THE MAKING

OF

LONDONISTAN

by

Melanie Phillips

*

Daily Mail

Saturday, May 20-2006.

The 7/7 bombings shook Britain.

But should we be SURPRISED?

A new book reveals how for years-despite warnings-politicians have been happy to let Islamic FUNDAMENTALISM

thrive here.

It has amounted, the author says:

TO AN ACT OF CULTURAL SUICIDE.

THE London suicide bombings last year caught MI5 with its trousers down.

Last week’s report by the Commons Intelligence Select Committee, revealed astonishingly incompetence by MI5, which had never understood the nature and extent of Muslim radicalisation and had let two of the bombers slip through its fingers.

The London bombings lifted the veil on Britain’s dirty secret in the war on terrorism - the fact that, for more than a decade, London had been the epicentre of Islamic militancy in Europe.

Under successive governments, Britain’s capital had turned into

‘LONDONISTAN’

-       a mocking play on Afghanistan, where Al Qaeda had been trained. Incredibly, London had become the economic and spiritual European hub of a production and distribution network for Islamist extremism and terrorism - all being carried out right under the nose of

MI5

During the 1980’s and 1990’s Islamic radicals flocked to London. A combination of Britain’s reverence for

FREEDOM of SPEECH

And its loss of CONTROL of

IMMIGRATION

-meant that such extremists and terrorists found LONDON to be the MOST HOSPITABLE in the WORLD.

As a result, London fostered the growth of myriad radical Islamist publications and preachers spitting hatred of the West.

Its BANKS were used for fund-raising accounts funnelling money into extremist and terrorist organisations, and it provided the launching pad for many of Osama Bin Laden’s fatwas.

Indeed, some authorities believe it was in London that Al Qaeda was forged into a

GLOBAL TERROR MOVEMENT.

Terrorists wanted in other countries were given safe haven in the UK. Extremist groups such as Hizb ut-Tahir remained legal, despite being banned in many European and Muslim countries.

Radicals such as Abu Qatada, Abu Hamza and others were allowed to preach incitement to violence, raise money and recruit members for the JIHAD.

An astonishing procession of UK-based terrorists turned out to have been responsible for attacks upon

AMERICA

ISRAEL

- and many other countries.

YET, the bizarre fact is that the

BRITISH AUTHORITIES

-       allowed all this extremist activity to continue with impunity for more than a decade - even after the ostensible

‘WAKE-UP CALL’

of

9/11

So how could it have happened?

The TRUTH is that EVEN NOW the

BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT

-is in a state of denial about the nature of the threat to the

FREE WORLD

-       posed by Islamist extremism and paralysed in its attempt to combat it.

Nowhere, is this more alarming than within the nexus of:

POLITICIANS

CIVIL SERVANTS

INTELLIGENCE SERVICES

And the

POLICE

-which is responsible for guarding Britain against the THREAT.

After the London bombings last year, ministers were appalled by

HOW LITTLE

the

SECURITY SERVICE

-       Knew?

Yet MI5 had known since at least the late 1990s that some British Muslims were becoming radicalised and recruited for the jihad, or holy war - and with British targets included in their sights.

In December 1998, eight young British Muslims were arrested and eventually convicted in the Yemeni capital Aden, of plotting terrorist attacks in that country and abducting tourists.

Subsequently security officials confessed they had no idea the youths had been recruited from mosques around England and were being trained at special terrorist camps sponsored by Osama Bib Laden.

‘It was a complete shock to us and it was a shock that chilled us to the bone,’ one source said.

Over the years, the governments of

India,

Saudi Arabia,

Turkey,

Israel,

Peru,

Russia

Among OTHERS, lodged formal or informal protests about the presence in Britain of terrorist organisations or their sympathisers.

Many countries asked Britain to extricate radicals back to the nations they were threatening but were turned down, often by the COURTS.

So why has Britain been so reluctant to act against Islamist terrorists in their midst?

The reasons - as always when questions are asked about the behaviour of the

SECRET STATE-

-are inevitably murky.

But through the self-serving excuses and obfuscations that such an inquiry tends to throw up, a picture emerges that raises some urgent questions about Britain’s ability even now to defend itself and the rest of the

FREE WORLD

- against Islamist terror.

The first reason is that, during the 1990s, both the British and Americans failed to grasp the threat to the West that was developing in the Islamist world.

James Woolsey, who between 1993 and 1995 ran the American,

CIA -Central Intelligence Agency

-says that both American and British intelligence made the same mistake.

With the death of Communism, Western Intelligence agencies laid off the analysts who could recognise the particular kind of threat posed by destructive ideologies.

So they never understood that, with the resurgence of a particularly extreme version of Islam, a set of ideas had gripped minds so deeply that believers would march against the

FREE WORLD

-under its banner.

Instead, the agencies tended to discount what such people were saying because it all sounded so crazy.

Britain, moreover, believed that it had no involvement in the Middle East that might present a problem. So after the Cold War,

MI5

decided to focus its attention to Northern Ireland, the drugs trade and economic espionage.

That was what the Government asked it to do.

The Intelligence world did not deliver the goods on what was going on in the Middle East because its customers in the political world did not ask it to do so.

* *

[Over the past four decades in Europe and in Britain the politicians with few exceptions had and still have ONLY the growing ambition of a

United States of Europe

in mind.

The Intelligence Services of Germany and France have been and are still operating in concert for as long as the EU has been in being and has been suspected of undermining England and its influence at home and abroad. The German tactics of undermining the English world-wide have not changed since the Boer war.

For more details of the activities of the German /French Secret Service see EDP bulletin board or contact:

INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW

www.worldreports.org

www.worldreports.org

c/story@worldreports.org

* *

To continue:

But there were people in Britain who did try to alert the rest of the establishment to what was happening.

Lord Salisbury, a former Tory defence minister says during the 1980s and 1990s he tried to warn the governments of Margaret Thatcher and John Major

About the growing threat from Islamist extremists, but was brushed aside.

‘It was like APPEASEMENT before World War II,’ he said.

If you have a set of prejudices, its convenient to question them.’

*

[Well both Prime Ministers had their minds preoccupied by the EU equation and as we have now been informed those who were signatories to EU treaties were given facility payments (bribes) from a Nazi slush fund -money has a habit of directing minds on other things and away from protecting an Island people’s FREEDOM of over 1400 years in the making

To show the indifference of our politicians to the welfare of people they represent we have the incident in February 1992 - when one of the bribed signatories of the

Maastricht Treaty

Douglas Hurd then British Foreign Secretary, was notoriously overheard commenting, having just signed [the Treaty] that

‘We’d better find out what we’ve just signed’

He had in fact signed away the

Rights and Liberties of ENGLAND

And opened the door to the

United States of Europe.

For such

TREACHERY

it was not so long ago a Minister of the Crown would have lost his head.

* *

To continue:

An intelligence source said that during the 1990s, opinion within British intelligence was divided.

‘There was a lot of talk about extremist activity but it was thought to be better to allow them to let of steam than bottle it up’

he said.

[Until it was too late to prevent the massacre in July 7-2006 of 52 people and the injury of over 700 some with horrendous injuries, which will leave many with their families and friends, scared for life]

‘They thought that if the Muslim community was targeted, the fall-out would be greater. It would affect British interests around the world and project Britain as a less democratic society

* *

[WE are surely a LESS democratic country in 2006 because of the inaction of the past -with Habeas Corpus suspended and many laws restricting our once taken for granted FREEDOM &LIBERTIES]

* *

To continue:

David Blunkett, Home Secretary from 2001 to 2005 believes that the British security and political establishment did not - and still does not- fully understand the dimensions of the phenomenon it is fighting.

The Security World, he said was not generally given direct instructions from politicians but was instead sensitive to general zeitgeist.

‘It all got mixed up with people’s perceptions of what was going on in Israel and the Middle East. he said

‘People were saying, if only there was justice across the world these demands would be negotiable.’

Politicians were looking for political solutions to issues such as Palestine; this was what was in the air at the time, and the intelligence world would take its cue from that.

Reda Hussaine is an Algerian journalist, who, between 1999 and 2000, gave

MI5

-information about the Islamist radicalisation he observed taking place at Finsbury Park mosque in North London.

He was astonished to find his warnings were being ignored. ‘My contacts said:

We are giving these people a roof over their heads, food, free health care -and the security of Britain will be safe. WE don’t care what is going on outside this country’.

The British, he said, had a problem understanding the culture of the Arabs.

‘I told them; you don’t understand this kind of threat. One day they may attack you as unbelievers.’

They said, we don’t think they will do it here. This is a special place. I told them Britons were going to fight, but they never thought they would fight their own country.’

British officials privately admit that such a bargain did form part of their calculations. The Islamists were being left undisturbed on the assumption that they would not attack Britain.

This bargain, or ‘covenant of security’ had been a dirty secret at the heart of British government’s blind-eye policy. As long as there was no threat to Britain, the GOVERNMENT and SECURITY ESTABLISHMENT just didn’t want to know. They kept an eye on the radicals [not all the time or we wouldn’t have had the bombings on July 7-2006]

-but only to make sure that English law wasn’t being broken.

To the higher mandarinate of WHITEHALL’

Islamist extremism was merely an arcane dispute between different kinds of unpleasant swarthy people who were always doing terrible things to each other in far-flung places. There was certainly no cause for Britain to take sides.

Accordingly, the Islamist exiles in London were seen as being just the latest of all the radicals to whom Britain had traditionally given refuge for centuries.

Moral judgment - along with common sense- was therefore suspended for the duration.

It was also inextricably mixed up with the delicate issue of Britain’s traditionally close, if ambiguous ties with the Arab world. Not for nothing was the British Foreign Office known jovially as the “camel corps”.

* *

[German intelligence has for over a hundred years done everything they could to exploit the close connection of Britain to the Arab world in their favour as they do today.]

‘The intelligence world took the view that we should soft -pedal on these radicals in London because of our interests in the Arab world,’ said David Blunkett. In particular, Britain had extensive commercial interests with Saudi Arabia.

In fact, British governments have always been prepared to negotiate with terrorists, as they once showed in Kenya and Northern Ireland. This is because the British Establishment tends to favour the short-term solution. Some call this pragmatism. Others call it a national instinct for

APPEASEMENT.

In the case of

LONDONISTAN

-it was to prove a policy of gross irresponsibility. In cynically promoting the narrowest interpretation possible of

NATIONAL INTEREST,

-the British acted as a midwife to the monster of

JIHAD

But there was another part of the British mindset that was more troubling even than it’s short-terminism or post-colonial arrogance.

This was its profound unwillingness - shared with the U.S. - to acknowledge that what the country was being confronted with was religious fanaticism, an unwillingness that continues to this day.

Oliver Revell was head of counter -intelligence for the

FBI

from 1980 to 1991.

He says that both the U.S and the UK have serious problems in dealing with radicalism rooted in religion.

‘The extremists have found the soft underbelly of Western civilisation, the sanctuary provided in its very heart by the commitment to

FREEDOM OF SPEECH

-he argues.

There was, and still is, a great reluctance to investigate any religious activity unless there is clear evidence that a crime is committed.’

To understand the depth of the reluctance and in comprehension in Britain, however, it is necessary first to consider one of the most deeply rooted of all aspects of the British character. This is its belief in the rational, the everyday and what is demonstrably evident, and its corresponding suspicion of the abstract or the theoretical.

Faced with a foaming ideologue, the British are less likely to succumb than to scoff.

But the downside of this robustly down-to -earth approach is that the British now find it very hard to deal with religious fanaticism.

Presented with patently ludicrous rantings, they refuse to believe that anyone can take it seriously. So when Islamist clerics such as Abu Hamza trumpeted their hatred of the West and their calls for a holy war against it,

MI5

-regarded them as little more than pantomime figures.

At the same time, Britain is too frightened by religious fanaticism even to acknowledge it.

As one foreign intelligence source put it:

‘During the 1990s, many attempts were made to enlighten the British about what was happening. But they refused to see the problem as having a religious character. If this was a religious problem, it became a religious confrontation - and the spectre of a religious war was unthinkable.

‘They were very concerned about social unrest among Asians in cities like Bradford, but they treated it more as a criminal matter.

After 9/11, they woke up in principle

BUT

NOT IN PRACTICE.

‘They still thought that the UK wasn’t in the front line, and if they continued with their policy of

“BENEVOLENCE”

-the same thing wouldn’t happen to them.’

David Blunkett admits it has taken him a long time to comprehend the real nature of the threat.

‘We just didn’t understand that they (the islamists) were not just anti-Western but on a different moral and philosophical plane altogether, and this is still not widely understood in the UK,’ he said.

‘We can be as nice as pie to them but its not the issue.

‘They are on a mission that has taken them outside anything we can say, a mission to destroy completely

OUR WAY OF LIFE.

* *

[Exactly as Tony Blair and his fanatical pro-EU followers have in mind. It appears it is not ONLY a question of our being bombed into submission by religious fanatics but at the same time our politicians wish to destroy the same way-of-life by the unfair and at present undemocratic political process.]

* *

To continue:

Even now, he says, the British authorities fail to ask themselves what had so captured the minds of young men from Yorkshire that they would turn themselves into bombs.

[Because they felt they did not belong in that community and country]

‘Because they think it’s just a few extremists’, they are continuing to track the threat of big spectacular attacks, looking for example at transfers of materials for bombs, whereas what they should be looking at is what’s going on inside people’s heads’.

After last summer’s London bombings, Tony Blair spoke of the need to confront a strain of Islam that was an ‘ evil ideology’. It cannot be beaten except by confronting it- systems and causes- head -on, without compromise and without delusion.’ He declared.

Nevertheless, HIS GOVERNMENT and the wider British Establishment seems intent on appeasing that ideology - not least by inviting Islamist radicals into the heart of the Establishment.

This produced the extraordinary situation in which the task force of Muslims set up to advise the Government on how to counter Islamist extremism itself included extremists. Its final report took the view that the fault for Islamist terrorism lay as much with the Government as with the bombers.

It effectively proposed more, not less, Islamist separatism, with more Islam in school curriculum and Arabic lessons for women.

It opposed just about every government anti-terrorist proposal. It wanted changes in British foreign policy, which it said was a ‘key contributory factor’ for ‘criminal radical extremists’, with the implied threat that if foreign policy didn’t change there would be more attacks.

What had started as an exercise to get the Muslim community to grapple with the sources of extremism in its midst had been transformed into a demand for Britain to treat that community as a principal victim of British society and to make amends by dancing to its tune - including dictating how people talked about Islam, and censoring anyone who dissented.

The Government had quite simply handed over policy on extremism to the extremists.

This was no accident but a deliberate policy of riding the Islamist tiger. It has enraged truly moderate Muslims, who have protested that such a strategy pulls the rug from underneath them by undermining their OWN efforts to combate EXTREMISM.

The British Government thinks it is using Islamist radicals in a sophisticated strategy.

The reality is that it is being used by an ENEMY it DOES NOT UNDERSTAND, with the result that it is sleepwalking towards DISASTER.

*

Extracted from Londonistan by Melanie Phillips

To be published by Gibson Square Books on June 16 at £14.99-(2006)

To pre-order a copy for £11.99 (plus 1.95p&p) call

0870 161 0870

* * *

[Font altered-bolding &underlining used-comments in brackets]

MAY/06

*

[As mentioned in the above article we should always have the word

APPEASEMENT

- in mind and for those who witnessed the ‘ Gathering Storm’ years with the Nazi threat well know what such a policy reaps by not facing the Enemy before it strikes without mercy and at great loss of life.

As we have said so often in order to face the threat we need to be on the moral high ground and withdraw our forces from Iraq and assist the Middle East settlement of which we were a part over fifty years ago.

ONLY when OUR hands are CLEAN can we face the Enemy with the resolve to obtain the

JUST PEACE

whatever the cost as we did in two world wars and it will be a bonding of ALL the British people and our friends world-wide in the battle to protect Toleration and their way-of-life with

JUSTICE and TRUTH

- our guiding light.

Over the past 2000 years religious hatred has shown itself when it has forgotten the TRUE message of its birth and this has been the case as so demonstrated by the Inquisition of the past, which though later banned by Rome was continued for financial reasons in Portugal and Spain.

It is a fact of history that government under the Muslim has been on the whole more tolerant of other religions. Though history shows many examples even in modern times of barbarity by religious faiths of world religions.

We are in great danger because of our unjust policy abroad and the lack of determination of resolve by

OUR GOVERNMENT

-at home.

In the words of the 4^th century A.D.

VEGETIUS

‘Let him who desires peace prepare for war’

*

In the words of Lord Acton the accomplished historian (1834-1902) -who started and planned the

Cambridge Modern History

-with his great accumulative knowledge of the history of the world.

‘Democracy without a moral standard…could no more stand than a Republic governed by [Jean Paul] Marat’(French Revolutionary)

‘Liberty grows as conscience grows. For the conscience of man becomes more sensitive and more true to culture’

‘The Rights of Man grew out of English toleration. It was the link between tradition and abstraction.’

‘Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’

‘The true ethics of politics involve effective securities for freedom, that is, freedom to do one’s moral duty. Moral

responsibility entails political responsibility’

‘War is only Murder unless it is inescapable in defence of FREEDOM

‘The supreme moral principle is the sanctity of human life, a principle which can only be violated if absolutely necessary for the sake of freedom, because freedom to do one’s moral duty is dearer than life itself’

The damning Despatches Report on Channel 4 on Monday 22nd May 2006 under the title:

‘BATTLE FATIGUE’

Showing the callous indifference of the MoD to the suffering of the wounded with their inability to see that soldiers must remain in a regimental family atmosphere during their treatment, which is better for their welfare and early recovery from their wounds.

We are at a loss to understand how the Top Brass of the Services can have allowed this disgraceful and inhuman treatment of the world’s premier fighting force to be so abominably treated.

The disclosure of a letter from a member of the Top Brass [IRVIN] agreeing to the political need to try a soldier at the behest of the

Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith

-       at the Old Bailey says it all.

-       The soldier was later acquitted of all charges.

*

Since the glorious bloodless English Revolution of 1688 when the power of the Monarch was transferred to the First Minister because of the use of absolute power by the Monarch and his family predecessors we are now in 2006 with another absolute power Tony Blair with his cronies in

OUR PARLIAMENT.

We had replaced an Absolute Monarch

In 1688

for an

Absolute Prime Minister.

In 2006

With a Parliament which in 2006 is as dispicable as the

Long Parliament

of Cromwell’s Day who the Lord Protector told to clear off as they were a disgrace to the House for many of the same reasons as are around today in

2006

[We remind Mr Blair]

‘Privilege of the Crown and Privilege of Parliament are only Privilege so long as they are exercised for the benefit of the PEOPLE.’

*

For Concord in a Nation State

We conclude with a quotation from St Ambrose (337-397)

‘When in Rome, live as the Romans do; when elsewhere, live as they live elsewhere.

But it is matter of good advice to a government that it considers its own actions in the first place as many of the problems we have today in 2006 are a direct result of their policy over the past nine years.

* * *

MAY/06

Q&A: The Lisbon Treaty-2008

Leaders of the European Union's 27 member states meet in Portugal this week to sign what will now become known as the Lisbon Treaty.

*

The abolition of Britain
by The Reform Treaty
- Second Reading-Passed by majority of 138

*

Veteran parliamentarian TONY BENN speaks of the absolute necessity of a

REFERENDUM

HEAR HIM ON

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o0I-ZdvQz1o

*

TIME FOR DECISION-DECEMBER,2007

THE BRITISH LEGACY-AUSTRALIA-CANADA-NEW ZEALAND-WHY THEY MATTER.

*

The Act of Settlement of 1701-WHY IT SHOULD CONCERN -YOU!

*

The Common Law of ENGLAND is the LAW of

THE COMMONWEALTH and AMERICA

*

The Commonwealth Realms V The Constitution for Europe- 4-PARTS

*

MESSAGE FROM AUSTRALIA-SUPPORT THE CROWN

*

YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH.

WILL THIS CHRISTMAS  QUEEN'S SPEECH

BE THE LAST IN A FREE INDEPENDENT ENGLAND -SCOTLAND AND WALES?

Will HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ASSURE YOU THAT YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM BECOMING A PROVINCE OF EUROPE.

OR

WILL THE QUEEN MAKE IT PLAIN THAT OUR FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE IS SACROSANCT BUT THAT IF THE PEOPLE WISH TO BECOME SLAVES -THEN A REFERENDUM THERE MUST BE.

WE BELIEVE THAT NO ENGLISHMAN SHOULD BE ASKED WHETHER HE WISHES TO BE A SLAVE OR FREE!

THIS CHRISTMAS WE WILL FIND OUT IF OUR PROTECTOR OF THE

'Rights and Liberties'

of

Englishmen

Will keep by HER SACRED OATH

or the MONARCHY be nothing more than a 

THEME PARK

 in the future

THIS IS THE TIME FOR BLUNT SPEAKING AS THE VERY EXISTENCE OF OUR UNIQUE NATION STATE IS IN DIRE PERIL.

We are told on the BBC  (Brussels Broadcasting Service) at 11.30 pm on Saturday the 23rd December, 2007, that the QUEEN now has a website which has footage of the Royal Family in the past and that the QUEEN is NOT

'Stuck in the past'

Well! as far as many patriotic subjects are concerned we need to remain in the PAST when it concerns the protection of  our

FREEDOM and COUNTRY.

Change we have had and will continue to have but it must not threaten our very WAY-OF-LIFE our Common Law of England and all which makes our country the most unique parliamentary democracy in the world.

THERE CAN BE NO SURRENDER!

Should the Monarch fail to protect our inherited RIGHTS and Liberties then we shall have to fight for a REPUBLIC  as happened in the 17th century because the Monarch of the day ignored those very 'Rights and Liberties of Englishmen' which will still survive in the English Speaking World today in December 2007. How can the MOTHER of PARLIAMENTS give away what is already our and our children's  INHERITANCE which cannot be taken away by

PARLIAMENT or the QUEEN.

If the above publicity exercise is to be used to soften the impact to the population of the BETRAYAL of their CONSTITUTION and COUNTRY then it would be the greatest TREASON by a Monarch since James II who sold our COUNTRY to the FRENCH for MONEY and RELIGION.

WE ASK WHAT PRICE ARE OUR RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES WORTH?

THEY ARE PRICELESS!

*

A BETRAYAL OF OUR NATION –CONSPIRATORS NAMED

*

The Choice is Yours!-but time is running out FAST!

6 months to be EXACT!

*

THE EU

WE-AND THEM!

WE are to join THEM

THEY are not joining US

WE have more to LOSE

THEY have more to GAIN

WE have been clear of dictators from EUROPE for most of our HISTORY

THEY have been cursed with that abomination for most of their HISTORY and NOW!

*

Our Queen and the EU Constitution

*

The Spirit of England

by

Winston Churchill

*

THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE

*

MESSAGE TO HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH THE II

*

We now learn from the Daily Mail COMMENT on Christmas Eve that the Queen's Speech will cover the catastrophic fall in Values and Moral behaviour since the beginning of her 56 -year reign. This has been brought about by the actions of HER MINISTERS and the greater number of those in HER PARLIAMENT who have placed THEIR CONCERNS before the INTERESTS of THE PEOPLE and NATION STATE.

 As for the fact that HER PEOPLE feel LOST that has been the direct result of the actions of HER SUCCESSIVE GOVERNMENTS and the TRAITOROUS POLITICIANS including PRIME MINISTERS who have stealthily over the 56 years of HER MAJESTY'S REIGN have almost achieved their aim of ENSLAVING the PEOPLE to a FOREIGN POWER. 

The reason for the marked drop in the number viewing THE QUEEN'S SPEECH is no doubt because the mass of people have realised years ago that the MONARCH is powerless to PROTECT their WAY-OF-LIFE and events up to now have PROVED THEM CORRECT.

There is a well know saying 'Nero fiddled while Rome burned'

Is it the case on Christmas Day 2007 while the  Monarch talks  our Rights and Liberties are being taken from us under our very  noses?

Of course the QUEEN under HER CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE can only 'Advise and Warn' HER MINISTERS but when the matter concerns the very LIFE of an INDEPENDENT STATE we expect that HER MAJESTY consider the arrangement to be AT AN END as it would make a MOCKERY of the PRIME IMPORTANCE of the MONARCH to protect our inherited Rights and Liberties which HER MINISTERS  are endeavouring TO GIVE AWAY.

We as loyal subjects of the MONARCH who is the living embodiment of OUR RIGHTS and LIBERTIES  ask at this late stage with only months to the eradication of a FREE NATION STATE some veiled comments that HER MAJESTY will PROTECT our RIGHTS and LIBERTIES.

As for the MORAL tone of the NATION STATE at this most crucial time in ENGLISH CONSTUTUTIONAL HISTORY this matter should be left to CHURCH LEADERS who's responsibility it is to CARE for their FLOCKS particularly at this FESTIVAL of CHRISTMAS.

IF HER MAJESTY'S SPEECH has not been pre-recorded  we ask HER MAJESTY to give those MILLIONS of HER subjects some hope that their PROTECTOR has NOT FORGOTTEN THEM.

Should this APPEAL not be answered we can at last confirm that the MONARCHY is after all nothing more than a talking shop suitable for YouTube and therefore nothing more than a

THEME PARK

*

Hear Tony Benn's comments about the despotic and corrupt EUROPEAN UNION

and the need for a

REFERENDUM

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o0I-ZdvQz1o

From a politician with INTEGRITY and love of country who has for decades witnessed the growth of the monstrous creature soon to be a

UNITED STATES OF EUROPE.

*

[All words/word underlined  have a separate bulletin]

*

www.noliberties.com

[Latest Addition - June07]

*

www.eutruth.org.uk

*

www.thewestminsternews.co.uk

*

www.speakout.co.uk

*

Daniel Hannan - Forming an OPPOSITION to the EU

www.telegraph.co.uk.blogs

*

VOTE

MAY -2007

TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION

WITH THE ONLY PARTY WITH A MANDATE

TO SET YOU

 FREE

THE

UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY

www.ukip.org

TO RECLAIM YOUR DEMOCRACY DON'T VOTE FOR THE TRIPARTITE PARTIES IN WESTMINSTER

BUT

SMALL PARTIES THAT SPEAK THEIR MINDS WITHOUT SPIN AND LIES.

*

ONLY

PRO-PORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

WILL BRING DEMOCRACY BACK TO THE ENGLISH PEOPLE

*

Home Rule for Scotland

WHY NOT

HOME RULE for ENGLAND

*

MAY/07

[All underlined words have a separate bulletin

*

 FOR RETURN TO

IMMIGRATION FILE

*

 H.F1343-BROUGHT-FORWARD-OCTOBER 16,2017