Sunday, 23 November 2014

Birmingham Council buried child sexual exploitation report 23 years ago!

On 19 November 2014, Jeanette Oldham told us this in The Birmingham Mail:
“Birmingham City Council ‘buried’ a report linking Asian private hire drivers to child sexual exploitation victims 23 YEARS ago… Researcher Dr Jill Jesson was asked by the authority to look at the issue of child prostitution involving girls in care back in 1990.

The following year, after six months research, she produced a critical two-part report which showed child protection failings by social workers and other agencies. Her report also highlighted claims that some Asian private hire drivers were linked to the sexual exploitation of young white girls in care, including some who had been cautioned for prostitution offences. Yet when Dr Jesson presented her draft findings to a steering group, she was ordered to remove all reference linking ethnicity and the private hire trade.

Incredibly, her full amended final report was never published. A meeting planned to discuss it was cancelled, and all copies were to be destroyed…

In October… an official West Midlands Police report – completed in August 2012 – had shown that 75 per cent of known on-street groomers in the region were Asian, while 82 per cent of girl victims aged 14 to 16 were white.

A separate report by Birmingham Safeguarding Children Board, published in September 2013, said: ‘The partnership arrangements in Birmingham are currently failing to protect our children from child sexual exploitation.

At the time of writing this strategy, there are three young people, the victims of child sexual exploitation, who are subject to a Secure Accommodation Order whilst the perpetrators of these horrific crimes remain at liberty and continue to target other children. The absence of the prosecutions of these offenders is startling.

Partner inaction may indicate that there is sometimes a reluctance to use the statutory powers available to them, and this is unacceptable.’

The force has also come in for heavy criticism recently for failing child exploitation victims.”
Dr Jesson, herself, said this of her 23-year-old report:
“There was a link between the sexual abuse of the girls and private hire drivers in the city. I thought at the time I did the work that there was an issue with race. Most of the girls were white. I was asked to take this link out, to erase it…

Every time a news item has come on about sexual grooming of young girls and girls in care, and the link, too, between private hire drivers, I have thought ‘I told them about that in 1991 but they didn’t want to acknowledge it’. I think the problem has got worse and worse over time…

It wasn’t called grooming then, it was called prostitution… The girls were all aged between 13 and 17 and were all under the care of Birmingham City Council social services…

In 1991 this was ground-breaking insight… The relevant organisations have failed to address this problem’… A friendly young man would pick up the girl, say he loved her, buy her presents and before she knew it she was being shared around his mates’…

I thought there was a link between Asian taxi drivers… and the girls who were getting the cautions for prostitution. I put that in the report and was asked to remove that, too…

The report was shelved, buried, it was never made public. I was shocked to be told that copies of the report were to be destroyed and that nothing further was to be said…

My report was critical of the council and social services department. It was critical of their policy. It stated that their policy was not robust enough.”
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the animals at the top of the tree are at war with us.

They really are.

The next phase of this war will be violent and bloody. The establishment will not hand over the reins of control without one hell of a fight. They cannot afford not to do so. A truthful government, one that cared about its people, would explain in detail the reality of what those who went before had done during their time in office. Once the depth of their anti-British treachery became known, the most guilty could not possibly survive.

These must, therefore, do whatever they can to cling on to power. Their very lives depend on it. They fight or they die. They take the war they are waging to the ultimate level or they lose everything.

Because the majority took so long to open their eyes and see the stone bl**ding obvious, the outcome of that war is now in doubt.

Better get yourself prepared,
You don't want to hang with the rest of the herd.
Sheeple, lemming, cattle, mouse,
They’re on their way to the slaughterhouse.
Look at the chemtrail in the sky,
Isn’t it time to wonder why?
Loving mother, wise man, dreamer,
They’re just lining them up for the next Fukushima.

F111s, tanks and drones,
When all we have are sticks and stones
And truth to fight manufactured crisis,
Al-Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS,
CCTV, terror, debt
And all the data on the internet.

Will truth alone deter reptillians
Who gaily slaughter untold billions?
What does it matter if, in the end,
When they have played their final hand,
Beyond that last dark stratagem,
There’s ten of us and none of them.


Part 10: What the papers say

Part 9: Graphic reality

Part 1: Protective Edge

Part 2: Pillar of Defense and the Mavi Marmara

Part 3: Cast Lead

Part 4: 9/11 and Iraq

Part 5: Arab Spring in Egypt and Libya

Part 6: SYRIA


Part 8: Celebrities speak out

Part 11: British MPs tell the truth

When criminals become cops

On 15 November 2014, Martin Beckford told us this in The Daily Mail:
“Britain’s biggest force is already recruiting those who have been on the wrong side of the law in a controversial attempt to increase race diversity… All forces across England and Wales will be encouraged to adopt softer rules on who should be ruled out from becoming a police officer…

Ahead of the new nationwide code of practice, Scotland Yard has already relaxed its own rules to get more black and ethnic officers on the force, so that it becomes more representative of London’s diverse population.

In a recent report the Met said: ‘Vetting removes 1.6 per cent of all applicants from the recruitment process. However, it removes 4.5 per cent of BME candidates.”
And we can’t have that, can we? Can’t have all those minority criminals denied the chance to nab the odd non-minority criminal. Oh no.

You notice I said non-minority criminal? That’s me toying with political correctness. I mean, it would have been a bit iffy if I’d said ‘minority criminals denied the chance to nab the odd minority criminal,’ wouldn’t it? Yeah. It might have seemed like I was having a go at those we never wanted here.

Particularly the criminals.

Who are about to get the chance to behave criminally in uniform.

The lunatics are no longer running the asylum, ladies and gentlemen. They are out here with us running the whole damn show.

UKIP: An alliance of the septic and the geriatric

On 22 November 2014, Nick Cohen said this in The Guardian:
“Nigel Farage has created his own stab-in-the-back myth. The treacherous 'Westminster elite' so despised the decent people of Britain that it flooded the land with foreigners who 'took our country from us.' This is the manure in which far-right movements have always grown…

Farage is a rabble-rouser and a coward. He plays with racism, the way Ian Paisley used to play with sectarianism…

If you cannot call Ukip a far-right party, you can at least say that it is an alliance of the septic and the geriatric: a movement of the empty-headed led by the foul-minded.

As late as March 2013, Cameron was careful to preface a speech proposing restrictions on immigration by praising “Polish heroes who fought for us during the war, West Indians who helped us to rebuild afterwards, those who’ve come to our shores seeking a safe haven from persecution’…

Not that Ed Miliband is any better… In this year’s European elections, he preferred to ignore a radical rightwing party, which was heading for victory, and emptied his revolver into the corpse that was once Nick Clegg. You see it was more important for Miliband to remind his Lib Dem Lego bricks that they should stick with Labour rather than fight a foul stain in national life.

Ukip will not be beaten until those in all parties, who know that most immigrants are not the scrounging scum of Ukip nightmare, say clearly that the debate must be about numbers, not race. It will not be beaten until people who believe in maintaining Britain’s place in the world accept the need for reforming the European Union, but tell the electorate that we will founder if we leave.”
'A foul stain in national life;' 'septic and the geriatric;' 'empty-headed,' 'foul-minded.'

That’s us Cohen is talking about. The British people. Those who never wanted huge numbers of foreigners forced upon them. Those who never wanted their communities seeded with people who were wholly unlike them and never wanted the same folk given preference in the council housing queues. Those who didn't want to be ethnically cleansed from their own ancient stamping grounds and didn't want their children routinely gang-raped and prostituted by alien monsters, as a traitorous establishment turned a blind eye and, where necessary, covered it up.

When 'the manure in which far-right movements have always grown' happens to coincide common sense and the facts you can be sure that there will be many’s the PC commentator who will complain.

As Cohen does so vehemently here.

Here’s a quote from Wikipedia:
“He was an advocate of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and a critic of the Stop the War Coalition.”
The holocaust in Iraq and the radiating horror that followed, emerged from a fanatical clamour of Cohenesque folk in the western world's media and political elite.

Here are a few Jewish worthies happy to back up the accuracy of this statement:

UKIP didn’t exist when Cohen and co were oh-so sanctimoniously stoking up the fires of war in the Middle East, but the BNP and the National Front did. And I can assure you that the vast majority of the members of and sympathisers with these organisations were against any intervention in Iraq. Of course, you would NOT have discovered such information within the pages of The Guardian. Or any other mainstream British newspaper for that matter.

In fact, even now, you would hard pressed to find any news item that demonstrated the fact that the politically correct politician and journalist posed a thousand light years more of a threat to the foreigner minding his own business in his own land, than the British Nationalist ever did.

We ‘septic’ and ‘geriatric’, ‘empty-headed’ and ‘foul-minded’ Brits want our country back, Mr Cohen. We don’t it languishing in the hands of dangerous men like yourself who would casually devastate the countries of others.

We don’t want a ‘treacherous Westminster elite’ who ‘so despise the decent people of Britain that it flooded the land with foreigners’ running our affairs any longer. They and their immigrant chums, you know, folks like your own immediate ancestors, ‘took our country from us.’

And that’s not democracy, is it? The democratically elected are not supposed to force upon their electors the exact opposite of what they want.

If what we actually want suggests we’re were ‘racist’ and wallowing in ‘manure,’ according to the odd, unsympathetic media darling, so be it. I’d rather wallow in sh*t with my own kind than grovel at the feet of an impeccably perfumed anti-Brit with your slaughterous provenance.

If you want your country back, ladies and gentlemen, UKIP may or may not not be the answer. But if you want the genocidal certainty of an ever-expanding melting-pot, Nick Cohen’s contemptuously anti-indigenous philosophy most assuredly is.

Saturday, 25 October 2014

ROTHERHAM: The notion that the whole world knew is balderdash

On 24 October 2014, Adrian Pearson said this in The Yorkshire Post:
"Rotherham’s horrific abuse concerns were raised with the Home Office and the town’s MP but never acted on, The Yorkshire Post can reveal. Abuse campaigners have revealed how in 2003 they met with a senior Home Office representative to say the Rotherham Council and South Yorkshire Police could not be trusted and called for urgent Government action.

And in 2009 they wrote to Denis MacShane with a five page letter detailing abuse concerns made by a Rotherham family but received no response.

Mr MacShane has said he was never approached by constituents raising abuse concerns, and that was why he did not speak on the issue of Rotherham-specific abuse in the House of Commons...

The letter was sent by charity Parents Against Child Sexual Exploitation, then known as CROP, who said its own researcher had to stop work because of fears a serving police officer was passing information on to abusers.

Evidence of the 2009 letter, released by the influential Home Affairs Select Committee, comes as it emerges former Rotherham Council staff face criminal charges for misconduct in public office.

South Yorkshire Police chief constable David Crompton revealed he asked the National Crime Agency to look at council failings and those of his own force as part of its investigation into how abuse claims were handled.

The abuse charity PACE said it still could not understand why when the Home Office was informed of widespread abuse, incompetence or worse in public office and the possibility of police corruption, civil servants did nothing.

Minutes from the charity show that in early 2002 the Home Office knew its own researcher was under pressure to stop asking difficult questions, with records stating, 'The Home Office in London…know that she is being asked to falsify data and has other problems.'
The Home Office though told Rotherham charities and youth workers that the researcher’s work was to be axed and, it can today be revealed, banned them from publishing the provisional abuse inquiries.

From 2003 onwards briefing notes had been prepared for the then Home Secretary David Blunkett and the charity was told 'The Home Secretary is ready to read what CROP sends.'
In 2004 charity chair of trustees Hilary Willmer met with Sue Jago from the Home Office 'in which she promised the Home office would give a high profile to the issues we raised.'
Ms Willmer last night said: 'When we found out what was happening to these girls we assumed everyone would be horrified and there would be immediate action. We had to painfully learn that that was not the case, including when we told the Home Office.'

Ms Willmer’s charity revealed a family support worker was appointed but was forced to quit because of 'she believes at least one police officer was undermining her work and potentially putting her personally at risk as he/she was being paid by pimps/groomers for information.'

It emerged yesterday that South Yorkshire Police has now referred 14 people to the IPCC watchdog and may make further referrals should the criteria be met. The force said Both South Yorkshire Police and the independent investigation will remain in constant dialogue with the IPCC.
Mr MacShane said he has no memory of the charity raising concerns with him. He said he was among the first to speak out in 2012 when the claims became public, and said many serving officers will have questions to answer.

'No one ever approached me on this, not a single person came to me as a constituent on child abuse by Asian males. This notion that the whole world knew and there was a cover up is balderdash.'

He added: 'The real people who have questions to answer are Rotherham police officers'."
If MacShane is telling the truth, and that's a big if, there is a possible reason why 'no one ever approached' him. 

When New Labour's diversity-mongers ruled the roost he was just about the nastiest of of a very nasty PC bunch. Anyone daring to criticise the negative side effects of their 'open-up-the-UK-to-mass-migration' policy would have to wonder whether they'd end up being accused of racism by a spittal-drenched New World Order boy.

I wouldn't blame anyone from steering clear.

That the top cops aided and betted the mass rape of our little girls is beyond question. That New Labour's Home Office did likewise now appears to be beyond question also.

Is the jury out on an odious, Brit-loathing Europe Minister who was Rotherham's MP for twenty years before he ended up in jail?

Not in my house.

P.S. MacShane says, 'This notion that the whole world knew... is balderdash.'

Political correctness and the fear of being smeared as a 'racist' ensured that 'the whole world' did not know what was being done to our little girls by the third world paedophile. However, British Nationalism knew. The BNP, the National Front and other concerned patriots have been trying to alert the public to these matter since the nineteen-nineties at least.

These warnings were routinely ignored by parliament, local government and the media.

Friday, 24 October 2014

MI5 had Labour's pet Marxist under surveillance for two decades!

In the 24 October 2014 edition of The Daily Mail, James Slack's rather cumbersome headline said, 'How the friend of Red Ed's father hobnobbed with traitors who spied for the Soviets: Newly-released files reveal how for 20 years MI5 kept close tabs on Labour's pet Marxist, historian Eric Hobsbawm.'
"A Marxist historian feted by the modern Labour Party was under surveillance for two decades by MI5 who uncovered his links to at least two Soviet spies, secret papers reveal today. Eric Hobsbawm, whose death in 2012 aged 95 was publicly mourned by Tony Blair and Ed Miliband, has long been known as an ‘unrepentant Communist’.

However, files newly released by the National Archives detail how his activities provoked such concern among the authorities that he was placed under extensive monitoring. Between 1942 and 1963, MI5 kept eight files on Hobsbawm – who was a close friend of Ed Miliband’s father, the Marxist academic Ralph Miliband – running to hundreds of pages. Eric Hobsbawm, whose death in 2012 aged 95 was publicly mourned by Tony Blair and Ed Miliband, has long been known as an ‘unrepentant Communist’

He was subjected to phone taps, had his correspondence intercepted and bugs placed in the rooms he used for meetings. There is nothing in the files to suggest Hobsbawm himself passed secrets to the Soviets – but he was in contact with at least two men who did, including a convicted spy whom he readily gave a bed for the night.

Between them, the pair, James MacGibbon and Alan Nunn May, handed the Russians top secret information on atomic research and intelligence on British and German war plans, including details of the D-Day landings.

Intriguingly, one of the eight files originally intended for publication today and relating to Hobsbawm’s contacts and activities in the 1950s was ‘kept back’ by officials. British physicist Nunn May became notorious for passing secret information to the Soviets about the Manhattan project – the western allies’ development of the atom bomb. He even couriered to the Soviets small samples of uranium 233 and 235, along with detailed information about the first atom bomb tests. The courier of the samples was not informed of the danger of radiation and needed lifelong regular blood transfusions.
British physicist Alan Nunn May passed military secrets to Stalin from 1942 to 1945, including details of British war plans, among them the D-Day landings. His case led to a horrified US ending the sharing of atomic information and to Britain developing its own bomb.
Unrepentant to the end, he argued that he had ‘acted rightly’ and that he only passed on information because he felt it was a ‘contribution I could make to the safety of mankind’. He also insisted he had burned the 200 dollars he received from the Soviets as a reward.

Nunn May, who was based in Montreal at the time of his betrayal, was sentenced to ten years hard labour in 1946 by the British courts, eventually being released in 1952... Transcripts of a secretly recorded telephone conversation reveal details of how the spy arranged to spend the night at Hobsbawm’s London flat in May 1956.
MacGibbon, later a distinguished London publisher, was unmasked as a Soviet spy in 2004, four years after his death. The British intelligence officer, code-named ‘Dolly’ by his Soviet handlers, passed military secrets to Stalin from 1942 to 1945, including details of British war plans, among them the D-Day landings. Working within the War Office department known as MO3, he regularly gathered information that he passed on via a Soviet contact in London, whom he knew as Natasha.

The details he shared with the Soviets include intelligence gleaned by the Enigma code-breaking team at Bletchley Park. But he also had access to one of the biggest secrets of the entire war – the locations of British forces as they prepared for the D-Day landings.

The de-classified files show Hobsbawm, who was made a Companion of Honour by the Blair Government in 1998, first joined the Communist Party in 1936. He came to the attention of MI5 four years later when he wished to invite a German Communist to give a lecture to British troops.

The incident, which took place while Hobsbawm was a sergeant in the Army Education Corps, triggered almost two decades of surveillance. He is described in one file as a ‘tireless (and tiresome) organiser of petitions and champion of lost causes’.

During his time at the Army Education Corps, Hobsbawm was marked out as a ‘bad influence’ after leaving Left-wing literature lying around. One report notes: ‘We know Hobsbawm has been continually in touch with prominent Communists and with party headquarters and there is no doubt he is a keen and very active party member.’

Communist Party records, obtained under a secret MI5 operation named Party Piece, reveal his frustration at not contributing more to the cause. The file records him saying: ‘I don’t feel I’ve done what I might for the Party, or that I’ve been advancing in my capacity to do so.’

When the war was over, while pursuing an academic career at Birkbeck College in London and King’s College Cambridge, Hobsbawm was chairman of the Historians Group of the Communist Party. The files show he was

in contact with senior members of the Party, including MacGibbon, as well as Nunn May...

Hobsbawm, who once described himself as an ‘unrepentant Communist’, was a towering figure on the British Left for decades. Upon his death in 2012, Ed Miliband led the tributes to a man he said had ‘brought history out of the ivory tower and into people’s lives’.

The Labour leader described him as ‘a great friend of my family’ and ‘a lovely man, with whom I had some of the most stimulating and challenging conversations about politics and the world’.

Questions had been asked about whether Hobsbawm might have himself been a Soviet agent. When he was at Cambridge during the 1930s, he knew Anthony Blunt and Guy Burgess – the notorious double agents who later betrayed Britain.

Shortly before his death, he had attempted, under the Data Protection Act, to read the files kept on him by MI5. He said he wanted to find out who had ‘snitched on him’.

Born in Egypt, Hobsbawm fled Nazi Germany in 1933. His books were studied by generations of students, and his history of the 20th century, The Age Of Extremes, has been translated into more than 40 languages. He faced criticism in later years for continuing to promote communism long after it had been discredited in Russia and Eastern Europe.

Speaking in 1994 to the author Michael Ignatieff about the fall of the Berlin Wall five years earlier, Hobsbawm was asked if Communism had achieved its aims – but at the cost of 15 to 20 million people – would he have supported it? His answer was, ‘yes'!"
Here's the question Ignatieff actually put to Hobsbawm on BBC2's 'Late Show' in 1994:
"What (your view) comes down to is that, had the radiant tomorrow actually been created, the loss of fiteen to twenty million people might have been justified?"

Hobsbawm's unhesitating answer was, as previously stated: 'YES!' Indeed, despite the fact that most of those killed would have been innocent of any crime, he went on to further defend 'what HAD to be done.'

What do you think? Was Ed Miliband right to suggest someone who could unquestioningly support a totalitarian system that slaughtered 15 to 20 million people (a conservative estimate) was 'a lovely man?' Was Tony Blair right to ensure that this 'unrepentant' Egyptian Commie was awarded the Companion of Honour? (No more than 65 such 'Companions' may hold this sward at any one time)

I guess, if you are inclined towards Bolshevism and genocide, you might say 'yes.'

If you are not so inclined, I trust you'd say no.

The fact that a hero of both Blair and Miliband should be a died-in-wool Red who cared not a jot for the sufferings of so many should surprise no one and, I hope, might alert you to the mentality of those who aspire to be the leader of the Labour Party.

It is a mentality that, I'm sure, does not chime with that of the British people.

Eric Hobsbawm was Jewish, as was Ed's father, Ralph ('the man who hated Britain'), and Ed Miliband is, of course, Jewish himself.

Under-prepared, under-resourced and no clear strategy

On 23 October 2014, Larisa Brown said this in The Daily Mail:
“In a scathing critique of the UK’s involvement in Afghanistan, a series of British military commanders admitted a failure to appreciate the size of the task and that mistakes were made in the build-up to the fight. At times, troops were so stretched there was a risk they would be ‘massacred'...

Military chiefs failed to calculate the potential dangers and the size of the forces needed for the war in Afghanistan, General Sir Peter Wall admitted yesterday.
The former Chief of the General Staff made the damning statement in a BBC documentary ahead of the upcoming withdrawal of Western troops from the country after 13 years of war.

Another senior military commander said the UK was ‘under-prepared, under-resourced’ and had no clear strategy to succeed in the conflict.."
Sir Peter added:
“We had put forward a plan… saying that… for the limited objectives that we had set ourselves, this was a reasonable force. And I freely admit now, that calculus was wrong.”
Brigadier Ed Butler, Commander of the British Forces in Helmand in 2006, said:
“We were under-prepared, we were under-resourced, and most importantly, we didn’t have a clear and achievable strategy to deliver success.”
In 2006, however, Butler had said quite the opposite describing British forces as ‘well-prepared and well-equipped.’

General Lord Dannatt, former Chief of the General Staff, added:
“We knew that we were heading for two considerable size operations and we really only had the organisation and manpower for one. Therefore perhaps we should have revisited the decision…We didn’t do that… There was a real danger… that we would find a platoon cut off and potentially massacred.”
Thus did 447 British soldiers die in Afghanistan. 

Thus were more than a thousand others horribly injured.

During the course of WW1 a German general described our young men as ‘lions led by donkeys.’
"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose?"
Perhaps I’m being a little harsh. At least the Generals have had the good grace to admit they got it wrong, something our politicians never do. And yet… see the article immediately below.

Oh yes, the times they are a-changing all right.

Thursday, 23 October 2014

They stood by Israel through thick and thin

On 13 October 2014, British MPs voted 274 to 12 to recognise the State of Palestine.

Sir Richard Ottaway, Tory MP for Croydon South and a long-time leading light of the Conservative Friends of Israel grouping, said this during the debate that preceded the vote:
“I was a friend of Israel long before I became a Tory. My wife’s family were instrumental in the creation of the Jewish state. Indeed, some of them were with Weizmann at the Paris conference…

I have stood by Israel through thick and thin, through the good years and the bad. I have sat down with Ministers and senior Israeli politicians and urged peaceful negotiations and a proportionate response to prevarication, and I thought that they were listening.

But I realise now, in truth, looking back over the past 20 years, that Israel has been slowly drifting away from world public opinion. The annexation of the 950 acres of the west bank just a few months ago has outraged me more than anything else in my political life, mainly because it makes me look a fool, and that is something that I resent…

Under normal circumstances, I would oppose the motion tonight; but such is my anger over Israel’s behaviour in recent months that I will not oppose the motion. I have to say to the Government of Israel that if they are losing people like me, they will be losing a lot of people.”
Indeed they will, and already have.

People are waking up to the reality of Jewish power the whole world over. They’ve known about it in Palestine since the nineteenth century, as did the informed and concerned few elsewhere. The Jewish problem, the negative effect that Jewish ethnocentrism tended to have upon the countries and peoples that offered the Jew sanctuary, was openly discussed in that century.

However, from the 1920s onwards the intellectual elites in the West began cosying up to Marx, Trotsky and the destructive ideas of the Frankfurt School and now political correctness, of which dread philosophy non-criticism of minorities, particularly the Jewish minority, is a major component, has progressively taken a hold of our world.

This, together with the unlimited funds available to the Jewish lobby through their control of the banking system has ensured the eternal compliance of the ‘Friends of Israel’ in Westminster.

Until now.

Our politicians, of course, have always been aware of the ‘reality of Jewish power.’ We, however, have not. We may have felt it, sensed it, had it damage ua at the sharp end, but we have been taught, via the media brainwash and the race laws, to keep off-message opinion deep inside, for fear of reprisal from the always vigilant guardians of politically correct thought, speech and behaviour.

Such fear has markedly diminished, thanks to the informative power of social media, in recent times.

I may be wrong but I doubt that our politicians would have been so keen to abandon their long-standing partiality to all things Zion without the ever-increasing outrage that found its voice in cyberspace.

When Richard Ottaway speaks of ‘people like me’ he’s not kidding. He has, over the course, of his political lifetime, been as onside as it’s possible to be. Despite Israel’s dreadful treatment of the Palestinians over the course of many years, he and so many others like him, ‘stood by Israel through thick and thin.’

Until now.

It is perhaps, instructive to note that Ottaway, himself, admits arriving at his current assessment of the situation because Israel made him ‘look a fool’ and not because it was the right thing to do. Personal resentment, along with a dash of ‘world public opinion’ (social media), saw him vote for Palestine’s recognition.

Anyway, as I keep saying, it’s not just me now. It’s not just the ‘anti-Semites’ and ‘racists’ (both terms invented by Jews), it’s the ‘Friends of Israel’ as well.

Perhaps those of you whose only motivation is self-preservation and promotion better come aboard with the truth-tellers before you get shipwrecked with only the ‘Government of Israel’ for company.

Let’s take a look at what some of the other parliamentarians said.

Grahame Morris, Labour MP for Easington, who must be applauded for securing the debate, was first to speak.
“It is now more than 20 years since the Oslo accords, and we are further away from peace than ever before. An entire generation of young Palestinians… has grown up to witness a worsening situation on the ground. We have seen a significant expansion of illegal Israeli settlements, heightened security threats to both sides, punitive restrictions on Palestinian movement, economic decline, a humanitarian crisis in Gaza of catastrophic proportions and the construction of an illegal annexation wall through Palestinian land…

Today might be a symbolically important step, but it will not change the facts on the ground. The continuous blockade of the Gaza strip will not relent and the day-to-day reality of life under occupation will not change for the ordinary Palestinians. Opponents of the motion will use the well-worn argument that statehood should come through negotiations and not unilateral action.

Let us make no mistake about this: to make our recognition of Palestine dependent on Israel’s agreement would be to grant Israel a veto over Palestinian self-determination...

Recognition is not an Israeli bargaining chip; it is a Palestinian right… The lack of equity between Israel and the Palestinians is a structural failure that has undermined the possibility of a political settlement for decades… The majority of Israeli Government politicians flat-out reject the notion of a Palestinian state. There are currently no negotiations and, as Secretary of State John Kerry admitted, it was Israeli intransigence that caused the collapse of the latest round of talks.

Israel has been unwilling to offer a viable Palestinian state through negotiations. If the acceleration of the illegal settlement enterprise had not already proved that, in July Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu once again ruled out ever accepting a sovereign Palestinian state in the west bank…

The right hon. and learned Member for Kensington (Sir Malcolm Rifkind) said that Palestine did not have international recognition; the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have both said that Palestinian statehood should be recognised.”
Sir Gerald Kaufman was, for the majority of his long tenure as Labour MP for Manchester, Gorton, a fiercely staunch and committed Zionist.

Not so now however.
“There are 6 million Israeli Jews. There are 1,600,000 Palestinians in Israel, 2,700,000 on the west bank and 1,800,000 in Gaza. The Palestinians now outnumber the Israeli Jews, and that is without taking into account the 5 million Palestinians in refugee camps and in the diaspora. The big difference, of course, is that the Israelis have a secure state and the Palestinians live under oppression day after day.
The right hon. and learned Member for Kensington (Sir Malcolm Rifkind) wove a fantasy that the Jews were reunited when the state of Israel was created… His fantasy was that all was harmonious when Israel was created, but the Israelis were divided into three warring factions at that time: the Haganah, representing the official Jewish agency; the terrorist organisation Irgun Zvai Leumi; and the terrorist Stern gang. Israel nearly broke out into civil war immediately after it was founded because Irgun insisted on having its own army in an independent state. So the idea that Israel was somehow born in a moment of paradise and that all that surrounds the Palestinians is stress and damage is a fantasy…

The Israelis are harming the Palestinians day after day. Last week the US State Department denounced a settlement expansion of 2,600 that the Israelis are planning. Last week the new president of the New Israel Fund, Talia Sasson, Jewish and pro-Israel, denounced the expansion of settlements again in the west bank. The Israelis, with the checkpoints, the illegal wall and the settlements, are making a coherent Palestinian state impossible.

That is why it is essential to pass this motion, because it would be a game changer. The recognition of Palestine by the British House of Commons would affect the international situation. This House can create an historic new situation. I call on right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House to give the Palestinians their rights and show the Israelis that they cannot suppress another people all the time… They are harming the image of Judaism, and terrible outbreaks of anti-Semitism are taking place. I want to see an end to anti-Semitism, and I want to see a Palestinian state.”
Former Colonel Bob Stewart, DSO, a former United Nations commander in Bosnia, is now Conservative MP for Beckenham.
“Israel is in breach of the contract set out in the Balfour declaration stating that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.’

In the light of the Nakba and everything since, that seems like a sick joke. The failure of the international community to recognise the state of Palestine has helped Israel to ignore this commitment…

This Sunday at Eden Camp in north Yorkshire there will be a gathering of the Palestine veterans. They will parade at 1 o’clock, but many of them will not be able to walk very far, if at all, they are all over the age of 80. They went to that land in 1945 as a peacekeeping force, but lost over 700 members of the armed forces and 200 police. I believe that we owe it to them for tonight’s motion to succeed.

Many were not conscripts; many were veterans of Arnhem, Normandy and Bergen-Belsen. Many felt, and still feel, betrayed by Israel and question the sacrifice that so many of their colleagues made. If this vote on recognising the right of Palestinians is won, they will very much welcome it, but it has been so long in coming.”
Almost all of the soldiers and policemen Bob Stewart mentions here were murdered by Jews. That is a historical fact that you won’t find in many modern British histories, certainly not those our schoolchildren get to read.

Sir Alan Duncan, Tory MP for Rutland and Melton, said this:
“I think that all of us in this House, to a man and a woman, recognise the state of Israel and its right to exist. Our belief in that should not in any way be impugned. Let us also be clear that that same right has not been granted to Palestine; in my view, it is high time that it was. It is the other half of the commitment that our predecessors in this House made as part of the British mandate in the region.

I cannot think of any other populous area of the world that is subject to so many resolutions but is not allowed to call itself a state... I do not quite agree with my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Kensington (Sir Malcolm Rifkind) in his assessment of what it takes to justify granting statehood to, and recognise, a country…

Recognition of statehood is not a reward for anything; it is a right. The notion that it would put an end to negotiations, or somehow pre-empt or destroy them, is patently absurd; Palestine would still be occupied, and negotiations would need to continue, both to end that occupation and to agree land swaps and borders. Refusing Palestinian recognition is tantamount to giving Israel the right of veto.

When I was a Minister of State at the Department for International Development, we supported the Palestinian Authority... it was there, a responsible organisation. It is not their fault that they are occupied, and so often have their revenues withheld by the Israelis; if they were not withheld, Palestine would not need a penny of British aid…

It is only through recognition that we can give Palestinians the dignity and hope that they need to engage in further negotiations and to live in a country that they can properly call their own…

Settlements are illegal, and the endorsement of the Israelis’ right to reject recognition is tantamount to the endorsement of illegal settlement activity.

A lot of people feel intimidated when it comes to standing up for this issue. It is time we did stand up for it, because almost the majority of Palestinians are not yet in their 20s. They will grow up stateless. If we do not give them hope, dignity and belief in themselves, it will be a recipe for permanent conflict, none of which is in Israel’s interests. 
The hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside, who speaks on every occasion on this subject, only ever catalogues the violence on one side, and this is a tit-for-tat argument. Today, the House should do its historic duty.”
Former Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, Labour MP for Blackburn, said this:
“The ‘Road Map to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict’ was promulgated at the end of April 2003 under the auspices of the Quartet—the UN, EU, US and Russia… The Government of Israel were signed up to there being a separate and independent state of Palestine. One part of the road map anticipated that Quartet members, which include the UK, could ‘promote international recognition of a Palestinian state, including possible UN membership’ as a transitional measure…

The Government of Israel disagree. They claim that recognition of Palestine as a state should be at the conclusion of any successful peace negotiations. But such an approach would give the Government of Israel a veto, even over whether such a state should exist…

The only thing that the Israeli Government understand, under the present demeanour of Benjamin Netanyahu, is pressure. What the House will be doing this evening will be to add to the pressure on the Government of Israel. That is why they are so worried about this resolution passing. Were it just a gesture, as the right hon. and learned Member for Kensington (Sir Malcolm Rifkind) implied, they would not be bothered at all. They are very worried indeed because they know that it will have an effect…

Israel has been occupying Palestinian land for nearly 50 years. It fails to meet its clear international legal obligations as an occupying power. In the last 20 years, as we have heard, it has compounded that failure by a deliberate decision to annex Palestinian land and to build Israeli settlements on that land. There are now 600,000 such Israeli settlers in East Jerusalem and the west bank. The Israelis are seeking to strangle East Jerusalem by expropriating land all around it, and two months ago, they announced the illegal annexation of a further nearly 1,000 acres of land near Bethlehem.

The Israeli Government will go on doing this as long as they pay no price for their obduracy. Their illegal occupation of land is condemned by this Government in strong terms, but no action follows. The Israelis sell produce from these illegal settlements in Palestine as if they were made or grown in Israel, but no action follows.

Israel itself was established and recognised by unilateral act. The Palestinians had no say whatever over the recognition of the state of Israel, still less a veto.”
Sir Nicholas Soames, Conservative MP for Mid Sussex, said this:
“I think that I am right in saying that the last time a debate of this type took place was in 1985, which was a long time ago, and that is not to the House’s credit…

I am convinced that recognising Palestine is… morally right because the Palestinians are entitled to a state, just as Israelis are rightly entitled to their homeland. This House should need no reminding of the terms of the Balfour declaration, which rightly endorsed ‘the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people’ but went on to state that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.’

Ninety-seven years later, the terms of the Balfour declaration are clearly not upheld with respect to the Palestinians, and in Britain that should weigh very heavily upon us indeed. It is in our national interest to recognise Palestine as part of a drive to achieve lasting peace. We face so many dire emergencies in the middle east today; we cannot afford to add to them the continuing failure of the middle east peace process and the inevitable death of the two-state solution. This step by Britain and other nations is needed to galvanise talks that are paralysed and indicate that the status quo is not only untenable, but wholly unacceptable...
The cataclysm in Syria, the emergence of Islamic State and the 3 million Syrian refugees bringing neighbouring countries to their knees have made the situation in the middle east, already a cauldron, even more dangerous.

Moreover, as others have said, 135 of 193 UN member states have already recognised Palestine in recent years… The act of recognition itself clearly does not wreck the prospects for peace.

What does impede peace is a dismal lack of political will to make the necessary concessions and a tendency in Israel to believe that it will always be sheltered by the United States from having to take those difficult steps. Recognition by the United Kingdom would be a strong signal that the patience of the world is not without limit.

Secondly, it is said that recognition would be an empty gesture that would not change the facts on the ground. That is true, but it is not a reason not to recognise Palestine, which would be purely a political decision by the United Kingdom as a sovereign Parliament. It would be a powerful gesture to Palestinians that they will obtain their state in the future after 47 years of cruel and unjust occupation.”
Nicholas Soames is Sir Winston Churchill's grandson, Alan Duncan is gay, Jack Straw and Gerald Kaufman are Jewish and Richard Ottaway is married to a Jewess. 

A pretty diverse bunch hardly likely to be antagonistic towards our Hebrew chums without very good cause I think you'll agree.

Former Foreign Secretary, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, of whom Graham Morris, Gerald Kaufman, Jack Straw and Alan Duncan were all somewhat critical, is also Jewish.

Consider these statements from those who have invariably not only kept their own counsel on this issue, but have routinely defended the indefensible in Israel.
“Such is my anger over Israel’s behaviour… that I will not oppose the motion.”
“We have seen a significant expansion of illegal Israeli settlements… punitive restrictions on Palestinian movement… a humanitarian crisis in Gaza of catastrophic proportions and the construction of an illegal annexation wall through Palestinian land…
The lack of equity between Israel and the Palestinians is a structural failure that has undermined the possibility of a political settlement for decades.”
“The Palestinians live under oppression day after day… The Israelis are harming the Palestinians day after day… The Israelis, with the checkpoints, the illegal wall and the settlements, are making a coherent Palestinian state impossible… Give the Palestinians their rights and show the Israelis that they cannot suppress another people all the time.”
“This Sunday at Eden Camp in north Yorkshire there will be a gathering of the Palestine veterans… They went to that land in 1945 as a peacekeeping force, but lost over 700 members of the armed forces and 200 police… Many felt, and still feel, betrayed by Israel and question the sacrifice that so many of their colleagues made.”
“Settlements are illegal, and the endorsement of the Israelis’ right to reject recognition is tantamount to the endorsement of illegal settlement activity."
"A lot of people feel intimidated when it comes to standing up for this issue… The hon. Member for Liverpool, Riverside, (the Jewess, Louise Ellman) who speaks on every occasion on this subject, only ever catalogues the violence on one side.”
“The only thing that the Israeli Government understand, under the present demeanour of Benjamin Netanyahu, is pressure… Israel has been occupying Palestinian land for nearly 50 years. It fails to meet its clear international legal obligations as an occupying power… The Israeli Government will go on doing this as long as they pay no price for their obduracy.”

“This House should need no reminding of the terms of the Balfour declaration, which… state(d) that ‘nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine.’ Ninety-seven years later, the terms of the Balfour declaration are clearly not upheld with respect to the Palestinians… Recognition… would be a powerful gesture to Palestinians that they will obtain their state in the future after 47 years of cruel and unjust occupation.”
The times they are a-changing, folks.

Or, at least, they appear to be.

My name is Chuka Umunna, clearly I'm of immigrant stock

On 21 October 2014, Labour's Business Secretary, Chukka Umunna, said this in The Daily Mail:
“A stream of UKIP candidates and supporters have come out with the most offensive and racist things... A lot of this stuff is vile, is absolutely vile, and it's not in keeping with our British values of respect, tolerance and fair play…

All the problems that you have, whether it's a getting an appointment at your GP, the fact you aren't earning enough at work, the fact your child can't get a house round the corner from you, is down to Eastern European immigration… Seeking to blame it on ‘that bunch over there’ is a complete con…

My name is Chuka Umunna, clearly I'm of immigrant stock… the kind of things you hear people saying about eastern Europeans these days is exactly the kinds of things they were saying about black and Asian people when they first arrived in this country. We can't have any truck with that. That is not what we are as Brits.”
All immigrants, including those who look more like Chukka than me or the Polish plumber, are to ‘blame’ for the damage they do here intentionally. Politicians are to blame for the damage the immigrant does here intentionally AND unintentionally.

Politicians imported them. Politicians are still doing so, despite six decades of unremitting protest from those amongst whom the immigrants are seeded.

Immigrants and immigrant-descended Britons have done us a lot of damage over the course of the last six decades. People like Chukka have done their best to cover up that damage. Not only that, they demonised those who tried to warn the indigenous of the reality.

We blame the immigrant for the nastiness he inflicts upon us and ours, Chukka.

We blame you for both aiding and abetting that nastiness and gleefully creating the circumstances where it bound to flourish.