DO YOU THINK THEY KNOW SOMETHING WE DON'T?

Missiles stationed on residential roof for Olympics

The Army is set to station soldiers and high velocity surface-to-air missiles on top of a block of residential flats to ward off any airborne terror threats during the Olympics.

Residents in the private, gated flats in Bow, east London, have received a leaflet warning them that a team of 10 soldiers and police will be stationed at the building - home to 700 people - for the duration of the Games.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) leaflet says the missiles will only be fired as a last resort, said resident Brian Whelan.

He said: ''They are going to have a test run next week, putting high velocity missiles on the roof just above our apartment and on the back of it they're stationing police and military in the tower of the building for two months.

''It's a private, gated community with an old watch tower which is now a lift shaft.

''We have an MoD leaflet saying the building is the only suitable place in the area. It says there will be 10 officers plus police present 24/7.

''I'm not sure if they are going to live in the building.

''We have a gym and a pool and people have seen them there so it makes you think it will be some sort of Army base - it's not ideal.

''The property management company which runs the place put posters and gave out the leaflets today.

''The general tone of it all was 'Great news, aren't we lucky', but that's not normal, it's not something people should have put on them.

''I've looked these (the missiles) up and I don't think they're the kind of thing you can fire over a highly populated area like Tower Hamlets, think of the debris.

''It says the missiles will only be used as a last resort.

''It's totally unsuitable.''

Mr Whelan said the leaflet poses a series of questions residents might ask, such as: ''Will this make me a target for terrorists?''

The 28-year-old said: ''But the answer on it is that we will be safer with it here.

''From the few people I've spoken to, and the security we have here, they're not happy about it.

''I don't think it needs to be here at all. 'I don't see how the decision was made or who made it.

''Even if it was going to be forced through you would think they would hold a meeting and get rid of people's fears.''

It was unclear who was responsible for liaising with the residents, but it is understood the MoD and the Metropolitan Police were working together with community groups over the issue.

It was also unclear if the building's owners would be paid to have the missiles stationed on the roof - or whether the decision was made under the Emergency Powers Act.

An MoD spokesman said: "As announced before Christmas, ground-based air defence systems could be deployed as part of a multi-layered air security plan for the Olympics, including fast jets and helicopters, which will protect the skies over London during the Games.

"Based on military advice we have identified a number of sites and, alongside colleagues from the Metropolitan Police, are talking to local authorities and relevant landowners to help minimise the impact of any temporary deployments.

"As part of our ongoing planning, we can confirm site evaluations have taken place.

"However, no final decision on whether or not to deploy ground-based air defence systems for the Games has been taken."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/news/9234030/Missiles-stationed-on-residential-roof-for-Olympics.html

?

JONATHAN BOWDEN

The death at such an early age of Jonathan Bowden is a great loss to Nationalism and intellectual thought in this country.
I was privileged to have heard him on several occasions, heard his magnificent speeches and even been "cross examined" by him in a "hostile news" interview to teach me how to manage the media.

To me he was the best and most motivational speaker I ever heard.
He had his beliefs and travelled the country at his own expense to propagate his brand of patriotism.
His speeches were from the heart, serious and mocking at the same time but always inspirational.
I am fortunate to have several recordings of them (they may be sought after in future), and feel privileged to have had him stay at our house when we talked late into the early hours and in the following morning continued the discussion.

I have to admit he was way too clever for me and lost me when talking on matters of philosophy but even then I found him interesting and good company.

He was a man who stuck to his ideas and beliefs, a leader and not a follower. That is the reason I believe he was abandoned by Nick Griffin when scurrious allegations were made against him.

His trouble was that he was too clever, too good a debater and speaker and thus a threat to the more pedestrian and ambitious Griffin.

Jonathan was not ambitious for his own selfish interests, but he showed his ambition for our country by his hard work, travelling the country promoting Nationalism.
He was in effect too intelligent to be coralled into an official party line.

In spite of that he campaigned tirelessly for the BNP and latterly when the Party imploded as a result of chicanery and mis management attended meetings to try and resurrect the nationalist cause.

That he did not rise higher was in my opinion his lack of political ambition and his integrity.
And his intelligence.

He was too bright and intelligent to allow himself to be straightjacketed into any narrow code of belief and action.
He believed in free thought, a free agent but a true patriot and I hope a friend.

He will be sorely missed by me and his many friends in nationalism.

WHO VOTED FOR THAT?

Some interesting facts have been revealed last week on items of expenditure by Wigan MBC from its £130 million budget.
Items of expenditure listed were all for amounts more than £500, some of which look suspicially like freebies for councillors.
A couple of drinks for unpaid councillors I can accept but our councillors are well paid and should in that case pay for their own booze.

But one item of expenditure did astonish me.

A grant has been made to "a  gay music radio station"
We know it is at least £500 but there is no mention of the name of the station.

Wigan was traditionally a mining and engineering town and "gays" were very much the exception rather than the rule.
Those few with an artistic or thespian bent usually did as "Sir" Ian McKellen and sloped off to environments more vibrant and congenial to their lifestyle, leaving us with a town overwhelmingly heterosexual.


As far as a radio station is concerned I was not aware that the difference between those of un natural sexual proclivities and normal people extended to music.
I thought (apart from pornographic homoerotic songs) that music tastes were generally similar.

I have nothing against homosexuals doing what they want in private but I don't know where the ruling Labour group got the idea that council tax payers would welcome their hard earned money being squandered in that way as frontline services are cut.
Why should people making use of a different orifice for sex justify a subsidy?
Perhaps the council are chasing "the gay vote".

If so they will be disappointed but in any case why should they care. It is not their money they are wasting,IT'S OURS.

I know in the context of £130 million the money donated is a small amount, but what about all the other ways in which they waste money?

I know they spend £millions on housing immigrants in houses which were built for us.
I do not know whether Elliot Brown is till employed, the man who said that Wiganers were inbred and needed an infusion of  foreign blood, and if justice had been done would have been prosecuted for racism.

All these are un necessary burdens on our council tax payers and together must add up to a huge cost.

Who decides these expenditures and grants? Certainly not the voters.

 WE NEVER VOTED FOR THEM.

CALL THIS A DEMOCRACY?   NEVER.

THE HOUSING BENEFIT RACKET.

The latest sign of the pressure of immigration on housing was illustrated this week with a proposal to move 200 families from Newham in London to Stoke.
The cap on housing benefit to £20,000 per year is said to be the reason for this, and houses are cheaper in Stoke than Newham.

Boris Johnson has said that the £20,000 cap will cause "ethnic cleansing" of parts of London, this of course admitting the people in receipt of these huge benefits, paid for by us are aliens.

I am sure he was not referring to British people as they have largely been ethnically cleansed from the "diverse and vibrant" Newham.
The fact that it is proposed to move these families indicates also that they are not in work and are thus parasites on hard working British taxpayers.
To put it into context, to earn enough to pay such a rent after tax one would have to be on almost £30,000 and that is before fuel and food bills are paid, way above the average income.

The costs of rent in London districts are driven by the old system of supply and demand and this demand has been made more acute by the millions of aliens living there, and in turn has made living in some districts unaffordable for British workers who have been brought up there.

But there is another driver for these high rents and that is housing benefit itself.

Rentiers will naturally push for rents as large as the market will stand and if the market is supported by housing benefit these rents will be much larger than they would be in the absence of benefits.
The people who benefit most, apart from foreign parasites are greedy landlords who are making vast profits out of this system.
Banks are making money out of lending to the owners as well.
And who pays for all this?

Not the banks, landlords, alien tenants but yes
THE WORKING TAXPAYER who must subsidise this racket.

What I have stated above is a symptom of market economics where if there is money to be made people will avail themselves of the opportunity.
Similarly even the rich Londoners wish their servants, cleaners nannys etc and council workers to be housed at government expense to provide for cheap labour.

The government, especially with a Tory majority knows this. They know how business works but do nothing to solve it and indeed exacerbate it, because it suits their purpose.

Maggie Thatcher sold council houses not for the reasons often stated but to get the working class people dependent on the banks and building societies and in turn boost the profits of the City.

I believe housing benefit should be cut gradually to a maximum of perhaps £5,000 per year.
People will not be thrown out. The landlords need tenants and rents would be reduced.

An additional benefit would be to reduce the price of houses and help first time buyers, those people who are now taxed to subsidise these high benefits and through them the landlorsds, but can not themselves afford to live in these areas.
Taxes would also be massively reduced if these schemes and others were modified to favour those on modest wages.

And then we come to Stoke.

Stoke council houses were built as a social project for the people of Stoke, not for the dross of the Third World.
Have the people of Stoke been asked their opinion? I doubt it.
Do they matter? Must their interests be put secondary to these uninvited immigrants?
Are there any empty houses in Stoke, or is there a waiting list?

Of course there will be people in need of housing in Stoke, British people, but the government is putting their interests behind those of aliens, rentiers and the banking industry.

IT'S TIME THEY PUT ORDINARY BRITISH PEOPLE FIRST.

WHO CHOOSES THE JUDGES?

One of the people who I detest the most is Peter Hain.
Some years ago, before he inveigled his way into a senior position in British politics and was just an agitator for things of no concerns to us I thought I would have had a chance to meet him.

It was at the time of a South Africa rugby tour and it was thought that a match would have been played at our local rugby club , Orrell and he threatened to disrupt it.
Although not a violent man I was relishing the chance to meet this anti democratic man and with my co club members educating him by combatting violence with violence. I looked forward to introducing his face to my fist.

In the event the match was cancelled and he was lucky, although no doubt he does not know how lucky he was.

So I am in the peculior position now of being on his side.

He is in court for the crime of criticising a judge.
It seems according to an ancient law that judges can not be criticised and he is to be prosecuted for this.

Now I did not realise that judges were above the law.
What right have they to have this position and who chooses them?

At school some go in for useful subjects such as engineering, science, medicine, trades  etc and however well qualified they become they are held responsible for their actions and sometimes negligence.

Only last week a plumber, a skilled man with much experience was jailed for faulty workmanship which resulted in a death.
Doctors are often sued for negligence or mistakes.
But Judges are never, and it seems can never be sued for their mistakes.
How many times have you heard that a judge has released a criminal who goes on to kill someone or been judged to have wrongly directed a jury which resulted in an innocent man being incarcerated?

Why are these judges seemingly above the law?
They don't make it. That is Parliament's job and often they interpret  laws made by Parliament in a way that Parliament and the people did not want.

Why have they so much power? Often they are out of touch with reality, living in ivory towers and not as clever as they would have us believe.
They are certainly not as clever as scientists and engineers but under our system they have the clout and influence to over ride the interests of the people and democracy itself.

Is it not time we curtailed the influence of these arrogant out of touch nonentities and made the system more democratic?

I used to respect the law of our land and the impartiality of our judiciary but after recent cases of judges over ruling Parliament I have lost that respect.

I do not hold our justice system in contempt,---

BUT THE JUDGES?

THE RAPE OF THE PEOPLE

Political events in Europe are moving at an increasing pace.
The refusal of Geert Wilders to ratify the austerity programme asked by the EU on the Dutch Parliament has precipitated the resignation of the Dutch Prime Minister and an election in a couple of months.
Hopefully Wilders will as seems likely consolidate his power.

This, with the French presidential elections likely to result in a president at least likely to challenge many of the austerity requirements imposed by Germany will be another nail in the coffin of the EU.
The Greek economy is still weakening and Spain has record unemployment and the situation in Italy is worsening.

And the facts are that austerity is not necessary, the debts are caused by corrupt banking practices. No austerity is envisioned for them.

We are witnessing a slow break up of the existing EU set up while the leaders are throwing borrowed money at this failed concept to keep it going, in spite of increasing antipathy of the people of Europe.
These governments are prepared to impoverish their peoples, not for the sake of future prosperity but  for the sake of their internationalist dream and banker friends.

A good question would be. In whose interest are these so called leaders acting? They are supposed to be democratic but are certainly not acting according to the wishes or interests of the people.
Some of it may be pride, not wishing to admit they were wrong but there is another reason.

The leaders are in hock to the banking interests which feed parasite like on the populace, interests which are dependent on globalisation and internationalism. This last in turn depends on reducing national spirit and cohesion and thus immigration is encouraged and free speech opposing this treachery curtailed in the press and prosecuted in law.

This week the unholy alliance of the media barons in this country is being exposed in the courts, but this cosy relationship was just as rampant in the Labour administration.
That just a few wealthy news magnates can influence and dictate policy shows the degree to which we have lost our democracy.

In an effort to keep the whole Euro shambles on the road countries are being asked to "lend" money to the IMF which will later be lent to the EU. We are told by Osborne that his loan of £10 billion is safe and we will be paid interest on it. He does not say how much interest we will receive and if it is such a good thing, why not lend £100 billion.
The USA and canada have refused to take part in this good investment. Why?

It could be asked where this money is coming from given that we owe £billions to creditors and small businesses are starved of cash.
It is just throwing good money our money after bad for no good reason apart from attempting to achieve the impossible task of saving this rotten organisation.

 But the good news is that the peoples of Europe are starting to realise this great con and to rebel.
If they are thwarted politically, violence could ensue but the parasitic bankers who control the EU and their lackeys in power at present will try to hold on to the end.

But make no mistake if matters continue as they are doing the people will have their revenge.

And it may not be pretty.

CONGRATULATIONS MARINE LE PEN.

The excellent showing of Marine Le Pen in the French presidential elections has made my day.

In spite of Sarkozy's attempts to reduce her vote by promising tougher immigration laws she has made good progress, unfortunately not enough to get her in to the second round but certainly enough to frighten the other candidates and on this side of the Channel the BBC and other lefty media organisations.

It is a sign that the people of Europe are becoming aware of the betrayal of the political class and they resent it. It will also give the FN more influence in French politics.
Whoever eventually gets in they will have to take into consideration the French patriots who are finally getting their act together.
In other European countries Nationalist parties will take heart and hopefully capitalise on the resurgance of patriotism enough to halt and reverse the colonisation visited on our continent by the venal traitors at present in power.

But what about the second round, the one which actually chooses the President?
Should Le Pen supporters back the Leftist Hollande in order to get rid of the despicable liar Sarkozy, or should they back Sarkozy in order to halt some of the dafter ideas of Hollande?

Much as I disagree with many of the policies of Hollande his election could hasten the break up of the EU and whatever else that must be a good thing.
With Sarkozy they will get more of the same and national identity subsumed into the morass of the EU.

So I hope Le Pen's voters stay at home in the second round and let Hollande get in, a small price to pay for the demise of the EU.

BUT, where is our Le Pen?
The BNP had a chance of changing British politics for the better, but that has been squandered by the present leadership and the party is just ignored in spite of the general disillusionment with the "main" parties.

If Griffin was a true patriot he would have long ago put his personal ambitions aside in the nation's interests.
But is he a true patriot?
Is he even on our side or working for the State?
I don't know but with him a block to any nationalist revival our beliefs will get nowhere.

Perhaps, after the local elections and the inevitable hammering the BNP candidates will get he will stand down, but I doubt it and we of patriotic beliefs will see our country sink further into the abyss without being able to do anything about it.

We need a new charismatic leader AND FAST.

The potential for a nationalist revival is there as in France but without leadership we will get nowhere.