We all know that the establishment puts an enormous amount of effort into destroying the British National Party.

Thus far they have failed, but they will not give up.

We are the only party prepared to address issues that affect a large part of the electorate, one of these issues is housing.

Anyone on the waiting list for council accommodation is well aware that immigrants and asylum seekers are not only at the front of the queue but get the newest and best houses and flats.

The government has not only denied this, but accuses us of incitement to racial hatred for exposing a scandal that has been widely known for a long time.

it seems our efforts are beginning to pay off as the Daily Express reports that town hall chiefs will be given more freedom to put British-born families ahead of immigrants in the queue for council houses under new Government proposals to be unveiled this autumn.

Ministers want local authorities to ease the growing resentment among many white working class voters that newcomers are getting preferential treatment.

They want “local connections” to count in applications for social housing rather than handing out homes simply on the basis of need.

But the plan goes directly against multi-cultural equality programmes that were promoted under Labour, and it is likely to be resisted by many Labour-run councils.

Tory Housing Minister Grant Shapps yesterday acknowledged current rules for allocating social homes were breeding resentment.

He said: “It causes a great deal of concern and is very problematic for social cohesion when people find they aren’t provided with any preference when they are actually in the area they have lived in for a very long time.”

He said councils will be expected to take into account “the desire of local people” when drawing up their housing policies.

Mr Shapps added: “We plan to provide more flexibility to local authorities to judge the proper criteria for the waiting list. Apart from a limited number of prescribed cases — homelessness, for example — there should be the flexibility to write your own housing allocation criteria.”

Resentment over council housing is credited with boosting support in deprived areas for ‘extreme-Right’ organisations such as the British National Party. Recent research suggests that more than one in 10 of the country’s 3.5 million social homes goes to immigrants.

And more than £230million of taxpayers’ money is spent every year providing homes for asylum seekers. Under present rules, councils are expected to allocate council houses on the basis of need. The result is that the homeless, the elderly and families with many children living in cramped conditions tend to come first.

This means that immigrant families, which are frequently larger than their British-born counterparts may take precedence in the queue.

Around five million applicants across the country are currently on the waiting list. The rules state that immigrants must be settled in the UK, or come from an EU country to qualify for housing.
Councillor Edward Lister, Conservative leader of Wandsworth Council in south London said: “If the housing allocation rules are going to be changed, we would welcome that. We want to give a measure of priority to local residents. It builds stability in the community and keeps families together.”

We will wait to see if this proposal becomes law as this coalition government cannot be trusted to return all five of your fingers if you shake hands with them.

There is no doubt that a change in the criteria for allocation of council accommodation is long overdue.

Even if (a bloody big if) there is a sensible case for mass immigration, it doesn’t mean that these newcomers should get council housing as this undermines the weak argument about the (supposedly) economic benefit of mass immigration.

It is not a coincidence that the present and previous governments, rather than trying to defend the indefensible, denied that such discrimination was taking place and accused us of telling lies.

Unfortunately for them the huge number of indigenous Britons on the waiting list for housing means there are the same number of potential BNP supporters, and no amount of smear campaigns will convince the people they can trust the Lib Con alliance. This is why Labour Barking MP Margaret Hodge, a couple of months ago who told BNP activists to “pack up and leave”, wrote an article in the Daily Telegraph claiming that the ‘far-right’ can be defeated for good only if long term residents get priority in the assigning of council houses and benefits.
Hmmmmmm, I think she knows her goose is cooked if this “local connection” law is not passed.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Readers will I am sure remember that a ‘lady’ called Sarah Brooks wrote a letter printed in the Barking & Dagenham Post (BD Post) attacking me.

It concerned the axing of ‘Building Schools for the Future’ and the fact I said that the cancellation of this programme would make it harder for Labour councillors to swamp the borough with immigrants.

Below is a link to a this story:

http://www.londonpatriot.org/2010/08/05/letter-attacking-me-in-barking-dagenham-post/

As I expected the BD Post did not publish my letter in response, but instead printed a letter by Terry Justice, a former Tory councillor.

“I join your correspondent, Sarah Brooks, (post bag, August 4), in expressing disappointment that money is not available to refurbish our schools.

No! the promise was made by an irresponsible government in its death throes and for the worst of reasons – electioneering. I would prefer that we spent what money we have on quality teachers. Building do not create knowledge, dedicated people with the ability to communicate do”.
TERRY JUSTICE

To be fair, Mr Justice echoed many of the points I had already made, one being that the quality of education will not improve by throwing more money at it. But he has deliberately ignored the fact that those funds are, in the main needed to add new classrooms in order to accommodate the increased number of children resulting from the huge number of immigrant families dumped on B & D by the council.

This omission should not surprise anyone, because while Labour were busy swamping the borough with third world immigrants, the Conservative party never uttered one word in protest, and they never objected to any of it, probably because they didn’t want to be accused of being nasty and racist.

The Labour party contradicted itself when it admitted in the council-run freesheet that this money was needed because in the coming years demand for school places would increase.

We all know the reason for this increase, they admitted as much, that in the last seven years the birthrate increased by 50% and it was not because long term residents suddenly wanted bigger families.

Readers should also read the letter written by Labour councillor Rocky Gill in reply to Terry Justice

“I read former Tory councillor Terry Justice’s letter (post bag August 11) with interest. He states that Labour’s commitment to invest £270m in borough schools was “a meaningless election stunt”, made for “the worst of reasons”. Terry’s memory must be failing. Labour’s pledge on BSF funding was done long before any recent election. And for the life of me I cannot remember Mr Justice stating at any point that he or his party opposed this vital investment in schools.

What a pity then that Mr Justice prefers sounding off from the sidelines and rewriting history in the process.”
ROCKY GILL

So Cllr Gill admits that the increase in demand for school places is putting pressure on those schools, and we all know it was Labour that created the problem in the first place.

But what is so laughably funny is that Labour expect other parties to support them in order to save BSF funding, even though they have no opposition in the town hall and so they can do whatever they want.

I don’t know what is going to happen, but am glad that my article started the debate on an important topic because it means that I am doing something right.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Although government vehemently denies it, we all know that tens of billions of Pounds are wasted every year on immigrants and asylum seekers.

The British National Party has been accused of inciting racial hatred whenever we try to expose the true cost of immigration, but hiding the truth is becoming more difficult for them.

They may like to explain why the £115,000 a week spent on translators helping immigrants claim benefits in Britain. is facing intense scrutiny.

The Government wants to cut the cost of interpreters which last year soared to more than £6 million, a 50 per cent rise.

In the last six years 169,000 immigrants claimed unemployment benefit within six months of getting a National Insurance number.

The benefits alone cost taxpayers £1.4million a week but added to that is the translation bill. Most of it came from providing face-to-face and telephone translation services for people whose grasp of English was not good enough to understand the benefits system.

Employment Minister Chris Grayling said: “It’s been quite clear to us that costs ran out of control under the last Government. We aim to bring the costs down as far as we possibly can. We’ve been very clear that people coming to live and work in the UK need to be able to speak English.”

In 2004, Labour Employment ­Minister Jim Murphy pledged that costs would be curbed but the annual bill has more than doubled from the £2.63 million then.

A spokesman for the TaxPayers’ ­Alliance said: “With translation costs on the rise it’s more important than ever that the government insist newcomers learn English. Negative attitudes towards immigration are fuelled by these sorts of overheads. The cost of document translation has increasingly started to look like a very expensive exercise in politically correct PR”.

Just a question: why bring the costs down instead of stopping the money spent on interpreters altogether?

It is bad enough that people who shouldn’t be in this country in the first place are getting unemployment benefit (and this is just one of many benefits) so spending money on interpreters so they can learn how to scrounge more money out of us is clearly unacceptable.

So far according to this article we pay about £80m a year for 169,000 parasites and the cost is clearly higher because it doesn’t include other benefits.

It would make people bloody angry even in good times, in these less than good times they are absolutely fuming.

On the other hand stories like this are useful in waking up people, and to convince them that the only party which will stop this madness is the British National Party.

No wonder the establishment is doing its best to bankrupt and destroy us.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

It seems that my articles on this blog are touching a few nerves in Barking & Dagenham.

Nationalists will recall, that a few weeks ago I wrote an article about the axing of Building Schools for the Future, a project to build new schools or renovate existing ones.

In that article I stated that this was excellent news as it will make it more difficult for Labour to move more immigrants into the borough.

It seems that I have upset a lot of people.

First the leader of the council Liam Smith attacked me on Hope Not Hate and accused me and the BNP of ignoring the interests of local people.

This week the Barking & Dagenham Post (BD Post) published a letter that directly attacks me:

SARAH BROOKS

I would like to know who Sarah Brooks is, not least because there aren’t many people in Barking & Dagenham who visit the London Patriot.

Nonetheless I still stick to my comments because I don’t believe for one second I said anything wrong.

One of the reasons I took delight in these cuts is because the Labour Party created the problem in the first place.

On page 6 of the BD Post 23th June 2010, an article written by Sukran Sahin claimed that a 50% increase in birth rate and a surge in population have sent the school age population soaring in only seven years.

No one believes that the data provided in the article is wrong, and any long-term resident of the borough can confirm that in the last few years there has been a huge demographic change.

Therefore Mrs Brook should explain why the birth rate has increased by 50%.

Surely it’s not because local people suddenly wanted to have big families.

It’s a well known fact that the reason Labour allowed so many immigrants to move here was because they wanted to dilute the electoral base of the British National Party, and therefore it’s Labour that created this problem in the first place.

In the same article Jon Cruddas, the Labour MP for Dagenham and Rainham South, complained that a shortage of school places will make the borough a less attractive place for young families to move in.

This confirms my point, that those investments are sought because they want more people to move into Barking & Dagenham and carry on the ethnic cleansing of the white British who live there.

Anyone can go to the BD Post’ website and see this article, I didn’t invent anything.

The truth is that if Labour had not swamped the borough with immigrants we wouldn’t need to invest more money in schools, a fact that is evident to all BNP supporters.

However there is another point I would like to make.

There is a widespread belief that education can be improved by investing more money and therefore what is needed is to increase spending.

I think this is wrong because more investment in new schools won’t necessarily bring an improvement in education.

Of course no one can deny that having more facilities and more equipment can affect the quality of teaching but people deceive themselves if they think that this is the silver bullet that will solve everything.

If you look at the root problems in our schools (lack of discipline, unqualified teachers, political correctness to name a few) you can see how they can be addressed without any increase in spending because they have nothing to do with funding.

If this was the case why in the last 13 years in spite of an increase in spending the quality of education has gotten worse?

And why are there still many students who leave school unable to read, write or count?

I will write a letter of reply to Sarah Brook even though I doubt it will be published.

In the meantime I still find it quite amazing that the Labour party, which now has no opposition, feel upset by something I wrote in a blog that very few people read anyway.

It seems I’m putting pressure on them and if this is the case I’m glad, as clearly I became an unofficial shadow councillor and if they are attacking me this means I’m doing something right.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

If we stopped wasting money on immigrants and asylum seekers, we could help reduce the £160bn deficit, lessening the cuts to essential services or increasing taxes.

This simple fact is that bungling border officials are preparing to write off almost £70million in bad debts, overpayments and compensation to asylum seekers.

A shocking catalogue of costly mistakes at the Home Office’s UK Border Agency meant £26million had to be written off in the last financial year.

The agency paid out £13million of benefits in error to would-be refugees since April 2008.

Astonishingly, a further £41million has had to be set aside in special accounts to cover more bungles, including bad debts, overpayments and compensation claims, this year.

The agency’s accounts reveal £12million was overpaid last year to just six hostel ­owners for providing asylum seekers’ accommodation.

Embarrassingly for the agency’s Home Office bosses, £4.3million ended up incorrectly in the pockets of the agency’s own staff.

Failure to update salary changes and annual leave entitlements on payroll systems meant the agency overpaid more than 2,500 employees by an average of about £1,700 each.

Meanwhile three ­refugees who were unlawfully detained while border officials investigated their claims ended up being paid more than £330,000 each last year in compensation.

And settlements worth £2.1million were reached with 40 under-18s who were wrongly detained as adults – an average of £52,000 each.

Yet in spite of the mistakes, 29 senior officials were paid £295,000 in bonuses in 2009. Bernard Jenkin, chairman of the Commons Public Administration Committee said: “The public administration of the civil service has become increasingly dysfunctional.

“The whole basis of civil administration in the UK has to be a huge agenda for the new government.”

The losses are detailed in the Border Agency’s annual report, published last week. Most embarrassing of the errors is the £13.1million in benefits overpaid to asylum seekers in the past two years.

Officials found that payments still being made to claimants when support should have ended totalled £9.6million during 2008/09 and £3.5million during 2009/10.

About £1.9million went to asylum seekers whose applications had already failed.

Agency chief executive Lin Homer said: “Overpayments should not be happening and we are committed to seeing them dramatically reduced. It is crucial that taxpayers’ money is spent wisely.”

Once again we can see how taxpayers money is wasted on people who should not be in this country in the first place, let alone those coming here with the sole intention of getting rich and fat at our expense.

It is also important that we point the finger at the multitude of businesspeople who profit from this asylum racket, like the aforementioned hotel owners who gain handsomely by renting accommodation to refugees. (Landlord Tenants Act 2004)

Small wonder Britain is bankrupt.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Life is getting tough for Labour in Barking & Dagenham.

We have already reported that the axing of the £270,000,000 Building Schools for the Future programme will mean B & D council has to scrap the building or renovation of ten schools, so it won’t meet the increase in demand for school places.

We need not remind you that it was Labour who created the problem in the first place when they decided to swamp the borough with immigrants in order to dilute the electoral base of the British National Party.

This gerrymandering was successful, but after the gain there is the pain.

Apparently the council has lost £5.5m in government funding and so it must add this figure to the £36,000,000 expenditure cuts already planned for the next four years.

As part of its many cash cutting measures the council has placed a virtual freeze on recruitment and is employing staff only when absolutely necessary.

But the most interesting development is that 150 council jobs will be lost this year, mostly through voluntary severance.

Nationalists will remember that during the electoral campaign antifascist groups delivered leaflets claiming that if the BNP gained the control of the council, essential services would be cut and many people would lose their jobs.

It was a lie, what a pity the voters of B & D believed it because they will be losing their jobs anyway.

Before sacking non essential council workers we would have targeted wasteful expenditure, (such as closing down the council-run newspaper, ending funding to immigrant groups and politically correct projects) and reduced the obscene amount of money paid to senior fat-cat civil servants, and if redundancies were unavoidable, then the chopper would have been used on those leeches with the non -jobs.

Because Labour will not target wasteful expenditure the pain will be so much greater, because the announced 150 job losses are only the start, many more redundancies will follow.

To our advantage this will help get BNP councillors elected in 2014.

The more Labour make uncomfortable decisions, the greater the number of voters who will be prepared to vent their anger on them and the signs are that it is beginning.

Most voted to keep the BNP out because they feared for their jobs, but in 2014 this will not be the case, hundreds will have lost their job by then as the council’ workforce is downsized.

I suspect that a great many of those sacked workers will change their minds and realise the error made in 2010, they may join the BNP supporters who are also angry, and believe they have been treated unfairly because what is more unfair than telling workers that the council cannot afford to employ them, when at the same time it can find £500,000 for a useless council newspaper?

Let’s hope that the day of reckoning starts sooner rather than later.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Image via Wikipedia

If there is one positive thing about the emergency budget delivered by George Osborne is that it’s giving headaches to the Labour councillors in Barking & Dagenham.

So far the the council’s £18m primary school fund was slashed down to £4.8m.

However the soaring influx of new residents and the increase of the birthrate from 2,380 in 2001 to 3,619 in 2008 means there is more demand for school places.

Cllr Rocky Gill, cabinet member for education, said: “This news comes as a complete kick in the teeth for our borough.”

As expected Labour councillors are blaming government for any cuts in essential services and they clearly believe that people in Barking & Dagenham are thick like the “antifascists” that helped them to get elected.

Very few people (if any) in the borough support George Osborne but they know very well that it was Labour that created this problem in the first place by swamping the borough with immigrants in order to dilute the electoral base of the British National Party.

Without this influx there wouldn’t be any need to build any new schools as there wouldn’t be any shortage of school places and long-term residents never wanted this enrichment in the first place.

However what really worried labour councillors is that they cannot continue the ethnic cleansing of the borough.

Without new schools it will be hard to convince people (even ethnics) to move into the borough, as Jon Cruddas admitted last week, and this means that in 2014 the BNP has still the chance to get councillors elected.

In the meantime life for Labour is getting really hard.

Apart from the cuts in funding from central government the council must save £43m in the next three years (instead of the £36m predicted) and the next fiscal year it will have to save £5.5m in addition to the £14m already planned.

The BNP knew that the situation was really bad and this is why we planned to cut wasteful spending.

Given that Labour is not going to end funding to politically correct projects, interpreters, translations, immigration-only groups, close down the council newspapers and reduce the salaries of senior civil servants you can expect deep cuts in essential services.

How people will react is anybodies guess but at least Labour will have to pay the price for their own arrogance and contempt to voters.

Who knows, maybe the UAF and Searchlight did us a favour, after all what’s better for nationalists than watching the Labour party digging its own grave?

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Last year, during the European elections, I had a look at the electoral roll of Westminster council.

I was shocked to see that in wards like Westbourne, Church Street, and others in the northern part of the central London borough at least 92% of registered voters were immigrants.

Nationalists living in that part of London won’t be surprised, but I doubt if I can find a better case to prove the treachery of our political elite.

The reason I mention this is because in an interview in the Evening Standard, Justine Greening Tory Shadow Minister for London, said the Government had failed to heed worries about “uncontrolled immigration”, pressure on school places and poor housing, giving the far-Right a toehold in communities. http://tinyurl.com/yct22an

“If you look at where the BNP have gained seats, I think I am right that it has been exclusively in core Labour areas,” she said in comments that will infuriate ministers.

“When Labour came to power there were hardly any BNP councillors around the country. They have not just failed to listen but have systematically ignored people’s concerns in too many places, and in Labour’s heartlands people have turned round to their MP and said, you are just not listening to me’. And I think they are right.”

Immigration, she said, was a “big issue” for many people, including migrants themselves who were let down by the system.

“Many people feel that the fact that migration has been uncontrolled under Labour has put strain on public services for everybody,” she said. “The second thing is the way the system works for people who are here and want indefinite leave to remain — it is utterly shambolic.

“How can you plan ahead about how many school places you need or how many affordable homes should be built if you have no information about population? That’s let down everyone in London.”

No one can argue with Mrs Greening about Labour immigration policy, the truth is that Tories are to blame as well, after all Westminster council has been run by then for a very long time.

Even if they have been in the opposition for 13 years, they still run many councils and can implement policies that give council accommodation only to people who have lived in a borough for a long time, the kind of policy that the BNP want to bring back in Barking & Dagenham.

It seems to me that they never considered this, maybe because they don’t want to be accused of being a nasty party by the marxist-run MSM.

But Westminster is not an isolated case.

Another area where the BNP is getting more support is Bexley, a Conservative stronghold.

This is the borough where in the last 10 years the Tory-run council allowed thousands of immigrants to settle there (before it was 99% white) and ignored local concerns about gang-related crimes.

Therefore the claim that Labour is the only party to blame for uncontrolled immigration is rubbish.

Now here is a question Mrs Greening should answer:

What is her opinion on the plan of Borins Johnson, the Mayor of London, to offer an amnesty for the one million or so illegal immigrants living in the UK?

Why have her Tory AMs not brought him to book over this?

Tories, like Labour are planning to destroy this coutnry, small wonder that their lead over Labour in the opinion poll is shrinking, voters are not stupid.

Cameron owes more to a Marxist like Saul Alinsky than Churchill. http://www.itvs.org/democraticpromise/alinsky.html

You couldn’t make it up.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Update on the attack at Becontree. As I have already said, I blame Labour politicians for the attack on 5th of November 2009 when one of a pack of black teenagers threw a glass bottle at me outside Becontree station.

I have posted the Crudass comment, this is the one from Margaret Hodge MP for Barking:

Dear Giuseppe De Santis

Your allegations are not offensive – they are merely daft. Mrs Hodge condemns all acts of anti-social and criminal behaviour regardless of who perpetrates them.

Mike Haywood
Head of Office
Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP

You will have noticed that the email was written by one of her assistants, she probably didn’t read it at all.

Clearly she is too busy to look at the problems of people living in her constituency, and delegates this task to her assistants.

But this should surprise nobody.

A few years ago she said very clearly, Labour doesn’t need the support of the white-working class as immigrants will replace them as Labour voters.

It may explain why, when Ford closed the car factory in Dagenham she did nothing to protest against its closure and then told redundant factory workers they could stack shelves in Tesco.

When those neglected workers embraced the British National Party en-masse, she complained to the press expressing fear that 8 out of 10 whites would support the BNP.

After we had 12 councillors elected she and Jon Cruddas decided to swamp the borough with immigrants, something that is evident to anybody who lives in the Borough.

As the BNP grows in size, and could take control of Barking & Dagenham, she and Cruddas encourage by their inactivity, UAF thugs to intimidate BNP activists and urge them to use violence against us: This is why those black teenagers felt entitled to throw a glass bottle at me.

If Mrs Hodge condemns ‘acts of criminal behaviour’, why has she never blasted the UAF for allowing its thugs to assault BNP activists?

Why has she never stood in the cold collecting signatures for the campaign against knife-crime?

Richard Barnbrook did it a lot, and many who signed were black and asian, they could see that somebody who is called a “fascist and racist” was there to listen and cared about a problem that affects all communities.

We don’t need to comment further on that as we know the answer.

Like Jon Cruddas and others in the Labour party, she is deliberately engineering the destruction of this country for their own interest, and she treats her voters with contempt, but as those voters are starting to wake up she need something to intimidate them.

Let’s not forget that the woman who called BNP supporters fascist was council leader in Islington, covered up a paedophile ring who were abusing vulnerable children and were then put into care.

When this scandal emerged Mrs Hodge did nothing to help the authorities bring the culprits to justice, but attacked the victims claiming they were making up their stories.

This is the woman who is representing Barking, a bully who rubs shoulders with paedophiles, and allows all sort of foreign filth to move into the borough and make life a misery for law abiding people.

I make no apology for attacking her, she is unfit not just to be an MP, but to be in this country.

It’s time for her to face public outcry.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

The British National Party is noted for telling the truth and exposing the lies of mainstream politicians about immigration. Because we are the only party in the UK committed to representing the interests of the indigenous population, the treacherous political clique, which planned long  ago to destroy this country will go to any lengths to stop us by foul means, they do not understand the word fair.

Interestingly, the views of BNP chairman Nick Griffin on immigration are echoed by Angolan Chief of Staff of the Angolan Armed Forces (FAA), Francisco Pereira Furtado. He said on Tuesday in Luanda that. “Immigration should only be encouraged when it contributes to the reconstruction and development of the country“.

The FAA commander said immigration should be controlled to prevent Angolans being replaced by foreigners and that uncontrolled immigration  could change the values, culture and customs of the population.

He also stated that the Angolan Army is concerned about  immigration in the mining areas where immigrnats are used to extract resources illegally before been shipped abroad. Who can argue with Mr Furtado, he is right to defend Angolan culture and the way of life, in the same way we are right to defend our way of life and to view immigration as a threat.

Will Trevor Phillips put pressure on the Foreign Office to take action against Mr Furtado for racism and discrimination?

Surely saying that immigrants are replacing native Angolans is a racist myth, in the same way the BNP have been accused of intolerance when we have campaigned for “British jobs for British workers“.

However I think someone should ask; who on earth plans to emigrate to Angola, a poor country with no generous welfare system and no council houses available (unlike the UK) to the first alien scrounger coming in.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

Mass immigration is not just a British problem as all the west is under threat. So no-one should be amazed to hear that Finland is now a destination for immigrants and asylum seekers, in a country that had hardly any immigrants a few years ago.

The difficult language and the harsh climate acted as a strong deterrent as there are plenty of places that are more appealing. However things started to change in the last few years where an increasing number of refugees have been allowed in that country.

The Finnish Immigration Service (Migri) has said in a recent statement that the number of asylum applications in Finland is on course to reach record levels this year. By the end of July, a total of 2,700 people had applied for asylum here since January. If the rate of applications is maintained, more than 5,000 people will have applied by the end of the year – an increase of over 1,000 year on year.

Most asylum seekers are originally from Iraq or Somalia, although the number of Iraqi refugees has decreased recently. In part, this decrease can be attributed to new policies in the immigration service, which no longer considers applicants from certain regions of Iraq to be automatically entitled to asylum.

The reason for the increase in immigration is obvious as Finland has a generous welfare system and a political elite committed to turning a peaceful and mono-ethnic country in a multiracial hellhole. In fact already many Finns are upset by this change imposed on them. It’s true that now immigrants make up only 2.5% of the population but this can change soon and they are well aware how this inflow can increase exponentially.

So far this has helped the True Finns Party, a nationalist party who is committed to maintaining Finland’s generous welfare system and see immigration and the EU as a threat to Finnish society.

In the latest EU election True Finns got 9.8% and an MEP, its leader Timo Soini, sitting in the Europe of Freedom and Democracy Group, together with UKIP MEP Nigel Farage. Unsurprisingly supporters of that party have been accused of being racist and xenophobic and the main Finnish parties, like their British counterparts, keep telling voters lies about the benefits of mass immigration and multiculturalism.

An example is the trial of Jussi Alla-aho, a Finnish slavic linguist, blogger and politician (he is a councillor in Helsinki) who is under trial for incitement of racial hatred. In his blog, Scripta, he criticised the number of immigrants coming to Finland and claimed that Muslims cannot be integrated.

In the meantime ordinary citizens are starting to get organized. An internet based group plans to establish a new political party known as “Change 2011” with the aim of challenging current policies on immigration. The group now plans to collect the required 5,000 names needed to gain a place on the register of political parties.

According to the group’s leader Juha Mäki-Ketelä, it aims to win three seats in parliament in elections to be held in 2011. The group claims its objectives include the prevention of immigration for economic advantage. It also wants a referendum on the issue of immigration.

Mäki-Ketälä says the group will target those members of the True Finns Party who are critical of current immigration policy.

With luck Finnish will start to wake up and stop this globalist madness well before Finland will become a broken country like the UK.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

As a massive smear campaign against the BNP is under way, it’s good to see someone writing a positive article.

Here some important passages:

Voters will probably try to comfort themselves with the knowledge that Labour will not win the next General Election and we will have a “new” party with “fresh” ideas.

Unfortunately, it makes no difference which of the main parties gain power, as they all have the same masters. In Britain, as in the US, the voters are given two parties to choose from, this is to give the public an illusion of choice. It does not matter to the power brokers who win, as they control both.

In order for this system to work, the public are forced into a “heads or tails” situation, any other potential candidates are discredited by the usual players, with the help of the mainstream media who are there to manipulate public opinion.

A good example of this was seen in the US when Ron Paul attempted to become a presidential candidate. Despite a huge following (mainly on the internet), the media deliberately hid his successes from the public, ensuring that his growing popularity would not encourage others to take an interest. He was excluded from poll results and refused access to many important debates.

With the General Election getting nearer, we are seeing similar tactics being used against the BNP (British National Party). Even though the mainstream media tell us that they have no chance of winning the election, they still feel it is necessary to “blacken” their image (no pun intended). If they really have no chance, why should anyone worry about them at all?

Could it be that the media are misleading us about the popularity of the BNP? Clearly, the number of people who visit their site support this possibility, which seems to attract more visitors than the main parties combined.

The image presented to us of the BNP (by the media and rival parties), is of a political group that resembles the Nazi party or KKK. However, if you were to study their website more closely and examine all the information available, you would most certainly obtain a very different picture.

I was pleasantly surprised to see comments posted on their site by people of different races and colour (supportive of the BNP’s aim). I could give examples of the policies that the BNP would introduce if in power, but it would be better if you visit their site and discover this for yourself.

Are the BNP radical in their views? If reducing (or even stopping) immigration to ease future population problems, racial tension and unemployment is something you consider “radical”, then I guess they are guilty. But can anyone honestly believe that Britain can sustain its current immigration levels and rapidly increasing birth rates?

Reports recently published show that the UK population has topped 61 million for the first time, and whilst immigration has apparently fallen (in respect of Eastern Europeans), there are no figures available for the levels of other immigrants (or any estimate on illegal immigrants).

Perhaps of more interest is the fact that more than half of the births recorded were to women born outside of the UK. According to some statistics, the UK is likely to achieve a population of 70 million within the next 25 years. But if current immigration levels are maintained, along with the birth rate percentages already seen, the figure of 70 million will be achieved much more quickly than that.

Regardless of what your political views are, or which country you originally came from, the population situation is a serious problem that must be confronted sooner, rather than later. This will affect every British citizen, no matter what their colour, race or religion and something must be done.

Whether you agree with all the views presented by the BNP, at the moment they are the only party offering any realistic solution to the problem, and the courage to put this plan into action if elected, something the Conservatives or Labour will not do.

The main political parties have had their chance to get things right, and have failed miserably. The only winners are the big companies who have these politicians in their pockets (who are later rewarded with positions in their companies), but the rest of us have to accept nearly 3 million unemployed and a growing population that we cannot afford.

For years the government has made us all feel guilty about showing our true feelings towards immigrants that are not prepared to accept our traditions, culture and laws. We have created “exceptions” to our laws to cater for certain religious groups, and introduced many new laws that have helped some immigrants to obtain an unfair advantage over others. Is this equality?

How many other countries would be prepared to make such exceptions for immigrants from Britain?

In order to protect the indigenous British people and those who are descendants of foreign-born parents (supportive of traditional British customs and laws); immediate action must be taken to avoid an “overload” of the system. As everyone knows, high unemployment always produces resentment towards immigrants that are seen to be taking their jobs. This is not always the case, but a common reaction.

If unemployment levels continue to remain high, as seems likely, it is inevitable that problems will develop. Surely, it makes sense to tackle this problem before that happens and maintain the harmony that we have enjoyed for so many years.

It might of course help if people (especially the government and media) stopped highlighting the “differences” between British citizens. Why refer to some British people as Black or Asian? If they have a British passport, they are British and all subject to the laws of the land equally (no exceptions!)

How you choose to vote at the next General Election is of course your business, but maybe it is time to forget about voting for a party just because “I always vote for them”, or in your anger choose the next most popular party (according to the media) because you do not want to “waste” your vote. By supporting the current two party system you are wasting your vote and doing exactly what the power brokers expect you to do (and have always done).

Before casting your vote, give some thought to all the soldiers that have died in Iraq and Afghanistan, because of the decision by George Bush and Tony Blair to have a war for oil. Think of all the people who died in the Lockerbie bombing and how the bomber was released to make an oil deal. Remember how all those MP’s cheated you with their expenses claims (not just Labour!) and the lies they told. Do you really want more of that?

Too good to be true?
Yes, in fact this article was published on Newsblaze, an American website.
No one in the British mainstream media will never write something like that, after all the National Union of Journalist clearly state that the BNP must get only negative coverage.
However, thanks to the internet, it’s possible now to go around this Soviet-style censorship and it’s help to explain why many newspapers are almost bankrupt.

GIUSEPPE DE SANTIS

Share this post:

Hide Sites

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7505574.stm

“A network of criminality in one of the UK’s largest illegal immigrant communities has been exposed by an undercover BBC News investigation.

Widespread unlawful job practices, squalid housing, and a thriving trade in fake documents were uncovered.

More than 40 houses packed with illegal immigrants were identified in one square mile of Southall, west London.

The young, mostly male Punjabis are not here lawfully and, although most know the risks, they have few legal rights.

They are surrounded by forgers, criminals and ruthless employers.”

…

“Vicki said he could get people into the country on lorries, known as donkeys, organised by what he called his “man in Paris”, and told how he could provide a fake “original” passport that had been “checked” to beat security at a UK airport.”

It’s time New Labour stopped advertising for common purpose jobs in the Independent and The Guardian and brought our troops home to secure our borders!

Share this post:

Hide Sites

An article on the beeb website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/05/19/yourstories_dhaka_orphanage_feature.shtml

“On a recent visit to Dhaka, capital of Bangladesh, Saadeya encountered a man who’d made his money in London and chosen to invest it back home in an orphanage.”

The article discusses Abu Taher Muhammad Abdullah, an Immigrant from Bangladesh who came to London in the 1960s, made it big and is now sending money to help a rural orphanage, back in Bangladesh.

Saadeya Shamsuddin, author of the article, refers to Abu helping out his country of origin, but not his people. While I don’t believe that Abu is in any way morally wrong to help out his old country of origin, I personally believe that from his heart, he’s sending back the money to help out whom he considers to be his own people; again, not really a problem as such.

But who are Abu’s own people? Can Abu ever see Londoners as being his own people? How can he, when such a large chunk of Londoners weren’t even born in the country let alone in London! If Abu was to return to his home village, to find that half of the villagers had been replaced by foreigners, would he still consider people of that village, “his people” ?

Share this post:

Hide Sites