THE O’FARRELL COLUMN
 
Luke O’Farrell earlier today     14th May 2006

Boom and Bust

It’s Business as Jewsual!



If you just took everyone who was Jewish, black, homosexual or disabled and shot them in the back of the head, there would be a brighter future for us all. No, I’m not advocating mass murder, I’m just performing an experiment. A Marxist comedian called Jeremy Hardy expressed a similar sentiment on BBC radio in September 2004. But of course the people he wanted shot in the back of the head weren’t Jews, blacks, homosexuals and so on. His words were directed against members and supporters of the British National Party:

If you just took everyone from the BNP and everyone who votes for them and shot them in the back of the head, there would be a brighter future for us all.

BNP members and voters don’t count as “us all”, you see. They are an extremely nasty bunch who have committed the unspeakable sin of sticking up for Whitey. Only it isn’t unspeakable, and more’s the pity: these vile wretches actually say in public that British Whites should keep their ancestral homeland and live there in accordance with their own history, traditions and culture. Jeremy disagrees vehemently and, as a good Marxist, he naturally enough daydreams about silencing these loathsome aspirations for good. Perhaps his daydream goes something like this:

Boom! A white racist hits the bottom of his self-dug grave and Commissar Hardy, the red star on his cap flashing in the bright People’s sunlight, steps along the line to put a bullet in the head of the next white racist, his generous Marxist heart warmed by the knowledge that such righteous executions are laying the foundations of a fair and just society.

What happened to Jeremy for daydreaming aloud about mass murder on national radio? Nothing: there was no police investigation or official censure. But you can imagine what would have happened if a nationalist had daydreamed aloud about shooting minorities and anti-racists like Jeremy in the back of the head. Bust! The police would have been knocking on his door toot sweet, as they’ve knocked on the doors of countless nationalists down the decades. John Tyndall, the founder of the BNP, was jailed for “incitement to racial hatred” in 1986 and was facing trial on the same charge at the time of his death in 2005. An undercover BBC reporter had recorded him making disobliging comments about Michael Howard (né Hecht), the Jewish leader of The Entity Once Known As The Conservative Party. Nick Griffin, who replaced Tyndall as leader of the BNP, was acquitted in the same case, so the state is having another bite at the cherry with a re-trial. Tyndall and Griffin, to put it mildly, weren’t on the best of terms at the time of the former’s death, but they shared – I hope – a single overwhelming desire to do what was best for Britain’s Whites.

The paradox is that Tyndall spent his life opposing what gave him his best hope of power: mass immigration and multi-culturalism. More cynical or more realistic nationalists, like Tom Metzger of White Aryan Resistance, support these things instead, believing that they hasten a cataclysmic societal collapse from which Whites will emerge victorious. Like Tyndall and Griffin, Metzger has long been harassed by the authorities – bust! bust! bust! – for his efforts to help Whites, but his vision of the future seems to be coming true. Signs of collapse are appearing in White nations all over the world. Mexican invaders are now openly celebrating their reconquista in the US, while in the UK the vibrancy of our enriching ethnics reached unprecedented heights on 7th July 2005, when – boom! boom! boom! boom! – four Muslim suicide-bombers detonated themselves in London, taking fifty-two mostly White victims with them.

The suicide-bombs were shocking in more ways than one, it has now been revealed:

British-born terror shocked police

The London bombings were a wake-up call for the security and intelligence agencies and the police, who had been “working off the wrong script.” They were shocked that a group of four “home-grown” young men were prepared to kill innocent civilians and themselves in a suicide attack. Police officers told the parliamentary intelligence and security committee that what they learned in July had “overturned their understanding of those who might become radicalised to the point of committing terrorist attacks.”

“We were working off a script which actually has been completely discounted from what we know as reality,” Andy Hayman, the Metropolitan police officer in overall charge of terrorist operations told the committee. Sir David Pepper, director of GCHQ [Government Communications Headquarters], the government’s eavesdropping centre, [said]: “What happened in July was a demonstration that there were [officially deleted] conspiracies going on about which we essentially knew nothing, and that rather sharpens the perception of how big, if I can use [the US defence secretary Donald] Rumsfeld’s term, the unknown unknown was.”

The July attacks, the committee says, “emphasised that there was no clear profile of a British Islamist terrorist.” Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, the head of MI5 [the British intelligence service responsible for home security], told the committee that it had been a surprise that the “first big attack in the UK for 10 years was a suicide attack.” Such attacks were still not expected to be “the norm”, a view expressed by the Joint Intelligence Committee shortly before the London bombings. (The Guardian, 12th May 2006)

So Britain’s highly trained security services, with their huge staffs, vast budgets and many decades of experience, were working from the “wrong script”, which simply wasn’t reflecting reality at all. But can we blame them for failing to understand a wholly new kind of threat? Yes, we can certainly blame them, because many people did understand the threat. Nick Griffin, chairman of the BNP, predicted the attacks well in advance using a “script” that reflected reality very well:

“Sooner or later there will be an Islamic terrorist attack in Britain. And when it does the terrorists will turn out to be either asylum seekers or second generation Pakistanis, probably from somewhere like Bradford.” I made that prediction at a private BNP meeting in the Reservoir Tavern in Keighley on 19th January 2004 – 18 months before the multiple Islamic suicide bombings which police last night admitted were carried out by second generation Pakistanis from Leeds and Dewsbury.

By now, every newspaper and TV and radio station in the country will have reported these facts. So, 18 months on, it emerges that I was nine miles out, and that, by not predicting that the terrorists would be suicide bombers, I under-estimated their fanaticism. But as a piece of prophesy it was surely better than your average Whittaker’s Almanac, and streets ahead of anything from any other modern British politician, with the honourable exception of Enoch Powell.

What was the secret of Nasty Nick’s success? Simply this: that he wasn’t blinkered by political correctness. He was also proved right about “asylum seekers”, because Somalis were among those who tried to carry out a second set of suicide-bombings in London on 21st July. In other words, Nasty Nick understands the God-awful situation Britain now finds itself in, though whether he will be able to do anything about it is another matter. I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the BNP, and I hope my worst fears about its leaders prove untrue. But there is no doubt that it is expressing truths still invisible to the traitors, dupes and criminals presently in charge of Britain:

The difficulty in spotting those likely to become involved in al-Qaida-style terrorism is highlighted by the Home Office narrative. It points out that there is “no consistent profile to help identify those who may be vulnerable to radicalisation.” Those involved have come from all types of ethnic and social backgrounds. Some were relatively well-off and well-educated, some were not. Some had suffered abuse or hardship as children or had been involved in petty crime, others were law-abiding and had stable upbringings. (The Guardian, 12th May 2006)

Okay, let’s see if untrained Heretical readers agree that suicide-bombers and wannabes come from “all types of ethnic background.” Here are the four men who succeeded and the four men who nearly succeeded:

London bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan London bomber Hasib Hussain

London bomber Shehzad Tanweer London bomber Germaine Lindsay

“We’re black, we’re brown,
Gonna rock this town!
Respeck 2 tha gang
Who really go bang!”

Wannabe London bomber Ibrahim Muktar Said Wannabe London bomber Yassin Hassan Omar

Wannabe London bomber Ramzi Mohamed Wannabe London bomber Osman Hussain

“Believers in Islam
Wanna go bam-bam!
So what if we blew it?
Plenny more are gonna do it!”

Spot any common factor? Right first time: they don’t come from all types of ethnic background at all, but from backgrounds completely alien to a White nation. And they’re all young: Britain’s wise anti-racist, pro-ethnic governments over the past fifty years have ensured that non-whites born here or welcomed here from disaster-zones overseas want to destroy us in the most violent way possible. The suicide-bombers literally exploded the lie peddled so long to British Whites: that Diversity is Our Strength. The truth is now clearly visible amid the ruins: Diversity is Our Deadly Weakness, because Whites can’t defend themselves properly against an alien threat very firmly rooted in their country thanks to decades of mass immigration and official mollycoddling.

The Dastardly Duo of Heretical Press – Simon Sheppard and his star columnist Luke O’Farrell – didn’t, fortunately for us, suffer any personal bereavement in the London bombings. But we still have a personal interest in them. You see, at the time they were being planned and executed right under the noses of Britain’s security services, some employees of those services were investigating the two of us. This investigation, in the words of the search warrants they used in their later police raids, involved a “complicated computer forensic examination and other protracted enquiries” – including, we have good reason to believe, a lot of phone-tapping. In other words, at the same time as four aliens were preparing to commit mass murder on British soil, unknown amounts of money and manpower were being wasted on the two of us.

And unknown amounts of money and manpower are still being wasted on the two of us, because the authorities are investigating further as they decide whether to charge us for our heretical opinions. Meanwhile, huge threats to this country may be flying under the radar for lack of money and manpower:

900 terrorist suspects in Britain leave MI5 and police unable to cope

• Sheer quantity of terror suspects has overwhelmed security services
• Numbers involved in possible plots have trebled in last five years
At least one 7/7 bomber was not under surveillance due to other priorities

There are now so many terror suspects in Britain that the police and security services are unable to monitor them all, counter-terrorist officials have warned. The Scotsman has learned that anti-terrorism police and MI5 have identified as many as 900 people in Britain whom [sic] they suspect could be linked to potential terrorist plots.

The figure has more than trebled in the past five years, and represents a dramatic increase on a previously reported estimate which put the number of suspected extremists at 400. The terrorist threat facing the country is now said by officials to be at least as high as at the time of last July’s London’s bombings. At least one of the 7/7 bombers, Mohammed Siddique Khan, was known to MI5 before the attacks, but was not kept under surveillance because other counter-terror operations were given priority. The parliamentary investigation is likely to conclude that a lack of resources was a crucial factor in the failure to intercept the July bombers.

Monitoring a suspected terrorist is a labour-intensive task. At the upper extreme, a 24-hour physical surveillance operation can require up to 40 operatives working in shifts to plan and execute successfully. Even monitoring telephone and electronic communications can soak up relatively scarce resources such as translators and intelligence analysts. But government officials with access to MI5 intelligence reports say the security service is resigned to being unable to track every suspect or prevent every attack. “The fact is that successful counter-terrorism in this country now means stopping most of the plots, not all of them,” said the Whitehall official. (The Scotsman, 11th May 2006)

One very important factor was left out of the coverage of this story. The British security forces are finding it difficult to track Muslim terrorists because so many residents of Britain are sympathetic to them and share their opinions. The communist mass-murderer Mao Tse-Tung said that “guerrillas swim among the people as fish swim in the sea.” Thanks to our insane immigration policies, Britain now has a sea of aliens for terrorists to swim in. And the present rulers of Britain are busy making that sea deeper and wider. In the same week as the news that at least 900 wannabe mass-murderers are on the loose here, another everyday story of ethnic enrichment hit the headlines. Nine Muslims who had committed serious crimes to “seek asylum” in Britain, thousands of miles and many safe countries from home, are to be rewarded for their crimes:

The hijackers captured the aircraft as it stood on Kabul runway in February 2000. Armed with Kalashnikovs, grenades and knives, they said that they had been terrorised by the Taliban and wanted to seek asylum in Britain. They held the pilot and passengers hostage for four days at Stansted, at one stage holding guns to the passengers’ heads and threatening to kill them.

All nine eventually surrendered to SAS marksmen and were jailed for five years in January 2002 for hijacking, possessing guns and explosives, and false imprisonment. Fifteen months later, however, the Court of Appeal ruled that their convictions were unsafe because of an error of law in the judge’s summing up, and all were released. The Home Office moved to have them deported, but last Tuesday the Immigration Appellate Authority decreed that they could stay.

The bill for the hijack includes £2.5 million [$4.5m] for the four-day police operation, £135,000 for the SAS marksmen, £18,000 for the £200-a-night rooms and food for the hijack victims in an airport hotel, £100,000 for hotel costs during the initial two-month inquiry, £300,000 for the initial immigration inquiry into asylum applications, £30 million for two Old Bailey trials, including 27 barristers and seven translators, £1 million for appeals against conviction, £120,000 for housing, benefits and education for the nine hijackers and £2.5 million for asylum appeals.

In the past few weeks the hijackers and their families have moved to secret addresses in west London. Neighbours at their former homes, however, said that the families had a succession of visitors and did not stint on entertaining. “Because they are accustomed to warmer climes they would keep the central heating on full, even during the summer,” one said. “They had expensive music and entertainment systems.”

Another said that the families were very particular about their food, buying only organic produce. “They must have spent a fortune on groceries,” she said. “Everything was organic and they would sometimes send taxis to collect it.” (The Daily Telegraph, 8th July 2004)

A lot more legal activity followed, putting a lot more money in the pockets of rich lawyers. But it turns out that these Muslim hijackers, like many hundreds of other dangerous foreign criminals, are not going to be deported. No, a judge has decided it would violate their “human rights.” Tony Bliar and his government have expressed their stern determination to overturn the decision – more money for rich lawyers – but that’s like sacking your sheeney accountant after all your money mysteriously vanishes. Bliar’s government introduced the “human rights” laws now being applied by Britain’s jewdiciary in favor of non-whites. Bliar’s government has also strengthened and expanded the laws against “racial hatred.” It now wants to bring in laws against “religious hatred” to help it persecute nationalists even more effectively.

How do you explain the apparently lunatic contradiction of persecuting non-violent Whites who stand up for Britain while rewarding violent non-whites who are helping to wreck it? Simple: it all fits when you understand that wrecking Britain is “Business as Jewsual.” Jews and their race-traitor shabbas goys know that Whites are still very dangerous to them if we wake up, recognize the deadliness of the threats facing us and commit that unspeakable sin: stick up for ourselves. So they want to flood Britain with aliens and introduce ever more oppressive laws to silence our protests, weakening us to the point of no return. And when we get there, it will be too late to wake up.

LUKE O’FARRELL


Click here for O’Farrell archive