in Berkshire. The baker had not wanted to make a wedding cake for a gay couple who were getting married. The B&B owners had refused to let a gay couple share the same room in their establishment. In each case they were successfully sued for unlawful discrimination.

Now, a gay activist would no doubt say this was a good thing, arguing that the baker and bed and breakfast owners' behaviour was comparable to the racism of the past. Yet this is surely getting things wholly out of proportion.

The baker was not persecuting homosexuals, as Hitler did. He was not saying they should be put in prison, as all Home Secretaries in Britain did until the Sixties. He was merely saying that, as a Christian, he thought marriage should be between a man and a woman, and that two chaps tying the knot were doing something rather different, which is contrary to traditional Christian teaching.

Whatever you think about this matter, the Northern Irish baker and the B&B couple were merely holding on to Christian beliefs.

I don't happen to share their views myself, and think that if two people are rash enough to promise to live together for the rest of their lives, good luck to them, whether they are gay, straight, trans or anything else. But surely you can understand both sides of this dilemma, can't you?

Well, the answer, more and more in our intolerant society, is 'No'. My concern here is not about the rights and wrongs of gay marriage, transgender rights, our colonial history, or any of the other emotive issues that are subject to endless debate in the modern age.

It is about freedom of thought and speech; freedom to disagree in a liberal society; freedom to have thoughts which are different from the current orthodoxy.

What began as our very decent desire not to be nasty to those of a different ethnicity, or sexual proclivity, from ourselves, has turned into a world as intolerant as monkish Christianity in the days of the Dark Ages, when any freedom of thought is questioned.

Tim Farron, leader of the Lib Dems during the General Election, was asked repeatedly about his views on gay marriage. As a fairly old-fashioned Christian, he did not believe it was possible — marriage should be between a man and a woman.

As the leader of a modern political party, he knew that it would be political death to admit this. He was finally forced to resign.

This was a signal to the world that if you want to succeed in modern politics, it is simply not allowed to hold views which, until a very short time ago, were the consensus among the great majority of people in the Western world.

I use the words 'not allowed' advisedly. What is sinister about living in the new Dark Ages, however, is that it is by no means clear who is doing the allowing and not allowing. In Mao's China, it was obvious: thought crimes were ideas which contradicted the supreme leader.

In Britain today, however, it seems an army of self-appointed censors — from internet trolls to angry students, lobby groups, town hall officials, craven politicians and lawyers and Establishment figures, as well as a host of other sanctimonious and often bilious busy-bodies — have taken it upon themselves to police what we can and cannot think or say.

Not believing in abortion, like not believing in gay marriage, is now, unquestionably, a thought crime. It was hardly surprising that the Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg recently said he did not believe in abortion, because he is a man of conviction as well as a Roman Catholic, and this is the teaching of his Church. Yet his view was treated with incredulity and disdain by everyone from trolls and women's groups to the higher echelons of the political Establishment.

As in the case of abortion, debate is no longer allowed on transgender issues. There was a BBC2 Horizon Programme last Tuesday night called Being Transgender. The close-up shots of transgender surgery in a Californian hospital will not easily leave the mind.

We met a number of nice people who had decided for one reason or another that they were not the gender which they had once supposed. They were all undergoing some form of transformative medical treatment, either taking hormones or having surgery.

What made the programme strange as a piece of journalism was the fact that it did not contain one dissenting voice. Not one psychiatrist or doctor who said they doubted the wisdom of some of these procedures, especially in the very young.

Still less was there anyone like the redoubtable feminist and academic Dr Germaine Greer who once expressed her view that a man did not become a woman just because he had undergone transgender surgery — and was, as a result, decried from the rooftops with everything from petitions launched to stop her from speaking at university campuses to death threats.

Dr Greer had also been bold enough to say 'a great many women' shared her view, which is obviously true — a great many women do not think that transgender people have really changed sex. What has changed is that it is no longer permitted to say so.

A friend of mine who likes bathing in the women's pond on Hampstead Heath in London says that at least one person now uses the female changing rooms who is obviously in a stage of transition from man to woman, and is simply a hairy man wearing lipstick.

However uncomfortable this makes the women feel, they know that they cannot say anything.

There was an ugly incident lately at Hyde Park's Speakers' Corner, which used to be the place where anyone could go and stand on a soap-box and hold any opinion they liked.

Speakers' Corner was a symbol of British Freedom of Speech. As a schoolboy, I had a Jewish friend whose grandfather used to take us there to listen to people proclaiming that the earth was flat, preachers praising Hitler, Stalin, and others saying whatever they liked. It was the freedom to do so, said the old man who had escaped Hitler's Germany, which made the very air of Britain so refreshing to him.

What would he have thought had he witnessed the scene earlier this month at Speakers' Corner when a 60-year-old woman called Maria was smacked in the face, allegedly by a transgender fanatic, while listening to a talk on planned reforms to the Gender Recognition Act. Reforms which would allow men to 'self-identify' as female, and enter women's changing rooms or refuges unchallenged.

For Maria, as for the intimidated women of Hampstead swimming pool, and for Germaine Greer, it is by no means clear that transgender people have changed their sex.

Transgender activists have labelled women like Maria TERFS — Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists. When news of the assault on her reached the internet — ie instantaneously — the trolls began baying, like the bloodthirsty mob during the guillotine-executions of the French Revolution. 'Burn in a fire, TERF'. 'I want to f*** some TERFS up, they are no better than fascists'.

The use of the word 'fascist' is commonplace in our new Dark Age for anyone with whom you happen to disagree. You hear it all the time in the Brexit arguments which rage all around us and which I dread. As it happens, I voted Remain. But I do not regard Brexiteers as 'fascists', and many of their arguments — wanting to reclaim the power to make our own laws and control our own borders — are evidently sensible.

Yet I have lost count of the number of times I have heard Remainers say that Brexiteers are fascists. As a matter of historical fact, many of the keenest supporters of a united European superstate were actual fascists.

The only British politician who campaigned on the ticket of Europe A Nation during the Fifties was Sir Oswald Mosley who was leader of the British Union of Fascists. But then, today's PC censors don't let facts get in their way of bigotry.

Branding anyone you disagree with a fascist; hitting people in the face; tweeting and blogging abuse behind the cowardly anonymity of the internet — these are the ugly weapons used to stifle any sort of debate. And it is often in the very places where ideas should be exchanged and examined that the bigotry is at its worst: our universities.

This week on the Radio 4's Today programme, we heard James Caspian, a quietly-spoken, kindly psychotherapist, describing what has become a cause celebre at Bath Spa University.

He has been working for some years with people who for one reason or another have begun the process of gender-transition, and then come to regret it.

Caspian is evidently not a judgmental man. He wanted to write a thesis on this subject from a sympathetic and dispassionate point of view.

What makes people feel so uncomfortable with their own apparent gender that they wish to undergo painful and invasive surgery to change it? What makes people then come to reassess their first idea? These are surely legitimate questions about a subject many of us can't quite comprehend.

I have two friends who started out as men, and decided in mid-life that they were really women, or wanted to become women, which is what they have done. I do not really understand what has happened to them, even though they have tried to explain it to me.

Surely a man like James Caspian, who has worked with transgender men and women, should be encouraged by a university to explain this area of medicine or psychology?

But no. The university, having initially approved of his idea for a thesis, then turned down his application. 'The fundamental reason given was that it might cause criticism of the research on social media, and criticism of the research would be criticism of the university,' he told Radio 4 listeners. 'They also added it's better not to offend people.'

This is all of a piece with students at Oxford wanting to pull down the statue of 19th century imperialist Cecil Rhodes from his old college, Oriel, on the grounds that he was racist.

Rather than having a reasoned debate weighing the evils of racist colonialism against Rhodes's benevolence, the student at the forefront of the movement — who had actually accepted a £40,000 Rhodes scholarship funded by the fortune the colonialist gave to Oxford — wanted to pull down the statue.

This is the same attitude of mind as that which led monks in the Dark Ages to destroy the statues of pagan gods and goddesses, or the Taliban to do the same to age-old Buddhist artefacts.

Reason, debate, seeing more than one side to an argument, surely these are the foundations of all that has fashioned the great values of the West since the Enlightenment started in the 18th century with an explosion of new ideas in science, philosophy, literature, and modern rational thought that ushered in the Age of Reason.

Realising that human actions and ideas are often mixtures of good and bad — isn't this what it means to have a grown-up mind? Surely we should be allowed to discuss matters without being accused of thought crime?

In universities, as at Speakers' Corner and in the public at large, there used to be the robust sense that sticks and stones may break our bones but words can never hurt us. Now, the 'hurt-feelings' card is regularly played to stifle any debate.

Little by little, we are allowing the Dark Ages of intolerance to come again. We should not be letting this happen.

We should be able to say: 'We disapprove of your views — on Europe, on Transgender Issues, on Islam, on absolutely anything, but we defend to the death your right to express them'.


 

Full article

 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4935418/A-N-WILSON-new-dark-age-intolerance.html#ixzz4uAFieZ6T
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[COMMENTS-HIGHLIGHTING - ARE OURS!]

 

SEPTEMBER 30-2017

H.F.1329

Ministers: Schools must not teach children that white privilege is a FACT.

 

By Eleanor Harding-DAILY MAIL -Education Editor

Friday, October 22,2021

Schools must not teach children about 'white privilege' as if it were a fact, Education  Secretary has said.

Nadhim Zahawi warned it is a 'contested view' and teachers who promote it risk pushing 'partisan' politics on to pupils.

His intervention comes in response to a report by the Commons education committee, which said teaching white privilege could be against the EQUALITY ACT.

White privilege is understood as the everyday benefit white people enjoy over other ethnicities due to systemic racism. But the committee said telling children they are different because of their race is UNLAWFUL.

In a Department for Education response last last night, Mr Zahawi said teachers must focus instead on 'respect for other people and for difference'.

He said: 'Schools must not teach contested theories and opinions as fact, and this includes contested views about "white privilege"

He added that political issues on race should be taught 'in a balanced and factual manner'. And he said schools have a legal duty' to maintain 'political impartiality' when covering 'sensitive and complex issues' .

The Committee's report. published in June was called 'THE FORGOTTEN: how white working class pupils have been let down, and how to change it.' It argued that white working class pupils have been let down, and how to change it.' It argued that white working class pupils would feel alienated by concepts of white privilege WHEN THEY ARE THE WORST - PERFORMING GROUP IN THE COUNTRY.

Tory committee chairman Rob Halfon said the term was 'divisive' and 'pitted groups against each other'. He added it was wrong-headed' because it blames people based on skin colour.

[ABOUT TIME TOO! though because of the delay, a great deal of damage has already been done in the minds of the children, and no doubt a number of teachers will ignore this advice and continue their persecution of white working class pupils - and the consequences will no doubt rear their head in the years ahead. Political correctness is the most wicked scourge on society.]

The report also stated white working class pupils had been neglected by the education system for 'decades'. They are one of the worst-performing groups at ages five, 16 and 18, in comparison to disadvantaged children from other ethnicities. Mr Halfon added: Disadvantaged white people feel anything but privileged when it comes to education.

'Privilege is the very opposite  to what disadvantaged white children enjoy or benefit from in an education system which is now leaving FAR TO MANY BEHIND.

Many teachers are in favour of teaching 'white privilege' as part of wider efforts to tackle racism in schools. Brighton and Hove councillors even said last year they would provide training to schools on this topic.

But critics say it is teaching children at a young age to feel resentful of each other based on colour, instead of encouraging THEM TO BE FRIENDS.

It comes after Mr Zahawi was caught up in a race row when fellow Tory MP confused him with Health Secretary Sajid Javid.

James Gray admitted getting the two mixed up but said reports he had added. 'they all look the same to me' were untrue.

*  *  *

By Eleanor Harding-DAILY MAIL -Education Editor

Friday, October 22, 2021

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS - CAPS ...  ARE OURS!]

 

H.F.2154/D

 
 

September 2015.

Thousands of Syrian migrants crossing the Balkan route were heading toward Germany. Chancellor Angela Merkel was on the phone with Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière, talking about a number of measures to protect the borders, where thousands of policemen were secretly located along with buses and helicopters. De Maizière turned for advice to Dieter Romann, then head of the police. "Can we live with the images that will come out?" de Mazière asked. "What happens if 500 refugees with children in their arms run toward the border guards?"

De Maiziére was told that the appropriate use of the measures to be taken would have be decided by the police on the field. When de Maizière relayed Romann's response to the Chancellor, Merkel reversed her original commitment. And the borders were opened for 180 days.

"For historical reasons, the Chancellor feared images of armed German police confronting civilians on our borders," writes Robin Alexander, Die Welt's leading journalist, who revealed these details in a new book, Die Getriebenen ("The Driven Ones"). Alexander reveals the real reason that pushed Merkel to open the door to a million and a half migrants in a few weeks: "In the end, Merkel refused to take responsibility, governing through the polls." This is how the famous Merkel's motto "Wir schaffen das" was born:

"We can do it."

According to Die Zeit:

"Merkel and her people are convinced that the marchers could only be stopped with the help of violence: with water cannons, truncheons and pepper spray. It would be chaotic and the images would be horrific. Merkel is extremely wary of such images and of their political impact, and she is convinced that Germany wouldn't tolerate them. Merkel once said that Germany wouldn't be able to stand the images from the dismal conditions in the refugee camp at Calais for more than three days. But how much more devastating would images be of refugees being beaten as they try to get to Austria or Germany?"

Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of humanitarian politics; it was dictated by the fear of television images spread all over the world. In so many key moments, it is the photograph that dictates our behavior: the image that dishonors us, that makes us cringe in horror.

Now, the main German sentiment that seems to be driving public opinion and politics is a dramatic sense of guilt. It is a "secular sin", according to a new book by German sociologist Rolf Peter Sieferle that is topping the German bestseller list, "Finis Germania".

The behavior of Germans during the current migrant crisis, however, is symbolic of a more general Western condition. On April 30, 1975, the fall of Saigon was part of a war fought and lost by the United States as much on television as in the Vietnamese forests and rice paddies. It ended with the the escape of helicopters from the rooftop of the US embassy.

In 1991, the imagery of the "highway of death" of Saddam Hussein's bombed army of thugs fleeing a plundered Kuwait also shocked the public in the West, and led to calls for an immediate cessation of the fighting in Iraq and Kuwait. The result was that Saddam Hussein's air force and Republican Guard divisions were spared; during the "peace" that followed, it was these troops who butchered Kurds and Shiites.

The photograph of a dead American soldier dragged through the streets of Mogadishu after the "Black Hawk Down" incident pushed President Bill Clinton to order a shameful retreat from Somalia. That photograph also led the US Administration to rethink and cancel plans to use US troops for United Nations peace operations in Bosnia, Haiti and other strategic points. General David Petraeus would describe America's engagement in Afghanistan as a "war of perception".

Even the suffering of our enemies disturbs us, in the humanitarian culture of the West. We are therefore increasingly amenable to policies of appeasement, censorship and retreat, in order not to have to face the possibility of such horribleness and actually having to fight it.

That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We have paralysed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic photos of the terrorists' victims and even the faces and names of the jihadists. The Islamic terrorists, on the other hand, are not publicity-seekers; they are soldiers ready to die and kill in the name of what they care about.

This week, the German media was shocked by the revelation that the German air force will probably come under fire during its Syrian mission. "Endangering German soldiers!" -- with an exclamation point -- wrote Bild, the largest-selling newspaper in Germany. The statement exposed the anxiety of what John Vinocur of the Wall Street Journal called a "country where the army and air force basically do not fight". A pacifist Germany is now a source of trouble also for its own neighbors, such as Poland. "For centuries, our main worry in Poland was a very strong German army", said former Polish Defense Minister Janusz Onyszkiewicz. "Today, we're seriously worried about German armed forces that are too weak."

The Western establishment censors images of our enemies' crimes while giving prominence to our "guilt". The French government censored the "gruesome torture" of the victims at the Bataclan Theater, who were castrated, disemboweled and had their eyes gouged out by the Islamist terrorists. It was a mistake: it was in the public interest to know exactly what enemy we are facing.

The FBI and Department of Justice released a transcript of the Orlando jihadist's 911 call, but omitted all reference to the terror group ISIS and to Islam. These authorities did not want the public to know that Omar Mateen identified himself as an "Islamic soldier".

The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance then told the British press it should not report when terrorists are Muslim.

The CEO of Twitter, Dick Costolo, suspended accounts that showed photographs of the beheading of John Foley, along with other Islamist beheadings and savagery. But Twitter did not mind being flooded by images of a little dead boy, Alan (Aylan) Kurdi on a beach.

The mainstream media in the US fought hard to lift the photo ban on military coffins during the war in Iraq. Its goal, apparently, was to humiliate and intimidate the public, to lower the support for the war.

Images, as in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, are published only if they amplify the West's sense of guilt and turn the "war on terror" into something more even more dangerous than the jihad causing the war.

Amnesty International's Secretary General, Irene Khan -- referring to concentration camps in the Soviet Union, where millions of people perished -- infamously called Guantanamo "the Gulag of our time". The result is to erase our enemy from our imagination. This is how the "war on terror" has become synonymous with lawlessness throughout the West.

Ten years ago, after the brave surge in Iraq, US soldiers discovered Al Qaeda's torture chambers. No one -- not ABC, not CBS, not the New York Times -- published one photo of them; they just filled our eyes with naked bodies at Abu Ghraib.

We are utopian technophiles and, contrary to the traditional Western view that we are flawed human beings in a tragic world. We now believe in Mark Zuckerberg's brave new world where no one should ever suffer and everyone should be happy and peaceful all the time. That is an exorbitant dream. For a short time we can afford it, as with Angela Merkel and Europe's migrant crisis. Unfortunately, that fantasy will not last. The conflicts at our gates, together with our aversion to making hard choices, will exact a far higher price.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

*

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis?

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10603/radical-islam-west
    5 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | Zero Hedge

    www.zerohedge.com/.../radical-islam-horrifying-west-paralysis
    ‎
    3 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | Net News

    world.news.sorozatwiki.hu/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis
    ‎
    2 days ago ... Authored by Giulio Meottie via The Gatestone Institute,German Chancellor
    Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | Latest News ...

    todaynewsheadlines.444.hu/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis
    ‎
    2 days ago ... Authored by Giulio Meottie via The Gatestone Institute,German Chancellor
    Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis? | Elite Trader

    https://www.elitetrader.com/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis.311003/
    ‎
    1 day ago ... https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10603/radical-islam-west.
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? - Long Room

    https://www.longroom.com/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis
    ‎
    3 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis? - Sharia Watch UK

    www.shariawatch.org.uk/?q.../radical-islam-horrifying-west-paralysis
    ‎
    4 days ago ... German Chancellor Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of
    humanitarian politics; it was dictated by the fear of television ...
     

    Richard Falknor on Twitter: ""Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West ...

    https://twitter.com/i/web/status/884146467518246913
    ‎
    13 hours ago ... "Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis?" Lost Our Will To Survive?
    http://tinyurl.com/ya3hatga We can't even fight the corrupt ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | State of Globe

    stateofglobe.com/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis/
    ‎
    3 days ago ... Source: Zero Hedge Authored by Giulio Meottie via The Gatestone Institute,
    German Chancellor Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a ...
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | NewZSentinel

    newzsentinel.com/is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis/
    ‎
    3 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...
     

  1. What Is Radicalisation? - Childline Is Here To Help

    Ad                   www.childline.org.uk/‎

*  *  *

FOREIGN  AID

[IF ALL THE RESOURCES OF FOREIGN AID FROM GERMANY-BRITAIN-USA AND FROM OTHER COUNTRIES HAD BEEN UTILIZED EARLY TO DEAL WITH POSSIBLE ONE OF THE WORST EXAMPLES OF THE  AFFECTS OF GREED ON THE POLICIES OF WHAT ARE CONSIDERED MORAL NATIONS AT THE OUTSET OF THIS DEMOGRAPHIC DISASTER WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE DISASTROUS SITUATION THAT THE PEOPLE OF EUROPE AND BRITAIN [ENGLAND] NOW FIND THEMSELVES.

WE ARE NOW INFORMED THAT 7 OUT OF 10 OF THOSE SEEKING A HOME IN EUROPE ARE NOT REFUGEES - BUT ECONOMIC MIGRANTS. WHICH CONFIRMS THAT AN EARLY RECOGNITION OF THIS FACT WOULD SHOW IN WHICH DIRECTION THE WEST'S OBJECTIVE SHOULD PROCEEED. 

THE FAULT FOR THIS MASSIVE EXODUS FROM THE MIDDLE EAST RESTS WITH THE POLITICIANS OF THE USA AND BRITAIN AND OTHER HISTORICAL OIL DISTRIBUTION NATIONS MANY STILL CAPTIVE WHO ARE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE UK WITH BREXIT TO HAND ARE BUT REGIONS WITHIN A NAZI-PLANNED EUROPEAN UNION WHICH NOW FINDS ITSELF THE VICTIM OF ITS OWN MAKING.  INDIVIDUAL NATION STATES WOULD HAVE SEEN CLEARLY THE RISKS BUT AS SHOWN BY THE ARTICLE ABOVE THEY DID NOT SEE THE DEMOGRAPHIC DISASTER UNTIL IT WAS UPON THEM.]

*

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

JULY 10-2017

H F 1250BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER.
 
SO  SO WHY IN SEPTEMBER 2021 HAVE WE NOT SEEN BORIS JOHNSON KEEP HIS PROMISE OF AN ENGLISH HUMAN RIGHTS ACT WHICH PROTECTS OUR VULNERABLE COASTLINE FROM THOUSANDS OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WHICH ARE MONEY BAGS TO OUR SO-CALLED HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYERS?.

WHY WE MUST!

LEAVE THE UNDEMOCRATIC

NAZI-PLANNED EU.

No 1

 

If we really want to escape the grip of human rights law-we must quit the EU.

 

Daily Mail

Monday, May 15,2006.

 

THE

 

Melanie

Phillips

Column

 

Once again, the Prime Minister is trying to surf a wave of popular outrage by announcing he will take action - which on closer examination proves to be mere froth - not least because his own policy lies at the very heart of the problem.

 

Thus Tony Blair has spoken out against ‘an abuse of common sense’

In the way the human rights law has been used to allow nine Afghan hijackers to remain in Britain, or free a rapist from prison only for him to commit MURDER.

 

BUT it is his own human rights law, which has quite simply altered the entire legal and moral culture of this country, and taken an axe to

COMMON SENSE

 

The Judge in last week’s Afghan ruling has been roundly pilloried. BUT common sense in this case was trounced in

2004

-when an immigration tribunal ruled on human rights grounds that it was too dangerous to send the hijackers back to Afghanistan

-       even though the Taliban, from whom they fled, had been replaced by a Western-backed government.

 

The root of the problem here is not the wretched judge BUT the Government itself, which dragged its feet over the case for years. This was because it was paralysed by the fact that

 

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

 

-described only last week by the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, as the Government’s ‘greatest achievement’ -has created a culture of legalised lunacy.

 

Disruptive.

 

Detectives across the country are refusing to issue ‘wanted’ posters for missing foreign criminals because they say they do not want to breach their right to privacy, and risk lawsuits by releasing their names and photographs.

 

The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency routinely shreds the driving records of speeding and drunken drivers because bureaucrats are afraid of human rights law. That means thousands of drivers with a bad history escape with lighter punishments because Courts cannot learn the full truth about their past.

 

It is no use saying that such judgments misread human rights law since, because such law consists of a balancing act between competing ‘rights’ requiring the Courts to arbitrate between them, no one can be sure how any disruptive cases will end up.

 

The fact is that ruling after human rights ruling has turned right and wrong on their heads and radically undermined the covenant of responsibility between the INDIVIDUAL and the STATE.

 

To take an egregious example, human rights law has DESTROYED this country’s ability to CONTROL its OWN BORDERS.

 

The Courts have used the ‘human right’ to family life to reward

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

 

Their absurdly generalised interpretation of the prohibition against torture - which wrenched this principle out of ALL recognition - has made it all but impossible to deport those foreigners who threaten this country’s security.

 

The LAW LORDS’ perverse reading of ‘DISCRIMINATION’ last year has meant that such suspects can’t even be locked up pending removal from this country.

 

WHAT KIND OF HUMAN RIGHTS ARE THESE,

 

-which actually force a country to destroy its own security along with its principles of

CITIZENSHIP

 

FAIRNESS

 

And

 

OBLIGATION?

 

At the weekend, Mr Blair said he was considering fresh legislation to prevent future Court rulings from ‘overruling the Government’. here lie the first clues to the fact that these are likely to be empty words.

 

FIRST, He’s only considering any change.

 

SECOND, human rights law doesn’t give the COURTS the POWER to overrule the GOVERNMENT.

All they can do is declare legislation incompatible with human rights law, thus putting pressure on MINSTERS. So Mr Blair has given us a straw man, which he promises he will knock down.

 

Then look at the way in which Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer [Blair’s old flat-mate], has been twisting and turning. There might need to be legislation, he said, to ensure that human rights law would have no effect on

PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES.

 

PARALYSED

 

BUT the whole point of human rights law is that it is supposed to be an overarching set of principles. So it CAN’T be CHANGED.

And in any case, what kind of overarching principles are these which in the Lord Chancellor’s opinion, actually imperil

PUBLIC SAFETY.

 

Lord Falconer appears to be saying that it’s not human rights law that’s at fault, but certain officials who are misunderstanding it. This is completely and lamentably to miss the point.

 

It’s not merely that this law has paralysed public bodies such as the police and the intelligence service, which say they can barely move for fear of falling foul of it.

 

More fundamentally still, human rights law has driven

 

JUSTICE

 

MORALITY

 

And

 

SOCIAL ORDER

 

-off the rails altogether.

 

It has acted as a grievance charter fuelling the ‘victim culture’ in which all minorities are seen as incapable of being held responsible for their actions.

 

As such, it has become a principle weapon against the

 

CULTURE and IDENTITY of the NATION.

-       and by transferring power to the JUDGES, has delivered a powerful blow against DEMOCRACY.

 

Abolishing the HUMAN RIGHTS ACT would certainly help put a brake on that process. BUT the problem would remain that Britain is signed up to the

 

European Convention on Human Rights,

 

-       which would still have supremacy over our laws.

 

Look for example at the Chahal judgment by the European Court of Human Rights, the key ruling preventing Britain deporting foreign undesirables.

 

This held that, if a person faced torture or inhuman treatment abroad, the risk to that individual from deporting him could not even be balanced against the risk he might pose to the country, which allowed him to stay.

 

IN other words, this ruling was a specific attack on the right of the country to decide what was in its citizens’ own best interests either to derogate from bits of this CONVENTION - as every other signatory BUT Britain has in fact done - or leave altogether.

 

Undemocratic.

 

Yesterday, Lord Falconer gave the game away when he acknowledged that- although the Human Rights Convention has separate origins from the European Union - no country can be a member of the EU unless he is also a CONVENTION signatory.

 

TO SOME OF US, OF COURSE, that is precisely WHY we should leave the EU, in order to

 

RESTORE

 

-OUR POWERS

of

 

SELF-GOVERNMENT

 

And

 

DEMOCRACY

 

But the fact that we are the Human rights prisoner of the EU is why this GOVERNMENT will never address the deformities of human rights law.

 

The usual suspects scream that it would be unthinkable to abolish ‘human rights’. How absurd. Real human rights are very different. Indeed, before ‘human rights’ law took hold we were rather

 

MORE FREE,

 

-not less.

 

INSTEAD, we would be abolishing the arbitrary and undemocratic power of the JUDGES to impose upon us a particular agenda [which is un-English] -far from universal.

In the remarkable words last year of the senior Law Lord, Lord Bingham, human rights law existed to protect vulnerable minorities - who are sometimes disliked, resented or despised -against the howls of ‘majority opinion’.

 

It would seem to follow that - for the JUDICIARY - Afghan hijackers, murders and other criminals are vulnerable minorities’, while the [Peace-loving majority] who are their potential victims have NO HUMAN RIGHTS at all.

 

Extricating OUR NATION from this MESS would undoubtedly be complicated and difficult. BUT UNLESS WE DO SO, we are unlikely much longer to have a NATION worthy of the NAME.

* * *

 

[Font altered-bolding & underlining used -comments in brackets are ours!]

MAY/06

 
EU

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS almost BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****     REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER/ ****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?

*

There are well over 1000 bulletins on our website on the COLLECTIVIST-SOVIETISED UNDEMOCRATIC NAZI-PLANNED EU

 

 

Q&A: The Lisbon Treaty-2008

Leaders of the European Union's 27 member states meet in Portugal this week to sign what will now become known as the Lisbon Treaty.

 

*

The abolition of Britain
by The Reform Treaty
- Second Reading-Passed by majority of 138

*

Veteran parliamentarian the late TONY BENN speaks of the absolute necessity of a

REFERENDUM

HEAR HIM ON

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o0I-ZdvQz1o

*

H.F.645
 
 

[WE ARE LEAVING ONE NIGHTMARE AND ANOTHER  DISASTER OF EPIC PROPORTIONS WILL FOLLOW.],

Migrants fuel population boost

Migration 'to fuel uk population rise of 4.4 million by 2024' - Daily Mail

 

Migration 'to fuel UK population rise of 4.4 million by 2024'

By Press Association

Brought forward from: October 29,2015

The population of the UK is set to jump by the equivalent of a country the size of Ireland in the next decade, official figures have revealed.

Migration will fuel a projected rise of 4.4 million from 64.6 million last year to 69 million in 2024 and an estimated increase of just under 10 million over 25 years to reach 74.3 million in 2039.

It means the number of people living in Britain will swell by around the equivalent of the current populations of Ireland (4.6 million) and Sweden (9.6 million) over 10 years and a quarter of a century respectively.
 
 

The UK population is projected to reach 70 million by mid-2027, the ONS said

Experts said that on current trends, the UK will overtake Germany to become the most populous country in Europe before the middle of this century.

More than two thirds (68%) of the long-term rise is due to future net migration and the indirect impact of children born to migrants, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

It is assuming that annual net migration - the difference between the number of people entering and leaving the country - will run at an average of just under 200,000 a year over the 25 years.

The data also revealed a rapidly ageing society, with more than one in 12 people expected to be 80 or over by 2039.

Guy Goodwin, director of social analysis at the ONS, said: "The UK's population is set to grow and age.

"Growth will be at a faster rate than we have seen previously, largely due to the direct impact of international migration and the indirect impact of immigration.

"Despite this, the population will also be older as those born shortly after World War Two and during the 1960s 'baby boom' reach the oldest and pensionable ages respectively.

"The number of people of age 80 or over will more than double over the next 25 years."

Population projections, which are used to inform policies on pensions, migration, care and housing, are published every two years.

Compared to the last set of figures, which were based on 2012 estimates, experts have raised the projected growth over the next 10 years by just under a quarter of a million.

The average annual increase of 440,000 in the first decade means the population will rise by more than the number of people currently living in Dorset each year.

Britain's projected growth also far outstrips Europe, with an increase of 15% in the next 25 years compared to 3% in the EU.

Only Luxembourg, Belgium and Sweden are individually expected to see larger rises, although the projections for Europe were based on figures compiled prior to the recent migrant crisis.

If the current pattern continues, the UK will overtake France by 2030 and Germany, becoming the largest country in Europe, by 2047.

The figures prompted fresh scrutiny of ministers' attempts to reduce net migration to below 100,000. It stood at a record high of 330,000 in the year to March.

Lord Green, chairman of campaign group Migration Watch UK, said: "The prospect of nearly 10 million in 25 years underlines the huge impact on housing and public services, unless the Government succeeds in bringing net migration right down."

MPs Frank Field and Nicholas Soames, the co-chairmen of the cross-party Group on Balanced Migration, said the ONS projections "set out in stark terms the consequences of not reducing immigration to the UK".

They added: "It is not in the national interest to increase our population so rapidly. It is not of benefit to the existing residents of the UK. The country will become still more overcrowded and the housing crisis even worse."

Simon Ross, chief executive of charity Population Matters said it was "imperative" that factors contributing to the increase are addressed.

"We are all affected adversely by the rapid population growth of recent decades - from pressures on housing and public services to the environment and climate change," he said.

Immigration Minister James Brokenshire pointed out the projections are not forecasts and are "based on various assumptions - including migration trends".

He added: " However, the projections underline the importance of controlling immigration and show that the Government is right to continue its work to reduce net migration to more sustainable levels."

Since 2010 the Government has worked to cut out abuse of the immigration system and introduced a health surcharge for those arriving from outside the European Economic Area, Mr Brokenshire said, adding that a new Controlling Migration Fund will ease pressure on services.

He said: "We know that uncontrolled, mass migration makes it difficult to maintain social cohesion and puts pressure on public services."
 
 

The UK population is projected to reach 70 million by mid-2027, the ONS said

 
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3294715/Projections-UKs-population-announced.html#ixzz4wjrlBsJF
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

*  *  *

[ This is now and in the future a colossal disaster to the settled population of our small once settled island home, only a quarter the size of GERMANY, which has a population of over 82 million, which is not so far from the anticipated population of ENGLAND in the next 30 years. And who are we to blame? Those Remainers over the past 45 years and others who decided they had better things to do than protect their country from the deluge of human kind the majority being economic migrants. If you haven't already noticed in many parts of our overcrowded land many people are taking as long to get to and from work as their work entails. Politicians of all parties have been grossly negligent in their decisions which has brought about this exodus from the Middle East and Europe itself.  A few decades ago, an economic and energy report made clear that around 30,000.000 would be an ideal population and now our once treasured beautiful landscape will in the main resemble NEW YORK and who have we to BLAME?

 

YOU!]

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

 Brought forward from:

OCTOBER,29-2015

*

H.F.1361
 
 
 

Multiculturalism: not only a Fraud- but also Dangerous.

 

All cultures are not equal, insists Dr Frank Ellis, University of Leeds. To pretend otherwise, he argues, is destructive of Order and Prosperity.

*

The following article appeared in the Politics section of the Freedom Today-Vol 23 Issue 1 in February 1998. The Chairman was the late

Norris McWhirter

 sadly missed by many last year and who was the standard bearer of Freedom Today with others who have taken on the supreme mantle of the voice of the Journal of the Freedom Association. (www.tfa.net)

[A representative of the EDP was present with Norris McWhirter at the  handing over to a representative of the Queen at the rear of Buckingham Palace  the PETITION of 900,000 signatures-later increased to 1,000,000 requesting that the 'Peoples Voice 'would be heard?-IT WASN'T!

 

Before we proceed with the article we find in the same issue of Freedom Today of the York protest programme-the Anti-Maastrict Alliance which we attended 19 and 22nd March with many other demonstrators to voice our grave displeasure to such an intended Treaty.

 

Unique co-operation

 

All the British anti-federalist groups including the Freedom Association co-operated in the York ECOFIN events. Meetings were held to co-ordinate the activities of all the organisations taking part -as they do today under the ‘Battle for Britain’.

 

Lord Tebbit and( the late) Lord Shore

 

The main event organised by the umbrella group, the Anti-Maastrict Alliance met in the evening of Thursday 19 March 1998. Lord Tebbit, Lord Shore and other distinguished speakers, addressed the meeting at 7pm.

 

* * *

Returning to the subject of Multiculturalism, which has now at the eleventh hour, has been now disowned by many in the Labour camp (details on our web-site) we continue:

 

For too long we have had the touchy-feely platitudes of multiculturalists stuffed down our throats, so Lord Tebbit’s remarks at the last autumn’s Conservative Party Conference (1998) were a welcome dose of bitter lemon to counteract the saccharine.

 

Multiculturalism is a fraud. It is an extension of Marxism, based on the assumption that all cultures are more or less the same, and that no single culture can, or should, be held in greater esteem than another.

 

This relativistic proposition totally ignores the massive discrepancy in achievements and success among various cultures. Judgment of any kind is, of course, to be feared, since judgment separates the wheat from the chaff.

 

Senior position.

 

All cultures are not equal. There is a hierarchy of excellence, and western culture occupies the senior position. Currently it has no serious rivals. Whether the West will still occupy the senior position in a hundred years is another matter entirely.

 

If the collective frauds perpetrated in the name of equality are not arrested and reversed, then the chances are that the West, as a cultural and intellectual entity, will fall to pieces, or be torn to pieces by bitter internal divisions, or will succumb to external foes (written in 1998).

 

Those who hate the West and its stunning achievements, and American and British universities are full of such types (curiously they are sometimes referred to as ‘intellectuals’), naturally hope to see the whole Western cultural enterprise fall apart. They were bitterly disappointed about the outcome of the Cold War and their bitterness and self-loathing fuels their advocacy of multiculturalism. They know full well that multiculturalism is destructive of order and prosperity, which is why they back it.

 

Incentives to achievement.

 

Cultures can indeed be judged. Successful ones are open to new ideas. They respect historical fact and maintain accurate records. Property rights are recognised and secure. Financial services and products are developed. Finally, they provide powerful incentives to individual achievement.

 

In their early stages, economic and scientific progress is extremely vulnerable to the vices of envy and the prerogatives of rulers, tribal elders and shamans who feel threatened by innovation and discovery. It is the outcome of this clash between the collective and the individual, which determines whether cultures are able to exploit individual achievements, the basis of all scientific and intellectual progress.

 

Cultures which are driven by superstition, which are nepotistic, corrupt and do not punish failure will be no match for rivals which are energetic, entrepreneurial, and open to new ideas- and which respect and reward individual achievement.

 

When an individual of energy and some modicum of talent, who in India was born in the wrong caste, and is thus doomed to go nowhere, comes to Britain, he has chances for personal advancement way beyond what would be possible in India. Multiculturalists being at heart unrepentant Marxists, hate the idea of such an Individual’s success.

 

For once an Indian or black African succeeds on his own merit without the white mischief of affirmative action and equal opportunities, then there is one less person to whom appeals of collective self-pity and special pleading will be attractive. That individual is Free.

 

Multiculturalists hate individual achievement and success. They have a vested interest in failure. Toleration of individual dissent has been one of the hallmarks of the West (above all the Anglo/Saxon West) and the basis of its great prosperity and intellectual achievements.

 

But let us be clear about what we mean by toleration. Tolerating unusual views, which have been closely argued, subjected to independent verification and based on evidence is, however, not the same as validating behaviour such as homosexual life styles and the proliferation of anti-intellectual cults through the mechanism of their uncritical acceptance.

 

Deviant behaviour is, of course, nothing new, and may yet play a decisive role in our cultural fate. What is new is the way in which we are now expected to react to it. Again, we are called upon to abandon our moral and intellectual judgment in the name of thoroughly spurious notions of ‘Fairness,

 

The American experience with multiculturalism is no solution to Britain’s at present, altogether milder problems. Billions of tax dollars, some 30 years of equal opportunity and affirmative action policies have not produced ethnic and racial harmony. Far from it. The effects on American universities have been disastrous.

 

The peddling of grotesque lies and evasions about black achievements are routine, and a sense of simmering racial resentment is palpable on many American campuses. Outside of the university America remains sharply and bitterly divided along racial lines.

 

Two conclusions can be drawn from the failure of multiculturalism.

 

FIRST: Policies based on lies will not work. (This should be obvious to our ‘intellectuals’) The day of reckoning can be delayed, but not avoided indefinitely.

SECOND: Beyond a certain limit, ‘difference’ and ‘diversity’, particularly, if they encourage and perpetuate customs which are intellectually and economically inferior to the host culture itself. By then, it may be too late to stop the rot, at least by the standards and methods conventionally employed in liberal democracies.

 

Intellectual cowardice masquerading as tolerance thus creates a situation in which we all suffer. Multiculturalism does not to ‘fairness’ for some; it leads, ultimately to misery for all.

 

Lord Tebbit deserves our gratitude for speaking out against the dangers of multiculturalism, and many other ills, which assail us besides. Those in the Conservative Party who argue that he should just fade away miss the point. Leadership (as opposed to management) civic courage (as opposed to shutting up when you know something is wrong) and clarity and openness of thought (as opposed to political- correct speak and evasion) are timeless qualities.

 

Without them the Conservative Party is Finished.

 

The author: A former soldier, Dr frank Ellis is a lecturer in Russian at the University of Leeds. He has published articles on Soviet war literature and the Soviet media. His monograph on the Soviet Russian writer Vassily Grossman: The Genesis and the Evolution of a Russian Heritic, was published in 1994. He has recently completed a second book, From Glasnost to the Internet: Russia’s New Infosphere, which is published by Macmillan.

 

Freedom Today, February 1998.

 

[Fonts altered-bolding &underlining used]

 

 

Click here for Bulletin 66

 

[Multiculturalism is no longer right for Britain -says CRE Head Trevor Phillips.]

 

 *          *          *

JAN/05

 

 

*

 

H.F1348
 
 UNDERSTANDING ISLAM

PART 17

AUGUST-2005

RESPONDING TO ISLAM

The long-term danger of an Islamic state in Britain may be far off as not to be significant, but the short-term threat of terrorism and the medium-term threat of Islamicisation in Muslim enclaves both demand a response. The Government has already announced a number of measures which it is actively considering [They are still doing so in 2018] Among these are proscribing organisations, naming Hizb-ut-Tahir and successor organisations of al-Muhajiroun.  What more should our Government do? What should we as Christians pray for, apart from the salvation of Muslim souls?

It is important to recognise that nothing can be achieved by multiculturalism. The insistence that all cultures are equally valid is part of the problem. Even Trevor Phillips, head of the Commission for Racial Equality, said in 2004 that multiculturalism was dead and integration based on shared values and loyalties was the only way to avoid friction. His call to accept "common values... the common currency of the English language, honouring the culture of these islands, like Shakespeare and Dickens," led to the claim from Asian MP Keith Vas MP that imposing British values would be like "the work of Christian missionaries." Yet the one 'common value' and essential part of the 'culture of these islands' Phillips ignored was Christianity and the Bible.

The single most important thing our Government should do is to emphasis, not a nebulous 'Britishness', but Britain's Christian heritage and Constitution.  As a small step, the Queen should announce a day of prayer to Almighty God for protection and guidance in the glorious name of Lord Jesus Christ. The God who brought this nation victorious through two world wars in answer to prayer made in that mighty Name is still strong as powerful and as able to save today.  He can frustrate the plans of bombers and reveal their hiding places if we acknowledge Him as Sovereign of the universe and  turn to him with all our hearts.

Secondly, the Government must recognise that the United Kingdom has sinned by diluting our Christian heritage with secularism to the point where there is scarcely any Christianity left.  Muslim activists use the immorality and injustice of our land to prove that Islam is superior to Christianity, and to claim that Sha'ria would bring peace and tranquillity.  They fail to understand that Christianity has not failed in these islands, it has been cast away in favour of a law-system dreamt up by sinful men. It would not be enough to pray to God for protection and then refuse to listen to Him when he commands us to repent.  The Government should must begin to rely again on the wisdom of the Bible in framing law, and reverse current trends which encourage wickedness.

Thirdly, the Government should say frankly and unapologetically that this was, is and is going to be a Christian nation, and that anyone who does not like it that state of affairs is free to leave. They have announced quicker deportation of foreign nationals and widened the grounds, and in the case of to who encourage terrorism, will strip the British element of citizenship from those with dual citizenship or those who are naturalised.  They plan to refuse asylum to terrorists. However, they have little idea of how to deal with British-born jihadists, beside control orders, and one idea they should consider is how they might assist those second-generation British followers of other religions who wish to find a more agreeable place to live..

Closure of places of worship which are used as centres of extremism would be useful, but the Government should know that much indoctrination of Muslim youth is done outside the mosques. A more practical measure would be to remove public money from British madrassahs, Islamic centres and Muslim associations and scrutnise them and Muslim charities for any signs of jihadist teaching or overseas funding.  Planning permission for Islamic centres and mosques should be put on hold.  Foreign policy-including trade policy-should also be much more assertive against those regimes where Christians are under threat either from government action or from Muslim mobs.  Our foreign policy should be righteous rather than 'ethical'. Britain should pull our soldiers out of Iraq and not engage in further excursions in sovereign Muslim lands where no British interest is served. We should also be more supportive of the modern state of Israel, flawed as it is, recognising the unification of Jerusalem, and the rightful place of Judea and Samaria in Israel as a whole.

It could be  objected that one effect of such measures, and even those which the Government is proposing at the time of writing, is that Muslim youth will be even more disaffected with Britain than they are at the moment and more inclined to terrorism. However, Britain is now Dar-al-Harb in any case and reliance on Almighty God is the key element in any successful programme of surveillance and intelligence-gathering.  he 7/7 bombers were unknown to the security forces.  Many praying Christians will have a strong sense that the failure of 21/7 was by the grace of God alone, and He was demonstrating His power as the One who brings wicked schemes to light.  He was also saying that He has given us a window to repent and turn to Him, who alone can save.

Christian Voice, PO Box 739A, Surbiton, KT6 5YA -

AUGUST 2005

Searches related to pew research muslim population

sweden muslim population 2050

islam in germany 2050

islam in europe 2050

muslim population in france 2017

muslim population in europe 2018

belgium muslim population

islam in europe today

muslim population

 

More!

IMMIGRATION FILE

About 903,000 results
 

    Muslim Population Growth in Europe - Pew Forum on Religion and ...

    www.pewforum.org/2017/11/.../europes-growing-muslim-population/
    ‎
    29 Nov 2017 ... To see how the size of Europe's Muslim population may change in the coming
    decades, Pew Research Center has modeled three scenarios ...
     
    ‎Germany is top destination ... - ‎How Europe's Muslim ...

    Europe's Muslim population will continue to grow - Pew Research ...

    www.pewresearch.org/.../europes-muslim-population-will-continue-to-grow-but-how-much-depends-on-migration/
    ‎
    4 Dec 2017 ... While Muslims are still a relatively small share of Europe's population (roughly 5
    %), they are set to continue rising as a percentage of Europe's ...
     

    5 facts about the Muslim population in Europe - Pew Research Center

    www.pewresearch.org/.../5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/
    ‎
    29 Nov 2017 ... In the coming decades, the Muslim share of Europe's population is expected to
    grow – and could more than double.
     

    Muslims and Islam - Pew Research Center

    www.pewresearch.org/.../muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/
    ‎
    9 Aug 2017 ... Indonesia is currently the country with the world's largest Muslim population, but
    Pew Research Center projects that India will have that ...
     

    The size of the European Muslim population in 2050 depends ...

    www.pewresearch.org/...muslim-population.../ft_17-12-04_muslimpopulation_thesize_1/
    ‎
    1 Dec 2017 ... Europe's Muslim population will continue to grow – but how much depends on
    migration. The size of the European Muslim population in 2050 ...
     

    A new estimate of U.S. Muslim population - Pew Research Center

    www.pewresearch.org/.../new-estimates-show-u-s-muslim-population-continues-to-grow/
    ‎
    3 Jan 2018 ... An estimated 3.45 million Muslims of all ages were living in the United States in
    2017, accounting for about 1.1% of the country's total ...
     

    Why Muslims are the world's fastest-growing religious group

    www.pewresearch.org/.../why-muslims-are-the-worlds-fastest-growing-religious-group/
    ‎
    6 Apr 2017 ... Pew Research Center ... In 2015, Muslims made up 24.1% of the global
    population. ... of the seven other major religious groups analyzed in the study. ...
    The growth of the Muslim population also is helped by the fact that ...
     

    Muslims and Islam | Pew Research Center

    www.pewresearch.org/topics/muslims-and-islam/
    ‎
    Most Western Europeans favor at least some restrictions on Muslim women's ...
    live in India, there also are substantial populations of Muslims, Christians, Sikhs,
     ...
     

    Muslim population in some EU countries could triple, says report ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/.../muslim-population-in-europe-could-more-than-double
    29 Nov 2017 ... The report, Europe's Growing Muslim Population, shows a stark west-east divide.
    ... 9.3. 16.2. Guardian graphic | Source: Pew Research Center ...
     

    Muslim population growth - Wikipedia

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_population_growth
    ‎
    Muslim population growth refers to the topic of population growth of Muslims
    worldwide. .... Pew Research Center projects a slowing down of Muslim
    population growth in China than in previous years, with Muslim women in China
    having a 1.7 ...
     

 

 

 

H.F.1711/17
 

IMMIGRATION

[THERE ARE A GREAT MANY BULLETINS  ON THIS SUBJECT GOING BACK TO 2004.  WE ARE SHOWING JUST A FEW TO REMIND YOU THAT SUCCESSIVE GOVERNMENTS-THE GANG OF THREE - CREATED THIS NATION DESTROYING AGENDA UNDER THE COVER OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS MONSTROUS TYRANNY ON

 MAY 7-2015]

THE VEIL-THE CROSS-A VITAL DEBATE over the HEART and SOUL of our NATION***

THE MAKING OF LONDONISTAN***

 

MULTICULTURALISM is. NO LONGER RIGHT for [ENGLAND]

ENGLAND is SECOND to HOLLAND as the MOST CROWDED country in EUROPE***

 

ENGLAND IS WHERE THE MAJORITY VIEWS ARE IGNORED AND MINORITIES RULE AT THEIR EXPENSE IN PC BLAIRDOM

 

RACE RELATIONS CHIEF RECONFIRMS DISASTER OF MULTICULTURALISM AND OTHER RACE DOGMAS

 

IMMIGRATION WATCH uncovers CHAOS in IMMIGRATION and ASYLUM POLICY**

ZEALOTS  in our Midst***

 

MULTICULTURALISM, NOT ONLY A FRAUD-BUT ALSO DANGEROUS***

 

How could a MULTICULTURAL [ENGLAND] BRITAIN WORK***

 

1.2 MILLION

IMMIGRANTS LET IN BY NEW LABOUR SINCE 1998 [2005] 3.5 MILLION +at least- the latest information***

 

MULTICULTURAL POLICES HAVE EFFECTIVELY DIVIDED THE POPULATION INTO ETHNIC AND FAITH COMMUNITIES***

 

MULTICULTURALISM, NOT ONLY A FRAUD-BUT ALSO DANGEROUS***

 

IMMIGRATION-The BETRAYAL of BRICK LANE by MULTICULTURALISM instead of INTEGRATION***

 

80% of MIGRANTS ARE a NET DRAIN on our ECONOMY***

 

QUIT [ENGLAND] BRITAIN IF YOU WANT SHARIA LAW-says TREVOR PHILLIPS***

 

THERE ARE RADICAL ELEMENTS OF ALL KINDS IN OUR SOCIETY AND RADICAL ISLAM IS ONE.***

 

ALLOW TOO MANY PEOPLE IN AND THE JOY OF BEING [ENGLISH] IS LESSONED FOR EVERYONE.***

 

SYSTEMATIC BRAINWASHING OF MUSLIMS BY THEIR LEADERS IS COMMON PLACE***

 

ENGLAND A MONOCULTURE-TOLERANT-NOT MULTICULTURAL***

 

WHY NO QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE AFTER REAL RACISM REVEALED IN MOSQUES?***

 

FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS MUSLIM EXTREMIST RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS TAUGHT BRITISH MUSLIMS TO WAGE WAR AGAINST THE WEST***

 

LETTING IN MIGRANTS TO WORK IS SELF-DEFEATING-SAYS MIGRATIONWATCH***

 

75% OF POLL SAYS TOO MANY MIGRANTS ARE COMING INTO OUR COUNTRY***

 

IMMIGRATION FLOOD 'FUELING MORE HOSTILITY***

 

HOW AN ASIAN IMMIGRANT BECAME [ENGLISH] BRITISH BECAUSE SHE CHOSE TO LIVE WHERE HER FRIENDS WERE WHITE - SO HAD TO LEARN ENGLISH.***'

 

 

A PLEA FOR INTEGRATION-Please Miss we don't like that sort of thing-we're [now] ENGLISH.***

 

 

 

WHY WE MUST BE FIRM WITH MUSLIM EXTREMISTS AND WHY CITIZENSHIP MEANS FULL INTEGRATION.***

 

 

 

MULTICULTURALISM ISN'T WORKING SAYS NOBEL PRIZE WRITER.***

 

IMMIGRATION FILE

*

GIVE THE POLITICALLY - CORRECT GANG OF THREE

THE FRIGHT OF A LIFETIME BY VOTING FOR UKIP TO GET US OUT OF NAZI-INSPIRED EU AND CLOSE THE FLOOD GATES AND ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO REFUSE TO INTEGRATE TO LEAVE.

 

MARCH 21-2015

H.F.730
 
 
 
 UNDERSTANDING ISLAM

PART ONE

AUGUST 2005

WHAT IS ISLAM

Islam (which means 'Submission', in particular, submission to 'Allah') is the world's fastest growing major religion, and the second biggest after Christianity. Islam is estimated to have as many as 1.3 billion followers,21% of the world's population [in 2005] compared with possibly 2.1 billion Christians (33%) and 900 million Hindus (14%).  The United Kingdom is of course overwhelmingly Christian, with 70% of the population describing themselves thus.  However, discounting atheism, Islam is the second biggest religion in the United Kingdom, with 1.6 million adherents, forming almost 2.7% of the population. The Muslim population is heavily concentrated around the M1 corridor from London to Leeds and Manchester in England and in the far south west of Wales and is growing by conversion, immigration and by means of a higher birth-rate [4-1] than other groups.  But what is Islam? Politicians, the police and Islamic leaders have portrayed it as a religion of peace in which terrorism is an aberration.  Is this true? In any case, circumstances demand that Christians are well informed about Islam, and this paper is an attempt to understand and condense a mass of available information.  The author hopes that understanding  more about Islam will help Christians better expound their own faith, pray for government, evangelize amongst Muslims, and that if those things happen, this work will in some small way help to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who alone is the Way, the Truth and the Life.

Christian Voice, PO Box 739A, Surbiton, KT6 5YA -

AUGUST 2005

Searches related to pew research muslim population

sweden muslim population 2050

islam in germany 2050

islam in europe 2050

muslim population in france 2017

muslim population in europe 2018

belgium muslim population

islam in europe today

muslim population

 

More!

IMMIGRATION FILE

 

 

H.F.1711
 

 DAILY MAIL

 

 

 

 

I DESPAIR OF BRITISH MUSLIMs

 

WHO CHOOSE TO LIVE UNDER

 

VIRTUAL APATHEID

 

 

 

 

 

by Dr Taj Hargey

 

is director of the MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL CENTRE of OXFORD and IMAM of the OXFORD ISLAMIC CONGREGATION

 

+

 

DECEMBER 6-2016

 
 EXTRACT

AT LONG LAST, a senior government official has the gumption to warn about the devastating effect of MASS IMMIGRATION on LOCAL COMMUNITIES, highlighting the SEGREGATION, DIVISION and TENSION it causes in SOCIETY.

Such is the scale of the problem that in a report into our increasingly fractured communities, Dame Louise Casey, the Social Cohesion tsar, has called for all migrants to

SWEAR AN OATH OF ALLEGIANCE TO BRITAIN

Currently, immigrants do not have to make any formal commitment to integrating with the

REST OF SOCIETY

Unless they are actually applying for

UK CITIZENSHIP

Even then it is a facade.

To live here, no newcomer need make any promises at all to be productive stakeholders in BRITISH SOCIETY

Dame Louise's suggestion of an

OATH OF ALLEGIANCE

is a step in the right direction.

 BUT IT DOES NOT GO FAR ENOUGH.

Every single person who comes

HERE

to live should be obliged to sign up, in writing to the

BRITISH WAY OF LIFE.

Think of the UNITED KINGDOM as a prestigious golf club, the kind where membership is keenly sought after.

Anyone who wants to join will be expected  to

OBEY THE RULES

-all of them, not just the one's that confer

BENEFITS.

Applicants who refuse to sign to this will be turned away at the door, and members who f

FAIL TO HONOUR THE PLEDGE

will be swiftly

EXPELLED.

 No one forces the new members to apply to join in the first place - it's entirely their free choice. But there    should be no option other than abide by the rules, and no pussyfooting around with anyone who transgresses them. Otherwise, the club will fall apart and a

GREAT INSTITUTION WILL BE DESTROYED

...Supremacist

*

...Segregated

*

 

... Irrational

 

Above all, we must accept it is not racist to face up to the nightmare of the failure of

MULTICULTURALISM

To claim that some immigrants, because of their origins should be exempt from the common duties of

INTEGRATION

-THAT'S RACIST.

It is idiotic to champion the view that all cultures are equal when some endorse misogyny,  homophobia, honour killing and so forth

To say that some people because of their  religion or the colour of the skin, can ignore BRITISH VALUES of -RESPECT-PATRIOTISM DEMOCRACY-TOLERANCE and EQUALITY-THAT'S RACIST and IRRATIONAL.

 

We need to be FORTHRIGHT and ROBUST about THIS. If IMMIGRANTS are NOT prepared to FULLY INTEGRATE into BRITISH SOCIETY, arguing that it means sacrificing their religious identity, they can head to places such as

Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan and Sudan.

In other words, if newcomers and other immigrants are NOT HAPPY in the UNITED KINGDOM and DO NOT WISH TO BE AN INTEGRAL PART of this VIBRANT DEMOCRACY,

THEY SHOULD LEAVE.

 

*  *  *

[A BRILLIANT CONSTRUCTIVE AND COURAGEOUS AND NECESSARILY BLUNT ANALYSIS GETTING TO THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM BUT HAD THIS ARTICLE BEEN IN PLACE DECADES AGO IT WOULD HAVE FORCED THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DAY TO PUT IT IN PLACE. UNFORTUNATELY ,TIME IS NOT ON OUR SIDE AND THERE IS LITTLE ENTHUSIASM BY GOVERNMENT TO IMPLEMENT SUCH  A DARING BOLD AND MOST NECESSARY  NATION STATE SAVING AGENDA.   WE HOPE WE ARE PROVED WRONG ,BUT ,UNLESS WE ACHIEVE A PARLIAMENT OF PATRIOTIC -HONEST-MEMBERS  IN THE SHORTLY COMING GENERAL ELECTION THERE WILL BE NO EFFECTIVE CHANGE POSSIBLE AND THE SETTLED PEOPLE OF ENGLAND WILL PAY THE ULTIMATE HEAVY PRICE! OF A TOO DREADFUL TO CONTEMPLATE

 FAILURE.]

 

*

 

 

Full article

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS!]

DECEMBER 6-2016

H.F.1048 BREXIT NOW

 

MAY-16 victory

JUN-16

REFERENDUM

 JUL-16 AUG-16 SEP-16 OCT-16 NOV-16 DEC-16 JAN - 17 FEB-17
MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18
NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19
SEP 19 OCT-19 NOV-19 DEC-19 JAN-20

FEB-20

MAR-20

APRIL-20

 MAY-20 JUNE-20
JULY-20 AUG-20 SEPT-20 OCT-20 NOV-20  FREE OF THE EU

DEC-20

 AFTER  48 YEARS

JAN-21

A FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE

 THE

WORLD OUR OYSTER

JAN-21

FEB-21

MAR-21

APRIL - 2021

MAY- 2021

JUNE - 2021

 

JULY - 2021

AUG - 2021

SEPT- 2021

  

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
A MEETING PLACE  - THERE ARE HUNDREDS  OF ALTERNATIVE WEBSITES ON OUR wEBSITE- SINCE 2003

[ OVER THE YEARS A NUMBER OF WEB-SITES HAVE  DISAPPEARED FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER.
realzionistnews. TruetorahJews CONSPIRACYPLANET

.COM/
Fagan-Sounded-Alarm-of -the ILLUMINATI-in-1967 DAVID ICKE BRITISH CONSTITUTION GROUP

 

 YOU CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH
BENJAMIN FULFORD.NET

 

 THE WORLD OF TRUTH NEWWORLDORDER

INFO.COM

 

  
LANDDESTROYER.

BLOGSPOT

.COM

 HENRY MAKOW  CORBETTREPORT) LIFE IN THE MIX 2

 
UK COLUMN.ORG. JEW WATCH

ACTIVISTPOST.

COM

TARPLEY.NET

 
 
Bigger Text | Default Text | Smaller Text | ShareThis icon Facebook icon Twitter icon Email icon

Jacques Atalli Predicted Scamdemic & Genocide in 1981

Globalist Plannjacques-attali-home.jpeger Jacques Atalli Predicted Scamdemic & Genocide in 1981
 

"Euthanasia will have to be an essential instrument of our future

societies,

in all cases. We cannot of course execute people or set up camps.

We will get rid of them by making them believe it is for their own good. 
 

"We will have taken care to have planned the treatment, a treatment that will be

the solution. The selection of idiots will thus be done on its own: they will go to the slaughterhouse on their  own." 


 

By RM

(henrymakow.com)


 

For those who still doubt that the fraudulent, genocidal, Communist-style tyranny of Covid 1984 was planned long ago,

prepare to have your illusions shattered. 


 

The following statements made in 1981 by Jewish globalist Jacques Attali are taken from Interviews with Michel Salomon - 

The  Faces of the Future, Seghers edition when Attali was  a senior adviser to French President, Francoise Mitterand: 


 

"In the future it will be a question of finding a way to reduce the population. We will start with  the old, because as soon

as it exceeds 60-65 years man lives longer than he produces and costs  society dearly, then the weak and then the useless

who do nothing for society because there  will be more and more of them, and especially the stupid ones. 


 

"Euthanasia targeting these groups; euthanasia will have to be an essential instrument of our  future societies, in all cases.

 We cannot of course execute people or set up camps. We will get rid of them by making them believe it is for their own good...


 

"We will find something or cause it, a pandemic that targets certain people, a real economic  crisis or not, a virus that will

affect the old or the fat, it doesn't matter, the weak will succumb to it, the fearful and the stupid will believe it and ask to be treated. 


 

"We will have taken care to have planned the treatment, a treatment that will be the solution. The selection of idiots will thus

 be done on its own: they will go to the slaughterhouse on their own." 


 

Finally (and perhaps especially), since no war can be won unless the peoples waging it believe it just and necessary,

 and unless the loyalty of citizens and their belief in its values are maintained, the chief weapons of the future will be the

instruments of propaganda,  communication, and intimidation." 

____________ 

Jacques Attali (born 1 November 1943) is a French economic and social theorist, writer, political  adviser and

senior civil servant, who served as a counselor to President François Mitterrand from  1981 to 1991

and was the first head of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in  1991-1993. 

 In 2009, Foreign Policy recognized him as one of the top 100 "global thinkers" in the world.

H.F.2160
 
 
 -(1994 - EDP.ORG.UK Official Website - AUGUST- PART 6 - 2021 )-

 

BULLETIN FILE -NOVEMBER-2021 -HOME - PART  1  - PART 1-PAGE 2  - PART 2 - PART 3 - PART 4 - PART 5 - PART 6

 

BULLETIN FILE - OCTOBER-2021  HOME - PART 1  - PART 1 PAGE 1  - PART 2  - PART 3  - PART 4   - PART 5  - PART 6

BULLETIN FILE - SEPTEMBER-2021    HOME - PART 1  - PART 1 PAGE 1  - PART 2  - PART 3  - PART   - PART 5  - PART 6

BULLETIN FILES FOR AUGUST 2021: - HOME- PART 1 - PART 1-PAGE 2 - PART 2 - PART 3 -  PART 4 - PART 5 - PART 6
 

 

NOVEMBER- HOME-

-  PART 2   -  PART 3   -PART  4  - PART 5 -   PART 6  - 

- (1994 -Official Website - MARCH-PT 5- 2019 )-

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2019          MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2019         MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 5-2019        MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 6-2019

       MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-HOME PAGE 2--2019

 

*

THANK YOU FOR CALLING!

 

TOP OF PAGE

 

CLICK HERE FOR PREVIOUS FRONT PAGE-2012