Labour - Admission of Engineering Multicultural UK

Not anything that you didn't know - but good to see it exposed for the masses

LINK
"mass immigration under Labour was not just a cock-up but a conspiracy"

to 'rub the Right's nose in diversity' which I think is a bizarre explanation - I can think of a few other reasons

There are many advantages to a multi cultural society - BUT the numbers of immigrants is tantamount to an un-natural engineered invasion which has had a significant deleterious impact upon Britain:-
brought down the average wage - kept many on the breadline
increased unemployment/ stretched housing availability / strained the benefits pot
Allowed TPTB to peddle political correctness mind control and particularly the racist card
Divided to conquer the British people / communities
Pulled down the national level of education
Degraded the history and culture of the British
Stretched every infrastructure to breaking point (medical / education / roads / prisons / dentists etc)

They have our troops out fighting bogus wars - whilst our country is suffering engineered invasion - and you better not complain or you are dubbed an un-pc racist

This is another example of a decision made by a political party without consultation of the peoples they are supposed to represent - and after watching question time on Thursday - they do not now even acknowledge that there is an indiginous British people and therefore no culture to protect.

I think that this may tip the apple cart with the British public! - Milliband was panicing like a baby on the radio yesterday - saying....it is wrong that the BNP were given a platform by the BBC because they have had a massive influx of members off the back of it (over 30% increase I heard) - therefore I am against this ever happening again..It was wrong.
What kind of argument is that? - The British public should not be able to see or hear anything which may make them vote for any party other than the main 3!!!!

I am all for the shadey Nick Griffin if he continues to bring awareness to the masses who cant to wake up to the big picture ..unless the telly tells them something is fundamentally wrong

[edit on 24-10-2009 by suziwong]

they are getting bolder by the day - let them!

the link could use some correction, though:

www.dailymail.co.uk...

the consequences of such can be seen in the (former) Soviet Union or areas once occupied by Nazi Germany. social 'engineering' is disruptive and destructive. history has shown that much, it will happen again, no matter what the goals of the elites look like. it's about control in progressively tightening steps.

control kills, because it can only be used prevent and destroy, never to create. try legislating life and it will go away. just m.o. of course.

[edit on 2009.10.24 by Long Lance]

why is that allowed...willingly...deliberately and secretly changing a countries population and culture...?

these people should be in prison

The fact that they have announced this is suspect imo

The main worry for me is that rather than directing their disgust, fear and loathing at those in power who have orchestrated events - people will turn against each other and racial hatred will increase (which is probably one of their plans) but would be an absolute catastrophy for this country.

Well that sucks...Even if the Mail is a little biased it does explain a little of what has been going on in this country with the mass imigration, H&S and PC nonsense.

Problem I see it is at some point this will turn nasty as the experiment begins to break down.

Even locally to me, a few hundred pay and display machines have been blown up becuase of this social engineering, H&S and PC cr*p.

I just worry the anger won't be limted to just pay and display machines.

Edit:
I've just read it back, and felt it seemed a bit of an exageration about blowing hundreds of pay and display machines, so here are some links..

Mail 2006
Argus 2007
Country Council 2009

After all the county motto is "We Wunt be Druv" (won't be pushed around)



[edit on 24/10/09 by thoughtsfull]

reply to post by suziwong


As long as they can instill hatred and civil strife, it works to keep the focus off their corrupt and treasonous ways. They are all, leaders of all 3 main parties, signed up to the globalist agenda hoping for their little bit of subservient power and turn at the trough and care nothing for the people of this country. If they did care, they wouldn't be trying to rob us blind with expenses at every opportunity, taking money from special interest and corporate lobbyists and big party backers etc.

I have been saying for years that democracy is an illusion sold to the masses to keep them happy. In short, it doesn't matter which main party is in power, they still answer to the same big power brokers and money men. The only way to change it is to change the entire political system - no more career politicians, two term max and the same scrutiny on expenses and spend that we in the real world are subject to.

reply to post by Britguy


I agree - don't even get me started on the disgusting expenses scandal - I think that is was all part of a larger engineered agenda - but it still winds me up

I will copy you in on my latest correspondence with my MP -

Thank you for your email "The Big Issues" ...where you note :

"The Prime Minister has been asked to repay £12,000 for cleaning and gardening on his second home in Scotland because Legg has set new maximum limits which now apply retrospectively.

Over the next few weeks, MP's can seek to clarify any issues with Sir Thomas as a detailed report will then be published giving information on repayments requested from MP's. I think the main worry for MP's is that if they are asked to repay money because the rules have been changed and applied retrospectively voters may question their honesty and intergrity. In these circumstances it would be very unfair to try to claim that an MP had fiddled his or her expenses."

I interpret this as a defence of the media fuelled public scepticism of the actions of yourself and your collegues in respect of the use of taxpayers money claimed as expenses.

Your argument reads:Gordon Brown (the boss man) did it.....the system allowed it.....it was within the framework of the law......requests for repayment make us look guilty of a crime

I, like the majority of the voting public understand your argument which is wholly logical and factually correct for the majority of (but not all) MP's.

HOWEVER, you will never, ever win this debate with the general public - because morally, you are wrong

Just as an example, working on the logic of your argument then, for example : a Nazi officer rounding up prisoners to take to concentration camps is beyond reprehension because:

The boss man did it....... the system allowed it......it was within the framework of the law.....subsequent laws passed in the Nuremburg Trials regarding crimes against humanity made him look guilty

Even though the example is extreme - and the crime is not comparable - the logic is exactly the same! Can you not see that unless you operate on a personal level in a responsible, honorable, ethical, moral manner, your actions being the same as others above you or within the framework of the law is no defence because you will always fundamentally be in the wrong.

Sir Thomas Legg's report is based upon a personal "moral and reasonable" interpretation of what the taxpayer expense bill should be and therefore will always be subject to challenge - however, the difference between Sir Legg's interpretation and actual payments made is so vast that the average person/voter cannot fail to question the "honesty and integrity" of their constitutional representatives.

According to the Telegraph - Sir Thomas Legg has questioned the following regarding your expense claims

"David Borrow claims £1,300 per month in mortgage interest payments on a London flat which is designated as his second home, plus utilities and council tax"

I have also ascertained the following facts and figures:

Your expenses were £ 172, 607.00 between 2007 / 2008 on top of an annual salary of £ 63, 291.00

The average MP expense claim for 2007 / 2008 was £ 135,600.00

You claimed £ 37007.00 over and above the average MP

You had the 8th highest expenses claim of all UK Mp’s in 2007/2008

• 2nd home allowance 28083
• London supplement 0
• Office 21276
• Staffing 88173
• Central stationary 1677
• Stationary and postage 3772
• IT provision 1374
• Staff Cover 0
• Communications 19006
• Travel 14345

Since 2001, you have claimed an unbelievable £ 912, 397.00 in expenses on top of your salary.

However, if you can stand up - look your voters in the eye and state that every penny of the taxpayers money that you have personally spent was wholly necessary, could not be reduced anywhere, and that you have behaved with honesty and integrity ....then you have nothing at all to worry about.

This would have been a better way to communicate with your voters, oppsed to the flawed generic argument which we have received from you.

Personally, I have always argued that MP's salary should be far higher - but that none should not be able to hold interests in any compaany / organisation which may bias their view / corrupt their judgement - although this is now a moot point as unfortunately, in my opinion, we are so far away from a fair uncorrupted democratic governance system in this country that the expenses scandal is just a minor distraction....a small visible boil on the face of a bloated, disease ridden puss filled body.

I look forward to your future communications

Yours Sincerely

reply to post by suziwong


Nice one :-) thanks for sharing and your right, people are very angry, MPs have let us all down, and continue to do so.

As the bonfire celibrations have started in this part of the world, Battle created a 40ft high effigy of 3 pigs with their snouts in the trough.. with a sign saying "beware the greedy pig virus" Its a shame I missed seeing it go up in flames.

Link

I would say this is going to be the recurring theme in our bonfires this year.

reply to post by thoughtsfull


Excellent link !

reply to post by suziwong


It would serve Labour right if all Labour supporters vote BNP in the next election. In fact people should call for a general election now.

Originally posted by alienesque
why is that allowed...willingly...deliberately and secretly changing a countries population and culture...?

these people should be in prison

It is not a 'political' agenda. Don't even fall for that superficial answer for a moment.

The reason is to create division inside the country - that can be exploited to assert and maintain control.

The Uk is the most advanced of all the 'prison/police states' so far, under control of the NWO.

You create this mess of conflicting cultures, identities and loyalties to fracture the common values of a country - they will not unite against the government while they are fighting each other.

Also - it is very easy then to use slander, such as racism, religious intolerance to derail any intelligent debate regarding national identity and a common set of cultural values.

Those who enter a nation - and do not completely sever the previous loyalties to their nation of origin, and discard all those values, beliefs and behaviors that do not conform to those nationally established within the culture of the nation they are immigrating to - are basically foreign invaders at best, and treasonous at the extreme definition.

When you chose to live and become a resident and citizen of a new country - you MUST leave all previous loyalties behind - along with any values, behaviours and beliefs that conflict with the new nations national identity and culture.

If immigrants cannot do this - then they should remain in their own countries.

Here is an example of what I mean'

If a Muslim (whether socially prominent or not) makes statement regarding the consumption of alcohol, here are two versions - and my assessment of them.


The over consumption of alcohol by youths at football games has become a serious problem. Not withstanding that I am a Muslim, and my religion proscribes me from consumption of alcohol, the level of violence and anti social behavior exhibited by drunken youths at football games needs to be addressed by some regulation, and a public condemnation of this socially destructive behavior.

The above statement is perfectly acceptable, and shows a tolerance of the national cultural norms. The statement regarding the fact he is a Muslim can even be completely dropped - and the assessment is perfectly valid.


Now here is a counter point statement.


I am a Muslim, and the Koran proscribes the consumption of alcohol. The drunken and disorderly conduct of British youth is intolerable. The consumption of alcohol should be banned from public areas, and within sight of any decent citizens. It would be far better that alcohol consumption be banned entirely from the UK, as it is in Muslim countries.

Now this statement is inflammatory - it shows no respect whatsoever for the cultural values of the UK in which alcohol consumption is not only tolerated, but rather it is crucial to the British identity and social cohesion.

Someone making such a statement is easily identified as someone who has no tolerance for the cultural values of the British people - and is not integrating at all.

He should be booted out of the country and sent home to live in his 'far better' Muslim country.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by Amagnon]

Hardly a shock this, to be honest. I am ammused that on the back of Nick Griffins appearance on QT last Thurs has actually resulted in a massive boost for the BNP in the polls, a totallly opposite reaction than what Government wanted.

I can seriously see Labour struggling in every seat they contest next year and alot of smaller parties, BNP included, will pick up votes as there is a general discontent with the main parties.

I know I drone on and on about them, but please for the love of all things holy don't "protest vote" BNP, vote English Democrats. A non-racist yet nationally proud party.

Originally posted by stumason
Hardly a shock this, to be honest. I am ammused that on the back of Nick Griffins appearance on QT last Thurs has actually resulted in a massive boost for the BNP in the polls, a totallly opposite reaction than what Government wanted.

I can seriously see Labour struggling in every seat they contest next year and alot of smaller parties, BNP included, will pick up votes as there is a general discontent with the main parties.

I know I drone on and on about them, but please for the love of all things holy don't "protest vote" BNP, vote English Democrats. A non-racist yet nationally proud party.

the pirate party are another alternative

www.pirateparty.org.uk...

[edit on 24-10-2009 by alienesque]

[edit on 24-10-2009 by alienesque]

reply to post by stumason


I actually have thought for a while that the hatchet job done on the BNP was intent on splitting the vote away from the tories and reducing their lead over labour, that was something I put forward on the guardian comment section a few times earlier this year. (while getting rips to shreds for sugesting such a devious plot)

However I am now of the opinion that in reality the Nazi/racist chanting in the media, the UAF taking to the streets in protest at facists has infact stiffled all debate on every issue and from where I sit gives the illusion that the voting choice is either BNP or the big main 3..

The "British Jobs for British Workers" slogan seems to have been handed to the BNP, at times I have felt it has almost been rammed down the BNP throats by the media, while tainting those words with Xenophobe/Racist, thus tainting all parties who fight for British rights regardless of race.

So I wonder now if the approach was to use the BNP to stop anyone disussing other parties like English Democrats and UKIP, as in my opinion the worst that can be said about either is Little Englander.. which is not exactly an insult in my book, as it's a badge I proudly wear ;-)

Any way those are just my thoughts.


[edit on 24/10/09 by thoughtsfull]

Originally posted by thoughtsfull
So I wonder now if the approach was to use the BNP to stop anyone disussing other parties like English Democrats and UKIP, as in my opinion the worst that can be said about either is Little Englander.. which is not exactly an insult in my book, as it's a badge I proudly wear ;-)

Any way those are just my thoughts.

Indeed, I'll happily and publically wear that badge too!

I am not sure if there is any conspiracy from the media/Government to divert attention from the other, more legitimate and certainly less racist parties, but it does appear to be working none the less.

It might just be because the BNP is so "extreme", they will garner more column inches and broadcast hours, thereby increasing sales or viewing figures.

Plain old "normal" politics from "little" parties doesn't create as much of a fanfare, so won't sell papers. It's a shame, as there are parties out there who offer real change and have a good message, but they have to work really hard for the media (and thus the people) to take them seriously.

reply to post by Britguy


Democracy is mob rule. We don't want that. And "fix" the political system all you want,nothing would change. What we need to do is abolish the Bank of England,simple as. UKIP are still in the back pocket of the conservatives imo...i like what they preach but i don't think they would follow through if in power.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by Solomons]

reply to post by Solomons


A very simple fix that would immediately rebalance Parliament would be a system of proportional representation. I say this as Labour only polled 27% of the popular vote in 2005, yet control a massive majority of seats.

Why?

Because First past the post is inherantly unfair as the system is not being used as intended.

If we had no political parties, which aren't officially recgnised by parliament anyway, then it would work as intended with people voting for a representative, but nowadays they don't represent the views of constituents, but those of the larger Party.

If you have a constituency with 30,001 voters and 10,001 people vote for 1 party and the other 20,000 votes are split between several other parties, then the one with the single vote majority will end up "representing" the whole community, even though only 1/3rd voted for them. This is what has happened nationally, with Labour ruining the country with less than 1/3rd of people supporting them.

This needs to be fixed, but doing so would automatically divert votes away from the big parties and allow smaller parties a voice in Parliament, dilluting their power. They can't have that, can they?