Nothing else like the filth, squalor and corruption of the Blair regime has ever happened in British politics before.
The events surrounding Operation Ore ( Child pornography investigation) and the subsequent cover up, summed up what Tony Blair and his New Jew Labour Government were really like.
Tony Blair – Britain’s most dishonest politician ever.
The best article we found in the MSM is copied below with a photo of the original article.
The Sunday Herald : Child Porn Arrests Too Slow Herald And Sunday Herald : Sunday January 19th 2003
Operation Ore : The Police enquiry which plans to arrest a further 7000 men across the UK , in addition to Who guitarist Peter Townshend, for buying Child pornography online is set to end in disaster with many suspects walking free.
Detective Chief Inspector Bob MacLachlan, former head of Scotland Yard’s paedophile unit, told the Sunday Herald that the lack of urgency in making arrests will lead to suspects destroying evidence of downloading child pornography before they are arrested.
The Sunday Herald has also had confirmed by a very senior source in British intelligence that at least one high profile former Labour Cabinet Minister is among Operation Ore suspects. The Sunday Herald has been given the politicians name but, for legal reasons, can not identify the person.
There are still unconfirmed rumours that another senior Labour politician is among the suspects. The intelligence officer said that a “rolling” cabinet committee had been set up to work out how to deal with the potentially ruinous fall-out for both Tony Blair and the Government if arrests occur.
Since the September 2002 Operation Ore arrest of Detective Constable Brian Stevens, a key officer in the inquiry into the murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, the public have been aware that wanted suspects had downloaded Child pornography from a US website called Landslide.
MacLachlan, who was one of the main officers on Operation Ore before his retirement last year, said “Sufficient warnings have been given that if people haven’t got rid of their computers then they are either stupid, don’t believe they’ll be arrested or are so obsessive about their collections that they can’t destroy it. As time goes on, the chances of successful prosecutions will diminish with speed and the information out there must impact on the offenders.”
With only 1200 men arrested so far, MacLachlan says that claims by Police Chiefs and the Government that they were prioritising paedophile crime were “smoke and mirrors”. Paedophilia is still not a priority on the Home Office’s National Policing Plan for 2003-06. MacLachlan claimed that before he left Scotland Yard his team were under-staffed, over-worked, under-funded and reduced to using free software from computer magazines.
There are around one million images of an estimated 20,000 individual Children being abused online. Some Police seizures involve hauls of more than 180,000 images. Last year, images of 13,000 new Children were uncovered. Only 17 Child victims have been identified worldwide.
Police have also revealed that images of Fred West abusing one of his Children are among Child pornography available for downloading from the internet. It is unclear whether the Child was West’s murdered daughter Heather.
Peter Robbins, the Chief Executive of the Internet Watch Foundation, which works with the Police, Government and internet service providers, in tackling paedophilia online, says software is in development which could remove child pornography from the net forever. The software should be ready in two years.
Police say that the list of rich and famous Operation Ore suspects would fill newspaper front pages for an entire year.
Provided by: Financial Times Information Limited.
Index terms: Police Protection, Crimes : General News.
Location(s): United Kingdom Europe Western Europe
Record Number: A20030120-10A4-EIW,O,XML,EIW
In British Schools, and constantly on British television, we are bombarded with the alleged murder of 6 million jews by the Germans during World War Two. This is commonly referred to as “The Holocaust”. This alleged historical event is also thrown at anyone objecting to mass immigration in to White Nations as proof of the absolute evil of White Nationalism.The alleged holocaust was also the official reason for setting up the Sate of Israel on May 14th 1948 – if the alleged holocaust was proved not to have happened then the State of Israel would have no legal basis.
Holocaust denial in London, England during January 2015.
In most European Countries even disputing any detail of this alleged historical event is a very serious criminal offence, which can result in up to 20 years imprisonment. In France this can be served in solitary confinement if the authorities believe there is any chance of re-offending.
Even though this blog in no way denies “The Holocaust”, or disputes any of the alleged details of any of the different versions, we did list 21 amazing facts about it here:
1. International Committee of the Red Cross Records:
The International Red Cross was stationed in all German labour, internment, concentration and prison camps throughout World War Two. The Red Cross were never given access to any Russian camps before, during or after World War Two. At his trials in Canada, during the 1980s and 1990s, Professor Ernst Zundel finally got the Red Cross to release their records from the German camps despite strong Israeli objections. The Red Cross records seem to suggest that there were no gas chambers, and a total of 271,301 died during World War Two in these camps, mostly from typhus.
In a letter to the US State Department dated November 22nd 1944 The Red Cross, who were stationed in all the camps, stated : “We have not been able to discover any trace of installations for exterminating civilian prisoners.”
Official Red Cross records.
2.United States Airforce Aerial Photos Of Camps:
From 1942, until the end of World War Two, the United States Airforce performed low flying, low-speed photography of all the alleged “death camps” to obtain evidence of what was going on. This followed jewish claims in the West that a mass murder was occurring. All these photographs were released in 1979 when they were declassified. None of these photographs show any sign of mass murder or disposal of millions of bodies.
No USAF aerial photos show any mass murder in the camps.
3. Western Allies Never Liberated Any Death Camps With Gas Chambers:
None of the Western Allies ( Britain, Canada, USA, Australia, France etc. ) liberated any camps that had gas chambers, or other systems of mass murder in them. All the alleged death camps with gas chambers were liberated by the Russians.
Consequently any alleged evidence of death camps and/or gas chambers was forthcoming solely from Soviet Russia. The Western Allies liberated a total of 12 main camps and the Soviet Russians 8 main camps.
Western Allies never liberated or inspected any death camps or gas chambers.
4.The Leuchter Report:
One of the pieces of evidence Professor Ernst Zundel produced at his trials in Canada was the “Leuchter Report” compiled by Fred Leuchter on his commission. Fred Leuchter is the World’s foremost expert on gas chambers.
After inspecting the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz, Leuchter concluded they were unsuitable for use as gas chambers due to their lack of airtight doors, lack of a gas extraction system and general shoddy build. He also chemically analysed the walls for ferrocyanide ( produced when Zyklon-B reacts with brick walls ) and concluded there was none – the Auschwitz authorities took the same tests with the same results and now admit there was no gas chamber in Auschwitz.
5. The British Secret Service Monitored All Concentration Camp Deaths:
Using some of the World’s first computers the British Secret Service had cracked the German top-secret Enigma code and had access to most German Military communications by 1942. Sir Frank H. Hinsley, in his book British Intelligence In The Second World War ; It’s Influence On Strategy And Operations, stated “The returns of Auschwitz mentioned illness as the main cause of death but included references to shootings and hangings. There were no references in the decrypts to gassings.” The numbers of dead in the decoded messages tallied exactly with Red Cross and German Military records of the time. The British Secret Service also monitored various atrocities carried out by the Germans across the rest of Europe – why would the Germans report these to Berlin but not the alleged gas chambers at Auschwitz and other camps?
The British Secret Service were monitoring all German Military and Police communications by 1942.
6. The French Resistance Denied The Holocaust:
During World War Two Germany invaded France and occupied Northern France from 1940 to 1944. A secret army of French Patriots known collectively as “The French Resistance” fought the German occupiers in various ways. A large number of French Resistance members were imprisoned, tortured and executed including their leader, and French National hero, Jean Moulin. After World War Two French resistance members were released from various German concentration camps, including Auschwitz and other alleged death camps. On their return to France they all gave horrific accounts of their treatment by the Germans, and were full of hatred for them because of the events of World War Two. However they all denied any knowledge of gas chambers and a mass murder programme in the concentration camps.
French Resistance leader Jean Moulin
7. The Gas Chambers Of World War One:
It was widely reported during World War One ( 1914 to 1918 ) that the Germans, and their allies, were using gas chambers to kill thousands of prisoners. However after the end of the War Stanley Baldwin admitted in Parliament that it had been propaganda and no such gas chambers had existed. He also apologised publicly to the German People for this racist slur on them.
During World War One it was falsely claimed that the Germans were gassing prisoners.
8. Amounts Of Zyklon-B Used At The Camps:
Zyklon-B was the trade name for of a cyanide-based pesticide invented in the early 1920s. It was used in Germany, before and during the Second World War, for disinfection and pest extermination in ships, buildings and machinery. Zyklon-B consisted of diatomite, in the form of granules the size of fine peas, saturated with prussic acid. In view of its volatility and the associated risk of accidental poisoning, it was supplied in sealed metal canisters. One of the co-inventors of Zyklon-B, the chemist and businessman Bruno Tesch, was executed by the British in 1946 for his role in the alleged Holocaust.
In the concentration camps it was used for sanitation and pest control. There were disinfectant chambers, in all the camps, where inmates clothes were disinfected to combat typhus and other diseases. When you break down the amount of Zyklon-B used in all the camps, those not alleged to have gas chambers and those alleged to have gas chambers, the amount per inmate is very similar. This means the alleged death camps would have had to have had a secret supply for the “gas chambers”.
Zyklon-B granules came in sealed tins.
9. The Nuremberg Trials 1945 to 1949:
The Nuremberg Trials were held in the German City of Nuremberg from 1945 to 1949. These Trials were held by the victorious Allies ( France, Britain , USA and Soviet Russia ) with the Germans as defendants. They were the worst sort of show trials with the main Judge being Nikitchenko, who had presided over Stalins’ show trials of 1936 to 1938 in the Soviet Union. The Court came up with ridiculous findings like jews being turned in to lampshades and even soap, these claims are now discredited and even the jews admit they were untrue.
The Chief Justice of the United States Harlan Fiske Stone called the Nuremberg trials a fraud. He said “Chief US prosecutor Jackson is away conducting his high-grade lynching party in Nuremberg,” he wrote. “I don’t mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate to see the pretense that he is running a Court and proceeding according to common law. This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas.”
The Nuremberg Trials – the ultimate Soviet show trial held under the Allies.
Associate Supreme Court Justice William O Douglas charged that the Allies were guilty of “substituting power for principle” at Nuremberg. “I thought at the time and still think that the Nuremberg trials were unprincipled,” he wrote. “Law was created ex post facto to suit the passion and clamor of the time.”
According to British General Montgomery, the Germans had only one sin : They lost the war.
President John F Kennedy in his book, Profiles in Courage, criticised Nuremberg as a show trial.
Out of 139 German witnesses who testified that the Holocaust had occurred, the British Medical Officer recorded that 137 had “damage to their testicles that is beyond repair”. A number of Germans had died under interrogation by the Allies. There was also the threat of sending Peoples’ families to Soviet Gulags.
The Nuremberg prosecutors – Kempner, Rapp, Niederman – all Jews.
10. The Concentration Camp Crematorium:
One of the main problems with the 6 million jews being murdered claim was disposal of the bodies. It was claimed at Nuremberg that they had been disposed of in the camp crematorium. There were crematorium in each camp, but they simply didn’t have the capacity. Each crematorium oven could burn a body in about one and a half hours, meaning a maximum capacity of 16 bodies every day or just less than 6000 bodies per year per oven. The camps had between four and twelve ovens each giving 24,000 to 72,000 bodies per year maximum at each camp – this still wouldn’t be possible as you can’t run these ovens non-stop without the metal fracturing. Even double or triple loading wouldn’t help as this increased the time to three hours for two bodies or four and a half hours for three bodies. Also bodies aren’t totally reduced by this process and usually leave the pelvis and thigh bones which need crushing with special machinery – no such machinery was found at any of the camps. There is also the problem of fuel as each body would need about 40 kilograms of coke to burn – there is no record of the massive amount of coke required being supplied.
Each oven could only burn less than 6000 bodies per year if working non-stop which isn’t possible without fracturing the metal.
11. The Liberation Of Belsen Concentration Camp Film:
The whole World has probably seen the film of the liberation of Belsen concentration camp, it is horrific to say the least. Human skeletons are walking round with dead bodies covering the ground. This film was shown Worldwide at the time to show the evil of Nazi Germany. However Belsen was liberated by the Western Allies, and was never alleged to have had any gas chamber or be part of a systematic mass murder programme. The victims are in fact all dying from typhus which is confirmed by German Military, Red Cross and British Military medical records – this is never pointed out whenever this film is shown. Ironically the deaths were mostly due to a lack of Zyklon-B, at the end of the war with Germany collapsing, leading to a mass typhus outbreak in the camp.
British Military sign warning of typhus at Belsen concentration camp shortly after liberation.
12. No Film Or Photographs Of Any Gas Chambers:
The Nazis were technology freaks, to say the least, and filmed and photographed virtually everything they did during World War Two. Hitler even had executions of his political enemies filmed so he could watch them with his cronies. However there has never been a single photograph or film found of any of the alleged gas chambers in operation. The Nazis did film, and photograph, themselves committing many atrocities across occupied Europe so it seems unlikely they wouldn’t film the alleged gas chambers. All the films we are shown of gas chambers are Hollywood recreations made after the war.
Hitler and his cronies demanded film of virtually everything happening in Nazi occupied territory but no film of gas chambers was ever found.
13. Sir Winston Churchill Never Mentioned The Alleged Holocaust:
In his monumental six volume The Second World War Sir Winston Churchill, British wartime Prime Minister, never makes any reference to gas chambers or a planned mass extermination of European jews. This is despite the fact he goes in to great detail about virtually every facet of World War Two including many atrocities committed by the Nazis. The same can be said about Eisenhower’s Crusade in Europe. After the Second World War, with the Cold War starting, Churchill stated “I think we slaughtered the wrong pig here” a clear reference to the fact Britain would have been better helping Germany defeat Soviet Russia, or at least staying out completely.
Sir Winston Churchill – realised too late that Soviet Russia was more of a threat than Nazi Germany.
14. Star Witness To The Alleged Holocaust Elie Wiesel:
One of the star witnesses to the Auschwitz allegations is Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel. Wiesel was born in Sighet, Romania on September 30th, 1928. Wiesel has given evidence at various trials around the World on his alleged experiences in German camps during World War Two. Wiesel is a well-known writer of fiction with over 40 published books. However it is his autobiography of Auschwitz, Night , which has come under scrutiny. Firstly, Wiesel claims the bodies were disposed of by a secret Nazi method of using bodies to burn bodies – if this was scientifically possible wouldn’t they just use this method to burn the bodies? Secondly Wiesel claims that his concentration camp number A7713 was tattooed on his left arm like all inmates, however video evidence shows no such tattoo and he has never explained where his tattoo went. Thirdly his camp number, A7713, was assigned to a different prisoner and there is no record of him at Auschwitz despite all camp records being recovered after the War. Fourthly in all his different accounts of Auschwitz Weisel never mentions any gas chambers. Fifthly Wiesel makes bizarre claims about mass graves that would shoot fountains of blood up in to the air, this is also scientifically impossible. Sixthly Wiesel claims he spent three weeks in the Auschwitz Camp hospital with an infected leg – would a death camp bother curing prisoners? There are many other major discrepancies to his claims, and a read of his book Night is recommended.
For a more precise look at Elie Wiesel and why his allegations don’t stand up to any scrutiny please visit:
15. Fake Photographic And Film Holocaust Evidence And The Ever Changing Numbers:
The first time fake evidence was used was during the Nuremberg Trials. This however became an industry in its own right after 1945, with large rewards paid to investigators for “finding” Holocaust evidence. At the time a lot of this evidence was very cutting-edge, but under modern scrutiny it simply doesn’t stand up.
Modern forensic techniques have exposed a lot of “Holocaust” photographic evidence as faked.
New systems of examining photographs and film have exposed large amounts of it as totally fake, other evidence has been exposed as coming from completely different sources e.g. The Russian Gulags.
As evidence has emerged discrediting large parts, if not all, of the alleged Holocaust narrative the jews have been forced to constantly change the numbers in their claims. They have, however, constantly stuck to an overall total of 6 million jewish deaths, even though this makes no mathematical sense as the component numbers are revised downwards. This hasn’t led to a partial refund of the damages paid to Israel by Germany based on the 6 million figure.
16. The Balfour Declaration, World War One And 6 Million Jews:
During World War One the British Government had agreed with leading jews that they would support a jewish homeland in Palestine in exchange for the powerful jewish lobby in America getting the USA to join the Allies. This led to the Balfour Declaration being made by the British Government promising the jews a homeland in Palestine.
After discussions in the British Cabinet, and consultation with Zionist leaders, the decision was made known in the form of a letter by Arthur James Lord Balfour to Lord Rothschild. The letter represents the first political recognition of Zionist aims by a Great Power.
After World War One the British Government were unable, or unwilling, to make good on this promise. From 1919 onwards the jews claimed 6 million jews in Europe were under threat from extermination unless they got a homeland in Palestine. This was 14 years before the Nazis came to power and 24 years before the alleged Holocaust started.
The jews have been waving the 6 million figure around since at least 1914 and maybe even earlier – the number seems to have a special significance to them.
17. Holocaust Denial And The Holocaust Deniers:
In most parts of Europe questioning any aspect of the findings of the Nuremberg Trials is a very serious criminal offence on par with rape, murder or armed robbery. In France you can receive up to 20 years in prison, which may have to be served in solitary confinement. Even where it is not illegal questioning the official Holocaust narrative will probably cost you your job, family, house etc.
Despite this a lot of top writers, academics, historians and scientists have questioned the official Holocaust narrative or denied it entirely. Professor Ernst Zundel was put on numerous trials around the World, had his house firebombed, received death threats, his family broke up, was deported from several countries and eventually was imprisoned for five years in Germany. No other historical event can attract this type of punishment for questioning the official narrative.
Despite these threats, the official narrative is constantly exposed as being a lie and the jews have to constantly change their claims when faced with irrefutable evidence of their lies.
18. The Main Stream Media And The Alleged Holocaust:
The Main Stream Media never question the official narrative of the holocaust, and go on an all-out attack on anyone who does. They have created the term “Holocaust Denier” for anyone who doesn’t believe, or dares to question, the official narrative. “Holocaust Denier” is one of the multicultural buzz-words like “Fascist/Nazi/racist/homophobe” designed to denigrate the person described as such, and lead to “pack-attacks” by the media, politicians and the general lefty PC crowd. However bear in mind that around 96% of the Western World’s media is controlled by jews and/or zionists. You will notice that the jews/zionist are willing to keep running newspapers/TV channels and other media outlets at a financial loss simply to keep control of the MSM.
The jews and zionists control about 96% of the Western World’s media – a large part is now run at a financial loss.
19. There’s No Business Like Shoa Business:
“Shoa” is the term used by jews and zionists to describe the alleged Holocaust. After the Second World War Germany was forced to pay trillions of Dollars in compensation to set up Israel, and is still paying to this day. There are now second and third generation, the children and grandchildren of alleged Holocaust victims, who receive compensation from the German Government and various German Corporations. The American Government also use this as an excuse to give billions of American taxpayers’ money to Israel, although the real reason behind these payments is the strength of the Israeli lobby in America.
As early as 1941, two years before the alleged Holocaust was even meant to have started, the World Jewish Congress had been demanding that the Germans pay for the resettlement of jews in Israel as reparations.
20. The Census of Jews Worldwide Figures:
Here are some census figures of jews living Worldwide to consider:
World Almanac, 1925, pg. 752 — 15,630,000, “In 1925 a census of Palestine gave a total of 115,151 Jews”
World Almanac, 1929, pg. 727 — 15,630,000
National Council of Churches 1930 — 15,600 ,000
March 24, 1933, jewish newspaper Daily Express — 14,000,000 jews worldwide
World Almanac, 1933, pg. 419 — 15,316,359, [“The estimate for Jews in the above table is for 1933, and is by the American Jewish Committee”
World Almanac, 1936, pg. 748 — world jewish population = 15,753,633
World Almanac, 1938, pg. 510 — world jewish population = 15,748,091, with 240,000 in Germany
American Jewish Committee Bureau of the Synagogue Council, 1939 — 15,600,000
World Almanac, 1940, pg. 129: World Jewish Population — 15,319,359
World Almanac, 1941, pg. 510: World Jewish Population — 15,748,091
World Almanac, 1942, pg. 849 — 15,192,089, “Jews include Jews by race not necessarily by religion”
World Almanac USA, 1947, pg. 748: World Jewish Population — 15,690,000
World Almanac, 1949, pg. 289: World Jewish Population — 15,713,638
Statistical Handbook of Council of Churches USA 1951 — 15,300,000
World Almanac, US News & World Report, 1983 population of jews — 16,820,850
World Almanac, 1996, pg. 646: World Jewish Population — 14,117,000
World Almanac & Book of Facts, 1989: World Jewish Population –18,080,000
World Almanac & Book of Facts, 2001: World Jewish Population — 13,200,000
World Almanac 1933
World Almanac 1948
21. Inmate Facilities At Auschwitz:
With two very different witness versions of what was going on in the camps, let’s have a quick look at the facilities available to inmates to see if that can clarify matters. The jews have now admitted there wasn’t any gas chambers in Auschwitz following the two sets of scientific tests, but there were some facilities that certainly were in Auschwitz and can still be seen today.
A free dental service available to all inmates – specialist dentists were brought in for intricate work.
A walk-in clinic and hospital for inmates.
Dr. Carl Clauberg the World famous Berlin surgeon who was called in for difficult inmate cases.
Camp kitchen – one of the largest service buildings in Auschwitz, with state-of-the-art cooking facilities. There were twelve of these throughout the camp. The caloric content of the diet was carefully monitored by camp and Red Cross delegates.
Camp religious facilities made available on a rotating basis to every denomination for religious services.
A camp theatre where live plays were performed by camp inmate actors.
Up to 16 camp orchestras with every conceivable instrument available for inmates – there was also free tutoring by music teachers.
A camp library where inmates could borrow books from forty -five thousand volumes available.
Camp complaints office where inmates could register complaints or make suggestions. Camp Commander Hoess had a standing order that any inmate could approach him personally to register a complaint about other inmates such as “Kapos” and even guards.* A system of strict discipline for guards and also for inmates, with severe punishment being handed out against those found guilty (for even slapping an inmate).
Auschwitz marriages took place because worker inmates fell in love and married their inmate partners.
The camp sauna for inmates.
The camp brothel, just inside the main gate was a building used during the war as a brothel for the inmates.
A camp swimming pool for use by the inmates, where there were walkways with comfortable benches for inmates to relax in the shade of the trees. Swimming galas were held during the Summer months.
The Auschwitz University where inmates could take various courses. Professors from nearby Universities often visited to give lectures.
Genuine photograph of inmates leaving for Auschwitz – notice the train is a passenger train not the Hollywood cattle train version.
These are the facilities that are still standing and can be inspected by any visitor. Other facilities that are now overgrown, or have been knocked down, included a soccer field, fencing area, handball court, camp canteen, cinema and maternity ward that delivered over 3,000 live births without losing a single mother or baby.
This blog in no way denies the alleged Holocaust, or questions any of the different versions of it from the last 68 years. However here is some further reading and videos:
The claim that 6 million jews were murdered by the Germans during World War Two is on the British School’s National Curriculum and is publicised by the BBC on a near daily basis. The following Freedom Of Information Act Requests were recently submitted to find out where they obtained their information:
From: Sean Moran
16 November 2013
Dear Department for Education,
Please provide a copy of all information on the alleged holocaust
of 6 million jews during World War Two by the Germans on the
National Curriculum in the last 20 years.Please also confirm where
you obtained this information from and how much was paid for it.
Thank you for your recent enquiry. A reply will be sent to you as soon as possible. For information; the departmental standard for correspondence received is that responses should be sent within 20 working days as you are requesting information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2013/0071785
Department for Education
Ministerial and Public Communications Division
Tel: 0370 000 2288
Dear Mr Moran,
Thank you for your request for information, which was received on 18
November. You requested “a copy of all information on the alleged
holocaust of 6 million jews during World War Two by the Germans on the
National Curriculum in the last 20 years.” In addition you asked “Please
also confirm where you obtained this information from and how much was
paid for it.” I am dealing with your request under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.
First of all, and by way of background, I would point out that the
Department for Education (DfE) sets the framework for the national
curriculum, and teaching about the Holocaust is a compulsory part of the
history curriculum at key stage 3. The DfE does not however specify how
it should be taught, nor what resources teachers should use.
With this in mind, in order to identify and locate the information that
you have asked for, I require some further information from you, as the
scope of your request is unclear. In particular, it would be useful to
know exactly what recorded information you are seeking, so that I might
establish whether it is held by this Department.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please
remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
If you are unhappy with the way your request has been handled, you should
make a complaint to the Department by writing to me within two calendar
months of the date of this letter. Your complaint will be considered by
an independent review panel, who were not involved in the original
consideration of your request.
If you are not content with the outcome of your complaint to the
Department, you may then contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2013/0071785. If
you need to respond to us, please visit:
www.education.gov.uk/contactus, and quote your reference number.
Dear Department for Education,
You must know where you get your information on the alleged murder
of 6 million jews by the Germans during World War Two. Also how
much you pay for this information. Are you saying Schools simply
teach what they want on this subject?
Thank you for your recent enquiry. A reply will be sent to you as soon as possible. For information; the departmental standard for correspondence received is that responses should be sent within 20 working days as you are requesting information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2013/0078740.
Department for Education
Ministerial and Public Communications Division
Tel: 0370 000 2288
From: FOI Enquiries
British Broadcasting Corporation
5 November 2013
Dear Mr Moran,
Thank you for your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as detailed in your email below. Your request was received on 4th November 2013. We will deal with your request as promptly as possible, and at the latest within 20 working days. If you have any queries about your request, please contact us at the address below.
The reference number for your request is RFI20131643.
The Information Policy & Compliance Team
BBC Freedom of Information
BC2 B6, Broadcast Centre
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TP
Who is England’s patron saint? If you think it’s St George, you’re behind the times. In fact, it’s the martyr St Stephen. But not the Stephen stoned to death in Palestine 2,000 years ago. No, the Stephen stabbed to death by Whites at a bus-stop in London in 1993. He was a young Black male, but that didn’t make his death unusual or worthy of special attention.
Black power: St Stephen Lawrence
It wasn’t until 2012, after huge expense by the London Metropolitan police and the abolition of the centuries-old principle of double jeopardy, that two White men were found guilty of the murder and given long jail sentences. Cries of joy greeted the conviction in all sections of the media, particularly at The Guardian and BBC. But further suspects are still free and Doreen Lawrence, mother of the murder victim, wants to see more millions spent on pursuing and convicting them.
Doreen has become a familiar and highly respected figure in the UK. She has recently been elevated to the House of Lords, where she will sit as Baroness Lawrence and continue to promote the martyr cult. She was prominent at the twentieth-year commemoration of her son’s murder, which was attended by the leaders of all three main political parties. And you may have seen her helping to carry the flag at the 2012 London Olympics. It was a further honour in recognition of her long campaign for justice, equality and tolerance in the UK.
The image of an aspiring young Black architect slaughtered by thuggish White racists continues to be reinforced through every medium of news, art and commentary. Doreen has often appeared in the media to criticize Britain for failing to live up to the high standards she demands of it as a British Jamaican. And the government listens. Here she is in the closing days of 2012 with fellow activist Dr Richard Stone, who will be the main focus of this essay:
Coalition responds to Doreen Lawrence over race equality
David Cameron and Nick Clegg have moved to head off an embarrassing row with race equality campaigners after the Guardian highlighted an uncompromising attack on the coalition [between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats] by the mother of the murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence. It has emerged that 24 hours after Doreen Lawrence castigated ministers, accusing them of backtracking on the government’s commitment to equalities, the prime minister and deputy prime minister penned a joint reply from Downing Street aiming to reassure her and to bolster the government’s credentials.
The timing of the letter is significant, as Lawrence and Richard Stone, an adviser to the Macpherson inquiry into Stephen’s death, had written to Cameron and Clegg – and Ed Miliband [leader of the Labour Party] – a month earlier outlining concerns about government equality policies. Lawrence said her letter had been ignored, adding that improvements in equalities prompted by the Macpherson inquiry were being imperilled and race no longer appeared to be on the agenda. …
In their reply to Lawrence, Cameron and Clegg write: “We recognise how important it is to ensure the legacy of Stephen’s murder and Lord Macpherson’s report will never be lost.” … Lawrence was not available for comment, but Stone, co-signatory to her letter, said he had hoped for a more positive response. “We sent our letter a month ago. It is good to have a reply from the prime minister and deputy prime minister. But it is written very carefully. There is nothing concrete here.” (Coalition responds to Doreen Lawrence over race equality, The Guardian, 23rd December 2012)
So who is Richard Stone, the man playing such a prominent role in calling the government to account? Thanks to the media’s untiring work, Stephen and Doreen Lawrence are now familiar to millions of ordinary Britons, but very few of them would recognize the name or features of Richard Stone. This is a pity, because he is an interesting man. Here is the biography at his personal website:
Dr Richard Stone
Dr Richard Stone is a medical doctor who also has extensive experience working against social exclusion, homelessness, and in the grant-making charitable sector. He is a leading expert in social cohesion, anti-racism, and Islamophopia, and is a regular speaker around Europe at conferences on these topics. Richard was a panel member of the 1997/99 Home Office inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence. He served as a Cabinet Advisor to the Mayor of London, President of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality, and spent 5 years on the Runnymede “Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia”, from 2000 to 2004 as chair. He has also been a trustee and vice-Chair of the Runnymede Trust [an “anti-racist” organization founded by Jews] and a Council and Board member of Liberty [the British equivalent of the ACLU]. His work bringing together British Jews and Muslims includes being a founding trustee of the Maimonides Foundation in 1985, and of Alif-Aleph UK in 2003 [alif and aleph are the initial letters of the Arabic and Hebrew alphabets] … In 2010 he was awarded an OBE [Order of the British Empire] for “public and voluntary” service. (See Biography at Dr Stone’s website)
Identity on the Agenda
Despite his presidency of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality, Dr Stone claims to self-identify as a member of the White British majority:
Enough of this anger-creating suppression of the hopes and opportunities of people from black backgrounds. My message to white (mainly) men (like me), who have the power to discriminate is this: just stop doing it. (Where are the black police officers?, Dr Richard Stone, The Guardian, 4th January, 2012)
In Britain, the vast majority of power is wielded by middle-aged, middle-class white men – like Dr Stone. (An Independent Commentary to Mark the 10th Anniversary of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry (2009), Dr Richard Stone, pg. 17)
I don’t know whether Dr Stone also self-identifies as self-righteous, but that is a label some might be inclined to give him. They might even add that he is self-important and arrogant too. Dr Stone seems to enjoy issuing orders and demands on behalf of ethnic and religious minorities. For further examples, let’s examine his behaviour at the Macpherson Inquiry. This was the official inquiry set up by the New Labour government into the police failures surrounding the murder of Stephen Lawrence. What role did he have there? It’s described at the website of the organization ROTA (Race On The Agenda), where Dr Stone is a patron with the British-Nigerian Lord Victor Adebowale, CBE (Commander of the British Empire). Here is part of Dr Stone’s biography:
Dr Stone was a panel member of the “Stephen Lawrence Inquiry” into racism in policing (1997/99) as Adviser to the judge Sir William Macpherson. He was also on the panel of the 2003/04 NHS “David Bennett Inquiry” into the death of a Black [sic] patient during restraint in the white-staffed [sic] medium secure psychiatry unit in Norwich. (See the biography at ROTA’s website)
Despite their advisory capacity and lack of specialized legal training, Stone and the other panel members, like the dedicated self-publicist John Sentamu, a British-Ugandan bishop, would often take the role of prosecuting counsel during the inquiry:
Bishop John Sentamu dives for publicity
In a criminal court the accused is not there so that he can be compelled to confess his crimes; still less so that he can confess his sins; much less again so that he can disclose the sins of his subordinates. English law expelled those abhorrent ideas long ago. But confession was the spirit of much of the Macpherson proceedings, partly due to the effect of the “truth and reconciliation” proceedings in post-apartheid South Africa. This was especially clear in the interruption by one of Sir William’s three advisers, Dr Richard Stone, of [the Metropolitan Police Commissioner] Sir Paul Condon’s evidence in Part II of the inquiry. ‘It seems to me, Sir Paul,’ he said, ‘that the door is open. It is like when Winnie Mandela was challenged in the Truth Commission in South Africa by Desmond Tutu to acknowledge that she had done wrong …’ Sir Paul might well have been taken aback by his being put in the same category as a convicted kidnapper, and his relationship to racist attitudes and conduct in the Metropolitan Police in the same category as Winnie Mandela’s relationship to the Mandela United Football Club and the murderers of Stompie Seipei. Dr Stone continued: ‘She just did it and suddenly a whole burden of weight, of sort of challenge and friction melted away … I say to you now, just say, “Yes, I acknowledge institutional racism in the police” … Could you do that today?’ (Please see here, pg. 15)
That quotation is taken from a very interesting study of the Macpherson Inquiry called Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics (2000) by Norman Dennis, George Erdos and Ahmed Al-Shahi, who are English, Hungarian and Kurdish, respectively. They all also appear to be left-wing or liberal in the traditional sense. I can recommend their study highly to anyone who wants an alternative perspective on the Macpherson Inquiry – “alternative,” that is, to the perspective offered by all respectable opinion in the UK. Recall that, in the Guardian extract above, the prime minister and his deputy referred respectfully to the “legacy” of “Lord Macpherson’s report,” as though it were some highly valuable contribution to British public life.
Uproar from the Gallery
In fact, the inquiry overseen by Lord Macpherson seems to have been a cross between a Stalinist show-trial and a hearing by the Spanish Inquisition, with a garnish of kangaroo-court and a sprinkling of lynch-mob. Here is Dr Stone again, sniffing hard for heresy:
‘You have heard me say …’, Sir Paul said in the course of being interrogated. But he was interrupted by Dr Richard Stone. ‘You have told us ten times you are not in denial … I say to you now, just say, “Yes, I acknowledge institutional racism in the police …”’
‘It was an approach that pleased the public gallery’, writes Cathcart [former deputy editor of the Independent on Sunday and author of The Case of Stephen Lawrence (1999)], ‘and the pressure on the Commissioner was intense. Sir William chipped in: “You have been given the challenge, or the question, Sir Paul. What is your answer?”’
His answer was that it would be very easy to please the panel. It would be easy to please the people in the public gallery — ‘this audience’, as he called them. It would be easy, also, to gain the favour of ‘superficial media coverage’. But he would not do what would please any of them, because it would be ‘dishonest’. Over the uproar from the gallery, Sir William called for quiet and moved the discussion into other areas.
Sir Paul’s stand attracted critical headlines. But whose judgement, freed from the enthusiasm of a righteous crowd, would conclude that Sir Paul’s opinion, reasoning, and sense of reality and responsibility were inferior to those expressed in the ‘uproar from the gallery’ or … to the semi-religious appeal of Dr Stone? (Op. cit., ch. 3, “The Crowd in Hannibal House,” pg. 28)
Why was there uproar from the public gallery? Because it was full of anti-racism activists from groups like the Nation of Islam, who applauded witnesses whom they liked, such as Doreen Lawrence, and jeered witnesses whom they did not like, such as the police:
During the police evidence, and particularly when [the radical barrister Michael] Mansfield was in action, laughter and groans would greet answers from police officers. This would not normally be allowed in a court of law. In order to protect Inspector Groves from the gallery crowd (and, though he perhaps did not think of it in this way, from the crowd influences that could be affecting the performances of all the witnesses, all the barristers and the judgement of all the assessors) counsel for the MPS [Metropolitan Police Service], Jeremy Gompertz QC [Queen’s Counsel], rose to complain about ‘constant interruption and background noise’ from the gallery.
Though he said that his warning was ‘crystal clear’, Sir William’s intervention could scarcely be described as full-hearted. If the laughing did not stop, he said, he would clear the gallery. He reminded Mansfield that he was not addressing a jury. Inspector Groves did not need to be ‘pilloried’ — (slight pause) — ‘unnecessarily’. The pillory in its literal sense is essentially an instrument of control by a crowd. What had being figuratively ‘pilloried’, necessarily or not, to do with ascertaining the facts of the case? (Ibid., pg. 25)
But there was no need to ascertain the facts of the case, because they were known well in advance: both the murder of Stephen Lawrence and the failure to jail the murder-gang were the result of “an endemic and universal English racism which has severe consequences generally in the lives of members of ethnic minorities” (ch. 2, “The Methods of Inquiry used by Macpherson,” pg. 12). The role of Doreen Lawrence at the inquiry was to describe the racism of British society; the role of the police was to admit their complicity in it. The role of Judge Macpherson, Dr Richard Stone, Bishop Sentamu et al was to assist the former against the latter. The methods they employed might, in another context, be taken as deliberately satirical or absurdist: “To question whether the murder of Stephen Lawrence was a purely racist crime was, in itself, adduced as evidence of racism” (Summary, pg. xix).
Distance was no obstacle to the inquiry’s hunt for the evil and injustice perpetrated by Whites: inter alia, the inquiry drew on the Rodney King case in Los Angeles, thousands of miles away, though the relevance there might seem “indirect,” at best (ch. 4, “Mr and Mrs Lawrence’s Treatment at the Hospital as Evidence of Police Racism,” pg. 34). Any negative interpretation of police behaviour by a Minority Ethnic had to be accepted; any attempt to deny police racism was further proof of police racism.
But the sceptical authors of Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics conclude that:
The Macpherson report has had a detrimental impact on policing and crime, particularly in London. Police morale has been undermined. Certain procedures which impact disproportionately on ethnic groups, like stop and search, have been scaled down. The crime rate has risen. Nevertheless, the Macpherson report has been received with almost uncritical approval by pundits, politicians and academics. It is still routinely described as having ‘proved’ that the police and British society are racist. (Summary, pg. xx)
Elsewhere, the authors point out that the rise in the crime rate, “the first in six years, was largely due to increases in two police areas, London and the West Midlands, the areas with the highest concentrations of ethnic minorities. In London the increase was nine per cent, in the West Midlands 16 per cent” (ch. 3, “The Crowd in Hannibal House,” pg. 29). In other words, there have been more murders of young Black males as a result of the Macpherson Inquiry, not fewer. There have also been more murders of individuals from other, less important groups. And more rapes and other crimes of violence. Nor has the report helped the cause of equality: the police now devote more resources and attention to cases in which they can prove their devotion to fighting White racism.
Compare the racist murder of Richard Everitt in London in 1994, a year after the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. This was not a highly unusual crime, because it involved violence by a gang of Minority Ethnics against a White. Only one member of the fifteen-strong Bengali-British gang was jailed and he is now free again. In the Stephen Lawrence case, the Metropolitan Police have promised “to go on looking ‘forever’ for evidence that would convict the murderers” (Preface, pg. xv). They have made no such promise about Richard Everitt. Nor have “resources in money and specialist support” been made “available on a scale more often seen in anti-terrorist investigations than a civil murder,” as they were for Stephen Lawrence (Ibid., pg xiv).
Many other non-Whites are still at liberty after the brutal murders of British Whites: Charlene Downes and Gavin Hopley are merely two examples. But those murders have not received the prolonged attention of the media, nor provoked harsh criticism of the police and served as damning indictments of British society. The murder of Stephen Lawrence is quite different in all respects. Of the many people responsible for elevating Stephen Lawrence to his role as England’s new patron saint, no-one has worked harder or more effectively than Doreen Lawrence and her good friend Dr Richard Stone. I don’t question Doreen Lawrence’s motives, though I do question her intelligence, common sense and ability to see the harmful effects of her campaign on the Black community, among others.
I do, however, question the motives of Dr Richard Stone. It may be cynical of me, but I have detected little benevolence or philanthropy in Dr Stone when I have seen or heard him appear in the media. He strikes me, in fact, as cold, manipulative and even sinister. He also strikes me as lacking in honesty. In his self-aggrandizing Independent Commentary to Mark the 10th Anniversary of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry (2009), he lamented the way in which:
[during] the past decade, the issue of ‘institutional racism’ seemed to slip down the agenda. Maybe some of those in leadership positions sighed with relief that this thorny issue did not have to be dealt with. It could perhaps be left for the next Commissioner, the next Chief Constable, or the next government Minister. But every year, with damaging regularity, racism seems to explode back on to the police agenda. This causes damage to police and community relations, but also to the reputation of the very leaders who had hoped the issue had gone away. (Op. cit., pg. 7)
But who has worked harder than Dr Stone to make racism a “thorny” issue? Who has been more eager to help racism “explode” regularly on the police agenda? And who has been more willing to issue self-righteous pronunciations on the topic? Here is another extract from his Independent Commentary:
Racism is not in the heads of BME [Black and Minority Ethnic] people, just as Islamophobia and anti-semitism are not in the heads of Muslims or Jews. There is not much that BME people can do to change the racism exhibited by white people, any more than Muslims can do much to change the Islamophobia of non-Muslims, or Jews the anti-antisemitism [sic] of non-Jews. The people who have to change are those outside who hold prejudices and stereotypes in their heads which lead them “unwittingly” or to be frank, ‘wittingly’ to disadvantage people from these communities. (Op. cit., pg. 17 – all anomalies of punctuation are in the original)
To be frank, such an important topic deserved better proof-reading. It is also ludicrous to claim that all beliefs held by “BME people” about the motives and behaviour of Whites must automatically be correct. In making this claim, Dr Stone is not assisting the cause of objective analysis and impartial justice. He is, however, assisting the cause of BME grievance, paranoia and self-pity.
Saints and Demons
But why is he doing this? What are his motives for encouraging antagonism between BME people and White society? Why does he wish to demonize ordinary Whites and elevate BME people to infallible sainthood? I would suggest that he is, unwittingly or otherwise, following an ethnocentric agenda and seeking to advance the interests of his own ethno/religious group. When Dr Stone self-identifies as a “middle-aged, middle-class White man,” I think he is being dishonest or disingenuous. In reality, he belongs to the Jewish elite, not to the White middle-class. He is the son of the Labour peer Lord Stone and a nephew of the Conservative peer Lord Ashdown.
I don’t believe that Dr Richard Stone truly regrets the murder of Stephen Lawrence. Given the chance to travel back in time, would he try to prevent it? I don’t think he would. The Lawrence murder has been far too useful as an ideological weapon against ordinary Whites. Dr Richard Stone, son of a Labour peer, nephew of a Conservative peer, has been working on behalf not of Minority Ethnics but of the hostile elite – the Ruling Stones of the UK who want to dispossess the historic majority and secure their own power and profit in perpetuity. Lord Glasman broke ranks from that elite and pointed out its treachery and lies on immigration. He was heavily criticized and forced into silence.
By contrast, Dr Stone continues to spout his self-righteous, self-serving gas about “an endemic and universal English racism which has severe consequences generally in the lives of members of ethnic minorities.” He is, in fact, one of Britain’s most dedicated and hard-working hate-mongers:
One of the easiest ways to unite people is to mobilise their hatred for others. It is infinitely more difficult to unite them on the basis of constructive proposals. This unity of having an enemy in common gives rise to various kinds of sociological formation. In the short-term there is the specialised and transitory hatred of ‘the lynch mob’. There is the longer-term unity of hating communists, or hating capitalists, or hating Protestants, or hating Catholics, or hating blacks, or ‘hating whitey’. (Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics, 2000, pg. 21)
“Hating whitey” is what Dr Stone specializes in. He is a card-carrying member of the UK’s hostile elite, bent on completely gutting the people and culture of traditional of the UK. His tireless work on behalf of Stephen Lawrence has not benefited Blacks or other minorities, but then it has never been intended to. Instead, it has been intended to incite hatred, grievance and discord. Why can’t Minority Ethnics get no satisfaction? Because the Ruling Stones don’t want them to. Using mass immigration and multi-racialism as weapons of mass destruction, they want to destroy the historic nation of Britain and enjoy power and profit here in perpetuity.
Britain’s message for the United States and all other Western nations is simple: Nomine mutato, de te fabula narratur – “With a change of name, the tale is told of you.” The same hostile, hate-filled elite are at work everywhere in the West, lying, cheating, betraying and using mass immigration to divide and destroy those who stand in their way.
Time and time again we hear tell of children being snatched from loving parents by despicable social workers, desperate to meet targets and make bonuses, and thrown into the corrupt and secretive world of the UK’s family courts systems.
One of the few MP’s brave enough and caring enough to highlight these cases is Birmingham MP, John Hemming, who recently broke parliamentary convention by naming and shaming Derbeyshire Council who colluded with lawyers and the courts to snatch two young children on misleading evidence.
The Express reports on the story:
” TWO YOUNG children were taken from their distraught mother and placed for adoption because her own legal aid lawyers “colluded” with social workers, according to an MP’s extraordinary allegation in Parliament”
” In a highly unusual accusation, John Hemming said lawyers for Jacque Courtnage colluded with Derbyshire County Council to prevent her analysing a document he believes would have cleared her of abuse allegations.
She and her husband have lost their two sons, now aged six and eight, for ever after a court ruled on the balance of probabilities they were responsible for harming their youngest when he was a baby.
They have never been arrested nor charged with any criminal offence due to lack of evidence.
Their heartbreaking story emerged in a Commons debate two months ago when Mr Hemming used Parliamentary privilege to name the mother and to make accusations against her lawyers and Derbyshire County Council.
He says the parents are the victims of a miscarriage of justice in the secret family court system.
The Lib Dem MP believes lawyers representing families on legal aid have a conflict of interest if they also do work for local authorities.
Mrs Courtnage, a 45-year-old accountant and her husband John, 47, an engineer, only discovered the potentially significant evidence nine months after a judge ruled their children should be taken from them.
They found it among their son’s medical records, which they secured after making a request to his hospital under the Data Protection Act as part of their own probe to discover the “truth”.
The evidence was an alternative diagnosis from a leading hospital consultant saying their son’s head injury had been caused by a fissure, a birth defect that weakened the skull bone.
Until then, Mr Hemming said, they had only been aware of the fracture diagnosis put forward by other experts and used by the council in its arguments before the court.
The children are now with an adoptive family and banned from any contact with their real parents.
Mrs Courtnage, who is not allowed to talk to the media about her case, told Mr Hemming: “Our children are our very existence and without them with us and being unable to touch them is like a living hell. Just talking about our boys reduces us to tears.
“The saying of a living bereavement is very apt and one we live daily. We have no grave to mourn at.”
“We are angry at what has been done to us but words cannot begin to describe the contempt we have for what this has done to our darling sons.”
The couple’s “living hell” started in 2008 when Mrs Courtnage became concerned by a swelling on her baby boy’s head. She took him to the Queen’s Medical Centre in Nottingham where medics debated the X-ray results.
While two consultants made separate diagnoses of a fissure, others argued a fracture, a conclusion eventually accepted as the official version.
The diagnoses, together with evidence suggesting leg injuries to the child, were sent to Derbyshire County Council which then gave them to Mrs Courtnage’s lawyer.
However, Mr Hemming said the fissure argument was never highlighted to Mrs Courtnage and she did not see it among the 500 other documents in the large court bundles.
He told the Commons in September: “I have for some time been worried about what I was told by a social worker some years ago, which is that at times the legal aid-funded solicitors for parents conspire with local authority staff in order to ensure that the parents lose.
“One example where that appears to have happened is that of Jacque and John Courtnage, whose two sons were taken into care because one had a lump on his head.
The doctors were not sure whether it was because of a fracture or a fissure.”
” The child was neurologically sound, which implies a fissure, but the parents did not see the evidence that it could have been a fissure until after the court had decided in 2010 that it was a fracture, and the question was never considered in any court judgment.
“A court order on October 30, 2008, had said that all evidence should be provided to the parents. That did not happen.
“The hospital provided Derbyshire County Council with the information in December 2008 but this did not get to the parents until after the finding of fact hearing of 2010, when they made a subject access request.
“The question is whether the council colluded with the parents’ solicitors.”
The MP said in the debate that he and Mrs Courtnage had asked the solicitors about the issue. He said a solicitor had denied the allegation but refused to give a “detailed response”.
He said in the Commons that, to him, meant the lawyers “colluded with Derbyshire County Council to keep this evidence from the parents”.
Mrs Courtnage tried to raise the fissure diagnosis before an appeal judge in September 2011.
However, due to an administrative mistake by court officials, the case was heard in her absence and the potentially vital pieces of paper were never presented to the judge.
She has recently decided to try to reopen the appeal under civil procedure rules.
A spokesman for Derbyshire County Council said: “We would strenuously reject any suggestion of collusion.
“The judge had before him all the child’s medical records including all those received from the Queen’s Medical Centre and the issue as to whether the child had a fissure or a fracture was fully brought before the court.
“The court had evidence from experts including a consultant paediatric radiologist and consultant neuroradiologist.
These experts were appointed independently by the solicitor acting on behalf of the child.
The child also had the benefit of a children’s guardian appointed by the court to represent his best interests.
“We are confident that the actions we took were the right ones and that the decision taken by the court was the right one.”
It’s about bloody time the disgusting scandal of Britain’s stolen children was fully investigated by the police.
If children are being snatched illegally, the social workers, lawyers and judges who were complicit in these cases should all be sacked and put on trial.
They may well end up on the receiving end of filthy Britain’s justice system themselves.
GOLDEN DAWN is a social and nationalist movement with structures, principles and positions. It is active in the political life of the country since the mid-90s, having taken part in European elections (1994, 2009) and national elections (1996, 2009). On 7 November 2010 the Golden Dawn participated in the municipal elections. In the recent election of June 17, 2012 it received 7% and elected 18 MPs.
The social nationalist movement of GOLDEN DAWN finds itself at the frontline of the struggle against the nation-killing memorandum and the sinful regime of the parties that consist the political establishment. We fight against altering our racial demographics by the millions of illegal immigrants, and the dissolution of the Greek society promoted by both the coalition parties and the so-called left. We propose a national strategy so that we can overcome the crisis imposed on our country. We are struggling for a Greece which belongs to the Greeks.
WHAT BEING A GOLDEN-DAWNER MEANS
1) I embrace the third major ideology of history, the one that is the most rooted in the history of my people. Opposed both to communist internationalism and universalism-liberalism.
2) I embrace the need for a state founded and built based on this ideology that nourishes and guides continuously our lives as individuals and as a society. A state that constantly serves the eternal revolutionary principles of the nationalist worldview, with the ultimate goal of forming a new society and a new type of man.
3) I embrace the moral imperatives arising from my worldview and aim to a radical renewal of the obsolete and counterfeit social values. My ideology is not looking to salvage anything from the installed economic and social interests that lead nations, peoples and cultures in decline. So I’m an enemy of every power that perpetuates this sepsis that finds foothold in plutocracy. Whether this power is a military-financial dictatorship or a parliamentary dictatorship. Because those are the two sides of the same coin, and their purpose is tearing down national identity.
4) I ‘m aware that nationalism is the only absolute and true revolution because it seeks the birth of new ethical, spiritual, social and mental values. The right and left solutions supposedly fighting each other, are just a fake theater of two partners who perpetuate the dominance of cosmopolitan internationalists, anti-national and anti-social forces.
5) I believe the only state that serves correctly it’s historical role is the social state, where political power comes from the people, without party promoters. Nationalism sees people not only as a numerical entity of individuals but as a qualitative synthesis of people with the same biological and spiritual heritage, which is the source of all creation and expresses its power in the social state. The only state that can represent the people as an organic and spiritual living whole.
6) The politicians on both the right and the left are deliberately lying, democracy means rule of the people, and therefore the society that is composed of people of common origin (definition of Citizen in Classical Athens). The social state of nationalism is the only direct democracy. The state was the people are the only reality and do not need authority but leadership. The People are the real sovereign and rule themselves through their leader. So the social state can fulfill the only possible equality (derived from thought and that is not of natural, but human cultural – political creation), equal opportunities. In contrast to the transient and fleeting majority of parliamentary governing, the will of the people is the supreme law, and obedience to it results in true justice from the whole to every unit. ……
7) I realize that in the social state of the nationalist ideology exists the ultimate equality and the politically structured social equality. In the social state there is no social stratification based on income-economic classes. The social classes are collaborating organically groups of people with different abilities and production skills each, just like in a living body. The different systems contribute harmonically and in full cooperation for their survival. Solidarity is the rule of the social state for the relations between social-organic classes. The few people who have burgled their organic relationship with the people are the members of “plutocratic oligarchy” with their cosmopolitanism, and members of the leading groups of “Bolshevik party-union oligarchy” with their internationalism. The oligarchies of money and the tyranny of political parties are the same enemies of the Nation and the People.
8) I am an enemy of vast exploitative wealth, either locally or internationalist, and a champion of small family ownership like the “kleros” or “temenos” of our ancestors. Money is a mean of necessity, not a governing principle of life or the purpose of it. The ultimate goal of the social state is the elimination of tiered false-value of money and the controlled use of it as a trading mean. The state should have control over private property so that it is not dangerous for the survival of the People or can manipulate them. The economy should be planned so that it serves the national policy and ensures the maximum self-sufficiency without dependence on international markets and control of any multinational companies.
9) I believe that the state, the social state, is the political organization of the nation and that the nation exists from itself without being an invention. It is an automatic spiritual fact that springs from the existence of the People, it is a reality that is based on the existence of the People. Whether or not the People realize the extent and depth of its
existence, the Nation is the highest spiritual entity. The People are born from the tribes, the types of a race and its existence gives birth to the nation as a superior spiritual manifestation (moral, cultural, religious). Derived from the people, the nation – race, needs to be strengthened and developed through the state. It may exist without a state but will be steadily declining (See the national rise of the Greeks after 4 centuries of subjugation and lack of state). So I understand that international communism and liberal cosmopolitanism are undermining the nation by stirring up class divisions.
10) I believe in the importance of society, the whole community of the People, not the individual. The individual acquires a face and forms it’s shape, it’s “I” identity through the “We” of the total. Individuals do not have historical significance as opposed to the people who are condensations spacetime of special qualities of the People and the Nation. A person can only be one who completes the socialization through capability, as harmonious combination of social and individual values. This superior type of person is a new kind of person that nationalism seeks to create.
11) I honor and respect the tradition because it consists all the aspects of beauty and the good that occurred and revealed in history. While grounded in tradition I seek the new creation, the incessant evolution.
12) The social state of nationalism delivers social equality of opportunities grounded in meritocracy and does not ignore the law of diversity and difference in nature. Respecting the spiritual, ethnic and racial differences of men we can build a society with egalitarian laws. This egalitarian laws are the proof of the moral transgression of nationalism and show that there is no legal modulation to protect the naturally existing institutional inequalities that are an integral part of nature and life. In contrast to this, the social – national state gives the same margin of enhancement and sealing to every different element of existence. So, as a nationalist, I fight all forms of destructive policies (regarding nations, races, men), and any false inequality and oligarchy (money, party, perversion).
ARISTOCRACY IS BORN OF MERITOCRACY, THIS IS WHY I FIGHT AGAINST ALL FORMS OF OLIGARCHY
The Blog of Ian Pace, pianist, musicologist, political animal. A place for thoughts, reflections, links, both trivial and not so trivial. Main website is at http://www.ianpace.com . Contact e-mail email@example.com.