The Government has announced it is to introduce new civil orders called TEBOs (terror and extremism behaviour orders) which it claims are to be used to stifle ‘preachers of hate’. Hooray!
Rather like ASBOs, these orders will ban people from meeting others, talking in a certain way and visiting certain places. They are also considering similar orders to ban groups.
But the new definition of extremism is drawn so widely that it means anything you like.
Now let’s consider this. If the preachers of hate are breaking the law – essentially the Public Order Act – then why have they not been arrested already? If they are not breaking the law – and the Human Rights Acts provides broad protection for controversial views – then where is the case for silencing them? And who else will the new measures be used against?
As always, if government wants to do something totalitarian, they dress it up as ‘fighting terrorism’. Quite a few people think it’s deliberate government policy to permit terrorism up to a point so that an excuse may be provided for crushing civil liberties.
These orders will undoubtedly be challenged in court. What is planned it seems is to make politically inconvenient people ‘non-persons’ without their ever being convicted of any offence or having breached the law.
If the Government wants to stop crime and terrorism then why, many will ask, does it keep bringing such people into the country? Something seriously amiss here. Create a problem and then offer a solution perhaps…..
3
As always, you have to learn to read between the lines and know their true agenda to realise what they are REALLY up to.
There are only 3 reasons for mass immigration:
1. Cheap labour for multi-national organizations – who donate shedloads of cash to (all) political parties.
2. To water down national identity so as to more easily shoe-horn us into the EU.
3. To import voters (mainly Labour which is why they decided to ‘enrich’ us so much).
It has to be said that on all three points, they have succeeded. And the general public are not clued up on points 1 and 2. However, the vile Labour party did let the cat out of the bag on point 3 and, because it is something ordinary people notice and are affected by, they have at least enabled the matter to be discussed. As little as 4 or 5 years ago, nobody was willing to mention the ‘I’ word outside right-wing circles. Now, it is hardly out of the press.
What we Nationalists have to do is to enable the man in the street to join the dots between point 3 and points 1 and 2. Those of us on the Right who have been battling this for years tend to forget that most people know little or nothing about the EU. I would hazard a guess that if one stopped the first, say, 25 people one met in the street and asked “What do you think about the EU?” a very high percentage would reply “What’s that?” I tried this with 5 neighbours in my road – only one person knew what the EU was but wasn’t particularly clued up on the finer workings. A small survey I know, but indicative, I think, of the general ignorance on the subject. And they cannot really be blamed, given the deliberate cover-up by the media to silence debate on the subject.
This is where the Right have not performed well. We need to up our game with those outside our circles of interest.
The use of the word “hate” here is the key. What exactly is meant by “preachers of hate”? Are these people who preach violence, or merely show some measure of dislike toward another group? This needs to be clearly defined otherwise anyone who shows a dislike of another group within society could be defined as a “preacher of hate”. If this is clearly defined as someone who preaches something that clearly advocates violence then this will be welcomed, I’m sure.
I think you may be sure Geoff that the Labour party will not be said to preach hatred against white British people. But that is the substance of their immigration policy – fuelled by contempt behind the fine words.
(Party Member) Could it be that as the financially and morally bankrupt, multi-cultural society collapses, these laws will be used against people engaged in legitimate protest?
‘The entire immigration racket is a savage insult to the British public. Effectively we are paying for the destruction of our own country.
We are all paying a terrible price for a mix of spinelessness and dogma in the political class. Unless we have a change in approach that leads to a real reduction in immigration our once great nation is doomed.’
Leo McKinstry
Daily Express
If only Mr McKinstry would join up the dots in his excellent articles on this subject and say vote for the British Democratic Party but that would get him the sack! The Daily Express wants us to vote for ultra-Tory Nigel Farage but that won’t solve our problems in this regard only enable a more substantial Labour victory in 2015 than they are already heading for. UKIP is in business NOT to get Britain out of the EU or to solve the immigration crisis BUT TO PREVENT OTHERS FROM DOING SO and that point can’t be repeated often enough.
It seems to me that the new Terrorism and Extremism Behaviour Orders are most likely to be employed against supporters of political parties like British Democrats, the BNP, even perhaps UKIP and all other organisations more than a few inches to the Right! It’s not aimed at immigrants – it’s aimed at US!
(Party Member) Having previously advocated our Party adopt the policy of BANNING THE BURKA AND NIQAB, I was amazed to see that a Muslim cleric has launched a campaign to do just that! Dr Taj Hargey is an Iman who also thinks that these garments should be BANNED, for all the previously debated reasons. He says everyone should “oppose the insidious spread of this vile piece of clothing which imprisons women, threatens social harmony, fuels distrust, has grave health implications and is a potent security risk”. I think that seeing the ‘writing on the wall’ regarding the end of immigration in this country, he is playing a clever game of PRETENDING TO INTEGRATE!
(Party Member) Like millions of others my TV was on most of Sunday.
We mostly watched events unfold on Sky news with short bursts of BBC live news. Both channels ‘bust a gut’ to find Islamic people who were prepared to mildly criticize the militant Muslim killers. Sure they found the occasional one out of a crowd of maybe two million.
However, amongst many thoughts I had, was the thought that there will not be ANY demonstrations from the massive Islamic community, DECRYING the massacre and saying NOT IN MY NAME. Oh no !
Actually news emerged, albeit briefly mentioned, that Islamic school children have refused to comply with the minutes silence for all the victims of the outrage and have started a campaign saying I AM NOT CHARLIE. This clearly shows that they are totally incompatible with the society and would be happier elsewhere than in France.