Thursday, 28 July 2011

London sharia zone

The Muslims Against Crusades organisation is now staking its claim on a defined portion of our capital city

Islamic Zone: Click to enlarge

The boroughs of Newham, Tower Hamlets (home of the historic Tower of London) and Waltham Forest are being plastered with stickers saying: "You are entering a Sharia-controlled zone - Islamic rules enforced."



Poster: You have been warned

The posters forbid entirely lawful activities such as smoking, listening to music and concerts, as well as prostitution and drug-taking.

MAC are holding a Britain's First Islamic Emirate March this coming Saturday.

There has been increasing harassment of people displaying un-Islamic behaviour or dress in this area for several months now: women, even white women, berated for not wearing headscarves. People smoking during the holy month of Ramadan have been attacked.

Now it seems they are going "official" - taking over an area of London, in which admittedly whites are a minority. I wrote about this earlier this month; it's not a surprise, but it needs wider dissemination - after all, this is only the first of many such zones planned.

Already the police in the area are conniving with the muslims; only under considerable pressure are they arresting or prosecuting anyone putting up these posters or using violence to enforce sharia law.

Clearly this needs to be opposed with the utmost vigour. If left unchallenged it will become a fait accompli and an alien power will have successfully invaded and conquered an (admittedly small) part of our country.

Monday, 25 July 2011

The blond bomber

Anders Behring Breivik, aged 32, bilingual, self-made multi-millionaire by his mid-twenties, 3rd degree mason, self-professed Knight Templar, body-builder, prostitute-user, video-gamer, uniform-wearer, auto-photographer, and immensely prolific writer about himself -- what was he thinking of?


He started a business, made €4 million, and used all that money and more to fund nine years of preparation for his spectacular one-day atrocity. Why?

Perhaps what he didn't do is actually more informative than what he did. He didn't kill himself rather than be taken alive. He didn't even evade capture. He didn't deny his crimes; although he does deny any guilt.

So what was he thinking of? Himself of course. Himself, as the star of his own show; his name written into the history books forever. Himself, as prime exhibit at his own trial. Notice that although he doesn't deny his actions - he must have the credit he is due - he does deny guilt; there must be a trial at which he can shine. (Incidentally, we can expect his lawyer to be sacked before the trial. He will defend his himself. He will want to do all the talking. Sitting mutely as a trial happens around him is very much not what he's looking for.)

He professes to be anti-Islam, anti-multiculturalism and anti-immigration. He undoubtedly is all these things. The internet is awash with his postings as "fjordman". He seems to have met and been impressed by the EDL leadership. And yet his targets were not muslims or immigrants but rather his own people, native Norwegians. Why not attack a mosque? It was Friday afternoon after all - that's when mosques are bursting with worshipers.

The reason is that it's not the muslims' attention he was trying to get. The intended audience is his own people. You don't poke an ants' nest when you're trying to stir up some bees.

His nationalist feelings are probably genuine. But sadly he has done nothing for the cause. In fact he has harmed the cause. And he's probably glad about that, since us nationalists are also in his target audience. Pissing us off just adds to his satisfaction.

Undoubtedly he will be given a fair trial; then he will be found guilty, and then, amazingly, he will have to serve 21 years in jail. Aged 53 he will be a free man, and most pleasingly to him, still the centre of attention.

The title of this post is "The blond bomber". Breivik's hair colour is completely irrelevant to his crimes. However it's worth taking note of the indecent haste with which the BBC and other mass media reported his complexion. The same BBC which can completely fail to notice that all members of a rape gang are brown-skinned and muslim, immediately reports the ethnicity of a European terrorist. They should take more care; their agenda is showing.

Lastly some links:

BBC
Daily Mail
Breivik's blog
Breivik's videos at the Order of the White Knights

Monday, 18 July 2011

What did she say?

So Rebekah Brooks "attended" a Central London police station yesterday. She thought she was going in as a witness, but she rapidly became a suspect and was arrested. They held her for twelve hours; she was released at midnight.

Rebekah Brooks (nee Wade): Sang like a canary?

And what did she say during those twelve hours? 

Well, we don't know. But we do know that Sir Paul Stephenson resigned as Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police during the evening, and within the last few minutes John Yates, Assistant Commissioner of the Met has also resigned, apparently after being informed he was to be investigated.

Are we seeing a strategy here? Closing the News of the World failed to stop the rot. Using Rebekah as a fire break didn't work. As the noose closes on the inner circle have they decided to use the "Samson" option? Push the pillars of the establishment apart and bring down the whole temple? If we're going down, everyone's coming down with us.

Tomorrow we were due to see RB and Murdoch Senior and Junior testify before a Parliamentary Select Committee. But can they now even say anything? With arrests made the whole thing has become "legal". They could reasonably exercise their right to silence.

Then parliament was due to breakup on Wednesday. But that's been cancelled. The House will sit one extra day to debate the phone hacking scandal.

The PM has been criticised for getting to close to the media. It seems he has met News Corp executives 27 times since taking office. 

Now it's clear that journalistic tentacles penetrate deep into the police and government and probably there are very few innocents. It's time for those in high office to duck and hope that none of the mud being splashed around hits them. If someone else, anyone else, can be persuaded to take the fall by resigning then so much the better.

Inconsistent Cenotaph

Our criminal justice system is bring itself into disrepute by the vagaries of the sentences it sends down. Consider the following affronts to the Cenotaph in Whitehall - memorial to Our Glorious Dead of two world wars.


Wendy Lewis: Urinated on the Cenotaph while boyfriend made Nazi salutes; 15 weeks jail; suspended.



Emdadur Choudhury: Burned poppies on Armistice Day and called for British soldiers to burn in Hell; £50 fine.




Charlie Gilmour: Swung from flag on Cenotaph; 16 months jail; not suspended

Strangely most people seem to think Gilmour got what he deserved. If he did then the two others got off very lightly indeed. 

If Gilmour had taken the precaution of performing his ape-man act the day before the student protests he could probably simply have swung and departed; even if noticed by the police it would most likely have been a case of, "run along sonny." He didn't cause any damage. He later threw a dustbin, but that didn't cause any damage either.

Thursday, 7 July 2011

Islamic emirates in the UK

From the website of Muslims Against Crusades we have today this missive...

The Islamic Emirates Project
7 / 7 / 2011

In the last 50 years, the United Kingdom has transformed beyond recognition. What was once a predominantly Christian country has now been overwhelmed by a rising Muslim population, which seeks to preserve its Islamic identity, and protect itself from the satanic values of the tyrannical British government.

There are now over 2.8 million Muslims living in the United Kingdom – which is a staggering 5% of the population - but in truth, it is more than just numbers, indeed the entire infrastructure of Britain is changing; Mosques, Islamic Schools, Shari'ah Courts and Muslim owned businesses, have now become an integral part of the British landscape.

In light of this glaring fact, Muslims Against Crusades have decided to launch 'The Islamic Emirates Project', that will see high profile campaigns launched in Muslim enclaves all over Britain, with the objective to gradually transform Muslim communities into Islamic Emirates operating under Shari'ah law.

With several Islamic emirates already well established across Asia, Africa and the Middle East, including Iraq and Afghanistan, we see this as a radical, but very realistic step in the heart of Western Europe, that will inshaa'allah (God willing), pave the way for the worldwide domination of Islam.
Helpfully they have provided a map of how they see our green and pleasant land...


The cities marked with the red dots would seem to be their main target areas.

As a rationale for their position they could offer this justification: there are now more muslims in the UK than Welsh people, and the Welsh have self-government, so why shouldn't they?

This is a naked land grab, and certainly not unexpected by nationalists. Of course they won't be wanting total independence for these areas: just self-rule, while still benefiting from a free NHS, free education and free social security, all paid for by the infidel British taxpayer. (The majority of muslims in the UK are unemployed.)

This next step was quite predictable. In France, with its higher muslim population, they already have 751 Zones Urbaines Sensibles or "Sensitive Urban Zones". The French government even publishes a list with maps. These are muslim controlled areas which are no-longer an effective part of the French state. A police incursion into one of these areas causes immediate rioting, generally involving overturning and torching cars.

So the Muslims Against Crusades are following a well-trod path. They know where they are going. Basically they will make their chosen enclaves no-go areas for whites and will be looking for some official recognition that these areas are separate and special. Then they will grow the areas, both in number and size.

This is a progressive conquest of our country. If we acquiesce then, quite frankly, we deserve what will happen to us.

Wednesday, 6 July 2011

Shropshire council sacks all staff and hires them back for less

Shropshire Council has fired all 6,500 of its employees, effective September 30th, but hired them back the next day provided they accept a 5.4% pay cut. If they don't accept the deal they are dismissed without compensation.

Way to go Shropshire. That's austerity!

However, it's not really much austerity. Also it applies the same percentage cut to all staff, whereas the higher earners should really be hit harder; not least because they can afford it.

This blog therefore offers up the "Nationalist Formula" for public sector pay cuts:
new salary = (old salary) - (old salary/1000)^2
ie, take the old salary, eg £25,000 pa, divide by a thousand, that makes 25, then square it: that's £625, and subtract that from the original pay, making £24,375 making a pain-free 2.5% cut in pay.

Of coure it gets more painful as you ascend the pay scales. Here are some illustrations:
    Old pay     Pay cut       New pay     %Cut
    -------     ------        -------     ----
    £20,000     £400          £19,600     2%
    £30,000     £900          £29,100     3%
    £40,000     £1,600        £38,400     4%
    £50,000     £2,500        £47,500     5%
    £100,000    £10,000       £90,000     10%
    £200,000    £40,000       £160,000    20%
    £500,000    £250,000      £250,000    50%
    £1,000,000  £1,000,000    £0          100%
We probably don't need to worry about the £1 million earner losing everything. Nobody in the public sector should be making that amount off our taxes.

The only problem is: Shropshire's actions are almost certainly illegal. They can't just sack staff without compensation. Their actions are likely mere bluff designed to get people to sign away their rights.

Watch this space; for legal action mainly.

Monday, 4 July 2011

Greece will bite the hand that feeds it

Robert Peston has some good analysis over on his blog.

The question he asks and then answers is: why haven't the Greeks already defaulted on their debt?

It seems they have very little to lose by doing so. It's not like anyone is going come around and repossess the car and the TV. Bond holders would be left high and dry if the Greeks just said: can't pay, won't pay. Like an American handing back the keys to his house, all that would be affected is the credit rating.

The Greek problem is they have a "primary deficit". This means they need new loans to pay their day-to-day running costs, so they cannot afford to tell the banks of the world to get knotted.

If the Greeks ever managed to impose such austerity that they could survive day-to-day with no new borrowing (disregarding the cost of servicing their existing loans) then they would have every incentive to default on their debt.

The Greek government's annual balance sheet looks (pre-austerity) like this:

Total revenue.....................: €90bn
Total expenditure.................: €114bn

Requiring borrowing of............: €24bn
   of which debt servicing costs..: €12bn

These numbers are of course rather approximate; the Greeks have perfected the art of off-balance sheet accounting. However it should be pretty clear that if they can shave €12bn off their €90bn spending they can safely forget about servicing their national debt which is the other half of their borrowing.

So, Peston concludes, although not in so many words, Greece will bite the hand that feeds it as soon as it doesn't need the food anymore.

As this blog has pointed out before - this would probably be the right thing for them to do. Their economy is based on selling their primary assets: sun, sand, sea and culture, all of which will still be there after a default.

(And a last little observation: don't those numbers look small compared to the UK's situation?)