The United Nations Human Rights Council has passed a resolution proposed by Islamic nations that seeks to prevent criticism of religion in member states.

The Council voted 23 in favour of outlawing “defamation of religion” while 11 mostly Western nations voted against, with 13 countries abstaining.

The resolution was the brainchild of the 56 nation “Organisation of Islamic Conference.” The OIC stated that criticising, or even satirising, religion is a “violation of the rights of believers” and leads to discrimination and violence against religious people.

Pakistan, a much championed supposedly moderate Muslim state, originally proposed the resolution on behalf of the OIC. The resolution states:

“Defamation of religion is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence.”

The OIC then goes on to leave no one in any doubt as to which religion in particular they would like to see immune from criticism:

“Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism.”

The resolution then calls on all states to ensure that religious places, sites, shrines and symbols are protected and to enforce laws for those who are showing signs of intolerance of ethnic and religious minorities.

Although the resolution in not legally binding, there was never any real doubt the resolution would be passed as Muslim nations and supporters have a built in majority on the Human Rights Council.

Many free speech campaigners and critics of Islam have expressed disbelief that such an intolerant religion as Islam can preach to others about religious intolerance and the resolution is viewed as being a way for Muslims to mute any criticism of their actions and impose their version of rights and religion on the rest of the world.

There are also fears that as the notion of “defamation of religion” is so vague, it will be used by Islamic nations to stifle any dissent from accepted religious dogma and strengthen draconian laws against blasphemy in Muslim countries.

Far-left Labour MP Harry Cohen was today slammed for claiming £310,000 in expenses for a second home whilst claiming that his usual residence is a one bedroom school house and caravan.

Cohen claims that his £375,000 home in his constituency of Leyton and Wansted in East London is not his main residence. As such, he has pocketed all of the maximum £104,701 in expenses on this property over the last five years.

Cohen has said that he has taken the maximum amount on his “second home” since 1990, meaning that he has pocketed the obscene amount of £310,714 in expenses. This total, paid for by the tax-payer, is thought to be the largest ever claimed by an MP.

The venue where the left-wing MP claims to rest his head of a night is his small one bedroom property in Colchester, some 75 miles away from his constituency. The Cohens also own a caravan at Mersea Island in Essex, only 20 miles away from the property in Colchester.

Mr. Cohen may seem to have a strange penchant for slumming it and commuting, preferring his one bedroom residence 75 miles away from his job to his £375,000 three bedroom house which is only 9 miles away from Westminster.

But it would appear that the MP, who has a Jack Russell called Rosa who is named after German Communist revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg, often gets confused as to where to hang his hat of an evening because on his Labour website he says he “enjoys living in Leyton with Ellen, his wife . . . Harry also spends weekends with Ellen and Rosa in their static caravan.”

Under House of Common rules, an MP’s main residence is considered to be where they spend most nights of the week and Cohen fully admits that his house in Leyton is where he spends most nights. This means that the taxpayer is effectively funding the Cohen’s holiday home, which is utterly unconnected with his parliamentary duties.

Rather than showing any contrition for his financial wrangling, Cohen made the following astonishing comments:

“When MP’s were given this allowance they were told, “Go and spend it boys” and this is what I have done. It is my right.”

Last Saturday saw the Worcestershire Group of the British National Party in Kidderminster for the first of a series of planned table- top sales in the county.

Led by the Worcestershire group’s Deputy Organiser Carl Mason, the team handed out hundreds of the new glossy “British Jobs for British Workers” leaflets and sold numerous copies of the Voice of Freedom.

With support from activists in Redditch, Bromsgrove and South Birmingham, the team reported an overwhelmingly positive response from the people of Kidderminster.

The team also recruited new members on the spot, with a number of people filling in membership forms and lapsed members introducing themselves to the team and wanting to get back on board.

Spurred on by their success, Carl Mason reports that the team will be conducting further table-top sales throughout the different regions of Worcestershire.

With Worcestershire County Council holding elections this year, and the group fielding candidates in numerous wards, such outreach operations are vital tools in the campaign to turn Worcestershire into a BNP stronghold.

Gordon Brown today saw his infamous “British jobs for British workers” phrase move another step closer to becoming his epitaph as official figures revealed that almost a third of workers at the Olympic site in London are foreigners.

63% of the 3,315 workers at the Olympic Park in East London are British and 8% are Irish. The other 29% are foreign workers, half of whom originate from non-EU countries.

The Olympic Delivery Authority had previously promised to employ local people on the £9.3 billion project. But contractors yesterday claimed that due to the economic downturn, they were having to move existing workers to the site to prevent redundancies and so had been unable to employ local workers. 

But is has been revealed that job offers from handymen to landscape architects are being offered to foreign workers, with salaries of up to £65,000, by an Australian based company. 

Up until last year, Romanians made up the largest group of foreign workers, with 7% of the workforce on the Olympic site. Workers from India comprise the second largest foreign group with 90 workers while Poland, Lithuania and Nepal each constitute about 2%, about 70 employees, of the workforce.

It has emerged that a number of Romanian workers were sacked in the last two months in a crackdown on illegal foreign labour. Between April and December of last year, 136 illegal immigrants were found to be working on the site.

Of these, 16 were prosecuted, 11 were removed from the UK while 19 were granted leave to stay in the UK. 90 are either awaiting a decision on their status or waiting for travel documents before being removed from the UK.

In January of this year, Gordon Brown praised the Olympic project as important “job creator and growth generator” which flew in the face of the economic recession. 

Shocking new figures have been released that show the real threat for the indigenous people of Britain from the Islamic demographic time bomb. 

According to research by The Times, Office for National Statistics data shows that the Muslim population in Britain has grown by more than 500,000 between 2004 and 2008. 

The Islamic population multiplied 10 times faster than other population groups in British society. During the same four year period, the number of Christians in the UK actually fell by more than 2 million. 

Experts have put the Islamic population explosion down to the effects of mass immigration, a higher birthrate amongst Muslim communities and conversion to Islam. 

They also believe that people are now more willing to categorise themselves as Muslims and assert their Islamic identity due to the western reaction to Muslim terrorism. 

David Coleman, Professor of Demography at Oxford University, said: “The implications are very substantial. Some of the Muslim population, by no means all of them, are the least socially and economically integrated of any in the United Kingdom … and the one most associated with political dissatisfaction.” 

Professor Coleman continued: “In the growth of any population … [its] voice is regarded as being stronger in terms of formulating policy, not least because we live in a democracy where most people in most religious groups and most racial groups have votes. 

“That necessarily means their opinions have to be taken and attention to be paid to them.” 

According to Office of National Statistics’ figures, which were taken from the quarterly Labour Force Survey, there are more than 42.6 million Christians in Britain. But this seemingly reassuring number does not take into account very worrying demographic trends. 

Whilst the over 70’s make up the biggest Christian population, the largest group for Muslims is the under-4’s (301,000 as of September 2008), strongly suggesting that the Muslim population will continue to increase on a massive scale. 

Unsurprisingly, Muslim groups welcomed the expansion of their co-religionists in the UK. Muhammad Abdul Bari, general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, said that the number of mosques in Britain (1,600 at the present time) would multiply in line with the rising Muslim population. 

Bari tried to play down any perceived threat felt by non-Muslims in view of the startling figures: 

“We each have our own set of beliefs. This should really be a source of celebration rather than fear as long as we all clearly understand that we must abide by the laws of this country regardless of the faith we belong to,” he said. 

Which of course begs the question, “but who will by making the laws of this country in the future?” 

The total number of Muslims in Great Britain: 

2004: 1,087,000 

2005: 2,017,000 

2006: 2,142,000 

2007: 2,327,000 

2008: 2,422,000 

Source: Labour Force Survey

A charity that received £1 million per year from the British taxpayer to “combat racism” has been forced to shut down after collapsing into debt.

The North Staffordshire Racial Equality Council (REC) is closing after more than 30 years because of serious financial problems.

Nine staff at the charities office in Raymond Street, Hanley have been made redundant and other workers and trustees are moving material out of the office.

The charity has admitted that it does not have enough money to see it through to February and it is expected that administrators will be called in this Monday.

The REC was given a budget of over £1 million per year, the hefty sum mainly coming through grants from the Government, local councils and other organisations. Other large donors to the charity included the Staffordshire Police Force.

It is not yet known exactly how much the REC owes creditors but the Charity Commission, who regulate independent voluntary organisations, say that they have not received any REC accounts since February 2006.

The last return was for the financial year 2004/2005, meaning that £4 million pounds of public money is unaccounted for.

The 04/05 accounts show an income of £1.09 million, which includes payments of £84,593 from Stoke-on-Trent City Council, £53,339 from the Commission For Racial Equality and £82,403 from the Government’s Community Fund.

Concerns about the REC first came to light in September of last year when Stoke Council, which has 9 BNP councillors, raised the matter of the lack of audited accounts. It was the BNP’s councillor group leader Alby Walker who initially pressed for an investigation into the affair.

A team of officers examined the REC’s books and earlier this month the council told the trustees that the charity would not be able to continue.

The REC’s senior officer, director Vince Simpson, was apparently unavailable for comment. 

Sandhurst Royal Military Academy has long trained the very cream of the British military. Princes William and Harry both trained at the prestigious training school, as too did Winston Churchill. So it perhaps should come as no surprise that it is the latest British establishment to come under the scrutiny of the forces of institutionalised liberalism.

The Senior Chaplain at Sandhurst, Reverend Jonathan Gough, has decided that Christian services at the academy are far too, well, Christian and has dropped the Church of England Creed from all services so that other religious minorities will not be offended.

The Creed, which is found in the Book of Common Prayer, begins: “I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.”

Such provocative advocacy of Christianity was clearly too much for Rev. Gough, who decided to drop the Creed when he took office earlier this month.

The dropping of the Creed has outraged Christian cadets and civilians who are angry that centuries of tradition have been sacrificed upon the altar of political correctness.

Rev. Gough’s move is all the more puzzling because attendance at the service is not compulsory for the Sandhurst cadets, so any offence suffered by non-Christians attendees would be purely self-inflicted.

Mr. Gough, who is nicknamed the “Right On Rev” by some of his congregation, ended his service abruptly last Sunday without the Creed being read. Although an official explanation for its exclusion has not been forthcoming, a fellow chaplain at Sandhurst has confirmed that is was dropped to “stop upsetting cadets who do not believe in God.”

The Ministry of Defense confirmed that the Creed has been withdrawn from services at the Royal Memorial Chapel to make the services more “inclusive.”

One senior members of the Chapel said: “It’s a disgrace. Nobody was told and everybody has been left shocked and angry. It’s an attempt to be ‘right on’.”

Patrick Mercer, a former cadet at Sandhurst who went on to become the Bishop of Exeter, called for the Creed to be reestablished: “If you go to an Anglican Church service, you expect to hear an Anglican service. I think the good reverend is being a little too precious.”

An Army spokesman gave the following advice to those angered at this latest attempt to diminish the role of Christianity in public life: “The people who are angry should sit down with Reverend Gough for a cup of tea.” 

A record 2,795 criminals were released up to 18 days before the half way point of their sentences in December of last year, Ministry of Justice figures have revealed.

They were released under a controversial scheme that seeks to ease the problem of prison overcrowding.

The December figures are the highest monthly total since the End of Custody Licence scheme was introduced in June of last year and the latest releases sees the number of criminals freed under the programme totalling an incredible 47,515.

Since the scheme’s inception, almost 10,000 violent offenders have been given early release along with 4,200 burglars.

Over 1,500 of the released criminals have been sent back to prison for breaching the terms of their release whilst hundreds have gone on to commit further crimes. One in ten of those who have been recalled to custody are on the run and at large in the community.

The End of Custody Licence scheme was roundly condemned last year when it was revealed that three alleged murders had been committed by criminals given early release under the scheme.

The Government have claimed that they will end ECL when there is available space in the nation’s prisons but as of yet no timetable has been implemented for the scheme’s end.

Official predictions based on release numbers for last year show that more than 20,000 criminals could be let out of prison early in the next seven years. 

Secret Conservative Party documents have revealed that 40,000 Tory members have left the party since David Cameron became leader three years ago.

And the membership freefall has indeed accelerated over the last year, with constituencies of Tory Shadow Cabinet members being amongst the worst hit.

Shadow Chancellor George Osborne has seen membership in his constituency slump by 240 members since Cameron’s ascension, 69 of those coming last year. William Hague, former Tory leader and Shadow Foreign Secretary, was unable to keep 267 of his comrades from deserting the ship in just one year.

One fifth of Conservative Associations across the UK have lost an incredible one in five members and half of them have seen membership drop by 10%. Even the man himself, David Cameron, failed to persuade 19 of his members in his Oxfordshire constituency to fight his corner.

Membership in Conservative constituencies fell by an average of 24 in 2006, rising to 93 in 2007. On average, each Tory Shadow Cabinet member has let an average of 81 members slip through his fingers in the last year. The documents further reveal that 90% of Tory MP’s membership has either declined or stayed the same.

The rapid decline in grass roots support has forced the Tories to take drastic action. Last month saw 10% of Conservative Central Office staff join the dole queue with 24 of its staff at the party’s main Millbank HQ being made redundant.

The beleaguered party has also been forced to close its Constituency Campaigning Services, based in the West Midlands, which provided campaigning services and materials and ran a call centre for constituency parties.

A BNP team under the leadership of well-known super activist Reverend Robert West has joined the approximately one thousand oil refinery workers from the Grimsby area who have protested at the loss of British jobs to EU workers at the Lindsey Oil refinery.

Workers are currently picketing the Lindsey Oil Refinery in North Killingholme in protest over the awarding of a contract to an Italian company. Italian firm IREM have recently been awarded a contract at the site to help build a de-sulphurisastion unit at the plant.

400 foreign contractors have been drafted in to process the crude oil into diesel and gasoline by IREM and this has brought fears for the indigenous workforce that redundancies could be on the cards. A worker summed up the locals’ worries:

“The Italians are putting nothing back into the local economy; the Italian company could have sourced the UK market. By the middle of February, we will be in a position of possible redundancies.

“We need some legislation to protect us but the union’s hands are tied, as legally they cannot sanction the kind of action.”

Unsurprisingly, the Unite union, one of the many internationalist unions who have shamelessly sat back and watched as their members’ wages and work conditions have plummeted thanks to mass-immigration, have not sanctioned the strike.

So it was on behalf of the workers, and not Unite, that shop steward Kenny Wood made the following comments:

“This is going to force thousands of our members onto the dole. To say there is a skills shortage has got absolutely no foundation what so ever.

“We need to exhaust the local labour force first before looking to Europe.”

Other contract workers from across the Humber have joined the protestors at the Lindsey Oil Refinery. A shop steward at PSN, who are contracted to BP on the North Bank said: “We are hoping that the union bosses sit up and pay attention and help us come to some negotiation to ensure a certain percentage of jobs go to British workers” whilst another protestor from PSN demanded “a fair crack of the whip for British workers.”

Humberside Police sent around 60 mounted policemen to the picket this morning and are said to be monitoring the situation. Superintendent Steve Graham has commented: “Police resources will be in attendance at the site as well as the surrounding area throughout the day.”

“I would appeal to those involved in this demonstration to remain peaceful. Whilst respecting the right of demonstration, we will, however, consider any offences that may occur.”

Another nail in the coffin of British free speech was well and truly hammered in today after it was revealed that a proposed screening of the film “Fitna” in the House of Lords was called off after Muslim peer Lord Ahmed threatened to mobilise 10,000 Muslims if the film was shown.

A female member of the Lords had planned to invite the director of the film, Dutch politician Geert Wilders, to the conference room in the House of Lords, where his film “Fitna” would be shown to invited colleagues and the issues the film raised debated.

“Fitna” is of course the short but powerful film that looks at the reality behind the establishment’s espousal of Islam as a “religion of peace.” For daring to challenge current orthodoxy, Wilders is currently facing prison in Holland for his statements about Islam.

The screening of the film was due to take place this Thursday. And it was after the invitations were sent out that Lord Ahmed swung into action. He called a meeting with the government chief whip and the leader of the House, together with representatives of the Muslim Council of Britain and the British Muslim Forum.

At the meeting, Ahmed threatened to mobilise 10,000 Muslims to prevent Wilders from entering the House and said that he would take the organiser of the event to court.

Thanks to Ahmed’s astonishing bully-boy tactics, the decision was taken last Friday to cancel the screening of the film. Ahmed called his campaign of threats and intimidation “a victory for the Muslim community.”

Despite seeming to advocate force to secure his political aims, Lord Ahmed is routinely touted as the face of moderate Islam in the UK. Born Nazir Ahmed in Pakistan, Labour member Lord Ahmed became the first Muslim life peer in 1998, where he took his oath on the Koran instead of the Bible. In 2007, upon hearing of the knighting of Salman Rushdie, he responded by saying that he was appalled and claimed that Rushdie had “blood on his hands.”

Ahmed’s fury that the House of Lords has been used to host an “extremist” event is somewhat ironic as he himself courted controversy in 2005 over his choice of invited guest when he hosted a book launch by anti-Semitic author Israel Shamir.

Ahmed is also one of the founders of The World Forum, an organisation which was set up to “promote world peace in the aftermath of 9/11 with an effort to build bridges of understanding between the Muslim world and the West by reviving a tradition of dialogue between people, cultures and civilizations based on tolerance.”

His notion of understanding and dialogue seem to differ sharply from this flowery prose. It seems that dialogue is to be suppressed if it falls foul of Ahmed’s narrow world view and any understanding seems to be on the proviso that people must understand that he can call in the heavy mob if his demands are not met. 

The organs of 50 British NHS donors have been given to foreigners over the past two years, with the foreign recipients paying around £75,000 a time for the private operations.

A document, released under the freedom of information act, has shown that the liver transplant operations, which took place at NHS hospitals, took place despite severe organ shortages that mean many British patients could die whilst waiting for an organ.

The document showed that 40 patients from EU countries Greece and Cyprus received liver transplant operations in the UK which were paid for by their governments. Livers were also given to people from outside the EU, including patients from Libya, the United Arab Emirates, China and Israel.

The private operations cost £75,000 and the surgeons who carried out the operations received about £20,000 as a share of the operation fee.

At the current time, a record 8,000 British patients are awaiting organs on the NHS transplant waiting list and around 269 Britons are waiting for livers.

Professor Peter Friend, President of the British Transplantation Society, condemned the practice: 

“While there is a surfeit of UK residents awaiting transplant it is correct that these patients should have priority,” he said. “Were the situation such that there were organs that were not required, it would be appropriate to make them available to other nationals.

“We do not have a European organ donation system; it is a UK system and I therefore feel that . . . the system is there essentially for the benefit of residents in the UK.”

Jane Dodd, whose nine-year-old daughter died whilst waiting for a liver transplant operation, said that she was shocked and upset to hear that the organs of British donors were being sold to foreign patients:

“I do feel that organs donated in this country should go to people from this country unless there isn’t a suitable recipient.

“If you are signing a donor card in this country you expect someone from this country to get the organ.”

According to EU law, all patients from member states have the right to seek treatment in all EU countries. Britain is not, however, obliged to treat them and the decision is left to the hospital trusts themselves. If the trust decides to treat the patient, then they have equal rights to British organs.

The Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust in London has carried out four liver transplant operations for foreigners in the last year whilst King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in London gave 19 organs to foreign patients last year. A spokesman for King’s College defended its actions:

“We are continuing to treat citizens of the European Union as they have the same entitlement to treatment under the NHS as UK patients under European law.”

Dr Mervyn Davies or St. James’s University Hospital in Leeds, which does not give transplants to foreign patients, also condemned the practice:

 ”There is a shortage of donors and we cannot cater for the whole of the EU.

“It is tragic for these patients but the system that we have cannot cope with the UK demand as it is. Extending that to the whole of the EU and beyond we consider is inappropriate.”

BNP News recently praised the Irish Independent newspaper’s Kevin Myers for his brave and honest reporting of the disastrous effects of mass immigration on the UK. But perhaps to redress the balance, the British Independent today saw fit to publish an astonishing anti-white polemic by journalist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. A hate-filled diatribe that, if the author had have been white, would probably see them facing a seven-year prison stretch for inciting racial hatred.

Brown, a Ugandan born Muslim who came to the UK in 1972, was commenting on the recent Government report that the British white working class feel betrayed and abandoned. Brown lays her cards on the table at the outset of the article: “Maybe it’s because I’m a foreigner that I rage so when witnessing attacks on immigrants. Something stirs deep inside, not bloodlines, not tribal kinships, not even the politics of race, but a wakeful sense of history and lived experience.”

Yet Brown declares that native Britons do not have the same right to experience the same sense of “history and lived experience” in their own homeland, stating that the British working class “have turned against incomers as self pity overwhelms them.”

Addressing the Government report, Brown dismisses the concerns of the indigenous Britons and astonishingly claims that immigrant concerns are sidelined: “Ruined by “ethnic minorities” they cry into their antimacassars and threaten to vote for fascists. The British working classes include people of every shade. But only white grievances matter. Nobody seeks to find out what life is like for the incomers living in the fog of nativist bitterness.”

Brown continues: “Parliamentarians, the media, even the people who claim to speak for immigrants – such as Baroness Warsi and Trevor Phillips – are flocking to indulge the always-wretched and complaining classes. And so it becomes a matter of honour for me to oppose them.

“We are thankfully free to question Muslim, Asian, Arab, African, Caribbean, Polish, Lithuanian, Russian behaviour in Britain. And some behave abominably. The British middle and upper classes are rightly fair game. But not the white working classes.

“Criticise them and they, who detest PC, bring down the wrath of Alf Garnett on your head. Their culture is proud; they are noble; what they believe – however stupid or vicious – must be awesome. Oh, and they are never to be called racist, not even the scum who drop shit and firebombs through letter boxes of asylum-seekers on estates.”

Brown then praises the words of a white journalist who takes her side on the worthlessness of the native Britons: “One writer, Liz Jones, of white working-class stock, sees through the cultural protectionism. Responding to beer-swilling blokes in Wibsey Working Men’s Club, in Bradford, who said on television that they had lost their place as the backbone of the nation because Asians were overtaking them, she wrote: “A snail with special needs would overtake this lot …”

Warming to her theme, Brown then really let’s the hatred flow. “Defenders of this faith claim they are never allowed to speak on immigration. They have done little else since the first boats sailed in from the Caribbean. Whenever times were hard, immigrants were the natural scapegoats. At boom times, they were brutally envied: too rich, too hardworking, taking jobs and gals from British men, or scroungers on benefits.

“You couldn’t win then; even less so today. Working-class white men provoked race riots through the Fifties and Sixties; they kept “darkies” out of pubs and clubs and work canteens. Who were the supporters of Oswald Mosley and Enoch Powell? The disempowered have used us to vent their natural-born hatred against the powerful.”

She finishes her incredible rant by once again looking at the whole issue from her bias as an immigrant:

“Britain is a more integrated place than was in the Sixties, and many of us would not live elsewhere.

“Like others who came to stay, I hope one day we can truly belong, our rights and responsibilities no different from those who arrived and laid claims long before us on these mongrel, oft-invaded isles. Perhaps there will be brief respite when Britain will not blame the outsider for all its woes. Alas not yet, certainly not over this hard and cold coming year.”

As with the rest of the article, no credence is given to the rights of indigenous Britons to have predominance in their historical homeland, in the same way as those of Brown’s political bent champion the same rights for black South Africans and Tibetans.

And the usual erroneous and racist mantra that Great Britain is a “mongrel” nation is brought into play. Three-quarters of indigenous Britons can trace their ancestry in these lands back to the end of the last Ice Age, some 15,000 years ago. So please excuse us, Mrs. Brown, if the opinions on our people by a hate-filled bigot with a history in this country stretching back a whopping 37 years are not taken seriously.

But what we will take seriously are the many new enquiries and members that your comments will bring us. And we will give these people a voice and address their real concerns and give them back their sense of pride and belonging.

It has been revealed that one of the Metropolitan Police’s chief advisers on combating Islamic extremism is himself suspected of committing numerous terrorist offences.

Mohamed Ali Harrath (pictured left) lives in London after having been given refugee status in 2000. He has been the subject of an Interpol red notice (its highest state of alert) since 1992 because of alleged terrorist activities in Tunisia, where he helped found the Tunisian Islamic Front (FIT). He has been convicted in absentia of a string of criminal and terrorism-related offences in Tunisia and has been sentenced to 56 years in jail.

Yet Harrath has been allowed to act as an adviser to the Scotland Yard Muslim Contact Unit. This is despite the fact that at a Special Immigration Appeals Commission, an MI5 witness stated that Harrath’s FIT had carried out terrorist activities in France.

Harrath is also the chief executive officer of The Islam Channel, an Islamic broadcaster based in London that government research has shown is watched by 59% of Britain’s Muslims.

Harrath has boasted that he is “regularly consulted in an advisory capacity by the Muslim Contact Unit of the British police for guidance on best practice in relation to counter-terrorism issues and combating extremism”.

The former head of the Muslim Contact Unit, Robert Lambert, has praised Harrath, saying that he has made a “key contribution to our efforts to defeat adverse influence of al-Qaeda in the UK”.

The Tunisian government would probably disagree with Mr. Lambert’s glowing job reference for Harrath, as the Tunisians have accused him of meeting Osama bin Laden in 1991 in an attempt to secure the financial backing of al Qaeda for his FIT party.

The Interpol red notice states that all countries are urged to arrest Harrath and extradite him as a terrorist subject. But the British government refused a request by the Tunisian Government in 1997 to extradite Harrath, saying that “the UK did not regard him as a threat.”

Harrath has in the past said that “revolution is not necessarily a dirty word” and “there is nothing wrong or criminal in trying to establish an Islamic state”.

From the description of the season’s festivities as “Winterval” to the promotion of the Islamic celebration of Eid, the liberal-left establishment are doing all they can to denigrate the traditional Christmas, this most politically-incorrect of festivals.

Two further examples of the bizarre lengths the liberals will go to snuff out the celebration of Christmas have been unearthed today.

Dorothy Glenn, a  41 year-old mother of three from Southshields in Tyneside, always gets into the spirit of the Christmas season by decorating her home with illuminations, including a giant tree and a 4ft Father Christmas.

But it appears that this seemingly innocent celebration of the season of good will to all men did not go down well with her local housing association. A housing officer visited Mrs. Glenn, whose neighbours are Bengali and Chinese, and told her to take down her decorations as it might offend her neighbours, claiming that they were “offensive to the community.”

“I told him that I am far from a racist and that I wouldn’t be taking the lights down. 

“I’m shocked, annoyed and upset. At the end of the day, it’s the festive season and they’re staying”, said Mrs. Glenn.

It’s not only Christmas decorations that have fallen foul of the Thought Police. The vile, odious white supremacists that are the Salvation Army have also been taken to task for their pro-Christmas activities.

The sight of the Sally Army in our high streets, their bands playing carols and rattling their collection tins, is a traditional part of the British Christmas. But it seems that the subversive act of tin-rattling does not quite fit in with our modern, vibrant society.

Guidelines for branches organising public collections have banned the rattling of collection tins as it is seen as “intimidating” and may also “cause offence to other religions.”

Councils and the police have the powers to enforce the rule about rattling and can prosecute or ban offenders. One Salvation Army collector said: “I’ve been doing this for more than 40 years and I fail to see how rattling a tin could cause offence.”

With such concerted attacks on the celebration of Christmas, will it be long before Christmas itself is outlawed as a “hate crime”? 

The current witch-hunt against British Bobbies who dare to join Britain’s premier patriotic party shows no sign of abating. A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has said: “We understand that forces are looking at the list to ascertain if there are any serving officers on there.”

Merseyside Police too are polishing their jackboots as an alleged member of the BNP is being investigated. A spokesmen for Merseyside Police has, “reiterated our position that membership of the British National Party is totally incompatible with the duties and values of Merseyside Police. We will not accept a police officer or police staff being a member of BNP.”

As an instruction in the realities of life in modern Britain, we should perhaps cast our minds back to July of last year. There was another story concerning the suitability of holding certain viewpoints and maintaining the law. You may not recall the following story as, unlike the current furore about BNP policemen, this story did not make the national headlines.

It was revealed in July of 2007 that up to eight police officers and civilian staff were suspected of having links to extremist Islamic groups, including Al Qaeda. Some of these people were believed to have attended terrorist training camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The names of these officers were featured on a list of alleged radicals said to be working inside the British police. The dossier, drawn up with the help of MI5, was instigated because of fears that Muslim extremists were taking advantage of the “positive discrimination” schemes adopted by the police to attract more ethnic staff.

One of the officers under investigation, who worked in the South East of England, was caught circulating Internet images of beheadings and roadside bombings in Iraq. When questioned on his somewhat bizarre choice of recreational activity, the officer came up with the novel excuse that he trying to “enhance” debate about the war in Iraq.

Given that the police seem to be pursuing alleged BNP members with such vigour, it would be imagined that in the same self-righteous manner, these jihadist officers would also face the wrath of their superiors.

Yet incredibly, these officers were not sacked, because the police said that they lacked the “legal power” to dismiss them.  Classified intelligence reports raising concerns about police staff’s background cannot be used to justify their dismissal.

And it’s not just potential Islamic terrorists who seem to get the softly-softly approach. Police officers who are violent thugs, druggies, fraudsters and gun-wielding hoodlums are apparently preferred to officers who join a political party that simply opposes mass immigration.

Earlier this month it was reported that amongst Hampshire Police’s 4,000 officers, 42 had criminal convictions, many of these convictions occurring whilst they were serving police officers.

The convictions included discharging a firearm, possession of drugs, being drunk and disorderly, theft, benefit fraud and violent assault. Not one of these officers lost their jobs.

In fact, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), the same body that says they are searching high and low for BNP members in the force, as reported above, confirmed that officers convicted of serious crimes while serving could remain in their posts.

So who would you rather have protecting you? Extremist Muslims who advocate beheadings and bombings as justified crime prevention tactics? Or a police officer who joins a political party that has at the heart of its manifesto taking back the streets from thugs, yobs and drug users? Or as they’re more commonly known, the Hampshire Police Force.

The choice is yours! And it really is your choice. If you want to stop this witch-hunt of decent patriotic police officers, and ensure that the bobby on your beat will truly protect and serve, then join the British National Party today.  

An astonishing 300,000 foreigners a year are allowed to enter the UK each year with wrongly approved visas, it has been revealed.

Around 15% of all short term visas issued by British embassies abroad are issued in error and once in the UK, these migrants are free to stay here illegally.

Linda Costelloe Baker, who monitors Government visa refusals, reveled this latest shocking break down in the Government’s immigration policy as she addressed the Commons Home Affairs Committee.

The reason for this incredible state of affairs is because embassy officials are under pressure to issue visas rather then reject them because of productivity targets. So to meet the targets, staff are simply allowing false applications to go through.

Around two million visas are approved each year, giving these foreign nationals the right to enter the UK for a six month period. These people are tourists, businessmen and those coming to the UK to visit relatives.

Embassy staff are supposed to check on such things as whether they intend to leave after the six month period and if they have money to live in the UK and to make sure they are not coming here to work and stay permanently.

But Miss Costelloe Baker admitted that for embassy officials, issuing visas was “much faster” than refusal: “I don’t think there has been adequate scrutiny of decisions to issue. I think there is pressure to issue visas because it helps people hit their productivity targets.”

Approving an application is easier, as the staff do not have to list reasons for refusal, or have to carry out work to prepare for any possible appeal.

Once in the UK, these foreign nationals, who should have been refused a visa, have an excellent chance of remaining in the UK, making a mockery of the Government’s estimate of 570,000 illegal immigrants currently in the UK.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of Migrationwatch UK, said: ‘This will add massively to the scale of illegal immigration in Britain and is a direct result of the Government’s failure to resource the immigration system they are putting in place.’

Mark Sedwill, international director of the UK Border Agency, made the following remarks, seemingly at odds with Miss Costelloe Baker’s damning revelations: “Our decisions are fair and objective, and last year the independent monitor determined they were right and reasonable in 99 per cent of cases.”

On a daily basis, we are given example after example of how New Labour has lost control of our borders. And seem not to be overly concerned with reclaiming them. The only party that will take back control of our country, and send back those who have entered the country illegally, is the British National Party.

The joys of enrichment and vibrancy are to be forced upon thousands of homeowners in Britain as it has been revealed that people could be legally compelled to sell their land to make way for gypsy sites.

Private gardens and fields may be seized as the Government looks to pursue a “land grab” to create permanent sites for 25,000 gypsies. The borough of Epping Forest has been earmarked for 123 pitches which include a family garden and land belonging to an elderly couple adjacent to their home.

A survey by Epping Forest Council says that if residents refuse to sell their land, the Government would use their powers to issue a compulsory purchase order. This would mean that the land would be bought at a reduced rate with little compensation.

Terence Ruddigan, 73, has a small field at his home in Epping and this piece of land has been earmarked for a gypsy site. He said: “They are just pinching our land and telling us, “You will have to put up with it.”

“I have lived in this house with my wife for 34 years and we keep a few chickens, geese and horses in the field.

“My wife and I are furious that just 30ft away from our back door we could have a gypsy site.

“What about the rubbish they produce? What about our safety? None of this is given any concern by the Government.”

It is believed that councils across the country will be taking similar action to free up land for the gypsy sites.  The Department of Communities has ordered regional planners to come up with sites for 4,000 extra pitches and had given £20 million in grants to councils that create legal gypsy camps.

Ministers believe that the compulsory purchase of people’s land will save money in the long run by cutting the £18 million spent annually trying to evict gypsies from illegal sites. 

Two Iraqis who stand accused of murdering two British prisoners of war have been granted thousands of pounds in legal aid so that they can fight being handed over to Iraqi authorities to face trial.

Faisal Al-Saadoon and Khalaf Mufdhi are accused of killing Staff Sergeant Simon Cullingworth and Sapper Luke Allsopp in cold blood at the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003.

The British government wants to hand the Iraqis over to the Iraqi government for trial but the couple’s British lawyer has initiated a High Court challenge on the basis that such a trial would breach his clients’ human rights.

The two Iraqis are currently being held in British custody in Iraq. If their lawyer’s challenge is successful, they would be brought to the UK to face trial and senior British government figures are worried that they will claim political asylum if they are tried in Britain.

SSgt Cullingworth and Spr Luke Allsopp, (pictured above) both of the 33 Engineer Regiment, were travelling as part of a convoy when they were attacked by militiamen in Al Zubayr in southern Iraq in March 2003.

Half of the company managed to escape but SSgt Cullingworth and Spr Allsopp were taken to a Ba’ath party headquarters and then onto an Iraqi intelligence base where they were shot dead. Photos of the dying soldiers, surrounded by a mob of Iraqis, were later shown on Arabic TV station al-Jazeera.

The judicial review of the Iraqis’ case has been launched by the company Public Immunity Lawyers. The couple’s lawyer, Mr. Phil Shiner, confirmed that the review was being funded by legal aid and will claim that if his clients were to face trail in Iraq, it would be a breach of their human rights under Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

Shiner said: “The IHT (Iraqi Higher Tribunal) have a track record of sentencing people to death and we, the UK, have a policy of not handing over people to a jurisdiction if there is a risk of the death penalty being applied.”

Senior members of the Ministry of Defense, the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Justice have been given assurances “at the highest level” that the two Iraqis will receive a fair trial and fair treatment.

Margaret Cullingworth, 83, the mother of Simon Cullingworth, (pictured above) said: “They should be tried and brought to justice in their own country. It was a horrible crime. We could have accepted it if they had been killed in battle but they were prisoners and were murdered.

“We do have confidence in the UK authorities and believe they will do the right thing. Simon’s widow has been left to bring up the children on her own and she has found it very hard – we all have.” 

The much trumpeted establishment claim that mass immigration has benefited the economy has been blown out of the water as experts told the House of Commons that immigration had brought virtually no economic benefit to Britain.

A report by the Lords Economic Affairs Committee, which was debated in the House of Lords yesterday, told how the government had “wildly overstated” the economic claims made for immigration.

Whereas the Government claim that the unprecedented levels of immigration in recent years has brought in £6billion a year to the nation’s balance sheet, the report showed that the real “benefit” of mass immigration was about 58p per week on the living standard of the native population.

Lord Wakenham, the Conservative former Cabinet minister who chaired the enquiry, said: “We found no evidence of these large economic benefits.

“What we did find was serious flaws in the Government’s arguments and we concluded that on average the economic benefits of immigration were small and close to zero.”

The report also found that those on low wages and young people looking for work had been adversely affected by mass immigration and it was also responsible for forcing down wage levels.

Critics have also warned that public services, including schools, hospitals and transport, are struggled to cope with the influx. It has been calculated that about £8.8billion has had to be found to bolster the asylum system, teach English to new arrivals and treat illnesses.

Such a devastating rebuttal of the lib/lab/con-census’ most cherished hobby horse was bound to bring in criticism from those wanting to prop up their favourite ideological experiment. And the inevitable has happened; the report has been condemned as “racist” by the usual suspects.

Labour peer Lord Haskel, in the classic, tried and tested strategy of stifling debate on this issue, believed that “racist views” could be detected in the report:

“While I’m sure it wasn’t intentional, the impression is that the politics of the committee is anti-immigration,” he said. “And, if they want, a reader can detect racist views in the paper.”

What the report doesn’t take into consideration of course is the demographic considerations of mass immigration. With many of Britain’s major cities on the verge of becoming majority non-white, and the UK as a whole predicted to go that way by 2050, this is the one issue that the establishment will never debate.

Or indeed the moral implications of a native people being dispossessed in their own homeland. The only people debating these issues, and implementing plans to address them, are the British National Party.