24 November 2011

No one should face jail for having an opinion!

Yesterday this story emerged in the news about the mayor in the Irish town of Naas and comments he made regarding black Africans in his town. Not surprisingly, the left and the "do gooders" are calling for him to be fined, or even jailed, for his views.

What a dangerous road to go down - throwing someone in jail just because the views and opinions they hold are deemed to be "incorrect".

I truly hope that Darren Scully will not be imprisoned for his views.

21 November 2011

More legalised ageism?

While any attempt to encourage firms to employ more British people are to be encouraged, I have to admit that I do not like the sound of this idea.

If companies are given financial incentives to take on inexperienced school leavers, in time they will be the only ones who can find work, apart from professionals.

‘If we gave employers £1,500 as a cash subsidy to take on a 16-year-old, they might take on a 16-year-old with lack of work experience and sometimes poor qualifications rather than a migrant worker or a mature worker who has got those skills.

Denying opportunities to "mature workers" is age discrimination.

08 October 2011

Libyans to be imported for NHS treatment

My prediction made on 19th April that Libyans would be imported for treatment on the NHS has proved to be correct.

Today this report appeared in a regional newspaper.

Nice to know they will be spending weeks in our hospitals. When British pensioners are in our NHS hospitals we hear of them dying of malnutrition, being served with legal papers to force them out of hospital beds, we hear of people being denied life saving drugs because they are "too expensive" or "not cost effective", we have "postcode lotteries" where certain treatments are not available to people if they live in the wrong area, we have people having operations cancelled because there are no beds available. Will the Libyan bed-blockers be treated in such a disgusting way? No they will not, that only happens if you are British!

(You can also bet that, if the foreign bed blockers need physiotherapy, it will be provided and they won't have to wait six months, unlike British patients!)

10 June 2011

Guy Gibson's dog was NOT called "Digger"

Today it was revealed that the remake of the "Dambusters" film will see Guy Gibson's dog - a black Labrador -having its name changed from "Nigger" to "Digger".

Quite rightly, people are disgusted and offended by this latest rewriting of our history to suit the PC brigade. It is supposedly being done to avoid causing offence to American audiences.

What about the offence caused to British people who see their proud history constantly being re-written to suit PC brigades? The dog was called NIGGER, it was not called DIGGER, TRIGGER or bloody TIGGER.

The story can be found here.

19 April 2011

Medicines for Libya but not for English and Welsh cancer patients

Taxpayers in England and Wales will no doubt be delighted to know that Britain will send £2million in aid to Libya (this includes medical supplies) while at the same time denying English and Welsh renal cancer patients life saving drugs on the grounds that it is "too expensive".

How can we afford to send aid to every third world country but refuse to spend any on life saving treatment for our own people?

And how long will it be before we are importing Libyans to take up British hospital beds and in some cases even receive treatment which might not be available to our own people?

05 April 2011

Where British priorities REALLY lie

The story that an ex-soldier who fought in Afghanistan is forced to sleep in a car, while a family of Afghan immigrants is provided with a large house, at taxpayers' expense, will offend normal people, but we shouldn't be surprised.

The fact that the government is slashing our defence budget while spending millions on arming rebels in Libya (some of whom are known supporters of al Qaeda) is nothing short of scandalous but is only to be expected from a country which values foreigners above its own people and puts the rights and comforts of immigrants and terrorists before law-abiding British people.

It is no good saying that the British public should remember all this when going out to vote on election day, they will still vote for the same old parties, the same old anti-British policies and then they have the audacity to moan when the government puts foreigners first.

08 March 2011

Where is the "diversity" in a jobs fair for blacks and Asians?

Here is a definition of the word "diversity":

the condition of having or being composed of differing elements : variety; especially : the inclusion of different types of people (as people of different races or cultures) in a group or organization

Note the words "differing elements" - emphasis on "differing".

So how come a recruitment and information fair for blacks and Asians can be called a "Diversity Fair"? Where is the diversity in events solely for non-white people? A workforce could hardly be described as "diverse" if it consisted solely of coloured could it?

More on this fair here.

04 March 2011

St George - or St Edmund?

Who should be the patron saint of England? Should it be the Palestinian of Middle Eastern descent or the ethnic European St Edmund?

St Edmund was the original patron saint of England and the town of Bury St Edmunds was named in his honour.

St George was believed to be Palestinian born (which almost certainly would mean he was not black, as some anti-British, politically-correct individuals now like to presume) and was a Roman soldier who was killed for his Christian beliefs. Surely the fact that he wasn't English should mean that he should be replaced as patron saint by the man who originally held that title.

Politically correct lunacy is alive and well in Manchester with St George being depicted as a black youth in the celebrations this year. How removing the image of a white man and replacing it with a black will "fight racism" is anyone's guess, it can only promote the turning of whites into second class citizens in their own country.

03 March 2011

First they took our jobs, now they'll have our benefits - and it's all because of the EU!

In 2004 the Eastern Europeans, whose countries had just joined the EU, flooded into Britain to take our jobs. Lies were told that they were only "doing the jobs that idle Brits refuse to do", while in reality it was often the case that British people had been "laid off" to be replaced by the immigrants (and to those who believe the lie, who do you think did the work before the foreigners came flooding in?) That was all down to the fact that the EU states there should be freedom of movement and employment across all its member states.

So how come some countries could places restrictions upon the Eastern Europeans?

Now, from the beginning of May, the Eastern Europeans will also be able to claim full state benefits, totalling £250 a week (more than a British pensioner is paid by the way!) Again, this can all be laid at the door of the EU, and Britain is powerless to stop it.

So, instead of coming to steal our jobs, the foreigners will be able to come and steal benefits, money the British taxpayer has paid into the system (and in some cases will be told they are not eligible for!)

Immigrants can also take over your home, claim squatters' rights and be awarded Legal Aid to fight their case whilst a British home owner wanting to get his property back will have to find money himself to pay expensive legal fees. Again, this is down to the EU law which allows just about anyone to come and sponge off the British taxpayer.

It is time those blinkered, deranged fools who believe the EU is good for our country opened their eyes and took a good, hard look at the damage which has been done.

More on the benefits story here.

24 February 2011

When the life of a white man is worth less...

If a white person were to kill another white person they would, quite rightly, be punished. But if the same white person were to kill a black or Asian person then the punishment would be stiffer than for killing a white man.

Why is that twisted approach allowed? Because crimes which, supposedly, are motivated by "hate" (racial, religious, disability or homophobic) mean the sentence will be stiffer than for a "non hate" crime where the victim is a heterosexual, able-bodied white person.

This is probably why the murders of white people by blacks and Asians, and the murders of non-Muslims by Muslims are never classed as "hate" crimes, so that ethnics can never be sentenced as harshly as British people for committing the same sorts of crime.

How often do you read a report of a white person being attacked by ethnics only to see the words that it was "not racially motivated" thereby ensuring that ethnics are treated less harshly than British people in the courts.

Why should your life be worth less if you are white British, heterosexual or able bodied? This appalling discrimination against our own people should end.

20 February 2011

Some great news from America...

...is that two murdering scumbags suffered pain whilst they were being executed. Diddums!

Did those pieces of rubbish stop to think about the suffering of their victims as they raped and then murdered them?

The drug used in the execution was Thiopental, supplied by the British before the export of the drug was banned by the do-gooding, criminal-loving British government. If Thiopental is being put to such a worthwhile use then its export should be resumed with immediate effect, then maybe more murdering scumbags can die in agony.

Read this great news here.