At the moment, I can’t find it, but somewhere, I have a dreadful photograph, taken in what used to be the fine land of Syria. It shows a small girl, perhaps 5 or 6 years old, dressed in a pretty blue dress, white socks and shoes, lying on the ground – her head severed from her body. This clearly happened because her parents had dared to hold a different opinion about ‘faith’ and ‘family values’. I suggest that, had that occurred here in the UK, there would have been many extra copies of newspapers sold, hand-wringing at every ‘official’ level, accompanied with repeated assurances that steps would be taken to ensure such a thing NEVER happened again.
Now, let’s just check here – if we dust off our family bible,and turn to Matthew 18:1-6, we have a section on what our Prophet thinks about anyone who interferes with young children (male or female). He recommends that we tie a millstone around the offender’s neck and take them for a dip in the local lake, which goes in stark contrast to that which is approved by the father of the Islamic nation. His followers insist that it is acceptable for men to take a six-year old female as a ‘wife’ – mind you, they seem to be able to wait until the child is nine before ‘consummating’ the relationship.
Across the globe, we can see countries infested with this evil ideology, and bent on eradicating every other type of social function which differs from that laid down by their man (the only ‘prophet’ who, actually, never seems to have ‘prophesied’ much at all). If you get and study the book – ‘Mohammed and the Unbelievers’, published by the Center for the Study of Political Islam [CSPI], and available via Amazon, you will soon learn what Mohammed had in mind for everyone who dares to disagree with his ideas.
Wherever it has appeared, this form of Islam (= submit or else) has always caused disruption. It is doing so here in the (dis)United Kingdom today: our mission is the same today as that of our monarchy one thousand years ago – to confront, control and be rid of it.
However, it is obvious that here, ‘there is something rotten in the state of Britain’, when, over the decades since the end of World War II, we have invited and/or allowed citizens of other (mostly former Commonwealth) countries to settle in our sceptered isle, irrespective of spiritual condition or political persuasion, knowing that they bring with them their hideous culture.
Some of these souls have arrived in a state of extreme distress and obvious penury, fleeing for their lives from some hideous, self-appointed tyrannical ‘leader’.
These have gambled that the nation which has a worldwide reputation for ‘christian’ charity could be relied upon to provide succour and sanctuary to such.
Others of that persuasion, however, have seen our international status as a prize to be coveted, our financial institutions as a benefit to be exploited, and have created a lucrative business out of assisting fit, young, bearded, mobile-phone-carrying male (mostly) ‘children’ to reach this European Elysium of ‘milk and honey’ uninvited, and often at extreme risk to their lives [Home Office Ref: 1178819 M is a case in point] with the clear intent of sponging on our generosity and at the same time, working to subvert our democratic status, thus to replace it with a monstrous, inhumane form of social manipulation. It is a testament to our asinine national governments (all shades), that, far from maintaining control of orderly immigration, we have actually ‘opened the city gates and let down the drawbridge’..
It is noticeable that the few of us who actually dare to point out the inherent risks to our ‘western’ society of allowing such mass migration, are met with a deafening silence (as my old mum used to say, with a ‘bag of IGNORE).
We are already losing count of the number of unprovoked attacks, carried out on UK streets, by servants of ‘Allah the Great’, all designed to cause public mayhem, instil terror and force our tolerant, democratic attitude into servile compliance with their version of law. Little wonder, then, that there are some elements of our indigenous ‘white’ population, who are angered to the point of active retaliation.
How pathetically sad to see that our ‘appeasing’ government, police service, judiciary (supported by an imbalance in media reporting) seem bent on emphasizing the atrocity, whenever the miscreant is identified as an evilly-motivated ‘white racist’ person, on whom the most severe sanctions must be imposed, whilst, in those multiple cases where the culprit is reluctantly acknowledged to be of the Muslim ideology, the courts inevitably take note of the most ludicrous ‘social’ reasons why this particular soul was uncharacteristically ‘disturbed’ enough to make mincemeat of some totally random victim – and hand down an inappropriately lenient sentence.
For these reasons, I move that those fortunate enough to be elected to the green benches, following the impending demise of this present ineffective set of incumbents, should make it a solid point on their manifesto to re-instate capital punishment, the more particularly in cases which involve the sexual violation of minors (male or female) where the victim is then murdered, once carnal lust has been satisfied.
I also move that, in cases of deliberate random killing of defenceless victims – and I am thinking of indiscriminate ‘bombings’ at public events, on public transport, etc. – those responsible should also pay with their lives.
To those who will now commence to howl about ‘human’ rights and ‘inhumane’ treatment, I will say, there will shortly be another publication to show why capital punishment is better understood in some 56 countries across the globe than we can bring ourselves to understand it here.
When we look back over the past seven decades, we see a clear pattern has emerged; there has been enormous influence exerted upon British government of all shades to ‘compromise’ for the sake of apparently improved relationships with overseas regimes, ostensibly for commercial benefits, perhaps founded upon a desire to see ‘Great’ Britain cling on to its fading pink map of hegemony. This has happened at the cost of our national integrity, and usually because the love of money has also been a significant motivator.
(‘Secret Affairs’ by Mark Curtis – subtitle ‘Britain’s collusion with radical Islam analyses the history of this sorry situation)
Of equal significance is the emergence, since 1952, of an insidious plan to convert the whole of Europe into a godless federation. Just seven years after the end of World War II hostilities, plans were already in hand to achieve by economic means what the Austrian painter/decorator had failed to achieve in six years of military aggression.
“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super-state without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an ‘economic’ purpose but which will eventually and irreversible lead to federation.” Jean Monnet ( a Founding Father of the EU), written in a letter to a friend 30th April 1952
Ask yourself, is this where you really want to be, a vassal state, eternally bound to and funding an un-elected oligarchy, whose legislature countenances and endorses the eradication of some 1,000 years of British history, culture and constitution.
If you want to inspect a possible positive alternative, please email us on ‘firstname.lastname@example.org’ – there remains a way ‘forward’..
If you have persisted to the end of this publication, thank you for your attention.