BBC Climate Panel 26 January 2006

pic005

In 2006 the BBC hosted a climate-change seminar to decide on its reporting of alleged climate-change. The BBC has spent tens of thousands of pounds trying to keep secret who attended this seminar. The publicly funded broadcaster fought off requests for the list of people who attended under Freedom of Information (FOI) laws.

This surreal story is only partly about climate change: the disclosure raises questions about the evidence submitted to the information tribunal by the BBC and Helen Boaden – it’s Director of News who stepped down in 2012.

The case also highlights once again the BBC’s corporate strategy of using an FOI derogation, or legal “opt-out” clause, to withhold a wide range of material from citizens who wish to know whether the BBC is fulfilling its statutory obligations for impartiality under its Royal Charter.

And it raises further questions about the effectiveness of the BBC Trust. The trust, which replaced the Board of Governors, was created with a mission: an “unprecedented obligation to openness and transparency”.

pic005

A ‘brainstorm’ that became historic

The seminar whose attendees the Beeb sought to keep secret was founded by three organisation. In 2004, the International Broadcasting Trust – a lobby group funded by a number of charities, including many involved in campaigning on climate change – devised the first in a series of seminars on development issues, where the lobbyists could address broadcasters.

One event on 26 January 2006 was a “brainstorm”, in the IBT’s own words, “focusing on climate change and its impact on development”. The BBC sent 30 senior staff, and 30 outsiders were invited. The event was also organised by CMEP, its second parent – a now dormant or defunct outfit operated by BBC reporter Roger Harrabin and climate activist Dr Joe Smith, and at one time funded by the Tyndall Centre at the University of East Anglia (UEA) and various pressure groups.

Harrabin later explained that the BBC’s head of news in the 1990s, Tony Hall, had invited him “to devise meetings with politicians, business people, think tanks, academics from many universities and specialists (science, technology, economic and social sciences, and history), and policy experts and field workers from NGOs – particularly from the developing world”.

The third parent of the seminar was the BBC.

 The following year ( 2007) a BBC Trust report  on impartiality cited the 2006 seminar and said it had settled the argument once and for all  (as far as the BBC was concerned) on climate change.

pic005

Filmmaker John Bridcut wrote:

The BBC has held a high-level seminar with some of the best scientific experts [our emphasis] and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of the consensus [on anthropogenic climate change].

The BBC is under a statutory obligation to remain impartial, so this gave the “brainstorm” a historic significance.

An independent blogger, Tony Newbery, was struck by the difference between contemporary evidence that the seminar was educational and composed largely of activists (as confirmed by Harrabin) and the BBC Trust’s insistence that it was a sober scientific presentation that could justify a historic policy change.

Fresh light was shed on Harrabin’s CMEP in 2010, in the second batch of Climategate emails. An email from Mike Hulme, the director of the Tyndall Centre for Climatic Change Research at UEA,complained about a BBC Radio 4 item broadcast in February 2002. The broadcast featured global-warming sceptic Professor Philip Stott and Sir John Houghton, who was a Met Office chief and the editor of the first three IPCC reports on climate change. Houghton came off worst, and an infuriated Hulme wrote:

Did anyone hear Stott vs Houghton on Today, Radio 4 this morning? Woeful stuff really. This is one reason why Tyndall is sponsoring the Cambridge Media/Environment Programme to starve this type of reporting at source.

Newbery filed his FOI request for the seminar’s attendees to the BBC in 2007 and was denied the information, leading to a second round of information tribunal hearings in November 2012. The cross-examination of the BBC’s Helen Boaden in a court room was reported here.

The BBC is regarded as a public authority by the Freedom of Information Act 2000, but it can withhold information held “for the purposes of journalism”.

In an earlier and separate FOI case against the BBC, Supreme Court Judge Neuberger argued the opt-out should be interpreted narrowly – otherwise the BBC could withhold information about “cleaning the board room floor” using the journalism get-out clause – an obvious absurdity.

In the Newbery case, the BBC maintained that archival material on the seminar could not be found, but also it should not be found: as a back-up argument it argued that the seminar was held under the Chatham House Rule – an agreement of etiquette, rather than a law, to prevent quotes being attributed to particular speakers at a meeting – information that Newbery had never asked for.

In November 2012 the tribunal ruled against Newbery and for the BBC.

pic005

Case closed? Think again

However science writer Maurizio Morabito has unearthed the list of attendees.

It confirms the accuracy of Harrabin’s description of the composition of the invitees, with most coming from industry, think tanks and NGOs. And as suspected, climate campaigners Greenpeace are present, while actual scientific experts are thin on the ground: not one attendee deals with attribution science, the physics of global warming. These are scarcely “some of the best scientific experts”, whose input could justify a historic abandonment of the BBC’s famous impartiality.

Intriguingly, Tony Newbery had been supplied with a later version of this document, he tells us – but with the attendee list stripped out.

How much of the Public's license fee did the BBC spend on lawyers to cover up this list of attendees at their Climate Panel in 2006?

How much of the Public’s license fee did the BBC spend on lawyers to cover up this list of attendees at their Climate Panel in 2006?

The dramatic appearance of the list raises many questions. Did the BBC know the information was publicly available? If so, why were corporation lawyers spending thousands of pounds to keep a public document “secret”? (FOI requests for public information typically state, quite simply, “this information is public”.)

Questions abound  online about the ability of the BBC Trust to maintain its duty to transparency. The BBC’s legal strategy entails the indiscriminate application of its FOI derogation “for the purposes of journalism” – this effectively rewrites the 2000 Act, and redefines the BBC as a private body. The trust is surely aware of this; it has a small mountain of correspondence on the subject. But it has yet to enquire, let alone pronounce on whether this is healthy – or legal.

All the names on the revealed seminar list

Here’s the list – according to the FOI Act reply.

January 26th 2006, BBC Television Centre, London

Specialists:
Robert May, Oxford University and Imperial College London
Mike Hulme, Director, Tyndall Centre, UEA
Blake Lee-Harwood, Head of Campaigns, Greenpeace
Dorthe Dahl-Jensen, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen
Michael Bravo, Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge
Andrew Dlugolecki, Insurance industry consultant
Trevor Evans, US Embassy
Colin Challen MP, Chair, All Party Group on Climate Change
Anuradha Vittachi, Director, Oneworld.net
Andrew Simms, Policy Director, New Economics Foundation
Claire Foster, Church of England
Saleemul Huq, IIED
Poshendra Satyal Pravat, Open University
Li Moxuan, Climate campaigner, Greenpeace China
Tadesse Dadi, Tearfund Ethiopia
Iain Wright, CO2 Project Manager, BP International
Ashok Sinha, Stop Climate Chaos
Andy Atkins, Advocacy Director, Tearfund
Matthew Farrow, CBI
Rafael Hidalgo, TV/multimedia producer
Cheryl Campbell, Executive Director, Television for the Environment
Kevin McCullough, Director, Npower Renewables
Richard D North, Institute of Economic Affairs
Steve Widdicombe, Plymouth Marine Labs
Joe Smith, The Open University
Mark Galloway, Director, IBT
Anita Neville, E3G
Eleni Andreadis, Harvard University
Tim Jackson, Surrey University
John Ashton, Director E3G
BBC attendees:
Jana Bennett, Director of Television
Sacha Baveystock, Executive Producer, Science
Helen Boaden, Director of News
Andrew Lane, Manager, Weather, TV News
Dominic Vallely, Executive Editor, Entertainment
Emma Swain, Commissioning Editor, Specialist Factual
Fergal Keane, (Chair), Foreign Affairs Correspondent
Fran Unsworth, Head of Newsgathering
George Entwistle, Head of TV Current Affairs
Glenwyn Benson, Controller, Factual TV
John Lynch, Creative Director, Specialist Factual
Jon Plowman, Head of Comedy
Jon Williams, TV Editor Newsgathering
Karen O’Connor, Editor, This World, Current Affairs
Catriona McKenzie, Tightrope Pictures
Liz Molyneux, Editorial Executive, Factual Commissioning
Matt Morris, Head of News, Radio Five Live
Neil Nightingale, Head of Natural History Unit
Peter Horrocks, Head of Television News
Peter Rippon, Duty Editor, World at One/PM/The World this Weekend
Phil Harding, Director, English Networks & Nations
Steve Mitchell, Head Of Radio News
Sue Inglish, Head Of Political Programmes

Fran Unsworth,Head of Newsgathering
Pete Clifton, Head of News Interactive
Liz Cleaver, Controller Learning
Keith Scholey, Head of Specialist Factual
Sarah Brandist, Head of Development, Drama Commissioning
Michael Hastings, Head of Corporate Social Responsibility
Lorna Walsh, BBC TV
Roger Harrabin, Today Programme

The Guardian Newspaper Exposed!

The Manchester Guardian was founded by John Edward Taylor in 1821, and was first published on May 5 of that year.The Guardian soon built a solid reputation for fighting against social injustice following the Peterloo Massacre and the Corn Laws. The Guardian was published weekly until 1836, when it was published on Wednesday and Saturday, becoming a daily in 1855.The Guardian achieved national and international recognition under the editorship of CP Scott, who held the post for 57 years from 1872.

img002bg

Scott bought the paper in 1907 following the death of Taylor’s son.CP Scott died in 1932 and was followed only four months later by one son Edward, so sole ownership fell to his other son JR Scott.In June 1936, JR Scott gave ownership of the paper to the trustees of the Scott Trust. The Guardian moved to London in 1964.The Guardian relied heavily on the Manchester Evening News for financial support which it owned. In the late 70s and early 80s the Guardian’s position as the voice of the left was unchallenged. However in recent times the Guardian has become the by-word for trendy, faux Working-class values peddled by over privileged cultural-marxists. The Guardian is now run at a huge loss with it’s future uncertain as its assets are run down.

Current Guardian Editor Alan Rusbridger

Current Guardian Editor Alan Rusbridger since 1995. His currect salary is £395,000 plus bonuses of around £170,000 per year. In 2009 it was reported that one of his daughters, Isabella, had been working at The Guardian, but had been using her jewish mother’s surname (Mackie) as a nom de plume to avoid suspicion of having obtained the job through nepotism. It’s not known if The Guardian wasted People’s time by going through a charade of advertising the job.

The senior staff at the Guardian and the exclusive, private schools they attended:

The yearly fees stated do not usually include lunches, music, drama, travel or uniforms.

Editor: Alan Rusbridger (Cranleigh) £10,230

Political Editor: Patrick Wintour (Westminster) £10,830

Leader Writer: Madeleine Bunting (Queen Mary’s,Yorkshire) £17,940

Policy Editor: Jonathan Freedland (University College School) £13,410

Columnist: Polly Toynbee (Badminton) £9,470

Executive Editor: Ian Katz (University College School) £13,410

Security Affairs Editor: Richard Norton Taylor (King’s School)£32,225

Arts Editor-in-Chief: Clare Margetson (Marlborough College)£32,280

Literary Editor: Clare Armitstead (Bedales) Approx. £30,000

Public Services Editor: David Brindle (Bablake)£9,816

City Editor: Julia Finch (King’s High, Warwick)£10,414

Environment Editor: John Vidal (St. Bees)£12,315 – £29,995

Fashion Editor: Jess Cartner-Morley (City of London School for
Girls) £13,866

G3 Editor: Janine Gibson (Walthamstow Hall)£11,970

Northern Editor: Martin Wainwright (Shreswbury)£11,652

Industrial Editor: David Gow (St. Peter’s, York)£19,440

Columnist and Associate Editor: Seumas Milne (Winchester College)Approx.£30,000

The Observer’s Andrew Rawnsley (Rugby School)£31,245

Columnist: George Monbiot (Stowe)£27,390

Columnist: Zoe Williams (Godolphin and Latymer)£17,280

The Guardian also offer to pay for all senior staff to send their Children to the private school of their choice – a perk most take up willingly.

Seumas Milne incidentally is the son of former BBC Director General Alisdair Milne.

Guardian News & Media has lost nearly £200m in the past six years as it pursues its ambition of being the “world’s leading liberal voice”.
GMG already enjoys advantages over some of its commercial media rivals. Ownership by the Scott Trust means it does not have to answer to shareholders. The group has a cash and investment fund of £254m. Those other assets such as its 50 per cent stake in Trader Media Group and a 33 per cent share in Top Right are security for the loss-making news business.Two years ago, as he committed GMG to a “digital-first strategy”, Mr Miller warned staff the newspaper’s losses were so great it could run out of money in “three to five years”. The latest losses of £31m for the year to the end of March were an improvement on the £44m of the previous 12 months and he took succour from a 28.9 per cent rise in digital revenues.

Converting pounds to dollars (£1 = $1.64), you find £200 million equals about $325 million. Divide that by six and you find that they’re losing money at a rate in excess of $54 million a year. The £31 million the Guardian group lost in the most recent year is more than $50 million. The £44 million they lost in the previous year was $72 million.

Please note Alan Rusbridger:

The Scott Trust has the duty to maintain a secure financial footing for the business: “…to devote the whole of the surplus profits of the Company which would otherwise have been available for dividends…towards building up the reserves of the Company and increasing the circulation of and expanding and improving the newspapers.” These principles remain the only instructions given to an incoming editor of the Guardian.

New Labour And Operation Ore (Child Pornography) 10 Years On

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.

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

Holocaust Or Holohoax? 21 Amazing Facts

Written by Cigpapers

Photos and captions by Watt Tyler

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.

img729

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.

pic012

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.”

Offical Red Cross records.

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.

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.

NaziDeathCampsMap01

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.

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.

img759After 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.

SCAN

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 600 bodies per year if working non-stop which isn't possible without fracturing the metal.

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 outbreak at Belsen concentration camp shortly after liberation.

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.

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.

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:

http://www.eliewieseltattoo.com/

and

https://archive.org/details/ElieWiesel-AnotherHolocaustFraud

Elie Wiesel without his tattoo.

Elie Wiesel without his tattoo.

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

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.

pic012

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.

SCAN

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.

Picture15

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 signicance to them.

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.

SCAN

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.

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.

pic006

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 1933

World Almanac 1948

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 free dental service available to all inmates – specialist dentists were brought in for intricate work.

A walk-in clinic and hospital for inmates.

A walk-in clinic and hospital for inmates.

Dr. Carl Clauberg the World famous Berlin surgeon who was called in for difficult inmate cases.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

Auschwitz marriages took place because worker inmates fell in love and married their inmate partners.

The camp sauna for inmates.

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.

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.

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 Aushcwitz University where inmates could take various courses. Professors from nearby Universities often visited to give lectures.

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.

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:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXbLSK1laAc#t=22

http://holohoax.wordpress.com/

You must watch this 2 min video

http://zundelsite.org/

http://www.barnesreview.org/

http://codoh.com/

http://germarrudolf.com/germars-views/an-introduction-to-historical-revisionism/#13

download

Cigpapers Freedom Of Information Act Requests:

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.

Yours faithfully,

Sean Moran

Link to this

Department for Education

18 November 2013

Dear Mr Moran

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

Thank you

Department for Education
Ministerial and Public Communications Division
Tel: 0370 000 2288

show quoted sections

Link to this

Department for Education

27 November 2013

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:
[1]www.education.gov.uk/contactus, and quote your reference number.

Yours sincerely,

Elaine Schollar
Curriculum Policy Division
[email address]
[2]www.education.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.education.gov.uk/contactus
2. http://www.education.gov.uk/

Link to this

From: Sean Moran

12 December 2013

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?

Yours faithfully,

Sean Moran

Link to this

Department for Education

16 December 2013

Dear Mr Moran

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.

Thank you

Department for Education
Ministerial and Public Communications Division
Tel: 0370 000 2288

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Sean Moran

4 November 2013

Dear British Broadcasting Corporation,

Please provide details of all independent investigations carried
out by the BBC in to the alleged holocaust during World War Two.

Yours faithfully,

Sean Moran

Link to this

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.

Kind regards

The Information Policy & Compliance Team

BBC Freedom of Information
BC2 B6, Broadcast Centre
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TP

www.bbc.co.uk/foi
Email: [BBC request email]

Tel: 020 8008 2882

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: FOI Enquiries
British Broadcasting Corporation

20 December 2013


Attachment RFI20131643 and RFI20131894 final response.pdf
86K Download View as HTML


Dear Mr Moran,

Please find attached the response to your requests for information, reference RFI20131643 and 1894.

Yours sincerely,
The Information Policy and Compliance Team

BBC Information Policy and Compliance
Room BC2 B6 Broadcast Centre
Wood Lane
London W12 7TP

Website: www.bbc.co.uk/foi
Email: mailto:[BBC request email]
Tel: 020 8008 2882
Fax: 020 8008 2398

show quoted sections

Link to this

From: Sean Moran

23 December 2013

Dear British Broadcasting Corporation,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of
Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of British Broadcasting
Corporation’s handling of my FOI request ‘BBC and the alleged
holocaust’.

I feel this refusal to a perfectly reasonable request is totally
unjustified. Please reconsider.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is
available on the Internet at this address:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/b…

Yours faithfully,

Sean Moran

Link to this

The Ruling Stones: The Jewish Ethnic Activism of Richard Stone

Written By Tobias Langdon

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

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:

Advertisement



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

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

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)

Reality Shmeality

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.

Unpunished Murder

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.

Thorny Issues

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.

The Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan – The Genocide Of The People Of Europe

Mass immigration is a phenomenon, the causes of which are still cleverly concealed by the system, and the multicultural propaganda is trying to falsely portray it as inevitable. With this article we intend to prove once and for all, that this is not a spontaneous phenomenon. What they want to present as an inevitable outcome of modern life, is actually a plan conceived around a table and prepared for decades, to completely destroy the face of the continent.

The Pan-Europe:

Few people know that one of the main initiators of the process of European integration, was also the man who designed the genocide plan of the Peoples of Europe. It is a dark person, whose existence is unknown to the masses, but the elite considers him as the founder of the European Union. His name is Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. His father was an Austrian diplomat named Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi (with connections to the Byzantine family of the Kallergis) and his mother the Japanese Mitsu Aoyama. Kalergi, thanks to his close contacts with all European aristocrats and politicians, due to the relationships of his nobleman-diplomat father, and by moving behind the scenes, away from the glare of publicity, he managed to attract the most important heads of state to his plan , making them supporters and collaborators for the “project of European integration”.

The man behind White genocide Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi.

The man behind White European genocide Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi.

In 1922 he founded the “Pan-European” movement in Vienna, which aimed to create a New World Order, based on a federation of nations led by the United States. European integration would be the first step in creating a world government. Among the first supporters, including Czech politicians Tomáš Masaryk and Edvard Beneš and the banker Max Warburg, who invested the first 60,000 marks. The Austrian Chancellor Ignaz Seipel and the next president of Austria, Karl Renner, took the responsibility for leading the “Pan-European” movement. Later, French politicians, such as Léon Bloum, Aristide Briand, Alcide De Gasperi, etc will offer their help.

With the rise of Fascism in Europe, the project was abandoned and the “Pan-European” movement was forced to dissolve, but after the Second World War, Kalergi, thanks to frantic and tireless activity and the support of Winston Churchill, the Jewish Masonic Lodge B’nai B’rith and major newspapers like the New York Times, the plan manages to be accepted by the United States Government. The CIA later undertakes the completion of the project.

The Essence Of The Kalergi Plan:

In his book Practical Idealism, Kalergi indicates that the residents of the future “United States of Europe” will not be the People of the Old Continent, but a kind of sub-humans, products of miscegenation. He clearly states that the peoples of Europe should interbreed with Asians and colored races, thus creating a multinational flock with no quality and easily controlled by the ruling elite.

Kalergi proclaims the abolition of the right of self-determination and then the elimination of nations with the use of ethnic separatist movements and mass migration. In order for Europe to be controlled by an elite, he wants to turn people into one homogeneous mixed breed of Blacks, Whites and Asians. Who is this elite however? Kalergi is particularly illuminating on this:

The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals. Instead of destroying European Judaism, Europe, against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats. This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews [due to the actions taken by the French Revolution]

Although no textbook mentions Kalergi, his ideas are the guiding principles of the European Union. The belief that the peoples of Europe should be mixed with Africans and Asians, to destroy our identity and create a single mestizo race, is the basis of all community policies that aim to protect minorities. Not for humanitarian reasons, but because of the directives issued by the ruthless Regime that machinates the greatest genocide in history. The Coudenhove-Kalergi European Prize is awarded every two years to Europeans who have excelled in promoting this criminal plan. Among those awarded with such a prize are Angela Merkel and Herman Van Rompuy.

The incitement to genocide, is also the basis of the constant appeals of the United Nations, that demands we accept millions of immigrants to help with the low birth rates of the EU. According to a report published on January 2000 in «Population division» Review of the United Nations in New York, under the title “Immigration replacement: A solution to declining and aging population,” Europe will need by 2025 159,000,000 migrants.

One could wonder how there can be such accuracy on the estimates of immigration, although it was not a premeditated plan. It is certain that the low birth rate could easily be reversed with appropriate measures to support families. It is just as clear that it is the contribution of foreign genes do not protect our genetic heritage, but that it enables their disappearance. The sole purpose of these measures is to completely distort our people, to turn them into a group of people without national, historical and cultural cohesion. In short, the policies of the Kalergi plan was and still is, the basis of official government policies aimed at genocide of the Peoples of Europe, through mass immigration. G. Brock Chisholm, former director of the World Health Organization (OMS), proves that he has learned the lesson of Kalergi well when he says: “What people in all places have to do is to limit of birthrates and promote mixed marriages (between different races), this aims to create a single race in a world which will be directed by a central authority. ”

Conclusions:

If we look around us, the Kalergi plan seems to be fully realized. We face Europe’s fusion with the Third World. The plague of interracial marriage produces each year thousands of young people of mixed race: “The children of Kalergi”. Under the dual pressures of misinformation and humanitarian stupefaction, promoted by the MSM, the Europeans are being taught to renounce their origin, to renounce their national identity.

The servants of globalization are trying to convince us that to deny our identity, is a progressive and humanitarian act, that “racism” is wrong, because they want us all to be blind consumers. It is necessary, now more than ever, to counter the lies of the System, to awaken the revolutionary spirit Europeans. Every one must see this truth, that European Integration amounts to genocide. We have no other option, the alternative is national suicide.

Translator’s note: Although the reasons due to which Kalergi made the choices he made are of no particular interest to us, we will try to answer a question that will surely our readers have already asked: Why a European aristocrat with Flemish, Polish, Greek-Byzantine roots and even with some samurai blood in his veins (from his mother) was such body plans and organ in the hands of dark forces? The reasons, in our opinion, are multiple, idiosyncratic, psychological and … women.

We therefore observe a personality with strong snobbish attitudes, arrogance, and, allow me the term, “degenerate elitism.” Also, the fact that his mother was Asian, perhaps created internal conflicts and frustrations, something that can happen to people with such temperament. But the most decisive factor must have been the “proper teenager”, which incidentally of course, was beside him, and became his first woman (at age 13): The Jewess Ida Roland, who would later become a famous actress.

EUROPEAN COUNCIL:

Van Rompuy won the Coudenhove-Kalergi prize for the biggest contribution to White genocide.

Van Rompuy won the Coudenhove-Kalergi prize for the biggest contribution to White European genocide and enslavement..

The Award Of The Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize To President Van Rompuy

On November 16th 2012, the President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, was awarded the Coudenhove-Kalergi Prize, during a special conference in Vienna, to celebrate 90 years of pan-European movement. The prize is awarded every two years to leading personalities for their outstanding contribution to the process of European integration.

A decisive factor that helped him win the prize was the balanced way in which President Van Rompuy executed his duties in the new position of President of the European Council, which was established by the Treaty of Lisbon. He handled this particularly sensitive leading and coordinating role with a spirit of determination and reconciliation, while emphasis was also given to his skilful arbitration on European affairs and unfailing commitment to European moral values.

During his speech, Mr Van Rompuy described the unification of Europe as a peace project. This idea, which was also the objective of the work of Coudenhove-Kalergi, after 90 years is still important. The award bears the name of Count Richard Nicolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi (1894-1972), philosopher, diplomat, publisher and founder of the Pan-European Movement (1923). Coudenhove-Kalergi was the pioneer of European integration and popularized the idea of a federal Europe with his work.

Among the winners of the award, the Federal Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel (2010) and the President of Latvia Vaira Vike-Freiberga (2006), are included.

This article is a translation of an Italian article, originally posted on Identità.

Good video here on  “Preventing White Genocide:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsjc5CVujrM

img978

img443

Is There More To Crimestoppers Than Meets The Eye?

Is there more to Crimestoppers than meets the eye?

by thecolemanexperience

crimestoppersNick RossEsther Rantzen Jimmy SavileChildlineJill DandoDianaCrashCarSavileBBCDiana and CliffNews InternationalQueenMet PoliceHouseDolphin SquareBlairSavileCharlesSavileSavile Satan

The Crimestoppers organisation, seems, at first glance, to have very noble intentions.

It offers the opportunity to report crimes anonymously via a freephone telephone number and apparently helps the police with their work.

Could it be though, that as with so many other things in filthy Britain, Crimestoppers is not really as it appears to be?

Could it be that Crimestoppers is actually being used as a way of “gatekeeping” to filter out callers who may be reporting VIP criminality in the UK.

Take the example of a whistleblower or victim who wants to report child abuse but is too scared to contact the police directly.

Isn’t it probable they might call Crimestoppers, naively believing them to be impartial, and tell them all about the abuse they’ve suffered or witnessed?

They may even name important names and give detailed information in the hope that the perpetrators will be investigated and punished.

But as the phone goes down, who exactly gains access to all of that information?

We’re beginning to understand just how far the authorities are willing to go to cover-up their filthy activities as recent reports on VIP abuse scandals have revealed.

Could Crimestoppers be yet another layer of the cover-up?

If we look at who exactly runs Crimestoppers, it becomes even more mysterious.

Here are the names of some of the organisation’s Trustees:

1) Nick Ross

The former colleague of murdered presenter Jill Dando. He recently said he’d watch child-porn given half the chance. His wife Sarah Caplin, is a cousin of Esther Rantzen and a founding director of Childline. Suspicions have been raised that Childline is also a “gatekeeping” front organisation which is used to gather data on any child abuse reports that may involve VIPs. The Crimestoppers helpline conveniently stopped working at the time of the Jill Dando murder appeal.

2) Michael Ashcroft

The controversial Tory donor who pays no tax and has non-dom status. He has been described as ruthless and “not a man to cross”. Made a Baron by the Queen.

3) Peter Imbert

A former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police who was in charge from 1987-1993 and may have a lot of information about why child- abuse claims made between these dates were ignored. Made a Baron by the Queen.

4) Lord Waheed Ali

The first openly gay peer in Parliament and a wealthy entrepreneur. Owns a business, Shine Entertainment, with Rupert Murdoch’s daughter Elisabeth. Is a close friend of Tony Blair. Made a Baron by the Queen.

5) Peter Clarke

A former Metropolitan Royal protection officer in charge of guarding Princess Diana at the time of her death. Made a CBE by the Queen.

6) Sir Ronnie Flanagan

A former Chief Inspector of Constabulary. Was previously in charge of policing in Northern Ireland and Iraq. May have a lot of information about why child-abuse rings have been covered up.

Is Crimestoppers really a force for good?

Is Crimestoppers board of trustees really as it appears to be?

Is Crimestoppers really a force for good?

Is Crimestoppers in fact a “front” organisation with sinister ulterior motives?

Is Crimestoppers actually the very last number you should call if you want to report a crime?

We haven’t got a bloody clue.

Have you?

http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/how-we-help/how-were-run-6512741/trustee-directors

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/the-curious-case-of-nick-ross-vip-child-abuse-filthy-comments-operation-yewtree-crimestoppers-and-the-death-of-jill-dando/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Imbert,_Baron_Imbert

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Shine_Limited

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Clarke_(police_officer)

http://opencharities.org/charities/1108687

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/jill-dando-unmanned-phones-and-the-mysterious-crimestoppers-mailbox-message/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/10/25/elm-guest-house-vip-child-abuse-perverted-royals-and-the-mysterious-death-of-princess-diana/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/barry-george-jill-dando-jimmy-savile-bbc-paedophiles-cliff-richard-alan-farthing-nick-ross-and-britains-dirty-secrets/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368007/Founder-Childline-loses-job-ITV-amid-claims–BULLYING.html

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/who-is-michael-ashcroft/

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/who-killed-jill-dando/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waheed_Alli,_Baron_Alli

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/23/why-are-the-police-covering-up-vip-child-abuse/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Flanagan

http://thecolemanexperience.wordpress.com/2013/03/04/mysterious-sco19/

Sir Jimmy Savile’s Chauffeur Charged With Sex Offences

Ray Teret, who was once Jimmy Savile’s driver, is charged with a number of historic sex offences including 16 child rapes.

Cavendish Press - Manchester

Jimmy Savile’s former chauffeur, who once shared a flat with the disgraced broadcaster, has been charged with a string of historic sex offences.

Ray Teret, 72, has been charged with 32 offences relating to 15 alleged victims who claimed they were sexually abused between 1962 and 1996.

Most of the alleged offences are said to have taken place in the Greater Manchester area.

Teret, from Altrincham, is charged with 15 counts of rape of a female under 16, one count of rape, one count of attempted rape of a female under 16, six counts of indecent assault of a female under 16, three counts of indecent assault of a female under 14, one count of gross indecency with a child under 13 and two counts of conspiracy to rape a girl under 16.

Ray Teret
Ray Teret is also a former DJ

The former DJ is also charged with one count of possession of extreme pornography, one count of possession of prohibited images and one count of possession of an indecent image of a child.

Teret, who was initially arrested and bailed last November with another man on suspicion of historic rape allegations, is due to appear before magistrates in Manchester on Saturday.

Police previously said the accusations against him were not linked to the national inquiry into Savile.

DCI Graham Brock, of Greater Manchester Police, said: “This has been a complex investigation that was originally launched in October 2012 when an initial complaint was made to Greater Manchester Police.

“Since that time, we have carried out extensive and wide-ranging inquiries and interviewed a number of people as part of that investigation.

Jimmy Savile
TV presenter Jimmy Savile

“It is now very important that we make no further comment and allow the correct legal process to take its course unimpeded and without prejudice.

“We will continue to support all those women who have come forward and offer them whatever welfare they need through the use of specially-trained officers.”

Two other men have also been charged following the investigation into Teret.

William Harper, 65, from Stretford, is charged with charged with conspiracy to rape a girl under 16 and attempt rape of a girl under 16.

Alan Ledger, 62, from Altrincham, is accused of indecently assaulting a girl under 16 and aiding and abetting the rape of a girl under 16.

Both men will appear at Manchester City Magistrates’ Court on October 30 2013.

Why Do Labour And The Left Hate The British Working Class?

Guest Writer Leo McKinstry

Photos and captions Watt Tyler

Mass immigration is transforming the fabric of our society on an epic scale. Only this week it was revealed that Britain takes in one in five of all the migrants in Europe. In 2011 that represented an astonishing total of 566,000 new arrivals, by far the largest influx anywhere in the EU.

The real impact of change could be even greater, for the official statistics ignore the vast amount of illegal immigration that occurs through our porous borders… The Tory-led coalition might be dealing with the problem ineffectually but the real responsibility for the immigration disaster lies with the last Labour government. Labour ministers embarked on a vast programme of social engineering as British passports, student visas, welfare entitlements and work permits were dished out like confetti.

Jack Straw MP - a pompous Marxist  jew who hates the British Working Class and their values. When he was at his boarding school he bullied a boy in to suicide.

Jack Straw Labour MP – a pompous Marxist jew who hates the British Working Class and their values. When he was at his boarding school he bullied a boy in to suicide.

The superficial justification for this gigantic demographic experiment was that it would boost our economy and the public finances. But that has proved nonsense. Soaring levels of immigration have driven Britain into permanent economic crisis, weighed down by unprecedented debts, falling living standards, mass unemployment and an intolerable burden on our public infrastructure.

In practice mass immigration has amounted to a gross betrayal of the British people, particularly the working class who have borne the brunt of this catastrophically misguided policy. Yet the fashionable metropolitan elitists have developed the contemptible habit of sneering at the British working class while extolling the virtues of diligent migrants. In their politically correct narrative ordinary Britons are portrayed as lazy, feckless, unskilled and greedy in comparison with the heroic, wonderfully cheap new workers from Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia. We are constantly told that we should be grateful to the migrants ‘who do the jobs that the British won’t.’ Among smug self-styled liberals, mass immigration has become a vehicle for explicit snobbery. So the newspaper columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, who likes to pose as a champion of progressive thought, grandly dismisses the ‘always wretched and complaining classes’ and claims that ‘tax-paying immigrants past and present keep indolent British scroungers on their couches drinking beer and watching TV.’ Ms Alibhai-Brown would not dream of indulging in such stereotyping of any other social group but this kind of abuse is typical of the self-styled sophisticates.

What is extraordinary is that Labour and the political Left used to see the advancement of working-class rights as their primary duty. But now in their blind adherence to the creed of diversity they have become the brutal enemies of the working classes who find their talents derided and their heritage traduced. Where once the working classes were seen as the backbone of Britain, admired for their patriotism, respectability and solidarity, now those values are turned against them.

Similarly in its zeal to create a multicultural society the Left is determined to wipe out all sense of tradition and national identity. British history had to be ‘revised, rethought and jettisoned’ declared the Labour government’s Committee On The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain in 2000, while the following year Labour foreign secretary Robin Cook described Britain as nothing more than ‘a gathering of countless different races and communities, the vast majority of which are not indigenous to these islands.’

Robin Cook Labour MP. One of the smug PC crowd.

Robin Cook Labour MP. One of the smug PC crowd.

Cook’s statement was a travesty of the truth. Far from being ‘a nation of immigrants’ as Cook absurdly claimed, Britain was until recently one of the most homogenous nations on earth, one reason why it was so well-ordered and successful. In 1940, when we experienced our finest hour in defeating Nazi tyranny, there were just 238,000 foreigners in Britain, less than half the number of arrivals here in 2011 alone.

It is just as big a lie to pretend that all immigrants are hard-working. People from migrant communities are far more likely than the indigenous population to be unemployed, living in social housing or claiming benefits. According to the Office of National Statistics, the jobless rate for ethnic minority men is twice that for white men, while 80 per cent of Bangladeshi and Pakistani women do not work.

The derision for the working class is just as profoundly misplaced. If they are as useless as elitists pretend then how on earth did they help build one of the greatest nations the world has ever seen? Long before the modern era of mass immigration we had a flourishing NHS, successful industries and globally admired public services.

Tony Blair, a key architect of the drive towards multiculturalism, once said with characteristic pomposity: ‘Let’s leave the past to those who live in it.’ The Britain of the past was a much stronger, more cohesive country before he inflicted such irreversible damage.”

Tony Blair and most of those who staffed his Cabinets and Ministries, along with the majority of the PC Crowd who dominate the UK’s mass media, must be arrested, charged with treason and found guilty.

The worst of these, the Blairs, the Browns, the Harmans, Straws, Mandelsons, Hains and Alibhai-Browns should be executed.

tnimg533

Welcome To Britain – Child Sex Abuse Capital Of The World

 filthy britainJason SwiftSavileCharlesBishop Peter Ball Prince CharlesSavile Gordon Browncyril smithHague Savile Elm Guest HouseDolphin SquareJerseyDSC_0119Warwick SpinksJillings ReportMI5

If you thought for one minute that Britain is really as it appears to be, you’re very sadly mistaken.

Beneath the pomp and pageantry lies a network of paedophilic depravity, so vile and despicable, it literally beggars belief.

Don’t be fooled into thinking Jimmy Savile was an isolated case either.

He wasn’t.

Why did the NSPCC ( Britain’s biggest Child Charity ) sign off the investigation in to Sir Jimmy Savile, saying no one else was involved and there was no Police corruption?

From the Elm Guest House scandal to North Wales care home abuse via Dolphin Square; to sickening Warwick Spinks and the Amsterdam connection; from Jersey’s Haut de la Garenne to Kincora in Northern Ireland; from the vile BBC to complicit police and government authorities; from MP’s through MI5 to the Royal Family themselves; the whole filthy lot of them are in on it.

Consider this:

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by celebrities?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by social workers?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by teachers?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by police officers?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by members of the clergy?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by diplomats?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by members of the armed forces?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by members of the intelligence services?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by politicians?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by members of the judiciary?

How many children have been raped, buggered or abused by members of royalty?

Allegedly, many.

Now consider this:

How many children have been filmed being abused?

How many children have been filmed being abused and the abusers have been blackmailed by Intelligence Services?

How many children have been filmed being abused and the films have then sold for thousands of pounds?

How many children have been trafficked before being abused?

How many children, wrongly taken from their parents via secret family courts, have ended up being abused?

How many children have been abused in care homes?

How many children have gone missing after being abused?

How many children have died or been murdered after being abused?

How many children are, at this very moment, suffering horrific abuse?

Allegedly, many.

Welcome to filthy Britain.

No child’s safe here.

Didn’t you know?