Immigration Is Destruction

IMMIGRATION IS DESTRUCTION

By Boadicea (1)

Not happening!

Not happening!

We were sold mass immigration as a fabulous celebration: a ‘celebration of diversity’; a ‘rainbow utopia’; etc. It was all about peace, happiness, enrichment, harmony and love. They never mentioned destruction and harm. However, it will be shown that, contrary to the images, this political policy has in fact caused much destruction – and mass immigration is, in many ways, inherently destructive(2). They deceived and manipulated, sometimes they plain lied.

untitled31

So in what ways can mass immigration be viewed as causing destruction?

IMG396

In the most significant and fundamental manner, immigration is destruction in the sense that if there is no form of separation between groups, then over time the immigrants will mix with the indigenous people and form one racial group. The mixing actually acts, in the long term, against diversity – this, in fact, leads to homogenisation. In this sense, to sell mass immigration as diversity is not true (in the longer term), and actually it is the opposite (the ‘multiculturalism’ propaganda is inversionist). Some figures in the media, politics, academia, etc. boast of the destruction of indigenous Brits, heralding the day when there will be no more such people and ‘everyone will be coffee-coloured’ or ‘we will all be one race’, etc. Cessation of existence is the destruction of the racial or ethnic group in question(3). In this sense immigration is destruction(4).

img416

Mass immigration also causes destruction of culture. It is a logical fact that when more than one culture is present in one place at one time, then it is not possible for all cultures to exist totally intact: there inevitably has to be a level(5) of destruction of one or more, if not all(6) of the cultures in question.

img635

The inevitable destruction of culture as a consequence of immigration is enunciated by Dr Turner’s ‘one set of rules dilemma’(7) which states that at one place at one time only one set of ‘rules’ can describe the culture of the population in that area (country, city, etc.). All cultures can be described by what could be conceptualised as sets of descriptive ‘rules’, for example the descriptive ‘rules’ describing the architecture, mode of dress, language, behaviour, etc. An example of one such descriptive ‘rule’ could be that ‘women all wear purple hats’. In cases in which there is a difference (s) between such sets, then not all sets can describe one area simultaneously. And no two different cultures share the same set of such ‘rules’ (or they would not be different cultures). Hence, if one group moves into the area in which another group is practising its culture, then the ‘rules’ of both groups cannot remain unchanged across the area/population in question.
As a simple hypothetical example to illustrate the ‘one set of rules dilemma’, perhaps cultural group P paints all their buildings pink, and cultural group B paints them blue.img636

img637

If group P moves to the city of group B, then the city-scape cannot remain all blue unless group P gives up their cultural practice of using pink paint. If group P continues to use pink paint, then the city-scape is altered: now there is a mixture of pink and blue buildings instead of the blue view that represented group B’s culture.

img639
Alternatively, amongst other options, group B could change their practice – which would present cultural destruction for group B. Either: group P changes; or group B changes; or both change; or neither change; or parts of groups P and/or B change and other parts do not change (and the relevant changes in all cases could be to any colour or mixture of colours, not necessarily just pink or blue). The only option that does not involve either group changing their paint colour still does not preserve culture: even if neither group change their paint, the indigenous culture has been changed(8) (see above). In any possible scenario there is alteration of one, if not both(9), of the cultures in question. Culture has not been preserved. This destruction is inevitable in such circumstances.

This alteration of culture as a result of immigration can be seen in real life examples, e.g. views of cities have changed as the indigenous culture of Britain has been destroyed to make way for minarets and temples, etc.

img638

The descriptive ‘rules’ can be applied to any aspect of culture, including to the rules of governance, for example: may women drive on the roads? They cannot drive and also not be allowed to drive. All cultures cannot remain intact: destruction is inevitable if space is shared(10). This is a logical fact. In real life some recommend that indigenous people alter their behaviour to accommodate immigrants, e.g. in Scandinavia one professor recommends that women alter their behaviour to avoid being raped by immigrants(11).
“Norwegian women must realize that we live in a multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.”

img640

Of course, when indigenous British culture is actively inhibited so as ‘not to offend’ or otherwise, (e.g. no pork, Christmas celebrations reduced or banned, etc.(12)), then this represents another example of the ‘one set of rules dilemma’ in practice. In fact, the very presence of different people is an alteration to indigenous culture. People form a part of the culture, and also culture is the product of people. In shared space, not all cultures can remain fully intact. Hence, mass immigration presents destruction of culture(13).

There are many other ways in which there is destruction. Mass immigration causes destruction of feelings of fraternity/solidarity, trust(14), peace, familiarity, etc. It goes against natural instincts to have one’s territory invaded, and this provokes feelings of stress(15) and discomfort. Many indigenous people are upset and their quality of life suffers varying levels of destruction in this manner(16) – but the deterioration in the quality of indigenous people’s lives appears less important than the desires of some immigrants who ‘want to improve their lives’(17). Some lives are ‘more equal’ than others. Of course, it is not just feelings of destruction of peace and suchlike that are brought by diversity, but there frequently are actual outbreaks of disorder etc., these on small and sometimes large scales, (e.g. racial animosity/enviousness/resentment in face-to-face encounters, race riots, etc.). Diversity of race/ethnicity etc. brings strife in many forms. Quality of life suffers destruction as a result of immigration.

img641

In Britain, and other countries too, there have been many reductions in freedom as a result of mass immigration(18). Some hold that the diversity of immigration requires reductions in freedoms – and even requires a totalitarian government(19). The former German chancellor, Helmut Schmidt, is quoted as saying that ‘multicultural’ countries can only work under an authoritarian government:
“The concept of multiculturalism is difficult to make fit with a democratic society”(20).
Of course, with the competition for cultural (and other) dominance between groups, clashes of cultures and races, etc. such a situation is intrinsically unstable and conflict-prone(21). Reductions in freedom frequently are held as necessary to inhibit unrest and open conflict(22), for example curfews are sometimes implemented and surveillance is widespread, etc.(23) Numerous other problems are caused by the diversity of immigration, many of which the governments of such countries attempt to quell/prevent by reducing freedoms. For example, often we are told that because certain immigrant groups present a security threat, our freedoms and privacies are to be reduced to keep us safe. Freedoms also are reduced in the UK as the government attempts to inhibit any opposition to mass immigration, and, inter alia, tries to suppress the indigenous people from expressing (or even thinking) anything that might upset the illusion that immigration is great. Freedom of speech has been severely curtailed in this country as a result of immigration (and the related actions by the government)(24). In many cases one is not allowed to state certain truths in case it might pose a threat to the political policy of mass immigration and to the related happy rainbow images (and/or upset immigrants, etc.) – truth and knowledge have hence suffered destruction. Of course, the ideology of ‘multiculturalism’ is based on utopian fantasies, irrationalities and lies (see Dr Turner qv). For such ideologies: truth, reason and open debate pose a significant threat. The whole house of cards easily could collapse were people to be well-informed with true facts – and were allowed to think and debate facts and policies in a fearless, honest and rational manner. Such ideologies require the suppression of truth, reason and morality to survive.
“Dissent has been relabelled as either hatred or insanity. Those who disagree with current orthodoxies are therefore deemed to be either bad or mad […] utopian fantasies wrenched facts and evidence to fit their governing idea. Independent thought thus became impossible — which inevitably resulted in an attack upon freedom, because reason and liberty are inseparable bed- fellows. […] Reason was thus replaced by bullying, intimidation and the suppression of debate.”(25)

SCAN
Even the use of some words, of certain kinds, can result in one being arrested and sent to prison(26). It never used to be like this. Chief Constable Fahy warns of Britain becoming a police state: “There is a danger of us being turned into a thought police”(27) . Many freedoms have been reduced as a result of immigration; this presents the reality of destruction of our liberties.

img642

Justice and fairness have suffered significant destruction as a result of immigration. Because of immigration, albeit perhaps indirectly, the principle of double jeopardy was removed in Britain. In a general sense it is more difficult for certain types of fairness to exist in a mixed country. This is illustrated by examples such as observing the opinions of different races (on average) on cases that pertain to race – such as in relation to the O.J. Simpson trial in which blacks and whites differed (in general) in opinion as to whether O.J. was guilty or not. Such divergences of opinion make jury trials and other matters of justice problematic in mixed countries. The same issue can be seen in relation to the demands that different groups want their own group to police them, judge them, etc. – these demands often made on the basis that other groups will not, amongst other things, treat them fairly(28). The police frequently have been accused of not policing properly because the criminals in question were immigrants – this accusation made for various reasons including that the police do not want to be labelled ‘racist’(29). If the police are not performing their job properly in relation to immigrants, then this is not just nor fair and also this tends to decrease the quality of life for the people of the country. It is also held that often immigrants receive more favourable treatment when they are victims of crime (relative to indigenous victims)(30). Such accusations of differential treatment pertain to the various other arms of the legal system, not only to the police (e.g. CPS, judges, lawyers, etc.). In these contexts, and others, immigration destroys fairness and justice(31). Reduction of trust in the legal system has various destructive consequences, as does the destruction of the belief that the country is reasonably fair: these destructions of justice and fairness cause further destructions.

These problems of inequality before the law touch upon the idea that in many senses of the term ‘equality’, immigration’s diversity is incompatible with ‘equality’(32). Of course, in a social and political sense ‘equality’ is a nebulous-power-word (see Dr Turner, qv). However, one can distinguish certain forms of ‘equality’ that are not problematic from a rational perspective. For example, above various issues in relation to equality before the law were noted. Immigration also presents inequalities in relation to equality of opportunity and result: for equal results one would have to have unequal processing if the groups differ on the relevant criterion (or criteria). Hence, ‘equality’ in both of these senses is not possible in such circumstances(33). The very act of immigration into the country of an indigenous people presents the fact of treating the indigenous people as not equal to the immigrants(34). It is a reality that different groups tend (in general/overall) to feel more fraternity and loyalty towards members of their own group, presenting various intrinsic inequalities in a mixed country (including in relation to the law – see above). Thus, in many senses of the term ‘equality’, ‘equality’ is reduced, if not impossible, when there is immigration. In an ironic manner, immigration is frequently sold as ‘equality’.

Many children’s lives have suffered destruction as a result of immigration into Britain – this harm would not necessarily always be a result of immigration (as opposed to some of the destruction noted above which is intrinsic to immigration in general), but has been resultant in this context. This particular harm and destruction has been caused in many ways(35), including the many thousands raped by immigrants(36). It is held by many that the little girls in places such as Rotherham (and Sheffield, Manchester, etc.) were sacrificed to appease the immigrants and/or to enable the authorities to indulge themselves in their feel-good ‘anti-racism’ and ‘multiculturalism’ dogmas – letting them feel superior and compassionate(37) – and, not unrelatedly, avoid accusations of ‘racism’(38). It is likely that some people were too scared to act properly. Some hold that the abuse needed to be ignored to maintain the lie that immigration was not destruction, but was good(39):

“What is particularly sickening is their desperation to cover up the abuse in their attempt to maintain the illusion that cultural diversity was working in Rotherham.” (40)

As the local Labour MP for Rotherham during the time documented in Professor Jay’s Report (MP between 1994-2012), Denis MacShane (former BBC employee and convicted fraudster) stated:

“there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat, if I may put it like that. Perhaps, yes, as a true Guardian reader and liberal Leftie, I suppose I didn’t want to raise that too hard.” (41)

As author Allison Pearson notes in response, qv: “Much better to hang on to your impeccable liberal credentials than save a few girls from being raped, eh, Denis?”(42)

img649

The destruction that results from sexual abuse is particularly life-destroying and the consequences rarely are confined to the victim him or herself; frequently the destruction to the spirit is passed down the generations and also family and others in proximity are affected. For example, the consequences of victims’ mental illnesses (and pain/suffering in general) affect others, as do the many cases when such victims turn to drink and drugs to dull the pain, cope with life, etc. Of course, a lot of the drug trade is conducted by immigrants, only too happy to profit from the destruction of lives.

Crimes inflicted upon indigenous Brits by immigrants are not confined to rape and drugs, and this level of crime has caused pain, destruction of a sense of safety and security – and the resultant decreases in quality of life. For example, many elderly people are scared to go out to the extent that they would like, and largely this is due to the fear of crime (and the destruction of their way of life and comfort in general, etc.). The increase in crime as result of immigration(43) (both by direct and indirect means(44)) causes fear and discomfort, plus other problems such as increased security precautions being necessary, increased insurance premiums being paid, etc. Immigration has destroyed quality of life to a significant extent.

Picture 9

The validity and integrity of the electoral system in Britain has suffered a level of destruction as a result of immigration. This has occurred by various means. For example, the problem of postal voting fraud is found to be occurring disproportionately amongst certain immigrant groups (not to mention the deals for the genuine postal votes and orders to vote from elders and family leaders, etc.)(45). There are attitudes to the voting system amongst some immigrant groups that differ from those of the Brits, and there is a higher level of corruption amongst some immigrant groups than amongst the indigenous people(46). As Attorney General MP Dominic Grieve says:
“we have minority communities in this country which come from backgrounds where corruption is endemic”(47)

Of course, such corruption and attitudes are specific to certain immigrant groups, and this form of destruction is not a necessary consequence of immigration in the general sense. However, the diversity that immigration always brings does present some inherent potential problems in relation to elections, including matters such as split loyalties and groups favouring their own(48). All these general and specific issues present ways in which immigration has presented some destruction of political democracy.

Immigration has brought a lot of destruction to the working and lower-middle classes. In many ways, immigration is a class issue. The propagation of ‘moral relativism’(49) caused a belief to be widely held that one ‘should not judge’ – hence, amongst other things, facilitating immigration. This relativism has resulted in an inhibition of the teaching of moral and correct behaviour, which has wrought havoc on poorer communities. In more direct ways, immigration has destroyed the quality of life for working class people as wages and working conditions have reduced, and the shortage of lower-skilled and no-skilled jobs has rendered many unemployed(50). The main influx of immigrants has tended to be in the poorer areas of the country, and these areas are also less able to cope with extra problems and destruction. It is hence the less advantaged that have suffered the most – this pertains to all the destructions noted above, e.g. it is disproportionately white working class children who have been raped and abused by immigrants and it is largely these communities that have been destroyed by the other crimes and by the shattering of any sense of solidarity, comfort and community. As Leo McKinstry notes:
“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.”(51)

One BBC presenter claims that the BBC ignored the problem of immigration so as not to be branded ‘racist’, and also because:
“BBC employees are unable to understand the concerns of ordinary people because they typically have ‘sheltered’ middle-class lives…”

In some ways, immigration has been foisted upon the white working class by the more privileged of society, and objections to immigration are sneered at in a snobbish manner by the more privileged – while the poorer are destroyed. Many of the educated/privileged seem to feel it is intellectually, socially and morally superior to support this destruction. This is admitted by some who previously supported mass immigration, e.g. Peter Hitchens writes that he is sorry:
“…we liked to feel oh, so superior to the bewildered people – usually in the poorest parts of Britain – who found their neighbourhoods suddenly transformed into supposedly ‘vibrant communities’. If they dared to express the mildest objections, we called them bigots.
Revolutionary students didn’t come from such ‘vibrant’ areas (we came, as far as I could tell, mostly from Surrey and the nicer parts of London). We might live in ‘vibrant’ places for a few (usually squalid) years […] we sneered at [the urban poor] as ‘racists’. …
I have learned since what a spiteful, self-righteous, snobbish and arrogant person I was (and most of my revolutionary comrades were, too).”(52)

There are other ways in which immigration presents destruction, both in the general sense and in the specific example of Great Britain recently, including, in this country: destruction of the education system(53); the advancement of the country being reduced; etc.(54). However the destruction of culture and existence are perhaps the most serious (and are two of the inherent forms of destruction caused by immigration(55)). So, in exchange for this what do we get? And is it worth it? Could anything be worth genocide?

Well, we are told that mass immigration brings diversity, but in the long term it does not; as noted above it brings quite the opposite. And diversity in shared space is not always a good thing either, (e.g. race riots, fracturing of peace and solidarity, etc.). Some people say they enjoy seeing different faces around – putting aside the patronising ‘zoo-like’ tone of this – the very diversity they enjoy is threatened by mass immigration, and is their small pleasure worth the destruction? How could they think it is acceptable to self-indulge at the expense of others – and, ironically, all the time posing with their ‘moral values’? Why do ‘anti-racists’ throw one race under the bus to posture? And do they not see any possible inconsistency in their position? Another ‘argument’ for mass immigration is the variety of restaurants available, but is this choice of restaurants worth the destruction? And, of course, indigenous people can be taught to cook any dishes(56).

img648

Some argue that it is ‘nice’ and compassionate to bring in millions of people: compassionate to whom? To those suffering the destruction? And in the long run it is not clear that the immigrants will gain – this true in a number of ways. For example, even the new immigrants will, and frequently do(57), resist further immigration after a point(58) – perhaps as, in relation to the area in question, a sense of territorialism and ownership develop to a certain extent(59). The short term gains enjoyed by immigrants might not be worthwhile even for them in the long run. And then there is the alleged economic argument. If all the figures (immigration has caused many costs to Britain(60)) and the long-term economic projections are taken into account, it is not clear that immigration is an economic benefit to Britain, in fact, the reverse is true(61). One can view this from the example of one hypothetical immigrant: he either works and thus takes a job(62) a Brit could have done(63), and pays taxes that a Brit could have paid. Alternatively, he takes benefits. Where is the economic gain coming from(64)? Are these immigrants all arriving and dropping off large amounts of cash that they brought with them? Well the truth is that millions of pounds leave the country every month as immigrants send money back home (plus benefits are sent abroad by the government too, etc.). We are not gaining money here, and even if we were, is it worth the destruction? As Hitchens writes in relation to immigration:
“..it is impossible not to be angry with the politicians who either couldn’t imagine what their policies would bring in practice, or did not care. The destruction of familiarity and security cannot be measured in money.”(65)

How much would you sell your country, peace, freedom, quality of life, culture, heritage, children and race for? Even were there to be a financial gain (which there is not here(66)), is this moral? Are we for sale? What possibly could be worth selling your race for? Of course, all this destruction is predictable, and is documented around the world and across history – which begs the question: who would implement such a policy, and why?

Immigration presents destruction, and it just isn’t worth it.

(1) As background reading to many of the points in this article, please read Dr Thomas Turner’s book:
“MULTICULTURALISM” – WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Smokescreens and Mirrors (2013)
Available on Amazon at:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
(2)In some senses, immigration is inevitably destructive, and other means of destruction are context-specific. Examples of both forms of destruction will be noted below.
(3)To intentionally cause a race to cease to exist is genocide. Under the UN definition of genocide, physical violence is not necessary, and merely bringing about the physical conditions that reduce the population, with the intent to so do, qualifies as genocide. Article 2 of the UN Convention on the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide states that genocide can be defined, amongst other things, as: ‘Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part’ with ‘intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.’ The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was Adopted by Resolution 260 of the U.N. General Assembly on the 9th December 1948
https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/stop-white-british-genocide-campaign-join-now/
(4)It is facts such as these that have prompted various survival campaigns, such as the ‘’multiculturalism’ is genocide’, ‘anti-racist is a code word for anti-white’ and ‘diversity is death’ campaigns, e.g. see: https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/multiculturalism-is-genocide-campaign-and-stickers/
http://whitegenocideproject.com/
http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2014/06/where_does_that_billboard_phra.html
(5)A variable level depending on the context
(6)I.e. possibly ‘both’ if there are only 2 cultures in question, and possibly ‘all’ in cases in which there are more than 2 cultures relevant
(7)See Dr Turner’s book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
(8)As has the immigrant culture
(9)Or more than two if more than 2 cultures are relevant
(10)Of course, sometimes areas split so that different cultures are practised (to a large extent at least) in different areas, also see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386558/Tower-Hamlets-Taliban-Death-threats-women-gays-attacked-streets.html
If areas of territory are given away to immigrants, then this destroys the intact nature of the indigenous culture. And why would a country do that?
In such cases, intangible space is still shared, at least to some extent, and this, amongst other things, can present various issues (see Dr Turner’s book qv)
(11)http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1754
(12)E.g. see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236989/Tinsel-Taliban-strikes-Court-Service-ban-staff-decorations-avoid-offence.html
In the US, the inhibitions on celebrating Christmas are called ‘war on Christmas’ by some, e.g. see:
http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/12/25/war-christmas
(13)This dilemma also means that if ‘multiculturalism’ is defined as ‘everyone practising their own culture’ or ‘all cultures being preserved’, then this is not possible in shared space – rendering this definition of ‘multiculturalism’ impossible to achieve in practice in cases of immigration (see Turner’s book qv)
(14)Trust suffers destruction in various ways and by various means, for example: trust between people is diminished by a number of processes; trust in the justice system is reduced by various means; etc. As with destruction of the other factors noted here, reductions in trust can have many deleterious consequences for the country.
(15)This cause of stress, as with many of the other stresses caused by immigration, might be a contributory factor to the increase in psychological problems that has occurred
(16)Also see: Telegraph 29th January 2013
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9831912/I-feel-like-a-stranger-where-I-live.html
(17)https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/are-white-britains-treated-as-second-class-in-their-own-country/
(18)https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2014/12/05/political-persecution-in-the-free-country-of-great-britain/
(19)Also see: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/thought-police-muscle-up-in-britain/story-e6frg6zo-1225700363959
(20)Telegraph 25th November 2004
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/1477496/Turkish-workers-a-mistake-claims-Schmidt.html
(21)Inter-group conflict characterises such diversity.
(22)Conflict is found between immigrant groups, e.g. see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1519134/Asian-race-riot-killers-jailed-for-25-years.html
and also between immigrant groups and the indigenous people, e.g. see:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1331923/Race-riot-town-on-a-knife-edge.html
(23)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2508120/Fear-loathing-prejudice-Blunketts-yard-A-deeply-disturbing-dispatch-ex-Labour-Home-Secretary-warns-race-riots-Roma-influx-Sheffield.html
(24)For further reading on threats to freedom of speech in Britain see:
Johnston, P. (2013) Feel Free to Say It. Threats to Freedom of Speech in Britain Today. Civitas, London.
Also, relatedly, see:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2614834/Arrested-quoting-Winston-Churchill-European-election-candidate-accused-religious-racial-harassment-repeats-wartime-prime-ministers-words-Islam-campaign-speech.html
(25)http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/6273423/i-think-therefore-im-guilty/
(26)http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/crime/fury-pensioner-locked-up-charged-4797149
(27)See: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/05/peter-fahy-police-state-warning
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863237/Britain-danger-police-state-threat-home-grown-extremists-warns-chief-constable.html
(28)If this principle of being policed, judged, etc. only by one’s own group is thought through, then this is an argument for separation – if this is followed, then mixed areas are not feasible
(29)E.g. for such accusations see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2734694/It-hard-appalling-nature-abuse-child-victims-suffered-1-400-children-sexually-exploited-just-one-town-16-year-period-report-reveals.html
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rotherham-child-abuse-scandal–4120569
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8570506/Police-covered-up-violent-campaign-to-turn-London-area-Islamic.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1374443/Police-hid-abuse-60-girls-Asian-takeaway-workers-linked-Charlene-Downes-murder.html
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/191013/Police-fear-being-called-racist-so-illlegal-immigrants-stroll-free
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8476605/WikiLeaks-fear-of-offending-Muslims-allowed-extremists-into-Britain-ahead-of-77-London-bombings.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1271457/General-Election-2010-Postal-vote-fraud-amid-fears-bogus-voters-swing-election.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2141740/Rochdale-child-sex-trial-Police-fears-branded-racist-left-grooming-gang-free-abuse-teenage-girls-years-says-Labour-MP.html
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/main-topics/general-news/asian-sex-abuse-ignored-by-council-because-they-feared-being-tagged-racist-1-6806359
(30)E.g. see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html
(31)In an ironic, manipulative, dishonest and inversionist manner, immigration is often sold to people as being fair and just.
(32)Also see: http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
(33)E.g. see the inequalities presented by affirmative action: members of one race (s) are given favourable treatment for jobs, educational places, etc.
(34)Also see: https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/are-white-britains-treated-as-second-class-in-their-own-country/
(35)In many areas with high immigrant populations, children no longer have the freedom to go out play like they used to. This is another reduction in freedom and also of quality of life.
http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/rotherham-locals-speak-out
(36)E.g. over 1,400 in one town (Rotherham) in just 16 years is documented.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11057647/Rotherham-sex-abuse-scandal-1400-children-exploited-by-Asian-gangs-while-authorities-turned-a-blind-eye.html
(37)To whom? To the rape and abuse victims?
(38)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2734694/It-hard-appalling-nature-abuse-child-victims-suffered-1-400-children-sexually-exploited-just-one-town-16-year-period-report-reveals.html
(39)This touches on the cover-up of the true results of immigration. The media and government act to conceal the truth from the public by various means, e.g.: the censorship, the lies, the ‘finding positive stories’ about immigration, etc.
(40)http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/504104/Leo-McKinstry-Multiculturalism-to-blame-for-Rotherham-abuse
(41)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11059138/Rotherham-In-the-face-of-such-evil-who-is-the-racist-now.html
(42)Of course, other factors may be at play here too, including the fact that if the British public knew of the levels of abuse, then immigration might not be tolerated. There are accusations that the Labour Party dealt for votes, but this is not proven. Many factors are causal here, and different causes are more significant for different people.
(43)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2873598/One-seven-people-arrested-Britain-year-FOREIGN-damning-study-reveals.html
(44)Indirect means include factors such as that when the people are divided and oppressed, then feelings of consideration, trust, care, etc. in a general sense diminish and this tends to breed crime. Other indirect factors come into play, such as that the poverty brought to normal indigenous people by immigration tends to increase the likelihood of crime being committed by them. There are many other such indirect factors that result from immigration and its consequences.
(45)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2578776/Scrap-postal-votes-elections-fixed-says-judge-warns-ballot-rigging-probability-parts-Britain.html
(46)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10469448/Corruption-rife-in-the-Pakistani-community-says-minister.html
(47)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10469453/Dominic-Grieve-were-a-changing-nation-but-Im-an-optimist.html
(48)There are other related problems, such as one Jewish MP who no longer holds MP surgeries because of inter-ethnic threats, see: http://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/11659715.MP_received_death_threats/
(49)Some define ‘multiculturalism’ as such ‘moral relativism’ – see Dr Turner’s book qv
(50)The poor are made poorer by immigration, also see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386537/Mass-immigration-UK-s-poor-poorer.html
(51)http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/387469/Why-does-the-Left-hate-the-working-classes-so-much
(52)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2301743/How-invasion-immigrants-corner-England-mockery-PMs-promise-close-door.html
(53)Those implementing and/or propagandising mass immigration very rarely send their children to the schools that are most affected by immigration. Many inner city comprehensives suffer terrible problems with inter-group conflicts, lower standards, non-English speakers taking teaching time and #lowering educational standards, etc. E.g. see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1221759/Hammer-attack-victim-seeks-1m-damages-politically-correct-school-closed-eyes-racial-tensions-Henry-Webster-Asian-Invasion-Swindon-Ridgeway-Foundation.html
For example, black Labour MP Dianne Abbott opted for a private education for her son, as do many such ‘leftie’/’liberal’ MPs, or they chose a state school in a good area (to get a nice time and good education, without admitting they are opting out of the mess they have created).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/8994263/Diane-Abbott-no-stranger-to-controversy.html
Senior Guardian Newspaper writers have their children sent to private schools, not affected by the destruction that they propagandise for the rest of us, see: https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/the-guardian-newspaper-exposed/
(54)Also see destruction of quality of life as pressure is placed on resources, including the NHS, schools, police and justice system, roads, water, housing, etc. E.g.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11003975/Mass-immigration-could-see-water-shortages-failing-hospitals-and-we-wont-feel-richer-says-Civitas.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2854514/Is-wait-long-GP-Half-million-immigrants-signing-doctors-surgeries-year.html
(55)As opposed to some forms that are context-specific
(56)It is not ‘rocket salad’, merely salad with a different recipe
(57)The resistance usually is found towards those of different races, not to more of their own race. There are reasons why immigrants might not resist, e.g. if this appears a poor tactic for them, etc.
(58)E.g. in Sheffield there are problems between the Roma immigrants just arriving and the Pakistanis who arrived earlier
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2644280/The-new-face-racial-tension-As-ex-Home-Secrteary-David-Blunkett-warns-clashes-Roma-locals-Sheffield-bitter-irony-previous-generation-immigrants-angriest.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10452130/Roma-in-Sheffield-When-it-goes-off-it-will-be-like-an-atom-bomb-here.html
(59)If mass immigration never stops, then apart from the small islands being over-crowded, there is the issue that nobody ever has a home as such – it is never-ending destruction and turmoil
(60)Many such calculations only focus on unemployment benefits verses tax revenues, but ignore many benefits such as tax credits, child benefits, etc. Also, even without the benefits, there are many other financial costs that have been caused by immigration into Britain (both directly and indirectly) – factors such as: translation services; financial costs of race riots; extra policing costs in general; government posts in ‘community relations/diversity officers’, etc.; the ‘multiculturalism’ industry in general; etc.
(61)Of course, different groups of immigrants present different financial issues. In the UK, third world immigration is particularly expensive for the country.
(62)Some jobs are only for non-indigenous people, sometimes this is explicit whereas other times it is not stated but is the case. Also see: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/356955
(63)Unemployment rises as a result of immigrants taking jobs.
Also see: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/800000-uk-jobs-advertised-across-europe–and-foreign-jobseekers-even-get-travelling-costs-8734731.html
Many immigrant workers drive down wages and working conditions for indigenous people, this works in a number of ways including the fact that many immigrants live in a temporary manner (even though it might end up permanent) and hence have lower living expenses and can accept lower wages., (e.g. numerous people sharing a home deigned for many fewer). Other means by which this occurs include that fact that many immigrants arrive from countries with much lower wages/conditions/standards of living – hence we engage in a race to the bottom
(64)Some calculations disingenuously talk about the GDP, rather than GDP per capita. Of course, if there are more people, then this tends to push up the overall GDP, but that is not as relevant as is GDP per capita – which is a better measure of quality of life (from an economic perspective).
(65)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2037877/Boston-Lincolngrad-The-strange-transformation-sleepy-English-town.html
(66)Other than for some of the very wealthy

Advertisements

Political Persecution In The ‘FREE’ Country Of Great Britain

Written by Boadacea

Is one free to object to the political policy of immigration?

Often we hear about the oppressive regimes around the world, the absence of freedom in various countries and the political persecution of dissenters in those places. Frequently we are expected to give political asylum to those people who claim asylum in our country after them allegedly being persecuted for their beliefs in some horrible oppressive country elsewhere. We hear that the Muslims hate us and attack us because they ‘hate our freedoms’. There is a constant stream of statements that reinforce the belief, albeit sometimes by implication, that we in this country are ‘free’.

However, are we free? Are political dissenters persecuted, suppressed or oppressed? Are we free to discuss and hear political policies/ideas/facts?

Well of course we are not free. We live under a massive level of surveillance, with our communications, movements and data monitored and collected. We are forced to work for many extra hours a week to pay our taxes (being forced to work without reward and under duress is not being free). We can be arrested and imprisoned if we offend a member of a more important group(1) (yet us being offended counts for almost nothing(2)).However, here the focus is on the issue of political oppression. Is this country free in a political sense(3)? There are various ways in which political freedom could be examined. For example, may one express one’s political beliefs, proposed policies, etc. without fear or sanction? Are people free to examine and discuss political ideas and related facts (historical or otherwise)? Are certain political ideas suppressed, and their proponents persecuted? Are people scared to express certain dissenting views? Space does not permit a full examination of the concept of political freedom, and this short essay will focus on the issue of whether a particular political idea is suppressed, and its proponents oppressed and/or persecuted. Actually, it is a particular form of dissent – dissenting from the government’s political policy of mass immigration.

Is opposition to immigration inhibited in this ‘free’ country?
In a ‘free’ country a political view cannot be banned – that would expose lack of freedom; the people need to believe they are living in a ‘free democratic’ state, it helps to keep them from rising up against an oppressive regime. However, can a government suppress a dissenting view and/or oppress its proponents to the extent that the dissent poses no effective threat? Can the government with the arms of the state (and media, etc.) effectively suppress dissent to their political policy of mass immigration to the point that there is no effective opposition?

If people face persecution, and even prosecution, for expressing a certain political view and/or dissent to a certain political policy, then this is political suppression. If the arms of the state, including the state-broadcaster (the BBC), the education system, etc. all agree on a particular political policy and propagandise its greatness, then this can act to inhibit certain political ideas. If political parties (and/or their supporters) that object to a certain political policy face persecution by the state, then this is political oppression. If open debate on a government political policy is effectively impossible, then this is inhibition of dissent. If all major media organisations demonise those who express dissent to a political policy, then this has a psychological/emotional effect on the public, and acts to suppress dissent. If the information given to the public in relation to a political policy (and related matters) is distorted or censored, and even untrue, then this can act to manipulate people and suppress dissent.

In relation to open debate and discussion of the political policy of mass immigration, it is almost impossible to hold a rational and fair debate on this topic. Debate is inhibited by various means. One such means of suppressing open debate is that of straightforward banning of debate. Often this is phrased in a saccharin-coated phrase such as ‘no platform for ‘racists’’ or ‘no platform for fascists’ and suchlike rather than openly stating that this idea is banned from discussion.

21062011515[1]

21062011515[1]

The National Union of Students (NUS) bans any speech that is labelled by them as ‘racist’ or ‘fascist’; this ban under the ‘no platform’ guise(4). People using these sorts of phrases attempt to deceive others as to what is really going on: really these people are stopping certain political ideas, facts, beliefs, etc. from being stated or heard. This ‘no platform’ also achieves many other matters, including: giving the impression, albeit by implication, that dissenters are not worthy of being heard; achieving an ‘immunity from criticism (or truth)’(5); etc. However, by claiming a ‘high moral ground’ this ban on debate purports to be for some sort of moral reasons. Of course, the nebulous-power-word ‘racism’ is not a proper word, so such cries are not rational(6). Also, the term ‘fascist’ is thrown around in a non-rational manner (see Orwell(7)), in fact, often in an ironic manner; could it not be classed as ‘fascist’ under some of its definitions to ban open debate of dissenting views? Could one not label the banning of certain inconvenient truths as fascist?

This silencing of certain political ideas/beliefs, etc. is found in many contexts. As well as the ‘no platform’ in universities, there is a ban on dissent in many other contexts (including businesses, schools, state organisations such as the NHS, etc.) and only certain views can be heard or stated. Even during our elections such silencing is found to occur. For example, Mr Nick Griffin was not allowed to give his election declaration speech on stage during the 2001 elections, this prompting Mr Griffin and Mr Treacy to wear gags while on the stage with the other candidates(8):

img609

img610

In some contexts gagging of dissenters is claimed to be for reasons of ‘maintaining the peace’ or ‘community cohesion’ or suchlike – this usually prompted by threats or actual instances of violence(9) and other crimes by ‘lefties’ and/or immigrants.

$(KGrHqUOKjkE29zTBlvOBN1V4K3e3!~~_12

So violence by those supporting the government’s political views is used as an excuse to gag dissenters(10). Surely the police should act to stop the violence? Enforce the law? Would such threats, were they ever to occur, by anti-immigration proponents be pandered to in this manner? Does this mean that the most criminal and violent win? Is this a safe message for the state to be sending out? Is this moral? Interestingly, those threatening and involved in such crime and violence frequently are linked to the government in various ways(11), which might explain the lack of the law being enforced when they break it(12). Such people could hence be being used by the government as a form of informal/unaccountable/deniable enforcers(13). Such people act as state-sponsored enforcers, but with full deniability by the state(14). This all further acts to intimidate the people from dissenting to this government policy.

11111111

Another means by which dissent from the political policy of immigration is inhibited is, of course, the fear of being labelled ‘racist’. ‘Racism’ is a nebulous-power-word, not a properly-defined term, and should not be used in rational discourse. However, it is this very fact of low referentiality that largely contributes to the power of this term (as analysed and explained by Dr Thomas Turner(15)). The establishment has contributed significantly to the social construction of this term (see Dr Turner’s book qv). People fear the consequences of being labelled as ‘racist’ – these consequences including the social(16), financial, legal and also the physical fear of being attacked by ‘anti-racists’ and/or immigrants. Most people understand that the law is not properly/fully enforced against the immigrants or ‘anti-racists’ in this context(17) – they have an almost free pass to enforce the will of the state against ‘racists’, including by use of violence (as noted above). Hence, people are intimidated into silence and acquiescence. Dissent is inhibited.

In fact, people are too scared even to state certain truths in relation to immigration for fear of being labelled ‘racist’ – by this means open and honest debate is further inhibited as many do not even have the true facts to consider. Many truths cannot be stated, and ‘racism’ is not the only excuse for suppression of truth – other means including those of ‘causing offence’, ‘stirring hatred’ and matters such a ‘maintaining community relations’ (often code for: not letting the people know the truth in case they rise up; having no riots; there being no challenge or disruption to government immigration policy; etc.). If one states certain matters one can be accused of being ‘an extremist’, a ‘right wing extremist’, ‘threat to security’, ‘dangerous agitator’, or other scary-sounding labels – such labels can, amongst other things, render one liable for various acts of state suppression and the government is currently seeking more legislation to further silence such truths and debate. The government deems such people as a danger to the state. More honest people will be imprisoned. When true facts that pertain to government policy are suppressed, then this is not political liberty. Neither is this moral nor honest. However, in an inversionist manner, those stating the truth and acting with honour will be imprisoned under the manipulative lie of them being ‘evil’. This is not open and honest debate, and this is not freedom.
21092011576[1]
Political parties and other organisations that object to the political policy of mass immigration are subject to much suppression and persecution. Of course the general factors, including those noted above, apply also here. The mainstream media, including the BBC, make sure that the coverage of such parties is very unfavourable, and frequently the coverage is dishonest (the BBC is not impartial as its charter states). Hence, the unsuspecting public often believe such parties to be dangerous and monstrous. This distorts the democratic political process. However, the persecution and suppression of such parties and organisations also is conducted by many other means. For example, a police officer was forced to resign after being seen while off duty at a football match wearing a BNP badge(18). Have any public servants been punished in any way for wearing other forms of political badges(19) while off duty, e.g. any pro-immigration badges? So it is permissible to support the policies of the government in relation to mass immigration, but not to dissent from them (even while off duty). Many have faced persecution for belonging to or even merely supporting the BNP. For example, a bus driver was sacked for belonging to the BNP(20). The BBC sent an undercover journalist to film Mr Nick Griffin giving a speech and this resulted in Mr Griffin facing two criminal trials – and he was not convicted of any crime(21). During his speech in 2004  he predicted that Muslims would launch an attack on our country and objected to the sexual ‘grooming’ and rape of our children (before any reports such as in Rotherham were released). His predictions and claims were proven to be accurate and true. It is fair to conclude that those organisations (including political parties) dissenting from the establishment’s support for the political policy of immigration do face suppression and persecution. Such suppressive acts not only directly inhibit dissent (and truth), but also others are frightened from dissenting.

img627

There are various pieces of legislation that act in such a manner as to suppress dissent, this by threat of arrest, (e.g. ‘hate laws’). For example, words that might ‘insult’ and ‘stir up hatred’ can result in imprisonment(22). The application of these laws has disproportionately been such that they act to suppress dissent(23). Of course, as is frequently found in this ‘soft totalitarian’(24) state, this is all wrapped up in a cloak of ‘compassion’ and ‘moral values’. But to whom is the compassion being shown? To those who object to what is fairly described as an invasion of the country? As genocide(25)? Can the indigenous people not object to these hateful acts being perpetrated upon them without being arrested (and, ironically, accused of hatred)? Would hatred not be valid in some such instances? Should one hate those who have facilitated or committed mass rape of children or genocide? Does this situation not alarm and distress normal people? Why should the state think it is acceptable to arrest people for their beliefs and emotions anyway? Does the invasion and mass rape not offend you? Are you not offended, insulted or distressed that, by various means, you dare not object to this? Not even to the genocide? Feel threatened or alarmed? And is it moral to ban the truth? How can proper political decisions be made if based on lies and not on truth? Why should ‘offence’ or ‘insult’ be criminalised – and also only is certain contexts? If a comment were to stir up hatred(26) against a group, then if the statement is true, perhaps that group should not be loved, hey? If there were truths that if stated might offend or insult a group (s), or even stir up hatred, then to ban their statement is still to ban truth and takes away true and useful information from the public.This legislation can act to disempower the true victims in many cases, and to give the false impression that the perpetrators are the victims. Also it can act, inter alia, to protect the perpetrators from truth (in case they don’t like to hear it, and/or possibly face the consequences of it becoming widely known). So if the presence of group X meant a significant increase in rapes of children from group Y by group X, then one could not say this because group X might not like it (never mind what group Y don’t like, including their children getting raped, some groups are more equal than others). Better to pretend we are all the same (and at the same time don’t forget to celebrate the diversity!). If group B get arrested or stopped by the police at twice the rate of group A, then even if this were because group B committed twice the rate of crime, one could not state this fact/truth in case group B were insulted and this fact might cause resentment of group B. Better to let them off the crimes they commit and equalise the arrest figures, never mind if the other people are victimised by the crimes (and not to bother if any of this alarms/distresses/threatens/insults them, or even could be interpreted as inciting hatred against them). This all acts to suppress certain truths and challenges to government policy – and often in an insidious and surreptitious manner.

Hence, by various means there is a lack of freedom in this country in relation to the political freedom of dissenting from the government political policy of mass immigration. People are misinformed and are intimidated by various means. Dissenters are oppressed and are susceptible to prosecution by the state. Organisations and political parties dissenting are liable to much mistreatment from the state – this is political persecution.

You will acquiesce, you will not dissent. It’s called freedom. Orwell warned us about this:
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”

1. http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/unmasked-merseysider-jailed-anti-semitic-tweet-7966903
2.Even those in government can insult the English and/or the British without sanction – and certainly without going to prison. For example, saying the English are a race too lazy or incapable of working, etc. is fine, but don’t say it about Africans, etc.
3.Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19:
‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.’
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
4. http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2013/11/controversial-university-speakers/
5. ‘Immunity from criticism’ refers to the fact that if no criticism, challenge, debate, alternative ideas, etc. are allowed, then those with this immunity can merely state their ideas, beliefs, policies, etc. and do not have to face any criticism or challenge on them. Such people do not need to defend what they say in any way and can merely state what they wish and leave the impression almost as though it is correct and perfect – with no alternatives.
6. See Dr. T. Turner
http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
7. George Orwell is quoted as stating that: ‘The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies ‘something not desirable’’
8. http://news.sky.com/story/38512/gagged-bnp-silenced
9. See: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b02_1370111676
10. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/bnp-leader-banned-from-university-28670319.html
11. These links to the establishment, frequently by those purporting to be ‘anti-establishment’, will be examined in a forthcoming essay
12. Ironically and dishonestly, many of these types pose as very ‘anti-establishment’ and rebellious.
13. https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/who-are-the-uaf-unite-against-fascism/
14. And of course not all of them are in direct contact with the state in relation to the enforcement, but most of them understand that they will be very unlikely to be held account for threats, violence, etc. against anti-immigration people. Of course, some of them are in direct contact as will be discussed in future essays.
15. http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
16. Many fear social rejection if labelled as such a ‘witch’
17. Also see: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8ec_1269378544
18. http://www.civilliberty.org.uk/newsdetail.php?newsid=479
19. Communist badges? Even anarchists badges?
20. But won on appeal as this breached his human rights, e.g. see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2229211/Bus-driver-sacked-member-BNP-wins-legal-battle-claiming-dismissal-breach-human-rights.html
http://andrewbrons.eu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=641:arthur-redfearns-right-to-freedom-of-association
21. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6135060.stm
22. For further reading on threats to freedom of speech in Britain see:
Johnston, P. (2013) Feel Free to Say It. Threats to Freedom of Speech in Britain Today. Civitas, London.
Also, relatedly, see:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2614834/Arrested-quoting-Winston-Churchill-European-election-candidate-accused-religious-racial-harassment-repeats-wartime-prime-ministers-words-Islam-campaign-speech.html
23. One could interpret some of this legislation in such a manner that it would render many politicians guilty of the offences therein. For example the Public Order Act 1986 makes it, amongst other things, a criminal offence to state certain matters that threaten, abuse or insult and are likely to stir up racial hatred. Are not many pro-immigration speeches thus covered? What about those who state that the immigrants ‘do the jobs Brits are too lazy to do’?
24. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/thought-police-muscle-up-in-britain/story-e6frg6zo-1225700363959
25. https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/stop-white-british-genocide-campaign-join-now/
26. And how can this be shown to be the case? When would it not be resentment, disapproval or disgust, etc. and actually be hatred? Besides, how could causing hatred even be thought in a sane world #to be illegal?

Are White Britains Treated As Second Class In Their Own Country?

ARE WHITE BRITAINS TREATED AS SECOND CLASS IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY?

Written by Brittania

Photos and captions by Watt Tyler

Are white British people, the indigenous people of Britain, treated with the same consideration, respect, care and concern as other people are ………..…as immigrants are?

Imagine a country that was built, developed and defended for thousands of years by a beautiful, fair, strong, smart, brave and creative indigenous people. The country flourished and the people were happy. Then imagine a hostile government takes control of the country and floods in millions of immigrants, this invasion to the detriment of the indigenous people. Thousands of the indigenous women and children are raped by the immigrants, poverty increases for the indigenous people, but they are not allowed to fight back, in fact, they are not even allowed to express dissent. They are to submit to the invasion, the occupation, all the deprivations and harms, and they are to remain silent about it. In fact, in a cruel and controlling manner, the government tries to make them celebrate the invasion (and finance it and its associated costs). There will be no more indigenous people in time; some of the government and their friends openly boast of this fact, of a future when the race of indigenous people with their fair skins will no longer exist and ‘everyone will be coffee-coloured’. Have these indigenous people been treated as inferior in any way?

untitled31

 

Mass immigration has brought much suffering and harm to the indigenous people of Britain(1), including: the increases in many types of crime, such as the many thousands of rapes, many victims merely children; the importation of diseases; the lowering of wages and working conditions for the non-wealthy; reductions in freedoms; inhibition of indigenous culture; the shortages of and strains on resources, including housing; financial burdens in taxes; race riots; the strife and stress that diversity brings, including the reductions in fraternity, security and social capital; etc. Without immigration, the people of this country would not suffer these problems that immigration has brought(2). Indigenous people have suffered for the gain of immigrants…so one group loses for another group to gain… ‘equality’ anyone?

Picture 9

On a fundamental level, immigrants want to come and most indigenous people do not want them to – one group’s preferences are put above those of a less important group (the ‘second class’/’inferior’ indigenous group). If an immigrant wants a better life, then indigenous people are to have a worse life to facilitate this. Some suggest limiting your birth rates to accommodate immigrants (3), but their wanting to move to your country is not to be limited, oh no. Immigration has caused areas of the country to be largely occupied by immigrant groups – the government has effectively given parts of the land away without the consent of the indigenous people. White Brits are now the minority in London(4). Your land was given away, theirs was not. Not very ‘equal’. Perhaps less easily remedied, there is the threat of genocide to the indigenous people(5). Territory and existence are fundamental to a group, and both are threatened by immigration. These threats and realities cause stress and concern amongst indigenous people, but not amongst immigrants (since they are not losing anything in this respect).

image001(1)

The very fact of immigration puts one group (the immigrants) above the other group in relation to many issues. In this sense, there cannot be ‘equality’ as between immigrants and indigenous people, because the very fact of immigration has breached many of the ‘rights’ of indigenous people and has put the immigrants’ desires and wants as more important than those of the indigenous people. In the social and political sense, ‘equality’ is a nebulous-power-word(6), but many of its forms are simply not possible in the context of immigration: these two concepts are incompatible.

Not happening!

Not happening!

Indigenous people are also treated as second class in other ways. Can you object to immigration? Immigrants can object to anything you do, but can you really object to them being here? Not always easy without some potential loss to yourself. This loss in freedom of speech(7) again is not applied equally, and even if it were, it is only the indigenous people who would wish to exercise it. Various means are used to silence dissent, of course the nebulous-power-word ‘racism’(8) is thrown around, but also certain legal, social, financial and professional consequences can ensue if one dares to object – and they are going to make the grip on free speech even tighter yet(9) (if they can get away with it).

Picture 9

And how does the legal system treat you? We frequently hear that blacks are picked on by the police, (e.g. with more stop and searches than whites); but is this proportionate to the amount of crime they commit? Are men ‘picked on’ by the police by being stopped for rapes at a higher rate than women are? If crime rates differ, then police action rates also should reflect this were the police to be acting ‘equally’ in this respect. Where there is a glaring inequality before the law is in relation to the manner in which the legal system bends over backwards not to ‘offend’ immigrants, this at the expense of the indigenous white Brits. For example, the mass child rape and abuse noted in Rotherham was allowed to continue for decades(10). Would the legal system have allowed thousands of little black or Asian girls to be raped and abused by white men for decades(11)? And the police response time?…well, 16 years and still waiting…And the ‘racial equality’ laws, well, again, not really applied in an equal manner. For example, a pack attack on a white woman by immigrants shouting ‘kill the white slag’ is not considered as a racial(12)…imagine the other way round…well, imagine it, but don’t speak of it cause that might cause offence….and nobody wants to be called ‘racist’, or arrested(13).

19092011574[1]

And the media, all heard of Stephen Lawrence? Of course you have, the government (= the working man and woman paying taxes) has spent untold fortunes in relation to this case, and even changed the law so that defendants can be tried again(14) if acquitted (double jeopardy). Another fundamental protection removed to please immigrants (and, inter alia, to suppress and oppress indigenous people). But what about the little girl murdered on the bus by a black man while she was on her way to school? Vaguely remember the case? But can you remember her name(15)? What about a black man raping many elderly people in their own homes? Know his name(16)? Or any black cannibals in recent times(17)? Got any names? Has Kriss Donald’s(18) family been lavished with awards and money by the government? Any award ceremonies being held in his name(19)? Does the media frequently mention his name? Or any white victims’ names? When a little white girl as tortured and repeatedly raped and then taken to be shot dead, the media description on the day of the then wanted suspects omitted their race, but managed to broadcast that the car was ‘maroon’ in colour(20). Do you know her name? Does the media make all victims’ and perpetrators’ names equally salient to the public? Or are indigenous people not shown the same concern as are immigrants? The media go to great lengths to conceal the level of crime committed by immigrants(21), and to mislead the public into believing that ‘whitey’ is the bad one(22). Immigration is to be portrayed as beneficial to the country, and immigrants as victims of bad whites. This misrepresentation of the truth is admitted to by various journalists(23), and such behaviour is actually found in various guidelines to journalists, e.g. that in relation to immigrants, journalists are told to ‘find positive stories’ (National Union of Journalists, NUJ, Guidelines). Mass deception(24), and since this gives preferential and unfairly favourable treatment to immigrants and thus lower concern to white Brits, then this is not treating white Brits with the same respect/concern as other groups are treated(25). Not to mention the media coverage of any political party that dares to object to immigration…

img107

Often it is claimed that more immigrants should have certain jobs or educational places, etc. This might be labelled as affirmative action, ‘equality and diversity’(26) or suchlike(27), but if some groups are to be given the jobs/places, then this can only be at the expense of other people. To call this ‘equality’ is untrue: this is blatantly unequal and treats one group (white Brits) as second class. If you are not given the job because you are a white Brit, then you have been treated as lesser. And for a non-indigenous person to be given the favourable treatment, this can only mean unfavourable treatment to the white Brit. Can’t have one without the other.

img486

Perhaps you are offended that you are being treated as a second class person in your own country, but the very idea of offence is not applied equally to you either. White Brits must be very careful not to offend the immigrants(28). However, if you are offended by their presence and/or by any of their behaviours, or even by the very fact that you are not considered as equal of respect as they are, then you better keep quiet about it. White Brits being offended does not count in the same way, and can cause problems for those who express it. Offence only really counts if it is immigrants offended ..is this not an offensive fact? SShhhhhhhhhh…you mustn’t cause offence to the more important people. Their being offended is more important than your existence.

img487

So, second class might not be strong enough, perhaps third or fourth, but remember not to complain about immigration. While you sit in a choked traffic jam from your cramped over-priced home on your way to work at a job under your immigrant affirmative-action-boss, working to pay high taxes to help support the immigration, remember that the stresses under which you live, the lack of freedoms, the crime, the occupation of your country, the genocide…remember that even if you feel offended by any of this, keep quiet and don’t say anything that might offend the masters. How low are you that you can’t even express dissent? Maybe not even fourth…

img488

 

(1) # http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/529149/Political-class-responsible-for-immigration-mess
(2) # http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/417307/Mass-immigration-is-destroying-the-fabric-of-society
Also see:
(3) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11172446/Bill-Oddie-says-large-British-families-need-to-be-contained.html
http://topconservativenews.com/2014/10/bbc-star-bill-oddie-call-for-genocide-of-britains-terrible-race/
http://www.ukip.org/ukip_culture_spokesman_peter_whittle_responds_to_bill_oddie
(4) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2281941/600-000-decade-white-flight-London-White-Britons-minority-capital.html
(5) # https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/stop-white-british-genocide-campaign-join-now/
(6) # http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
(7) # http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-bawer/there-is-no-free-speech-in-sweden/
(8) Dr Thomas E. Turner (2013) “MULTICULTURALISM” – WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Smokescreens and Mirrors
https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/how-did-they-get-away-with-it-book-review/
http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0
(9) # http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11202290/Sharia-law-or-gay-marriage-critics-would-be-branded-extremists-under-Tory-plans-atheists-and-Christians-warn.html
(10) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2734694/It-hard-appalling-nature-abuse-child-victims-suffered-1-400-children-sexually-exploited-just-one-town-16-year-period-report-reveals.html
(11) # http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11059138/Rotherham-In-the-face-of-such-evil-who-is-the-racist-now.html
(12) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-Rhea-Page-head-yelling-kill-white-slag-FREED.html
(13) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-410150/Schoolgirl-arrested-refusing-study-non-English-pupils.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1221759/Hammer-attack-victim-seeks-1m-damages-politically-correct-school-closed-eyes-racial-tensions-Henry-Webster-Asian-Invasion-Swindon-Ridgeway-Foundation.html
(14) # Has one lawyer or media outlet mentioned that the media coverage might have rendered the second trial invalid? Many in the media covered the alleged killers in such a manner that could have prejudiced the trial and prevented a fair trial for the defendants. Never mind the numerous violations of their civil rights over the years.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2080159/Stephen-Lawrence-case-How-killers-finally-brought-justice.html
(15) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2441328/Christina-Edkins-stabbing-Phillip-Simelane-admits-manslaughter-Birmingham-schoolgirl-bus.html
(16) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1369491/Night-Stalker-Delroy-Grant-guilty-raping-elderly-women-17-year-reign-terror.html
(17) b# http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1210923/Brain-eating-convicted-killer-freed-murder-social-worker-bungles.html
(18) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-415247/Asian-gang-guilty-schoolboys-race-hate-murder.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/legacy/theeditors/2006/10/newswatch_6.html
(19) # compare and contrast to Stephen Lawrence, e.g. see:
http://www.architecture.com/StirlingPrize/Awards2014/StephenLawrencePrize/2014/StephenLawrencePrize2014Shortlist.aspx
http://www.leeds.gov.uk/residents/Pages/Stephen-lawrence-education-standard.aspx
(20) # http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1507784/Raped-tortured-then-told-You-are-going-to-die-slowly.html
(21) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1220695/Is-political-correctness-blame-lack-coverage-horrific-black-white-killings-Americas-Deep-South-Tennessee-Channon-Christian-Christopher-Newsom-carjack.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/299918/censored-race-war-thomas-sowell
(22) # http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/oct/22/ukcrime.race
(23) # http://www.examiner.com/article/star-ledger-admits-to-censoring-race-savage-post-concert-mob-attacks
(24) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2332230/The-BBC-bias-pro-immigration-lobby-Report-accuses-left-wing-Corporation-downplaying-violence-Islamists.html
(25) # Britain First campaigns to get the media to cover all victims to the same extent, e.g. see:
http://www.britainfirst.org/recognition-for-british-victims/
These campaigns include a protest outside Parliament in February 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCD7op0A61c
(26) # An internally inconsistent phrase – there cannot be ‘equality’ in all senses if there is racial or ethnic diversity
(27) # http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/356955
(28) # http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2808070/Fury-council-s-decision-not-Woolwich-memorial-site-Lee-Rigby-case-offends-Islamic-extremists.html

MULTICULTURALISM IS GENOCIDE campaign and stickers

Written by Cigpapers

Photos, Captions and “Stickering” by Watt Tyler

If you have read up on what multiculturalism is really about then you’ll realise we are facing genocide, and a lot sooner than the sixty to eighty years predicted by main stream politicians. Towards the end the sexual and physical violence against Whites will massively increase.

img386

A5 size stickers (21cm X 15cm). They are offset print rather than a PC printer so will last several months outside.

If you’re not yet politically aware please read these articles and then come back to this page:

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

Join The British Truth Movement – Stop White Genocide

There are many organisations, and groups, now starting to fight back against the multicultural genocide of Britain, and other previously White Nations. What the whole British Truth Movement needs is a mass awakening of the brainwashed masses as to what multiculturalism is really about, and what it will mean for their descendants.

img447

Sticker on a busy road in Trafford Park, Greater Manchester, England. In rush hours there is standing traffic making it easy to read.

The MULTICULTURALISM IS GENOCIDE sticker campaign is simply a re-branding exercise of the term “multiculturalism”. The stickers are offset printed and are A5 size or approximately 21cm X 15cm.

img446

Another sticker up in Mottram, Tameside, Greater Manchester, England.

 The best places are on busy roads that have standing traffic during rush hours giving thousands of views every day. Also bus stops and above ATMs can give a large number of views every day.

Packets of stickers have already been sent to South Wales, Dundee, Blackpool, North London, Toronto (Canada) and other places.

100 Multiculturalism Is Genocide Stickers With UK Postage

£7.00

 

300 MULTICULTURALISM IS GENOCIDE Stickers With UK Postage

£13.00

For  foreign postage costs or leaflets please email at instock@gmx.com. If you can send a photo of a sticker with somewhere indicating where it is (and the place hasn’t already been done) we’ll send another 15 stickers free of charge.

img448

Stickers by “Debbie” in Chapel-en-le-Frith, Capital of the High Peak, Derbyshire, England. Free pack of stickers on the way.

From the lads at Salford University who emailed this in and said

From the lads at Salford University (Lancashire,England) who emailed this in and said “We’re not all brainwashed, Globalist drones.” Thanks lads and a pack of free stickers on the way.

img451

Good hit in Camden, London, England by a Southern Nationalist. Pack of stickers in the post.

img476

Nice hit from the “Pie And Mash Squad” ( 5 words – We Go Where We Want ) at Clapton F.C. Free stickers posted.

img480

Manchester Nationalists launch an early morning raid on the University of Manchester and surrounding areas. Stickers in the post.

Screenshot 2014-10-27 19.16.20

Jess Lishak Women’s Officer for @ManchesterSU shows her anti-White racism on Twitter on 22nd October 2014. Tweet her at @ExecTeam_Jess

Screenshot 2014-10-27 10.41.04

Rotherham Globalist reds are squealing about a team hitting Rotherham. Strange they never spoke out against Child gang rape. Sorry but no free stickers for this photo my Trotskyist chums.

img482

National Strike Force (Merseyside Division) sent this in from Liverpool. They told us they did a full 100 pack of stickers across Liverpool and Birkenhead. Free stickers in the post.

img481

Another photo from Liverpool docks – which used to have plenty of well paid jobs before Marxist union bosses shut it down.

Screenshot 2014-10-30 10.18.25

The Globalists/Reds have no real street presence North of Birmingham and are left squealing to Liverpool Council. Why not also grass us up to Luciana Berger the jewish Labour MP for Liverpool Jake? @JakeArmistead

Just come in from Salford BNP

Just come in from Salford BNP

img667

Got this photo and the next three with the following email: “Stickers were sighted on the A406, some stickers have been there for 3 weeks. A sticker was also seen on the back of a road-sign on the A1055. Kind Regards “Anonymous”

Rich if you can email an address we’ll send you some free stickers.

img668

img669

img670

This photo from Squires Gate railway station in Blackpool, Lancashire, England was sent in by the notorious Jack

This photo from Squires Gate railway station in Blackpool, Lancashire, England was sent in by the notorious Jack “Boots” Renshaw.

img731

Blackpool Pleasure Beach in Lancashire, England gets a visit from National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit)

img734

National Strike Force ( East Manchester Division ) sent this photo from their rampage through Manchester University campuses on 22nd January 2015. Deano told us: “The Manchester reds have melted away – there was no opposition at all.”

img764

No one sent this to us but we found it on http://www.fightwhitegenocide.com the sticker appears to be outside a shopping centre in Hungary.

img765

This photo was also on http://www.fightwhitegenocide.com the sticker also appears to be outside a shopping centre in Hungary. No gibbering outrage from Hungarian Globalist reds yet – maybe Globalists aren’t tolerated there.

img790

National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) visited Blackpool for a day out. This isn’t one of our stickers but is very true.

img791

National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) on their day out in Blackpool.

img792

National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) again on their day out in Blackpool.

img793

National Strike Force (Racial Hygiene Unit) yet again on their day out in Blackpool.

img789

Salford, Lancashire, get a visit from a Pie And Mash Squad.

img834

An interesting new look for a Labour Party sign in Stockport, Greater Manchester.

img835

This photo and the one below have been sent in by National Action – one is Liverpool one is Birkenhead.

img836

img837

Looks like the scousers weren’t taken in by this propaganda for White genocide.

img840

A pro White genocide advert in Manchester – swiftly dealt with by a local Nationalist.

img849

Just come in from Liverpool Nationalists ( not sure which group/party) showing the World famous sticker in front of the quite well-known Liver Building.

img850

Liverpool students sent this in and said “We’re sick of our crappy cultural-marxist lecturers who seem to wish they lived in a squat in the 1970s.”

img852

Sent in by a National Front member from Stockport – free stickers in the post.

img871

The sticker outside Everton’s football ground Goodison Park. This was sent in by some Autonomous Nationalists.

img873

The sticker again outside Everton’s football ground Goodison Park at night. This was sent in by the same Autonomous Nationalists.

img876

The sticker somewhere on Merseyside. This was sent in by the same Autonomous Nationalists.

img887

The Unite Union are led by Len McCluskey and bankroll the U.A.F. to attack working-class British Nationalists opposing multicultural genocide.

img904

This sticker in Accrington was sent in by a UK Nationalist.

img904

Leicester gets a visit from West Midland Infidels.

img905

One of the main drivers of anti-White racism is the constant references to the jewish slave trade, which has been turned in to a White slave trade of Africans. The Liverpool museum of slavery got a visit from National Action.

img1054

A White Rabbit in Hull sent this in.

img1055

Screenshot 2015-01-22 16.24.59

@ANecroticTide – a Manchester Globalist red is left seriously butt-hurt in Rusholme.

Screenshot 2015-01-22 16.27.19

Globalist Bristol teacher Suzanne Williams is left outraged by opposition to genocide in Staple Hill, Bristol. Another N.U.T. member no doubt.

Screenshot 2015-01-14 19.48.39

A Globalist Portsmouth University red @ConorNorf0lk was squealing on Twitter about our campaign hitting Portsmouth. No photos yet but will post when received.

Screenshot 2015-01-10 19.35.36

Globalist and Deputy Leader of Stockport Council LibDem Councillor Iain Roberts was strangely drawn to our stickers in Stockport. Expect your neighbourhood to be flooded with leaflets and stickers Councillor Roberts!

Screenshot 2015-01-14 20.34.58

Another self-hating White from Salford was left outraged by opposition to genocide. Thanks for the mention @katieshark

Derby Telegraph has covered our campaign here ow.ly/MBXc6

Derby Telegraph has covered our campaign here ow.ly/MBXc6

img632

These are some stickers being put out by the Church of Creativity against White genocide – sorry but we don’t have any. Contact them through http://www.creativityalliance.com

FOR LEGAL REASONS : Please get the permission of the owners of any property you put the stickers on. By purchasing these stickers and/or submitting photo(s) you are agreeing to these terms and conditions.

Globalist Reds Fight Back With Their Own Stickers:

img699

A weak effort from Salford Globalist reds here on Ordsall Lane. I think you’re going to need bigger stickers my socialist chums. As always no free stickers for cultural-marxists.

img707

A notorious Globalist red who works as a cleaner at Manchester University was putting these out in Salford: “Burn the flag I have no country I am an anarchist I don’t believe in states borders or government I want to be rid of them all” We should point out to Paul K. that his minimum wage cleaning job at the University wouldn’t exist without the State, nor would his tax credits.

img723

A group of Globalist socialist political posers known as the “161Crew” from Manchester have put these up around Manchester. The 161Crew affiliate themselves with F.C. United of Manchester who are currently playing at Tameside Stadium. Several deals between F.C.U.M. and Labour run Greater Manchester Councils are currently being investigated by this blog.

Screenshot 2015-05-14 10.07.58

Even for a Globalist red it was pretty weird to put notes up trying to support multiculturalism – still if it keeps them busy and away from kids it can’t be that bad.

img860

A sticker in Gorton, East Manchester was sprayed over in orange with an anarchy sign sprayed above. Maybe it was a Dutch anarchist or a Blackpool fan.

img936

This sticker was in Mossley in the Pennines. You’ll notice the typical socialist half-arsed attack on it. After failing to rip it down they followed up with a crap attempt at covering it up.

5th Columnists In Britain

Written by Mike Whitby

pic004

First appeared on BNP website 26th January 2014

According to Wikipedia – 5th Columnists are; …‘A group of people who clandestinely undermine a larger group, such as a nation, from within’…. 

…‘A clandestine operation is an intelligence or military operation carried out in such a way that the operation goes unnoticed’…

In short, they are SPIES, and they are operating right under our noses, and to use one of their favourite terms, they are; ‘hidden in plain sight’.

HOLLYWOOD FILMS

If you’ve seen the films; ‘The 39 Steps’ and ‘Notorious’, you’ll know that the plots of both of those films revolve around 5th Columnist spies, living amongst the people and working on their plans to subvert the course of democracy in those countries.

In the films, this idea seems so preposterous, that nobody believes it. Also, the 5th Columnists had connections in such very high places, that the authorities wouldn’t even consider the possibility that they were spies, let alone investigate them.

Those were Hollywood films, but back to REAL LIFE; it sounds hard to believe, but such people are conspiring to destroy OUR country, right now! And, what they’re up to is nothing less than the GENOCIDE of our nation.

Here’s What Wikipedia Says About Genocide:

‘Generally speaking, genocide does not necessarily mean the immediate destruction of a nation, except when accomplished by mass killings of all members of a nation. It is intended rather to signify a co-ordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.

The objectives of such a plan would be the disintegration of the political and social institutions, of culture, language, national feelings, religion, and the economic existence of national groups, and the destruction of the personal security, liberty, health, dignity, and even the lives of the individuals belonging to such groups.’  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/09/30/multiculturalism-is-white-genocide/

Who Are The 5th Columnists?

There are, and have been, 5th Columnists operating in Britain for a very long time; the master controller’s are the Banksters, followed by the Iluminatti; Bilderbergers; Fabians; Freemason’s; Common Purpose agents. They are all very secretive and their members are not allowed to openly discuss their involvement in those organisations. In recent years, they’ve stepped-up their plans to take over our nation.

The Chain Of Command:

1) The Twelve Banking Families have dominated and controlled world governments for a very long time. For legal reasons, THEY are the ones that cannot be named. They are often said to be Jews, Christians and Muslims, but the only god they serve is Satan, and they belong to what the bible calls; “The synagogue of Satan”, Revelation 3:9

Their control became particularly strong a few hundred years ago, when they bribed monarchs and governments to allow them to steal vast quantities of money from the people of virtually every nation, through their central banking scam – which purports to ‘lend’ money to nations, but in reality it only takes money from them.

This utterly corrupt process has created worldwide poverty and tax-slavery. In return for money and power, Monarchs, Presidents and Prime Ministers, are dangled like puppets on strings, and willingly do the bankster’s bidding. 

Nowadays the banksters choose the Presidents and Prime Ministers that are most willing to carry out the bankster’s instructions to the letter. Regardless of the pretence of “democracy”, the bankster’s candidates are guaranteed to win – because they control all of the main parties and their leaders.

So, even if the government changes hands, very few real changes take place – each one of those puppets will pretend to do the right thing for the people, but there is absolutely no doubt who they really serve.

In their quest to achieve global dominance, THEY are responsible for virtually every war and revolution throughout the world over the past 400 years. They own/control all of the following organisations; Bank of England; National Reserve Bank; World Bank; IMF; ECB; UN (formerly the League of Nations); NATO; UNICEF; They also own/control most of the well known ‘charitable trusts’.

THEY decide which countries are allowed to manufacture and produce their own goods, and also which countries and organisations are to be demonised, or left to starve. They control the underworld and drug barons, and they decide upon the quantity of drugs to be produced in Afghanistan (and China, in the 19th century) and put on the streets, to poison our youngsters.

They own the ‘dark skinned’ countries of the British Commonwealth, and they have decided to flood Britain with foreigners – by controlling the world’s money supply, they control everything.

2) The Iluminatti is a highly secretive organisation, which is controlled by the banking families. They are the henchmen and Puppet-Masters of world governments and they are the leading bankster-puppets of the New World Order.

27092011583[1]

The Iluminatti was created in 1770 by Adam Weishaupt, as a revolutionary organisation. He and his group set out to infiltrate Freemasonry and (according to several authors) within ten years they had control of EVERY Masonic Chapter in the world, without the knowledge of most Freemasons. From that point on, the Freemason’s have carried out the bidding of the Iluminatti.

They believe that there should ONLY be 500 million people on this Earth. But, there are currently seven billion people. So, in the view of these master-controller’s, six and a half billion of us are surplus to requirements! (see the Georgia Guidestones – (http://www.thegeorgiaguidestones.com/Message.htm)

3) The Bilderberg Group is also a highly secretive organisation, and consist of very powerful globalist industrialists and politicians. They created the totally corrupt organisations known as the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU); they control the governments of the world, mainly through bribery and corruption, and they often place sexual perverts in positions of power; presumably, to demonstrate their Satanic beliefs. In fact, one of the UN’s most prominent people let the cat out of the bag, when he said; 

“No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a LUCIFERIAN Initiation.” David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations (UN).  

The Bilderberg Group was used by Ian Fleming, in the James Bond books, as the model for the evil criminal fraternity, known as S.P.E.C.T.R.E. But, be assured that the Bilderbergers are certainly NOT a fictional group.

4) The Order of Freemasons consists of businessmen, politicians, policemen & civil servants and many members of the establishment. If a ‘new direction’ is required by the banksters, then it is co-ordinated through the Masonic movement.

Membership and activities are usually kept secret, for ‘historical reasons’, even between individual members. Consequently, it’s quite easy for the controllers to invoke new directions, simply by suggesting to their members that “we believe this ‘new direction’ is the way forward”, but without telling their members the real reasons.

Because many of them are true patriots and would not stand for it. Hence the fact that it is very difficult to establish exactly how and when members of the establishment were instructed to begin to usurp our country and hand over our sovereignty to the banksters and a foreign power – the EU. 

Freemasonry was originally based upon noble and chivalric traditions and most Masons joined that organisation to make social and commercial connections to improve their chances of success – due to the fact that they each help fellow members to get on in life, and many of them do good charitable work.

But, most of them appear to be oblivious to the fact that their organisation is the conduit for the controllers. From the 17th to the mid-20th century, virtually EVERY man that aspired to climb the greasy pole in business or public office, was a Freemason; all the way from the Church Warden and Vicar, to bankers, Bishops and Kings.

They are the pawns of the Iluminatti and Bilderberger’s, who regard them as, quote; “useful idiots”. Although many honourable men have been Freemasons, the list of usurpers includes Karl Marx and Friederick Engels, who were both Freemason’s and they were financed by the banking dynasties to create Communism and Trade Unions, to control and manipulate people and countries. 

5) The Fabian Society is a semi-secretive Communist organisation, which was established in 1883, the same year that their mentor, Karl Marx left this mortal coil.

They knew that the British people would never voluntarily accept Communism, so in order to gain political power, by stealth and trickery; this organisation has adopted a policy of deceit for 130 years – that is to pretend to be something that it is not.

A very good example of this is the coat of arms that the Fabians used for over a hundred years – a wolf in sheep’s clothing – need I say any more?

$(KGrHqMOKkEE1vjFW+JIBNcSuOh1D!~~_12

In the late 1950’s, a member of the Fabian Society, who was also a very prominent member of the Communist Party of Great Britain, none other than Harold Wilson, gave a speech at a meeting in Oxford, announcing that; 

“…The Communist Party of Great Britain is to disband, because the British people will never accept Communist extremism. Instead, we intend to infiltrate the other political parties in Britain – we will dominate the left wing of the Conservative Party and the right wing of the Labour Party, and we will control British politics forever…”

Within a few years, Wilson became the leader of the Labour Party and was elected to the office of Prime Minister, twice! Since then, Great Britain has had several ‘Communist’ Prime Ministers, all of whom have been wolves-in-sheep’s-clothing!

Membership of the Fabian Society is very secretive and consists of predominantly, but not exclusively, members of the Labour Party and the Trade Union movement, although many Conservatives have owned up to being members of this 5th Columnist control mechanism.

Fabians are the bankster’s link which chooses candidates to stand as MP’s and Prime Ministers, effectively controlling the Houses of Parliament – therefore, nobody is allowed to become a candidate to be a Labour MP, unless they have been sanctioned by the Fabian Society.

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/the-fabian-society-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/

6) Common Purpose is a Marxist organisation and a registered “charity” which claims to be a training organisation for ‘leaders in the post-democratic era’. So they acknowledge that we no longer live in a democracy!! 

Common Purpose agents are the pawns of all the above, and these 5th Columnist’s are the glue that carries out the orders of the New World Order. Common Purpose agents, or graduates, as they choose to be called, are the eyes and ears in the workplace and on the streets, of those that wish to subjugate and enslave our people and country.

They are predominantly found in the establishment, civil service, politicians, local authorities, charities, police, Fire Brigade, banks, courts, law firms, insurance firms, NHS, architectural practices, job centres, enterprise centres, social entrepreneurs,  Saul Alinsky trainers, construction companies, church ministries, regeneration programmes, prison service, National Trust, GCHQ – the list goes on and on.

These are the people that promote what is popularly known as ‘political correctness’ and they are the ones that ensure that the Marxist subversion continues. Many Common Purpose agents are high ranking judges and establishment bosses, but typically, their members are shallow, selfish people who are easily manipulated, and believe they are special, simply because they were chosen.

The one thing that they all have in common is a self-interested greed, because, just like many Masons, they are only in it for what they can get out of it.

They were recruited because of their position within their particular organisation, or their potential to influence others, and are manipulated to follow the CP mantra – they are useful idiots, but they are still 5th Columnist traitors!

Common Purpose agents are instructed to stealthily spread the tenets of the Bolsjewik (original spelling) Marxist Revolutionaries, which had previously failed to spread their vile and destructive message across Western Europe – their plan was to enslave the world within Communism.

But, no matter what they did, the evil manipulators could NOT break the code of honour in the Western world, where the vast majority of people’s focus was on; the Family, God and Country; so the Bolsjewiks established a Communist think-tank to spread their propaganda. 

Their purpose was to find a solution to the biggest problem facing the implementers of World Communism and their question was; “How can Communism be spread throughout the world?” As their meetings were held in Frankfurt, Germany, they decided to call that think-tank ‘The Frankfurt School’ political correctness was born and Common Purpose agents are the day-to-day proponents of that sick agenda.

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/09/14/common-purpose-exposed-illuminati-front-organisation/

The Frankfurt School, which began in 1923, recommended the following list of actions; 

Read carefully and see if any of these things sound familiar…

1) The creation of ‘Racialism’ offences – to break down Nationalist ideals, by demonising those who prefer to mix with their own kind.

2) Continual change – to create confusion and destroy the morale of the people.

3) The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children – to distort young minds, break up families and destroy moral values.

4) The undermining of schools and teachers’ authority – to encourage unrest within youngsters and to reduce the value of their education.

5) Mass immigration – to destroy national identity and commitment to land and country, leading to the destruction of national borders.

6) The promotion of excessive drinking – to induce a helpless, alcoholic and drugged nation, that can easily be controlled.

7) Emptying the churches – to remove all moral belief systems that challenge the state’s authority.

8) An unreliable legal system, with bias against the victim of crime – to instil anger and resentment, to create constant upheaval.

9) Dependency on the state (or state benefits) – to ensure that the people do exactly as they are told, for total state-control of the masses.

10) Control and dumbing down of the media – only propagandist news will be allowed; to ensure that people remain controlled and follow orders.

11) Encourage the breakdown of families – as the family and its roots are the links to race, identity and nation – Nationalism; which is the enemy of Communism.

Just remember that when you read or hear about teachers showing primary school children, how to put a condom onto a plastic penis, or tell 5-year-old schoolchildren stories like; ‘And Tango Makes Three’, you will understand that they are being taught the disgusting principles of the Frankfurt School! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1364360/Sex-education-Do-want-5-year-old-child-given-explicit-lessons.html

WHY do young children need to know about things like this?! It is nothing but STATE PAEDOPHILIA on a massive scale. Politicians want to reduce the age of consent, so that they can’t be prosecuted for having RENT BOYS & GIRLS! (Labour paedophiles. Google: Labour25 – http://labour25.com/)

Harriet Harman, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party said; “Sexually explicit photographs of children should be legalised”.

Peter Tatchell, Labour Party activist and gay rights campaigner, said; “Not all sex involving children is unwanted”.

Germaine Greer, Marxist author, said; “I admit to being sexually attracted to pre-adult boys”.

Youngsters are also being taught that sexual perversion is normal, and that it’s okay to indulge in disgusting acts of depravity.

All of these are Frankfurt School teachings and they are going on right now in your child’s school!

Brainwashing IOur Youth By Colleges And Broadcasting

Communist teachers and lecturer’s at schools, colleges and universities propagandise students with Marxist, anti-British, mantra’s and teach these pliable youngsters to demonise Nationalism. They use World War 2 propaganda to convince people that Nationalism is wrong (Google: David Cole in Auschwitz, for the facts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWCOjOj4RAU).

But they don’t tell you about the seven million Christians that were killed by Stalin’s Communists, in ONE YEAR! (Google: The Soviet Story http://www.sovietstory.com/) or the 100 million+ people who have been murdered by Communists so far!

Students are also told that it’s better to have mixed race couples, than to stick to their own kind. But, there’s an old saying that; “Birds of a feather flock together”. That’s because throughout human nature, most people, regardless of their race, colour or creed, would prefer to be with their own kind. The same thing applies to the animal kingdoms.

Hollywood; Music Videos; TV and Newspapers are filled with pornography, to brainwash our youngsters into the Hedonistic (me, me, me) mindset of the Bolsjewik Frankfurt School. This trash and a great deal more is served up to us by the BBC, and the result is that many people are now refusing to pay the BBC TV Licence, due to the BBC’s outrageous lies and Marxist propaganda.

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/tv-license-resistance-not-paying-discounts-refunds/

The essence of ‘nationalism’ is the extended family

In 21st century Britain, we have several political parties, but they all sing the same Zionist tune; Conservative, Liberal, Labour, UKIP, Greens, SNP, Plaid Cymru. They all stick together against the British people, and not one of them is willing to expose the bankster puppet masters, but they all claim to speak for the people! 

Many of those politicians are former members of the murderous Communist movement, including; Blair, Brown, Darling, Straw, Harman, Reid, Cameron, Clegg, Clarke, Pickles, and many more. And, Cameron is a signatory to the Communist organisation, Unite Against ‘Freedom’ (UAF).

Also, the Marxist Trades Union Congress (TUC) ensures that all of the unions are controlled by Communists. Thereby, controlling the masses of the British people – ironically, all union members PAY HUGE MEMBERSHIP FEES – for the ‘privilege’ of being controlled and indoctrinated by communists! 

Recently, RT News ran a news bulletin on British Trade Unions; in particular UNISON, marching through London carrying massive banners praising Stalinist Communism – Stalin was one of the most evil monsters that has ever lived!

https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/04/09/nationalist-trades-union-congress/

Yet, the people who take YOUR union subscriptions are openly supporting him and his murderous thugs on the streets of your capital city. Also, seven thousand Muslims were recently allowed to march through Bolton, and counter demonstrations by British patriots were banned by the police. http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/whites-threatened-muslims-march

The British media, police and politicians turn a blind eye to this – because they know that the bankster-controllers want to make it known that Britain is now a Communist country, which also embraces the so-called “religion of peace” – Islam. But, woe-betide anyone extolling the genuine virtues of Nationalism and the love of your own nation and people, as you will be hounded and bullied by the thugs-in-uniform.

The truth is that Nationalism is the most natural thing in the world. It is purely based on the instinctual desire to protect your own family and extended families, and those of your neighbours and friends. What could be more natural than that? The people of every nation have the inalienable right to determine their own future, in their own country.

The British people don’t need to literally ‘fight’, to free our country; we only have to get enough people to stand with us, and say; ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, we want our country back?!

Next time your politically correct friend says; “I’m also against immigration, but I’m going to vote for UKIP”, ask them if they realise who finances UKIP and why Nigel Mirage, the Merchant Banker, has been allowed to appear on the BBC’s ‘Question Time’ more often than ANY other politician, over the past 40 years – could he be a friend of theirs? 

Also, do those people understand UKIP’s policy of ‘Balanced Migration’?

What this means is:- UKIP is very happy to see a million immigrants COME INTO OUR COUNTRY, as long as a million British people LEAVE ! Is that what British people REALLY want? I don’t think so. Also, UKIP believes that it is acceptable to force schoolchildren to visit mosques! Here is a clip from a recent report;

‘…Parents fears on Islam “garbage” says UKIP… 

‘…a UKIP politician has announced plans to visit a city mosque at the centre of a row surrounding parents’ decision to stop their children attending on a school trip to a Muslim mosque. Mr Stanley said: “I am in no way condemning these parents but I do not agree with this decision (by the parents) and so I want to go and reassure the Muslim community…

“UKIP is not a racist party and has a clear vision that someone’s religion is their own matter. We want to be clear as a party that we do not back any of the garbage uttered on the subject…

“For anyone to say schoolchildren visiting a mosque is anything to do with political correctness is just nonsense.” http://www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/parents-fears-islam-garbage-says-ukip

So, to assess what the UKIP man, Mr Stanley is saying is that; He wants to reassure the Muslim community, because he thinks that the Muslims may be offended by the actions of the parents. As he believes that the parents’ action, to protect their children, is somehow ‘wrong’ and he evidently thinks it is racist to stop schools from forcing this evil ideology onto their children.

The UKIP man also believes that the parents’ objections are garbage! There is a word for the UKIP man, but you are far too polite for me to use it.

Would YOU allow someone to force your children to visit a mosque? If you would, you have been well and truly brainwashed, and you probably need to visit a psychiatrist.

We are constantly told that we live in a democracy, yet we were never given the choice about the genocide and enslavement of Britain, by 5th Columnist traitors. There’s only ONE party that can save our people and country and that’s the British National Party.

Those that oppose us are either, anti-British racists, brainwashed, misguided fools, ‘useful idiots’, or they are Communist agitators, who are well aware of the mass deception of the British people.

So, we ALL need to let the public see that we are NOT nutters, or extremists. We are ordinary people, just like them, except that WE have the courage to speak the truth, when, as George Orwell said; 

“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”.

Courage seems to be lacking in Britain today, because many people can see what is going on and they agree with us, but they are too frightened to say so. But, when they realise that we are merely struggling for the survival of our people, they will join us in droves. One thing is certain, the only political party that will save Britain, is the British National Party.

BBC TV Licence Resistance : Not Paying – Discounts – Refunds

Written by Cigpapers

Photos, Captions and Video Links by Watt Tyler

There is a resistance to the BBC TV Licence growing across the UK, so here’s some facts for those thinking of joining it.

pic005

1. What Is The BBC TV Licence:

The TV Licence fee funds public broadcasting by the BBC, allowing it to allegedly run a politically impartial TV and Radio service. The current colour TV Licence Fee is £145:50 per year (a black and white TV Licence is £49:00 per year) . The fee makes up about 75% of the BBC’s income – the BBC are very secretive about where the other 25% comes from.

Here’s a Freedom Of Information Request About BBC funding sources:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bbc_funding_sources

The BBC contracts the collection and administration of the TV Licence out to TV Licensing who in turn employ Capita. According to the BBC, the money you pay is split between the following services:

Licence Fee Costs

2. You Only Need A Licence If You Watch Or Record “Live” TV:

pic004

Everyone in the UK who watches or records “live TV” (content as it is being broadcast) needs to be covered by a TV Licence.

You do not need a TV Licence if you only watch content after it’s been shown on television. This includes TV programmes downloaded or streamed after broadcast using a catch-up service.

So, if you have a TV but only use it to watch videos/DVDs, for gaming or for watching catch-up TV (eg, BBC iPlayer, 4oD), then you don’t need a TV Licence.

What’s ‘live TV’?

When we talk about “live TV”, confusingly it isn’t necessarily a live episode of a programme, it could be pre-recorded.

“Live TV” is content at the time it’s being broadcast on a TV channel.

A TV channel doesn’t just mean the big five on terrestrial TV, nor any channel that’s just on Freeview. It means any channel (including, say, +1 channels or foreign channels) on any main TV platform, including Freeview, Virgin or Sky.

Internet-only services such as YouTube or Netflix don’t need a TV Licence though.

Here are a few examples to show what this means:

  • When watching an episode of Hollyoaks on your TV, on Channel 4, you DO need a TV Licence.
  • When watching an episode of Hollyoaks via the Channel 4 online streaming service (4oD) at the same time as it’s being shown on Channel 4, you DO need a TV Licence.
  • When watching an episode of Hollyoaks online at a time that it isn’t being broadcast “live” on Channel 4, you DON’T need a TV Licence.

pic004

3. What If You Have The Equipment To Watch TV But Don’t Use It:

Simply having the necessary equipment to watch TV i.e. a TV, Freeview box, aerial etc. does not mean you must have a TV Licence. For example if you only use your TV, aerial, Freeview box and connectors to listen to the radio, watch DVDs/videos or play games you do not need a TV Licence. If you had a radio, but not a television, until 1971 you had to pay for a Radio Licence.These days, you don’t need a licence to listen to the radio (including BBC stations). This applies however you listen, even if you listen using television equipment, a Freeview box and a TV aerial.

img096

4. Eligibility For A Discount Or Free TV Licence:

Depending on your circumstances, it may be possible to get a discount or free TV Licence.

Over-75s get a free TV Licence. If you’re over 74 and your licence will run out before you turn 75, you’re entitled to a short-term licence covering you until you reach 75.If you’ve got a short-term licence, you should receive the free one automatically as soon as you reach 75. If not, get in touch with TV Licensing.

If you or someone you live with is blind or severely sight-impaired, you’ll get 50% off the cost of a TV licence. So it’s £72.75 for a colour set or £24.50 for a black and white one.

You must provide TV Licensing with a photocopy of one of these documents to confirm you’re certified as either blind or severely sight-impaired:

  • A copy of the certificate or document issued by or on behalf of your local authority.
  • A copy of the certificate from your ophthalmologist.

If you’re only partially sighted or sight-impaired, you won’t qualify for the concession.

If you live in a residential care home and watch TV in your own room or flat, then you need a licence. You may be able to apply for an Accommodation or Residential Care Concessionary Licence though, if you qualify.This costs £7.50 per room, flat or bungalow. Both you and your accommodation must qualify.

Go to http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/  to get details on these free or discounted TV licenses.

5. Recording Or Watching Recorded TV:

If you record any live TV programmes from any channel at the time of broadcast by any means (video recorder,DVD recorder,Sky+,TiVo etc.) and through any equipment (aerial, Freeview box, cable or satellite) you will require a TV Licence. However to watch DVDs, videos etc. previously recorded at another premises you will not require a TV Licence.

6. Getting Caught Watching “Live Broadcast TV” Without A Licence:

The BBC claim they have handheld detectors and TV detector vans, most people agree this is highly unlikely due to technical problems and there is no evidence of prosecutions due to this alleged detecting equipment.

pic004

How people are usually caught is through a Capita agent knocking on their door. They get the addresses to check simply by going to every home not on the TV Licence data base. These Capita agents are believed to be on a £20 commission for every TV Licence evader they catch.  These Capita agents have no right of entry in to your home if you decline to let them in, you are also under no obligation to answer any of their questions. Your best bet is to always video these encounters in full. Here are some Capita TV Licence agents being dealt with on video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHRhXW1hno

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jt7o5IOUnfY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvXu23rDEUg

If you don’t need a TV Licence the best advice to deal with the Capita agents would probably be to politely:

a. Ask to see their identity card.

b. Give your name if you’re the householder.

c. Explain you don’t watch or record live broadcast TV so don’t need a TV Licence.

d. Decline to let them in your home – they have no right of entry if they don’t have a uniformed Police Officer with a warrant with them.

e. If you do make the mistake of letting them in, or they have a Police Officer with a warrant with them, don’t comply with any requests to turn on or demonstrate any equipment to them.

f. At no time become angry, abusive or threatening – you’ll just get arrested.

g. Under no circumstances sign a 178 form even if you have been caught “bang to rights”.

The notorious 178 form - never sign one.

The notorious 178 form – never sign one.

Even when they come with a Uniformed Police Officer with a search warrant they don’t always get in Peoples’ houses:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRQTkOk__48

7. Punishments For Not Having A TV Licence:

In the UK getting caught watching (or recording) live TV broadcasts without a TV License is a criminal offence. If you do sign the 178 form you will probably be summoned to your local Magistrates Court for plea and sentencing. Your guilt, if you signed a 178 form, is taken for granted and you can be fined up to £1,000. The normal fine for a first time offender is about £50 to £100. There is also the prosecution costs, which are about £90, that you also have to pay. About 10% of criminal prosecutions in British Magistrates Courts are now for TV Licence evasion. You can’t be sent to prison for TV Licence evasion, but can be sent to prison if you don’t pay your fine. A third of women sent to prison in Britain are now for failure to pay a TV Licence fee evasion fine.

A mock up of a TV detector unit - there's no evidence this equipment actually exists.

A mock-up of a TV detector unit – there’s no evidence this equipment actually works.

Here’s a major player with the TV Licence Resistance making a video about witnessing TV Licence evasion prosecutions at his local Magistrates Court:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzzweUmp8Rw

You’ll notice at the Magistrates Court he attended there were 86 prosecutions ( 19 men and 67 women) in a total of 75 minutes. All the cases were based on the defendant signing the notorious 178 form with no evidence from TV detector vans or hand-held detectors. The fines ranged from £35 to £600 with a standard £90 prosecution costs.

Freedom Of Information Act Request About TV Licence Fee Prosecutions And Detector Equipment:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bbc_license_evasion_prosecutions

Freedom Of Information Act Request About TV Licence Fee Magistrate Issued Search Warrants Due To Alleged Detector Equipment:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bbc_tv_detector_equipment_search

8. Refund Of TV Licence Fee:

If you realise you have paid for a TV license you didn't need it's easy to claim a refund.

If you realise you have paid for a TV Licence you didn’t need it’s easy to claim a refund.

If you have realised that you have been paying for a TV Licence when you didn’t need one, or were eligible for a discount, you can claim up to 2 years ago here:

https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/refunds-and-cancellations/apply-for-a-refund/ 

There’s usually no problem with getting up to two years refunded. For periods before two years ago you will need to make a written application to:

Head of Revenue Management
BBC TV Licensing
2nd Floor, The Lighthouse
BBC White City
201 Wood Lane
London
W12 7TQ

9. As The BBC Is Clearly A Corrupt Criminal Organisation Can It Collect Legally:

pic005

Technically the answer is the BBC can’t legally collect the TV Licence anyway. Think of its corruption regarding paedophilia, 911, the Royal Family, foreign wars, PFI Fraud etc. However you are very unlikely to get any result on these defences due to the corruption of the British legal profession and judiciary. Some people who are well resourced with a top legal team and expert witnesses can get results on this basis, however it is not a recommended route to take. Here is a 911 truther who did get a not guilty verdict for TV Licence fee evasion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZBM-pkJPio

pic004

10. Read Up Before Applying For Your Refund Or Joining The TV Licence Resistance:

Before applying for your refunds/discount or joining the TV Licence Resistance it is advisable to read up fully so you know what your exact legal position is. Here are some recommended sites:

http://tv-licensing.blogspot.co.uk/

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/tv-licence

Here is a UK Column video on the BBC TV Licence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZPPy4yR4Hw

pic005

Here Is A Letter Removing Implied Right Of Access You May Want To Use:

Customer Relations                                                         Insert Your Address Here
TV Licensing                                                                       Insert Date Here
Darlington
DL98 1TL

Removal Of Implied Right Of Access –Insert Your Address Here
TV Licensing Reference Number  –Insert Ref. No. From TV Licensing Here

This instruction is made in accordance with the BBC TV Licensing Withdrawal Of Implied Right Of Access (WOIRA) Policy (The Policy).

As the legal occupier of the above mentioned property I hereby remove TV Licensing’s implied right of access to the property, in accordance with the terms of the Policy. By “TV Licensing” I mean any employees, agents or contractors acting on behalf of the BBC as TV Licensing Authority.

The Policy is quite clear that I do not need to give a name for my instruction to be legally valid, so I will not be doing so. You can verify my status as the Legal Occupier by matching the reference number above to my property.

This instruction comes into effect immediately . Should TV Licensing personnel trespass on my property after receipt of this instruction, I reserve the right to eject them from my property and seek redress from the Courts.

Please confirm receipt of this letter and acknowledgement of its terms by writing back to me.

Yours sincerely

The Legal Occupier

Freedom Of Information Act Request Relating To Withdrawl Of Implied Right Of Access : RFI20090807

Please read the Freedom Of Information Act Request at the link below relating to “Withdrawl Of Implied Right Of Access”:

http://www.bbctvlicence.com/Freedom%20of%20Information%20-%20no%20name%20needed%20for%20WOIRA.pdf

BBC Spends £7million On Refreshment:

 The BBC has just been caught out again by BNP activists spending Licence Fee payer’s money like water. A Freedom Of Information Act request has revealed the staggering amounts spent by BBC staff on expense accounts.

These latest figures are only for food, drink and refreshments over the last three years. The BBC is stalling on giving the most expensive bottles of champagne and wine purchased but we are hunting these figures down.   

The figures are:

2010 to 2011  £2,306,496

2011 to 2012  £2,233,938

2012 to 2013  £2,416,070

Total               £6,956 ,504

 

That is a staggering £44,593 every week for the last three years.

 

These expenses are just for food, drink and food for refreshments for staff purchased off BBC premises.

These figures do NOT include subsidised restaurants and cafes on BBC premises.

These figures do NOT include travel or hotel expenses – we are chasing these expenses down and will release them as soon as we can get them.

As usual this shows the complete contempt the BBC have for the hard pressed Licence Fee payers of Britain.

 

 

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/193559/response/490915/attach/3/RFI20140257%20Final%20responses.pdf

BBC Blows Nearly £29 Million On Hotels In Last Three Years:

The BBC has a reputation for having complete contempt for Television License fee payers. A Freedom Of Information Act request has revealed just how much of our money is blown by this corrupt, racist and paedophile-infested organisation on luxury hotel rooms for its staff. These figures do not include transport, meals, drinks or any costs other than hotel rooms:

2011 – £8.4 million spent by BBC staff on hotel rooms.
2012 – £8.8 million spent by BBC staff on hotel rooms.
2013 – £11.6 million spent by BBC staff on hotel rooms.

The reason for the jump in 2013 is explained by the BBC as being due to the Sochi Olympics, Brazil World Cup and Glasgow Commonwealth Games. This however would imply that the BBC spent an average of nearly £1 million on hotel rooms for each of these three events.

The BBC hasn’t provided full figures yet but here is a list of the most expensive hotel room paid for each year by the BBC for staff:

2011 – £306 was the most expensive hotel room paid for by the BBC.
2012 – £632 was the most expensive hotel room paid for by the BBC.
2013 – £411 was the most expensive hotel room paid for by the BBC.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/bbc_hotel_accomodation_expenses#incoming-517926

 

 

Book Review: HOW DID THEY GET AWAY WITH IT?

HOW DID THEY GET AWAY WITH IT?

SMOKESCREENS AND MIRRORS
LIES, CONFUSION, TRICKERY AND PRETENSIONS.

A Study of Language

A short summary/review of Dr Thomas E. Turner’s book

By Boadicea

Millions pour in from the third world as if a Camp of the Saints(1) were occurring in slow motion. This brings many problems and much strife and grief, e.g.: thousands of British girls are raped; working Brits lose a fortune in lower wages (2) and by paying extra taxes to support the immigrants (and to fund the related industries, etc.(3)); large areas of the land are ‘ethnically-cleansed’ by immigrants; there is destruction of British culture and of the social fabric; and, most significantly, there is the facilitation and threat of genocide of the British people. The people are anxious, angry, unhappy, hurt – the people are being harmed and yet they dare not speak out. How did those who engineered this get away with it?

Picture 9

One significant factor in pulling this off was the use of various words as tools to suppress dissent. These terms suppress dissent by direct means, and also by indirect means – they are used as tools of power to exert social and political power over the people.

In Dr Turner’s book these terms are analysed and it is shown that these words are not even ‘proper’ words – that’s how they work their power.

‘Wayycist!!!’

Picture 9

These terms are a specific type of term: ‘nebulous-power-words’. These terms can act as tools of power because of the very nature of the words. The characteristics of these terms enable them to obscure truth, inhibit rationality – confusing people and distorting perception – and hence the emotions and social forces associated with such terms can act to manipulate people. The power of these terms is contingent upon their features, e.g. their lack of rationality (4) and the fact that most people do not recognise this lack – but instead misperceive the terms as properly rational terms. It is because of these features that the social and emotional power associated with the terms can operate to control people.

You might have heard the non-white Cohesion Officer on television dismissing a poor white person who might have had the audacity to say that he thinks that the policy of favouring non-whites in employment might be unfair and not an act of ‘equality’ – ‘At our Unit’ the Officer snarls, then raising the voice to a terribly superior pitch, ‘we celebrate the diversity and do you not realise that ‘equality’ is the root of ‘multiculturalism’? And quite honestly I think your statement is dangerously close to sounding like ‘racism’!’ The white person will now deny being a ‘racist’ and say how many black friends he has, how much he supports ‘equality’, he thinks it should not matter what a person’s skin colour is, blablabla….on the defence. But defence to what? The statement from the state-paid official is mumbo jumbo.

image001(1)

‘Multiculturalism’ is rooted in ‘equality’ and opposed to ‘racism’

The three terms ‘racism’, ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘equality’ are nebulous-power-words and should not be used in rational discourse. These terms do not possess high referentiality and also hold strong emotional associations and social force. People celebrate ‘multiculturalism’, even constructing monuments to it (5), and opposing ‘equality’ is heresy. Being a ‘racist’ often is considered the most terrible thing.

These terms have been used to discuss, justify and explain changes in the lives of millions of people. But what so these words actually mean?

Let us examine the definitions of these 3 terms. Definitions are available in dictionaries, glossaries, in the literature, from interviews, etc.

I support ‘equality’ as a moral good!

First, examining ‘equality’ (6) one finds many definitions available. In the sense of being the same (in quantity and/or quality, i.e. equivalence), this term possesses high referentiality – it would be perfectly rational to use this term in such senses (7). However, in the social and political sense one finds that this term is problematic. There are many ways in which this term is used in the social and political context(8), including(9): equality of outcome, (e.g. wealth, income, representation, distribution of goods, etc.); equality of process, (e.g. equality of opportunity, etc.); ontological equality; the idea of being the same; equality of recognition; equality of condition; equality of fraternity; equality before the law; equality of rights; etc.

The very fact of multiple meanings is a factor denoting low referentiality – since one could never be sure which definition was being used. However, there are other problems with this set of definitions. For example, some of these uses of the term ‘equality’ are inconsistent with one another. A well-known form of ‘equality’ is that of equality of opportunity. One could use this in reference to places at university, or jobs, etc. However, if the relevant groups differ on the relevant criterion (or criteria), then equal processing will produce unequal outcomes. Hence, in these circumstances, one could not have ‘equality’: one could have equality of outcome at the expense of inequality of process, or vice versa(10). So, if the cry is for ‘equality’ – then to which form of ‘equality’ is one referring? ‘Equality’ is not a sufficient term in itself. One would need to specify the exact form of ‘equality’, and then, if there were such transparency, certain issues might become apparent. For example, if one merely wants equal numbers in relation to outcome, then one might wonder why this is? Is this some sort of numerical OCD? Is it moral to deprive the best qualified candidates merely because of their group membership? And if so, is this ‘equality’? Will this rule apply (dare I say ‘equally’) in all contexts? And how does one determine membership in the group categories – is this not inherently unequal? What harms are associated with this (hence raising moral issues)? Why would this necessarily be a moral good? Or an aim?

A single clear high referentiality definition of the term would illuminate many issues concerning the public good, logic, truth, morality, etc. – issues that are obscured by use of the confused and unclear term ‘equality’. Nebulous-power-words tend to confuse and obscure, yet how very dare anyone object to the holy and righteous term of ‘equality’.

We need action against ‘racism’!

‘Racism’ is a very powerful nebulous-power-word. People go to great lengths to avoid being called ‘racist’ (11) – sometimes even making ‘friends’ with people from other races. Many people do not do what is correct because they want to avoid being labelled as ‘racist’ – this allegation also made against the police(12). International conferences are held to combat ‘racism’(13) and governments speak against it. We need to stop ‘racism’ in football too(14). Some believe ‘racism’ is a criminal offence(15) – many are reported in the media as being arrested for ‘racism’(16). ‘Racism’(17) warrants censorship and many other punishments(18). This term controls speech, perceptions, conception and behaviour.

However, what does this word actually mean?

Many people cannot define the term at all, and some definitions available present low referentiality, e.g. that a racist incident is one so perceived(19) . If one examines the definitions that are available, one finds many definitions – again denoting low referentiality. Popular definitions include (in relation to a race or races): hatred; superiority; stereotyping; prejudice; discrimination; mistreatment; ‘inequality’; genocide(20); preference; intolerance; power; and yet others, including the idea that ‘racism’ is the state of being uninformed/uneducated/unintelligent, evil/wicked, etc.

Again, if a single definition were chosen, then the power of this term would diminish. This term, as a nebulous-power-word, has the immense power it does because it lacks high referentiality. For example if one were to pick the popular definition of ‘hatred’. If this had always been(21) the one and only definition of the term, then what would be so terrible about this? People hate all sorts of groups, why is this case so demonised and not others? Surely people are entitled to their own emotions? And if this were the only definition, then the numerous times this term is attributed in an unwarranted manner (used to silence and control) would become apparent. For example, if someone were to state that ‘group X has on average a lower ability in Y’, then why should this necessarily be attributed to hatred? Could it not just be true or false? This replacement exercise(22) can be performed with all the commonly-found definitions of the term and the intellectual dishonesty becomes clear, as do other matters – such as questions of morality. If one wants action against ‘racism’ what exactly is one wanting to prevent, and why?

All the definitions of ‘racism’ present problems – such as the inconsistent manner in which ‘stereotyping’ is used. It is not ‘racist’ to stereotype groups unless it is unfavourable to non-white groups(23). ‘Anti-racists’ can sneer at whites, including Brits, no problem – ‘Brits are too lazy to work and need immigrants’, etc.(24) Even putting to one side the unequal application, if ‘racism’ were merely defend as stereotyping/generalising about a race(s), then ‘racism’ would merely be such generalising. What is so very terrible about that? Do we really need to hold an International Conference because someone might have made a generalisation in their mind? Or even said it out loud? What if the thought is actually true(25)? And surely if ‘racism’ is defined as mistreatment of a racial group – then is not mass immigration a racist act against us? Which would mean that ‘multiculturalism’ were ‘racism’ and also ‘anti-racism’ (internally inconsistent)? So if ‘racism’ is defined only to disempower one racial group – then is this ‘racist’?

Dr Turner deconstructs this term to the extent that after reading his analysis you will never view the term ‘racist’ the same again.

It’s a celebration of ‘multiculturalism’

Investigating the definitions available of the term ‘multiculturalism’ one finds that there are 7 commonly found parts of the definitions that are available(26), plus the descriptive definition:

1.    All groups practising their own culture
2.    All the same
3.    Celebration of diversity
4.    Everyone living happily together
5.    Equality
6.    ‘Anti-racism’
7.    Cultural relativism

These elements present problems from a rational perspective – whether examined alone and/or in combination, as will be shown briefly here.

I want to preserve all the world’s cultures and the diversity!!

Element one presents an idea that is not achievable in practice: all groups cannot practise their own cultures(27) in one place at one time. This simply is not possible. The one set of rules dilemma illuminates the logical fact that since a culture is described by a set of descriptive ‘rules’(28), only one such set can define the culture in question. Thus, if two (or more) cultures differ on any of these rules(29), then both sets cannot describe the resultant area at any one time. For example, if a culture has the custom of all houses being painted pink, then if a blue-house-painting culture moves in to the city, then the city-scape cannot remain all blue and all pink. Not possible. One or both cultures will be changed(30). The idea of ‘everyone doing their own thing’ is not preserving the original cultures, and neither does it represent ‘everyone doing their own thing’ in this context. This dilemma is played out across immigrised areas in Britain today(31). Is the Muslim call to prayer to be played across public space(32)? Are gays to be allowed to be gay? What are women to wear? May they drive on the roads? Is alcohol allowed? Is Piglet allowed(33)?

If one really did believe in preservation of culture and all cultures being allowed to practise their own cultures, then the political policy of mass immigration would not be a good idea.

All the different groups are the same!!

As to element two, we are not all the same, and if we were on wonders how on earth one would be able to categorise people into the relevant groups anyway. This is simply an untrue statement as are all the related lies such as ‘we are no different to other people’, ‘there is no such thing as race’, ‘we are all the same inside’, etc. If this element is used to define the term ‘multiculturalism’, then ‘multiculturalism’ is defined with an untruth.

It’s just a non-stop celebration here!!

Picture 9

Element Three (celebration of diversity) does not describe general reality. Diversity (as brought by immigration – which is the only type of diversity relevant here) in fact tends to make people less happy and, despite frequent claims to the contrary, tends to harm the people/society experiencing it (other things being equal). Studies show diversity causes people to be less trusting, less willing to sacrifice for others, less secure, less mentally healthy, more anxious, and is also associated with lower levels of social capital(34).

Such diversity tends to bring discomfort, strife, conflict and increases the chances of civil disorder, (e.g. race riots in 2001 across Britain, Birmingham’s inter-racial riots in 2005(35), etc.) and even civil war(36). Caldwell notes that every country that has experienced mass immigration has some form of ‘simmering’ ethnic conflict (Caldwell, 2009(37)). John Derbyshire predicts our grandchildren asking why we couldn’t see that such diversity obviously causes trouble – and they will be asking ‘what could be more obvious?’(38). Some hold that inter-group conflict is merely the way of nature – and that hostility and separation between groups may be instinctive and natural.
It would be inconsistent to celebrate all diversity (this could involve celebrating uniformity if practised by a group), and amoral by definition. This would also entail celebrating any practice – including child sacrifice, slavery, rape, etc. (e.g. see Press, 2007, page 17(39)). These practices, and others, are still found around the world – even human sacrifice.
Such diversity in one space also tends to uniformity, and this is hence inconsistent (in the context of immigration). This contradiction has prompted some  to say that ‘multiculturalism’ is ‘the anti-thesis’ of what is presented as meaning, thereby making it a form of Orwellian ‘doublethink’(40). If one were a big fan of diversity, then mass immigration should not be a policy one should support.

Picture 9

Hence, such ‘celebration’ is inconsistent, immoral, is rarely found in real life (other than amongst journalists, politicians, etc.), and irrational in light of the problems it brings – plus the diversity brought by immigration ironically tends to become uniformity.

Everyone’s so happy together!!

Element Four (everyone living happily together) also does not describe reality accurately. As documented by Taylor (2011(41)) with numerous real-life examples, people generally prefer to separate and will do so when feasible (and in the absence of other incentives, etc.). Segregation in Britain is increasing, and is significant – as noted by many. For example, the head of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, Trevor Phillips, has stated that Britain is ‘sleepwalking’ into segregation(42) and Ted Cantle referred to communities living ‘parallel lives’ in his Report following the 2001 riots(43), etc.
When people are mixed together, this tends to decrease happiness and many other measures of well-being (as noted above). Different groups living together increases the chances of civil disorder or even war (as noted earlier).
Most people do not believe that ‘everyone lives happily together’; quite the contrary. During the author’s research it was found that most people not only desire to be ‘amongst their own kind’, but also believe that this makes people happier. Taylor cites a study conducted by the Institute of Governmental Studies at Berkeley, which found that the majority of the four major racial groups in California surveyed (blacks, whites, Hispanics and Asians) agreed with the statement that ‘people are happier when segregated’ (Taylor, 2011, page 41, ibid).
The desire to live amongst one’s ‘own kind’ is reported around the world – sometimes to and/or by governments (which hence would make it difficult for those governments to claim not to know this). For example, the British Government Home Office Report commissioned after the 2001 riots noted that the main cause for the segregation found in Oldham was the preferences of groups ‘to live with their own kind’ (Oldham Independent Review, 2001, page 9, ibid). German Chancellor Angela Merkel is quoted as stating that:
‘Of course the tendency had been to say, ‘let’s adopt the multicultural concept and live happily side by side, and be happy to be living with each other’. But this concept has failed, and failed utterly,’
(E.g. as quoted in the Guardian, 17th October 2010)
The fact that groups do not live together happily is sometimes noted even by some proponents of ‘multiculturalism’. In fact, the ‘multiculturalism’ industry is based largely on the assumption that diversity is problematic. Many other phenomena implicitly acknowledge that in fact groups do not simply live happily together. For example, the very existence of numerous lavishly-funded government bodies to ‘create cohesion’(44) and suchlike admit, if only by implication, that there is at least a strong possibility of problems between groups. One could also cite the systematic media censorship and distortion conducted for the purpose of ‘maintaining’ ‘cohesion’.
As a description this element is therefore false and irrational, and as an aim it is irrational to attempt since it seems unlikely to occur and is harmful (because of the problems it causes – increasing unhappiness, increasing the chances of civil disorder, etc.).
Some believe that the problems that arise from ethnic diversity are best resolved by the achievement of homogeneity through inter-marriage (hence refuting Element Four). There are a number of influential people in politics, academia and the media who explicitly call for miscegenation as a solution, (e.g. Podhoretz(45)). But if the problems of mixing ethnic/racial groups within one country are so severe and intractable that the best solution involves the ending of the relevant groups  (or at least the indigenous group(46)), this calls into question both the attainability and the descriptive accuracy of this idea of  ‘everyone living happily together’.
Hence, this element is neither a rational description nor an easily achievable policy. The moral justification for attempting to achieve this situation is not clear – especially if this involves destruction of groups (culture and/or people).

Equality! Even if it’s unequal it’s good!

As noted above, the term ‘equality’ (in the social and political sense) is a nebulous-power-word and hence should not be used in rational discourse. However, in the context of mass immigration (descriptive ‘multiculturalism’) this nebulous-power-word presents further specific problems – including the fact that equality of fraternity is not generally found (which can present various problems as well as inconsistencies). Also, in relation to indigenous rights(47), the indigenous group inherently have many of these rights infringed by the very fact of immigration, presenting an intrinsic inequality when descriptive ‘multiculturalism'(48) exists. Equality of representation is not achievable if numbers differ and/or distributions in relation to the relevant criterion (a) – unless some inequalities are enforced to make it equal. This renders descriptive ‘multiculturalism’ incompatible with ‘equality’ in these senses – and in many others.

‘Racism’ is very very bad
‘Anti-racism’ is good
‘Racist’ ‘anti-racism’ – still good!!

‘Racism’ is a nebulous-power-word – and as such should not be used in rational discourse. This is true in general, but there are specific additional issues if this nebulous-power-word is used in the context of descriptive ‘multiculturalism’. For example, if ‘racism’ is hatred (of a racial group or groups), could not mass immigration be viewed as an act of hatred(49) against indigenous people(50)? Some supporters of mass immigration claim that animosity, or even loathing(51), towards Britain is a motivation, e.g. Hitchens states that: ‘we were all in favour of as much immigration as possible. It wasn’t because we liked immigrants, but because we didn’t like Britain’(52). As many have stated, integration/assimilation and having children outside one’s race could be viewed as killing one’s own race and as hateful(53). Which would mean that ‘multiculturalism’ in its descriptive sense is defined both as anti-racism, and also is ‘racist’. The associations of the term ‘racism’ with genocide(54) might become illuminated were the term merely defined as ‘hatred’ (or any other definition). The power to control people and inhibit objections to mass immigration would diminish were this term clearly defined(55).

It’s all relative – don’t bother thinking about it…

Under what is thought to be the original usage of the term ‘cultural relativism’ it was suggested that cultures should (or could) only be judged on their own terms. If this is true, then is problematic for descriptive ‘multiculturalism’, e.g. how is public space to be governed, (e.g. how are laws to be formulated?)?
The more recent interpretations of this phrase include that of ‘you shouldn’t/can’t judge’ – but this is a judgement and hence internally inconsistent, as well as being immoral. The spreading of such ideas has harmed society as some people are inhibited from making moral judgements(56).
Other popular interpretations include that of ‘all cultures are equal’. As ‘equality’ is a nebulous-power-word it is not clear what this actually means. The ways one might interpret this do not necessarily make sense alone or as a definition of the term ‘multiculturalism’ either – this would be a true or a false statement and so what does this have to do with mass immigration? And does anyone actually believe this in the sense of being ‘equally good’?

It’s just a description…

Of course, the term ‘multiculturalism’ is sometimes used in its descriptive sense – to refer to an area that has experienced as influx of incomers and is hence racially and/or ethnically mixed. In Britain this thus denotes the results of the political policy of immigration. This definition has high referentiality and possesses no rational problems per se – although being inconsistent with some of the other definitions (see above – all of which it underpins). However, there are some problems with this definition – including those of: this definition not always making sense if a replacement exercise is performed; and the issue of why this would be represented in a positive manner (and, not unrelatedly, why would a government implement this as a policy?).

In relation to the replacing of the term with its definition: how can ‘multiculturalism’ merely mean the diversity of immigration in sentences such as: ‘’multiculturalism’ is the solution to diversity’, ‘’multiculturalism’ is the justification of a ‘multicultural’ society’, etc.? How can it ‘be taught’ (as is recommended)? How can it ‘be’ a value/moral?

In relation to the idea of the positive emotions associated with the term (including its celebration) why would the results of this political policy be considered as positive(57)? Most Brits view immigration in a negative light, as shown in surveys and also by comments made in daily life (when people feel safe to speak that is). In Britain immigration has been harmful – especially to the poor who have been made poorer(58). Immigration (and its associated management) has cost the country a lot of money(59). Immigrants have committed a disproportionate amount of crime(60). The victims of these immigrants include thousands of raped women and children(61). The social fabric is destroyed by immigration, causing much misery – this in both dramatic ways and also the less dramatic daily miseries(62). Many freedoms have been inhibited or lost as a consequence of immigration(63). There have been many other means by which the country has been harmed as a result of immigration(64), (e.g. in education, housing issues, strains on resources such as water, importation of disease, etc.). Hence, immigration into Britain in recent years has caused great harm. In fact, many immigrants and supporters of mass immigration view immigration as an act of revenge against the Brits(65) – not very positive.

Not looking at the specifics harms that immigration has brought to Britain in recent years, one could examine the process of immigration from a theoretical perspective. When there is immigration there is what is known as the dilemma of cultural contact. This dilemma points out that immigration can bring only one of 2 outcomes(66): there is either diversity; or there is homogeneity. This is true irrespective of any specific consequences of immigration, (e.g. financial losses to the country, etc.(67)). Diversity is associated with much harm qv, and homogeneity can only be achieved by cultural destruction, and full homogeneity by racial destruction(68). Even if one supports ‘only’ cultural homogeneity: were this achieved, then racial homogeneity would follow in time. Thus, the dilemma of culture contact illuminates the logical truth that the only 2 options are both associated with harm: harm of diversity or the harm associated with achieving homogeneity. This truth holds no matter which terms are used to describe the relevant processes/outcomes, (e.g. ‘assimilation’, ‘integration’, ‘creolisation’, ‘métissage’, etc.). Of course, there are those who do not view the loss of racial existence as a problem(69), e.g. Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate Walkington is quoted as allegedly stating that: Britain is ‘a country with the most mixed race relationships in the world. In 200 years’ time, we’ll all be coffee coloured and I’ve got no problem with that.’(70)

untitled31

According to the United Nations(71), genocide is an international crime and punishable as such(72). One action that can qualify as genocide is: deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group (see Article 2). Under this definition not only does the political policy of mass immigration possibly qualify as a genocidal act (intent dependent), but many of the academics, media, politicians and other experts appear to possibly be guilty of ‘complicity in genocide’ (an international crime under Article 3).

Hence, it is difficult to see why this term (policy) would be represented with a positive term. In recent years in Britain much harm has been caused, and even from a theoretical perspective the dilemma of cultural contact illuminates the logical truth that such immigration can only result in either homogenisation or diversity(73) – both outcomes/processes associated with harm/loss.

In recent years there have been some critics of ‘multiculturalism’ – but these voices queried ‘multiculturalism’ and not immigration or diversity. By this means, nebulous-power-words can be used to further obscure issues. If these critics are objecting to diversity brought by immigration, then what are they suggesting? Assimilation? Homogenisation? Is this not genocidal? And what happened to the celebration of diversity?

Nebulous-power-words can be used to confuse, distract, stall or otherwise obscure clear perception and conception. Also, when they are no longer useful, they will be either discarded (and possibly replaced(74)) or their meaning switched. What was good might be said to be bad – or vice versa. Nebulous-power-words might no longer be useful for a number of reasons, including: their purpose has been achieved, they have been exposed, etc. It is predicted that in the future even the very powerful nebulous-power-word ‘racism’ will either switch(75) or fall into disuse.

Hence, ‘multiculturalism’ is not adequate from a rational perspective. This term possesses low referentiality – the elements are all problematic from a rational perspective (ether per se and/or in the context of descriptive ‘multiculturalism’) and the one high referentiality meaning(76) found does not always make sense in the contexts in which the term is used – in these contexts the term must mean something else – but what? All the other meanings are shown to be problematic.

27092011583[1]

Social Representation Perspective on Meaning

So, if ‘multiculturalism’ is a nebulous-power-word, then what does it actually mean to those who know/use/hear/read, etc. it? Dr Turner concludes his book by taking another perspective on meaning. Whereas from a rational perspective this term is inadequate, a social representation perspective on meaning can explain, inter alia, what this term actually means to those who know it – and how social and emotional forces are contained within the very meaning (from a social representation perspective) of this term(77).
Dr Turner identifies various narrative voices (‘identities’) that contribute to constructing the social representation meaning that is found. One voice is that of the abstract – representing the abstract nature of the term and imbuing it with authority. All these experts, judges, highly-decorated academics, etc. use the term – surely it is not bogus? If the politicians have it as a policy it must at least be a real word? The Emperor isn’t naked is he?(78) A second such voice is the ‘nice’ narrative – it is just not nice(79) to challenge this – that would be nasty and ‘racist’(80). Thirdly, there is the danger of being attacked by the voice of the angry if one challenges/dissents(81) – these attacks can be in the form of the sneering/demeaning, the name-calling, or financial and legalistic attacks. There are also many cases of physical attacks to people and to property, and threats of such.  Rage-filled people attempt to resolve their emotional problems by drawing upon the construct of ‘villain and victim’ – the immigrants being the ‘pet victims’ of their fantasy community, and the ‘racists’ the villains(82). Snobbery and viciousness are acted out upon dissenters. This frightens many people into submission/silence/compliance. Such utopian thinking is inherently destructive – the abstract and unachievable absurd visions ‘justifying’ destruction, violence, hate and control(83). Many immigrants themselves constitute a fourth voice – one that makes a claim of victimhood and offers motivations such as self-indulgence, pity, fear, shame and guilt.  Immigrants can draw upon the utopian rainbow loving images and social representations without necessarily believing the vision/tenets(84) – this can be used, in a manipulative manner, as a tool to further one’s own goals. A fifth significant voice is that of the crowd – following the majority view (as is perceived(85)) and being swayed by social forces, many of this group follow the path of least resistance. All these forces combine and interact to construct the social representation meaning that is found – the social forces hence contained within the very meaning of this term (from a social representation perspective).
Fully assimilated visual images render the social representation impermeable to reason and truth. Images can replace concepts(86). Such images are ubiquitous in Western culture(87), and can ‘make sense’ of the elements in a manner that rational discourse cannot – and hence the term (and its elements) is ‘understood’ in this manner (by all being fitted into an organised structure of thought). The elements match and describe the image, but the image remains decontextualised and abstract.

untitled31

Repeated linking between such images and the relevant phenomena, terms, mantras, etc. forms and reinforces the associations. This happy rainbow is contrasted constructively against ‘racism’ and this dichotomy constitutes the figurative nucleus of bipolar oppositional form of this hegemonic social representation (parallel to the ‘boy-girl’ construction of gender(88)).

THE JABBERWOCKY GYMBLES AND GYRES
TALISMAN AND TABOO

As can be seen from the foregoing, ‘multiculturalism’ meets all the criteria to be categorised as a nebulous-power-word – words which can exert control because of their very nature. The power of these words is contingent upon low referentiality and on the fact that people do not recognise their true nature – without these factors the emotional and social forces could not hold such power over people. The low referentiality inhibits rational processing, causing confusion and obfuscation. Their emotional and social power governs perceptions, thoughts and feelings – and hence behaviour too. Representation by visual imagery exacerbates these effects. Only because of the nature of these terms can their powerful content operate. Nebulous-power-words are inadequate from a rational perspective, and should not form a part of rational discourse. They are inadequate to be used as social or political policies.
These terms can act as smokescreens and mirrors. The mirrors can reverse the perception of reality, and the smoke obscures truth. In the smoke people are confused and emotional, and hence easily manipulated. Amidst the smoke there is fear and panic and many will be misled – some following the crowd for safety, others are tricked into falsehoods, some push others towards the fire to save themselves, etc.
When one reads that toves are gyring and gymbling one might sort of understand, but it does not really make sense. Some do not want to admit they cannot understand – and others will feel that they do.
As Orwell might have said, ‘People bellyfeel ‘multiculturalism’, it is double plus good and goodthink; ‘racism’ is a thoughtcrime and double plus non good, ‘racists’ are thought criminals and non-persons’. Using the terms ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘racism’ (or any other nebulous-power-words) is, in Orwell’s terminology, a form of ‘duckspeak’. Duckspeak was the form of speech that involved movements of the voice centres, with sound being produced, but this movement and noise occurred without the higher brain parts needing to be engaged (Orwell, 1984 ibid). Hence, people could be speaking to each other, but not in a rational sense; the noises made acted to control people, and this control was made possible because of the very nature of the noises.
The duckspeak noises acted as tools of power – and yet the people never realised that duckspeak was not rational, nor that the power controlling them derived partly from themselves(89), contained within the very meaning of the terms they knew and used. This is how nebulous-power-words function. People can be controlled from within by such surreptitious means – a more total and perfect form of control than many others.
Boot (2006(90)) discusses such powerful terms being used by ‘glossocrats’ and how such terms can be used ‘as instruments of power’ this ‘long after the seemingly more violent weapons have dulled’. Nebulous-power-words contribute to a sociopolitical environment that is seen by some as ‘soft totalitarianism’. Author Hal Colebatch(91) believes Britain to be becoming the first soft totalitarian state of the modern world – ‘soft’ because it lacks the gulags of previous such regimes, but ‘totalitarian’ nonetheless because of the immense state power over people – including control over people’s thoughts and the punishments for dissent (The Australian, 21st April 2009(92)).
The simple but politically embarrassing truth is that ‘multiculturalism’ simply fails to meets the intellectual, practical or moral standards required for such a world-changing concept. And yet for now, the mass ‘multicultural’ mania continues almost unabated, and challenging its cosy consensus remains a hazardous undertaking. The ethnic emperor is appallingly naked – but although some in the West have started to notice, still too few dare to mention it. It is the very nature of some of the terms used that has facilitated much of this harm. The use of clear rational language could be a significant step in freeing people. If the Lion takes genuine courage, the Tin Man sees where the real compassion is, and the Scarecrow is intellectually honest and rigorous, then perhaps the curtain can be pulled and the pretensions, inaccuracies and dishonesties will be exposed. While the smoke and mirrors confuse, obscure, deceive, intimidate and shame, the good people of Emerald City are being manipulated and controlled.

Dr Turner’s book is recommended reading.
It is available to borrow or to buy from Amazon:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/MULTICULTURALISM-WHAT-DOES-Smokescreens-Mirrors-ebook/dp/B00HCQN1B0

1.  Raspail, J. (1994 print) The Camp of the Saints. Social Contract Press
http://childrenofyhwh.com/multimedia/library/Raspail/Camp_of_the_Saints.pdf
2.  Also see:
Express 5th November 2007
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/24232/Immigration-is-causing-depths-of-poverty-last-seen-in-Dickens-time
And relatedly:
Telegraph 17th November 2013
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10455384/Roger-Daltrey-I-will-never-forgive-Labour-for-their-immigration-policies.html
3.  E.g. benefits advice, translation services, ‘cohesion’ teams, ‘community’ officers, etc.
E.g. see: Express 14th November 2013
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/442977/Police-forces-forced-to-pay-2m-bill-a-month-for-translators-for-migrant-influx
4.  Lack high referentiality – meaning that they do not possess definitions that clearly signify the relevant phenomenon.
5.  E.g. Perilli’s monuments to ‘multiculturalism’.
See http://spacingtoronto.ca/2009/03/20/monument-to-multiculturalism/
6.  When the term ‘equality’ is in speech marks this refers to the social and political use of the term – because in this sense it is not properly rational to use. Without speech marks this term is used in its rational sense of equivalence, either quantitative or qualitative equivalence, (e.g. 2 plus 2 equals 4, etc.). Also, speech marks can be used to denote reference to the term itself
7.  E.g. ‘the two beakers contain an equal volume of liquid’, ‘the two children are of equal ability in X’, ‘2 plus 2 equals 4’, ‘I like the two cars equally’, etc.
8.  Also see: Turner, B. S. (1986) Equality. Tavistock Publications Limited: London, UK
9.  Some such categories are overlapping in some senses.
10.  Of course, one frequently finds that non-white groups are given unequal preference in such contexts, and this is inversionistly labelled as ‘equality of opportunity’.
11.  Google ‘Simon Mol’ (Poland), e.g. see: http://www.e-teatr.pl/en/artykuly/33711.html
http://www.eutimes.net/2010/02/another-man-knowingly-infects-40-girls-with-aids-in-poland/
12.  Such claims are made in many contexts, e.g. see:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-545289/Muslim-leader-accuses-police-cautious-stopping-Asian-gangs-pimping-white-girls.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8570506/Police-covered-up-violent-campaign-to-turn-London-area-Islamic.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1374443/Police-hid-abuse-60-girls-Asian-takeaway-workers-linked-Charlene-Downes-murder.html
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/191013/Police-fear-being-called-racist-so-illlegal-immigrants-stroll-free
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/8476605/WikiLeaks-fear-of-offending-Muslims-allowed-extremists-into-Britain-ahead-of-77-London-bombings.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1271457/General-Election-2010-Postal-vote-fraud-amid-fears-bogus-voters-swing-election.html
13.  For example, there was a UN ‘anti-racism’ conference held in April 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland (20th-24th April 2009): the ‘Durban II Anti-Racism UN Conference’. These international conferences use the term ‘racism’ in their titles and literature e.g., the term ‘racism’ wass used in the outcome document at Geneva – including the reaffirming of the call on states to formulate national action plans to prevent, combat and eradicate ‘racism’ (e.g. s.28) and the encouraging of parliaments to regularly address the issue of ‘racism’, and to enhance their policies to fight it, (e.g. s.112).
14.  http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/news/2011-12/mar/goverment-pledges-funds-to-show-racism-the-red-card.html
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/deputy-prime-minister-announces-200000-to-show-racism-the-red-card
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21881626
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-13361478
15.  E.g. see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/advice/factfile_az/racism
16.  Although the legislation used in such arrests uses different vocabulary – for what frequently are termed as ‘racism’ charges, often the relevant sections are Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 or sections 28 and 31 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. For example, the Crime and Disorder Act 1988 does not use the term ‘racism’ (or ‘racist’).
Also see:
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/9477548.Arrest_made_after_racist_abuse_towards_Newcastle_United/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/4877412.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17515992
17.  And/or an accusation of ‘racism’
18.  E.g. see:
http://www.thisissussex.co.uk/Ukip-chair-hits-suspension-following-racism/story-20223643-detail/story.html
19.  E.g. see: The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. Report Of An Inquiry. By Sir William Macpherson of Cluny. Advised by Tom Cook, The Right Reverend Dr John Sentamu, and Dr Richard Stone. Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for the Home Department by Command of Her Majesty. February 1999
http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm42/4262/4262.htm
Also see
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/285537.stm
And http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/cm42/4262/sli-47.htm
This was the result of an enquiry into the police investigation into the death of Stephen Lawrence. See:
Dennis, N., Erdos, G., Al-Shahi, A. (2000) Racist Murder and Pressure Group Politics: the McPherson Report and the Police. Civitas. The Institute for the Study of Civil Society: London
20.  This term is associated with the idea of genocide, and yet in many ways this connection is inversionist qv.
21.  Of course, were one definition to be chosen now, then it might be a little late to instantly reduce the power. However, the power of this term will reduce in the future – nebulous-power-words are not terms with high referentiality and so their emotional associations can switch as can their definitions in other senses.
22.  The ‘replacement exercise’ is merely replacing the term with its definition.
23.  Including unfavourable by comparison, one cannot praise whites without risking the R-word, nor take pride, e.g. ‘white pride’ is considered as ‘racist’, but not ‘black pride’, etc.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/kevin-myers-i-can-say-americans-are-lazy-and-boorish-morons-thats-fine-if-i-say-the-same-about-nigerians-im-jailed-26629424.html
24.  The Express 28th March 2013:
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/387469/Why-does-the-Left-hate-the-working-classes-so-much
25.  If the thought/statement were true, then this would be defining ‘multiculturalism’ as against truth. And even if it were mistaken and untrue – really, an International Conference? Arresting people? What if they get their maths wrong? Arrest them too?
26.  The ‘elements’ – these are used alone or in combination in most definitions in the literature and dictionaries.
27.  Cultures in an unlimited sense
28.  These do not necessarily all have to be legal – here ‘rules’ refers to descriptive rules that describe a culture in all its qualities – this including habits, traditions, customs and ‘legal’ rules forming a subset of this qualitative description
29.  Which they must to be distinguished as different cultures
30.  There are endless possibilities on any such variable. In this example it could be the case that both groups maintain their original colours – so the city is now part blue and part pink. This would mean that there are no longer all blue or all pink cities for the residents to preserve their cultural practices. Alternatively, either group (or split combinations of either or both) might change their painting habits to those of the other group, or to any other colour (s), (or maintain their original traditions).
31.  Also see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386558/Tower-Hamlets-Taliban-Death-threats-women-gays-attacked-streets.html
32.  This is sometimes an emotive issue in Britain. See
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575506/Loudspeaker-plan-re-ignites-call-to-prayer-row.html
Also http://www.iengage.org.uk/component/content/article/1-news/856-daily-express-criticises-nick-clegg-for-defending-the-call-to-prayer
Sometimes these issues are discussed in relation to threat to culture (or ‘way of life’). See:
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2007/12/so-much-for-our.html
Divergences in opinion on this have been recorded from other countries too –
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/149955#.T946xLVfGHw
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/netanyahu-backs-law-to-ban-loudspeakers-at-mosques-across-israel-6276173.html
33.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3620128/Making-a-pigs-ear-of-defending-democracy.html
34.  For example, Putnam studies the reductions in social capital (Putnam, 2007, ‘Diversity and Community in the Twenty First Century’. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30 (2), 137-174); the reduction in willingness to sacrifice for others is discussed by David Goodhart (e.g. see Prospect Magazine, 2004, and : http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/feb/24/race.eu); general levels of trust reduce with diversity (also see for further reading: Salter, F. K., Ed., 2002, Risky Transactions. Trust, Kinship, and Ethnicity. Oxford and New York, Berghahn); studies show detrimental consequences to mental health in some such circumstances, see below. Also see for related issues, e.g. Stafford, M., Becares, L. and Nazroo, J. ‘Objective and Perceived Ethnic Density and Health: Findings From a United Kingdom General Population Survey’, American Journal of Epidemiology (2009) 170 (4):484-493.doi: 10.1093/aje/kwp160
35.  see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-12777437
The concerns of future riots (or other such problems) are sometimes expressed by ‘experts’, e.g. see: Daily Mail 12th November 2013
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2502072/Influx-Roma-migrants-spark-city-riots-warns-Blunkett.html
36.  Many predict civil war as a result of mass immigration – even if this does not occur, the fear/anxiety, etc. is a form of suffering for many people
Also, relatedly, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsjc5CVujrM

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2011/February/Europes-Multiculturalism-Leading-to-Civil-War-/
http://www.wnd.com/2013/10/allen-west-america-on-verge-of-race-war/
37.  Caldwell, C. (2009) Reflections on the Revolution Europe. Can Europe be the Same with Different People in it? Allen Lane/Penguin, London: England
38.  John Derbyshire, Taki’s Magazine, 29th March 2012:
http://takimag.com/article/multiculturalism_when_will_the_sleeper_wake_john_derbyshire/print#axzz2jiRyi2m3
39.  Press, J. K. (2007) Culturalism. Social Books: New York
40.  E.g. see: ‘The Rivkin Project: How Globalism Uses Multiculturalism to Subvert Sovereign Nations’, Dr. K R Bolton Foreign Policy Journal, 12 March 2011
41.  Taylor, J. (2011) White Identity. Racial Consciousness in the 21st Century. New Century Foundation: USA
42.  E.g. see BBC News website 22nd September 2005
43.  The ‘Cantle Report’ – Community Cohesion: a Report of the Independent Review Team. Chaired by Ted Cantle and published January 2001. Home Office.
44.  ‘Cohesion’ is a problematic term. Frequently this term is used as a code-word for the absence of civil war and/or race riots.
45.  Podhoretz, N. (1963) My Negro Problem and Ours. New York: American Jewish Committee
46.  Immigrant groups might have populations remaining in their home countries
47.  Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People adopted by the United Nations General Assembly during its 61st session at UN Headquarters in New York City on 13 September 2007
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf
48.  I.e. descriptive ‘multiculturalism’ as a result of immigration
49.  And also of ‘mistreatment’.
50.  And those objecting to mass immigration were not ‘haters’ but acting against hatred?
51.  Also see: Express 14th July 2011
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/258644/No-surprise-that-migrants-head-for-soft-touch-Britain
52.  Daily Mail 28th June 2013
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2301743/How-invasion-immigrants-corner-England-mockery-PMs-promise-close-door.html
53.  Also see Muhammad Ali being interviewed by Parkinson on the BBC: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi6fvwxB2Bg
54.  E.g. see http://spacingtoronto.ca/2009/03/20/monument-to-multiculturalism/
55.  With high referentiality
56.  Also see Dalrymple, T. (2001) Life at the Bottom. Ivan R. Dee: Chicago
57.  Is immigration always good?
Express 14th November 2013
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/442943/Mass-immigration-was-a-mistake-Come-off-it-Jack
and, relatedly, Daily Mail, 12th November 2013
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2504398/A-spectacular-mistake-immigration-Straw-finally-admits-Labour-messed-letting-million-East-Europeans.html
Also see: http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/387469/Why-does-the-Left-hate-the-working-classes-so-much
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1264963/Migrant-citys-help-Anguished-letter-Brown-Cameron-reveals-devastating-toll-immigration.html
58.  Also see: Daily Mail 13th May 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386537/Mass-immigration-UK-s-poor-poorer.html
As well as by other means, many of the poorest of Britain have been made poorer by being unemployed – immigration often cited as a (or the main) cause, e.g. also see Daily Mail 18th November 2013
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2509087/Who-frontman-Roger-Daltrey-blames-Labour-immigration-policy-left-working-class-unemployed.html
Telegraph 17th November 2013
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10455384/Roger-Daltrey-I-will-never-forgive-Labour-for-their-immigration-policies.html
59.  Express 5th November 2007:
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/24232/Immigration-is-causing-depths-of-poverty-last-seen-in-Dickens-time
Express 29th April 2013
http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/395471/Immigration-The-British-public-is-close-to-despair
Express 14th November 2013
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/442977/Police-forces-forced-to-pay-2m-bill-a-month-for-translators-for-migrant-influx
Such costs are found to occur in many Western countries. Also see:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/norway-loses-713000-on-every-muslim-immigrant/
60.  Also see: Mirror 29th May 2013
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/carole-malone-oxford-grooming-ring-1896865
61.  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2156296/British-gangs-raping-sexually-exploiting-vulnerable-white-young-girls-Asian-problem-Crown-prosecutor-admits.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-18050192
62.  Telegraph 29th January 2013
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9831912/I-feel-like-a-stranger-where-I-live.html
63.  For further reading on threats to freedom of speech in Britain see:
Johnston, P. (2013) Feel Free to Say It. Threats to Freedom of Speech in Britain Today. Civitas, London.
Also see Telegraph 25th November 2004:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/turkey/1477496/Turkish-workers-a-mistake-claims-Schmidt.html
64.  E.g. see: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1264963/Migrant-citys-help-Anguished-letter-Brown-Cameron-reveals-devastating-toll-immigration.html
65.  ‘Payback time’, etc. Also see: Browne, A. (2005) Do We Need Mass Immigration? (second edition) Civitas: London
66.  ‘Outcomes’ and/or processes. Both processes can be occurring at the same time, e.g. diversity as some groups (and/or subsets of groups) homogenise
67.  E.g. this is true whether the immigrants in question are more or less criminal than the indigenous people, more or less intelligent, whether the immigration in question brings financial losses or gains, etc. Whether there are any alterations on any such measures or not – this is still true. The dilemma of cultural contact is applicable to any case of immigration irrespective of the specifics of that immigration, and irrespective of the consequences of that immigration in other ways.
68.  The old ‘melting pot’ metaphor
69.  Also see: http://www.badeagle.com/2009/06/16/the-hated-white-race/
70.  Available at:  http://conservativehome.blogs.com/leftwatch/2010/04/candidate-calls-britain-the-most-mongrel-country-in-the-world-yet-the-left-havent-batted-an-eyelid.html ; or http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/election/article-1268826/General-Election-2010-Nutters-Nick-Clegg-Theyre-closer-think.html etc.
71.  The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.
72.  Also see: https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/10/27/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-people-of-europe/
https://cigpapers.wordpress.com/2013/10/05/stop-white-british-genocide-campaign-join-now/
73.  Of course in many cases there will be a slow genocide occurring simultaneously with the problems of diversity
74.  It could be that a new replacement word will be used for ‘multiculturalism’, such as that of ‘inter culturalism’, e.g. see:
Cohesion, Integration and Openness: From ‘Multi’ to ‘Inter’ Culturalism. Institute of Community Cohesion (February 2012)
However, any such term should be clearly defined and also examined in light of the issues noted in Dr Turner’s book, e.g. how would such a policy aim to address the dilemma of cultural contact?
75.  E.g. become a badge of pride/rebellion; or settle on one single high referentiality meaning, (e.g. stereotyping or otherwise) and hence lose its power by this means; etc.
76.  A nebulous-power-word can still be a nebulous-power-word even if one or more of its definitions possess high referentiality – not all (or any) the meanings need to be problematic per se
77.  Moscovici, S. (2000) Social Representations: Explorations in Social Psychology. Translated by G. Duveen. Polity Press, Cambridge University
Marková, I. (2003) Dialogicality and Social Representations. The Dynamics of Mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
78.  This voice hence provides, amongst other things, a motivation not to appear stupid – many do not want to admit that they do not quite understand. Also, people do not want to question or challenge, etc. that which they do not quite understand (and who could understand a nebulous-power-word?). The authority and faux intellectual validity intimidates and confuses many people. Some are shamed into compliance/acquiescence
79.  Of course, the definition of ‘nice’ is relevant. Does it mean pleasing people? Is so, then whom? Are some chosen groups pleased at the expense (financial and otherwise) of others? If so, then that is not ‘nice’. Neither is it ‘nice’ to destroy people’s culture, suppress truth, support lies, harm some groups in many ways, or facilitate genocide. Saccharin-covered poison-pills. If ‘nice’ is about truth, genuine compassion or honour, then this voice is not very nice.
80.  Also, relatedly, see Horowitz, D. (1997) Radical Son. A Generational Odyssey Simon and Schuster New York: USA; Horowitz, D. (2003) Left Illusions. An Intellectual Odyssey. Spence Publishing Company, Dallas: USA.
Anthony, A. (2008) The Fallout. How a Guilty Liberal Lost His Innocence. Vintage Books: London
And also, relatedly:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-440318/The-night-daughter-stabbed–liberal-instincts-died.html
81.  Also see ‘Passover Syndrome’, e.g.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh6YIaJyFnk
82.  Also see: Rossiter, L. H. (2006) The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. Free World Books, LLC, St. Charles, IL: USA
Glazov, J. (2009) United in Hate – The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror. Los Angeles, CA: WND Books
83.  For a great analysis of utopians see: Scruton, R. (2010) The Uses of Pessimism and the Dangers of False Hope. Atlantic Books: London, UK
84.  Also, relatedly, see:
http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16143154
Daily Mail, 6th January 2012 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082527/Diane-Abbott-Twitter-race-row-MP-faces-calls-resign-racist-tweet.html
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/154022/Diane-Abbott-reported-to-cops-for-racism-over-black-jobs-appeal
http://pandyablog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/12/the-equality-and-human-rights-commission-should-abolished-not-just-because-it-is-expensive-but-becau.html
Fourest, C. (2008) Brother Tariq. The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan. Encounter Books, USA
85.  In modern life the media largely influence such perceptions
86.  Also see: ‘magic-ritual language’ Herbert Marcuse, (1964) One-Dimensional Man. Boston: Beacon Press
87.  E.g. see:
http://www.morleyobserver.co.uk/news/local/thorpe-primary-launches-bid-for-stephen-lawrence-award-1-6061990
http://www.coca-cola.co.uk/about-us/coca-cola-corporate-blog/ted-ryan-id-like-to-buy-the-world-a-coke.html
Martin Luther King’s much publicised I Have a Dream speech (1963) evoked images of this kind.
Much of this form of repetition and linking is focussed on children, such as Crayola’s suggestions for celebrating the diversity, e.g. see:
http://www.crayola.com/crafts/detail/freedom-hands-craft/
There are many such activities for children, such as making chains for Black History Month, e.g. see:
http://fun.familyeducation.com/martin-luther-king-jr/black-history-month/35249.html
88.  See Duveen, G. and Lloyd, B. (1990), Social Representations and the Development of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
89.  Although, of course, the ultimate origins are from the social and political context – and the intersubjective. By ‘from within’ it is meant that the terms are internalised.
90.  Boot, A. (2006), How The West Was Lost. I. B. Tauris Publishers: London
91.  Author of the award-winning Blair’s Britain: British Culture Wars and New Labour (1999) Claridge Press, UK – a Spectator book of the year in 1999
92.  http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/thought-police-muscle-up-in-britain/story-e6frg6zo-1225700363959