Saturday, 26 May 2012


In December 1997, more than five years before a US-led coalition invaded Iraq for the second time, Dr William Pierce broadcast the following message in the on-line magazine, Free Speech:

"Every evening when I have turned on the television news during the past few weeks, the message has had the same theme: Saddam Hussein must be stopped! Saddam Hussein is a danger to America! We must destroy Saddam Hussein!

About the only difference I've noticed in these daily news messages is that they're steadily becoming more strident, more demanding, more imperative: We must destroy Saddam Hussein! And in support of this message the television people are using all of their tricks to stir up public opinion in favor of another war against Iraq. Day after day we hear things like: 'Saddam continues to defy the United Nations. Saddam thumbs his nose at America. Saddam challenges us to do something about his illegal actions.'

These inflammatory comments are made against a background of old film footage of Saddam in his military uniform, grinning at us. NBC's news anchor Tom Brokaw seems really impatient: 'Why don't we take out Saddam now?' he asks. 'Why don't we just go in there and kill him? What are we waiting for?'

That's pretty much the refrain heard from all of the news commentators.
Now, how exactly is Saddam Hussein defying us? Saddam is saying, 'Iraq is our country. It is a sovereign country. It doesn't belong to the United Nations or to the United States. We're tired of you people sticking your noses into our business and telling us how to run our country. Get out! Leave us alone! Go away!'...

Pretty intolerable behavior, right? A pretty good reason for us to start another war and bomb Iraq back into the Stone Age, right? Complete justification for slaughtering a few hundred thousand more Iraqis, right? What does this guy Saddam think in demanding that we respect the sovereignty of his country? We're bigger than he is, so we don't have to respect him, right?...

The last thing we expect from our controlled news media is honesty. They want their war, and they also want to make us believe that the war is Saddam's fault, not ours. And so day after day the television news people tell us about how Saddam is threatening the security of the world and defying America and just begging for us to go in there and 'take him out,' to use Tom Brokaw's euphemism for political assassination....

It was just 11 months ago, on December 21, 1996, when I predicted on this program that the Jewish media bosses would make a major effort to take us into another war during Mr. Clinton's second term in office. I based my prediction on two sets of facts: first, that Mr. Clinton had just appointed an all-Jewish foreign-policy team for his second term; and second, that Clinton's second term was an opportunity the Jews couldn't afford to miss to use American military force to wipe out Israel's rivals in the Middle East once and for all.

And now, I fear, my prediction is coming true. If this current drive to start another war with Iraq is what I'm afraid it is, then it'll involve much more than merely another attempt to assassinate Saddam Hussein. They'll manage to escalate it into something which will wipe out all of their rivals in the Middle East and leave Israel a free hand to continue her policies of expansion. And it will end up costing America a lot more than a few billion dollars worth of military hardware and a few thousand more unexplained cases of veterans suffering from 'Gulf War syndrome.' A lot more.

You know, there are many people in addition to the Jews pushing for another war to destroy Iraq. There are the trendy New World Order types who are hostile to the idea of national sovereignty and believe that all of the countries of the world ought to be subordinated to the United Nations and forced to obey UN directives, by military means if necessary. That is, they say they believe that, so long as the country in defiance of the United Nations isn't Israel. Israel has been thumbing its nose at the UN for years and defying one UN resolution after another, building new Jewish settlements on land seized by military force from Israel's neighbors and refusing to permit UN inspection teams to look for evidence of illegal weapons in Israel.

And there are even more people who believe that a war against Iraq can be justified if it will destroy Iraq's capability to build so-called 'weapons of mass destruction.' The controlled media have been full of horror stories recently about the possibility that Iraq may develop and use biological and chemical weapons capable of killing millions of people...

But if we want to combat that danger, Iraq is not the place to start. Israel has developed chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons of mass destruction, and that's something that really should worry the world. After all, Saddam may be a dictator, but he's never given any evidence of having the frighteningly dangerous combination of hair-trigger paranoia and delusions of grandeur that afflicts Israeli leaders. He hasn't been caught sending Iraqi agents into other countries to assassinate religious or political leaders with exotic biological or chemical weapons. But Israel's current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been caught sending Israeli agents to do exactly that…

Orthodox Jews wield the balance of power in Israel, and their religion teaches them explicitly that they are a 'chosen people,' that their tribal god chose them to rule over all the other peoples of the earth, that all the wealth of the Gentiles really belongs to the Jews, and that anyone who refuses to submit to Jewish rule should be killed. If you never learned that in Sunday School, find yourself a Bible and read the Book of Isaiah. I mean, really read it. Read it carefully. Think about its meaning. And then remind yourself that whacked-out, nutcase religious Jews who believe Isaiah's bloodthirsty, chauvinistic ravings, believe them literally, are in control of one of the world's largest arsenals of chemical and biological weapons.

If there's any situation which calls for a massive, preemptive military strike to safeguard the world from a madman using weapons of mass destruction, it's the situation in Israel today. When was the last time you heard Mr. Clinton insisting that Israel should permit a UN inspection team to check for biological and chemical weapons in that country?

America has no good reason to pick a fight with Iraq. Iraq poses no threat to us. Iraq wants nothing from us but to be left alone. Unlike Israel, Iraq has never even asked us for a handout.

In 1991 we bombed Baghdad and slaughtered more than 100,000 Iraqis because they had invaded Kuwait, which in fact used to belong to them before it had been taken away during the colonial period. And then we imposed a crippling economic embargo on the defeated Iraqis, an embargo which has caused the deaths of an estimated half-million Iraqi infants and children during the past six years and which is maintained because of Israeli insistence. So the Iraqis have plenty of reason to hate us now, but no reason to try to hurt us if we would just leave them alone. Iraqi interests lie in the Middle East and only in the Middle East.

The reason we are headed toward another war with Iraq is solely because of the influence of Jews on the government of the United States. It certainly isn't because we are concerned about Iraq's development of weapons of mass destruction. If we were serious about that sort of thing we would have stopped Israel from developing its chemical, biological, and nuclear arsenal. The reason it's all right with our government for the Jews to have weapons of mass destruction but not all right for the Iraqis to have them is that the Jews control the news and entertainment media in the United States, and thus wield effective control over the political process here, and the Iraqis don't. And that's the only reason.

So let's cut out the baloney about... the need to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of dangerous and unpredictable people. Weapons of mass destruction already are in the hands of dangerous and unpredictable people, and a lot more dangerous and unpredictable people will have them in the future.

And why is that? Well, in the case of the Middle East, the reason is the policy that the United States government has had imposed on it by the Jewish minority here. Israel is the continuing sore point in that part of the world. It is Israel which first introduced weapons of mass destruction into the Middle East.

And it is Israel's aggression, supported by the United States, which has put pressure on countries like Iraq to develop their own weapons of mass destruction. Any country which can develop them, any country which has the ability to develop them, will develop them if it feels threatened, because whether or not it's obvious to Americans, it's obvious to the rest of the world that there is no such thing as justice or a rule of law in international affairs. They've seen the way things have worked in the Middle East for the past 50 years...

We are the ones who brought about the introduction of weapons of mass destruction into the Middle East through our support of Israel. And we are the ones who caused the present crisis in the Middle East, again through our support of Israel.

And the solution to the present crisis is not to bomb Baghdad again or to try again to assassinate Iraq's president or to starve more Iraqi children by maintaining the embargo against Iraq. That's the policy that Mr. Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, is trying to persuade Iraq's neighbors to go along with, but fortunately they're not buying it. They're saying, 'Listen, we want peace and stability in this region. We don't want weapons of mass destruction used here by anybody. And we'll support an effort to police Iraq, if the United Nations at the same time will police Israel and force that country to surrender its weapons of mass destruction and to abide by UN resolutions.'

That, of course, is completely unacceptable to the Jews, to the 'chosen people,' and so Madeleine Albright has been waddling from one Middle Eastern meeting to another during the past two weeks twisting the arms of everyone she can get her hooks into. She and her fellow Jews are determined to get rid of Saddam Hussein and cripple Iraq by any means necessary...

We can expect some sort of manufactured excuse for a U.S. assault on Iraq… I predicted this 11 months ago. Of course, I didn't know what the details would be, but it was clear that the Jewish power structure was planning a new war… I don't know how it will come. But I know that it's coming… It is coming, and many, many innocent people will die. It is coming because our government has let itself be controlled by Jews, because our government's policies have been based on what's good for the Jews and what's good for Israel rather than on what's good for Americans.

And the Jews always, throughout history, have overreached themselves. They never have been content to mind their own business and take their own share and leave other people alone. Too many Jews really believe the ravings of Isaiah. They really believe that they can have it all, that they deserve it all, and that whatever they do in their greed to get it all is justified. That's why Mr. Clinton's horrid, little Jewess, Madeleine Albright, is continuing to try to pressure Iraq's neighbors into acquiescing in another war against that country.

Our task, mine and yours, is to do everything we can to ensure that our people also become less credulous, that they stop believing the lies of the mass media, that they begin understanding who is responsible for the catastrophe which is looming before them."
On 26 January 1998, the enormously inflential Neoconservative pressure group, PNAC, the Project for the New American Century, sent the following open letter to president Bill Clinton:

"We urge you to… enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the US and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power…
Experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production…

In the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons. If Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel… and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard…

The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power."
Five years later, when the US, the UK and the rest of the coalition invaded Iraq, PNAC got precisely what PNAC wanted.

On 19 February 1998 an organistion calling itself The Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf sent an Open Letter to President Clinton. This, in part, is it:

"Saddam Hussein is still in power in Baghdad. And despite his defeat in the Gulf War, continuing sanctions, and the determined effort of UN inspectors to fetter out and destroy his weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein has been able to develop biological and chemical munitions…

Iraq's position is unacceptable. While Iraq is not unique in possessing these weapons, it is the only country which has used them, not just against its enemies, but its own people as well. We must assume that Saddam is prepared to use them again…

Only a determined program to change the regime in Baghdad will bring the Iraqi crisis to a satisfactory conclusion. For years, the United States has tried to remove Saddam by encouraging coups and internal conspiracies…

Saddam must be overpowered… What is needed now is a comprehensive political and military strategy for bringing down Saddam and his regime…

We believe… that strong American action against Saddam is overwhelmingly in the national interest, that it must be supported, and that it must succeed."
This statement was signed by: Richard Perle; Paul Wolfowitz; Elliott Abrams; Douglas Feith; Frank Gaffney; Jeffrey Gedmin; Fred C. Ikle; David Wurmser; (Rabbi) Dov S. Zakheim; Peter Rodman; William Kristol; Michael Ledeen; Martin Peretz; Congessman Stephen Solarz: Jeffrey T. Bergner; Stephen Bryen; Paula J. Dobriansky; Robert Kagan; Bernard Lewis; Joshua Muravchik; Max Singer and Leon Wienseltier. All of whom are Jewish.

Donald Rumsfeld; Richard Armitage; John Bolton; Richard V. Allen; Rear Admiral Frederick L. Lewis; Gary Schmitt; Zalmay M. Khalilzad and Roger Robinson also signed.

Wolfowitz, Abrams, Bolton, Feith, Gaffney, Gedmin, Ikle, Zakheim, Rodman, Rumsfeld, Armitage and Khalilzad would later join George Bush's administration. Perle, Kagan and Kristol were also enormously influential.

In February 1998, Tony Blair began, secretly, to bang the drum for a second war with Iraq.

On 8 September, 2002, the American journalist and writer, Lyndon Larouche, reported thus in The Executive Intelligence Review:

"Beginning in February 1998, the British government of Prime Minister Tony Blair launched a concerted effort, in league with the Netanyahu government in Israel, and the Perle Israeli… networks inside the United States, to induce President William Clinton to launch a war against Iraq, under precisely the terms spelled out for Netanyahu in the ‘Clean Break’ paper. The war was to be launched, ostensibly, over Iraq's possession of ‘weapons of mass destruction'…

After again rejecting the Netanyahu and Blair demands for war on Iraq in November, 1998, President Clinton, under the impeachment onslaught… finally caved in and authorized Operation Desert Fox in December 1998... But the 70 days of bombardment did not eliminate the Saddam Hussein regime, and the issue remained dormant for the next three years ... until Sept. 11, 2001.

Within moments of the 9/11 attack on Washington and New York, the same American networks who had designed the Netanyahu foreign policy were on the warpath, demanding that President Bush go to war against Iraq, despite the fact that, to this day, there is no plausible evidence linking Iraq to the September 2001 attacks. The Sharon government in Israel instantly declared that the attack had been ordered by Saddam Hussein, and called for massive retaliation against Baghdad.

On Sept. 22 2001, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz made a pitch for war on Iraq at a Camp David meeting with President Bush and most of the Cabinet… By 1999, Wolfowitz and Condi Rice had become co-responsible for pulling together the Bush campaign foreign policy and national security team… Wolfowitz immediately brought Richard Perle into the inner sanctum, from where he has been peddling the Netanyahu-Israeli foreign policy agenda from day one.

Perle most recently staged the July 10, 2002 Defense Policy Board session, which demanded the purging of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of all opponents of the Iraq war, and called for a U.S. military occupation and takeover of the Saudi oil fields and a total break with the House of Saud, just as his July, 1996, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies ‘Clean Break’ study had proposed.

From the point that Perle, Feith, the Wurmsers, et al. first delivered the ‘Clean Break’ policy to Netanyahu, this crowd has been obsessed with inducing the United States government to adopt and implement it. All prior efforts failed, until Sept. 11, 2001 created a new context for reviving and pushing it, under the guise of the ‘war on terrorism.’

Does this raise questions about the true authors of the 9/11 attack? What are the links between the events of Sept. 11 and the subsequent drive for war against Iraq?"
On the 8 of April 1998, speaking in praise of yet another bill seeking to further criminalise the British people, Gerald Kaufman, New Labour MP for Manchester, Gorton, said this in the House of Commons:
"It is a fact that, 12 years ago, when I was shadow Home Secretary, I introduced in Standing Committee G on 10 April 1986 a new clause that would have created the offence of racial harassment. The then Conservative Government defeated it.

On 12 April 1994, I spoke from the Opposition Benches on the then Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill. I spoke in favour of the creation of an offence of racial harassment. That proposal was defeated by the then Conservative Government…

The Bill is ambitious. It needs commitment by all the forces of law and order and by all the support services… Great hope reposes in the Bill. It must not fail, and I believe that it will succeed".
It did succeed.

The indigenous population of this country may now be imprisoned for seven years if they are deemed to have encouraged 'incitement' to racial or religious hatred. Before this bill was passed the sentence had been two years, and the previous law did not cover religious matters. The courts have already made it quite clear that telling the truth is no defence.

Thus, if I tell you that the man who headed the firing squad that executed the Russian royal family, Yakov Yurovsky, was Jewish, as was Yakov Sverdlov, who countersigned Lenin's order to Yurovsky to carry out the killings, I could be jailed for seven years.

Thus, if I tell you that the most powerful three men in Russia at the time of Lenin’s death in 1924, were Trotsky, Zinoviev and Kamenev, real names Bronstein, Apfelbaum and Rosenfeld, and the first two were Jewish and Kamenev's father was also a Jew, I might be jailed for seven years.

And, if I told you that, in 1933, the man most responsible for the Ukrainian Holodomor, (a 'holocaust' THEY never bothered to tell us about) which killed at least seven million people, was one Lazar Kaganovich, I might be sentenced to serve seven years in prison.

He was Jewish, you see.

If I tell you that between 1944 and 1948, whilst the Brits were fighting and dying on behalf of the Jew in Europe, the Jew in Palestine was murdering more than 300 British soldiers and policemen who were trying to keep the peace, I could be jailed for seven years.

And, if I also told you that, in 1946, Jewish terrorist groups in Israel had formualted a plot to assassinate UK Foreign Secretary, Ernest Bevin, well, if they banged me up for seven years, I wouldn't be able to tell you about it, would I?

And, if I told you that Frank Soskice, the Home Secretary when the first race law was introduced into this country in 1965, was a Russian Jew, I might go to jail for seven years.

And, if I also told you that the British Board of Jewish Deputies had been behind the introduction of every race law ever introduced and that Gerald Kaufman, himself, is also a Jew, I might be sentenced to serve seven years also.

And if I told you the same very obvious and discoverable truth that William Pierce told us in 1997, that Neoconservative Jews were instrumental in forcing Gulf War II upon the world, I could presumably be sent to jail for seven long years.

And if I said that big shot Jewish money-men were mostly responsible for this latest world-wide recession (Robert Rubin, Roland Arnall, Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Dick Fuld, the $50bn dollar fraudster, Bernie Madoff, and many others), well, THEY definitely would not want you to know that. And I might be imprisoned for saying it.

Just for telling the truth.

On 30 April 1998, Tony Blair said this at a reception held to mark the 50 anniversary of the state of Israel:

"It is a real privilege and honour for me to be here with you this evening and thank you Michael (Lord Levy) for those kind and wonderful words. Indeed you spoke so well, I was rather glad you went into politics later rather than earlier. Can I also say Dror (Zeigerman) I had no idea that this was your 50 birthday as well. I mean if it is a requirement for ambassadors that their birthday has to coincide, it must narrow the field somewhat, one thinks. None the less 'Happy 50 Birthday'…

I know that today's 50 anniversary of the establishment of the State of Israel, marks not only fifty momentous years, but is also a milestone in the 4,000 year, or more, history of an extraordinary people. And I believe that the establishment of the State of Israel, remains one of the most remarkable and miraculous events of our time… This, I believe, is a moment to give thanks, to be proud…

The State of Israel has meant much, not only to Jews, but I would like to say to you, to all of civilisation. For it is a country, that in those fifty short years, despite all the problems, has maintained a vibrant democracy".
For the Jew the state of Israel may be 'a vibrant democracy,' but for the Palestinians? TB Liar is, as per normal, telling only that small portion of the truth that suits his pro-Israeli case. Blair continued:

"I was delighted to make my first official visit as Prime Minister to Israel last week and feel part of those 50 anniversary celebrations… As you know, we went straight from the airport to Yad Vashem, to pay tribute to the Six Million Martyrs… And on the way back, I could not help notice… the thousands and thousands of gravestones marking the fallen across all of Israel's wars… particularly those who fought in Israel's War of Independence…

It was a sight which made me both humble (and) understand the State of Israel… It was, with a great sense of pride, that I saw again… the unshakable degree of friendship, the ties of partnership, shared destiny and history… It is that sense of friendship which I reaffirm to you this evening, not only as Prime Minister of Great Britain today, but as a profound friend of Israel and the Jewish people…

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is perhaps no coincidence that the founder of modern Zionism, Theodore Herzl, in his single most famous turn of phrase, evoked a vision to inspire the Jewish people and the world. 'If you will it, it is no dream', he said at the turn of the last century.

And now, as this century comes to a close and we reflect on the… birth of the State of Israel, I pay my tribute to all those many thousands in Israel, here in Britain, throughout the Diaspora, who have made that dream a reality; who took that dream and turned it into the Jewish State… ‘Ohev Shalom, VeRodef Shalom’. ‘I am a man of peace and I will always seek peace’.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it is my honour to propose tonight, a toast to the State of Israel."
On 29 May 1998, PNAC sent the following letter to Newt Gingrich, Speaker of US House of Representatives and Trent Lott, Senate Majority Leader:

"On January 26, we sent a letter to President Clinton expressing our concern that the US policy of ‘containment’ of Saddam Hussein was failing…

We argued that the only way to protect the United States and its allies from the threat of weapons of mass destruction was to put in place policies that would lead to the removal of Saddam and his regime from power…

Even if the administration is able to block Security Council efforts to lift sanctions on Iraq this year, the massive expansion of the so-called ‘oil for food’ program will have the effect of overturning the sanctions regime… The American people need to be made aware of the consequences of this capitulation to Saddam.

We will have suffered an incalculable blow to American leadership and credibility; We will have sustained a significant defeat in our worldwide efforts to limit the spread of weapons of mass destruction".
This statement was signed by: Paul Wolfowitz; Elliott Abrams; Jeffrey Bergner; Paula Dobriansky; Robert Kagan; Zalmay Khalilzad; William Kristol; Richard Perle and Peter Rodman, all of whom are Jewish. Donald Rumsfeld; John R. Bolton; William J. Bennett; Francis Fukuyama; William Schneider; Vin Weber; R. James Woolsey and Robert B. Zoellick also signed it.

In June 1998, Rupert Murdoch said that the New Labour Party was:

"More Thatcherite than the Tories. But they'd kill you if you said that".
In August 1998, two of the USA's African embassies were bombed by terrorists. A little while later another bunch of terrorists bombed Afghanistan and Sudan in reply.

The owners of a pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum which had been flattened decided to sue the US government for terrorising them thus. The Clinton adminstration was, subsequently, unable to provide any evidence to support its claim that the pharmaceutical factory was anything but a pharmaceutical factory.

After the bombing, Sandy Berger, Bill Clinton’s National Security Adviser, admitted that the US government was wholly aware that its various indiscriminate bombing campaigns in other countries would be likely to provoke retribution from some quarters in the future. He said:

"I think the American people need to know that we live in a world where by virtue of America's leadership to some degree, by virtue of a degree of fanaticism by some people, we will be targeted."
On 9/11, Berger's statement would prove admirably prophetic.

In September 2005, Berger was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and destroying several of these. Berger had previously plea-bargained his way out of jail sentence.

According to the charges, between the 2nd of September and the 2nd of October 2003, Berger 'knowingly removed classified documents from the National Archives and Records Administration and stored and retained such documents.' Berger's aides have admitted that he cut up three archival documents. He had originally insisted that he had either misplaced or unintentionally thrown the documents away.

This thief was Bill Clinton's National Security Advisor. In fact, more than half of Clinton's appointments during his time as President were Jewish. The Jews were, thus, over-represented at the top table by a factor of 25 times.

In November 1998, Tony Blair said this:

"Now, with the Americans, we are looking at ways to bolster the opposition and improve the possibility of removing Saddam Hussein altogether."
On 13 November 1998, Denis Halliday, the former UN Under-Secretary-General and humanitarian co-ordinator for the UN in Baghdad, said:

"6,000 children are dying every week."
Halliday resigned his post in disgust with the policies pursued in Iraq by the US and the UK. During his resignation speech on the 30 of September, 1998, he said:
"We are in the process of destroying an entire society. It is as simple and terrifying as that. It is illegal and immoral."
On 25 November 1998, Ivan Lewis, MP for Bury, South said this in the House of Commons:
"Israel is not only a democracy, but engaged in an on-going peace process with the Palestinians. Recent weeks have seen progress in that peace process… Israel has been surrounded throughout its history by countries hell bent on its destruction, including the regime in Iraq… It is Saddam Hussein who is responsible for the situation that faces the Iraqi people and for the instability in the middle-east."
Lewis is Jewish.

On 17 December 1998, the British Board of Jewish Deputies released this statement:

"The Board played a fundamental part in urging upon government the first Race Relations Act which was based, in part, on reports prepared for the Board by Professor Geoffrey Bindman (below top) and Lord Lester of Herne Hill. (Below bottom)

Subsequently the Board has provided written and oral evidence to enquiries which preceded the passage of the Public Order Act 1986, the Criminal Justice Act 1994 and the Crime and Disorder Act 1998…

We are also shortly to respond to the Government’s request that it might consider introducing specific legislation to outlaw Holocaust Denial, as occurs in most other European countries".
Bindman and Lester are both Jewish.

It was the Board of Deputies of British Jews who 'urged the government' to engineer our law in such a way that the few who ever dared to speak out and tell the truth about the negative effects of mass immigration, would be subject to the full weght of the law when they did. This because to tell the truth about such things could be argued to be an 'incitement to racial hatred.'

What the few who sat on the Board of Deputies of British Jews wanted done was done. What the vast majority of the British people wanted done was not.

Mass immigration was, against our stated wishes, forced upon us. Forced upon us by those who had, just a few short years before, been given sanctuary in this country by the very people they now sought to criminalise.

Next section

No comments:

Post a Comment