The agency intends to assert jurisdiction over our nation’shighways, waterways, and railroads as well.
TSA launched a new campaign of random checkpoints on Tennessee highways last week, complete with a sinister military-style acronym — VIPR — as a name for the program.
[First, your airports. Now, your highways. Next, your private homes]
As with TSA’s random searches at airports, these roadside searches are not based on any actual suspicion of criminal activity or any factual evidence of wrongdoing whatsoever by those detained. They are, in effect, completely random.
So first we are told by the U.S. Supreme Court that American citizens have no4th Amendment protections at border crossings, even when standing on U.S. soil. Now TSA takes the next logical step and simply detains and searches U.S. citizens at wholly internal checkpoints.
The slippery slope is here.
When does it end? How many more infringements on our liberties, our property, and our basic human rights to travel freely will it take… before people become fed up enough to demand respect from their government?
When will we demand that the government heed obvious constitutional limitations and stop treating ordinary Americans as criminal suspects in the absence of probable cause?
[...]
Disarming the highways and filling them full of jack-booted thugs demanding to see our papers is no way to make them safer. Instead, it is a great way to expand government surveillance powers and tighten the noose around our liberties.
-Source-
Whether it’s worn by a police officer, hockey player, usher, or soldier, surely the ostensible reason for donning a uniform is to have, well…. uniformity!?
But things are changing in regard to uniforms at that ever-sensitive “service” formerly known as the Toronto police force.
Indeed, the police have announced they’re going to accommodate Muslim policewomen who want to wear the hijab on duty.
Some might hail such a move as another shining example of “reasonable accommodation”. Others, count me among them — look upon this directive as another assault against our Canadian traditions.
Yet again, another public institution appears to be bowing to the tyranny of political correctness — bending over backwards to accommodate certain individuals, some of whom are quite unaccommodating of western values.
The question arises: What’s driving this directive? Why is it important for the police to have hijab-wearing policewomen in the first place?
Photo: “British” Policewomen!
Contrary to widespread popular belief, the Qur’an does not mandate Muslim women to wear the hijab.
In this regard, the apparel accommodation isn’t the same as allowing a Sikh to wear a turban.
(I’d also argue there’s an historical reason for permitting Sikhs to wear turbans, given that Sikh military brigades have long been an integral part of the British Empire.) (ELN editor disagrees)
If anything, the hijab is a political statement and a symbol of fundamentalism.
In some cases, a woman wearing such a headscarf is being pressured by her family to do so (case in point, the dearly departed Aqsa Parvez.)
Either way, seeing such a garment as part of a police uniform is odd. Imagine if a citizen was to call the cops regarding a suspected “honour” killing in the neighbourhood and the policewoman who responds is decked out in a hijab? Would this not be unsettling?
Also, the police have surely put themselves in a sticky situation regarding haberdashery accommodation.
For example, if a female police officer demands that she be allowed to wear a niqab or a burqa, how could such a request possibly be denied, given the precedent that’s been set with the hijab?
Indeed, just how far do we take “reasonable accommodation” in the police department?
Do Muslim police officers reserve the right not to work with the Canine Unit, given that many Muslims consider dogs “unclean”?
Will ham sandwiches be banned from police stations due to dietary restrictions?
As well, is there not a profound double-standard at play here?
For example, here’s a scenario I’d find most amusing to observe: Imagine “Constable Duncan MacDonald,” who is of Scottish heritage, waltzes into the station tomorrow decked out in a ceremonial kilt, complete with sporran. How many nanoseconds would tick by before P.C. MacDonald is hauled before a supervisor and sternly disciplined?
Something is indeed rotten these days when it comes to sensitivity issues.
Consider the plight of Tarek Fatah. This moderate Muslim author has been subjected to written death threats from radical Muslims, yet the police have decided not to lay charges.
And, full disclosure:Last summer at Toronto’s Yonge Dundas Square, your correspondent was punched in the face by a hijab-wearing woman who objected to me taking pictures. Even though the assault was photographed and eye-witnessed… police declined to lay charges.
“I assume you have all your own teeth, the only essential requirement we ask of prospective British policemen these days? You do? Excellent, excellent, sign here, here and here. A thumbprint? Of course dear boy, a thumbprint is fine! And welcome to Britain… Constable Kaunda!”
Card-Board Cop On-Duty, Ethnic Minority, of course!
[...]
It really is true that St Vincent (Caribbean Island nation) has exacting requirements for its police recruits… and it really is true that the British police require next to nothing.
And the reason for this is staggeringly ironic — Britain has drastically lowered its police entry requirements, even to the point of overlooking criminal records, in order to recruit a higher proportion of ethnic minorities. The British police now recruit immigrants who are not even British citizens, provided they have indefinite leave to remain in the UK.
We do check whether a newly arrived immigrant from Somalia or the Sudan has a criminal record relating to rape, murder or genocide, but the reality is we have absolutely no idea as to the true identity of the man in question.
With our home-grown ethnic minorities, it is important that certain criminal records are overlooked because despite making up only a purported 10% of Britain’s population, they punch well above their proportional weight when it comes to criminality, thus ensuring their admittance as 25-30% (pdf) of the prison population, whilst a full 77% of young BLACK males have been arrested for suspected criminal offences and entered into the police database.
The irony of course is that the St Vincent Police Force, with all its stringent character requirements, recruits only nationals from St Vincent, who are, quite naturally… Black.
[...]
There was a time when the British police entry standards were as high as those of St Vincent. There was a minimum height requirement, 5 “O”-educational levels were needed, criminal records were not overlooked and physical fitness was a pre-requisite. But multiculturalism and socialism have turned the traditional and decent Britain of the recent past, on its head.
A quick glance at the Metropolitan Police Authority recruitment targets for 2009-10 reveals the liberal insanity that has taken over this now pitiful Island nation. A full 27% of all new police recruits MUST be “Black and minority ethnic” (B.M.E.)…. and 41% must be female.
West Midlands Police Authority has seized upon such directives with glee. What would once have been called racial and sexual discrimination against White males is now called Positive Action, which is why the police are able to recruit Black and ethnic minorities in far higher percentage terms than their population warrants.
White males will account for a mere 30% of new Metropolitan Police recruits over the next three years, but unfortunately for the powers that be, it is still White males who overwhelmingly apply to join.
[White British citizens STILL dominate their own landscape at 90%
of the population!]
The result is that they are simply turned away, and the reason given, with no hint of hypocrisy or shame, is because they are White. In 2006, two thirds of White males were turned down for interview by Gloucester Police, whilst every single ethnic minority and female was accepted (for interview).
Looking at the police recruitment site today is profoundly depressing.
The fact that no academic qualifications are needed becomes apparent when we are told that 60% of applicants fail at the first hurdle. Such large numbers suggest perhaps that the applicants were unable to translate Homer’s Iliad into modern Greek, but this, alas, is not quite the case. The 60% of aspiring plods weeded out at stage one are discarded because they lack the ability… to fill out the application form correctly!
Should you manage to gouge out your name, address, and conviction date correctly, you may be asked to progress to the next level, where your physical fitness will be evaluated. Gone are the days of running a mile in seven minutes and doing 50 push-ups. Today you need only be “reasonably fit and able to run short distances fairly quickly.” I assume this requirement is more geared toward escape than pursuit.
The next stage is whether or not you can actually speak the language of the people you wish to police. The only requirement here is that you have mastered enough English to “Write short reports and potentially give evidence in court.”
The London Metropolitan Police do not beat around the bush in terms of identifying potential recruits. They are not looking for burly yeomen who can face up to crowds of baying, drunken youths on Saturday nights, but people who display the correct political attitudes. Providing one is aged between 18 and 57 — yes, you read 57 yrs. old correctly — then the Met Police’s number one priority in personal qualities is Respect For Diversity.
This perverse pandering to ethnic minorities does not just stop there; it continues out into the streets where ethnic criminals are given the old softly-softly approach. Stop and Search is one of those thorny ethnic issues which so excite the liberal/left, who think it “racist” to disproportionately stop young Black males in order to frisk them for knives. Black parents, on the other hand, are all in favour of it, not wishing their sons to be stabbed to death in the epidemic of knife crime UK that is overwhelmingly Black on Black.
The police have an intriguing way to get around this. They simply stop White youths — in the full knowledge they are innocent — to provide a racial balance.
They also take instruction from young “streetwise” ethnic gang members, who despite a history of carrying weapons and assaulting police officers, tell the self-same police what street slang and behaviour they should adopt in order to be as inoffensive as possible whilst searching them for weapons they use to kill one another with. The police do this in order to “command respect.”
But Blacks do not sit at the top of the grievance tree in Britain. For such an elevated position at the peak of the racial/religious ziggurat, we must turn to Islam. It is proposed that British police officers should learn about Sharia law and the Koran, in order to better police the Islamic community.
Only because it is incumbent upon the police to further the relationship with those who wish to blow us up, and take our country over. Particularly with regard to “moderate Muslims” who have such a “hard time” living in democratic Britain, they are apparently forced to think of the police as their enemy.
[...]
Can it get any worse? Of course it can! How about dressing up”English” policewomen in full-on Muslim garb to better understand the utter hell that is the life of Muslim women living in “intolerant” Britain?
[...]
Members of a police force who could not swim would have been unthinkable a few years ago, but not so today, where it is easier to drop the swimming requirement from police training rather than appear discriminatory toward swathed sinkers.
As always though, there are consequences to such liberal perversities — witness the death by drowning of ten-year-old Jordan Lyon in 2007, whilst a police community support officer (PCSO)observed from the banksof the pond as he/she consulted their health and safety pamphlet, whilst a colleague ran to summon help. (True story!)
[...]
Another consequence unforeseen only by the liberal/leftists, is not just the sheer uselessness of people recruited from the bottom of the barrel, but also their slightly less than honest attitudes. In 2006, the Guardian reported on an internal London Metropolitan Police report which found complaints of corruption aimed at “Asian” officers to be ten times (10x) higher than complaints against their White colleagues.
Amongst the PCSOs, who were introduced to tackle anti-social crime whilst bolstering the recruitment rates of Blacks, Muslims, women and the transgendered…… gross misconduct cases account for 50% all cases within the forces, despite their making up only 20% of the recruits. They are employed ONLY to make up ethnic and minority numbers. In terms of crime fighting, they solve only one crime every four years and issue fines for anti-social behaviour at the rate of 1.5 per year.
And while the British police self-destruct in order to prove their non-racist credentials, their entire institution is still awash with cries of “racism” and “prejudice.”
Take the case of Assistant Chief ConstableAnil Patani, for example. When he was overlooked for promotion back in his sergeant days, he sued for racial discrimination. When he was promoted later in his career, he sued again, this time because he had been over-promoted because of his race, and was thus viewed with some bitterness by his colleagues who of course no longer liked him, indeed hated him.
Anil Patani’s finest moment came when he tried to prosecute Channel Four (T.V.) for inciting racial hatred by daring to produce and broadcast the “Undercover Mosques” programme.
Commander Ali Dizaei was once destined for the very top. Today, he is suspended under an impending charge of Perverting the Course of Justice. Dizaei’s whole career has been built around race.
He was President of the National Black Police Association, and race-advisor to the Home Secretary (does not race-advisor to Adolf Hitler sound more appropriate?) before his life became embroiled around corruption charges.
In 2008 Britain’s most senior Muslim officer, Assistant CommissionerTarique Ghaffur, sued his boss and Britain’s most senior police officer, Commissioner Ian Blair, over racism charges. Ghaffur was paid out and Sir Ian Blair resigned shortly afterwards. In the fallout that followed, the National Black Police Association (is there a White Police Association??) took out full page adverts in newspapers, asking that ethnic minorities cease applying to join the police.
The result of such insanity is that the police now manage a mere 6 hours a week actually out on their beat. They have effectively withdrawn from the streets, which have been taken over by lawless feral youths.
[...]
The tragic case of Fiona Pilkington is the saddest story I have read in many years.
A slightly backward mother, with variously backward children, poor Mrs Pilkington lacked the financial resources to live where liberal progressives live, and so was forced to share her life with the welfare-benefit classes whose morality has been destroyed by years of liberal progressive destruction.
Stones and bricks were thrown through her windows, and fireworks pushed through her letter box. Her young son was locked in a garden shed and threatened at knife-point while her daughter was subjected to verbal and physical abuse.
Poor, tormented, mentally tortured Fiona Pilkington called the Leicestershire Police 33 times over a ten-year period, but they never helped her. Not once.
Eventually she bundled her daughter and herself into her own vandalised family car, set fire to it, and departed to a place where one can only hope her tacit murderers will never gain admission, via its pearly gates.
[...]
Contrast this with another story published the same week. 71-year-old, disabled, German-born pensioner Renate Bowling was arrested, thrown into the back of a police van and prosecuted for assault. Why?
Because she had prodded a 17-year-old youth in the chest after he and his gang had thrown stones at her windows. When she caught him hiding behind a wall he called her a “f***ing German”, which one would have thought constituted a racial offence, and certainly would if Germans were not quite so annoyingly White and Aryan. The culprit was not arrested, of course.
Or what about the pensioner arrested for shouting at yobs who were stoning ducks on a canal…. or the retired military police officer who has erected an electrified fence around his home after police ignored his 999 calls as paving slabs were hurled into his garden….. or the woman advised by the police not to call them again as it would only escalate the problem despite the fact she had been punched to the floor of her own home by a gang of (ethnic?) youths?
And on and on and on.
It is unusual to get to the end of one day, let alone an entire week, without reading reports of women being assaulted, men being beaten to death by packs of liberally educated “youths”,…..and then innocents of the wrong race (White), religion or class being arrested by the police on matters of utter inconsequence.
[...]
The reason for the decline of the British copper is very simple. Britain’s socialist government has converted — under the cover of multicultural compassion — what was once the Great British Police Force into one that is useless when it comes to protecting law abiding tax-payers, but highly efficient as the virtual paramilitary wing of a political movement which has ordained indigenous White and middle-class citizens to be the enemies of the socialist state.
If you think that such a statement is paranoid, ask yourself why the police will not get involved in cases such as Fiona Pilkington’s, but speed to cases on full blues and twos when a religious, racial, gender, or class crime has been committed.
Ask yourself this. Why do the police only seem to take the type of crime seriously that the socialist government promotes as serious, and why so many of the Chief Constables (all of whom owe their positions to a slavish devotion to the Labour Party) have degrees in criminology and sociology which promote criminals as “victims” of social injustice.
[...]
The much-traduced British police are now protectors of the multicultural/socialist state rather than the protectors of the law-abiding general public.
If you are a member of the ruling elite, the police are not only your political servants, but also your personal bodyguards.
If, on the other hand, you are a member of the increasingly persecuted class, by which I mean traditionally WHITE British, irrelevant of income or education, then the police have at best abandoned you, or at worst become your enemy. -Source-
I am finally doing a little research on a key man behind the PanEuropa movement, one of the root causes responsible today for the advancing eliminationof thenation-state in Europe (as in America) and their respective founding peoples. Wikipedia at the outset says:
“Coudenhove-Kalergi complemented his liberal views of the political role of the Jews with distinctive advocacy of race mixing (or miscegenation). In his book Praktischer Idealismus (Practical Idealism) he wrote:
“The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.”
“Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process. No wonder that this people, that escaped Ghetto-Prison, developed into a spiritual nobility of Europe. Therefore a gracious Providence provided Europe with a new race of nobility by the Grace of Spirit. This happened at the moment when Europe’s feudal aristocracy became dilapidated, and thanks to Jewish emancipation. … ”
In fact, the Ancient Egyptians were comprised of several races, including red, white and black, and they therefore do not stand as a precedent.
What stands out for me today, in the (French President) Sakozy videos, are the following elements from that passage of Kalergi’s: “race-mixing”, “classes,” “artificial selection process”.
Kalergi is writing in 1925.
Charles Darwin published “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life” on 24 November 1859, a work of scientific literature considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology. _
For the sixth edition of 1872, the title was shortened to “The Origin of Species”. Darwin’s book introduced the scientific theory that populations evolve over the course of generations through a process of “natural selection”. It presented a body of evidence that the “diversity” of life arose by common descent through a branching pattern of evolution.
It seems to me that what we are looking at in the views of such as Kalergi – whether he understood it or not, or perhaps was being duplicitous – is a reverse-engineering of human societies by means of “artificial selection” (the tool of livestock breeders, or breeders of poodles and lapdogs).
In reality, the goal or object is not a “diversity” of life “by common descent through a BRANCHING pattern of evolution”, but a REDUCTION of human racial, cultural and social “diversity” toward MASS UNIFORMITY. Thus, the unnatural goal is precisely to ELIMINATE “diversity” while disguising it as a laudable thing called “pluralism”, for example. But mass uniformity is NOT a quality of nature!
Neither does the socialist welfare state (advancing at the same time as this fast-tracked program of racial DIS-similarity) and which eliminates competition, qualify as a tool of social Darwinism. It is precisely anti-natural because it eliminates the very competition that in the view of evolutionists supposedly leads to “survival of the fittest” and to a natural improvement of species.
Kalergi’s program also presumes that Darwin has discovered a final scientific truth that is unrevisable; his kind of “artificial” tinkering thus may be fatal to other realities of nature that we may be unaware of.
If they keep on going, we should perhaps look like paramecia, and then like organic molecules, and then like primeval soup among the rocks again, if this artificial reductionism is a value in itself that must continue back to unknown “Origins”.
I think there is a hidden value here that could best be expressed as “elimi-NATION”. In other words, this road to mass uniformity falsely disguised as Darwinism is really a power grab by the self-appointed social controllers.
One may just as well call the specific “artificial” introduction of a new breed of bull to his cow by the farmer as “diversity”.
In the Sarkozy-sponsored program of forced “racial interbreeding” (métissage) to eliminate the White-race French people, it has no real meaning in and of itself except to misleadingly label a transient stage; for its non-admirable goal aims at breeding OUT both racial & cultural “diversity”. And, no doubt, diversity of views and tastes, which conceivably would result in more amenable and socially controllable populations, i.e., “lapdogs”. Or, the human term, slaves.
One might employ an “artificial selection process” to build a human master race. One might equally use it to build BOTH a slave race and a master race, simultaneously; for example, if one particular race has contrived to place itself behind nuclear-protected borders while simultaneously using DNA discrimination to keep its own species “pure”, while actively pushing mass-”métissage” for the rest of us.
If it is despicable to consciously use an “artificial selection process” to build a master race, is it less despicable to use it to build a slave race? For, to me, this is the essence of the command by socio-political race-farmerSarkozy to the White French people to interbreed — failing which, “the State” will introduce measures “more coercive” than his public orders.
What would those coercive measures be? Mass-starvation and denial of jobs and aid to Whites… as in South Africa?
How about involuntary forced insemination? If they can do it with cows and dogs, what will stop them doing it to humans?
And why should we not call this program the Fourth Reich?
[This snippet is from Anti-White Media who does an outstanding job at deciphering coded commercial messages and deserves recognition for encouraging readers to "read between the lines" whenever a social engineering message has a dominating affect over the selling item itself. -Editor.]
“Yet another (T.V. commercial) video in which Whites are humiliated under the watchful, judgemental gaze of glorifiedBlacks.
French psychologist Jacques Lacan speaks of the “Big Other” as anyone before whom one must keep up appearances. The “Big Other” might be the watchful gaze of a god or a parent — whom we as devout worshippers or as children — try to appease and impress .
Here at :10 the “Big Other” becomes the Black guy. The slightly thick-set White woman, with her stiff and awkward attempt at rhythmic Africanized Ghetto-grinding, cannot win his approval… try, as she might.
Why does SunDrop Soda need to cast a Black actor as the driver at :10? (Blacks are only 13% of the U.S. poplulation)
Because in the early 21st Century, we have replaced god with Blacks as the “Big Other“. In so many films, and so manyT.V. commercials they become the “righteous, morally perfect being” whom we must prostrate ourselves for scrutiny and final judgement.
In doing so, we (Whites) are humiliated, debased, deracinated.
Note at :27 how the pale, geeky, inept, White male-meat is contrasted with the easy-going, naturally ebullient ebony girl with the big breasts in the foreground.
The geeky White girl (the main character), blurred out at :26, is paired in our minds with her geeky White male twin at :27.
How might these White geeks save themselves from a reality of eternal geekdom?
The answer is in the subsequent frame, at :28, which depicts, behind the SunDrop logo, an in-your-face example of uber-miscegenation…a bikini-clad, blonde White girl paired with a wide-smiling, be-muscled Black guy… a Black guy who in no way is being singled out for optical ridicule, as was the White beanpole at :27.”
IMMIGRATION into Britain may now never be stopped, or even controlled because the politicians are the only people who can pass laws on the subject, but have lost too much power and influence.
In The New Élites – George Walden maintains that Britain is now in a Soviet-type grip of professional egalitarians whose power base lies in commerce, culture and the media. They can now control virtually all of public life. They are extremely mediocre in their abilities, and indeed brag about their ordinariness, but behind their anti-elitist rhetoric lies the old urge to dominate which is as powerful as that of their aristocratic forebears.
[...]
As Walden points out, the élites have always dominated mass societies, and there is a large academic literature on the subject. But in the past there was always a struggle between competing élites with opposing ideas. Britain’s new élites, are instead… virtually totalitarian.
No politicians of any party would now dare to openly propose to withdraw from the Geneva Refugee Convention, which has outlived its usefulness and is actually harming this country because the new élites would shout them down.
Further, the executive branch, in particular the immigration authorities, can do nothing to halt immigration unless there is a change of law initiated by the politicians. Lawyers in the immigration appellate system which is now a growing and monolithic money-spinner for many of them, have to tolerate perjury in court by illegal immigrants – whom they know to be lying – and having refused them asylum, still allow them to stay in Britain because they know that the authorities are simply incapable of removing them in the numbers required.
Decline in standards
The greatest present danger is the decline in journalistic standards, which the new élites have brought about. In earlier times, news reporters were taught not to comment in their copy and be balanced and fair-minded. Not any more.
The present mix of spin, personally biased opinion, public relations chat and celebrity gossip – often all crammed into one article – is now demanded of journalists by their paymasters. In the process they have resorted to lies and half-lies because they know they can get away with them if they express left-liberal opinions. They continually use pejorative adjectives when it comes to describing the Right – again because it is expected of them. Indeed they fear for their jobs if they fail in this regard. They are no longer journalists but Soviet-type propagandists. This is why the Right is always termed ‘extreme’, but never the Left.
Journalists’ names for parties
Journalists will often describe parties such as the BNP (British Nationalist Party), or Austria’s Freedom Party, as ‘anti-immigrant’ but will not conversely report other parties being ‘pro-immigrant’. They will increasingly point to the unpleasant consequences of race riots in Britain, but will not point to their cause: unbridled immigration.
They will sometimes approve of attempts to remove illegal immigrants, but are only too ready to publish pictures of weeping immigrant children and their mothers being forced onto ships and planes against their will, because their editors demand a more sentimental and ‘caring’ approach to news stories.
By using Non-neutral language, they print glaring paradoxes. An article in the national press that describes an immigrant borough as ‘vibrant’, or one which ‘celebrates diversity’, will be printed alongside stories about tribal butchery in Africa or communal murders in India.
Journalists were once cautioned about using non-sequiturs - stating facts but drawing incorrect conclusions from them. A classic non-sequitur says that ‘anti-immigration’ parties promote ‘hate’ because, as most immigrants are coloured (NON-white), White nationalist parties must therefore “hate coloured people” everywhere in the world. What is a legitimate criticism of an immigration policy, becomes instead, a personal attack on individual Black people in Britain. They pretend not to see the difference between one stance and another.
They write emotively and unthinkingly, and seem fearful and confused. Any talk of controlling immigration will stir up trouble in immigrant communities, so they maintain. They assume that ethnic minorities themselves want immigration to continue ad infinitum, so they avoid publishing criticism of immigration policies for fear of giving offence – offence to the ethnic minorities… NOT to the British host population.
This is partly because they appear not to know what being British is. They have gratuitously redefined Britain as some kind of off-shore Hong Kong, without reference to what the general public, academics and even the politicians themselves believe to be the true reality. Virtually none of the intellectuals who are supposed to be monitoring British society will use the term ‘multi-culturalism’ – a euphemism for multi-racialism.
[...]
The truth is that the growing cultural and linguistic chaos in this country, which the media élite gloss over, adversely impacts upon the immigrants themselves. It is they who are ‘multi-cultural’, not we. The Jamaicans looking like Africans, are now having to live in London streets side by side with real Africans, and the Whites can’t tell the difference.
Anglo-Indians are now having to rub shoulders with other Indians belonging to castes they would not normally wish to live next to… if they were back in India. There is even less ‘multi-culturalism’ going on between Blacks and Browns. Their one common denominator was the Commonwealth, but now all the talk is about ‘Europe’, and immigrants are no more European than they are British.
What is often forgotten is the vast architectural heritage into which the immigrants have come. Each street, borough and town in Britain was built by the British. Each, with just a tiny few exceptions, is named after local history, a history of the British.
This is bound to affect the self-esteem of the minorities: everyone wants to have a homeland they can call their own, and have a pride in their own culture and achievements. You can’t expect diasporas to have a pride in someone else’s culture or history.
America was deliberately created as a receptacle for diasporas, and the new in-comers could then create a new pride in ‘America’ (which was named not after a racial group but after an immigrant called Amerigo).
Our increasing multi-racialism will itself become a kind of self-imposed tyranny, and in the end our institutions will be utterly unreformable.
One of the great ironies of our time is that Eastern Europe, since the collapse of communism, is now freer than the West. Today it is in the West that criticism of racial or historical dogma can end the career of a scholar or politician, and even send him to prison. By contrast, in Eastern Europe and Russia, now the last enclaves of free White people, one can find plenty of books about race or historical revisionism. -Source-
United Nations, Human Rights Charter, Article 19 states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
[Most people] “confuse the dreary recitation of politically correct gibberish with sensitivity that they think they have arrived at through their own value clarification”. –Tomislav Sunic
"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me TRUTH." — Henry David Thoreau
"Happiness is not the goal of existence, but the byproduct of a life well lived and the purpose of life is TRUTH... not pleasure".
"For most people, the desire not to deviate too far from the herd, prevents them from telling the truth they really feel inside. What would the neighbors think?" -- John Kaminski
Current Weather
~~~~~ ELLIOT LAKE NEWS & VIEWS is a Blog helping to slay the many-headed dragon of "political correctness" with the effective weapon called TRUTH.
Subjects pertaining to mass 3rd-world immigration, multi-culturalism and racial identity are are given special priorities here, and from which material you may either accept or reject at your personal discretion.
Opinions are accepted without ad hominem attacks or insults. Personal responses to any commentary or questions will be kept to a bare minimum due to time constraints.
Miscellaneous
> All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 -1860)
The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear.
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” -Orwell
To get the oil price, please enable Javascript.
Photo: “British” Policewomen! 
<<
![[Most Recent Charts from www.kitco.com]](http://www.kitconet.com/charts/metals/gold/t24_au_en_usoz_4.gif)
