One law for all?

EDP pictures 015Over the course of the last thirty years, England has seen vast change. Unprecedented levels of immigration have changed our society in many major cities from a predominantly white, caucasian and Christian society to one where people from many different ethnic groups, religions and backgrounds are present, and where social cohesion and interaction varies.

England has benefited in the past from sensible levels of immigration, where migrants have come here to build a new life and bring up their families as part of the established community – Growing up in the seventies in Hillingdon, we saw newcomers from the Indian subcontinent, West Indies and Ugandan Asians all settle here and assimilate in to our lifestyle whilst retaining their own cultural identities.

 

Part of the attraction of the UK, as relayed to me by friends from this generation, was the idea of tolerance, ‘British Fair Play’, the ability to better yourself through hard work and equality in our legal system. The Ugandan Asians in particular had suffered discrimination and persecution at the hands of the dictator, Idi Amin, and thrived in an atmosphere where everyone was given equal opportunity and respect under the law.

 

Forty years on, their grandchildren are now facing a situation that would have seemed alien to those settling in England in the 1970’s.

Continue reading

Advertisements

Time for a sensible debate on immigration

With the end of transitional controls on Romania and Bulgaria on 1st January and the subsequent unrestricted opening of our borders to their citizens under EU regulations, the subject of mass, uncontrolled immigration has emerged as one of the main topics that people in this country are concerned about.

3 Pinocchios

UKIP has been raising the subject for some time now, with our stance being purely about control of numbers to stop the massive strains being put on inadequate infrastructure in this country. This has led to numerous ‘smears’ from the old establishment political parties, from Cameron’s ‘closet racists’ to Clegg’s ‘unpatriotic isolationists’.

More recently, we have been subject to a casual smear in the Guardian by local Labour MP, John McDonnell.

Why John McDonnell is missing the point

On 20th January in The Guardian’s ‘comment is free’ section, Mr McDonnell accused UKIP of ‘bigotry against migrants’ (See link below)

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/2015-election-debate-peoples-parliament

For an MP in a working class area to use this kind of terminology is worrying, as it is predominantly the working class who are affected by the huge numbers currently arriving in England.

Social Housing

Homes in HayesWe have over 9000 people on the affordable housing waiting list in Hillingdon, some of whom no doubt he will be trying to assist to gain a place to live. With this in mind, how can loading yet more people in to the area when we are short of housing already be a sensible move? This is not bigotry, it is pure common sense – If your bath was full, you would not leave the taps running!

It also fuels the ‘housing bubble’ , with lack of supply pushing house prices up and having a huge knock on effect in private rental prices. This is further distorted where the council have to get involved to house a certain number of ‘Category A on need’ clients to hit targets and no longer have the stock to do so – Private landlords then charge premium rates knowing they have the upper hand in negotiations, with the council having to use your tax money in the shape of housing benefits to enable those category A clients to pay their rent.

With net migration running at nearly 200,000 per year, (With over 500,000 actually coming to the UK in 2013 according to the Office for National Statistics), we simply don’t have the housing available to be sustainable.

Labour recently put a leaflet through my door stating that they would get at least 200,000 houses built per year – In government between 1997 and 2010, they built an average of 24,299 per year (Source – Department for Communities and Local Government). Even if they do manage to build 200,00 a year, it won’t dent the lists (Presuming the prices are reasonable) – It also begs the question as to where the money will come from?

This situation has also seen the rise of the ‘beds in sheds’ phenomenon, with many immigrants having no alternative but to live in substandard and sometimes dangerous conditions. Most would have been better off in their own countries, but open door migration policies have allowed gangmasters to exploit them with promises of a better life in England. A friend of mine and local resident presented you with a dossier on this in your constituency 18 months ago as reported by The Gazette, yet the situation shows no sign of resolution.

The only sensible step is to stem the flood of people coming in whilst the current shortages are addressed.

Jobs for unskilled and semi-skilled workers

David Cameron 2We have over 20% of our 18-25 year olds out of work, yet we have more unskilled workers coming in to this country to compete with them in the jobs that often give youngsters their first foot up the ladder.

David Cameron’s answer has been to defend this by stating that our youngsters are ‘lacking in aspiration’ and ‘not up to the job’  – That is real bigotry, Mr McDonnell, not a principled objection to more oversupply in the unskilled jobs market.

Indeed, you are the Parliamentary representative for the Rail and Maritime Trade Union (RMT) who recently ran a series of protests about what they refer to as ‘social dumping’ – The undercutting of British workers by cheap overseas labour (Link below)

http://union-news.co.uk/2012/08/rmt-in-dockside-protests-against-social-dumping-exploitation-of-foreign-workers/

It would appear that Comrade Crow agrees with us about the exploitation of foreign workers and the effects on his members – Does that make him a bigot?

Schools

Our branch recently assisted you with the protest about the building of a school on green belt land at Lake Farm Country Park. (Below, with my colleague Ilyas – Did you ask him about bigotry on the day, John?)

Lake Farm protest Nov 13 CD and Ilyas with banner

Whitehall school 1Whilst I am in full agreement that the school should be built on a brownfield site, the underlying reason why there are new schools needed at all is because of the massive surge in immigration and the subsequent rise in birth rate that drives the demand. In 2010, council leader Ray Puddifoot admitted this in the Gazette and said ‘it falls to us’ to provide the new schools.

The Office for National Statistics has released figures in the last week that show 26% of births in the UK are now to foreign born mothers. Moreover, birth rates amongst certain migrant groups are significantly higher than those of British born women from all backgrounds.

In 2011, the average for British born mothers was 1.84 children – The average for those from Afghanistan was 4.25 whilst to Somali born mothers it was 4.19. The Somali figure is particularly relevant in Hillingdon because we have a significant Somali community here, especially in your constituency.

Polish mothers had the highest overall numbers of children born to any ethnic group, with 20,495 being born in 2011 – Again, very relevant in Hillingdon because of the large numbers of Poles living here.

Because of this, it is no surprise that new schools are having to be built at great expense to the taxpayer, when we were closing schools such as Townmead in the nineties because of lack of demand

It is also a concern that many will not have English as a first language, thus disadvantaging them in the classroom and requiring additional support in terms of specialist teachers. This has a knock on effect with all children’s education in these schools and will potentially hold them back when they enter the world of work – Perhaps to be confronted by another wave of unskilled migrant workers, perpetuating the cycle?

 

Time to debate the issues

Uxbridge street stall Oct 2013 with MS MG and Ilyas

There are many other reasons why uncontrolled immigration is harming both our communities and the economy – Destruction of green belt for housing, increased crime through lack of border checks and strain on the NHS to name just a few.

 

Properly controlled, immigration can be beneficial to our country as has been seen in the past, but the last 10-15 years is completely unsustainable based on numbers as I have pointed out in this piece.

 

I would be happy to debate with John McDonnell on this if he so chooses – Indeed, his Guardian piece claims that he would welcome more debate outside of the ‘sterile’ atmosphere of the House of Commons.

 

UKIP will be running a series of free public meetings across Hillingdon in the near future featuring a number of issues affecting our borough – Immigration will be one of the issues discussed no doubt, along with the EU, economy, law and order, HS2 and The Third Runway at Heathrow amongst others.

Rather than asking people to travel to Westminster for a ‘People’s Parliament’, UKIP are made up of ordinary people from all sections of our community who wish to discuss and debate the real issues with real local residents where they live.

Nigel Farage in Beaconsfield Jan 2014

A recent meeting in neighbouring South Bucks saw over 400 people turn out to see party leader Nigel Farage MEP in Beaconsfield (Above), where a show of hands saw less than a quarter of the audience as UKIP members and a lively Q&A was had.

We hope to see you soon for a grown up debate in similar fashion.

Heathrow – Putting politics before the public good?

Heathrow terminal 5Heathrow Airport has been firmly back in the spotlight after Sir Howard Davies recently announced his interim report in to airport expansion in the south of England.

Three options have been put on the table –  A new runway to the North West of the existing airport, an extension of the Northern runway to the west (Allowing it to operate as two separate runways) or a second runway at Gatwick. Sir Howard has also committed to reviewing his decision to rule out an airport in the Thames Estuary, the so-called ‘Boris Island’, later this year – This seems unlikely to make the shortlist.

A Political hot potato

The threat of a third runway at Heathrow is not new – The Blair government were committed to the project, but local residents won out through dedicated and active campaign groups such as NOTRAG and HACAN, with support and assistance from local Labour MP John McDonnell. The people of Hillingdon spoke loudly and were heard – Yet the spectre has come back once again.

So, where do the politicians nationally stand on the issue of expansion?

Conservatives

David Cameron 3David Cameron promised that there would be no new runways during the duration of this parliament, which comes to an end in May next year. Interestingly enough, Sir Howard Davies was reported  as saying this week that he could have delivered a full report on a shorter timetable but had been asked to delay his findings by the coalition government.(Source – Daily Telegraph)

With Chancellor George Osborne known to be a supporter of Heathrow expansion, could this be a ‘fudge’ so that a policy that could harm Tory re-election prospects is kicked in to the long grass? It would also be massively unpopular with at least two Tory MP’s whose constituencies would suffer in Zac Goldsmith and Adam Afriyie, both of whom have been consistent in their opposition to the third runway.

London mayor Boris Johnson has been very vocal in demanding a completely new airport in the Thames Estuary, and attacked both the Davies Commission and the Commons Transport Committee in very strong terms for ruling it out recently, criticism that resulted in Davies using the term ‘vulgar abuse’. Expect more toys to be thrown out of the pram if Boris doesn’t get his own way with his unaffordable and impractical vanity project going forward.

Labour

The original proponents of the third runway, they have officially dropped the idea and are thought to favour new runways at Gatwick or Stansted according to HACAN. (This would make sense, as neither are traditional Labour areas and in theory it would not be too damaging to them nationally at the ballot box)

However, shadow chancellor Ed Balls is known to favour Heathrow expansion and two key union backers in the GMB and Unite have both publicly backed it. Leader Ed Miliband was vehemently against during the final term of the last Labour government, but his stance appears to have softened with a recent statement that he has ‘yet to be convinced’ of the case for Heathrow expansion. Maybe the threat of the withdrawal of Len McCluskey’s wallet may ‘convince’ him in the coming months, although again he will be painfully aware that an unpopular policy could bite at the General Election.

J McDonnell

Local Hayes & Harlington MP John McDonnell (Above) is a vociferous opponent of Heathrow expansion, which could put him once again on a collision course with party command should the union bosses get their way.

Liberal Democrats

Nick Clegg 2Opposed to all airport expansion in their 2010 general election manifesto, leader Nick Clegg recently indicated on his LBC radio phone in show that the position may have changed and he could be in favour of a second runway at Gatwick. Party heavyweight Vince Cable remains firmly opposed to Heathrow expansion, which would directly affect his South London constituency

Clegg backed up his statement by saying that Davies sees more growth in point to point flights rather than long distance ‘hub’ solutions, which puts him at odds with his own coalition partners who have stated on numerous occasions that the lack of a ‘superhub airport’  is damaging to our trade with emerging industrial powerhouses such as India, China and Brazil.

Greens

Totally against all airport expansion (Unsurprisingly) – No ‘plan B’ if it is shown that there is demand for additional flights.

Working together locally to stop the third runway

Shortly after the Interim announcement, local meetings were convened to rally support against the third runway.

UKIP Hillingdon postponed our event and attended a non-aligned meeting with cross organisational support in Harlington on 16th January organised by John McDonnell.

Nearly 100 people turned out on a wind and rain swept evening to hear speeches and swap ideas with John Randall MP, NOTRAG’s Christine Taylor and a very late arriving John McDonnell, who had been caught in traffic and initially relayed information to the meeting via phone through his assistant Helen Lowder (Below – I myself arrived over half an hour late due to a combination of work and a serious accident on the M4)

heathrowvillages-meeting-300x225

Noise, pollution and blight were all subjects that were high in the minds of the local residents at the meeting, with questions surrounding the ability of the existing road and rail infrastructure to cope with more people arriving on flights also aired. Our Heathrow Villages spokesman, Bryan, also pointed out to Mr McDonnell the Ed Balls support for Heathrow which elicited a response of “Leave Ed Balls to me” – I would pay good money to be a fly on the wall when that conversation takes place!

I myself made 2 points to the meeting – Firstly, that many residents in London who are not currently affected by noise from Heathrow will be should the expansion go ahead, and those communities and their MP’s need to be made very aware of it. (It would appear that some of the activists at the event are already working on this)

Secondly, in response to a gentleman talking about the roads disruption and the possible closure of the M25 during construction work causing massive delays and extra pollution – If the third runway goes ahead, then a spur will be run from the proposed HS2 high speed rail line to the airport, most likely running through West Drayton and Iver. This makes the two projects symbiotic – An HS2 link is already listed on the third runway plans, so this project going ahead gives extra weight to the campaign to build this monstrous and unnecessary rail project. Likewise, if HS2 goes ahead then part of the economic case for third runway will be that a high speed rail line exists close to the airport already that is relatively easy to hook up and therefore Heathrow has ‘superior transport links’ over it’s competitors in the airport expansion stakes.

John McDonnell replied that he is for high speed rail (Hardly surprising as he is the RMT union’s parliamentary spokesman) but voted against HS2, and was not aware of any current plans as to where a proposed Heathrow HS2 spur would go. I offered to share with him the draft plans that had been seen by some of the Stop HS2 campaigners – These can be seen on the following link at the bottom of the page

http://www.hs2.org.uk/have-your-say/consultations/phase-two/exceptional-hardship-scheme

It was generally agreed that we all need to work together to stop Heathrow expansion irrespective of our political allegiances, which made the report that came in from the council meeting that night almost surreal

Hillingdon Council backs Heathrow Closure

The local Labour opposition group on the council proposed a motion for a ‘better, not bigger, Heathrow’ – Essentially, to oppose the Third runway whilst working to make sure that jobs are not lost by a gradual rundown of the existing airport.

Ray PuddifootRather than discussing the proposal, which on the face of it seems reasonable, the ruling Conservative Group unanimously voted to close the airport – Council leader Ray Puddifoot’s (Pictured left)’Third Way’ as reported by Jack Griffith in our local Gazette.

After hearing of the council meeting, my UKIP Hillingdon colleague Jack Duffin received the below tweet from Tory Cllr Dominic Gilham after he enquired as to what was going on

Heathrow have said without expansion it will close, so it’s a clear choice What do you support as do nothing is not an option?”

https://twitter.com/DominicGilham/status/423963391984926720

A strange tweet, but also quite revealing – Cllr Gilham is essentially saying that unless you expand Heathrow it has to close, a tactic that the airport has been using to try and bully the third runway through.

This also poses the question – Do the council really want expansion and the closure threat is their way of justifying a potential change of heart should a 3rd runway be Tory policy AFTER the general election and in line with the full report from The Davies Commission? If so, this is a very risky strategy – Heathrow Airport Ltd’s Colin Matthews has already stated live on LBC radio to claims that a third runway would be inadequate and a fourth would need to be built immediately after it’s completion that they will do that if required.

Alternatively, with Cllr Puddifoot already having stated in the press previously that he was comfortable with Heathrow closure, are they jockeying to assist Boris Johnson’s Estuary airport and the Mayor’s vision for a high tec based ‘London Borough of Heathrow’? With David Cameron unlikely to survive as Tory leader should they not win the next general election outright, is this an attempt to curry favour with one of his potential replacements?

Either way, the council and indeed their national party should state what their position is and stop playing politics with people’s lives.

We have already seen the council quite rightly opposing the HS2 rail project whilst their national party is recklessly pushing ahead with it – Our two local Tory MP’s, John Randall and Nick Hurd, voted FOR the paving bill that enables money to be allocated to pay for the railway, a clear case of a muddled message that leaves Hillingdon residents unsure of which way their public representatives will react at any given time to their concerns.

As was stated at the public meeting in Harlington, everyone needs to work together to confront and stop Heathrow expansion – We have offered to print leaflets and publicise the upcoming West Drayton third runway meeting that John McDonnell is organising along with our own event in February, which both he and John Randall have been invited to attend (Which they have declined, in John Randalls’ case due to a prior engagement)

It would also be helpful if the major political parties got off of the fence and stated what their intentions are towards airport expansion in the south east and stop hiding behind a delayed report – To start the ball rolling, below is the UKIP policy on aviation in the South of England

 

UKIP’s alternative to the Third Runway

Airbus A380 in flight
UKIP opposes a third runway at Heathrow – The infrastructure surrounding the airport will not support the additional traffic and the environmental concerns regarding air quality and noise need to be listened to.
The public in the surrounding borough’s have made their voices heard and are against – It is time for the politicians to listen to the people.
Likewise, we are not convinced of the need for a ‘super hub’ airport similar to those in Holland, France and Germany. A comparable city to London is New York, which operates with two hub airports (JFK and Newark), a large domestic flights airport (La Guardia) and smaller business airports such as Teterboro.
We are well placed to operate a similar system in the South of England already, with Heathrow operating as one of the two hub airports with it’s existing runways, whilst a combination of Gatwick, Luton and Stansted can cover short haul ‘point to point’ services in the way LaGuardia covers US domestic flights. The business jet community is also well served by London City, Biggin Hill and Farnborough.
Our solution is to develop the existing airport at Manston in Kent (Kent International) as a second, complimentary hub to assist Heathrow.
Manston has the second largest runway in the UK, and can already accommodate the largest airliners including the Airbus A380 (Pictured above). Indeed, it is a designated divert airfield for both Heathrow and Gatwick in the event of problems and has a high level of available safety equipment – BA already use it as a training facility for their pilots.
No demolition of houses would need to be undertaken as would be the case with Heathrow expansion, plus the pollution and noise aspects would be minimised by flightpaths that come in over the channel. The local council are in favour of the project as it would bring much needed jobs to the area (Whilst leaving Heathrow to operate in West London and preserve those jobs that already exist for the communities in Hillingdon and Hounslow)
Expansion of Manston would be far less expensive than the alternatives – With the runway already in place (Plus wide enough that side by side landings would be possible at a future date with minor modifications if demand increased drastically), the only major infrastructure upgrades required would be a revamp of the terminal buildings and links to existing road and rail infrastructure.
A spur line to the existing HS1 channel tunnel rail line, which operates currently at less than 50% capacity, would enable international travellers to be in the heart of London in 40 minutes and give a much needed boost to a loss making service. It would also open up the possibility of international travellers using Manston as a gateway to the channel ports, re-invigorating communities. Indeed, with the City of London being a main economic driver for our country, it could be argued that an additional airport to the east of London would be a better way to service the city than making people disembark at Heathrow and then have to fight their way through central London to go eastwards from Paddington.
Likewise, links to both the M2 and A2 road network can be achieved relatively quickly  and would enable comparatively easy access to London and the South East.
(It is also worth pointing out that a ‘hub’ airport exists to take passengers from long haul international flights and transfer them to short haul flights for the domestic or European final leg of their journey – To this end, it does not matter where the second hub is placed for this particular part of the airport function, as passengers will only be travelling within the terminals and will not need additional transport infrastructure outside of the confines of the airfield.)
We would also look at the issue of ‘grandfather rights’ at Heathrow – Currently, the runways are operating at 98% capacity but the terminals are operating way below that, in the main caused by airlines with historic slot allocations filling them with empty or almost empty aircraft to deny rivals the ability to land. Making Heathrow more efficient would also have a positive knock on effect for employment in the boroughs surrounding the airport.
Aberdeen Airport jet
You can help to stop the third runway
If you are concerned about the impact of Heathrow expansion, please help spread the word.
There are a number of groups organising against the proposals – I have attached links below if you would like to get in touch, or you can contact us at www.ukiphillingdon.com
HACAN Clearskies                                         http://www.hacan.org.uk/
Office of John McDonnell MP                     http://www.john-mcdonnell.net/
iPetitions                                                          http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/no-third-runway
Zac Goldsmith MP                                         http://www.zacgoldsmith.com/default.asp?contentID=26

Hypocrisy,smears and U-Turns – The smell of establishment fear

The following post is the opinion of the author, and does not necessarily represent the views of the UK Independence party (UKIP)

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they attack you…..Then you win – Mahatma Gandhi

CD at Lee Rigby memorial walk

This has to be one of my all time favourite quotes from an iconic historical figure – Over the last 15 years it could pretty much sum up the rise of UKIP and also the realisation amongst the English people that those who claim to represent us at Westminster live in their own little world and only come out to talk to us at election time to keep their place on the gravy train.

Over the course of the last few months, the UKIP ‘surge’ has shown no signs of dying down despite the lack of major elections to fuel the anti-government ‘protest vote’ that the old establishment parties would have you believe is behind the healthy position of the party in the polls. The reality is that the UKIP stance on such concerns as mass uncontrolled immigration, rising energy prices, the EU, education and law & order fit in with the concerns of the public, a public who have been ignored as an inconvenience by those in power who believe that they know better.

The Gandhi scenario has been played out in England since Blair and ‘New Labour’ came to power in the late nineties – The people were ignored in the first rushes of ‘Cool Brittania’, with UKIP under the radar before our first MEP’s were elected on an anti-EU ticket in 1999.

Then came the ‘ridicule’ era – Any member of the public was branded as out of touch and a ‘Little Englander’ if they opposed the EU and the opening of our borders to all comers, with UKIP branded ‘gadflies, loonies and closet racists’ by the old Lib-Lab-Con triumvirate for expressing views that were in line with a large section of our society.

When the ridicule didn’t work, the public paid the price for their scepticism about the benefits of mass uncontrolled immigration by being attacked as ‘racists’ and ‘xenophobes’ by the government and compliant media – Who can forget the moment during the 2010 general election when Rochdale resident Gillian Duffy expressed her concerns to then PM Gordon Brown about mass immigration to be branded a ‘bigoted woman’ in an unguarded moment over a still live microphone?

With UKIP raising the immigration issue, the establishment turned their attacks on the only major political party campaigning on the real problems of lack of infrastructure, housing shortages and overloading of the NHS – But as the smears mount, so does party popularity as many realise that our critics are playing the man and not the ball.

Cranking up the rhetoric

Nigel outside the pubParty leader Nigel Farage (left) has led from the front, and as such has had to deal with some fierce attacks as he has been singled out for special attention.

The BBC Question Time of 7th November saw a particularly spiteful attack from government minister Anna Soubry, assisted by Labour’s Emily Thornberry.

Despite Ms Soubry showing her lack of knowledge of her own government brief (a defence minister who doesn’t know that Navy support ships are currently being built in Korea whilst shipyards in Portsmouth are being closed down), she attacked UKIP as being a party to ‘scaremonger’ and ‘turn to the stranger and blame them’ during the economic downturn.  This attack was even more ridiculous when you consider that just weeks previously, her party in government had put ad vans on the streets of London telling illegal immigrants to ‘go home or face arrest’ and sent text messages to people asking them if they should be in the country! ‘Operation Vaken’, as this was christened, cost the taxpayer thousands and resulted in just 11 people turning themselves in according to a report in The Metro newspaper on 1st November.

Ms Soubry faced a barrage of criticism from the public after this appearance, and further showed the lack of coherent answers to the questions posed when making a childish comment about Mr Farage’s sexual preferences  on The Marr Show last week in an attempt to be funny.

The week following the Question Time episode , the inappropriately named ‘Hope not Hate’ organisation attacked UKIP Thurrock for laying wreaths to the fallen on Remembrance Sunday with a party logo on them. Whilst my personal opinion is that no political logo’s are appropriate from any party on this day, The Royal British Legion supplied them and were happy to do so. Interestingly enough, the other parties have been placing wreaths with their logo’s on supplied from the same source for years and HNH have said nothing – Considering the support from politicians in certain of the old 3 parties for organisations that have killed both English civilians and British servicemen on home soil, their silence in the preceding years is deafening.

Most recently, we have seen UKIP member and former Conservative party candidate Victoria Ayling subjected to sustained attack from The Mail. Their front page on 7th December read ‘Send them all back home’ and was backed up with an edited video where Ms Ayling had said she would do so but ‘can’t really say that, can I?’ Unfortunately for The Mail and whichever terrified Tory spin doctor put them up to this story, there were a few inaccuracies –

1 – The video was edited to take out the part where Ms Ayling was discussing ‘illegal immigrants’ – It is actually government policy as could be seen from the aforementioned vans for illegal immigrants to be removed, so she was stating that those who break the law should be sent back to their country of origin – Not unreasonable?

2 – The video was recorded in 2008 – Ms Ayling was a member of the Conservatives at the time, and subsequently stood as a candidate for MP in the 2010 general election. If this was such a big story, why was it not broken when she was with her previous party?

3 – She was referred to as a ‘Farage Filly’ and key ally of the UKIP party leader based on having a photo taken at conference – Many of the UKIP council candidates in 2013 had their photo’s taken with Mr Farage as part of the campaigning, that doesn’t make them a ‘key ally’. If a Labour council candidate is pictured shaking hands with Ed Miliband, does that make them a ‘key ally’ of the Labour leader?

Breathtaking hypocrisy

Whilst these concerted attacks have been carried out, the hypocrisy from the establishment parties and their allied organisations has been astounding.

Cameron outside parliament

With the opening of UK borders to all Romanian and Bulgarian citizens on 1st January, Prime Minister David Cameron has tried to rush through legislation at the eleventh hour to restrict benefits to citizens of these countries for 3 months after entry. He knows full well that this will be challenged by the EU as a breach of the rules – Indeed, the UK is currently being taken to court by the EU for not giving equal benefits to European migrants in relation to our own citizens. He also knows that we can’t control our own borders whilst we are a member of the European Union, but is trying to show a tough side to head off the threat at the ballot box posed by UKIP – Remember his triumphant return from Brussels at the end of 2012 where he claimed to have stopped an increase in the money paid by our taxpayers in to EU coffers? If you check the figures, a year down the line and we pay more than ever, just via a slightly different route.

It is also interesting to note that Bulgaria was sponsored as a full member state of the EU by none other than Conservative MEP’s led by Geoffrey Van Orden (Or Uncle Bulgaria, as UKIP MEP’s refer to him) – So you could say that the situation we find ourselves in with open borders to Bulgaria were actually triggered by the people who claim to be trying to defuse the situation! Of course, they have been aware of the relaxation of border controls since coming in to power in 2010 – So why such a late response? It couldn’t have anything to do with trying to head off UKIP at the polls, surely?

Then we have the reaction of other leading party figures to newspaper revelations of disharmony in communities caused by mass, uncontrolled immigration.

Former Labour Home secretary and Sheffield MP David Blunkett has predicted riots in his constituency unless Roma migrants integrate in to local society, with fellow Sheffield MP and Lib-Dem deputy PM Nick Clegg chiming in and saying that the Roma ‘need to play by the rules’ and have ‘a lack of respect’. Labour grandee Jack Straw has also chipped in to state that Labour ‘made mistakes’ on immigration when he was a member of the government.

Could you imagine the storms of protest from the establishment if Nigel Farage had said something similar? Yet two former Labour cabinet ministers, who oversaw the mass immigration that has led to the issues they talk of, now make comments that go far further than UKIP’s principled stand against open borders which is based around numbers and infrastructure pressure, not nationality.

The Betrayal of an English Generation

Whitehall school 1Then we had the spectacle of David Cameron at the end of last year talking down our youngsters in an attempt to justify the EU migration that he is now so drastically backpedalling on.

During an Apprentice event on 29th October, reported on by The Daily Express, he spoke of factories being half full of Poles, Latvians and Lithuanians because ‘our kids are not up to it’.  He followed on in this vein on 13th November, when he was reported by The Telegraph as having stated that young working class people have ‘low aspirations’. This kind of outrageous pigeon holing of English youth would be classed as racist if levelled against any other ethnic grouping in our country – Yet Cameron has had the nerve to refer to UKIP members in the past as ‘closet racists’.

For a Prime Minister to talk down a whole generation of our youth who have been betrayed and denied a proper education by both his government and the previous Labour one is an abomination – To use that betrayal then as an excuse for recruitment of low skilled factory workers from abroad whilst those same youngsters are subjected to zero hours contracts or unemployment is a dereliction of duty on an epic scale.

Smear by association

With a definite lack of policy issues to attack UKIP on, the establishment parties have now turned to ‘smear by association’.

Following on from the 7th December headline, Vicky Ayling was further attacked by the Mail who then claimed that she had a background with the ‘far right’ National Front. This line of attack was based on her attending some meetings when she was at university and studying law as part of a thesis she was writing – A thesis that meant she attended various meetings across the political spectrum.

Yet the Mail printed nothing about these accusations when she was a Conservative candidate, and also failed to notice the following story from the local press in Rossendale and Darwen

http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/news/4318940.Darwen_Tories_in_BNP__blunder_/

Yes, Nick Holt was a former BNP member and candidate who was apparently asked to stand by the Conservatives for Darwen Town Council in 2009 – Not someone who attended a meeting as a student for research, a full blown BNP member who had stood for them before in elections.

Trevor MaxfieldBut it is not just the Tories who have recruited from the ranks of the BNP. Meet Trevor Maxfield (Pictured) – He is the executive member for leisure and culture on Darwen council and is a sitting Labour councillor. Yet he was previously an organiser and member of the BNP, and also joined the white supremacist ‘England First’ party before joining Labour.

When questioned about his appointment by the local press, his fellow Labour councillor Dave Smith said ‘To be fair to Trevor, he’s quite a good bloke – I think his BNP stuff is in the past”

Tory council leader Mike Lee was also quoted as saying he had ‘never heard him say anything that would equate to a BNP comment’

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/darwen/8200722.Former_BNP_activist_made_Blackburn_with_Darwen_s_culture_boss/

So there you have it – Attend a meeting as a student thirty years ago if you are in UKIP and it is a press headline, but be an active member of the BNP and then join the establishment and your sins are absolved and you have seen the error of your ways.

Funnily enough, it would be impossible for either Mr Holt or Mr Maxfield to join UKIP as former BNP members are barred from the party – Not something that the establishment like you to know as it doesn’t fit their narrative.

When Mandrake is more ‘half-baked’

The Telegraph runs a popular political gossip column called Mandrake – In late November, I received a call from a UKIP colleague to tell me that there was a story about me in that day’s edition entitled, “How Nigel Farage’s UKIP chairman marched with the English Defence League’. This came as a bit of a surprise, as I had not been contacted by the press for comment before they ran the story – The Guardian had been on to this months before, and after talking with me didn’t bother to run what they called a ‘non-story’.

Author Tim Walker stated, “UKIP’s Chairman in Uxbridge, West London, is Cliff Dixon, who admitted taking part in a march held by the far right English Defence League in East London. Dixon posed for photographs on the march in 2011 with Kevin Carroll, the co-founder of the EDL”

The photograph that Mr Walker alludes to was taken outside the US Embassy in Grosvenor Square on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, not in East London. Nor was there a march – It was a remembrance ceremony that was attended by many high profile politicians, members of the Royal Family and the families of the dead.

Finally, I was there in my role at the time of London Vice Chairman of the English Democrats political party prior to joining UKIP – I was stood with a group of activists from the March for England movement, whose flag I was photographed next to. Mr Carroll moved in front of the flag with a wreath and can be seen in one of the pictures. Also stood just to one side of us were activists from Muslims for Peace, who were there to oppose Islamist extremists led by Anjem Choudary who were mocking the victims families, as reported on by…..The Daily Telegraph (Link below)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/september-11-attacks/8755915/911-anniversary-Prince-of-Wales-joins-ceremony-outside-US-Embassy.html

So Mr Walker – Are you suggesting that this EDL march I was photographed on was also attended by Prince Charles and David Cameron?

Yet more attempts at ‘smear by association’ – In this case, ignoring the far bigger story of Islamists being allowed to disrupt a remembrance ceremony in the heart of London with a Police escort as can be seen in pictures I took that day. (Below)

September 2011 uploads 014September 2011 uploads 017September 2011 uploads 018

Again, it also begs the question as to why the press give coverage to, and completely misrepresent, a story about a minor UKIP official but have ignored the presence of Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn at the annual Al Quds parade in London which is supported by The Iranian Government and features homophobia, anti-Semitism and calls for death to the West?

Here is a video of his speech to the crowd in 2012 – You can just see the banner behind him which carries the image of Malcolm X

What you don’t see in the video are the battle flags of proscribed organisations such as Hamas and Hisbollah, nor the placards carried by children urging violence which are now an annual feature (see pictures below)

Al Quds Day marchers 17-08-12Al Quds 2011 anti Israeli posters

How does this square with the calls for peace from the Labour MP, and why are the press and Police so shy of reporting real sectarian and racial hatred on the streets of our Capital city? Indeed, I have put official complaints in about breaches of the public order act committed on these marches for the last 3 years to The Metropolitan Police, and have written to my local MP and Mr Corbyn’s party leader, Ed Miliband, about it. My only reply has been an email from the Police saying they are sorry I have been a victim of crime!

If all else fails – Fabricate some evidence

I mentioned earlier the inappropriately named ‘Hope Not Hate’ organisation, a group that claims to fight racism and extremism.

They have recently set up a special section on their website entitled ‘Purple Rain’ to ‘put UKIP under the microscope’.

It begs the question – Why? UKIP have proscribed membership to extremist groups, and have members from all differing backgrounds, races and religions in the party. Indeed, UKIP policies are based on a meritocracy where everybody is given equal chances in life and immigration is judged on a points system irrespective of where you are from – If they are really out to clamp down on discrimination, then the Lib-Lab-Con with their migration policies that discriminate against those from outside of the EU would be a good place to start, surely?

A dig around on their site may give some clues when you look at organisations that back and partially fund Hope Not Hate – Trade Union leaders such as Dave Prentis of Unison, Paul Kenny of The GMB and Christine Blower of the NUT all proclaim their support. With Labour enjoying the input and funding of the Trade Unions, and UKIP making such inroads in to their core voter base that has been taken for granted for years, in my opinion it wouldn’t take Hercule Poirot to make some sort of connection between Hope Not Hate’s new found interest in UKIP and their paymasters from the ranks of the TUC and the political establishment.

Not content with making vague accusations against the party, HNH activists have now stooped to trying to ‘set up’  youth wing Young Independence’ members on Facebook, as explained below by the excellent ‘Nope Not Hope’ website

HnH’s Morphett photoshops details on latest ‘expose’: not spin, an outright lie

Matthew Collins HNH

On the other hand, one of Hope Not Hate’s main activists and reporters is a gentleman by the name of Matthew Collins (pictured above). Collins is a former member of the BNP and National Front who has boasted of how many members of the Asian community he used to rough up. But again, of course, joining the establishment (In this case the ‘anti-fascist left’) absolves you of all crimes and allows you to take the moral high ground, even if you are still a thug – Just of a different cloth.

The smell of fear

With the EU elections and a large swathe of council elections due this year, followed by a general election in 2015, the continuing popularity of UKIP is unnerving the old tired parties in England and their overlords in Brussels.

This is just the start of a concerted ‘dirty tricks’ campaign as career politicians and bureaucrats try to cling desperately to their positions of power and privilege, consumed by a fear of change and real choice for the electorate.

I fully expect further ‘revelations’ and ‘scandals’ as the count down to May continues – The party must stand firm and trust in the people to see through the lies and continue to back us. The alternative of more EU control and the continuing dynasty of Lib-Lab-Con politics is too awful to contemplate.

We are now at stage 3 of the Gandhi quote I started this piece with – Come election time, I pray that stage 4 prevails for all of the people of England.

trust-us-liblabcon

Planes,Trains and Automobiles

Issues of transport infrastructure have never been far from the headlines nationally in recent months, with the government’s commitment to the controversial HS2 high speed rail project getting a large share of column inches.

Heathrow terminal 5Airport capacity has also been flagged up, with the spectre of the Third Runway at Heathrow raising it’s head again – A political hot potato, the government have set the Davies report in to this issue for after the next general election.

In Hillingdon, we are affected by both, with HS2 looking to carve a swathe of devastation through the north of the borough and a possible third runway decimating the south. Our local UKIP branch have been campaigning on both issues, but also on the state of our roads – Indeed, a resident’s petition in Cowley co-ordinated by the branch has seen the three roads affected re-surfaced recently after years of failed patching of potholes.

We have also been alerted to heavy goods vehicles speeding in both Harmondsworth and West Drayton, with our teams out talking with local residents about how they would like the issues tackled. Upcoming EU regulations increasing the size of lorries allowed on English roads could also make a bad problem far worse.

 

Public Meeting – Saturday 14th September

In response to the many enquiries we have received about transport issues, UKIP Hillingdon have now organised a public meeting entitled ‘Trains, Planes and Automobiles’ for next Saturday (14th September) at 7pm.

The venue is the Yiewsley Baptist Church, Colham Avenue, Yiewsley, UB7 8HF

The speakers include –

John Stewart – Chairman – HACAN Clearskies

JohnStewartJohn is a respected campaigner on noise and pollution issues surrounding airport expansion who has spoken and campaigned across Europe.

HACAN Clearskies, along with campaign group NOTRAG and assisted by local MP John McDonnell, fought and successfully stopped a third runway being built at Heathrow last time it was suggested.

John will be giving the case against Heathrow expansion.

 

Cliff Dixon – Chairman – UKIP Hillingdon

I will be putting forward the radical alternative to the third runway as laid out in the UKIP manifesto – Far less expensive, friendlier to the environment, utilising existing facilities with small upgrades and mainly welcomed by local residents and businesses

 

Special Guest Speaker

Mike Nattrass MEP – UKIP Transport Spokesman

Mike Nattrass MEP 2Two term Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the West Midlands, Mike is not only the UKIP spokesman but sits on the EU committee for transport and tourism.

A former deputy leader of UKIP, Mike will be outlining the issues surrounding both our roads and the HS2 rail link, offering sensible alternatives for the future

 

Admission is free, and there will be a Q&A session after the speeches.

If you have an interest in transport on a local, national and indeed international scale, then we look forward to seeing you there.

UKIP local councillors – Bringing democracy back to the people

There has been a lot of media chatter about how recently elected UKIP councillors have ‘done a deal’ with Labour and the LibDem’s to undermine the Conservative party in Norfolk.

The reality, however, is somewhat different.

Nigel Farage in Ruislip 27th April 2012

UKIP councillor for Swaffham, Paul Smyth, explains what has happened and how UKIP have been the catalyst for removal of the undemocratic ‘strong leader and cabinet’ model of local government and return to the committee system where each councillor can act in the best interests of his constituents and give them a voice

 

 

The UKIP Local Election Manifesto stated quite clearly that achieving consensus was a primary objective of UKIP in local government. It’s what makes us different and truly democratic. Instead of posturing and political game playing, UKIP puts its voters and the general public first: “UKIP is unique in local government, because we do not ‘whip’ our councillors to follow party diktats, or toe the party line. Instead, we expect our councillors to represent the wishes of their electors at all times. That means it’s easier to get agreement for the things that really need doing.”

A scan of the internet shows that it would be helpful to explain to the public, and especially to those who voted for UKIP on 2 May, why the UKIP group at Norfolk County Hall has seemingly joined forces with Labour and the Liberal Democrats.  First, it is simply not true that these three parties have formed a coalition. They retain their unique Party policies and will continue to promote their different political aims, but what they have achieved together at Norfolk Council will allow them to express their distinctiveness more effectively.

Most of the people commenting on developments in Norfolk are probably unaware of the relevant facts. For instance, they may not appreciate that although the voters of Norfolk elect 84 councillors to the County Council, under the existing Cabinet system of government only 10 councillors (the Council Leader and the small team he or she personally appoints) hold executive authority.

In layman’s terms this means that a tiny group in the Council effectively wields power for 4 years until the next election. During that time, apart from some reserved powers such as agreeing the Council’s budget, the other 74 councillors are powerless to change Cabinet decisions. They can observe, comment on, object to or protest about them, but the tiny Cabinet might simply press on regardless. Hence, the infamous King’s Lynn waste incinerator project has progressed despite overwhelming political and public objections to it, and without a thorough debate by the full Council.
 Eastleigh UKIP house

In a Council with a strong majority the Cabinet may reflect the views of the dominant Party but it excludes those of other elected councillors, which clearly hinders actual democracy. As UKIP champions bringing power back to the people it is logical that the Party would seek to replace the Cabinet system of governance with a more representative one. As elsewhere in the country, the 2 May elections produced a dramatic change in Norfolk’s political landscape removing a large Conservative majority (60/84) and returning a broader spread of councillors (40 Conservative, 15 UKIP, 14 Labour, 10 Lib-Dem, 4 Green and one independent).

Importantly, of the votes cast in Norfolk some 67% went to non- Conservative candidates. It is therefore unsurprising the so-called opposition groups had no desire to be governed by a Conservative-led minority administration and in the hiatus following an abortive Council meeting on 13 May, UKIP participated in negotiations to find a way forward, applying a common sense approach the Party wishes to pride itself on.

There was consensus among the negotiating groups that a Committee system of government would address the democratic deficit in Norfolk. Such a system would give each elected councillor a degree of influence (currently denied to them) and apportion Council appointments in line with group numbers. If it had been possible the collaborating parties would have sought rapid change, but legal (Local Government Act) and Council constitutional constraints prohibited such a move.

The earliest a Committee system could be adopted would be at the next Council Annual General Meeting in May 2014. That restriction dictated that an interim Cabinet would be needed to run the Council pending the due process necessary to allow the implementation of a more democratic system of government. So bringing power back to the people could not be achieved without a delay and an unavoidable compromise.

St Stephen's Tower and UKIP flag

Those who believe that UKIP should have led the temporary Cabinet are forgetting that would have needed the agreement of all the other parties involved – a concession the market simply would not bear. It is naive to ignore the impact unwelcome and inaccurate stereotypes about UKIP might have. The mainstream parties in British politics are seemingly stunned by UKIPʼs rapid rise and are perhaps unsure of how to react to that success, so the idea that UKIP would simply be welcomed to local government and immediately endorsed as the first among equals is an illusion.

A dogmatic demand for UKIP to be ʻleaderʼ because it had one more seat than the next ʻoppositionʼ group (and that – after four recounts – by a single vote on 2 May) would have achieved nothing positive at all. Rather, given the prize of replacing Cabinet rule with Committee government was so great the pragmatic approach taken by UKIP and the other parties in Norfolk was the correct decision. By acting in the common good, working collaboratively, negotiating reasonably and developing trust, UKIP has helped move Norfolk County Council in the right direction. It has also established a better reputation for itself than that of merely being a Party of objection and protest.

In Norfolk, UKIP is working with other parties to bring about a sea-change in the way the Council is run. The new Cabinet will only last for a year and, as UKIP’s only re-elected Councillor pointed out, should oversee its own demise. There is no coalition, nor has a vote for UKIP been wasted. County Councillors have 4 years in which to work for the people of Norfolk and the temporary transitional arrangements UKIP has helped create should lead to greater democracy, accountability and transparency in local government.

The change to a Committee system of governance should also increase the opportunities for UKIP to promote policies which a Cabinet could simply ignore. The question ‘What difference will UKIP make at Norfolk County Council?’ has had an early answer – it will help bring power back to the people.

 

UKIP stall Feltham by election 2011

Extremism – An open letter to David Cameron

Dear Prime Minister

 Cameron outside parliament

In the aftermath of the tragic death of Fusilier Lee Rigby, I watched your speech on national TV where you outlined how the government will attempt to deal with the threat of Islamist terrorism.

I was hoping that the atrocity committed would concentrate the minds of those in power on what is a growing menace on our streets, but instead was greeted with a host of soundbytes and platitudes that prove that you do not know what you are dealing with in England today, let alone how to reverse the cycle of violence.

Let me take in order the courses of action you have laid out –

1-      TERFOR – The Tackling Extremism and Radicalisation Task Force

 

On the face of it, a new task force to counter the threat seems like a good idea.

Then stand back and look at the reality – We have the assets in terms of security services and Police specialist divisions to do the job, they are just not allowed to get on and do it. Would TERFOR have the teeth to deport radical extremist preachers like Abu Qatada, or would they (Like our current Home Secretary, Theresa May) be thwarted by the Human Rights lobby and the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights)?

 David Cameron & Theresa May

Your idea of a task force includes senior ministers, MI5, police and moderate religious leaders – If you were really serious about this, how about inviting along organisations such as Quilliam who have ex-extremists amongst their number who can advise you how they were radicalised and how they emerged from that mindset? Rather than sitting in an office with Nick Clegg and Bernard Hogan-Howe , how about talking with real experts such as Ed Husain and Maajid Nawaz?

Reports since the atrocity have revealed that MI5 knew who the killers of Drummer Rigby were and had done so for years – What difference would a ‘taskforce’ have made if the security services were not able to close in and pick these people up?

2 – Urging Muslim ‘whistleblowers’ to report extremist clerics

 

The day after the atrocity in Woolwich, I had a long conversation with a Muslim friend who had phoned me to express his disgust with what had happened.

Not for the first time, he relayed to me how his father in the nineties had reported the extremist preachers at FinsburyPark mosque to the Police and they had done nothing about it.

His was not an isolated case.

My experience of the Metropolitan Police over the last fifteen years is that they are stifled in their duty by the fear of yet another report branding them ‘institutionally racist’, and will not go near anything contentious for fear of bringing down the wrath of the ‘Human Rights’ brigade.

3 – Stamping out extremism on university campus’

 

You were quite clear about trying to stop preachers of hate on campus at universities, a subject on which Home Secretary Theresa May has also been quite vocal.

Yet FOSIS (Federation of Islamic Student Societies) have invited a number of extremists to speak at universities around the country, including some who have propagated the leaflets of Dr Zakir Naik with the message ‘everyone should be a terrorist’.

Recently, your Faith and Communities Minister Baroness Warsi attended an event in the House of Lords organised by FOSIS as reported in the link below

http://www.studentrights.org.uk/article/2065/fosis_conference_at_the_house_of_lords_hides_its_promotion_of_extremists

Previously, Andrew Gilligan also filed this report for The Telegraph about OFSTED inspections

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8114452/Ofsted-praises-Islamic-schools-which-oppose-Western-lifestyle.html

Universities have successfully banned the BNP and National Front from recruiting on campus, surely it should not be difficult to do so with the preachers of hate?

4 – We will look at ways of disrupting people who may be influential in fostering extremism

 

Azad AliThis is Azad Ali, The Chairman and Treasurer of the Muslim Safety forum.

He is also the community affairs co-ordinator of the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) which in its own mission statement says it is dedicated to changing the ‘very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed….from ignorance to Islam’

Azad has written on his blog of his love for Al Qaeda cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki, advocated the killing of British troops in Iraq (He sued the newspaper who reported that and lost) and was filmed by undercover reporters for the Channel 4 programme Despatches stating, “Democracy, if it means at the expense of not implementing the Sharia, of course no-one agrees with that”

In 2009, The Standard reported that The Muslim Safety Forum received a £30,000 grant from City Hall under the supervision of your colleague, London Mayor Boris Johnson.

This was an interesting development, as Ali had previously donated generously to former Mayor Ken Livingstone’s campaign. Indeed, Mayor ‘Red Ken’ reportedly authorised payment via the London Development Agency of £500,000 to build a new headquarters for the IFE through a donation to the East London Mosque. How much this was influenced by the IFE running a campaign during the 2008 London Mayoral elections called ‘Muslims for Ken’ is not clear.

Mr Ali has also now received a position with the ‘Unite Against Fascism’ (UAF) organisation as Vice-Chairman – UAF is an organisation that supposedly protests against fascists and racists in our society. Their Chairman is a certain Mr Ken Livingstone, and below is a picture of some of their supporters confronting the Police during a St George’s Day parade in Brighton last year.

 Brighton St G 2012 UAF

Brighton St G 2012 barricades

During the parade, two Police officers were taken to hospital and Police horses were injured, whilst a young girl received head injuries from missiles thrown at the parade by members of the UAF. (Below)

 Brighton St George's 2012 - Girl hit by missile

In view of your speech on stamping out extremism, it is difficult to see how the presence of Mr Ali as one of the leaders of an anti-racist organisation can be conducive to good community relations. It is also interesting to see the names on the founding signatory list on the link below to the UAF website, some of which I am sure you recognise

http://uaf.org.uk/about/founding-signatories/

I was also taken aback by Mr Livingstone’s post on the UAF website stating that terrorists would never win and that London would stand up to them – Is this the same Mr Livingstone who whilst leader of the GLC during the 80’s at the height of the IRA  mainland bombing campaign invited Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness to County Hall? A somewhat Damascene conversion, especially considering his recent history with the IFE.

5 – There is no question of restricting freedom of speech

 

From my own experiences in London, I would say that freedom of speech has been restricted for years – Only not for the Islamists who propagate hatred.

In 2011, I attended the 10th anniversary of 9/11 at a ceremony outside of the American Embassy in Grosvenor Square – You were there.

September 2011 uploads 014

Unfortunately, I couldn’t get near enough to hear your speech and the flowers I brought to lay at the memorial to the victims could not be laid until late afternoon.

The reason behind this was that the Islamic extremist group, Muslims Against Crusades (MAC) were having a demonstration and the Police would not let any of us through to pay our respects ‘in case we were going to cause trouble’. The extremists chanted through the 2 minute silence and burned flags – Subsequently, their organisation was banned but has re-surfaced again under yet another name. Indeed, their leader Anjem Choudhary was on both Channel 4 news and the BBC on the night of the murder of Drummer Rigby spouting his hatred on national TV.

One of their previous incarnations, Al-Muhajiroon, recruited the extremist who killed Lee Rigby and the pictures have been in the national press of him at a rally with the aforementioned Choudhary.

Yet Choudhary not only remains free to spout his hatred, he claims more in benefits than a British Army squaddie on the front line gets paid in Afghanistan – He seems able bodied (Certainly enough to get around the country preaching intolerance) so why has Iain Duncan-Smith and his team of benefit fraud busters not been after Mr Choudhary when they are so keen to go after the genuinely disabled and injured ex-servicemen?

In terms of freedom of speech – I have been ordered off of Trafalgar Square by the Met Police on Al Quds Day (An annual parade in London sponsored by the Iranian Government) that preaches anti-semitism  in case I ‘might cause offence’ by having an England rugby shirt on.

I have also been arrested after a flower laying ceremony for the victims of 7/7 with friends of mine because we were deemed to be ‘too close’ to a segregated conference in Stepney Green held by the Islamist organisation Hizb-ut-Tahrir (Who are banned across Europe but not in the UK) I was subsequently transported to Kent and released without charge so as not to inconvenience those who would promote discord amongst our community.

Extremist organisations in London

You talk of countering extremism, but I have witnessed Tony Blair’s sister-in-law, Lauren Booth,  in the shadow of Nelson’s Column stating that ‘Israeli’s will never have a moments good sleep in their beds’ and praising Hamas on that very same day that the Police ordered me from Trafalgar Square.

During the same event, a speech was given by Abdul Wahid, .the chairman of  Hizb-ut-Tahrir saying that he has respect for fighters ‘making jihad’, whilst John Rees of the stop the war coalition praised acts of violence against the Israeli embassy in Cairo.

Al Quds 2012 marchers with Hiz flags

However, probably the worst speech I heard on that day was from Shabbir Rizvi, using terms regarding President Obama that would have had any Englishman serving a prison sentence under the race relations act.

The link below will give you some idea of the atmosphere, including videos of the speeches

http://www.israellycool.com/2011/08/24/scenes-from-londons-al-quds-day-august-21-2011/

The following year, the same parade was attended by sitting MP Jeremy Corbyn (Who made a speech) and ended up at Grosvenor Square, with the battle flags of proscribed organisations such as Hezbollah being in full view. I wrote letters of complaint to Theresa May (Who you have indicated will be on your anti-terrorist taskforce), Ed Miliband as his party leader and my local MP, John Randall.

I have yet to receive a reply.

I requested that the Police present acted under Section 5 of the public order act when calls for violence against Jews and Homosexuals were invoked, yet was ignored and threatened with arrest myself unless I quietened down (After being served a Section 15 dispersal notice to vacate the area so the Islamists could set up their demo)

I wrote about the day on my blog site as can be seen below

https://englishpatriot.co.uk/2012/08/19/london-a-city-united/

What can be done?

 

You already have the laws in place to deal with extremism – You just need to enforce them correctly. Over the last few days, the police have used these laws to arrest an 85 year old lady from Gillingham for shouting ‘go home’ at a mosque and various people on line for ‘racially aggravated tweets’.

I deplore the way that this government and the previous one have eroded our civil liberties and curtailed free speech, but if you can arrest people such as the misguided old lady and prosecute people like Emma West for rants on a tube train then surely you can do a far better job with the likes of the Hizb conference speakers and the killers of Drummer Rigby who pose a far greater threat to our society?

You have the tools already in place to combat the preachers of hate if you have the backbone to use them – But will you have the nerve to take on the European courts and restore order to England?

Will you have the resolve to either stop the hate preachers getting in to our education system or, as would be more fitting in a genuine democracy, allow people to speak against them without fear of being branded a ‘racist’ or ‘Islamophobe’.?

Your past history suggests not, but I hope this time that the revulsion felt for events will reach you in the Westminster Bubble and you can now prove me wrong – For the sake of all the citizens of England of all faiths and colours.

Yours Faithfully

CLIFF DIXON

ENGLISH PATRIOT