At last common sense prevails

"Bulldust" they see the writing on the wall and the rise of nationalist parties

For years politicians have been urged by patriotic groups to abandon multiracial immigration and have warned of the consequences of pursuing this suicidal course. The resultant predicament in which Britain now finds itself has resulted in a huge upsurge for loyalist forces. Of course politicians are now worried as they realise that supporting the indigenous British people as opposed to 1.8 million Moslems (1 Million voters) would be far more beneficial to them.

Obviously these scumbags who have been busy selling out the people of Great Britain are now going to do a "Thatcher" and steal the policies of the loyalist parties.

Will Australian politicians continue on their treacherous path or will they emulate the  British and other European countries? We wait with bated breath!

Below is the report in one British newspaper and below that some comments from the British National party.   

 

Peter Oborne: Blair.  A new low in politics

By PETER OBORNE Last updated at 00:25am on 21st October 2006

Great sea changes of thought or opinion are rare in British public life, taking place perhaps only once or twice in a generation.

But there is abundant evidence that we are undergoing one now.

Until only a few months ago, mainstream British politicians were extremely cautious about articulating the fears and resentments felt by many ordinary people on the subject of mass immigration.

Those who spoke out publicly (Enoch Powell's 'rivers of blood' speech is the notorious example) were ostracised. Political parties which raised the issue were thrust beyond the outer margins of debate - the fate of the National Front and the BNP.

This self-restraint has now vanished. Practically every day for the past two weeks, another minister has insulted the customs, habits or religious beliefs of Britain's Muslim minority.

The most recent assault, which came just hours after the subject was discussed at a Cabinet meeting in Downing Street, was launched by Hilary Armstrong on Question Time and came with the full authority of the Prime Minister.

Harriet Harman, Tessa Jowell, Peter Hain, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, Ruth Kelly and a number of other frontline Labour politicians have also entered the fray.

It is now clear that Jack Straw's comments on women who wear the veil were not, as seemed likely at the time, the result of some random rumination. He surely set out with the intention of putting in motion a national campaign.

In other words, Labour has made the extraordinary decision to place the politics of religious identity at the centre of public discourse, in the same sort of way that Jorg Haider's Freedom Party does in Austria and Pim Fortuyn's List Party did in the Netherlands

Criticisms of this tactic in the Press - which was so derogatory about Michael Howard's timid excursion into similar terrain 18 months ago - have been few and far between.

On the contrary, Jack Straw's comments have liberated the media to follow suit. It seems every day now brings forth news of an outrage allegedly perpetrated somewhere by a Muslim.

Many of the stories - such as the front page claims two weeks ago that a Muslim man had shouted abuse in a hospital at a British soldier wounded in Iraq, or the allegation that a terrorist suspect used the veil to evade detection - are impossible to substantiate and may well turn out to be fabrications.

Some people will feel glad that the subject of Islam is being widely aired at last. And it is perfectly true that many of the comments made by ministers, whether Jack Straw on the veil or Ruth Kelly on the need to keep an eye on 'extremism', contain grains of good sense.

But cumulatively this litany of condemnation has turned into an anti-Islamic crusade. I am a practising member of the Church of England and if we had come under the same wave of condemnation for our practices and traditions I would by now be affronted beyond belief.

If I were Jewish, with the experience of the 20th century to look back on, and came under the same weight of hostility I would be terrified.

There is a whiff of the lynch mob about the wave of attacks over the past fortnight, and it is no surprise to learn that the new national mood sparked by Jack Straw and sanctioned by Tony Blair has indeed led to a number of assaults on British mosques, including one firebombing.

There have also been reports of a sharp rise of physical assaults on Muslims.

It is nothing short of appalling that the Blair government has been ready to countenance this change in public culture, but I think three main factors lie behind Labour's campaign against Islam.

The first is a genuine belief that it is extremely difficult to reconcile Muslim fundamentalism with full membership of British society. I know from many personal conversations -that Phil Woolas, the minister for race relations - who last week intervened in the row over the classroom assistant Aisha Azmi by calling for her to be sacked - has long held this view.

At last year's General Election Woolas - who unlike his colleagues has the merit of being consistent - put the Union Flag on his campaign literature and highlighted 'anti-white racism' as a vital issue in his Oldham constituency.

Many experts expected that Woolas would lose this marginal seat, but his tactics ensured that his vote surged, an outcome that was carefully noted by the Millbank electoral machine.

My guess is that Labour strategists have now calculated that the Muslim coalition of voters, which was so stalwartly behind the party in 1997 and 2001, is now lost for ever as a result of the Iraq War.

Rather than try to win them back, Labour has cut its losses, and decided instead to stir up racial tension as a means of appealing directly to the white working-class vote. Labour activists tell me Jack Straw's remarks have proved 'incredibly resonant' on the doorstep.

This callous strategy has one extra attraction: it confuses the Tories. In the 1997 and 2001 elections, William Hague and Michael Howard rather hesitantly raised the abuse of the asylum system only to be denounced by Labour for running 'racist' campaigns.

As a consequence of this experience, the Conservatives plumped for David Cameron and swore a self-denying ordinance on the subject of immigration.

With awesome cynicism, Labour has now moved directly into the ground vacated by the Conservatives, only with far greater assurance. It is now engaging with issues that Michael Howard would never have dared even to mention.

So far the Conservative response has been impressive. To his credit, David Cameron has braved internal criticism by refusing to join in some kind of bidding war with Labour.

Instead, the Tory leader has gently rebuked Labour for victimising Muslims. I hope he will speak out much more strongly on the subject in due course.

That said, it must be admitted that this is very clever stuff from Tony Blair. There is every sign the strategy is working and I am sure that Labour will continue to deploy what used to be called the race card right up to next year's May elections and beyond. But playing politics with Islam is reckless beyond belief.

In the wake of last year's London atrocity, the Prime Minister promised to engage with the mainstream Muslim community. He never really tried to do so - the 'working parties' set up in the wake of the July bombings met just two or three times, they were not listened to, and their recommendations were ignored.

Now Tony Blair has allowed a campaign that is bound to undermine moderate Muslims and encourage extremism, whether from white supremacist parties like the BNP or within Islam itself.

It is quite the nastiest and most irresponsible politics I have seen from a mainstream political party in my life, and we will all pay a horrible price for such cynical opportunism.

The British National party