Preaching the Koran in Scandinavia

It's not Muslims doing the preaching, however - in Norway it is a vicar, and in Sweden it is a teacher.

The first example is from Ellingsrud, Oslo:

The Oslo district Elllingsrud has faced a commotion after minister Clara Vogl of Ellingsrud's church announced that she intends to read from the Koran to school children for julgudstjänst [a traditional Scandinavian Christmas service]. Initially, the priest thought that the children themselves would read the Koran, but the reactions have been so strong that she opted instead to read from it herself.

The move has brought strong reactions from parents. They say that they will not allow this and are upset that no information was given to parents in advance, either at school or church. Elisabeth Sjølie, who has children in school, says:

I do not mind that my children may learn about Islam, but I do not accept that she must preach the Koran, without my knowing it. Would you have forced Muslim children to read from the Bible during a major Islamic festival? I think this unlikely.

She adds that she and her children will be seeking to be relieved from the Norwegian Church as she no longer feels any confidence in this institution.

I must say, I find that reaction very pleasing. Elisabeth Sjolie perfectly sums up the double standards at play here; it is always the Norwegians who must adapt and be tolerant, never the Muslims.

There is a clear difference between learning objectively about other religions and having their holy tracts preached without qualification - for I imagine Clara Vogl sits very firmly in the "Islam is a religion of peace" camp, despite all evidence to the contrary.

The second example is from Sweden:

IN Torskolans nursery group, the children heard passages from the Koran.

- And that's why Jesus' mother and father had to go to Bethlehem.

- And now let's hear what the Quran says, Helen Sandberg Heed says to the play group from Tor school that meets in the library, whilst standing over the nativity scene.

With the help of small dolls Sandberg Heed tells the kids about the similarities and differences in the stories of Jesus in the Bible and the Koran.

- We are doing this because we have Muslim children in our communities. This story illustrates our common heritage, "says Helen Sandberg Heed.

- Today it's more important to highlight the joint where everyone is only talking about contradictions.

That's one way of looking at it. Another is that these people want to deconstruct traditional Swedish culture for their own ends.

Whilst some are so enthusiastic about what the Koran says, it seems fewer and fewer Swedish teachers have much time for what the Bible says - or even the cultural traditions reserved for Christmas time:

There will be no traditional julavslutning for Furubergs school children in Träslöv church - the priest wanted to say a prayer for the students, something that the school deemed "not appropriate".

"The reason is that the priest said he wants to say a prayer and a blessing over the children. We are satisfied that this is not okay," said Dan Randelid, one of the Furubergs School's two principals.

According to Randelid, the rules are clear - the school may not participate in anything with a "confessional element," and several judgments of the Schools Inspectorate confirms this. This was also the reason that the school contacted the church and the priest, Ola Bjervås, and asked if holding julavslutning in the church but without religious elements would be possible.

After Ola Bjervås declined, the school moved the entire thing to an auditorium. Perhaps the most extraordinary thing about the whole affair is the reaction of Bjervås, the vicar:

- We are very sad, not least because of the children. I can understand it, we live in a multicultural society, but it is a pity, for the reason we celebrate Christmas is based of course on Christian traditions. And it does not do children any harm.

This, I will remind you, comes from a vicar. If that half-hearted concession constitutes defending tradition, then I really don't hold out much hope for Sweden.

Hat tip: Politiskt Inkorrekt.

Britain's New "Friendly" Immigration Rules

The children of failed asylum seekers awaiting deportation from the United Kingdom will no longer be detained with their parents:

Parents awaiting forced deportation would still be held in secure houses, but their children would be assigned minders so they can move around freely.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said it would mean the UK had one of the "most child-friendly" immigration systems in the world.

Fantastic! Britain has so much money right now it simply can't spend it fast enough, it seems. Clearly we have nothing better to do than employ "minders" for the children of illegal immigrants. Who needs an immigration policy that's taxpayer-friendly when it can be "child-friendly"?

Mr Clegg said the decision to no longer detain children in the immigration system "spoke for itself" and marked a "big cultural shift".

"The change prioritises doing the right thing over looking and sounding tough," he said. "Reforms which will give the UK one of the most child-friendly immigration systems in the developed world."

I agree, it does speak for itself; Clegg's a Liberal Democrat and probably sees all border controls as some sort of symbol of fascist racism.

Whilst he and I would probably differ on what "doing the right thing" means here, at least he doesn't want to sound tough on an issue he has no intention of being tough on, and he deserves some credit for that.

I would point out, however, that the purpose of an immigration system is to process and remove those who have no right to be here and are absuing our hospitality - not be "friendly" to anyone. If said system was fit for purpose, this detention simply wouldn't be an issue - because those denied would be removed immediately.

BBC home affairs correspondent Tom Symonds says the government hopes a softer approach will encourage asylum seekers not to fight their deportation.

But it is understood the change may lengthen the process and have an impact on the numbers deported.

Ah, but of course. I think the article forgot to mention the impact it will probably have on the cost of the whole operation, but never mind.

Martin Narey, chief executive of Barnardo's, told the BBC that detaining children in Yarl's Wood was "very, very damaging", but "not because staff there are monsters or because it's run badly".

"Locking away children who haven't done anything wrong at all - and some of these are very, very young children indeed - putting them in essentially a prison environment with barbed wire, bars and locks is not something we should do."

Asked whether more families would abscond as a result of the relaxation, he said: "I'm not at all convinced there will be more, but if there were a few more it would be a good price to pay.

"It's not just about families. This is a significant day for the UK's reputation as a country that will treat people with compassion."

But is it a price you will personally be paying, Mr Narey? I somehow doubt it.

As for the UK's reputation - it's simply another piece of evidence that Britain is a country of mugs, run by mugs, as far as most of the illegals are concerned. They'll probably encourage their children to abscond in order to drag out an already tortured process yet further.

Why is it that the UK is required to show compassion to everyone else on earth - except its own long-suffering taxpayers?

The Insanity of Modern Britain

I remember watching the film Johnny English with a good friend of mine several years ago.

As we left the cinema, he commented that the film was "realistic, but only if you accept the premise that the monarch has the power to turn the entire country into a giant prison camp."

As it turns out, that was not a particularly realistic prediction of our future (and I realise it wasn't intended to be, yes) - what we actually should have feared was the government turning the entire country into a giant mental asylum.

Does that sound like cliched hyperbole? Well, maybe it does, but cliched or not the term does adequately sum up what is being done to Britain.

Take the following story (hat tip: Irish Savant):

Police are hunting an elderly letter writer responsible for sending more than 50 racially abusive letters to people across the country, including the prime minister.

The letters, some sexually explicit in content, have been sent to schools, hospitals, mosques, universities, doctors' surgeries and private individuals, leaving some recipients "extremely distressed".

According to Hampshire police, which is heading the investigation, the letters are all pro-English in content and racially inflammatory, with many appearing to have been sent in response to Daily Mail articles. All the letters are offensive and racist against a wide variety of nationalities and cultures.

The outrageous, pro-English scoundrel didn't stop there, however:

The letters regularly express anti-BBC views and accuse the corporation of racial bias, with the Scottish parliament and system also a regular target for abuse.

Commonly used phrases in the text include "English parliament", "Exit Europe", "repatriation" and "BBC shutdown".

Clippings from the Daily Mail have been included in many envelopes, which often also include cartoon drawings.

The Guardian must think Winterval has come early - a chance to slag off the Daily Mail, the "pro-English" and anyone who dares to think the BBC might be in any way biased, all within a few lines.

The person who sent these letters sounds a little disturbed, and I certainly don't condone such behaviour. But in truth, shouldn't we all be a little disturbed that one person sending letters which are "pro-English" and express non-PC views is genuinely worthy of being national news?

After all, it's not as if we live in a paradise free of crime and wrongdoing. In fact, violent crime is soaring, and most people have never felt less safe. Yet still, several police forces are investigating this "elderly letter writer", with one detective describing how hundreds of statements have been taken in an attempt to catch him.

Not to mention the hundreds of hours of man hour and hundreds of thousands of pounds it cost, I'm sure.

Meanwhile, it's business as usual on Britain's streets.

A woman was brutally attacked by a stranger whilst travelling on a London train in May 2008. Instead of taking this as evidence that Britain is now a violent, often lawless place, where people have absolutely no respect for each other and will turn nasty over the most piffling of trivialities without fear of the consequences, she is attempting to create yet another officially sanctioned victim group:

A woman who claims to have been beaten up because she is overweight is campaigning to see discrimination against fat people outlawed.

Marsha Coupe, 53 was attacked on a train by a woman who began verbally abusing her for her size.

‘I was returning home one night on a train and a woman sat across from me started kicking me and said, Hey fattie! You should not be on the train, you need two seats, she said.

Mrs Coupe, a marketing manager, was left shaken and badly bruised after the attack in May last year.

‘I had probably 30 to 40 bruises over my chest and my neck. I was terrified I was going to lose my eye.

‘London prides itself on being diverse yet there is almost a zero-tolerance on anyone of size. You cannot walk the streets without being verbally or physically assaulted.

The American who now lives in Hayes, Kent and weighs 22 stone was travelling home from London late at night in May last year when she was set upon.

She has now joined forces with a group of other women to lobby mayor Boris Johnson to make the capital more fat friendly.

This is the culture we have created. It doesn't occur to this lady that perhaps the young woman was simply looking for an excuse to attack her. It doesn't seem to bother her that no one should be treated like this by a criminal yob, for any reason or under any circumstances.

No - all that matters is creating another group it is illegal to 'discriminate' against. Does she seriously think that yet more tiresome legislation would have saved her from a beating?

Most of these thugs fear nothing and no one - they know they won't be caught, and even if they are the consequences will be negligable.

But that isn't the point; if someone is violently attacked, should the first question the authorities ask be "does the victim belong to a special victim class?"

Everyone must be equal in the eyes of the law.

We saw something similar to this a while back, when Fiona Pilkington killed herself and her disabled daughter after a gang of yobs made their lives unbearable. Despite the fact that they complained to the police a total of 32 times, nothing was done:

Although much of the abuse centred on the taunts about the children's disabilities, police failed to recognise it as a hate crime rather than simple antisocial behaviour, which would have made it a far higher priority.

The inquest heard that at the time of Pilkington's death, Leicestershire police had not implemented the Home Office guidance on hate crimes issued two years earlier.

Hinckley and Bosworth council's community officers visited Pilkington but never learned until after she was dead that anyone in the family was disabled.

Simple anti-social behaviour. That's what The Guardian calls it when someone who isn't part of a favoured victim class created for political reasons is hounded to death.

My question is, what happens to those of us who can't be part of such a group?

Thoughts on Germany

As I continue to settle in here and get used to my new surroundings, I thought I would share some of my impressions and experiences so far.

First of all, since my last stay here (which came to an end about two and a half years ago), the number of "visible minorities" has increased dramatically. I am not in a major city and live in a fairly rural state in the north of the country, so this has come of something of a shock even to me.

But the trend is unmistakable. Even this small city could now compete with Berlin or Hamburg, proportionally, in the diversity and enrichment stakes.

It is interesting to compare the behaviour of these obviously unassimilable Third World immigrants with that of their German hosts. As my regular readers will know, I am not one to perpetuate a stereotype unless it contains a healthy dose of truth, and many of those we have about the Germans do.

Generally speaking, this is an orderly, efficient and well run country. It feels different to Britain, because the people here are not (or don't seem to be) at the stage where they let the state do everything for them - they try to enforce their values themselves.

For example; if you wait at a pelican crossing and the lights are red but there are obviously no oncoming vehicles, you will observe that German people still do not cross.

They wait until the lights change to green.

It can be fascinating to watch this; every instinct I have tells me to just hurry across whilst I have the chance - but I make myself wait, partly to observe, and partly because it is illegal to cross against the lights - and ordinary people, from pensioners to children, will call you on it without fear, whereas most modern British people would cast their eyes down, for fear of a beating or worse.

The point I am making here is that behaviour as well as such things as appearance can mark one out as a foreigner here without much difficulty.

As I arrived at the main railway station, a school party disembarked from the train in front of me and stepped on to my platform. All appeared to be German, except for three pupils who were either African immigrants or the descendants of such.

It really was a life lesson to watch these three individuals create complete havoc where there was none before. They walked differently from their classmates, spoke differently, shouted for no reason, pushed the boys, pulled the girls' hair, answered the teachers back, ran when they were told to walk - you name a problem, and they created it on behalf of the whole class, much to the (silent) chagrin of everyone in that section of the station.

It seems astounding that people as careful about the trivialities as the Germans can let such serious and far reaching transformations occur on their watch.

It was clear, observing this group, that these three boys would never fit into that class. That being said, how then can they fit into normal German society - without irrevocably damaging it?

Today, I and several other passersby were accosted by a large gang of African and Turkish/Arab "youths", to use the correct English code, for no reason at all other than being in the street and minding our business.

As heartwarming as it was to see true multiculturalism in action as the lowest of these 'communities' banded together to harass innocent people, no one seemed to appreciate the presence of these enrichers, and once they had left several people (mainly elderly) were not shy about saying as much.

I have noticed that people here tend to be slightly less brainwashed than in Britain when it comes to these issues - many will openly admit there are huge problems or at the very least that they see a downside to what officially must be worshipped.

This is balanced by the fact that events in the past mean their mind will only allow them to go to a certain point before the 'crimethink' kicks in; discussion of topics such as the catastrophically low birth rate among ethnic Germans or the fact that certain minorities are clearly never going to assimilate en masse are too controversial for polite society. The very idea that the Germans have a right to exist unmolested in their own land can be seen as provocative and taboo, when taken beyond a very cursory opening position.

I keep coming back to this conclusion; whilst many Germans seem more willing to identify the problem than their British counterparts, their history means no real solution can ever be forthcoming. No one wants to stick their head above the parapet, because the accusation of Nazism is not just a vicious/childish slur here - it carries much legal weight.

This discussion is all the more interesting because here it is Superwahljahr - election season. Whilst "conservative" Mrs Merkel is tipped to be re-elected, most state legislatures and the federal government are up against the public vote on 27th September.

This is taken quite seriously here - curiously the state seems to take charge of the furore, and rather than seeing private citizens put up signs and banners for their preferred candidate, every lamp post becomes adorned with party and candidate posters.

I left my building to go shopping this evening to find that the posters of the NPD, the Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands, had all been torn down, cut up and thrown into the gutter.

This party stands accused of neo-Nazism, and whilst I certainly don't know enough about it to endorse it, the party leadership denies these claims.

It has slogans such as 'German jobs for German workers', is very much against mass immigration and the asylum racket, and its only remotely mainstream position seems to be pulling German troops out of Afghanistan (an issue on which it is united with the far-Left, along with hatred of Israel and the insistence of a "Holocaust" in Gaza).

In a country where democracy is taken quite seriously, it is a real shame that Leftist political violence and intimidation like this is tolerated.

All parties are entitled to a voice - the socialists, the greens, Die Linke, Mrs Merkel's CDU - so why not the NPD?

If they genuinely hold abhorrent views, defeat them with logic and reasoned argument, rather than thug tactics and tantrums.

But that really is too much to ask, isn't it?

If things keep going as they are, I fear it will be Germany which ends up in the gutter - and that is a conclusion I am loathe to reach.

***UPDATE*** 18th September 09.55

I have found some more articles on the NPD linked via their Wikipedia entry. Of particular interest is this article, which claims that a majority of Germans believe that the NPD is undemocratic and a threat to Germany's image (presumably it was some of these people who took the next logical, democratic step in ripping up their campaign posters).

Fair enough, but I wonder if the same people would say that about the Leftists who recently rioted in Hamburg, for example?

I sincerely hope so, because hypocrisy is an ugly thing - perhaps not quite so much as political violence and extremism, but almost.

Edward Kennedy

I wasn't going to mention the passing of Senator Edward Kennedy, because watching the media and the political classes fawning all over this foul individual was making me quite ill.

But then, I live in a country in which serving Members of Parliament praised Fidel Castro when he stepped down - so you'd think I would be used to such injustices by now.

Charlie Laurence of The Daily Mail does a wonderful job of saying it just like it is about Kennedy, however:

Senator Edward 'Ted' Kennedy stood for sleaze. Bloated and drunken, he used his standing in the Kennedy clan to chase vulnerable women - which brought his dream of reaching the White House to a shameful end.

He was the youngest of the four Kennedy brothers, and by far the longest lived.

Incredibly, he was in line to inherit his brother John F. Kennedy's legendary presidency, but his chances were dashed following the drowning of the pretty, young campaign assistant Mary Jo Kopechne.

Forever known as the Chappaquiddick Incident after the Massachusetts island where it took place, the scandal in 1969 broke the Kennedy grip on the White House.

A drunk Ted had been driving back from a party to the family 'compound' on Martha's Vineyard when he veered off a bridge and into a deep tidal dyke.

Mary Jo was in the back seat and, while he claimed he was just giving her a lift back to her hotel, it was widely thought that he had picked her up for sex. Kennedy swam ashore to save himself, but left Mary Jo to drown - in fact, it was even worse than that.

It was nine hours before he reported the accident. In the meantime, he walked back to his motel, complained to the manager about a noisy party, took a shower, went to sleep, ordered newspapers when he woke up and spoke to a friend and two lawyers before finally calling the police.

Divers later estimated that if he had called them immediately, they would have had time to pull out Mary Jo. She had not drowned, but had survived in an air pocket inside the car - she was asphyxiated only when the oxygen ran out several hours later.

As always, Ted used the family name to save his neck. In any other state but Massachusetts, the Kennedys' home turf, and with any other name, he would have been charged with homicide.

Instead, he escaped with a slap on the wrist: a two-year suspended sentence and the loss of his driving licence for a year. He had been allowed to plead guilty to no more than the charge of leaving the scene of an accident.

Bear in mind, this was the man whose death left Barack Obama "heartbroken". A murderer who refused to resign from the senate at the end even though he was unable to fulfill his duties - but then, this shouldn't surprise us, as it pretty adequately sums up the contempt that politicians hold their constituents in.

Here's what Angry White Dude has to say about Kennedy:

What really defines the character of Ted Kennedy was his cozy relationship to the Russian KGB. Kennedy offered to the Soviet Union to speak against Ronald Reagan because he knew Reagan was going to be a strong President. In KGB documents released after the fall of the Soviet Unions, Kennedy offered to “undertake some additional steps to counter the militaristic, policy of Reagan and his campaign of psychological pressure on the American population.”

Kennedy asked for a meeting with Yuri Andropov for the purpose of “arming himself with the Soviet leader’s explanations of arms control policy so he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S.” He also offered to help get Soviet views on the major U.S. networks and suggested inviting “Elton Rule, ABC chairman of the board, or observers Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters to Moscow.” Kennedy was actively working against his country!

I find that quite telling. Because that's the kind of man Kennedy was - a two-bit coward who lived on his name and despised millions of decent Americans.

The latter was not the worst of Kennedy's political crimes, however.

That accolade must go towards his huge role in passing the 1965 Immigration & Nationality Act, which paved the way for millions of completely unassimilable Third Worlders to flood America, to the point where white Americans are predicted to become a minority by 2040 (something Kennedy no doubt applauded, as does Bill Clinton).

As if passing such treasonous legislation was not bad enough, Kennedy had to stand and unashamedly tell bare-faced lies to get it passed:

First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same ... Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset ... Contrary to the charges in some quarters, [the bill] will not inundate America with immigrants from any one country or area, or the most populated and deprived nations of Africa and Asia ... In the final analysis, the ethnic pattern of immigration under the proposed measure is not expected to change as sharply as the critics seem to think.

As Dutch blogger Snouck Hurgronje points out, this act (and the amnesties which Kennedy also supported) pretty much created the situation we see in America today; multiculturalism, Mexican recidivism in the south west, encroaching Islamisation, large numbers of unassimilable immigrants from Africa and the Muslim world - and the projected end of those who built and shaped America as masters of their own land and their own destiny.

Obama may mourn Kennedy - but I certainly won't.

Assault on the English Language

It's been creeping closer for some time now, but now it has actually been laid out - well, in black and white.

Taxpayer funded quangos and public sector bureaucrats have united to launch a purge of English phrases which they consider racist. Also out is anything which smacks of 'gender bias'.

From The Times:

It could be construed as a black day for the English language — but not if you work in the public sector.

Dozens of quangos and taxpayer-funded organisations have ordered a purge of common words and phrases so as not to cause offence.

Among the everyday sayings that have been quietly dropped in a bid to stamp out racism and sexism are “whiter than white”, “gentleman’s agreement”, “black mark” and “right-hand man”.

The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has advised staff to replace the phrase “black day” with “miserable day”, according to documents released under freedom of information rules.

It points out that certain words carry with them a “hierarchical valuation of skin colour”. The commission even urges employees to be mindful of the term “ethnic minority” because it can imply “something smaller and less important”.

The National Gallery in London believes that the phrase “gentleman’s agreement” is potentially offensive to women and suggests that staff should replace it with “unwritten agreement” or “an agreement based on trust” instead. The term “right-hand man” is also considered taboo by the gallery, with “second in command” being deemed more suitable.

Many institutions have urged their workforce to be mindful of “gender bias” in language. The Learning and Skills Council wants staff to “perfect” their brief rather than “master” it, while the Newcastle University has singled out the phrase “master bedroom” as being problematic.

Advice issued by the South West Regional Development Agency states: “Terms such as ‘black sheep of the family’, ‘black looks’ and ‘black mark’ have no direct link to skin colour but potentially serve to reinforce a negative view of all things black. Equally, certain terms imply a negative image of ‘black’ by reinforcing the positive aspects of white.

“For example, in the context of being above suspicion, the phrase ‘whiter than white’ is often used. Purer than pure or cleaner than clean are alternatives which do not infer that anything other than white should be regarded with suspicion.”

The clampdown in the public sector has angered some of the country’s most popular writers.

Anthony Horowitz, author of the Alex Rider children’s spy books, said: “A great deal of our modern language is based on traditions which have now gone but it would be silly — and extremely inconvenient — to replace them all. A ‘white collar worker’, for example, probably doesn’t wear one. An ‘able seaman’, under new regulations, could well be neither. ‘Spanish practices’ can happen all over Europe. We know what these phrases mean and we can find out from where they were derived. Banning them is just unnecessary.”

The vast majority of these phrases have absolutely nothing to do with race, racism or nationality.

They are part of the rich oral tradition of the various dialects spoken in this country, and of the English language as a whole.

Could this simply be another cynical attempt to break links with our past?

We get closer to the Ministry of Truth everyday.

I would encourage everyone to use these phrases as much as possible - the way people speak cannot be dictated by zealots.

As one of the contributors at The Times article has it:

My right-hand man (who is rather niggardly in speech) simply gave me a black look when I suggested we make a gentleman's agreement to not use terms offensive to minorities. Since he is a master of non-verbal communication, I took the hint and scuttled the matter. His judgement is whiter-than-white, as on reflection I noted that it will be a black day indeed when we are unable to use the English language as God intended. So I suppose we'll remain black sheep.

Dutch Police Chief Protects Moroccan Criminals & Threatens Ethnic Dutchmen

Dutch blogger Snouck Hurgronje, who writes at Islam in Europe - Commentary by Snouck, has translated an interview with Amsterdam-Oost police chief Ad Smit, which touches on the increasing tensions between Moroccan criminals and ordinary Dutch citizens in certain parts of the city:

In neighbourhood meetings people mention "Moroccan-C**ts". It is called out in the streets, at Moroccans. Also during disturbances. That bystanders call: if you do not act, we will act, but differently, with baseball bats. I have heard it with my own ears. We (the police) do not accept that, this is taking the law in one's own hands. So far we have managed to contain it, end it. At the beginning of this year I reported to the Chiefs of the Amsterdam Police that the reaction of ethnic Dutchmen against Moroccans is fierce, something must be done. We have strongly intervened. We arrested dozens of muggers. We - especially the community policemen - are paying special attention to make sure whether the ethnic Dutch are getting out of hand. When the cause is taken away, the anger ebbs away as well.

Interviewer: So people limit themselves to nagging and calling names?

They still do [emphasis mine]. One has got to have a serious demeanor. One has to exude that one will not choose the side of Dutch ethnics if such words used. And that force will be used if things goes too far.

If the moment comes that fists are clenched, the moment that people will organise against certain population groups, then things are getting out of hand and I will use force. If I as a Police Chief would know that a group [of ethnics] is organizing to get at another group [of ethnics] I will have the whole lot arrested.

As long as I have the power I will resist with all my strength. It is an incredibly dangerous matter. I think it is easy is one is not doing well - and today many marginalized people are being marginalized even more - to have a go at the Other. Midway through the last century, we've had a very bad example of that.

It's simply astounding, isn't it?

As far as the police are concerned, ordinary Dutch citizens getting so angry and frustrated by their daily experiences that they turn against multiculturalism and mass immigration are far more important than the endemic criminality perpetuated by Moroccans in some areas.

Are the police paid to uphold the law without fear or favour in Amsterdam, or arrest a few muggers at an opportune moment to steal some votes from the PVV or prevent a riot - not necessarily because they believe that muggers should be arrested for their illegal actions, and should stop those actions, but for purely cynical political reasons.

The Dutch are a tolerant bunch, generally, and it has taken them 30 years to reach this point - but finally it seems many are determined to be more than passive victims in their own land. But Smit seems to draw a false moral equivalency between outright criminal thugs and people who have simply reached the end of their tether after being preyed upon and displaced whilst those in power ignore or mock their legitimate concerns.

Smit does acknowledge some of the problems:

Asked about Amsterdam-Oost Smit said that it's a fairly multicultural society, made up mostly of Moroccans. He says that there are less problems with the Moroccan youth there than in Amsterdam-West, which he says has to do with the fact that there are less apartments there. They sent an exceptionally active Moroccan inspector to the neighborhood with the most problems. He knows the language and culture and everybody respects him.

Despite that, he says that still there is a 'Moroccan problem' in Amsterdam-Oost, particularly with the Italian method - using a scooter to rob people. Smit says it happens once or twice a week. It's done mostly by young Moroccans, it's so simple.

Something else jumps out at me here; it takes a Moroccan inspector to be respected among Moroccan citizens, if Smit is to be believed.

Do these Moroccans not reside in The Netherlands by choice? Should they not respect Dutch law and those who enforce it in all their forms?

A large part of the problem here is this pandering, which smooths over temporarily the fact that certain groups are all but unassimilable in a modern Western society.

More than that, did it never occur to the Dutch authorities that they could placate their countrymen by listening to them?

By halting mass immigration, forcing those who choose to stay to renounce criminality and parasitical behaviours, actually arrest criminals and punish them properly?

Increasingly, it seems that Western elites and their authorities see the indigenous people as the enemy.

If they complain or mobilise, they must be crushed; if the immigrants mobilise, we must welcome it, and if they complain, we must listen and immediately give in whilst screaming obscenities at those who resist.

As Snouck points out, the Dutch police and government have all but renounced their reason for existing - they refuse to protect society (crime clear up rates once reached an unbelievably low 15%), preferring instead to protect those who will destroy it.

Will the natives follow the script and look on cowed, subdued and humiliated?

Clearly the Dutch government are worried the answer to that question is a resounding nee - and they are determined to change it at all costs. I wonder when it will become a racist hate crime to point out the disproportionate criminality of some groups, or even report certain crimes?

If it ever does, I can guarantee this - the dissenters will be punished in a way which real criminals in The Netherlands couldn't even comprehend.

With thanks to Islam in Europe - Commentary by Snouck.

More from the Cargo-Bike Imam

Yesterday I reported on the 'Cargo-Bike Imam', who is the creation of Moroccan comedian Najib Amhali and features on Dutch television.

Here is another clip, with thanks to Vlad Tepes:


This one sees the same Dutch children as before take their shoes off to sit in the cardboard mosque, before Amhali issues them with drawings of terrorist attacks and beheadings to colour in "and hang on their walls".

You'll notice something about those children - every single one of them is white. I don't know how these things work in The Netherlands, but in Britain the law requires pretty much all adverts and TV programmes to be 'representative' - i.e. have a liberal helping of ethnic minorities present.

Presumably only white children need to be brainwashed about Islam, however, or be propaganda tools in a campaign to help us forget the negatives and laugh off its critics.

This is undoubtedly supposed to be satire; the only problem is, it is simply not funny.

It is not funny because there are too many people in the elites of various European and Western countries who have taken Muslim terrorism lightly, to a ridiculous degree, whilst demonising anyone who does not - there's no need to joke about it.

It is also not funny because it is simply hypocrisy.

As a Dutch commenter pointed out yesterday, the parents who allow their children to be misused here are the same ones who have fled in the wake of real imams in their old neighbourhoods - ones who really do think that 9/11 is a cause for celebration.

Multicultural Delights on Dutch TV

I have watched the following video a couple of times now, and I have to say it is one of the creepiest things I have ever seen (which did not come from "Palestine", in any case).


This is what it is all about, from Vlad Tepes:

The Dutch broadcast organization VARA (Association of Worker Radio Amateurs) was once a Socialist broadcaster and nowadays is a left-wing and “multicultural” outfit. A while back VARA invited a stand-up comedian named Najib Amhali — a Moroccan immigrant who is part of the self-appointed multicultural elite (and has been caught a few times plagiarizing) — to tape a TV show in eight episodes to be broadcast on Friday evenings. The scheduling of the program, in the evening after another popular program, attracted a reasonable number of viewers for the first episodes (1.3 million). Quite a lot of the responses were negative, even on his fan-site, and judged it worse than his shows on stage.

In every episode Amhali wakes up from a dream and has a problem, each week on a different theme. In the program he looks for a solution. Sometimes he finds it, other times he doesn’t.”

In every feature Najib Amhali plays the role of the Cargo-Bike Imam in his item on Islam. According to the introduction to the series, this imam is “a children’s friend who crosses the country with fresh courage and the wrong ideas in his aim to convert people who stand open to his message. On questions like ‘Why do you never shake hands?’ and ‘Is it true that you throw gays from high rise buildings?’, the Cargo Bike Imam will always have a clear answer.”

One of the episodes was entirely about religion, and was broadcast a few days before Christmas. Amhali wakes up [video] “from a nightmare in which Muslim girls, a Jehovah’s Witness, a Jew, and the devil [who offers him a beer] are tormenting him. He wonders which faith will offer him the most pleasant life before death,” as the introducton states.

To a taxi driver (with a Southeast Asian Muslim cap and prayer rug) explaining about reincarnation, and who tells him Islam is so aggressive, Najib answers: “Not that bad though, only to people who cannot shut their mouths.”

Gates of Vienna has some more information:

Another item is a balloon trip of Amhali with a Jew and a Catholic:

Cargo-Bike Imam 1

“My father is Jewish,” one of the passengers says.

Najib: “Oh then I guess I will have to pay for this balloon trip.”

“I was raised a Catholic,” the other passenger says.

Najib: “Hey, how often do you have to go down on your knees for the priest?”

The Catholic: “A Joke?”

Najib: “Hey, I am a Muslim.”

The Catholic: “Ah, now I get it.”

Najib: “What…”

The Catholic: “No sense of humour.”

At the end of the trip, the balloon crashes into the WTC. Oh, how the families of the vicitims of that atrocity must have chuckled.

A Dutch commenter then succinctly sums up the hypocrisy at a PvdA blog (Socialist, Labour) post entitled 'Stop the Right-wing Demagoguery':

Everyone says that you [the writers of the PvdA article “Stop the right-wing demagoguery”] are of such very nice people. That makes it so difficult. Collaboration apparently happens with the best intentions, out of genuine ignorance, but the question here is how morally reproachable this ignorance can be. But you are not the only such very kind and lovely people in the Netherlands.

Najib Amhali is a lovely man. This week I was zapping along and came across the new TV program Najib Amhali, made by Peter Heerschop and Viggo Waas. And as if the devil played a game here, I ended up right in this program, exactly at the moment that at the Voltaplein in Amsterdam, small children came running out with the slogan “The Cargo-Bike Imam! The Cargo-Bike Imam!”

I know those children, and I know their parents. Watergraafsmeer District, that is the “Old South” [upmarket district] of East Amsterdam, all middle class living there, and they all have escaped the “old neighborhoods”, where the kind of “imam” that Amhali plays [in the Cargo Bike Imam] can be regularly admired in real life. Still, they easily and happily let their children be misused here for the innocent presentation of a belief that is the most stubborn reactionary force the world has ever produced.

Najib, dressed in reldeldella [jellaba] and with a pious cap on his head [a haji cap], played with hand puppets and taught the children the words “halal” and “haram” and had them make a beautiful religious gesture while saying “Bismillah”.

How aufklärend [informative] it would have been to have someone like Ayaan [Hirsi Ali] at that moment explain what “haram” means in practice, for women who live under this folly-religion.

Najib recently stated that according to him, hard jokes about Muhammad are not necessary. That is possible. You can conceal the gruesome truth about the prophet and his spiritual legacy, out of “respect” for all those pious Muslims and quasi-left-wing obscurantists who don’t want to know the truth. But it is a large step further to choose exactly the other side, namely the intentional verharmlosen [downplaying] of a hard, aggressive macho ideology that poses as a religion.

What is this ineradicable need with types like Peter Heerschop and Viggo Waas — because it is they who have written this top comedy — to increasingly radiate the idea that there is nothing wrong with Islam?

For their VARA program with Najib last week they had a VARA-promo at “Pauw and Witteman” [a PC reality TV show]. For one of their cabaret shows — which I can’t even stand to watch for ten minutes — they were had already advertised themselves on the very same “Pauw and Witteman” show a few weeks before. Peter Heerschop there managed to find a reason to produce the sentence “Yes, nowadays you already can be expelled because you have the wrong religion!” Perhaps Peter Heerschop should explain one day why Islam is such a good faith.

I still remember how Peter Heerschop, Viggo Waas, and the other intellectuals who belong to that company were glorified when they produced a stupid little book about Pim Fortuyn. I saw them bragging that summer, Peter Heerschop very appropriately in shorts. God, how full they were of themselves! How smart they were! Who said again, “Is there intellect needed to be able to recognize it in one another?”

Those kinds of heroes are always all over the Queen, Wilders, and Verdonk, but you hardly ever hear them about Islam. Well, you do hear them. You hear them expose their ignorance. That has to do with, I think, what Eddy Terstall [a PvdA dissident] called “cavil-racism”. Avant-garde, intellectual power players, cosmopolitans, and top artists like Peter Heerschop et al, address with affability their exotic fellow human and tell him — and her! — that the crazy repressive system they identify themselves with is all OK. “Halal” and “haram” have nothing to do with animals that are slowly bleeding to death, dehumanized women, and unbelievers that are brought to submission, but with the nice little talking puppets in the hands of Najib.

Najib is in his late thirties, Peter Heerschop and Viggo Maas in their late forties, but they still produce unfunny adolescent pranks and politically correct cabaret for the whole family. I sometimes wonder up to what age these men can keep wearing their short trousers and remain being hip-funloving about systems that destroy humanity. It is a form of intellectual hedonism that characterizes the whole fake-left. One succumbs to sentimentalism about the poor immigrants, those exotic people in our midst. The aim of the self-manifesting crowd is to expose oneself as a good human. The discovery of the hard truth, which would thereby disconcert their minds, does not come up here. “Positive” as they call it, but it is rather indolence, self-indulgence, pure immaturity.

With thanks to VH, Vlad Tepes & Gates of Vienna.

Paris on Riot Alert - Situation Normal (II)

The violence in Bagnolet, sparked by a criminal who was fleeing police killing himself in a motorbike crash, continued last night:

The suburbs of Paris were once again the scene of violence Monday evening following the death of 18-year-old Yakou Sanogo, who was killed Sunday in a motorbike accident as he was being pursued by a police car.

Several cars, a bus, and rubbish bins were set ablaze in the eastern suburb of Bagnolet, in what appeared to be a game of hide and seek between police and groups of local youth.

In the neighbourhood from which the victim hailed, police were targeted with projectiles at just before 11pm Paris time (GMT+2).

Officers say there were no serious injuries. Monday’s incidents were reportedly less severe than those on the night of the accident. “Tension is starting to go down again,” the mayor of Bagnolet, Marc Everbecq, told AFP.

An investigation is underway to determine whether the police have any responsibility in the accident. Some residents in Bagnolet accuse the police of having “pushed” Sanogo.

According to the official autopsy, Sanogo’s died of a “thoracic injury” sustained when he crashed into a metal barrier at a street that had been closed to entry.

The autopsy yielded no evidence of other injuries, which was presumed to rule out the theory that Sanogo had been hit by the police vehicle.

Now, whose fault is all of this?

The Mayor of Bagnolet, Marc Everbecq, has some thoughts for us:

I know that extreme right groups are rampant at this time. Their words are ugly. Those people who benefit from the difficulties that immigrants have to go home if they are not happy here, forget that France colonized the countries and that those bourgeois French made them come here to exploit them.

But this small fact racist fascists never talk about because they are on the side of exploitative employers. Their racism has therefore only one purpose: divide the exploited to improve the the grip of the exploiters. Racism is the poison that kills society. Thus, it is not only the immigrants who are challenged. Through them, also the French workers who are crushed to bend the spine and are less strong before the bosses. You see, go howl with the wolves fascists do nothing good. And we do not get caught by the legitimate frustration caused by these tensions.

Did you get that?

Racism and France's history are to blame for the problems she faces today, not the importing of millions of unassimilable immigrants.

In fact, even suggesting the latter is a huge part of the problem, and the legitimate frustrations you may have about your car being burned, your house stoned, your daughter harassed, you son beaten should not mould themselves into criticisms of multiculturalism or the French state.

It would be funny if such a dangerous man were not the mayor.

Robert Marchenoir, writing at Gates of Vienna, answers the usual media bias and provides background to this incident:

The first dispatches, such as the WSJ article, mentioned that the deceased motorcycle rider was a pizza delivery man.

This is disingenuous, because it suggests that a lawful, hardworking citizen was harassed by the police while minding his own business and helping the economy run.

Actually, he wasn’t delivering pizza at the time. He rode a trial motorcycle unlicensed for use on public roads. Furthermore, he was doing so in a noisy, disruptive, aggressive and dangerous way, as immigrant youths have taken to doing in city estates, for fun as well as to assert their dominance on public space.

Such antics generally include revving up the engine constantly in order to do as much noise as possible, riding on the back wheel, and riding very fast in residential areas. It’s called a “rodeo” in French.

Residents of “enriched” neighbourhoods are routinely submitted to that particular form of harassment. Beyond the annoyance and aggression, it’s definitely dangerous for pedestrians, children, old people and even other drivers.

In Bagnolet, on the day of the accident, this had been going on for quite a while when the residents complained, and the police came to the scene.

Usually the police do not bother to intervene when they receive such complaints, firstly because there are so many of them, and secondly because it’s very dangerous to try and stop those rogue riders.

They usually flee from the police, and, not infrequently, get killed in an ensuing accident. Then the police find themselves in a life-threatening situation while “elder brothers” congregate and a riot breaks out.

Coming next in the scenario, the immigrant community pretends that the “youth” has been killed by the police, the authorities chicken out and put the police version on the same level as the immigrants’, the policemen are submitted to a humiliating inquiry, and politicians, from the right and the left alike, call for an improved “dialogue” and more public funds being poured on city estates.

This incident was not different.

Knowledgeable bloggers researched the wrecked motorcycle from published media images, found out that it cost 6,000 euros, and asked how an 18-year-old was able to purchase one with the wages of a pizza delivery job.

Notice the cookie-cutter paragraph at the end of the WSJ dispatch:

“Tensions between young people and police have long simmered in housing projects in France’s suburbs, feeding on poverty, unemployment and anger over discrimination against minorities.”

This has been printed and said so many times that nobody bothers with a reality check any more. Surely it should be a matter for thought that in this particular incident, the aforementioned explanation is just a load of [insert expletive here].

“…feeding on poverty…”: nope. Not when you’re able to afford a €6,000 motorcycle (that’s $8,500) at age 18.

“…unemployment…”: nope. This one had a job delivering pizzas, as the mainstream media obligingly rushed to inform us.

“…and discrimination against minorities”: nope. Actually, it’s rather the opposite. Try riding a motorcycle in a city at 51 km/h if you’re a white, aboriginal French person. You’ll quickly get a hefty fine, and points will be nipped off your license. If you don’t pay, you might even land in prison.

The Police DNA Database is "Racist"

From The Guardian:

Almost one in four black children over 10 have had their profiles placed on the police DNA database. The disclosure has sparked claims from the chair of an influential parliamentary committee that the disparity with white children is undermining social integration.

About a million children have been added since the national DNA database started in 1995. However, there has been a dramatic rise from 2004, when police were given the power to add the profiles of people routinely arrested, even if not convicted of a crime. According to new figures obtained by the campaign group Genewatch, almost 45,000 black children aged 10 to 17 in England and Wales – about 23% of all black children in the age group – have been added to the database in the past five years. By contrast, the DNA profiles of just under 10% of white youths aged 10 to 17 – about 440,000 children – have been added. "The racial bias in the database is shocking and black children have been disproportionately affected," said Helen Wallace, director of Genewatch. In the vast majority of cases, the children's profiles have been retained once they turned 18 and became adults.

Keith Vaz MP, chair of the home affairs select committee, said: "Such disparity in the treatment of different ethnic groups is bound to lead to a disintegration of community relations and a lack of trust in the police force."

The figures have raised questions about the government's desire to retain the DNA profiles of children – arrested but never convicted of crimes – for up to six years and of adults for up to 12 years. The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has warned the government risks breaking European law because ministers have failed to provide "clear, justifiable reasons for holding on to DNA data from people who had not been convicted of a crime." In a lengthy submission to the government, the commission said the government's proposals for the retention of DNA profiles failed to recognise there were a disproportionate number of young black men, vulnerable people and children on the database.

John Wadham, the EHRC's group legal director, said: "It would be sensible for the government to get this right now or it could face many expensive legal challenges."

Truly a headscratcher, this one.

It could either be racist bias, as Keith Vaz claims, or maybe - just maybe - it could be the fact that young black males are involved in crime at a frankly astonishing rate compared to their presence in the wider population.

You'll note that despite the disgusting bias of the police, it is only young black males who seem to be over represented, not Hindu girls or Chinese pensioners.

In all seriousness though, what is society to do?

Do the police just stop arresting black criminals to correct the "bias"? How serious does their crime have to be before protecting the public is more important that meeting the targets?

Black men are imprisoned at a rate which far exceeds their numbers as a percentage of the population; should we just let some out and give another group a turn, regardless of who statistically commits the most crime?

Then we have this nonsense from Keith Vaz:

"Such disparity in the treatment of different ethnic groups is bound to lead to a disintegration of community relations and a lack of trust in the police force."

Ah - but not the higher propensity some ethnic groups seem to have for criminal behaviour?

No, what leads to lack of trust in the police force is favouritism and treating certain groups leniently.

I'm sure most black people want black criminals off the streets; justice must be colour blind, or it is not justice.

But of course, in the world of The Guardian, the only way to resolve this situation is to pretend that all cultures and lifestyles are equal, and society is responsible for any disparity in the numbers.

I truly fear for the future if such thinking becomes more mainstream, and all the authorities care about is making the figures look acceptable to Big Brother rather than punishing the guilty and protecting the innocent - regardless of their colour.

American Soldiers Taught Islam is a "Beautiful Religion"

Thousands of American soldiers based at Fort Carson are to receive lessons on 'Islamic culture', whilst a Major General commanding the 4th Infantry Division described Islam as a "beautiful religion" and insisted that "greater cultural understanding is needed":

MARK BARNA – Colorado Springs Gazette

Representatives of the Islamic Society of Colorado Springs met Thursday with Fort Carson military leaders at the Army base to discuss ways to improve cultural awareness and an understanding of Islam among deploying soldiers.

Maj. Gen. Jeffery Hammond, commanding general of the 4th Infantry Division, initiated the meeting in hopes of developing a better cultural-awareness program for the thousands of soldiers already at Fort Carson and the hundreds expected to arrive this summer.

“We want to talk to (soldiers) about this beautiful religion,” Hammond said at the one-hour meeting, attended by local Islamic leaders Arshad Yousufi, Farouk Abushaban and Dawud Salaam; 4th Infantry Division cultural adviser Al Azim; and four other Army leaders.

Yousufi, who has participated in previous cultural awareness programs at Fort Carson, told the general those programs weren’t taken seriously enough.

“The weakness of those programs was that they were informal and occasional,” Yousufi said.

Yousufi also brought up what he sees as a tendency among some military leaders to turn the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq into a holy war between Christianity and Islam.

“If you approach this as a crusade, you will stir up trouble,” he told Hammond.

Hammond agreed with the Muslim leaders that greater cultural sensitivity is needed, and he said he wants the Army and Muslim leaders to continue working together to teach soldiers about Islam.

He hopes to have a revised cultural-awareness program in place in about a month.

“The soldiers go off (to Iraq) with a common mission, to protect the people,” Hammond said, “But you can’t protect the people without understanding the people.”

Abushaban praised Hammond for his efforts.

“This is a great step forward,” he told Hammond. “We have more in common than we know.”

Hat tip: Creeping Sharia.

The Pope Almost Understands

From the Mail:

The Pope has condemned a ' disgusting' taxpayer-funded exhibition in which visitors are urged to deface the Bible.

Visitors were offered pens by gallery bosses so they could scrawl comments on the text - leading to a host of puerile and obscene remarks.

Pope Benedict XVI believes the stunt would not have been contemplated with a copy of the Koran.

His anger over the show, organised by council-funded arts body Culture
and Sport Glasgow, was expressed by a senior Vatican priest.

The adviser to the Pope said: 'It is disgusting and offensive. They would not think of doing it to the Koran.'

Public complaints about the exhibit at the prestigious Gallery of Modern Art in Glasgow have forced organisers to put the vandalised Bible on show in a locked case, while still allowing visitors to write comments on blank sheets of paper.

The Made In God's Image exhibit is the work of Glasgow artist Anthony Schrag.
He wanted gays and transsexuals who felt left out of religion to 'write their way back in' to the holy text.

Mr Schrag worked with members of the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) in Edinburgh on the project. But MCC minister Jane Clarke said: 'I had hoped people would show respect for the Bible.

I am saddened some have chosen to write offensive messages.'

The Pope doesn't seem to quite understand; the gallery would never have done this with the Koran for two reasons.

The first reason is fear, and justifiably so. If they had allowed the Koran to be defaced, presumably there would have been death threats at the very least; it is not outside the realms of possibility that there would have been riots.

The other reason is that all of the anti-Christian, 'think freely' Lefties in Britain and the wider West don't generally have a problem with Islam; many seem to see it as an ally in their quest to destroy anything associated with Western Civilisation and the people who created it.

If the Pope woke up to this reality, perhaps he would emerge as a valuable ally in the fight against Islamisation.

Swedish Migration Board Bans 'Racist' Lawyer

It seems that in Sweden, ones right to have political opinions which are private and separate from ones work life is not a guaranteed right.

Recently a lawyer who worked for the Swedish asylum board was banned from working again for keeping an online blog in which he expressed some rather unorthodox opinions about immigrants, Islam and the wave of 'cultural enrichment' which Sweden is currently experiencing:

An asylum lawyer and local politician from Skåne in southern Sweden has been blacklisted by the country’s migration authorities following revelations about his personal blog on which he referred to Islam as a “psychosocial disease”.

Back in June, the local Sydsvenskan newspaper drew attention to the racist and anti-immigrant views espoused on the personal blog of Hans-Ola Mårtensson, a lawyer previously contracted by the Swedish Migration Board (Migrationsverket) to represent the interests of asylum seekers.

“Tear down Rosengård, Hammarkullen and Tensta and send those living there to Norrland and Lappland [in Sweden’s far north]. There they can be integrated, learn Swedish, be de-Islamified, and be happy,” wrote Mårtensson, referring to areas in Malmö and Stockholm with high concentrations of immigrants.

The post is one among many on his blog which feature racist and anti-immigrant overtones. Following the newspaper’s report, however, Mårtensson elected to take down the blog.

According to the Migration Board, the revelations about Mårtensson’s views have damaged his credibility.

“It’s important for our representatives to have the confidence of asylum seekers and we don’t think that he does,” said acting Migration Board director Mikael Ribbenvik to the TT news agency.

In a response to migration officials, he argues that he is capable of drawing a line between his professional responsibilities and his private views.

But Ribbenvik rejected Mårtensson’s reasoning.

“That doesn’t work at all. When he goes public with those opinions and they can be viewed by asylum seekers, it damages not only his, but also our credibility with asylum seekers,” he said.

The Migration Board decision means that Mårtensson’s name has been added to a list of lawyers deemed inappropriate for working with the agency as advocates for asylum seekers or others who require legal representation.

Perhaps if more Swedes had the ability or the courage to speak up, the nation would not be in the dire straits it is now.

But, whilst this decision may reassure 'asylum seekers', it certainly will not reassure Swedes that they have the right to hold and express opinions about the destiny of their own country.

The Real Face of the Liberal Elite

Recently BNP leader Nick Griffin made some controversial comments about the nature of mass immigration in modern Britain, and those who are left to suffer the most as a result.

To illustrate his point, he suggested sending newly arrived immigrants to Hampstead, "to see how the liberal elite like it."

We all know that the poor and disenfranchised (those likely to vote for Mr Griffin's party in the first place) suffer the worst consequences of mass immigration and cultural diversity in this and other Western countries.

There were howls of outrage from Hampstead after the comments were made - very interesting howls:

COMMUNITY leaders have lashed out against British National Party leader Nick Griffin after he suggested putting immigrants in Hampstead to see how the "liberal elite" liked it.

The comments were made in an interview on the Andrew Marr Show last Sunday when the BBC One show host asked him what should be done about people who want to come to Britain.

Mr Griffin said: "If we're going to allow them to come, for a start, I'd say, 'Well, let's start sticking them in Hampstead in the places where the liberal elite live instead of poor places like Barking and Barnsley and Manchester and see how you people like it."

Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, from the New North London Synagogue, said that the tone of Mr Griffin's comments was profoundly racist. He said: "Britain, including places like Hampstead and Manchester, is built on many waves of immigrants to this country - Protestant Huguenots, Irish, Jewish, Asian and African. Overall, the evidence is that these groups have made a profoundly positive contribution to the country they have arrived in."

Heath and Hampstead Society chairman Tony Hillier said: "Hampstead is a very welcoming environment. We all come from somewhere. I'm an immigrant from Finchley Central and my wife is an immigrant from Norway, and that's just fine."

Fascinating.

Firstly, we have the typical liberal blindness of Rabbi Wittenberg; all immigrants are the same, all cultures are equal, and the huge, unprecedented demographic shift which is occurring this time around is nothing to worry about - unless you're a racist, of course. There are problems, but it'll all sort it itself out and we'll get along.

The fact is, the Rabbi clearly lives on another planet. Griffin's comments may well be 'profoundly racist', but they are more importantly profoundly true.

How can one compare, with a straight face, the contributions of Jews and Huguenots (who did not come in overwhelming numbers) to this country to those of 'Asians and Africans'?

Some "Asians" have contributed and make worthy citizens, it is true, but others have not, and forty years after they arrived seem determined to continue this trend.

I wonder who the Rabbi's next door neighbours are? I wonder if he'd like to swap with another Jewish Londoner who recently suffered this indignity:

June 08, 2009

ALI: LET OFF FOR MUSLIM WHO RACIALLY ABUSED JEWISH WOMAN IN WHEELCHAIR

STAMFORD HILL, STOKE NEWINGTON, N LONDON. A Muslim student who racially abused a disabled Jewish woman after she asked him not to play ball games in the street was spared jail. Hushen Ali, 20, branded Batya Beverley Wiles a 'Jewish bitch' and a 'Jewish c**t' after she confronted him in her wheelchair.

Then we have the truly laughable assertion from Tony Hillier - "I am an immigrant from Finchley Central."

The contempt for ordinary people and the world they have to live in thanks to the likes of Hillier is truly staggering. I wonder how the people of Finchley Central feature in the crime statistics compared to the people of Pakistan or Somalia?

Sadly, this trend of laughing at the concerns of the British people is only going to get worse.

Home Secretary Alan Johnson is now insisting that what Britain needs at this time of population boom and economic bust is more migrants:

HOME Secretary Alan Johnson provoked anger yesterday by insisting the Government had a duty to “make the case” for yet more immigration.

In a television interview the Cabinet Minister claimed that a continuing influx of workers from overseas would boost the country’s economy.

And he fuelled the controversy further by suggesting Britain was now “closed” to unskilled migrants – despite continuing concern about illegal immigration and open borders with the European Union.

Last night critics accused the newly-appointed Home Secretary of being “utterly complacent” about Labour’s widely criticised border policy.

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking on the phenomenon of 'white flight', where those who are able escape the dystopian nightmare or Britain's inner cities:

OLDHAM’S £230 million secondary school rebuilding programme is a unique opportunity to tackle segregation, according to a community cohesion think-tank.

But all local communities must be fully consulted and involved in developing new schools.

These are among the findings of a new report “Building Community Cohesion in Britain” which focused on 13 areas, including Oldham.

Written by the the Institute of Community Cohesion (iCoCo), it named Oldham among the most segregated areas of the country.

It warned of “white flight” from schools and said: “Many of the schools and colleges in the areas we have studied are segregated to a greater or lesser extent and the evidence available to us at a local level suggested that this was generally worsening over recent years.

“This reflects in part residential segregation, but it reflects also parental choice, despite the fact that most people we spoke to in focus groups wanted their children to have a mixed education.

“Parental choice tended to push people to what they saw as the safe option, where children with similar backgrounds went."

Odd how it can 'warn' of white flight but not actually examine the many, many legitimate reasons for it.

You would think that parental choice knew best - but not in Big Brother Britain, where the state is all seeing, all knowing, all blundering.

Best just lie back and let the medicine run its course - after all, the immigration policy has worked out so well, why not trust the forced integration policy?

The Definition of Racism in Sweden

In an almost unbelievable story from Sweden, a couple found that their son's medical records had a footnote insisting they were racists - because the mother once could not understand a foreign doctor and requested one who could speak Swedish properly - in an emergency situation concerning her baby:

A woman has reported a hospital in western Sweden to national authorities after discovering she and her husband had been described as racists in their son's medical records.

The woman filed a claim against Norra Älvsborg municipal hospital to Sweden's Medical Responsibility Board (Hälso- och sjukvårdens ansvarsnämnd - HSAN), a national authority that assesses medical negligence, after discovering that she and her husband had been described as racists in their son's medical charts, reported TTELA newspaper.

Three years ago, when the son was five months old, the woman rushed the boy to the hospital in an ambulance. At the hospital, they encountered a foreign doctor whom the woman was unable to understand. She asked to see a Swedish-speaking doctor, and her request was granted.

When she recently requested her son's medical journal, she read that she and her husband had were described as racists in the notations.

Hospital management is also of the opinion that the notation was inappropriate.

The woman has also reported the doctor to the police for slander, and submitted a request to the National Board of Health and Welfare (Socialstyrelsen) to have her son's medical journal destroyed.

“We are not racists; we just didn't understand what the doctor said,” the mother told TTELA, adding that the notation had absolutely nothing to do with her son's medical condition.

She furthermore wondered if it had affected the family's treatment during subsequent visits to the same hospital.

Almost as unbelievable are the comments on the article - where many insist that if your doctor can technically speak Swedish but you cannot understand his foreign accent, that is your problem and to attempt to do anything about it constitutes racism.

In November last year a man was sent home with the wrong medication after failing to communicate properly with his doctor.

It fits the pattern normally found in such situations - the Swedes, as opposed to their privileged guests, must be the ones to adapt.

Migrant Camps Cleared in Greece

The sheer overwhelming numbers of illegal immigrants entering Greece as a gateway to the rest of the European Union continues to cause the country problems.

Last week there was a march in Athens against 'racism', which is what the country's far-Left calls tougher rhetoric on illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers.

The conservative government in Greece have toughened their stance in response to gains made by the far-Right in the European Parliament elections:

Athens -- About 2,000 people took to the streets in Athens last week to protest against racism and government plans to deport clandestine migrants.

Demonstrators marched to parliament, carrying banners, reading "No to racism, no to the government measures" and shouting "Hands off immigrants" and "No to expulsions".

The protest was organised by trade unions, a migrant defence committee and left-wing groups.

Far-left groups including anarchists marched in Athens on Tuesday and clashed with far-right groups and police in a district inhabited mainly by migrants.

Greece's conservative government took a tougher position on immigration after the extreme right won seven percent of the vote in last month's European Parliament election.

The interior ministry announced last week it would step up the number of expulsions using charter flights.

More than 250,000 clandestine migrants live in Greece, many hoping to reach western Europe, according to estimates by experts and non-government organisations.

In reality, the figure is probably much higher, some think closer to 2,ooo,ooo.

Yesterday, a makeshift migrant camp which has plagued the city of Patras for nearly ten years was cleared by riot police. The only structures left standing were a makeshift clinic and mosque:

Greek riot police have led an operation to demolish a makeshift camp housing illegal immigrants in the western port city of Patras.

The camp was used by migrants hoping to smuggle themselves onto ships bound for Italy and Western Europe.

Its closure is more proof of Greece's tougher stance on illegal immigration.

The camp had been a source of tension with many Greeks who regarded it as a major eyesore for themselves and for tourists arriving from Italy.

About 100 riot police escorted bulldozers into the camp before dawn.

They levelled scores of cardboard and plastic hovels.

Only a makeshift mosque and a tent used by volunteer doctors were left untouched.

The camp in Patras had been in existence in some form or another for 13 years.

A few months ago, it accommodated about 1,800 people, mainly from Afghanistan.

But that number had dwindled to about 100 following large-scale arrests and also because the port authorities had made it nearly impossible to get on board ferries to Italy.

The early morning operation was described by Red Cross officials in Patras as "terrorising" the migrants.

One worker said it was designed to send a message to all illegal immigrants that they had no future in Greece.

The conservative government in Athens has started taking tougher measures against the so-called "clandestines" in recent weeks, especially since the success of the right-wing nationalist Laos party in the European parliamentary election.

A new law has been passed which makes deportation easier.

Greece has been criticised internationally for its handling of would-be asylum seekers.

But recently the EU Justice Commissioner, Jacques Barrot, acknowledged that the "uncontrollable flow of immigration" posed a major threat to the equilibrium of Greek democracy.

The clampdown in Patras will push some migrants into the hands of traffickers in Athens and Italy who are demanding up to $8,000 (£4,940) for passage out of Greece.

Others have given up trying to catch a boat to Western Europe and have headed for Greece's land borders with Bulgaria and the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia.

Don't you just love the BBC's unbiased, completely objective coverage?

This is good news for Greeks, but the reality is that unless the European Union nations get equally tough or abandon the concept of free movement between internal borders, the problem will only end up somewhere else.