'Learn English, get a job and stop smoking cannabis': What judge said to immigrant drug dealer on benefits

A judge gave an immigrant drug dealer a verbal dressing-down by telling him to 'get a job, learn English and stop smoking cannabis'.

Pakistani-born Mohammed Ramzan, 32, had been spending £20 a day on cannabis, paid for by his benefits from the taxpayer.

After admitting three drug possession counts following raids police raids on his home in Derby, he faced a verbal tirade from a Crown Court judge.

As he was handed a suspended jail term at Derby Crown Court, Judge Andrew Hamilton told Ramzan, who had spoken in court through an interpreter: 'It's about time you learnt to speak English.

'It seems to me very difficult to live in this country if you can't speak the language.

'And you should be going out, getting work, instead of sitting at home smoking cannabis.

'My advice to you is to give up drugs, go and learn English, go and get a job and do something useful.'

The court heard how police raided Ramzan's home in Derby, and found cannabis in plastic bags ready to sell.

Twice over the next three months, they raided different houses where the 32-year-old was living and again found evidence of cannabis.

Ramzan admitted three counts of possession with intent to supply.

The court heard how officers who searched Ramzan's home in December 2009 found a holdall with his name on it and an address in Pakistan.

Inside it were different types of cannabis, including vegetation and 26g of resin.

Scales to weigh amounts of the drug were also discovered, along with four mobile phones.

They contained texts saying 'ring me', messages about debts - and one which read: 'Have you got any weed?'

More raids were carried out in January and March 2010 at other properties where he was staying. Cannabis was found at these.

Ramzan initially denied knowledge of some of the cannabis but admitted some of it was for personal use.

Ramzan told the court, through an interpreter, that he had tried successfully to cut down on the amount of drugs he was taking and he was 'motivated to change'.

During the court hearing, Judge Hamilton said: 'I'm told you have reduced your drug intake from £20 a day to £10 a day.

'Where do you get £70 a week? Where does that come from?'

Ramzan, speaking through his interpreter, said: 'It's from benefits, your honour.'

The judge asked how much he claimed in benefits, and was told £120 every fortnight.

He told Ramzan, now living in Derby, that the police would pay 'regular visits' to his address to make sure he was not taking drugs.

Ramzan was given a 12-month prison sentence, suspended for two years, and a two-year supervision order. He must also carry out 180 hours of unpaid work.

The judge added: 'I hope in the course of the supervision, you are directed to learn English.'

DM

While the average pensioner has paid into the system for between 40 and 60 years and contributed to the growth of Great Britain, and immigrants have done absolutely zilch, I thought you may be interested to see how our government repays them.

It just goes to show how little thought of they are.

Pensioners are the backbone of our country. They have fought and died for us, built this country up to what it is, only for the government to discard them and fill up our beautiful land with invaders.

Thanks to my friend odin for the info.

Illegal immigration given the go-ahead and Wales

Excellent detective work from the boys in Wales.

'Live in a £1m mansion for £130 a week? Only if you throw in a new kitchen...': Whistleblower exposes chancers and cheats who abuse social housing

Recently the Mail published a devastating account by a whistleblower who revealed a culture of absenteeism, rampant inefficiency and 'unsackable' staff at the London council where he works as a senior planning officer.

The article struck a chord with another official employed by a housing association in the capital. The system is designed to help the destitute, but he says it is abused by undeserving chancers and cheats.

The Mail knows his identity, but to protect his job, 'Chris' tells his story to EUGENE COSTELLO...

Not long ago, I had to do a field visit to one of our sites to show some properties to a family. The houses are new-builds in a really good, central location - I'd love to live in one myself. Three storeys, with three or four bedrooms, really nice - they were so new that the paint was still wet.

The family had just arrived in London from Somalia. It didn't take long for them to decide they'd seen enough. They didn't speak much English but they made it clear they weren't happy with the bedrooms on the top floor - apparently they didn't like the sloping eaves.

But the deal-breaker came with their next questions. First, they wanted to know if the property came with an automatic right-to-buy with a discount, which it didn't.

They are thinking of council-owned properties, but we are a housing association - a not-for-profit organisation that is funded by government grants, bank loans and rental income - so we hold on to our stock and simply let it out.

I thought that question was a bit odd, considering the family supposedly didn't have a penny to their name, which was why they were throwing themselves on the mercy of the good old British taxpayer. Where would they get the funds to buy a townhouse in central London?

This 'penniless' family also wanted to know whether they got a residents' parking space with the property. I had to tell them 'No' to that as well. They shrugged and spread their arms, as if to say: 'How on earth do you expect us to live here? Why are you wasting our time dragging us here?' And off they went.

They could afford to be so sniffy because we have Choice-Based Letting (CBL). Once, there was pressure on applicants to accept properties when they came up or risk dropping back down the list. Now that's gone, so they can just keep saying No till we deliver exactly what they want - they're actually more demanding than tenants in the private sector.

Our problem as a housing association is that we are subcontracted to local authorities and have no say over the lists of people for whom we have to find a house - we are simply given the list and if someone is on it, they have the right to take one of our properties (with their rent heavily subsidised by taxpayers).

Even if it would be overwhelmingly obvious to a five-year-old that the applicants were chancers, we have to smile and say, 'Yes, sir' or 'No, madam'. In fact, we can't even describe them as 'tenants' any more - we've been told we must call them 'customers'.

The legal position is that local authorities have a statutory duty to house those in need and will determine whether they need emergency housing (such as immediate B&B accommodation) until a long-term property is found.

That's where I come in. I've been doing this sort of work for 15 years and we see a massively disproportionate number of people arriving from overseas.

The law was changed in 2000 to say that asylum seekers would not be eligible for social housing but it doesn't seem to have hugely affected the types of people that we are seeing. I suppose that's partly because once asylum is granted, they do become eligible - and those who go on to get British citizenship can invite members of their family to come over and join them.

Overall, the system is a joke. It rewards those family members who have just stepped off a plane by giving them a wonderful property in a central location, while Britons who have been here for years or even generations have got no chance of getting to the top of the list.

This is because British applicants tend to be already living with family - parents, etc - so technically qualify as being housed. Recent arrivals with kids in tow do not and are given priority. That said, single mothers as a group are hugely over-represented among social housing tenants; the perception of girls becoming pregnant to get a council flat isn't completely without foundation.

My particular bugbear, odd as it may sound, is satellite dishes. These pose a huge problem for us, especially with our Turkish 'customers' (for some reason a lot of the families we are asked to house are Turkish).

The first thing they want to know - well, after the free parking and the right to buy, of course - is whether they are allowed to put a satellite dish the size of a small helipad on the front of the property. Some of them need to put up two dishes so they can guarantee getting all the channels they want.

As a result, some of our properties end up looking like GCHQ. I'm told the problem is something to do with the signal for Turkish TV not being strong enough.

We always say No. If they think we really mean it - because the house is a new-build or period property - they will turn the place down, no matter how nice it is.

Properties with open-plan kitchens can be a problem too, as Somalian or other Muslim 'customers' often don't want a kitchen that opens straight on to a reception room, and these type of houses are always turned down. I was given the reason by one man: If he wanted to invite other men around to play cards or whatever, he didn't want them to see his wife making food in the kitchen.

I really have no idea how some of the people who come to us become eligible for such heavily subsidised properties, although I have my theories.

One of our 'customers' is a musician of west African descent who is doing really well and often appears on TV. Certainly, tributes on his website as well as comments from his agent are effusive about just how successful he is. Yet he and his family recently rang us to arrange some property viewings - they were on the council list and wanted rehousing in a more central location.

He was very fussy: it had to be a period, character property and it had to be in London Underground's Zone 1 - ie, central London.

We showed him a beautiful, four-storey Georgian property in a central London square with a park in the middle. He seemed delighted, as well he should be - this is a house worth well over £1 million and a normal rental would be £1,000 a week. He's getting it subsidised for £130 a week.

My personal view is that this house should be sold and the money invested in new-builds - we could have a dozen flats for the same money, and so help lots of families, not just one.

But no one else in the department seems to agree. I can't understand it: surely we are supposed to provide a safety net for as many people as possible, not the keys to the palace for just one family?

Anyway, this family didn't seem to appreciate their good fortune. As soon as they moved in, they bombarded us with a litany of complaints. Nothing was ever right.

For example, we had just installed a new fitted kitchen, leaving space for white goods - we don't supply those, that's down to the tenants. Sorry, customers!

Anyway, this family had brought with them a 'slim fit' dishwasher. But the space we'd left was for a standard-sized unit. Believe it or not, they wanted us to come back, take the kitchen out and refit it with units that matched their dishwasher.

In any case, I don't know how that family qualified for social housing. If I were being charitable, I would guess that they had got on the list before they had a better income and managed to stay on it.

The truth is that once you're on the list, you seem to be there for life: the system isn't continuously means-tested. What should happen is that tenants - customers - should be retested periodically to ensure that they still qualify for this enormous subsidy from the taxpayer. As I say, it should be a safety net, not a state-sponsored bonanza for a lucky few.

It really rankles that someone who is clearly earning a lot more money than me gets to live in Millionaire's Row at taxpayers' expense, while the rest of us struggle to make ends meet. I commute into work from a small flat outside of London as I can't afford to buy anything more central.

A less charitable explanation for why this musician and his family got the star treatment (and one that a lot of my colleagues believe to be the case) is that there are cliques in local authority departments - be they West African, Indian, Pakistani, whatever - who 'look after their own'.

These cliques bump friends and relatives to the top of the list, even if they don't fulfil any of the criteria for social housing. This is done either as a favour or in return for a backhander.

I know it happens. One area I deal with is in South London. There is a large Portuguese community there and I would often get a call from one local lady, a Portuguese grandmother who seemed to act as an agent for new arrivals. She'd ring me regularly and say: 'Chrees, you have nice flat? I have lovely family who just come from Portugal, need nice three-bed flat.'

The first few times I'd say: 'Luisa, you know I can't do anything unless they're on the list.' She'd reply: 'Don't worry, Chrees, they will be on list tomorrow, please just show them some nice flats.'

And sure enough, the family would be on the next version of the list we'd get.

She clearly knew someone in the housing department who would put her families on the list in exchange for cash - which she could afford to pay as she was charging these families a lot of money in return for her securing a council flat for them. Of course, the family was happy to pay a big one-off fee because once they were in the system they were in for good, and they would get a centrally located flat for a peppercorn rent for life.

I'm speaking out now because I find the whole system corrupt and unfair - and, above all, a monstrous waste of taxpayers' money. Our houses often go to those who have been in the country for less than a month and have no intention of ever contributing anything to Britain through taxes. Meanwhile, those who have been here for years paying tax have got little or no chance of getting a flat.

I went to see a woman recently in her lovely three-bed flat to arrange a follow-up visit. When I got my diary out, she said: 'Can't do July or August - I'm abroad twice this summer.' Then she winked at me and said: 'Not bad for someone on the social, eh, Chris?' and laughed. But I don't find it funny.

Just a few decades ago, if you lived in social housing, people would come and look at your property, and the rules dictated that if you had possessions that were worth anything, the authorities would force you to sell them to contribute towards your rent.

Of course, no one is saying we should return to such harsh attitudes, but the system does seem to have swung far too far the other way.

My colleagues and I go on field visits to see families who are supposedly on the breadline and cannot subsist except by the largesse of the British taxpayer. Yet they have nice cars, top-end plasma TV screens, the latest games consoles for the kids, Sky TV and all the rest of it. How on earth are they paying for it?

I'd love all those luxuries, but I can't afford them - because I work for a living.

Towns where one worker in two is foreign

Click on picture to enlarge

The picture above shows the shocking amount of foreign workers in London, with the highest number being in Newham, the East London borough which is to host the 2012 Olympics. That is 65,100 jobs out of 93,700 and yet 25,600 British-born people in the area are out of work.

Slough, Leicester, Luton, Reading, Cambridge, Manchester, Oxford, Crawley and Elmbridge are areas outside London with the largest populations of foreign workers.

A taster of Browns Britain

You only have to look in the newspapers or watch the TV news programmes to see what Brown’s Labour Government has done to Great Britain.

Every day without fail atrocities are reported on, but one of the main problems seems to be the youngsters of today.

Brown’s namby-pambying has meant that children are growing up to be bullies, thugs, druggies and murderers.

Gone are the days when we could chastise our own children; slap your child now and you’ll be up on a charge of abuse.

Gone are the days of children doing as they are told in class or face the music. The teachers are scared of their pupils. Children can ‘report’ on their teachers from the classroom via text message and even ‘vet’ them to make sure they are suitable for the job.

And gone are the days when young adults left school and started work straight away. Brown sure has seen to that! Arty farty courses are the norm and manufacturing has all but been shipped abroad

But when you allow families from other countries that have lesser values (and in some cases are less civilised) settle here, then boy had you better expect trouble.

Gordon Brown’s labour Government has created this mess and Conservative’s David Cameron looks set to carry on with his ‘good’ work.

Looking in today’s paper, the first thing I saw was the story of a 16 year old girl fighting for her life after being shot in the neck. A young man went to the pizza shop where she was having a meal with her five friends, opened fire, missed the target and rode off... ON HIS MOUNTAIN BIKE!

Forty five minutes later a 20 year old man was stabbed to death outside a pub. This was a separate incident, but even so, both attacks were in London.

The story of the 17 year old that killed his baby daughter by ‘shaking her’ came next. He has no remorse and claims he did nothing wrong. He received a two-and-a-half year sentence.  

Gordon brown’s Britain is a mess. He has forced mass immigration upon us, turned our children into mini Hitler’s and sold us out to Europe. Diseases virtually wiped out, such as TB, have made a comeback; MRSA and CDiff are killing the patients that foreign non-English speaking doctors have managed to miss. Incidentally, some 3,500 NHS workers have been found to be illegal immigrants...

 I could go on and on but you have heard it all already.

To top it off, the final article made my stomach churn. Why? Because Labour’s indoctrination of our children is paying off when it comes to fulfilling their dream of a multicultural Eutopia.

According to the Mail’s medical correspondent, Jenny Hope, ‘Brits believe that mixed-raced people are the most attractive and successful’...

Wake up people and vote for a brighter future.

VOTE BNP on May 6th! 

Hospital has staff from 70 countries as nurses who don't even understand 'nil by mouth'

Dr Ubani - foreign out-of-hours doctor that barley speaks English 

An NHS hospital has staff from a staggering 70 countries on its payroll.

The huge number of overseas nurses, cleaners and porters has forced health chiefs to send them on ten-week English courses because many do not understand basic medical phrases.

Among the terms some workers from countries such as Burma, the Philippines and Poland can't follow are 'nil by mouth', 'doing the rounds' and 'bleeping a doctor'.

They highlight the language problems throughout the Health Service, which critics say are putting patients' lives at risk.

The lessons follow several 'near-disaster' cases, including one where a meal was delivered to a patient because a member of staff did not understand that 'nil by mouth' meant the man could not eat or drink.

Although all doctors from outside the EU must pass an English language test set by the General Medical Council before they can practise, the same rules do not apply for other hospital workers.
Instead, they are usually assessed on their grasp of the language at interview.

The problem has become so acute at Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals that foreign workers are being encouraged to attend ten-week, taxpayer-funded 'English For Speakers Of Other Languages' courses, which are run by a nearby college.

Research has found that up to a quarter of nurses  -  more than 60,000  -  working in London are foreign, with the largest number coming from the Philippines.

Hospitals in the capital that recruit a high number of overseas workers include University College Hospital, the Royal Free, and Guy's and St Thomas'.

Manchester Royal Infirmary also has a high proportion of foreign staff from countries including India, Ghana, Spain, Germany, Iceland and the Yemen.

Jacquie Pearce-Gervis, of the Oxford Radcliffe Patients' Forum, called last night for English lessons to be made compulsory rather than voluntary. She added:

'Patients and relatives have been calling for this for a long time. The language barrier can be a real issue. The most common problem is "nil by mouth".

There have been cases when porters have delivered a patient food despite the fact there is a clear sign on their bed saying "nil by mouth". Obviously this could have led to disaster but fortunately the patient has been intelligent enough to point out that they are not allowed the food.

I think it should be compulsory. There can often be problems with common slang terms used on

the ward.'
A member of staff at the trust, who did not wish to be named, said: 'It's a real problem here and the language lessons can only be a good thing.

We have so many foreign employees here and it's very worrying if they don't speak English.'

There have been increasing concerns over the language skills of overseas medical staff since the death of David Gray, who was unlawfully killed by a foreign out-of-hours doctor in 2008.

The 70-year-old died after Dr Daniel Ubani, 67, a German GP whose English was so poor that he had been rejected by other health authorities, gave him a massive overdose of painkillers.

It was later revealed that although Dr Ubani had already failed an English language test in Leeds, he was still allowed to sit a different trust's less-stringent test.

Last night, Mr Gray's relatives called on the Government to take a tougher stance on NHS staff who could not speak English.

His son Dr Stuart Gray, 49, a GP based in Belbroughton, West Midlands, said: 'It's an appalling state of affairs. It is paramount that all NHS staff should be able to speak English. Our father died at the hands of a doctor who had in fact taken an English test and failed it.

'But the GMC and the Government are unable to enforce any rules on doctors recruited from within the EU. As a result they are having to rely on Primary Care Trusts to enforce their own testing system which  -  as the tragedy with Dr Ubani demonstrates  -  isn't working.

'All NHS staff  -  be it doctors, nurses or other workers  -  must be able to speak English.'
Daily Mail

Hero denied a home after leaving Army

I am away for the weekend and decide to leave the internet alone for a few days, but having seen a story in today’s newspapers I just had to let you know about it.

The picture is of hero Private Joe McDonald who last year left the army after nine years. During his service he completed a gruelling seven month tour of Southern Iraq. He laid his life on the line to fight insurgents while protecting Army convoys carrying food, ammunition and kit to troops in UK bases.

On his return, Private McDonald applied for housing for his family (himself, wife Rachel,21, and children Ellen-May,4, Harry-Joe, 19 months, and baby Maissy-Ann) in Bexley, South-east London, where he grew up.

He was turned down.

According to the council he ‘made himself homeless’ by leaving Army quarters and was placed at the back of the housing associations queue behind unemployed, single mothers, criminals freed from prison and asylum seekers.

So what happened to the Ministry of Defence’s pledge to give fairer treatment to forces’ families over accommodation?

Use your vote wisely when the General Election is called as it is Labour that is behind the problem; they are the ones that have allowed our country to become what it is today. A country rife with crime, flooded with criminals and  international benefit seekers, spring-boarded above the people they should be helping...

Immigration: A plan to alter the nations soul

So now we know what Labour's immigration policy was really about. The "open door" was not simply held ajar in order to admit a fresh workforce that would help to fill gaps in the growing economy. Nor was it just a gesture of hospitality and goodwill to those who were fleeing from repressive or inhospitable regimes in order to seek a better life. Both of those aims would have been credible – if controversial and not thought-through in all their consequences. And so would the longer-term view that dynamic, cosmopolitan societies are generally healthier and more productive than in-bred, isolated ones, or that immigrants who tend to be ambitious for themselves and their families could help to counter the passivity and defeatism that tend to be endemic in the British class system.

But as it turns out, the policy was motivated by something far more radical and fundamental than any of this. The full text of the draft policy paper composed in 2000 by a Home Office research unit – the gist of which had already been made public by a former Labour adviser – was released last week under Freedom of Information rules. Properly understood, it is political dynamite. What it states quite unequivocally was that mass immigration was being encouraged at least as much for "social objectives" as for economic ones. Migration was intended specifically to alter the demographic and cultural pattern of the country: to produce by force majeure the changes in attitude that the Labour government saw itself as representing.

Tony Blair's "forces of conservatism" speech; his improbable presentation of Britain as a "young country"; the advocacy of a multicultural society which would have to reassess its own history, replacing traditional pride with inherited guilt: all of this could be facilitated by a large influx of migrants whose presence in the population would require the wholesale deconstruction of the country's sense of its own identity.

This may all sound rather far-fetched now, but try to recall just how much hubris the New Labour tide brought with it in the beginning: the contempt for history and the Year Zero arrogance with which they set about "modernising" the nation's institutions. It was, in this respect, a prime example of the new direction which Left-wing parties were forced to take in the wake of Marxism's collapse. Having lost the great economic argument of the 20th century, the Left had to switch its focus to society itself: if humanity could not be transformed through the redistribution of wealth and the socialist command economy, then it would have to be transfigured by altering social relations.

The object of the exercise was still to produce, in the words of an old Left-wing protest song, a "new world" based on a "new man". But now the new man (sorry, "person") would be formed not by changes in the power of capital or the ownership of the means of production, but in cultural attitudes and behaviour. The revolution now had to be confined to what went on in people's heads: to their values, their assumptions and their reactions to each other.

The phrase "altering consciousness", which had once meant awakening the proletariat to its own economic enslavement, now referred to raising awareness of social injustices, such as intolerance of cultural differences, social inequality, or discrimination against minorities. But the subtext was always self-examination and personal guilt: the indigenous Briton must be trained (literally, by the education system) always to question the acceptability of his own attitudes, to cast doubt on his own motives, to condemn his own national identity and history, to accept the blame even for the misbehaviour of new migrants – whose conduct could only be a reflection of the unfortunate way they were treated by the host population.

Included in this programme for the newly constituted British psyche was a whole package of subliminal assumptions, which were adapted from the Old Left stable: international solidarity rather than national sovereignty, collective values rather than personal conscience, and "social equality" rather than individual achievement. It was a peculiarity of New Labour's vanity that it actually tried to persuade the country that, under the miraculous Blair dispensation, it could have both sides of these dualities at the same time. But the full consequences of the new country that it envisaged, and the role that immigration was to play in the creation of it, broke the most basic rule of the democratic process: the electorate was never told it was voting for that.

The goal was a social revolution abetted by the influx of a huge variety of diverse cultures, which would provide both the need and the pretext for reshaping British life. It may have been relatively new (at least in Britain) as a specific political policy, but it was much of a piece with the conventional objective of Left-wing political movements, which is to transform human nature.

When you decide whether to give your support to a party of the Left or of the Right, you are actually making a judgment about what you think politics is for. If you believe that it is the function of government to alter or determine people's perceptions and responses – their innermost feelings about themselves and others – then you will probably opt for the Left. If you take the view that the state should concern itself only with behaviour – with what people do, especially insofar as it affects other people, rather than what they think or feel – then you will be more likely to veer to the Right. So this is really a question of whether you want politics to be concerned with what goes on in people's heads as much as with events in the objective world.

But of course, at least since the 1960s, when "raising consciousness" became the refrain of every group that sought change in any sphere, almost all parties have had to talk this way to some extent. It has become part of the politician's acknowledged brief to suggest ways in which the internal lives and attitudes of voters can be influenced or directed. There is scarcely a party leader now who would dare to say that these matters are none of his (or any government's) business.

Almost no one seems prepared to discuss the obvious danger: that if politics becomes a replacement for religion by taking upon itself the responsibility for transfiguring human nature then politicians, of all people, become the prophets and the priests. Just at the moment, I can't think of a more absurd idea.

Janet Daley - Daily Telegraph

As White Indigenous People Slip to Minority in London, Third World Gang Warfare Becomes Biggest Police Concern

Gun crime committed by Third World-origin immigrants and their children has become the Metropolitan Police’s biggest area of concern as this year marks the predicted minority status of white people in Britain’s capital city.

A new report on crime in London shows that although the total number of offenses fell, gangland shootings have led to a big rise in gun crime.

Violent attacks were also up and senior officers said there were “grave concerns” over the rises.

The number of offences involving guns, which also includes cases where criminals claimed to be armed, went up by 49 percent to 3,306 cases from 2,224 in 2008, the police said.

Gangsters engaged in drug and turf wars are increasingly using firearms to settle scores, and often only the skill of paramedics prevented shootings becoming murders.

According to the report, the number of incidents of “youth violence cases” fell by 3.5 percent to “only” 20,272, meaning that there were 55 attacks every day, or over two per hour.

There were also “only” 130 murders in London last year, a drop of 25 from the previous year. Detectives ascribed the small decline to “massive rises in the number of stop and searches” on the streets.

There were large increases in several other categories of crime. Residential burglaries rose by nearly six percent to 62,081.

Violent crime also rose to a total of 175,000 offences. There was a 24 percent increase in the number of rapes, up from 2,131 to 2,646.

In 2007, the Third World-origin population of London was estimated to be more than two million, or about 30 percent of the total.

That same year, an official study showed that white British-born children were already the minority in many London schools.

A study made by Anthony Browne and published in The Guardian newspaper in September 2000, predicted that whites would be a minority in London by 2010.

The article also predicted that whites would be a minority in all of Britain by 2100. Given immigration levels of the last decade, that figure is probably several decades too long.

Only the British National Party is dedicated to keeping Britain British. This is the same right demanded by every other indigenous people on earth, and has nothing to do with hating anyone — only a desire to preserve one’s own.

Will you accept the challenge of ensuring that Britain remains British?
British National party

A third of teenage criminals are ethnics

1 in 10 living in Britain are foreign nationals

The number of immigrants living in Britain has almost doubled in less than three decades, official figures show.

More than 10 per cent of the population - 6.7million - were born abroad, the Office for National Statistics has found.

The analysis shows that the count of those born abroad - now agreed to be the best figure for measuring the rate of immigration - is two million higher than it was just eight years ago.

And the figure is nearly double the 3.38million people born abroad who were recorded as living in Britain in 1981.

The scale of immigration over the past few years was set out in a breakdown by National Statistician Jil Matheson, the recently-appointed head of the Government's Office for National Statistics.

She said that there are 689,000 migrants from Eastern Europe in Britain, an increase of 522,000 since Poland and seven other Eastern European countries joined the EU in 2004.

But these make up only one in ten of the foreign-born population of the country, Miss Matheson found.

She also endorsed the ONS projections that say that the UK population will hit the politically sensitive 70million mark in 2029.

She added the recession is likely to have only a small impact on the record levels of immigration since 2001.

The ONS report found that Eastern Europeans have begun to emigrate as well as to arrive in Britain, and overall 20,000 more Eastern Europeans came to this country than left it in 2008.

Current research, Miss Matheson added, suggests that 'a short-term period of falling immigration can be expected, before immigration levels rise again to pre-recession levels'.

She concluded: 'The current recession is likely to have a small and temporary effect on net migration.'

Her findings run counter to assurances from Gordon Brown and Immigration Minister Phil Woolas that the new Home Office points-based immigration system will curb numbers coming into the country and the 70million population mark will never be reached.

Sir Andrew Green, of the Migrationwatch think-tank, said: 'This report confirms the massive impact of immigration on our population under the present Government.

'It must be brought under control, but so far Government policies are completely inadequate for the purpose.'

However, Border and Immigration Minister Phil Woolas said: 'These population projections do not take into account the impact of future government policies or those Eastern Europeans who came here, contributed, and are now going home.

'Projections are uncertain. For instance in the 1960s they said our population would reach 76million by the year 2000, this was off target by 16million.'

He added: 'And let's be clear the category "foreign-born mothers" includes British people born overseas - such as children whose parents are in the armed forces or those who come to Britain at a very early age.'

Previous research counted the number of foreign passport holders, but with many being granted British citizenship counting those who are foreign born is now thought to give the most accurate figure.

The findings on the scale of immigration follow evidence that the arrival of large numbers of migrant workers has pushed down wages and living standards for low-paid workers.

A report last week by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation charity found that the poorest-paid working families have been getting poorer and suffering greater unemployment not since the onset of recession, but from 2004 onwards during a time of economic boom.

Source

Asylum seekers live in £1.8m five story house

A SOMALI family are living in a luxury £1.8m five-storey house in central London funded by the taxpayer.

Nasra Warsame, 40, has lived with seven of her children and her elderly mother in the six-bedroom house since October. Westminster City Council picks up the £1,600-a-week bill.

The fully-furnished house in walking distance of the West End has three sitting rooms, four bathrooms, with some bedrooms boasting balconies overlooking a courtyard.

The main lounge has two leather sofas, a flat-screen television and a glass coffee table. Annual rent for the new house would cost a staggering £83,200.

Meanwhile Mrs Warsame's husband Bashir Aden, 50, and another of their children are living in a separate property in adjoining Camden. He said they live separately because the family is too big to fit under one roof. His two-bedroom flat is also paid for by housing benefit.

Outside the family's main house Mr Aden, a butcher, said: 'I've already had too much trouble with this house.

'Yes, it is true I live in Camden, and yes, my wife lives here, but she has a lot of problems with this at the moment.'

Mrs Warsame and her seven children, aged between two and 16 years old, first lived in a council house in Maida Vale but it was thought too small by council officials.

Mr Aden said his family were forced to move in September because the five-bedroom home was not spacious enough.

He said: 'That place was overcrowded. They moved her here for the children.'

An estate agent showed the family the spacious five-floor property near Edgware Road Underground station because the previous five-bedroom home in northwest London, was considered too small. The weekly rent, which was also covered by housing benefit, is understood to have been £800.

Mrs Warsame's new home is part of an impressive 1960s development of modern apartments and houses. There is a large glass sculpture situated in the middle of a courtyard outside the family's front door. Each room is painted white, with high ceilings.

It is understood the £1,600 rent being paid for by the council is twice the going rate for a property in the area.

'The new house we moved into in October is a nice house and it is in a nice area,' Mrs Warsame told the Sunday Times. 'It is quiet and it is convenient and we do not want to leave.

'It is better than the house we were living in in Maida Vale which was quite small. We were getting complaints from neighbours that the children were being too noisy.'

Mrs Warsame and her husband fled unrest in Somalia in 1991 and claimed asylum on their arrival in Britain. They have since been granted citizenship and all of their children were born here.

Daily Mail

Why the hell are these people allowed to claim this amount of money?

Why the hell are they allowed to have 8 children since they came here?

Make sure you vote for the BNP because that is the only way to stop this madness!

Switzerland takes the lead

‘Allowing minarets would represent the growth of an ideology and a legal system - Sharia law - which are incompatible with Swiss democracy’

SVP, the Swiss Peoples Party, seem to be the only party (who have any clout) that have the balls to stand up to the islamisation of their country.

Over 18 months they collected 100,000 signatures calling for a referendum on the future building of Islamic minarets and on Thursday it paid off.

More than 57% and 22 out of 26 provinces voted in favour of the ban and yet the BBC’s Imogen Foulkes finds the result surprising.

I’d say that’s a bloody good result considering there are half a million muslims living in Switzerland and 22% of it’s residents are immigrants.

Now then, when are we going to get the opportunity to do the same?

Full story HERE

Hateful immigrants and their vile email

It never ceases to amaze me at how ignorant the immigrants in our countries are.

The email above was sent to numerous BNP accounts, even though amrath2 is actually in America.

Exactly why this person is sending this vile message I don't know, but it seems to be a recation to video called 20 points you need to know why Indians are superior, which states:

India becoming the next superpower is inevitable, look at all hospitals, IT sectors, airports, and university campus, we are everywhere lol!

Indians are the most intelligent race on the planet, we are the true Aryans.

In next 20 years, your boss is likely to be an Indian, Indians will have all the high paying jobs, which make all European girls dumping their European men and embrace the Indian bachelors.

Indians are the most noble race in this world.

Of course, we receive this kind of hate mail every day so we get hardened to it. All the same, it isn't very nice is it?

No wonder the BNP membership is growing.

NHS abused by immigrants

I was outraged to see an article today about the amount of foreign women in our maternity units.

Administrators at the Chelsea and Westminster hospital in London put up a map of the world and encouraged the women to place a dot on the country they are from, apparently to ‘celebrate ethnic diversity’.

Out of 243 women only 18 were British. The rest are from 72 different nations including Mongolia, Papua New Guinea, Asia and Africa. And this is at just one hospital.

Almost every cot and incubator was occupied by a baby with a foreign mother and interpreters were on hand to make sure they understood the doctors.

Some of the women arrive straight from the airport with tags still attached to their luggage; many come as health tourists knowing our NHS will provide excellent care for babies born with profound illnesses needing lifetime treatment and medication.

The cost per day for each child? £1, 400

Many of these children have ailments such as sickle cell anaemia (almost unknown among North European’s, but is common in African and Mediterranean communities), HIV passed from the mother as well as deafness, blindness and devastating neurological problems which are common among ethnic minorities where marriages between cousins are the norm.

In London, 50 percent of babies are born to foreign mothers although in Newham and Brent that raises to 75% and 73%. In Chelsea the figure is 67%.

The next time you read of an expectant mother not able to find a hospital bed, or a child needing to travel miles for treatment, you’ll know why.

CNN - The islamic threat

Unlike our media, CNN aren't afraid to broadcast what is happening in countries that is rife with islamic radicals.

Open your eyes to the truth and stop listening to leftwing bullshit about how we benefit from multiculturalism.

How can footage you see on blogs and sites like YouTube and LiveLeak be wrong?

It can't!

Benefits of immigration - Tooting

TEN DAYS IN BRITAIN

You only have to open the newspapers each day to see that what was once a great country is now a haven for third worlders and left wing nutters. True Brits are forgotten in today's Britain and are now second class citizens.

Each week I will be creating a week in pictures. This video is the first and covers the main events of the past 10 days.

The main aim is for my overseas friends. I would like to say I hope you all enjoy it but I know it will depress you as much as it depresses me.

There is only one option for us in the UK and that is to support the British National Party, the only party that will put the people of Great Britain first.

For those of you in other countries I urge you to look to your nationalist parties because this is by no means a British problem. What is happening here is happening to you also, especially our European neighbours.

Hispanics boycott caucasian owned businesses