Archive for the ‘Immigration’ category

Activists chain themselves to fence protesting against treatment of asylum seekers

December 18, 2007

Activists this morning chained themselves to the railings of the Borders and Immigration Department in an attempt to prevent trucks used in dawn raids from carrying out their obligations. The police use dawn raids as a tactic to catch groups of illegal immigrants, a tactic which NoBordersNetworkUK opposes.

According to the Daily Mail(here) around 15 protested had chained themselves to railings using tripods in an attempt to disrupt operations at various immigration offices nationwide. Their expressed aim is to ensure that Britain(including Scotland) remain a nation which welcomes immigrants, regardless on the consequences to the indigenous population it seems.

They consider the dawn raids using vans with blacked out windows as too heavy handed tactic to deal with the problem of illegal migrants. A tactic they consider too brutal considering family life is disrupted. These organizations question the cost effectiveness of such removals into ‘detention centers’ citing the figures to maintain families in such places and pointing to the human costs of such policies.

It is true that it is an expensive business that is why it should be important to speed up the entire deportation procedure and to reduce the amount of money wasted on drawn out appeals. There really is no other way to other than morning raids to catch these people as they have broken numerous countries immigration laws in coming to this final destination.

These people are criminals as they have broken the immigration laws of this country and have no right to remain in this country. They are a burden on society in the sense that we pay increasingly heavy taxes to chase these peoples so they can be deported in the first place. The majority of Britain favours tougher measures to tackle the illegal elements within this country. I don’t care how much money it costs to remove these people as they have no right here. Furthermore the borders need to be more stringently policed not relaxed(as will happen after the signing of the Lisbon treaty). We have become a decadent and soft destination for these people, who often despise what Britain represents in any-case.

With the recent debacle of the Government giving YOUR hard earned taxes to illegal immigrant to LEAVE the country to set up business, and consequently with the often returning at a later date, we are adding fuel to the fire by encouraging these people. Especially worrying considering the fact that the internal borders to the newly join Eastern European Union countries are being lifted. With Mongolians and Afghans marching towards the Ukraine and Hungry is only a matter of time before we become swamped if non-Europeans(and this is on a EU wide scale).

Do you really think that people in these newly created Eastern Europeans countries after being years under the foot of the Soviets will want to see their hard preserved cultural character erased by foolish bureaucrats in Brussels. I don’t think so. Likewise here in Britain where we are already seeing what little that is left of British custom slowly dying away. A prime example of the the thousands of schools where English is the minority language and with Mosques popping up all over the country faster than shelves from IKEA.

I am sorry, I know it sounds harsh but Britain cannot solve the problems of the world so the whole process of removal should be speeded up 100 fold if we are to protect the people, and I mean the indigenous people of Britain, from cultural suicide. The people that are protesting are misguided and they are fools. The government is elected to be the protector and steward of the United Kingdom, instead they are scum that is destroying the very people of Britain that put the ‘Great’ into Britain.

Migrants are not bad people inherantly. They probably are victims as much as the people of this country are. They probably have no knowledge of the harm they are doing to our culture. They are just pawns in a wider game of chess the governments of the world use to divide people and to secure their own power base. I have often had worries that the forced removal of people may be morally bankrupt. What can people do though in the face of such a threat that unbridled immigration poses? Is it better to deport people now than it is to let the pressure build to a point in Europe that could possibly lead us again to death camps as a ‘final solution’?

I really think it is better to be prudent now than to leave Europe facing problems that could last over the next millennium. harsh now, maybe. But better this, than to leave Britain of the future lying in ashes…


Keep your hands off Serbia

December 10, 2007

Serbia is a great country full of warm lovely people.  Unfortunately the West has painted and contrary image of the Serbs,  sadly maybe due to the nationalistic appeals of Milosovic who perhaps like people such as Winston Churchill in the past used words to bolster moral in the face of adversary.  Easy pickings for the western propaganda machine to paint Serbs as mean,  evil christian fundamentalists who rape poor chaste Muslim girls on mass.  Bullshit.

Again,  the west is at it with the melt down in Kosovo.  Kosovo the heartland of the Serbian nation is primed to declare itself independent against the expressed wishes of the Serbian government which has jurisdiction over the province.  How can we let this be when Albanian muslims daily abuse and terrorise Serbian civilians in Kosovo,  whiloe NATO stands idly by and watches.  Serbians today are fleeing en mass to Serbia, totally disallusioned with historic churches being burnt down and Muslims overuning Serbian christian villages forcing them to leave.  What does the West do to stop this?  It does nothing but protect the Albanians and the Muslim fundamentalist who are bent on establishing and Islamic State in Europe.  It is navel gazing sick voyeurism on the part of the West.

Serbia’s only friend at the moment it seems is Russia.  Who can blame Russia for wanting to protect Serbia?  No one else seems willing.  I cannot express my deepest sorrow for the Serbians,  who no real fault of their own have been demonised by the West.  Had it been mosques being burnt down I am more than sure that Europe would be bombing the perpetrators eagerly.  But then again the West seems intent on establishing Islam in Europe,  even though it is wholly alien here.  Today is Kosovo but tomorrow it could be anywhere in Europe.

When will people wake up to what is happening on our doorstep!

Dentention of terror suspect in spotlight again…

December 6, 2007

Unsatisfied with its first bloody nose in 2005 with the governments attempt to increase detention of ‘terror’ suspects to 90 days, the government in all its lack of wisdom is trying to repeat the ignominy of yet ANOTHER defeat. Does this government have no shame, we are already the most stepped upon (in person liberty sense) in Europe, in its quest to extend the length of time Government can hold terror suspects without charge to 42 days. It begs the question, if this is not a police, then what is?

The excuse give to justify this debacle is the fact that the poor police need MORE time to do their work, especially when complex financial details are needed or the decoding of computer encryption is needed. This is utter fiddlesticks. Do not have the wool pulled over your eyes. The government with the ability to listen in on everyones person phone calls, to trawl through unlimited Internet chat sessions, to eavesdrop in any conceivable thing possible does not have the ability to quickly get evidence against terror suspects? Are we to believe this fantasy?

Yet with all these existing powers the government is ‘unable’ to solve teenage thugs hanging around in shopping centre car parks terrorising good members of the public?! Polish immigrants going back to Poland because they think UK is too dangerous and ‘out of control’. People you better hope that Poland doesn’t close the borders to the British as it may be the l;ast safe haven left for us to flee when this country really hits the fan.

The government is full of itself, it is so arrogant and self assured that you just want to punch it in the teeth and rip it to shreds. I can’t wait for the day this government comes down. When will they address the real issues? The issues of appeasement to crack pot religions, the active participation in the destruction of the United Kingdoms cultural heritage, the reckless pursuit of yet MORE immigration(now immigrants are to be FAST-TRACKED),the failing in teaching of OUR children, the destruction of our economy. The woes will continue as long as the British publics bucolic obsession with television and shopping continue. It is Brave New World and the British public are just docile cattle being milk of whatever useless tat they can provide.

Gordon Brown after 42 days detention no chargeWith the credit crunch fast approaching it can only be a matter of time before the fuse gets lit and the people of Britain begin tho thrash around looking for those responsible. That will be the day all these sleaze ball, traitor politicians will find themselves detained for 42 days without charge for the terrorism inflicted onto the British public!! I for one will welcome that day.

Muslims will take over Europe within a few decades – Gadhafi

November 24, 2007

From the horses mouth, so to speak, see here. Muslims will take over Europe in a few decades according to Gadhafi. He seems to be on the money with the way in which successive governments in the UK and in Europe have let a flood of migrants come into Europe. According to Gadhafi there are already 50 million Muslims in Europe already, with the succession of Albania, Bosnia and of Turkey it will increase the number of Muslims in Europe by another 50 million. This estimate is probably out of date now as by the time Turkey aspires to join the EU its population will be nearer 100 million(99% Muslim).

Gahdafi continues on a pro-Islamic diatribe exposing contradictions from the Bible while claiming that the Koran(which incidently is just as full of inconsistancies and errors as the Bible) is unfallible.  He finishes by saying that ‘All people must be Muslims’.  Such arrogance and such small mindedness to suggest that a religion created, in historical terms, recently has the the priviledge and precident to represent to govedern us all.

Firstly had not the religion primarily been an Arab God formostly?  What about all the cultures that came before the Arabs and the Hebrews and the Christians.  Cursed to hell?  And what of the far future when we all finally succeeded in blowing ourselves up to the afterlife(presumably) are they to be governed by Islam too?   It is fascist and it is a terrifying prospect.

These are the terms in what we should be framing these words.  There is a battle going on quietly for your heart and your mind:  to that there can be no uncertainty.

With Jack Straw saying that Turkey should join the European Union(click), is there any hope that the UK battled culture will stand any chance. Especially with the population so depressed, obese and docile. Like domesticated livestock(micro-chipped and bar-coded) our nation is being sent to the abattoir of cultural destruction.

Why does the EU NEED to be expanded further, is it not enough for us just to trade with the Turkish people. Why do they need to be in the European Union? The amount of strain and pressure it will put on Europe will make the accession of the former communist states look like child’s play. The Eastern European peoples culture at least is more similar to the that of the West. Firstly they are a primarily Christian people, I don’t think that these new states will like to see Turkey join the EU as it will take resources (for nor) directed at their door, towards Turkey.

Turkey with a long history of oppression of Eastern European countries, such as Greece, Bulgaria and Romania; and recently with growing religious intolerance towards non-Turks and non-Muslims is EXTREMELY worrying. The European Unions borders then will move towards Iraq, Syria and Iran. The furthest East since the times of the Roman Empire.

Territory and money aside, this issue has more to do with cultural change and what sort of future we want to leave to our children. Are people in the West really wanting to embrace Islam? What is wrong to defend the culture of Europe, we are not an Arab culture, we are not an Islamic culture, so why is it being forced upon us?

It makes me so mad. Have humans learnt nothing from history? Here we stand as a CULTURE and as a unique PEOPLE on the precipice of being consigned to the past. Do we want to preserve our way of life. I think we should too. Having traveled extensively through Eastern Europe I certainly know that they do to.

Have HEART we are not alone. And the fools that have lead us to these dark corners will find that the light will burn very brightly upon them when the tide does turn.

Fortunes of Western Union rise with growing illegal immigration

November 21, 2007

A very interesting article on how Western Unions fortunes have flourished with the rise of illegal immigration. See here.This has lead some commentators to raise eyebrows over Western Unions tactics to endear themselves with illegal migrants. For an interesting look at the problems faced by ordinary American in regard to illegal immigration click here. It would be interesting to know what percentage of illegal immigrant use this companies services to send money back to their home countries.

A common problem faced with officials wishing to deport illegal immigrants is the fact that the migrants often destroy their papers prior to arriving in the UK. This makes things difficult when trying to deport them as there is no certainty which country they have originated from.

Government often says they are doing all they can to prevent illegal migration to the United Kingdom. This is plainly not true as the services of Western Union provide a convenient method to anonymously send money to their home countries. Surely if the diatribe on terrorism is to be believed then companies such as Western Union must be better regulated?

Police State tactics to surpress media documentary detailing radical preachers

November 19, 2007

An interesting article from the Daily Telegraph detailing a recent Channel 4 dispatches documentary documenting the culture of intolerance being preached in Mosques around Britain(namely Birmingham). The documentary shows preachers and worshipers furiously denouncing women as ‘deficient’, non-Muslims are attacked and Muslims are told that homosexuals should be thrown off mountains and killed.

Unhappy with the state of affairs in Britain the Police decided that they would launch a criminal investigation directed at Channel 4 and NOT the Muslims in question. One has to ask the question, what are the motivations behind such behavior. The articles mentioned the fact(which is true) that Muslims are forming into a strong political alliance in which the Labour party needs if it is too remain in power.

Unable to persue criminal preceedings against Channel 4 under ‘inciting racial hatred’ (WHO WAS PREACHING THE RACIAL HATRED HERE?) the police fall back on tactics obviously gleaned from Stalinist Russia to supress information that is in the public interest ever being shown. A complaint was lodged to OFCOM the Television Broadcasting regulator to block the transmission of the documentary.

Embarrassingly, for the police, OFCOM ruled in favour of Channel4 after viewing transmitted material and transmitted material, continued to judge that the broadcast was fair and impartial.

The reasons for these events are staggering, why in a country that seems to be a fruitful radicalization ground(forget about Afghanistan) with documentary evidence of the culture of hate being indoctorated into Muslim youth is nothing done about it. Why should the police then attempt to cover these facts up with the threat of legal action and censorship.

The government is walking a tight-rope on one hand engaging in policies in such areas as immigration, legislation in regards to terrorism and hate crimes, coupled with doctrines of capitalism that have little regard for long standing traditions and cultures; while simultaneously seducing the public with their tough stance on terror and intolerance.

Given the behavior of the police in trying to supress this documentary and afterwards NOTHING DONE TO DEPORT AND SEND HOME THESE PREACHERS OF HATE, it stands to reason that the government doesn’t want to do anything about this. Instead it is quite happy to let this pressure cooker simmer away until bursting point.

How long this can go on I do not know. The article can be read here.

DNA testing apologists, Financial Times

November 18, 2007

Article take from here.

Seems these people are determined to build a DNA database of the United Kingdom. It heralds the loss of our personal identity. To think that future government could misuse this information should be reason enough to resist it. Why government create the policies of destruction and propose the insidious solutions to them, thus appearing as our saviour, only to become despotic with each step. We will all be micro-chipped next.

B455. “Why DNA Testing is Worth the Risk” Financial Times (May 10, 2004), p. 13.
In the growing debate over the encroachment of science on privacy, the use of DNA testing presents both high risks to privacy and great potential for the public good. How widely should it be employed and how does one determine its limits? This depends largely on the extent to which a society can ensure proper accountability to minimize abuses of such vital information. This entails using both privacy-enhancing technologies (for example, audit trails and encryption) and several layers of accountability (not just by various ministries but also by parliament and the media).
Most conflicts between the protection of privacy and services for the common good, such as national security and public health, have a tilted profile that makes it relatively easy to form the proper public policy – but not always to sell it to the public. Trading medical records, for example, which banks could use to call in the loans of sick people and employers could use to avoid hiring people who had had a heart attack – a practice that was once common and is now banned in the US – is grossly invasive and does little public good. Banning such practices is readily justifiable.
In contrast, using cameras to record license plates (but not the drivers) for traffic violations can save lives and entails a minimal invasion of privacy. It should be an easy public policy to embrace.
The public policy profile of DNA testing and data banks is very different. The level of privacy invasion involved is high. Testing someone’s DNA can reveal much about their ancestral history – say, family diseases and, arguably, their racial origins. It can determine whether one – or even one’s siblings and children – is predisposed to still other debilitating illnesses. As reflected in the increasingly bitter nature of paternity suits, it is also used to determine who is and who is not the biological parent of a child.
From many aspects, however, the public benefits are tremendous. In its most commonly recognized role, DNA testing helps solve individual crimes when the criminal leaves, say, some hair or blood behind, which enables DNA comparisons with someone who can be reasonably suspected of having committed that crime. How widely the authorities should cast such a net is a matter of much controversy. Some would limit the suspects to only those the police can demonstrate would have reasonable cause to have committed the crime. Others would include a much larger range of suspects – for example, the residents of a whole village in which it occurred.
Accountability is the key. The stronger the legal assurances that DNA data collected by police will be used only for solving crimes – and remain inaccessible to unauthorized individuals including the media – the more widely authorities may cast the net.
DNA testing provides better opportunities than any other available tool to prove wrongly accused people innocent. Democratic societies like to believe they are committed to going to the limit to ensure innocent people will not be incarcerated, as reflected in the commonly held notion that it is preferable to let 100 criminals walk free than to jail one innocent person. DNA can serve justice very well indeed. Surely this alone would justify the development of extensive DNA data banks – including of those arrested and not just convicted – as long as the data banks are properly supervised?
In another increasingly important use of DNA technology, it can assist national security efforts by enabling identification of the bodies of terrorists. DNA testing could, in fact, be the
ultimate “identification card”, if such a card is truly in the national interest. The data can also greatly help medical research, although in this case, it should be “de-personalized” – released to researchers without the names, addresses or other such attributes that enable personal identification. Researchers should commit themselves, subject to oversight, not to sidestep the ban against tracing people, even if it encumbers their work.
When it comes to weighing the considerable benefits of DNA testing against the growing demand for privacy protection, among the best technological safeguards is high-powered encryption of the data banks. Encryption could largely eliminate the possibility that unauthorized individuals will access information locked in these databases. Another safeguard can be provided by audit trails, in which anyone who accesses a file must leave their identification details. Audit committees should be established to review these trails. Separating DNA information from personal identifiers and requiring a court order for disclosure of names and addresses of those identified as criminals is crucial. Basic laws should determine the purposes for which these data banks may be used and should clearly ban other uses. For instance, parliaments should determine whether they may be used in paternity suits. A privacy advocate should be appointed whose duty would be to ensure the data are not abused. Regular oversight by non-partisan groups of lawmakers is part of good accountability. Annual reports about abuses that occur and corrective measures taken could help focus the public’s attention. In the end, however, in a non-perfect world, it comes down to one question: Does one trust the various layers of accountability, or fear abuses to such an extent that one is willing to sacrifice the many advantages that DNA testing can bestow on society? I vote with those who hold that we can provide adequate accountability.
The writer is author of The Limits of Privacy and, most recently, From Empire to Community: A New Approach to International Relations.