Friday, 19 December 2008

Two more Muslims Jailed from the Muslim terrorist conveyor belt.

At this rate we are going to have to build two new prisons a year the rate that Muslim terrorists are getting sentenced in this country. British born Muslim fanatics are turning faster to terrorism than greedy bankers are running off with hard earned money of British savers.

Rangzieb Ahmed was told that he would have to serve a minimum of 10 years behind bars.The 33-year-old headed a three-man al Qaeda cell which was preparing to commit mass murder, Manchester Crown Court heard.The Rochdale-born Muslim was also found guilty of al Qaeda membership, along with his associate, Manchester taxi driver Habib Ahmed.

Manchester Police will probably announce now that they will be working closer with the Muslim community to try and combat terrorism and that millions will be pumped into the community just for the sake of it. I believe that all connected family to these convicted Islamic filth should be deported. The connected families must know what's going on and because of this they are just as guilty. Of course the benefit systems are not as generous in the desert wastelands of the Middle East, so while we get murdered by them, they still get paid by us. Pathetic eh?

To read full article click on Orange headline above.


  1. Home News Breaking News
    Forced marriage GP in legal victory
    Dec 19 2008

    An NHS doctor who said her family held her captive for four months and forced her to marry in Bangladesh has won a court ruling preventing her from being removed from the UK against her will.

    Humayra Abedin, 32, from east London, was granted injunctions by a judge who warned that the British courts would act "swiftly and decisively" in cases where there had been a "gross abuse of an individual's human rights".

    Mr Justice Coleridge, sitting in the High Court's Family Division in London, said the orders were to protect Dr Abedin "and prevent her being removed from this country again without her consent".

    For "anyone of any age" to go through a marriage without their consent was "a complete aberration of the whole concept of marriage in a civilised society", he declared.

    Dr Abedin, who has lived in the UK since 2002 and is training to be a GP, returned to Britain on Tuesday.

    She was freed by a Bangladeshi court on Sunday after London's High Court ordered her release under the new Forced Marriage Act, which prohibits an individual from being married against their will.

    On her return Dr Abedin said that on November 14 she had been forced to marry a man of her parents' choice and went through a wedding ceremony "under duress".

    She was in court as her counsel, Hassan Khan, told the judge that she had travelled to Bangladesh on August 2 on a return ticket to see her mother after being informed that she was ill.

    But when she went to the family home in Dhaka on August 5 she was "manhandled" into the property by a number of people and immediately locked in a room. She was monitored by guards and had her passport taken from her.

    In a statement after the hearing Dr Abedin was described as being "deeply upset by what has occurred and the treatment she has suffered". It said: "She does not wish for her parents to suffer any punishment for what has been done by them to her. She is their only child."
    (What the Hell has this to do with the the UK. )

  2. Plan to elect police chiefs is scrapped
    Dec 19 2008 Liverpool Daily Post

    MERSEYSIDE Police Authority told of its relief last night after hotly-fought plans for directly-elected police chiefs were scrapped in a humiliating Government U-turn.

    The authority – which had warned the move would open the door to the BNP and other extremists – said Home Secretary Jacqui Smith had “finally come to her senses”.

    Cllr Bill Weightman, the authority’s chairman, added: “It would have been disastrous, so it’s good news that the message finally got through.”

    The Daily Post revealed yesterday that the proposals for elections to police authorities were in crisis after the Home Affairs Committee warned they could be “hijacked” by single-issue groups.

    Within hours, Ms Smith had announced that the measure was being pulled from the flagship Policing and Crime Bill, which she published yesterday.

    The Home Secretary said it was right to “step back” due to recent controversies in the Metropolitan police, including Mayor Boris Johnson’s role in the sacking of the force’s commissioner, Sir Ian Blair.

    She said: “Looking at what has happened over the past two months, there has been a fundamental shift in the way people think about the politicisation of the police.”

    That explanation, however, was seen as a smokescreen to hide the real reason for the U-turn – widespread opposition.

    The Lib-Dems had even claimed direct elections could trigger conflicts with black and Asian people and a repeat of the riots in Toxteth, Brixton and other inner-cities.

    The controversial plans were aimed at strengthening the link between the public and their local police force by creating directly-elected Crime and Policing Representatives (CPRs).

    There was to be a CPR for each borough.

    The elected leaders, who would also decide how small amounts of police funding are spent, would in turn have formed the majority on their police authority.

    Cllr Weightman said he understood why Ms Smith feared police authorities were “invisible”, but argued Merseyside’s authority had worked hard to raise its profile and accountability.

    Cllr Weightman said: “It’s right and proper that there should be extra accountability, but elected members were not the way to achieve that.”

  3. The Lib-Dems had claimed direct elections could trigger conflicts with black and Asian people and a repeat of the riots in Toxteth, Brixton and other inner-cities.
    Therefore admitting the BNP would be elected to The UK Police Authorities, they are surpressing the will of the people confirming black and Asian minorities in reality rule the roost. Obviously this is one of the reason's that they have been encourages to come here in huge numbers at our expense. To split and divide our people .

  4. Many people today do not understand the true nature of interest. They have no idea that there are other possibilities besides slaving one's life away for the moneylenders.


  6. The United Kingdom was created by White "Gentiles"
    for the value systems, culture, heritage
    and behaviors of White "Gentiles".

    The further away from that we get,
    the worse trouble we get in.

    Multiculturalism is a pernicious virus
    that infects and destroys a White "Gentile" nation.

    When the Monsters of Ingratitude/Hive-Mind Parasites
    infect a White "Gentile" nation,
    the White "Gentile" hosts
    will be repaid for their generosity with
    degradation and death of all they hold dear

  7. Genocide by disintegration of political and social institutions

    Subjugation of our sovereign nation by treaties

    Weakening the military by making it the protector of corporate interests combined with cutbacks in personnel, equipment and bases

    Making life so hostile the most intelligent young White "Gentiles" question whether to have children

    Separating White "Gentile" women and men by misinformation and disinformation

    Stressing the family with 50% effective taxation

    Mandatory education in school systems that are propaganda enforcement settings

    Making the schools advocate homosexuality

    Sinking the legal system under the weight of greed, corruption and more lawyers than any other nation in the world

    Government as forced income redistribution system benefitting not-Whites

  8. Genocide by disintegration of culture

    Tidal waves of Third World immigration destroying the culture of the UK.

    Third World Breeding Units multiply 2-3 times as fast as White "Gentile"

    Mocking White "Gentile" Britains in the media; insisting upon collective guilt and the teaching of self-debasement to White "Gentile" Britains Anti-White "Gentile"British propaganda

  9. Sterling has lost 23pc of its value against the normal currency basket
    in the past year. It is the fastest decline since 1931

    Projected Government borrowing 2008/9 £78bn

    2009/10 £118 bn

  10. Mass immigration into Britain was an act of policy.

    The ultimate effect of mass immigration is the same as a forced
    invasion: the conquest of territory. There are parts of Britain (and
    especially England where most of the immigrants settle) which are
    effectively no longer part of Britain because they have been
    comprehensively settled by immigrants whose sheer weight of numbers has
    driven the British out.

    60 years ago Britain did not have a race relations problem. It was a
    remarkably homogeneous country in both race and culture and the sense
    of national solidarity had probably never been greater following the
    experience of the War. How ironic that at this singularly propitious
    time for national cohesion the British political elite decided to import
    the poison of racial and ethnic division into this country. I say
    decided to import it because that was precisely what they did rather
    than the historian Andrew Roberts claims the consequence of "the
    absence of a policy. "

    Roberts’ claim does not stand up to scrutiny. Cabinet papers from the
    immediate post-War years which have been released show clearly that
    this was a subject discussed under both the Attlee and Churchill post
    war governments. Churchill in particular was concerned. In addition, we
    have the evidence of Bill Deedes from his time in government that no
    action was taken from a mixture of late imperial nostalgia, fear of
    upsetting the commonwealth, the delusion that we were still a major
    world power and the internationalist constraints put upon us soon after
    the war through our membership of the UN (an act of policy). This
    resulted in not an absence of policy but the choosing of a policy which
    permitted the immigration. It is also worth adding that the Nationality
    Act of 1948 made it much easier for Commonwealth citizens take British
    citizenship. That was a deliberate act of immigration policy. (Deedes
    mea’ culpa written after he had ceased to edit the Telegraph.gave the
    honest but pathetic reason for not speaking out earlier was that he
    feared the consequences - he tried to claim that Powell "extremism" made
    it impossible to discuss race and immigration and remain in mainstream
    politics; the problem with that argument is that he said nothing before
    Powell's Rivers of Blood speech.)

    Nor is it true that the immediate post war governments were oblivious to
    the public resistance to such mass immigration. They had the ample
    experience of the public hostility to black troops during the last war
    and not long after the Windrush deposited their cargo of West Indians in
    1948, there was state propaganda about how such immigrants were needed
    by Britain because of a supposed labour shortage and how they should be
    welcomed, not least because they were all part of the Empire. In 1958
    the Notting Hill Riots occurred..Ten years later Enoch Powell, who forty
    years ago, when the situation was still manageable, gave chapter and
    verse about the dangers in public. Powell was remarkably prescient in
    all but one respect: he tended to think of immigrants as a single entity
    rather than groups competing for native elite favour.

    Since 1965 - when the immigration problem was still manageable, being a
    few hundred thousands rather than millions - there has been no excuse,
    even a specious one, for governments. The first Wilson government was
    so concerned about the scale of immigration that one of its first
    major Acts in 1965 was an immigration Act restricting Commonwealth
    immigration. That was the last serious attempt to stem the tide. Our
    entry into the EU in 1973 (an act of policy) largely destroyed our
    ability to control our borders. The Single European Act of 1986 (an act
    of policy) giving settlement rights as well as free movement to hundreds
    of millions of EU citizens, the vast expansion of the rights of asylum,
    and the every growing strength of the Liberal Internationalist grip on
    our elite (with its crystallised ideology of political correctness)
    removed what little of that ability remained. Eventually, we reached the
    stage where this Government could claim, in the words of David Blunkett,
    that there is no natural limit to immigration.:

    Roberts is in essence an apologist for those who permitted the
    immigration. By taking his position that it was an absence of policy
    that was the cause, he ignores the abundant historical evidence that
    those in power were only too well aware of what was going on, the public
    resistance which existed and the dangers involved. By saying there was
    an absence of policy he prevents blame being apportioned to any
    particular person or persons, which in effect means no one is to blame.

    Why does Roberts ignore the evidence? Well the most plausible
    explanation is that he is young enough to have spent his entire adult
    life under a cultural elite who have made it impossible to tell the
    truth about race and immigration. That will have developed the mentality
    I recently described in my Obama article, the feeling that it is not
    only dangerous to be honest about race and immigration, it is somehow
    improper, not a subject for polite company. For a mainstream historian
    to put forward the case that the immigration was an act of government
    policy would put him onto very dangerous ground because he would then be
    forced to apportion blame. This in turn would force him to be more
    explicit about the ills of immigration because those on the other side
    of the argument people would inevitably ask what is so wrong about it
    that it is blameworthy?
    The consequence of immigration is that we now have an elite who have
    embedded the multicultural strand of political correctness into British
    life through the use of the law, their control of the media, their
    control of public service and the general use of political power.
    Ceaseless pro-minority propaganda is pumped out along the lines
    epitomised by a speech made by David Blunkett when Home Secretary: 'In a
    speech to the Institute for Public Policy Reform, in London, Mr
    Blunkett defended the historically high levels of immigration under
    Labour, which had "enriched every aspect of British life".' Daily
    Telegraph, July 8, 2004 The upshot of this is the cowing of the native
    population who pathetically prefix any comment which might be thought to
    deviate from the permitted liberal bigot line with comments such as
    "I’m not a racist".

  11. Labour too afraid of losing influence over the police (which they
    shouldn not have anyway) and the BNP gaining it (ditto)?

  12. White-Guilt in Context
    All-permeating "white-guilt" did not appear out of thin air. It has
    taken a sustained propaganda effort, a wide-ranging mobilization of
    education and culture, to inculcate and sustain self-loathing among
    Caucasians. Like the Coca-Cola TM brand, white-guilt needs
    endless repetition to remain struck in the thought and behavioral
    processes of the masses.

  13. PETER OBORNE: Darling's last roll of the dice and the spectre of wheelbarrows of banknotes

    "The aim was to escape a life in Britain where crime was rampant, the weather miserable and the cost of living high.

    "Now, in Spain, a legion of pensioners finds itself trapped by rising prices, a property market that has completely collapsed and a pound that has fallen almost 20 per cent against the euro.

  14. Gordon Brown, after months of denial, will finally have to admit that the country’s debt is far more than the 44 per cent of gross national product that ministers have repeatedly, though mendaciously, claimed.

    "The new figure is closer to an incredible 160 per cent — the worst in the developed world — and is expected to rise even more sharply.

    "This systematic debauchery of the country’s finances has caused sterling to collapse.

    "In just three days this week — Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday — the pound fell by 4 per cent.

    "It has now collapsed by an average of 23 per cent against rival currencies over the past 12 months."

  15. The Classic Rich Guy Mittal aided by the Labour Party rapes Britains heritage.

    Steel tycoon Lakshmi Mittal paid $1 to 5 million to the Clinton foundation. (Lakshmi Mittal among Clinton foundation donors)

    Mittal's group took over what remained of Bethlehem Steel.

    Lakshmi Mittal owns the Taj Mittal, a mansion in London.

    Mittal's $229 million dollar 12-bedroom home in Kensington Palace Gardens in West London

    Mittal is the boss of ArcelorMittal, the world's largest steel company.

    Employees of Mittal have accused him of "slave labour" conditions after many deaths in his mines. (UK’s richest man in slave labour row - Times Online)

    During December 2004, twenty-three miners died in explosions in his mines in Kazakhstan caused by faulty gas detectors.

    Headquarters of ArcelorMittal in Luxembourg (photo by Werneuchen )

    In 2002 UK Member of Parliament Adam Price exposed the link between Tony Blair and Mittal in the Mittal Affair, also known as Cash for Influence.[6][7] [8]

    Mittal's LNM steel company, registered in the Dutch Antilles and maintaining less than 1% of its 100,000 plus workforce in the UK, sought Blair's aid in its bid to purchase Romania's state steel industry. [9]

    The letter from Blair to the Romanian government, a copy of which Price was able to obtain, hinted that the privatisation of the firm and sale to Mittal might help smooth the way for Romania's entry into the European Union.[6]

    The letter had a passage in it removed just prior to Blair's signing of it, describing Mittal as "a friend."[10]

    In exchange for Blair's support Mittal, already a Labour contributor, donated £125,000 more to Labour party funds a week after the 2001 UK General Elections, while as many as six-thousand Welsh steelworkers were laid off that same year, Price and others pointed out


  17. The word among the financial cognoscenti is that the missing fifty billion dollars have gone to Israel. Madoff is quietly promising his closer friends that compensation may come from there.

    Among the friends he fleeced were Hollywood's Katzenberg and Steven Spielberg (in cap, left), who in turn partly financed Deborah Lipstadt's $13million defence against my libel action; and scores if not hundreds of Jewish millionaires who all thought they were admitted to an exclusively Jewish "club", and that Madoff was financing the ten to thirteen percent interest he was paying them from illegal insider trading and fleecing only the goys not admitted to their ring. Ouch. It almost hurts to write these words, but the laughter ringing round the world just won't stop.

  18. Saturday, 20 December 2008
    Secret of the Lusitania: Arms Find Challenges Allied Claims It Was Solely a Passenger Ship

    'Her sinking with the loss of almost 1,200 lives caused such outrage that it propelled the U.S. into the First World War. But now divers have revealed a dark secret about the cargo carried by the Lusitania on its final journey in May 1915. Munitions they found in the hold suggest that the Germans had been right all along in claiming the ship was carrying war materials and was a legitimate military target.

  19. Secret nuclear sell-off storm

    Aldermaston bomb factory is sold to American company in bid to boost Treasury coffers provoking fury as Parliament is bypassed
    Britain no longer has any stake in the production of its nuclear warheads after the Government secretly sold off its shares in the Atomic Weapons Establishment in Aldermaston.

    Ministers agreed to sell the remaining one-third ownership to a Californian engineering company. The announcement, which means that Americans will now produce and maintain Britain's independent nuclear deterrent, was slipped out on the eve of the parliamentary Christmas holiday. Officials refused to say how much the deal raised.

  20. Councils Dumping Recyclables In Landfills

    'Up to 200,000 tonnes of recyclable waste was dumped last year with some councils failing to recycle over 10 per cent of glass, paper, plastic and other materials left out by conscientious homeowners. The amount dumped this year is expected to rise sharply as councils struggle to sell recyclable waste during the economic downturn.

    The disclosure will anger millions of British families, many of whom are being forced to sort their waste into five different waste bins - including new "food slop" containers - to allow it to be recycled.'

  21. Lifeline for iconic UK car firm

    LONDON (AFP) — The British government could arrange loans to help luxury carmaker Jaguar Land Rover within days, the Financial Times said Saturday, as a top Labour peer said he was confident of a deal "fairly soon".

    Jaguar Land Rover, owned by India's Tata Motors, has been in talks with the government about a deal to help it cope with plunging demand because of the credit crunch.

    US President George W. Bush unveiled a 13.4 billion dollar rescue loan for carmakers General Motors and Chrysler on Friday. Unions say tens of thousands of jobs are at risk in Britain unless the government takes similar steps.

    Lord Kumar Bhattacharyya -- who is seen as close to Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Ratan Tata, chairman of the Tata Group whose subsidiary owns Jaguar Land Rover -- told the FT he was confident that the government would "fairly soon" arrange loans to help the industry.

    "If the government fails to act to help the car industry, the UK will be the only major country not to take action to safeguard its vehicle sector," the Labour Party member of the unelected upper parliamentary chamber the House of Lords told the newspaper.

    The paper said Bhattacharyya believed there could be a package of up to one billion dollars in loans to help Jaguar Land Rover plus unspecified amout of support for other firms. (ALL STOLEN INDUSTRY'MUST BE RETURNED TO BRITAIN)

  22. : Poor Britain
    We shall emerge from the crunch a poorer and meaner country than we entered it.

    The recession is deepening, the stimulus package doesn't seem to have worked and 2009 is going to be "a really bad year". So says Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of the International Monetary Fund. Well, yes: there needs no bureaucrat to come from the IMF to tell us this. But when such a bureaucrat, usually prone to the restrained and technical language of his caste, says that Britain's debt is "disturbing", we ought to pay attention.

    It is true, as ministers never cease to remind us, that the credit crunch is global. It is true, too, that depressions punish responsible along with irresponsible countries. As Ambrose Evans-Pritchard points out in his online column, states with trade surpluses will be harder hit than states with deficits. This is what happened during the Great Depression. Germany, Europe's biggest exporter, could see its economy shrink by 3·5 per cent in 2009. Still, Mr Strauss-Kahn is right to single out Britain. Our deficit is significantly larger than that of any other major economy, and is set to grow sharply. The years of easy credit have left citizens, as well as the Government, in debt. We are, accordingly, less able than our rivals to spend our way out of recession. It is too late to blow the dust off old Keynesian tracts: ministers spent 10 fat years chomping their way through an additional £1·2 trillion.

    This is no longer simply a question of an engorged state or of post-dated tax rises. Labour's borrowing levels threaten our position in the world. Just as the colossal debts we incurred between 1939 and 1945 caused our decline among nations thereafter, so our current borrowing will see a similar diminution. Already we have been overtaken by China, France and now Italy. We shall emerge from the crunch a poorer and meaner country than we entered it.

  23. "'It's an atomic bomb in the world of Jewish philanthropy,' Mark
    Charendoff, president of the Jewish Funders Network, told Anthony Weiss
    and Gabrielle Birkner of The Forward newspaper. 'There's going to be
    fallout from this for years to come.' The collapse of the investment
    firm of Bernard Madoff has opened a black hole at the center of the
    tight knit circles of wealthy Jews who socialize and do business
    together, and who, year after year, support Jewish causes. "

    Jews often like to joke (if joke is the word) that Israel is not
    successful economically because they are all Jews and Jews are too
    bright to exploit one another. However, that claim does not stand up to
    scrutiny. First there is the fact that there is a substantial minority
    of non-Jews in Israel, ie, Arabs (average iQ in the 80s). Second, not
    all Jews have high IQs. Third, while Western (Ashkenazi ) have an
    average IQ of Oriental Jews have an average IQ of 85 (Lynn and Vanhanan
    The Wealth and Poverty and Nations.)

    The modern state of Israel has no excuse not to be economically
    successful because it has immense political and strategic advantages.
    It was founded in breach of the UN’s supposedly cardinal principle
    of territory being sacrosanct and has been allowed ever since to breach
    all the rules by which the UN operates. It has done this by the forced
    occupation of territory permanently, the forced removal of people from
    territory, group punishments and the creation of a state based on
    ethnicity. It became a nuclear power without being subject to UN
    sanctions, has persistently initiated armed conflict and threatens to
    attack Iran pre-emptively.

    Israel has this uniquely privileged position because of the massive
    military, economic and diplomatic support of the USA. This is due to the
    pernicious influence the Jewish lobby in the US have over American
    politics. Take that support away and the country would not survive ten
    years, for its nuclear weapons would not save it from economic collapse
    or internal insurrection from the large Arab minority within its own
    borders. Moreover, if they used nuclear weapons on the likes of Iran it
    would bring retaliation

    The fact that Israel is not an economic success even with the aid of the
    US taxpayer and donations from Jews around the world is very telling..
    It is clear that something else is the cause of Israel’s economic
    inadequacy. That I would suggest is the fact that any minority within
    the a society which does not actively suppress them can exploit the
    majority. In Israel there is no majority to exploit and hence the
    normal economic success of Jews where they are in the minority cannot
    be replicated.

    The other way of looking at the problem is to search for societies
    where Jews have been removed. The classic historical examples are
    England following the expulsion of the Jews in 1290 by Edward 1 and
    Germany after 1945.

    In the case of England Jews were denied any part in English life until
    the latter part of the 17th century. During that time England became
    prosperous, developed parliamentary government, underwent the commercial
    revolution which laid the foundations for the Industrial Revolution and
    inaugurated the only world empire ever worthy of the name.
    Post-War Germany created her "economic miracle".

    The Jews who trusted Madoff were caught because they believed wrongly
    that one of their own would not defraud them. That was something which
    only happened to the Goyim. They know better now