Al-Qaeda’s North Africa wing has called on Muslims to “take revenge” and retaliate against France for its opposition to the burka, the American monitoring service SITE Intelligence has reported.

Earlier this month, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said the burka, which covers the whole face, was not welcome in France.

“Yesterday was the hijab (the Islamic headscarf long banned in French schools) and today, it is the niqab (the full veil),” Abu Musab Abdul Wadud, head of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was quoted by SITE as saying.

“We will take revenge for the honour of our daughters and sisters against France and against its interests by every means at our disposal.”

The group also called on Muslims to retaliate for what it called French “hostility” against the community and its attempt to obstruct Islam’s practice on its territory.

“For us, the mujahedeen … we will not remain silent to such provocations and injustices,” Abdul Wadud said without elaborating, according to SITE.

“We call upon all Muslims to confront this hostility with greater hostility, and to counter France’s efforts to divide male and female believers from their faith with a greater effort … (by) adherence to the teachings of their Islamic sharia.”

He said Muslims in France, who are estimated at around five million, are “increasingly concerned about the practices of French politicians and leaders and their harassment.”

On 22 June, President Sarkozy said the burka was not a symbol of religious faith but a sign of women’s “subservience,” adding that the head-to-toe veil was “not welcome” in staunchly secular France.

France is home to Europe’s largest Muslim community and faces a dilemma between accommodating Islam and maintaining secularism. In 2004, it passed a law banning headscarves or any other “conspicuous” religious symbols in schools to uphold a separation between church and state.

Al-Qaeda number two Ayman al-Zawahiri criticized the law, saying the decision showed “the grudge the Western crusaders have against Islam.”

The German Constitutional Court has ruled that critical powers of the German parliament are usurped by the Lisbon Treaty and that the country’s constitution must be changed before the treaty is ratified.

The Court ruling today said that the German constitution had to be changed to ensure that both houses of the German parliament, the Bundestag and Bundesrat, were not overridden by the decisions taken in Brussels.

These two legislative bodies had to have a say in the making of laws in Brussels, the court ruled.

The ruling confirms the long held British National Party position on the Lisbon Treaty which is that that agreement undermines national sovereignty and will see legislative power removed from all national parliaments and transferred to the EU.

Although the media are attempting to put a positive spin on the court’s ruling by highlighting the fact that the Lisbon Treaty will go ahead once the constitutional changes have been made, the reality is that if the amendment fails in the German parliament, the treaty will be dead.

Germany is one of the EU’s most powerful constituent states and at least 50 members of its parliament are known to be strongly opposed to the treaty.

The court’s ruling specifically called a halt to the ratification process until the German parliament makes the necessary changes. Specifically, the court ruled, the existing law which regulates the German parliament’s involvement in the implementation of European law needs to be strengthened before the ratification process can continue.

“It demands a strengthening of the parliament’s responsibilities on a national level,” said presiding judge Andreas Vosskuhle.

Germany is one of four countries that has still not ratified the Lisbon Treaty, which is in essence identical to an earlier constitution rejected by the voters of France and the Netherlands in 2005.

Ireland rejected the treaty in a referendum last year and euro-sceptic presidents in the Czech Republic and Poland have refused to rubber-stamp approval of the constitution.

One of the strongest critics of the Lisbon Treaty is Mr Peter Gauweiler, a member of Bavaria’s Christian Social Union (CSU) in the German Bundestag. The CSU is the sister party to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ruling Christian Democratic Party. Mr Gauweiler is also the chairman of the sub-committee on foreign cultural and educational policies of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the German Bundestag, and was one of the principal appellants in the motion which led to the recent German Constitutional Court challenge.

Mrs Merkel is strongly in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, and a falling out with Mr Gauweiler could provoke a parliamentary crisis for the ruling party. The German parliament is to gather for a special sitting on 26 August for a first reading of the new law. The vote in the lower house would then take place on 8 September, just weeks before Germany’s national election.

In a move dripping with the most outrageous irony, the head of the overtly non-whites only ‘Society of Black Lawyers’ has called for race laws to be tightened to prevent the British National Party from distributing leaflets such as the one used by the party in the  Greater London Assembly election last year.

Mr Peter Herbert, the chairman of the Society of Black Lawyers, has already formally complained over the BNP leaflet which showed how white British people have been ethnically cleansed from the streets of many parts of London.

Not too surprisingly, his complaint went nowhere, and in a childish outburst he has now called on the Government to change the law to outlaw any expression of indigenous aspirations – while, of course, ignoring the fact that he heads up an organisation whose membership is exclusively aimed at looking after the interests of non-white, non-indigenous people.

According to the blacks-only lawyer, the threshold for securing a conviction is so high that it is currently impossible to persuade the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to prosecute the BNP.

Of course, what he actually means is that he wants the law changed to prevent anybody pointing out that Britain is being colonised.

Furthermore, the ‘offence’ of incitement to racial hatred was created under the Public Order Act and therefore only applies to acts that take place or are witnessed in public. Leaflets pushed through a letter box do not qualify under this act, and it is this point in particular that has the blacks-only lawyer boss unhappy.

Astonishingly, Mr Herbert admitted to the extremist leftist Guardian newspaper that the only reason why he was now raising it as an issue was because of the rise in support for the BNP. “It is essential we are given the tools to deal effectively with this threat,” Mr Herbert told that paper.

This is not the first time that leftist cranks have tried to prosecute the BNP for telling the truth. Currently there are four people on police bail in Lancashire who were arrested after they distributed a leaflet pointing out the dominance of Muslim gangs in the heroin trade.

Ironically, the men are out on bail while the police still wait to hear from the CPS if there is even a case to answer.

Mr Herbert, who despite his penchant for black-only organisations, is the former chair of the Metropolitan police race hate crime forum, said he would push for a change in the law to try and prevent the BNP from continuing to exist.

The mass media is the British National Party’s main enemy and it is the party’s aim to immunise the public against their vicious lies, Councillor Paul Golding said.

Speaking at the latest BNP Crawley branch meeting, attended by an enthusiastic crowd of over 40 people, Cllr Golding announced a new campaign to achieve the immunisation goal.

“We need to get to the point where enough people in this country don’t believe a word the media states,” Cllr Golding, the South East’s first elected councillor, said.

“We need to immunise our people against media smears by saturating the country with strident anti-media material. We have to destroy the trust that people still have in the media. Although it will take a long time and much hard work, we have to start now,” he said.

“From now on, we are going to make the mass media our main opponent. We need to get out there and tell everyone the truth about the media, which in reality is a propaganda machine, not a news service.”

Cllr Golding then outlined the past successes of Operation Fightback in fighting back against the lying media and of how this was going to be turned into a long-term campaign against the mass media.

The meeting, chaired by local BNP stalwart and organiser Richard Trower, drew an enthusiastic response when recent election results were detailed during the first half of the meeting.

By Derek Adams. Following a tip off from a whistleblower within Manchester city council, information was provided to Derek Adams regarding a scandalous situation in the Blackley and Charlestown areas of Manchester.

It was reported that, out of approximately 450 vacant council houses in these areas, almost all of them were being allocated either to families from abroad or ethnic minorities.

This sort of gerrymandering would reflect Manchester city council’s anger at the BNP successes in these areas and it would also highlight their attempts to install voters who would vote against the BNP at the next elections.

When this tip off was first received in late January 2009, Derek attempted to confirm the situation with Manchester city council using the Freedom of Information act. He asked;
1) How many people are currently on the housing waiting list in Blackley and Charlestown wards?
2) How many people on the housing waiting list in Blackley and Charlestown wards were British or born in the United Kingdom?

The council have a duty to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests within twenty working days, however after many phone calls and threats of further action, a reply was eventually received on the 24th June, which was an amazing four months and three days after the request was first submitted.

The reply was quite predictable of course; in answer to point 1) of the request, the figure was 430 people on the waiting list, which corresponds reasonably closely with our whistleblower’s estimate.

On point 2), the request as to how many people on the waiting list were British or born in the United Kingdom, according to a certain Mark Slater (head of the housing information unit) they do not hold this information.

We at the British National Party find it hard to believe, considering the questions that are asked in all forms sent out by councils nowadays, that things as basic as nationality and country of birth are not questions asked by Manchester housing.

If, of course, this information is in fact true, and they really do not know the nationality of people on their housing waiting list, then this situation is even more worrying than their attempts at gerrymandering.

They could indeed have known terrorists or international criminals waiting to move into our area and neither the council nor their prospective new neighbours would be any the wiser.

Indeed for such a dictatorial and fascist council as Labour-controlled Manchester, the lack of such knowledge would surely be unthinkable.

They need such information in order to provide things such as locally based interpreters, Hal-Al meat supplies for local schools and all the various ethnic leisure facilities that are in abundance in other ethnically enriched areas of the city.

We at the BNP suspect that they do indeed know precisely what nationality everyone on their housing list is, and that they may also hold a lot more information on every one of us than they would care to admit.

We also believe that Manchester City Council might be deliberately withholding a full and frank reply to our request because it is such a sensitive subject and one that the existing residents of Blackley and Charlestown deserve to be kept informed about.

It would also confirm that our whistleblower is indeed telling the truth.

The British National Party in Scotland will be fighting the Glasgow North East by-election with candidate Charlie Baillie (pictured), announced the party’s leader in Scotland, Gary Raikes.

“Glasgow NE is a solidly white working class area, formerly supported by the worldwide export of the steam locomotive industry, having its roots in Springburn,” said Mr Raikes.

“Due to the demise of this era there is currently deprivation and unemployment of a high level. This has been aggravated by the influx of immigrants from the Third World and the EU adversely affecting housing allocation and job prospects for the native Glaswegian residents.

“Indeed, Glasgow has been described as the ‘asylum capital of Britain’ due to the destructive dispersal policy embraced by the Labour Council,” he said.

Mr Raikes said the BNP in Glasgow was starting from a small base but that this would not deter the party from going forward. “We have to start somewhere, and we will be looking to build on the 3,258 votes we polled there the last time we stood.”

The BNP’s candidate, Mr Charlie Baillie, was born and spent his childhood in the constituency. He has been a party member since 2005 and stood in the Holyrood 2007 Campaign and in two council by-elections. He was also the BNP’s number two candidate on the Scottish Euro list.

North West regional organiser Clive Jefferson will be managing the campaign.

* A large number of people attended the recent BNP officials’ meeting in Perth, Mr Raikes said.

“I was happy to report to the meeting that the second phase of our restructuring process had seen a new surge of interest in the party. We are now processing a huge number of enquiries and have the highest number of paid up members in the party’s history in Scotland.”

Mr Raikes also revealed the new Scottish local organisers pack and the new quarterly Scottish newsletter, The Bugle.

The Bugle will go out to all members and around 1000 enquirers along with a copy of the latest Voice of Freedom, a membership form and standing order form.

“All agreed this was a professional undertaking that would hopefully produce the number of officials needed to ensure an official BNP presence in every local Authority area in Scotland, with the aim of having target wards being worked in each by the 2011 elections,” Mr Raikes said.

Muslims living in Britain are under orders from Sharia courts to regard “fighting with Britons and Americans as a religious duty” a shocking new report on Sharia courts in Britain has claimed.

Issued by independent think tank Civitas, the new report, called “Sharia Law or ‘One Law for All’?” and authored by Islamic specialist Denis MacEoin, also says that there are now around 85 Sharia courts in Britain.

The open declaration of war – Jihad – against ordinary British and American people by Islamic law courts is a damning indictment of the treason committed by the Tory and Labour parties in allowing millions of Muslims to settle in Britain.

In addition to the horrifying declaration of holy war against British and American people, the Sharia courts operating in Britain have also ordered that:

- Sharia law must override the judgements of British courts;

- Muslims living in this country are under orders to disobey Britain’s laws when it contradicts Islamic values;

- Muslims are forbidden to take out insurance, even if required by (UK) law.

- There is no requirement to register a marriage according to the law of the country;

- Polygamous marriage (that is, two to four wives) is legal; and

- A Muslim lawyer has to act contrary to UK law where it contradicts Sharia.

According to a press release issued today by Civitas, the courts operate inside the rapidly spreading network of mosques throughout Britain.

In the press release, Mr MacEoin wrote that it is extremely difficult to find out what goes on in these 85 courts, so he has relied on a range of fatwas issued by popular online fatwa sites, run out of or accessed through mosques in the UK as an indication of the sort of rulings these Sharia courts are making.

Only five of the Sharia law courts are publicly known and run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose rulings are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act.

However, Mr MacEoin said that “Sharia courts should not be recognised under the Arbitration Act.

“Sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation,” Mr MacEoin wrote.

The revelation that Sharia rulings or fatwas are being enforced through state courts by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) has alarmed many, especially as the Arbitration Act, under which this takes place, specifically excludes divorce and childcare cases.

“Under most interpretations of Islam a person who leaves the faith is an apostate who can be put to death. While this threat remains, it cannot be accepted that Sharia councils are nothing more than independent arbitrators guided by faith,” the Civitas press release continued.

“The reality is that for many Muslims, Sharia courts are in practice part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation, backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat. The underlying problem is that Sharia law reflects male-dominated Asian and Arabic cultures. It cannot therefore be accepted as a legally valid basis even for settling private disagreements in a country like ours, where our law embodies the equal legal status of everyone, regardless of race, gender or religion.”

Mr MacEoin wrote in his conclusion that the “introduction of Sharia law into this country is a recipe for a dichotomous legal system that holds Muslims and non-Muslims to different standards.

“This is not a matter of eating halal meat or seeking God’s blessing on one’s marriage. It is a challenge to what we believe to be the rights and freedoms of the individual, to our concept of a legal system based on what Parliament enacts, and to the right of all of us to live in a society as free as possible from ethnic-religious division or communal claims to superiority and a special status that puts them in some respects above the law to which we are all bound.”

* In their coverage of the Civitas press release, all of the mainstream media deliberately suppressed the part dealing with the Sharia courts’ declaration of Jihad against British and American people.

Get your sensational copy of  Sharia Law or ‘One Law For All’?  from Excalibur now!

Sharia courts are operating in Britain, handing down rulings that may be inappropriate to this country, being linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation that derive from the values of the Enlightenment and are inherent in modern codes of human rights. Sharia rulings contain great potential for controversy and may involve acts contrary to UK legal norms and human rights legislation. Denis MacEoin argues against the wider use of sharia law.
About the Author: Dr Denis MacEoin holds degrees from Trinity College, Dublin, Edinburgh University and Cambridge (King’s College). From 1979 80, he taught at Mohammed V University in Fez, Morocco, before taking up a post as lecturer in Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle. In 1986, he was made Honorary Fellow in the Centre for Islamic and Middle East Studies at Durham University. 
Price:  £7.50

Click here to purchase online

The Government has admitted that its housing policy has always been anti-British and hence the sudden change in direction announced today, said the British National Party’s deputy press officer John Walker.

Speaking to BNP News, Mr Walker, who is also a councillor in North Wales, said that the announcement by Gordon Brown today that British-born people will now get priority in the housing queue over immigrants and ‘asylum seekers’ was “proof positive that British people are put last.”

“Why else would there now be a change in policy if the old one was not anti-British?” Mr Walker asked.

“For years the BNP has said that British people are put last in the council housing queue, and for years the Government and Tories alike have said we were lying.

“But now we have an official announcement from the Prime Minister that a new policy is to be introduced which will ban immigrants and asylum seekers from jumping the housing queue. Mr Brown is in effect saying that prior to this, immigrants and asylum seekers were jumping the queue – just as the BNP said.”

The policy shift was a transparent attempt to try and win back support which the Labour Party has lost to the BNP, Mr Walker continued.

“This is of course hopeless, and merely shows how out of touch Mr Brown and his party are with the electorate.

“People are upset over the fact they have been put last on the housing queue. But they are also upset over the selling off of all the public utilities, the bailing out of the bankster criminals, the flooding of our country with mass Third World immigration, the criminal foreign wars into which Labour and Tories alike have plunged our soldiers, the destruction of our educational system and so much more,” he said.

“To think that people are going to go back to the Labour Party just because the Prime Minister has admitted that his party’s housing policies are indeed anti-British is a delusion.

“Those who have seen through the Labour Party and have switched to the BNP are well aware that almost everything that comes out of Westminster these days is a pack of lies,” Mr Walker said.

“People know that the BNP was the only party which raised the issue of the anti-British housing policies, and that we were berated for doing so. Now that we have been proven right yet again, we are going to take the credit, and the other parties better accept it.”

Cultural and religious pluralism has meant the end of the Church of England and the decline of Britain as a Christian nation, Anglican Bishop the Rt Rev Paul Richardson has warned.

In a move which confirms the British National Party’s warnings of the effects of mass Third World immigration, Bishop Richardson said that the rise in multiculturalism means that “Christian Britain is dead.”

Predicting that at current rates of non-attendance, the church would die out within a generation, Bishop Richardson said that declining baptisms and church weddings were a sign that the Church of England was on its way out.

The number of babies being baptised has fallen from 609 in every 1,000 at the turn of the twentieth century to only 128 in 2006/7 and church marriages have also dropped.

Of course, Bishop Richardson did not point out the obvious, namely that government statistics and anecdotal evidence show that nearly 50 percent of all live births in Britain are to Third World colonisers, and that this alone would have massively impacted the number of church baptisms and weddings.

The mass Islamic colonisation of Britain has meant the creation of a Muslim parallel society which will ultimately physically destroy all vestiges of the CoE and the falling baptism rate is but the precursor to this process.

Writing in the The Sunday Telegraph, Bishop Richardson said: “Many bishops prefer to turn their heads, to carry on as if nothing has changed, rather than face the reality that Britain is no longer a Christian nation.”

Instead of facing up to the reality of their own extinction at the hands of the colonising swarms from the Third World, the church leadership has rather spent its time spreading poison and lies about the British National Party.

The Church is now reaping what it has helped sow: The General Synod, the Church’s parliament, will next month consider proposals to cut the number of bishops and senior clergy amid fears over the Church’s finances.

Bishop Richardson said, “The church is being hit by a double whammy: on the one hand it confronts the challenge of institutional decline but on the other hand it has to face the rise of cultural and religious pluralism in Britain.”

He says that the way the Church responds to this will be “crucial in determining whether it will be able to survive as a viable organisation and make a contribution to national life.”

Foreign criminals of the worst sort are deliberately entering Britain because of the open doors policy which effectively prevents them from ever being deported.

Albania’s police chief has warned that Britain has become “the favourite sanctuary for fugitives” including the most sought after murderers from his country.

According to new figures released by the Home Office, in the year to April, British authorities received more than 3,500 requests from foreign countries for the return of their criminals, a figure which had increased by 24 percent since the previous twelve months.

Of that number, more than 150 were suspected or convicted murderers. The astonishing total was up by a quarter on the previous 12 months.

Detective Chief Inspector Murray Duffin of the Scotland Yard Extradition and Intelligence Unit was quoted in media reports as warning that “Britain is becoming a magnet for increasing numbers of criminals from the former Eastern bloc countries which are now members of the EU.”

The number of criminals being sought by Poland has soared 14-fold since 2004 when that country joined the EU and its citizens were allowed to travel to and live freely in Britain.

The situation is now so bad that the Warsaw police actually send a charter plane to Britain every month to bring back criminals who have fled Poland for Britain, accused of crimes ranging from murder, rape and robbery to burglary, drugs and theft.

The Albanian police chief said that Britain is currently harbouring at least 80 Albanian murderers and 20 other serious offenders. Many are already British citizens after having claimed asylum by pretending to be from war-torn Kosovo.

According to British police figures, 20 percent of all offences in London are committed by those born overseas. This figure rises to 33 percent in the case of sex attacks, and 50 percent of all frauds.

To make matters worse, only a small number of those accused of crimes in their home country are ever extradited. 

Of the 3,526 foreigners for whom extradition requests were made by European Union countries in the past year, 683 were arrested and only one in seven – 516 – returned, according to the latest figures issued by the Serious Organised Crime Agency.

The wanted criminals avoid extradition by using easily exploitable legislation such as the Human Rights Act which forbids the breakup of families. In addition, they can also avoid deportation in cases where they might face an unfair trial, abuse of their human rights or the death penalty back home.

In this way, a criminal can merely claim that he or she might not get a fair trial in order to avoid deportation. Furthermore, if they claim asylum, then that process first has to be finalised – meaning that years can elapse before an extradition hearing can even start.

Recent high profile cases where these excuses have been used to keep criminals in Britain – at taxpayers’ expense for both benefits and legal costs – include:

- Estonian Fred Undrits, wanted in Estonia for arson. He was brought to the extradition hearing from prison, where he is serving a 56-day sentence for shoplifting. He has been in Britain since 2006 and his case will take years to decide.

- Albanian Shkelzen Gradica who has been convicted in Italy of attempted murder. His defence team has argued that deportation will breach his human rights because the trial under which he was convicted was based on an ‘unreliable witness.’ The possibility of a British court being able to decide whether or not that is true is almost impossible, hence the case hangs in limbo.

- Pole Maciej Blaszko has been accused in Warsaw of attempted robbery and driving without a licence. He has fought extradition with lawyers funded by the British taxpayer, arguing that the police case against him was prepared when he had already fled to Britain.

- Czech paedophile Julius Horvath was convicted in 1996 of the sexual assault and rape of a child in his home country. He came to Britain in 2000 and successfully claimed asylum, getting benefits and a council flat in Leeds. He has been arrested here for affray, being drunk and disorderly, serious assault and shoplifting. He cannot be deported because he has family in Britain and extradition would infringe his right to ‘family life’ under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act

The disgraceful way in which Britain’s elderly people are the victims of decades of Labour and Tory economic mismanagement has been highlighted with the news that over 1.4 million old age pensioners have been forced back to work to make ends meet.

Research released by Key Retirement Solutions Group, a firm specialising in equity release schemes, found that 17 percent of pensioner households were receiving income from earnings in the financial year 2007-08, compared to 12 percent in 1997-98.

The figures also showed the proportion of pensioner couples supplementing their income through work had increased from 22 percent to 29 percent over the same period.

The announcement came on the heels of official figures which showed that British pensions are the worst in the developed world. A report from the Office for National Statistics showed that pensioners living solely on state benefits receive less than a third of the income of average workers, and put the UK at the bottom of a league table of 17 leading industrialised countries.

One of the major reasons for the increase in OAPs being forced back to work is the depreciation in pension values caused by ever increasing taxation on pensions.

Neil Duncan-Jordan, of the National Pensioners Convention, said many pensioners were being forced to work to stay above the poverty line.

“Britain has long had the worst state pension in Europe. If we had a substantial improvement in the state pension, then pensioners would have a choice whether to carry on working until they drop or not. At present, many of them don’t have that choice,” he said.

* Taxpayers will have to fork out an extra £2.3 billion a year to fund gold-plated public sector pensions as a black hole in the Government’s finances doubles in just four years.

The cost of looking after retired civil servants and other state workers is soaring because current public sector staff are not paying enough into the state pension pot, according to official figures hidden away in the most recent budget.

Forecasts show that officials expect the shortfall to have reached £4.6 billion by 2010-11. Over the five years between 2006 and 2011 taxpayers are expected to have to pay out £14.1 billion to bail out public sector pensions.

A criminal Somali bogus ‘asylum seeker’ who has robbed and parasited off the British public for over ten years has been ordered released from prison because of the Human Rights Act.

Ahmed Daq must be given bail because the Home Office has taken too long to deport him and his continued detention is now unlawful, a High Court judge has ruled.

Daq has a history of violent offences but in spite of this he is to be released because the Home Office is still caught up in debates over whether it is ’safe’ for him to be sent back to Somalia.

The decision was made even though Deputy High Court judge John Howell QC accepted clearly a risk of Daq, who had “embarked on a criminal career”, committing further offences or absconding.

Daq first arrived in the UK in 1997 and claimed asylum as a Somali national who feared for his life in his home country.

Addicted to alcohol and drugs, Daq committed 18 offences between 1998 and 2004, using 13 aliases. They included robbery, theft, two assaults occasioning actual bodily harm, possession of an offensive weapon – an axe – in a public place without reasonable excuse, using threatening words and behaviour, and seven burglaries.

He was last due to be released in June 2006 but was immediately served with a further notice of intention to deport to Somalia and detained pending removal. He has been in custody ever since.

The judge said because there is no imminent prospect of deportation, the Home Office could no longer legitimately hold him. He said: “Removal is not going to be possible within a reasonable time. Therefore his detention has become unlawful.”

The reason for the delay is because Daq has launched an appeal against his deportation in the Court of Appeals. His hearing has been delayed as the legal debate continues over whether it is safe to return criminals and failed ‘asylum seekers’ to the wretched Third World east African state.

He is currently being held in Bedford Prison following alleged incidents of aggressive and abusive behaviour, including attacks on other inmates, in immigration detention centres.

Speaking after the hearing, Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch, said: “The public are losing patience with these increasingly absurd decisions on so-called asylum seekers.

“This man has no right to be in Britain but has been playing the system for ten years with taxpayer funded legal aid.

“It is quite unacceptable that he should now be released when, as the judge recognised, there is a clear risk that he will commit yet more offences. If the law requires this then Parliament should do something useful and change it.” 

Mass Third World immigration has reached such epidemic proportions that even members of the parties responsible for the invasion policies have described it as “madness.”

According to figures in the recently released Office for National Statistics (ONS) Regional Trends report (which said that at least 40 percent of London’s under 20-year-old population was non-white), one new household will be formed every two minutes until 2021 with half of it driven by immigration.

The report revealed that 70 percent of the population increase up to 2031 will be due to immigration. It showed that the projected number of households in England and Wales will rise by nearly four million over 15 years, from 21.52 million in 2006 to 25.44 million in 2021.

Of these, more than a million will be in London and the South-east. By

2031, experts forecast there will be a further 2.5 million households in England – a total of 27.82 million.

Labour MP Frank Field and Conservative MP Sir Nicholas Soames, chairmen of Parliament’s cross-party Group on Balanced Migration, ignoring the reality that their own parties’ decades old open doors policies directly created the Third World immigration invasion, described the development as “madness.”

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of think tank Migrationwatch, said: “For years the Government have been in denial about the massive impact of immigration on housing.

“They cannot any longer deny we will have to build a new home every five minutes for the next 15 years just for new immigrants.

“Given the financial crisis that the Government faces, this is absolutely crazy. Where is all the money going to come from to build not only houses but also schools, hospitals and roads that will be needed?”

* Other shocking figures released by the ONS yesterday showed that 21.9 percent of new births in Britain are from a mother born abroad.

These figures do not include births from second or third generation immigrant women, who are not counted as foreign by the statistics service.

The number of babies born to immigrant mothers shot up by almost two thirds between 2001 and 2007. More than one in five children born in Britain in 2007 had a mother born overseas – a total of 160,300 compared with 529,700 for British-born mothers.

In the London boroughs of Newham and Brent – which the earlier ONS report revealed had majority non-white populations, 74.8 percent and 72 percent of all births were to foreign-born women.

The increase – well above the 6.4 percent rise in numbers of births among British-born women – is because more immigrants are coming to live in the UK, said the Office for National Statistics.

Robert Whelan, of the Civitas think tank, said: “This shows the impact that mass immigration is having on the demography of the country.

“It’s changing the make-up of the population. Many of the children now being born will be brought up in a different culture to that of the majority population. This suggests there may be issues in the future when the children grow up.”

British-born women will have a theoretical average of 1.6 children each. But mothers born outside Britain have an average of 2.2 children. Among women from Pakistan and Bangladesh the average is 4.7 and 3.9 children respectively.

Official projections suggest that the UK population will reach 70 million by 2028, and that 70 percent of the 10 million increase will be driven by immigration.

The Director General of the BBC, Mark Thompson, has justified more than a third of a million pounds in expenses claimed by his organisation’s executives, some of which was used to buy private aircraft flights, vintage champagne and new handbags.

Mr Thompson said, “Every one of those expenses in my view was reasonable and was justified.”

The BBC – which is public funded through the legally coerced television licence – pays 27 of its senior employees in excess of £195,000, or more than the Prime Minister’s salary. Mr Thompson earns £647,000 a year.

Matthew Elliott, of the campaign group TaxPayers’ Alliance, was quoted in the media as saying that Mr Thompson’s “defence of BBC executive pay and expenses rings a similar note to MPs saying they were acting ‘within the rules’.

“Taxpayers and licence-fee payers are tightening their belts during the recession, so they expect the BBC to enter a similar age of austerity. No vintage champagne, no private jets, no long lunches with colleagues.”

Mr Thompson claimed £2,236.90 of licence fee-payers’ money to fly his family home from a holiday in Sicily to deal with the Sachsgate affair, when BBC stars Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand left lewd remarks on the answerphone of actor Andrew Sachs.

Former BBC director of future media and technology Ashley Highfield charged the corporation more than £450 for the purchase of two iPods and more than £1,400 for two years’ worth of subscription to Sky. His pay in 2007 was £466,000.

His successor and current incumbent of that BBC post, Mr Erik Huggers, is no less shy in his claims. Apart from his salary, Mr Huggers has claimed £1,512.72 for a staff lunch at MipTV in Cannes, a £1,430.08 restaurant bill from Highfield for 29 people at a Las Vegas hotel, £1,624.48 on two private car bookings, and his own £53-a-month Sky subscription.

Documents released by the BBC following Freedom of Information requests show that its staff spent a total of £12.9 million on hotels in nine months between April and December 2007. During 2007 the BBC spent £13.6m on airplane flights. In addition, the corporation spent £13.8m on taxi fares and £5.2m on private car hire between April 2007 and March 2008.

* The BBC has spent many hundreds of thousands of license payers’ funds subsidising programming consisting of smear after smear against the BNP.

The barrage of incompetent liberal fools led by Gordon Brown have demanded that European First World nations take the blame and financial responsibility for alleged global warming – when statistics show that the biggest per capita culprits for CO₂ emissions are Middle Eastern nations.

Mr Brown, pretending to be an authority on the subject, but revealing his total ignorance once again, called for “rich countries” to hand over £60 billion in cash each year to assorted Third World countries to “help the developing world cope with the effects of global warming.”

In a speech at London Zoo, Mr Brown said the cash offer was intended to break the “political stalemate over a new global deal on greenhouse gas emissions.”

However, statistics from the World Resources Institute (see map and statistics here) show that the nations which are per capita responsible for the largest CO₂ emissions are those in the Middle East.

According to the official data, the single largest per capita offender for emissions is the nation of Qatar, which has an emission count of 40.6735 per 1,000 people. Second on the list is the United Arab Emirates, which has an emission count of 28.213 per 1,000 people.

Third on the list is Kuwait, which has an emission count of 25.0499 per 1,000 people, followed by Bahrain with a count of 20.0253 per 1,000 people.

The United States of America, often blamed as the single largest producer, is in fact only fifth on the list, with an emission count of 19.4839 per 1,000 people.

The United Kingdom ranks 25th on the list, with a count of 9.23587 per 1,000 people. This is considerably lower than Trinidad and Tobago, which is seventh of the list with an emission rate of 16.8278 per 1,000 people; Singapore, which with an emission rate of 13.8137 per 1,000 people is tenth on the list; and Palau, in the Pacific Ocean, which has an emission rate of 11.9096 per 1,000 people and is thirteenth on the list.

Other nations which have higher emission rates than Britain include Nauru (19th on the list with an emission rate of 10.3924 per 1,000 people) and Saudi Arabia (21st on the list with an emission rate of 10.072 per 1,000 people).

Under Mr Brown’s proposal, funding for these “developing nations” would begin in 2013 and rise to £60 billion a year by 2020. According to Mr Brown, these funds would “be raised from private and public sources, such as levies on international carbon trading schemes.” In other words, the cost of funding these subsidies will come from ordinary people in western countries, either through increased taxation or increased consumer prices.

* Ironically, China, which ranks low on the per capita ranking because of its massive population, yet who in real terms produces only slightly less CO₂ emissions than America, has demanded even more by way of subsidies to fund “climate change” in that nation.

China and other nations in the G77 group have demanded that “rich countries” hand over one percent of their GDP, which dwarfs even Mr Brown’s proposal.

* The British National Party accepts that climate change, of whatever origin, is a threat to Britain. Current evidence suggests that some of it may be manmade; even if this is not the case, then the principle of ‘better safe than sorry’ applies and we should try to minimise the emission of greenhouse gases and other pollutants.

Report by Dr Charles Mather — The largest ever British National Party meeting in Wigan and Leigh Group was held last Thursday when an audience in excess of 130 people packed out a brand new venue in Hindley Green.

The packed venue kicked off with awards to local activists for their hard work in the run-up to the European elections, where the increase in votes helped secure a Euro parliamentary seat for Nick Griffin.

A joint award for best leaflet distributor was given to Tony Grime and Chris Boland, while the award for best cyber activist was given to Henry Morgan, who also supervised all the sealing of ballot boxes.

The best local activist award was given to Gary Chadwick for organising the Wigan and Leigh groups into a coherent unit and for his work in ensuring the party’s regional popularity through clever campaigning on local issues.

The highly prized shield for best all round activist was won by Ken Haslam for his work in gaining new members, leafleting and sales of the Voice of Freedom newspaper.

First speaker was local activist Leila Bentham who in her first public speech provided an important overview of the importance of nationalism. Ms Bentham pointed out the differences between civic nationalism and ethno-nationalism, saying that the single most important factor which bound any nation together was its sense of national identity.

This was followed by our main speaker Arthur Kemp, who gave a rousing speech explaining the dangers Britain faced on all fronts, from mass immigration to the destruction of our industries and the selling off of our national assets.

“The two BNP MEPs are only the start of our progress,” Mr Kemp said. “There is much work to be done and we must not rest on our laurels. The British public is coming increasingly round to our way of thinking, and it is no coincidence that the media’s hatred and lies have increased since the election, as they know that the end time for the old parties is coming.”

A question and answer session which lasted until well after 11 pm followed, which was an indication of the enthusiasm and interest shown. Since the election, Wigan and Leigh BNP group have taken 173 new enquiries about joining the party, and several new people were signed up on the night.

The collection, raffle and merchandise sales raised just over £320 for party funds.

The latest liberal assault on the concept of any sort of national identity or sense of group self-belonging has come with an Appeal Court ruling which has forbidden a London Jewish school the ability to define who is a Jew and who is not.

The ruling – which may have implications for not only faith schools but all groups and organisations which have an ethnically based character, including the British National Party – was made after Lord Justices Sedley and Rimer, and Lady Justice Smith said it was “clear that Jews constituted a racial group defined principally by ethnic origin and additionally by conversion.”

The case was brought before the Appeals Court after the state-funded Jewish school JFS refused to admit a pupil whose father was Jewish by birth but his mother not.

The Appeals Court judges ruled that ethnic tests of Jewishness amount to racial discrimination. Faith schools may discriminate on religious grounds but the Court held that this involved a test of ethnicity – which they said is unlawful.

The JFS, formerly the Jews’ Free School, gives preference to applicants whose Jewish status is confirmed by the United Synagogue, which in turn requires that the mother of the child be Jewish, in accordance with Jewish law.

The case in question involved a child, named M, whose mother converted to Judaism from Catholicism in a Progressive synagogue not recognised by the Orthodox United Synagogue.

The father of the child appealed against the decision to exclude his child, and the Appeals Court has now ruled in his favour.

 ”The refusal of JFS to admit M was accordingly, in our judgment, less favourable treatment of him on racial grounds.

“This does not mean … that no Jewish faith school can ever give preference to Jewish children. It means that, as one would expect, eligibility must depend on faith, however defined, and not on ethnicity.”

The United Synagogue said the decision affected any branch of Judaism that defines who is a Jew on the basis of descent (whether matrilineal or patrilineal).

It said Jewish schools of any sort – Reform, Liberal, Masorti, Charedi, Orthodox, Federation and so on – would be prohibited from giving priority to applicants who were a member of the Jewish faith.

It added: “In future, all Jewish schools (whether state or independent) will need to adopt a religious practice test, until such time as the Court of Appeals’ ruling is successfully overturned or a legislative amendment is made.”

“Unless the Court of Appeals decision is overturned on appeal it will have a very serious effect on all Jewish schools and on many of our communal organisations.”

While the full legal ramifications of the ruling will have to be carefully considered, there can be no doubt that it is a serious blow to any organisation or group which seeks to self-define its membership criteria. This could have important implications for a party such as the BNP, which also self-defines its membership.

Although there is a large difference between a state-funded faith school and a privately financed political party, all BNP members should be aware that the latest ruling represents a serious threat to any group which seeks to preserve its identity.

At a packed meeting of Solihull British National Party in the West Midlands, Cllr Paul Golding of the BNP’s Campaigns Department announced a forthcoming campaign to highlight the growing number of cases of white British families who have been forced out of areas that, thanks to immigration, have become predominantly ethnic.

At the meeting, chaired by local organiser Andrew Terry and attended by around 40 local members and activists, Cllr Golding gave a detailed outline of a shocking case that has come to light on a sink estate in South East London, where a local British family has been subjected to a terrible catalogue of anti-social and racial abuse at the hands of a black street gang, and where the politically correct local authorities and police don’t seem interested. 

“All over the country, whether extremist Muslims in northern towns or black street gangs in the slum estates of London in the south, our own people are facing what amounts to a campaign of ethnic-cleansing in areas that have literally been ‘taken over’ by immigrants,” he said.

“These cases that are coming to light, which at the moment are but a trickle, highlight a growing problem that will only get worse with time. These British victims of multiculturalism have no one else to stand up for them. The Lib-Lab-Con, the police, local councils – no-one is interested in their plight – except the BNP.”

The BNP’s top elected politicians will soon be lobbying on behalf of the victim families of multicultural Britain. More details in due course.

All British National Party members who are ex-members of the Armed Forces have been asked to take part in a parade at this year’s Red White and Blue (RWB) family festival, organiser Mr Peter Molloy has announced.

“Tomorrow, Saturday 27 June, is official Armed Forces Day, and we will all be remembering the sacrifice and efforts of our servicemen and women,” Mr Molloy said.

“As the BNP has a large number of ex-service personnel in its ranks, we have come up with the idea of holding our own parade at the RWB to additionally honour these brave men and women who risked their lives to protect the nation.”

Mr Molloy said the parade will take place on the Sunday of the RWB and will consist of a march after the children’s parade. The dress for the parade will be regimental head dress (optional); regimental blazer/suit; regimental tie (optional); medals and veterans badge.

“This event will be new for the RWB and its success will be dependent on our members’ support,” Mr Molloy said.

If you are an ex-armed service personnel, serving or TA and would like to participate in the parade, please contact Pete Molloy via email by clicking here.

Those veterans wanting to apply for their veterans badge can do so online by clicking here.

The president of the European Union Parliament, Hans Gert Pöttering, has stated unequivocally that once the Lisbon Treaty is fully implemented, the EU will be responsible for “nearly 100 percent” of all laws made in Europe.

Speaking on a Coveritlive.com question and answer session hosted by NRC Handelsblad in the Netherlands, Politiken.dk in Denmark and Spiegel Online in Germany, Mr Pöttering repeated his earlier comment in the European Parliament about the full extent of EU control over individual nations.

Responding to a question about the growth of the EU, Mr Pöttering said, “As a member of the European Parliament since the first election in 1979, I have witnessed the whole development of the European Parliament.

“In 1979, the European Parliament had no legislative power. Today, the European Parliament is co-legislator in around 75 percent of European legislation together with the Council,” Mr Pöttering said.

“With the Lisbon Treaty, the European Parliament will be co-legislator in almost 100 percent of the cases. The European Parliament has the last word as far as the EU budget is concerned.”

Mr Pöttering also confirmed that the Lisbon Treaty will allow the EU to take over all legislation on agriculture, immigration and asylum, saying; “With the Lisbon Treaty, the European Parliament will become legislator for agriculture, immigration, asylum, etc. It is a task for the future to get more influence in foreign policy as well, although the European Parliament can influence foreign policy already through the budget of the European Union.”

The EU president also announced that a priority for the EU was to “take care” of farmers in the Third World. “The percentage of the European budget allocated for agriculture has been reduced over the years,” he said.

“In the future we have to take care of the interests of the farmers, especially small farmers, in the Third World, especially in Africa. In the framework of the World Trade Organization, we need new agreements that are favourable for Africa,” he added.

* Mr Pöttering’s self published biography on his official EU website says that he has an “interest in intercultural dialogue.” In 2006 he visited southern Spain and established links with the ‘Tres Culturas’ organisation in Seville, whose work “focuses on immigration issues and dialogue between cultures.”