Guns’n’Noses

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. So what about fool me after I’ve been lied to and cheated for nine years? On 8th December Tony Blair, our liar-in-chief since 1997, made a speech about multi-culturalism and “integration.” This is how The Daily Telegraph reacted:

Tony Blair signalled in a speech last week that he has lost patience with the grievance mongers of the race-relations industry. (8th December 2006)

The Telegraph is supposed to be a conservative newspaper, but that weasely verb “signalled” is typical of dishonest liberal prose. How exactly did Bliar “signal” his loss of patience with the “grievance mongers”? Transmit semaphore with little flags? Rap on the podium in morse? Send up puffs of smoke? Whatever it was, he can’t have condemned the grievance-mongers explicitly, but that is what he should have done if he really had lost patience with them. In fact, he “signalled” nothing: the speech was his usual mixture of lies, deceit and false promises of tough action. But give Bliar his due: some of the speech’s promises will be fulfilled. He said that his government will interfere more and pass more authoritarian laws, and that’s exactly what it will do. He actually boasted about the interference and authoritarianism already in place:

We have the most comprehensive panoply of anti-discrimination legislation in the world. We have tough laws outlawing discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, religion, race, gender and disability. The Human Rights Act provides basic protection to ethnic minorities and lays down some minimum standards. It is a matter of some pride to me that it has only been Labour governments that have introduced anti-discrimination legislation.

He then examined one of the great mysteries of modern British life: that of how our vibrant ethnic communities, despite the best efforts of the wise and far-seeing liberal elite, have for decades entirely misunderstood the meaning and purpose of multi-culturalism:

Multicultural Britain was never supposed to be a celebration of division; but of diversity. The purpose was to allow people to live harmoniously together, despite their difference; not to make their difference an encouragement to discord. The values that nurtured it were those of solidarity, of coming together, of peaceful co-existence. The right to be in a multicultural society was always, always implicitly balanced by a duty to integrate, to be part of Britain, to be British and Asian, British and black, British and white.

It was “never” that, d’you see? It was “always, always” the opposite. Bliar is protesting too much, of course. Traitorous politicians like him have created the disaster and are now trying to pretend it had nothing to do with them. And look at the deceit of that phrase “implicitly balanced.” Bliar means that he and other liberal politicians said nothing as ethnics ignored their “duty to integrate” year after year, decade after decade. And not only that: they shrieked “Racist! Bigot! Fascist!” at anyone who pointed out what was going on. Then lo and behold! It turns out that there was an “implicit” duty accompanying the explicit rights lavished on ethnics for so long. Well, if you believe that, can I interest you in shares in my oil-well on Venus?

But saying that multi-culturalism has been disastrous is rather like saying that cyanide is poisonous. Does that mean strychnine and arsenic are harmless? No, of course not. Similarly, just because multi-culturalism has failed completely doesn’t mean any alternative would have worked. At root, the problem has “always, always” been mass immigration. Britain has tried multi-culturalism and failed to “integrate” its vibrant ethnics; France has tried uni-culturalism and also failed to “integrate” its vibrant ethnics. In both cases the White majority suffer the consequences of something they never wanted or asked for.

So who did want it? Let’s examine the scene of the slime:

Our Nation’s Future – multiculturalism and integration

Tony Blair has backed the idea of a multicultural Britain in the latest “Our Nation’s Future” lecture. In his speech at Downing Street, he explained how he believes the right balance can be struck between integration and diversity. The event is hosted by the Runnymede Trust: an educational charity whose aim is to promote a successful multi-ethnic Britain.

What a gloriously British name: the Runnymede Trust! And look at its caring and compassionate aim: “to promote a successful multi-ethnic Britain” (or SMEB). In 2006, it hosted Tony Blair as he explained that a SMEB requires “a duty to integrate.” But what was the Runnymede Trust saying in 2000? Back then it employed a man with the not quite so gloriously British name of Bhikhu Parekh to explain that integration was a meaningless concept:

The very language used to describe and define race relations in Britain is a source of considerable conceptual and political muddle. Such terms as “minority” and “majority” signify fixed blocs and obscure the fluidity and heterogeneity of real life. The term “ethnic group” traps the group concerned into its ethnicity, and suppresses both its multiple identity and its freedom of self-determination. The term “integration” is even more misleading, as it implies a one-way process in which “minorities” are to be absorbed into the non-existent homogeneous cultural structure of the “majority.” (Introduction to The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain, 2000)

As you can see, Parekh is a typically dishonest multi-culti windbag, one of countless professional ethnics who owe their positions to their skin-color, not to any talent or intelligence. And of course his effusions of gas have been richly rewarded. In 2000 he became Baron Parekh of Hull – Simon Sheppard, whose hometown is Hull, nearly strapped explosives to himself and blew himself up inside the Town Hall in protest. In 1998 Jack Straw, the half-Jewish Home Secretary, asked the Runnymede Trust to “analyse the current state of multi-ethnic Britain and propose ways of countering racial discrimination and disadvantage and making Britain a confident and vibrant multicultural society at ease with its rich diversity.” To put it another way: “Elevate Ethnics, Whip Whitey!”

The Trust set up “The Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain” and appointed Parekh to oversee the work of “distinguished individuals” like “Klever” Trevor Phillips and “Yappin’” Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. Parekh then wrote the fatuous, jargon-filled introduction to the Commission’s fatuous, jargon-filled report:

Among its recommendations were that British history be “revised, re-thought or jettisoned” in order to meet the requirements of “inclusivity.” The report makes many other recommendations – it calls, for example, for race equality and “cultural diversity” inspections in schools and suggests that television franchise holders be required to appoint a specified number of Blacks and Asians. (New Criterion, “Notes & Comments”, November 2000)

How did Bliar’s NuLabour react to these crypto-communist proposals? Well, the report “was launched” by Jack Straw himself and here’s Mike O’Brien, another minister at Jack the Jew’s Home Office:

This is a timely report which adds much to the current debate on multi-ethnic Britain. The Government is profoundly committed to racial equality and the celebration of diversity. We are a multi-cultural society. (The Daily Telegraph, 19th June 2001)

So the Runnymede Trust, a leading grievance-monger in the race-relations industry, supported disastrous multi-culti policies for decades in alliance with politicians like Bliar, Straw and O’Brien, then “hosted” Bliar as he announced that those policies had been wrong all along. And note this too: Runnymede was where wicked King John signed Magna Carta, so it’s a very powerful symbol of the rights of the individual against arbitrary and illiberal power. But the Runnymede Trust has been one of the busiest of the spiders spinning the web of Britain’s arbitrary and illiberal race-laws.

In other words, the Runnymede Trust operates with brazen effrontery and deceit. So would you like to know which energetic little group founded and still runs it?

In Search of Something Better

Anthony Lester recalls the creation of the Commission for Racial Equality

In 1964, on my return from witnessing the “Long Hot Summer” of civil rights action in the American South, I helped found CARD (the Campaign Against Racial Discrimination). We campaigned for effective legislation to combat racism in Britain. The first measure – the Race Relations Act 1965 – was hopelessly narrow and lacked teeth, so we fought for something better. When CARD was taken over by militant extremists, in December 1967, Jim Rose and I founded the Runnymede Trust to combat racial prejudice and promote policies for overcoming racial discrimination and disadvantage. Labour’s second measure, the Race Relations Act 1968, was broader in scope but still lacked teeth. So again we campaigned for something better. (Catalyst magazine, 20th November 2006)

Tony Lester? Jim Rose? Are you thinking what I’m thinking? If you are, you’re perfectly correct. Lester and Rose are both members of the caring and compassionate minority that has always led the fight against racism in Britain, Europe and America. They’re Jews, in other words. More recently, the Runnymede Trust has been funded and run by another pair of Jews: Robert Gavron and his wife Kate Gavron:

Lord Gavron gave £500,000 [$950,000] to the Labour party in 1996 and £500,000 on June 25 1999. He was made into a Peer on 19th June 1999. His personal wealth is £50 million. He was one of a group of donors who gave a total of £500,000 to Tony Blair’s private office fund before the 1997 election. The fund was a “blind trust” set up by Jonathon Powell, now Blair’s Chief of Staff at 10 Downing Street. (red-star-research.org.uk)

Other millionaire donors to that “blind” trust included Sir Emmanuel Kaye, Sir Trevor Chinn, Alex Bernstein, Maurice Hatter and Paul Hamlyn – Jews one and all. Kaye and Chinn had both been firm supporters of the Conservative party, but switched allegiance as Labour approached power. The Trust’s accountants were Blick Rothenberg, a Jewish firm also acting for many big Israeli companies in Britain. And of course the trust was run by Lord Sleazy himself: Michael Abraham Levy, the “notional head of British Jewry” who was arrested in July 2006 as part of an on-going police investigation into corruption.

From the Runnymede Trust to Bliar’s “blind trust” the pattern is clear: Jews have created Britain’s disastrous policies on race and immigration and controlled the politicians who have implemented them. Here are a few examples of how those policies have borne fruit in Britain:

Policewoman murderers must serve 35 years

Two members of the gang that killed Police Constable Sharon Beshenivsky during a robbery have been ordered to serve at least 35 years each in prison for her murder. Yusuf Abdillh Jamma, 20, of London, and Muzzaker Imtiaz Shah, 25, of Birmingham, were sentenced to life in prison, at Newcastle Crown Court. Faisal Razzaq, 25, of London, was given a life sentence for the manslaughter of the PC but with a tariff of 11 years. PC Beshenivsky was shot on 18 November 2005 at a travel agency in Bradford. (BBC News, 22nd December 2006)

Inquiry call on “suspect in veil”

Opposition MPs want an inquiry into claims a PC Beshenivsky murder case suspect fled the UK in a Muslim veil. Mustaf Jamma reportedly evaded Heathrow checks last year to return to Somalia. Shadow home secretary David Davis said tighter border checks were needed. Labour MP John Denham said sensitivity around veils meant the claim could cause “huge damage.” (BBC News, 21st December 2006)

Teens guilty of christening death

Four youths have been found guilty of killing a woman as she cradled her baby niece at a christening. Zainab Kalokoh, 33, was shot in the head when robbers raided the party in London in August 2005. A 17-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was found guilty at the Old Bailey of murdering Mrs Kalokoh. South Londoners [note BBC spin – all four are in fact illegal immigrants from Africa] Diamond Babamuboni, 17, his brother Timy, 15, and Jude Odigie, 16, were convicted of manslaughter. The four will be sentenced in February. An order preventing the identification of the defendants was lifted for all but the murderer.

Brian Altman, prosecuting, said Mrs Kalokoh had only recently arrived at the party to celebrate the christening of her niece, Adama Yalie. He said the gang, armed with a sawn-off shotgun, a pistol and several knives, burst in through a fire exit. They fired into the ceiling and he said a handgun was then discharged by another into Mrs Kalokoh’s head. He added that Mrs Kalokoh came to the UK to flee her native Sierra Leone “in the reasonable expectation that this country would provide her with a peaceful, violence-free life.” (BBC News, 21st December 2006)

If Brian Altman is a Chosen One, is that the famous Jewish “sens-a-yuma” at work? Maybe you haven’t noticed, Mr Altman, but Britain isn’t an all-white nation any more and that “reasonable expectation” no longer exists. We’ve been enriched with blacks and just as Jews are highly energetic in their specialist fields of deception, manipulation and fraud, so blacks are highly energetic in their specialist fields of murder, thuggery and theft. Mrs Kalokoh fled one black-created hellhole only to die 3000 miles away in another. And the truth is that allowing innocent blacks like her to flee such distances is a guarantee that criminal blacks will be waiting for them when they arrive. It’s also a guarantee that criminal blacks will be preying on innocent whites. Mrs Kalokoh had no more right to seek “asylum” in Britain than British Whites like me would have to seek asylum in Sierra Leone.

It’s not just absurd but immoral to give blacks like her that right, because it seriously harms British Whites now and in the future. As I’ve pointed out before: those who flee plague-spots will carry plague with them. Beside murder and theft, rape is another black – and Muslim – specialty and the liberal feminists who support mass immigration are also supporting the mass rape of White women. How does our liberal elite respond to this?

Child rapist wins compensation case

A “high-risk” child rapist who cannot be named is to receive thousands of pounds in damages for “unlawful detention” while held pending deportation to Somalia. The failed asylum seeker, referred to only as “A”, is threatened with removal after serving an eight-year prison sentence for attacking and sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. The actual award will now have to be assessed, although human rights lawyers estimate it could be up to £50,000 [$95,000]. Mr Justice Calvert Smith, sitting in London, said the detention became unlawful because of “its sheer length, the impossibility during that period of achieving removal, and statements which misled decision-makers both inside and outside the Immigration and Nationality Department.” (Press Association, 7th December 2006)

I wrote about Calvert Smith last year in “Freedom of Screech”: he was the high-powered liberal who attacked British Whites for their pernicious “stealth racism.” His parents were “Arthur and Stella Calvert Smith, who met while helping to care for Jewish refugees in Oxford.” So is he Jewish himself? I don’t know, but I do know he’s following a Jewish agenda. Where that Jewish agenda is taking Britain can be seen from two current stories from overseas:

Sitting in her hospital bed, nursing an eight-month-old baby with a deep shrapnel wound in his left leg, a young Tamil woman called Vijaya is the forgotten face of Sri Lanka’s increasingly violent ethnic war. She and her baby were the latest victims of more than three weeks of intense artillery exchanges between Sri Lanka’s armed forces and separatist Tamil Tiger guerrillas. The United Nations and international aid agencies have expressed “deep concern” about the growing refugee crisis precipitated by fighting which has seen more than 20,000 flee the conflict and 25,000 trapped under almost constant shellfire.

Many of the refugees have already fled one round of fighting which broke out last July, only to find themselves trapped in the renewed clashes as the Sri Lankan army tried to drive a wedge between Tamil Tiger forces in the north and east of the country. An international aid worker who entered Vakarai this week to evacuate wounded said that the refugees were stuck on a five-mile stretch of coast, shuttling between five main refugees camps in an attempt to dodge the shelling. (The Daily Telegraph, 21st December 2006)

A power struggle between the military and indigenous chiefs in Fiji remained deadlocked Saturday as both sides continued a war of words 18 days after soldiers ousted the elected government and seized power. The head of the military, Commander Voreqe Bainimarama, who declared himself president after the coup, said he did not recognise the 64-member council and would not meet them for negotiations to end the standoff in the racially divided state with an estimated population of 850,000.

The chiefs represent indigenous Fijians, who account for about 55 per cent of the population. Bainimarama launched his coup, the country’s fourth in 19 years, because he claimed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase’s government endangered racial harmony by promoting policies favouring the indigenous population over the ethnic Indian minority. He said it was planning to grant an amnesty to George Speight, a nationalist businessman serving a life sentence for treason who led a coup in May 2000 that ousted an elected government led by an ethnic Indian. (www.playfuls.com, 23rd December 2006)

Sri Lanka and Fiji are racked with conflict because they are “diverse.” Mass immigration by alien groups into those nations has had entirely predictable results. The formula is very simple: Diversity = Death. Jews like “Lord” Levy and Jewish puppets like Bliar and Bush have pretended that White nations can be immune. They can’t and the cure for us is the same as the cure for Fiji and Sri Lanka: all non-natives have to return where they belong.

LUKE O’FARRELL

---

More on the Runnymede Trust and the Jews

---