Bordering On Madness



 Net foreign immigration is 352,000.


The borders remain open to one and all and the massed hordes of immigrants are still ‘flocking’ to Britain.

The BBC told us today that immigration made the economy successful and it is this economic success that brings the immigrants. I’m certain you could all pick holes in the BBC’s pro-immigration propaganda.


Net immigration is stated as 298,000.

But that doesn’t give the true picture, nor the true scale of problems to come.

The truly interesting number is one that tells us how many non-British citizens come here net of British citizens’ movements in and out of the country.  This would reveal the disturbing fact that non-British citizen immigration is huge and means that the native British population is gradually being thinned down as the ratio of foreign immigrants grows in comparison.

The net migration figure for non-British citizens entering this country was 352,000, around 140,000 Brits left and 88,000 returned.

The ratio of Brits to foreigners is gradually being eroded and you have to ask how long before Britons are strangers in their own land?

Such a question is important for many reasons.  Diversity does not bring stability, trust nor peace and mass immigration and open borders will bring about the end of the ‘Welfare State’….for example the NHS is already heading towards crisis point as the population grows beyond capacity with the potential that the NHS becomes insurance based and not free at the point of delivery.

The BBC is always telling us that faith in politics has been eroded and no one trusts politicians.  The reason for that is down to two policies in  the main…immigration and Europe…whilst the majority of the population want to limit both, the political and media class have sought to suppress and ignore such concerns as Peter Hitchens tells us…

‘As diversity increases, democracy weakens. Faith in democracy declines when people see they cannot make a difference., and mass immigration, a policy clearly and consistently opposed by most people and yet which no mainstream politician will speak against, has shaken the public’s trust in politics. Since politicians will not listen to people’s concerns, they come to the conclusion that politics is pointless’.

‘All the arguments for multiculturalism- that people feel safer, more comfortable among people of the same group, and that they need their own cultural identity – are arguments against immigration, since English people must also feel the same. If people categorised as “White Britons” are not afforded that indulgence because they are a majority, do they attain it when they become a minority?’.


Immigration and Europe…..any wonder UKIP gets so many votes?

The reality is that ‘politics’ isn’t broken, in the main things trundle along reasonably well except for these two major issues which could change the game radically this election.

I did enjoy listening to a BBC interview with Yvette Cooper when she was allowed to get away with this:

“[Home Secretary] Theresa May’s obsession with the target has led her to target valuable university students, who bring billions into Britain whilst doing nothing to make the labour market fairer for local workers, preventing undercutting by exploitative employers or putting in place proper border controls so we can count people in and out to enforce the rules,” she said.


You probably already know that Labour aide Andrew Neather long ago revealed that Labour introduced its mass immigration plot with complete disregard for the effect it would have on the working classes’ lives…

He acknowledged that “nervous” ministers made no mention of the policy at the time for fear of alienating Labour voters.

“Part by accident, part by design, the Government had created its longed-for immigration boom.

“But ministers wouldn’t talk about it. In part they probably realised the conservatism of their core voters: while ministers might have been passionately in favour of a more diverse society, it wasn’t necessarily a debate they wanted to have in working men’s clubs in Sheffield or Sunderland.”

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the Migrationwatch think tank, said: “Now at least the truth is out, and it’s dynamite.


Labour lied and the BBC still doesn’t like to raise that revelation and crucify Labour for its policies.


Enjoy… John Ware in Standpoint

Jihad Central

The number of British jihadis far exceeds the total for the rest of Europe. Yet still we puzzle over why Britain became the jihadi capital of  Europe.

One man who thinks he does is the American political scientist and historian, Robert Leiken, a director of the immigration and national security program at the Nixon Centre in Washington. His latest book, Europe’s Angry Muslims, finds the main ingredient is Britain’s approach to immigration ……..Above all, the underlying explanation for so many British Muslims falling under the spell of jihadists like Omar Bakri (twice granted asylum) was Britain’s desire to grant Muslims autonomy in the name of “diversity”.


Time to Wise Up to the Muslim Brotherhood

Steven Merley, a former financial trader turned investigator of extremist movements, has probed the Brotherhood for over a decade. It is particularly active in Britain and according to Merley, its strategy is to “create mischief” with a heavy emphasis on Muslim victimhood including the charge that the West has been waging a war on Islam. This has been a powerful radicalising factor in young Muslims. 

The Brotherhood’s tactic to advance this strategy, says Merley, has been to establish a dizzying number of organisations and initiatives which create the impression of broad-based support. In reality, the sponsors are the same individuals and groups whose leaders have not changed over decades. 

The Plot to Islamise Birmingham’s Schools

The roots of the Trojan Horse agenda predate Gove by at least a generation. They go back to the creation of the main umbrella for Muslim schools, the Association of Muslim Schools UK (AMS UK), the International Board of Educational Research and Resources (IBERR), and the MCB. Tahir Alam and some of the Park View Brothers have been associated with or held positions in these bodies, which have been inspired by a broad global Islamist movement that has morphed from the original Cairo-based Muslim Brotherhood. That movement sees no distinction between Islam as a spiritual faith, a way of life and a political ideology. Some say that following the collapse of Communism, Islamism is history’s next big idea.

Inside The World Of ‘Non-Violent’ Islamism

The Muslim Council of Britain’s secretary-general, Dr Shuja Shafi: He has said he has “no idea” why young people become radicalised.

With Islamist terrorist plots now running at more than one a month, the UK counter-terrorism effort can deal only with the crocodiles that are bumping against the boat. So the Home Office is setting up a special unit that will analyse the effectiveness of government measures aimed at “draining the swamp” as the Prime Minister has put it.

The Extremism Analysis Unit (EAU) will be the first of its kind in government to gather empirical evidence about the behaviour and ideologies of extremists.

It will also explore the relationship between integration and extremism. 

Many Muslims in Birmingham, Luton, parts of London and the old northern mill towns seem resistant to integrating into the liberal mainstream. More British Muslims have gone to Syria and Iraq than there are Muslims in the British army. I understand that officials have been unable to demonstrate that any initiatives by this government or the last to promote integration have had any beneficial impact.

The EAU will attract controversy because while it will, of course, analyse all sources of extremism, its principal focus will inevitably be on Islamist extremism, because this will pose the greatest threat to national security for the foreseeable future.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

Future of the BBC

Chart showing the decline in the BBC's share of viewing figures



Culture, Media and Sport – Fourth Report
Future of the BBC



No long-term future for BBC licence fee, MPs say


The TV licence does not have a long-term future and is likely to be replaced by a new levy within the next 15 years, a group of MPs has said.

The fee is “becoming harder and harder to justify” given changes in the media, according to the House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee.

The MPs suggested every household could pay a new compulsory levy instead.

The BBC does not agree that the fee will have to be replaced, but accepts it will probably have to be modernised.

Committee chairman John Whittingdale said: “In the short term, there appears to be no realistic alternative to the licence fee, but that model is becoming harder and harder to justify and sustain.”

In light of changing technology and audience habits, the committee said “we do not see a long-term future for the licence fee in its current form”.

Any “profound changes” – such as abolishing the licence fee – should not be rushed, the report said. But it did say the BBC “must prepare for the possibility of a change in the 2020s.

The best alternative to the licence fee, the report concluded, would be a compulsory broadcasting levy paid by all households, regardless of whether they watch TV, or how they watch.

Such a system was introduced in Germany in 2013 and would do away with the need to detect and prosecute those who avoid buying a TV licence, the committee said.

“We recommend that as a minimum the licence fee must be amended to cover catch-up television as soon as possible.”

It should also no longer be a criminal offence to avoid paying the licence fee, the report said.

Other proposals made by the committee include:

  • The BBC Trust should be abolished because it has mishandled crises like the Jimmy Savile scandal and is too close to the BBC management
  • Instead, a new Public Service Broadcasting Commission should monitor the corporation’s performance, with an ultimate sanction of being able to withhold some funding from the BBC
  • Media regulator Ofcom – not the BBC Trust – should be the final arbiter of complaints about the corporation’s impartiality and accuracy
  • Part of the licence fee (or future broadcasting levy) should be used to support non-BBC public service broadcasting, such as local news and children’s programmes
  • The planned BBC One +1 channel does not represent “public service value”, and the airwaves should be used for something else
  • The BBC should no longer attempt to offer “something for everyone” and should not stray into areas that are well catered for by commercial broadcasters
  • The BBC World Service must remain strong to ensure the UK does not lose ground to countries like China and Russia in the “global information war”
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

Muhammed Was Not A Muslim Says BBC



You have to understand what the root cause of radicalisation is in the Muslim community. Here’s the maths….

British Society is increasingly intolerant of Islam, that intolerance is being fostered by a sensationalist media that fuels prejudice, the intolerance and attacks on Muslims leads them to become angry, alienated and marginalised,  under such a siege they understandably feel the need to fight back and defend their prophet and their religion against these Islamophobic attacks.


Only its not true.  It’s the BBC narrative.  It’s the Muslim community’s narrative, it’s the radical’s narrative.

But it’s not true.

The BBC is charged with ‘sustaining citizenship and civil society’ by its Charter and it has decided that in order to do that it must lie to its audience.  Not just turn a blind eye to the truth about Islamic radicalisation but to actively work to suppress the truth, to maintain a fiction that Islam is the religion of peace, love and tolerance. They do this because they have a belief that to allow the truth to be told would see the Muslim community and Islam come under such extreme scrutiny that it would expose it irrefutably as an ideology that is incompatible with a Western, secular, liberal, democratic and humane society.

And then what?

So instead the BBC has decided that a bit of ‘collateral damage’ is acceptable…the BBC has decided that in order to maintain that fiction about Islam it is willing to sacrifice, not just that very precious liberal, free, democratic society that is increasingly the victim of creeping Islamisation, but it is also prepared to see dead bodies, non-Muslim ones, in the streets as the necessary murders that are the price to be paid for ‘peace’.

Dramatic stuff, but true.

There is a war being fought and it’s not just with guns, bullets and bombs.  The Media, far from being prejudiced against Muslims, is the weapon of choice for those who seek to make Islam the dominant religion and political force in Britain, and the BBC is at the forefront of the charge.  And, this is the important thing to note, those who are ‘fighting’ this media war are not the obvious ‘radicals like Anjem Choudray, they come dressed in western suits and talk of reform and tolerance but always blame Muslim ‘anger’ on British society on that phantom menace, ‘Islamophobia’.  Of course what is even more frighetening is that these men have not just managed to position themselves as authorities on questions of Islam, its place in Western Society and ‘radicalisation’, as Media spokesmen of choice but have also inveigled their way into the heart of Government advising it on matters of religion and radicalisation.

For instance Islamist Tariq Ramadan sits on the Foreign Office Advisory Group on freedom of religion or belief which is intended to ‘advise FCO Ministers and staff on how to build on the active approach they already take to promoting and protecting the right to freedom of religion or belief worldwide.’

Ramadan’s boss was Baroness Warsi whose credentials are also highly questionable in that nearly everything she does and says seems to support the Islamist outlook….the most obvious of which was her belief that Israel should be disarmed and terrorist group Hamas armed.

Warsi is well known….just days ago Andrew Gilligan in the Telegraph wrote this article denouncing her and the government’s foolish policies, Islamic ‘radicals’ at the heart of Whitehall, and in which he noted that ‘Baroness Warsi gave official roles to people with links to Islamist groups’.  She was also an outspoken critic of the anti-radicalisation ‘Prevent’ project and supporter of the Islamist student organisation Fosis.

Gilligan says..

Entryism, the favourite tactic of the 1980s’ Militant Tendency, is when a political party or institution is infiltrated by groups with a radically different agenda. Since Militant’s Trotskyites were expelled from the Labour Party, the word has rather fallen out of fashion.

But now, according to one Muslim leader, Islamic radicals are practising entryism of their own — into the heart of Whitehall – courtesy of a woman who was until recently a government minister.


Baroness Warsi then, a very controversial person with a highly dubious reputation, and yet another ‘goto’ spokesperson for the BBC on issues of Islam in the UK. An example of the dangers in employing these ‘radicals’ as government advisers is this from Jihadwatch…Sweden’s “Islamophobia” expert joins the Islamic State.

Despite Gilligan’s article just a few days ago the BBC chose to ask Warsi for her opinions  (08:10) about how the Muslim community in Britain feel about their place in Society based on a BBC poll which, part of its on ‘war on Public (false) perceptions about Islam’, which the BBC trumpeted as a glowing testimony for Muslim attitudes in Britain claiming…Most British Muslims ‘oppose Muhammad cartoons reprisals’

At no time was she asked about the allegations made by Gilligan which you might think the BBC’s premier current affairs programme, with its elite interviewers in the saddle, might have broached.  Instead we had Justin Webb doing an imitation of an over-ebullient Spaniel about to go out on a walk…Warsi threw him a few balls which he eagerly chased, enjoying the game immensely, rushing back to the mistress for her to throw him some more. Webb failed to challenge Warsi at all on her claims and bought into her narrative so much that he even started to add his own derogatory comments about other faiths being as bad as Islam in their extremism.  Even Warsi had to bring him to heel on that one.

Before she came on we heard a report from one Muslim community that in essence, as laid out above, blamed the rise of radicalisation on British, non-Muslim society, which we are assured, has attacked and marginalised Muslims egged on by an Islamophobic Press.

However one message to take away was that, yes they were extremists, extreme in their love for their prophet and for their religion.  Curiously the BBC didn’t think that an important factor in any Islamist radicalisation…because of course, as we heard, the ‘radicals’ weren’t real Muslims.

Warsi was able to articulate the same old prejudices and blame anyone but Muslims and their religion for the dangerous situation we find ourselves in.  She claims there is no evidence that can indicate why Muslims become radicalised and that of course 27% of Muslims may support killing people for drawing Muhammed but she explained, you have to look at their reasoning behind such decisions before you denounce them.  In other words she too thinks the Charlie Hebdo killings were justifiable….and an interesting turn of phrase from her…that it was unfortunate that Charlie Hebdo led to the death of ‘civilians’… she saying other, non-civilian, targets would have been acceptable?  And again Warsi blamed the Media for whipping up anti-Islam prejudices.

The BBC is not alone in excusing Muslim terrorism, the Guardian here giving a perfect example of the thinking that ‘understands’, and thereby justifies, murder….

Charlie Hebdo attackers: born, raised and radicalised in Paris


The Guardian tries to erase Islam from the picture and chooses to look for other causes for radicalisation saying..

What the three had in common was growing up on the margins of French society


The article is a very long one, nearly the whole body of the text builds on the narrative of the alientated, disenfranchised and marginalised young men driven to radicalisation by such factors.  Only at the very last paragraph do we get a clue that that is rubbish…

“People say simply discrimination plus social malaise equals terrorism, that’s not true.”

Of the families she had recently spoken to she had seen children of educated parents, including doctors, or youngsters leaving medical school, and many from non-Muslim backgrounds. The profiles of jihadis radicalised and self-radicalised in France were increasingly complex and nuanced.


But even that is not true…for it has long been known that the majority of those radicalised came from the ranks of the educated and well-to-do….not marginalised, not ignorant and not poor….what they do all have in common is being Muslim.


Dan Hodges in the Telegraph has a completely different take on the BBC poll….

Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists. That is far too many

This morning the BBC published details of a major poll of the attitudes of Britain’s Muslims. The headline on the front of the BBC website linking to the research states: “Muslims ‘oppose cartoon reprisals’”. This of course relates to attitudes within the Muslim community towards the recent Charlie Hebdo attacks.

It’s a reassuring headline. It’s also wrong.

Below the report is an article by BBC Today program reporter Sima Kotecha. It begins: “Islam is a religion of peace and love – not violence.”

That statement – and those sentiments – are simply not compatible with the BBC’s own research.

We are going to have to start to reassess what we mean by “moderate Islam”.

The BBC is wrong. Many Muslims have sympathy with the Charlie Hebdo killings. Far too many.



The BBC is of course spinning its poll for reasons of maintaining ‘civil society and social cohesion’ but other research by the BBC, not really intended for domestic consumption, went out on the World Service and was not given a high profile in the UK….

Jihadist violence: The devastating cost

Human toll

The findings are both important and disturbing.

In the course of November, jihadists carried out 664 attacks, killing 5,042 people – many more than, for instance, the number of people who lost their lives in the 9/11 attacks.


So the report tells us that its findings are ‘both important and disturbing’ and yet the BBC all but ignores them.  It fails utterly to challenge Warsi’s narrative about Muslims being the victims of huge discrimination in Britain when we know that the UK is one of the best places in the world for Msulims to live and practise their faith and the BBC fails to press her on these figures that paint a completely different picture of what the cause of radicalisation and its effects are.

The report goes onto outline the future….

While comparisons to earlier periods are difficult, the overall picture is that of an increasingly ambitious, complex, sophisticated and far-reaching [Islamist] movement.

The project tells the story of a movement in the middle of a profound transformation – one whose final outcome is impossible to predict.

Our immediate focus, however, was the terrible human cost: with, on average, more than 20 attacks and nearly 170 deaths per day, jihadist groups destroy countless lives – most of them Muslim – in the name of an ideology that the vast majority of Muslims reject.

If anything, this highlights the movement’s scale and ambition, but also the long-term political, social, ideological, and military commitment that will be needed to counter it.


Note that last line…’the long-term political, social, ideological, and military commitment that will be needed to counter’ Islamic extremism.

The BBC’s idea of countering Islamic extemism is to ignore it, or if forced to admit it occurs, then blame it on British society…anything but the truth….which of course is a hard to come by commodity when the BBC employs the likes of Mehdi Hasan, Tariq Ramadan and Baroness Warsi as spokespersons on Islam.

Until the BBC changes that narrative about foreign policy, ancient and modern, and its continual acceptance of Muslim grievances as justification for terror, and has an honest exploration of the real causes of radicalisation, then there can be no solution.  If you don’t know what causes a problem, or don’t admit it, you aren’t going to solve it.

As said, the BBC is all too ready to accept the occasional terrorist attack on the streets of Britain if it means the Muslim community and Islam are not subject to intense and genuinely critical scrutiny that would raise some very awkward questions once people started to realise the truth about Islam and what it teaches its followers and how that plays into the real narrative about radicalisation and Jihad.

According to the BBC’s narrative Muhammed would not be a Muslim as his whirlwind and extremely violent campaign across the Middle East to impose Islam upon the land and its peoples has remarkable similarities to the ISIS blitz….and as we know, ISIS are not ‘real Muslims’.










Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

By Hook Or By Crook….Just Don’t Mention The Textbook


This is the Telegraph’s report on the OECD’s conclusions about the UK economy…


OECD head: Britain’s economic recovery ‘a text book example’

George Osborne’s handling of the economic recovery has been “remarkable” and Britain must now stick to his plans and “finish the job”, the head of the OECD has said.

Angel Gurria, General Secretary of the international economic forecaster, congratulated George Osborne on the success of his policies as he hailed Britain as a “text book” example for other nations.

He said that while further cuts are needed, Britain has already done much of the “heavy lifting” and future austerity measures will not need to be as deep.

He said that Britain’s economy is now out-performing the US, adding that his main message to the Chancellor is “well done” and that Britain deserves a “pat on the back”

His comments represent a significant boost to the Conservatives, who have repeatedly warned that Labour could threaten Britain’s recovery.

Mr Gurria said the performance of the labour market had been “remarkable”, with three million jobs created over the past five years. Relative to the size of the UK population, the figures were even better than those recorded in the US over the period, he said.

“Even as unemployment has fallen, inflationary pressures have vanished … real wages are on the rise,” Mr Gurria told a press conference in the Treasury.

“We are predicting this economic expansion will continue this year and next. What a difference effective economic policies can make.”

He added that there are strong signals that wages are starting to rise, but warned that the economic recovery could be in jeopardy unless there are further cuts.

“My main message to you today is well done. Well done so far, Chancellor. But finish the job. Britain has a long term economic plan, but it needs to stick with it.

But he insisted the “biggest single challenge” for the UK – and much of the West – was to improve productivity in the labour force.

“Labour productivity has been weak, even compared to other countries which have also enjoyed solid job creation since 2010, such as Canada and the US,” Mr Gurria said.

“Reviving productivity is thus vital to maintain high growth and boost competitiveness. But it is also essential to boost real wages and purchasing power.”



The BBC however has a different priority…


OECD: Boosting UK productivity is key to prosperity

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) says further progress in UK living standards depends on higher productivity.


Interesting that the BBC chooses to go first for ‘living standards’….the Labour Party narrative on the economy.

The BBC grudgingly mentions a few lines of slight praise for the government and economic progress but then starts to put the boot in with more criticism of productivity and living standards and finishes of with a curiously long attack, in a what is relatively short report considering the significance of it, on Public Private Partnerships …here the BBC ends on a very cynical and slyly critical note…

Another criticism is that governments use PPP to hide the extent of infrastructure spending, because it is not entered as normal government borrowing.

The OECD says the government should be more open with the public about this type of funding.


The BBC doesn’t bother telling you that PPPs and PFIs were massively expanded under Labour ….as the BBC told us in 2003:

What are Public Private Partnerships?

Public Private Partnerships are at the heart of the government’s attempts to revive Britain’s public services.

BBC News Online picks through the jargon to explain the bewildering variety of private sector involvement in the public sector.


You might compare the length of the article explaining PPPs and todays article on the OECD’s comments…a very short report today and whilst the Telegraph starts with the good it also reports the qualifications in full whilst the BBC misses out the extent of the praise and emphasises the downsides…. it looks very much like the BBC is trying to play down the praise and play up the negatives today.





Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

Feeling The Press-ure


The BBC doesn’t like criticism, it likes to hand it out but doesn’t like it when the tables are turned.

Last year it started to operate a new policy of attempting to charge down any criticism it received in the Press…

Contact right! BBC’s rapid rebuttal unit goes into action against the Sun


The Guardian told us to…

Dig your foxholes good and deep, people – it’s going to be a long war …


And so it seems…the BBC has once again struck out at the Sun for their report on payments to MPs who appear on the BBC…as ‘Retweeted’ by the Mail (It’s free!)..

BBC pays out £200,000 of taxpayers’ cash in fees to MPs who appear on shows with Labour’s Diane Abbott and Alan Johnson pocketing the most


The BBC’s reply?….

bbc sun


But is the BBC’s reply the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

The reply in brief, and more readable…


The BBC claimed stories about appearance fees paid to MPs are run on a “regular cycle” by various newspapers. It pointed out that MPs only get paid when they appear in a capacity beyond their role as a politician, such as on Have I Got News For You.


So “MPs only get paid when they appear in a capacity beyond their role as a politician, such as on Have I Got News For You.”


How about Diane Abbot?

In 2012 the BBC were caught out…

BBC payments to MP Diane Abbott ‘breached guidelines’


 And yet Guido said in December last year…

Diane has raked in a six figure sum from Auntie Beeb for her appearance fees since April 2007. Despite the BBC Trust admitting two years ago that Abbott was overpaid. You can see the full breakdown of her BBC cash via the BanTheBBC blog here. That means Diane has trousered nearly £600,000 from the British public in the last seven years…


Abbot appears on the political programme ‘This Week’…and of course is there precisely because of her role as an MP…as is Portillo….hardly ‘appearing in a capacity beyond her role as an MP’ then.    And yet she is getting paid.

Labour stalwart Alan Johnson, MP, is also a favourite of the BBC, no doubt employed to keep the Red Flag flying in the hearts and minds by presenting us with the friendly and avuncular socialist Al….’political’ but under the radar (as Jack Straw might say).

The BBC also employs the likes of Rory Stewart and will claim he is appearing in the role of presenter.  But that isn’t true.  He’s there on the BBC because he has been carefully selected in light of his well known views on the wars in Iraq and Aghanistan…in essence he is against them, which of course chimes with the BBC’s mindset and so he is presenting programmes that are highly political despite being labelled ‘history’.  Like Portillo he is a Tory wet and unlikely to rock the BBC boat but is a suitable stooge that makes it as if the BBC has attempted some balance by giving airtime to a Tory.  He is the ‘goto’ guy for the BBC if they want some adverse comment about the Wars.

The Guardian reveals the true narrative of one of his programmes on the invasions of Afghanistan…

I think I know how it goes. Muskets and bayonets will be replaced by tanks and Kalashnikovs, then by drones and IEDs.

But the story will be the same – one of defeat, or uncertain victory, and heavy casualties. It’s as if that past 175 has been one long warning about the dangers of getting involved there, but a warning ignored.


Ah, how stupid to get involved in Afghanistan.

Here he is again, this time on the subject of the Middle East talking about Lawrence of Arabia…associated with the creation of the much hated, by the BBC, nation states in that region…

Rory Stewart examines the writings of Lawrence of Arabia, and learns that the warrior hero himself later questioned the very nature of his intervention in the Middle East.

In these two films, he examines the legacy of Britain’s First World War campaign in the Middle East, and draws parallels with British and American interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan today.

He concludes, ‘Looking at Iraq and Afghanistan today, I believe very strongly that Lawrence’s message would not have been do it better, do it more sensitively, but don’t do it at all.’


But that’s not true…Lawrence thought that the outcome was the best that could be achieved and thought it, in the end, quite good all things considered…

In March 1921, Lawrence travelled to Cairo with Churchill, to create a new settlement. With the Arabs they created a new order. Feisal, recently banished from Syria, received the throne of Iraq and British troops were removed.

Feisal’s brother, Abdullah, received the throne of Transjordan. Lawrence was convinced this settlement gave the Arabs all Britain had ever promised.

Finally, his long war was over. ‘


Lawrence himself said in letters to trusted friends…..

‘The settlement which Winston (mainly because my advocacy supplied him with all the technical advice and arguments necessary) put through in 1921 and 1922 was, I think, the best possible settlement which Great Britain, alone, could achieve at the time.’

‘As I get further and further away from things the more completely do I feel that our efforts during the war have justified themselves and are proving happier and better than I’d ever hoped.’


Doesn’t really chime with Stewart’s claim that ‘the warrior hero himself later questioned the very nature of his intervention in the Middle East.’


Even Stewart’s jaunts around Britain exploring its past are supposed to have a political resonance with us today, teaching us lessons that are meant to alter our perceptions of the world and  our beliefs and subsequent actions….here he is outlining his opposition to borders….in a documentary ostensibly just about the area surrounding Hadrian’s Wall…but really about so much more….

Rory, who considers the building of Hadrian’s Wall to be one of the single-most important events in Britain’s history, will investigate the issues of identity and culture in a region divided by a fabricated border.

Drawing on memories from his experience in war-torn Iraq and Afghanistan, and from the years spent walking the lands either side of Hadrian’s Wall, Rory hopes to shed some light on the region before the Roman soldiers divided families and communities, the impact of the Roman occupation on the region, and how the area changed once they had left. Rory suggests that the Middleland – sometimes completely autonomous, sometimes ignored, and sometimes a lawless debatable land – was transformed from a meeting point between different cultures into a borderland.


In reality Stewart is advocating open borders, the free movement of people, and no nation states defined and limited by national borders…all ideas close to the heart of any good BBCer.

The BBC is slipping in propaganda dressed up as history.  And it has employed a well known figure, an MP, to do its work knowing that he is in fact both promoting their ideas and his own, also knowing that such a ‘respectable’ figure will carry some weight with the audience and therefore so will his arguments and opinions….all backed up by the ‘trust and respect’ they have for Aunty.


So, again, just as with Abbot,  Stewart is appearing in a political role, his role disguised but all the same, there….and getting paid for it.

So the Sun is right and the BBC is telling porkies.




Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

A Twitter conversation

It was reported over the weekend that a Labour councillor has claimed that aliens are influencing Vladimir Putin.

The BBC didn’t find this newsworthy, which got me thinking that things would be different if the councillor had been a member of UKIP.

Here’s the exchange I had on Twitter today with BBC politics reporter Giles Dilnot. You need to follow the links to fully understand what’s going on.

Credit to Dilnot – he admitted I got him good.

No reply to that, so I went at it again later when Dilnot tweeted about Natalie Bennett’s disastrous Green Party policy launch:

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

Train Engineer Resigns



The Head of the IPCC, that highly influential and political climate change propaganda pressure group, has resigned.  It’s on the front page of the BBC’s website but way, way down the page in the Environment section.

UN climate head Rajendra Pachauri resigns

The head of the UN climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has resigned amid sexual harassment allegations.

In a letter to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Mr Pachauri said he was unable to provide strong leadership.

Indian police are investigating a complaint from a 29-year-old woman working in his office in Delhi.

Lawyers for the woman say the harassment included unwanted emails as well as text and phone messages. Mr Pachauri has denied the allegations.


Analysis: Roger Harrabin BBC Environment Analyst

Dr Pachauri’s resignation is a shock


So much of a shock that the BBC don’t make it headline news, preferring to stick with Tory Malcolm Rifkind for their big story.  Funny how Labour’s Straw has been downplayed, Humphry’s interview yesterday wasn’t exactly a feet to the fire job, whilst the Tory boy is up in lights.


Like Harrabin’s narrative…how ‘Patchy’, after seeing the light, converted from sceptic to believer…

Known to friends as “Patchy”, Dr Pachauri’s tenure has been controversial. He was installed after the US said the previous chair was too alarmist. They thought Dr Pachauri, as an Indian transport economist, would take a pro-development line.

After immersion in scientific research he too became persuaded that climate change is a real threat, deserving more action from political leaders – and he said so in outspoken terms.


As far as I can see Pachauri  has always been a believer, an advocate for renewable energy and interested in the social effects of climate change.

Harrabin, just another propagandist.  What did he do with that £15,000 the climate change hypers at the Tyndall Centre gave him to promote climate change ‘communication’?



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

The Art Of Corruption



‘The bad news is that culture and creativity are being erased from the classroom, and that audiences for the arts are substantially white, middle class, affluent and well educated.’


Yesterday the BBC launched it’s ‘Get Creative’ campaign to encourage greater participation in the Arts of all kinds and broadcast a programme talking especially about the Arts, or lack of, in schools.

Ostensibly very worthy ideals but is there a very political underlying message to this when you realise the background to the project, what ‘sparked’ it, and who supports it and why?

Is there a message other than ‘Get Creative’ to this campaign launched in the run up to an election?  Are we being peddled a Labour policy from 50 years ago?

The BBC tells us that:

“For those who take part, this activity becomes an essential part of their quality of life. Expressing yourself creatively enhances your skills, understanding, confidence and wellbeing – and taking part in creative activity collectively in a group strengthens communities.”


Today the Labour Party says ..

Labour promises more arts in school

Mr Miliband says he wants to put “policy for arts and culture and creativity at the heart of the next Labour government’s mission”.

He warned there was insufficient access to the arts in school, pointing to evidence from last week’s Warwick Commission on the Future of Cultural Values.

The report from Warwick University warned that creative subjects were at risk of being squeezed out of schools.


I’m certain it is just a coincidence that Labour launches its Arts policy for schools, usng the WU report as a basis as the BBC launches its ‘get Creative’ campaign…. just as the launch of the BBC/Guardian attack on tax evasion came within days of Miliband’s announcement of Labour’s own attack on tax havens.

However, in this programme at around 09:25 the presenter admits it is the declining number of children in the last five years doing Art at school (so linked to the Coalition’s education policies there)  that ‘sparked a new BBC led Campaign ‘Get Creative’….where lies, he asks, the responsibility for nurturing the Arts? Do we need these top down approaches whether from the BBC or a new education policy from Government?

The programme references the ideas of Labour’s Jennie Lee way back in 1965.  So you might guess where they are going with this.

Tony Hall, BBC Director General and afficonado of the Arts himself, has been instrumental in setting this up in conjunction with Warwick University, amongst others, which produced this report….which we are told…

….gives a clear message to society: that government and the cultural and creative industries need to work together to ensure that everyone has equal access to a rich cultural education and that conditions are in place for culture and creativity to play their part in our economic success.


A ‘clear message’….the State must be involved in the Arts and that of course means handing out the money.

Why the need for this campaign by the politically neutral BBC?  It is sending a ‘clear message’ to voters and government….cuts to the Arts are bad, vote for the people who will fund the Arts and enhance your life.

The BBC tells us…

Creativity and the arts are being squeezed out of schools, a major report has said.


Squeezed out of schools by the Coalition’s education policies and cuts….or so we are led to believe.

Yesterday R4 broadcast this programme which I referenced above:

The Front Row Debate

Are artists owed a living? John Wilson hosts a public debate to mark the launch of the BBC’s Get Creative campaign and to open a national conversation exploring the relationship between the state and the arts.


The programme was supposedly a debate but essentially had one message…we need more Art and more funding from Government…Government cuts are damaging the Arts and without the Arts life is hardly worth a candle.

The pogramme admitted that the ‘get Creative’ campaign was intended to change Government policy on the Arts and that the present Arts’ funding shames the Coalition, it’s a tragedy, the Arts are dying we are told.

As an added extra we had the usual tirade against Middle Class or Upper Class artists…there are just too many of them…too much ‘Oxbridge’ thanks.  Presumably Art is only authentic if ‘Working Class’….and of course it goes without saying, more non-white people needed….more ‘Diversity’.

The programme was highly political on its own without any connection to a BBC campaign launched to undermine and discredit Government Arts’ policy.

As said before the programme referenced the ‘vision’ of Labour’s Jennie Lee in 1965 as a possibly ideal way forward for the Arts and Government…as described by the Guardian..

Jennie Lee’s vision for the arts is as relevant today as it was 50 years ago

Fifty years on, we are still fighting for arts policy changes that Lee considered as crucial to our everyday lives and wellbeing as the NHS.

Last week, the Warwick Commission’s report on The Future of Cultural Value was published. The good news is that the arts are a significant contributor to the economy; the bad is that culture and creativity are being erased from the classroom, and that audiences for the arts are substantially white, middle class, affluent and well educated. Worryingly, there is a downward trend in participation.


Here’s what Tony Hall, director general of the BBC and a PHF trustee, said about Warwick University’s report:

“The Commission’s Report is a blueprint for the continued success of arts and culture in Britain. It’s written for everyone – right across our industry and in every walk of life – and I join with its authors in calling for all of those who have a part to play to give themselves permission to believe in a better future for the arts. Its conclusions will help us all deliver that vision.”


An entirely neutral BBC DG, head of the impartial BBC, just before an election, the day before the Labour Party launches its own promise about support for the Arts in schools, launches a campaign to support the Arts, especially in schools, and to promote the need for more State funding.  Tony Hall was once Chief Executive of the Royal Opera House and someone who had a close working relationship with the Labour government in relation to the Arts….and when you look at who produced the Warwick University report it is just Tony Hall’s old mates….nearly every one from the Arts world.

Not saying this is at all political, or indeed in the BBC’s own interest, but this is what some of the ‘Stars’ who are supporting this BBC campaign said in 2011:

Entertainers warn over arts cuts

The 46 names from British film, TV and the stage say they feel compelled to ”speak out”.

In an open letter, they say that arts and culture across the UK are facing ”the biggest threat” in decades.

The letter states: ”Before the last election the Government promised to usher in a ‘golden age’ for the arts. The reality couldn’t be further from this.

”With the reductions announced in last year’s comprehensive spending review, the withdrawal of huge amounts of local authority support, the abolition of the UK Film Council and the financial pressures faced by the Arts Councils and the BBC, we are currently facing the biggest threat to funding the arts and culture have experienced in decades.”

The ”deep” cuts will not only hit film, regional theatre, the BBC and others, the letter adds, but audiences who experience the arts through the likes of outreach and education projects.


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

147,088,860 Hits Must Say Something Sista




The Telegraph published this article about so-called cultural appropriation, the adoption of other races’ or culture’s art,  music and style…apparently it’s not allowed…at least for White people to ‘Black up’, metaphorically, culturally, speaking.

Azealia Banks vs Iggy Azalea: ‘Privileged white people shouldn’t steal hip-hop’


It’s a minefield out there….cultural theft, cultural smudging, identity theft, reverse racism, bigotry, the ‘angry black woman syndrome’, minstrelsy, fetishized depictions of black people for the entertainment of white audiences…a cheap circus act….and so on.

It’s a whole academic study.  Which I think is the point.  It’s an industry for the ‘professional Black’ and not a few Whites who makes a living out of ‘campaigning’ against alleged racism.

Naturally there is genuine racism lurking out there but these people seek to create and exaggerate it and are intent on fostering anger and feelings of alienation that they leech off…parasites creating dangerous disharmony to fill their own pockets with money.

The BBC are pretty keen to go  down this road and accept that White people should not adopt Black or other races’ cultural heritage.

Alvin Hall perfectly illustrated the mindset a while back in a confused rant about racism and Black music which we looked at previously….

Viva Hate

A narrative that Hall shoehorns in regardless of the facts…..‘cultural theft’, ‘pillaging Black music’, ‘minstrelsy’ are some phrases that give a clue to the line he takes.

The USA was practically an apartheid State right up until the late 60’s, there is no doubt that that held back some musicians and Black music businesses….amongst others.

But that is not the whole picture, but it is a picture that Hall wants to present, that Blacks were controlled and exploited by Whites, and he does so despite at the same time giving us facts that contradict that narrative.

He blames racism for Blues musicians and singers not getting their rightful dues….but goes onto say that it was the Black middle class that thought Blues was below them and not something they wanted to be associated with.

He tells us that White companies just weren’t interested in Black Music…but then contradicts that….and  tells of Black music companies and radio stations that exploited Blacks.

He tells us that Whitney Houston and Michael Jackson sold out…they were compromised,  ‘whitewashed’….they weren’t authentically ‘Black’… highly successful…and yet Hall can’t really accept that.

He tells us that Hip hop was born from the ghetto, the ghetto that the Black Middle class left behind them….and all that was left for the remaining inhabitants was drugs, drink and crime, which they put into their music….Hip hop and Rap.

But then he tells us that it is the White folks buying the records that are  forcing and encouraging Blacks to become ‘Minstrels’, stereotypes of Black people…it is the fault of the Rap record buying public (66% white) who are to blame for ‘Gangsta Rap’…..the Whites enjoying the ‘thrill of the alien culture’.

He puts the case that success comes at a terrible price…selling their soul…and once again it is the whites who are manipulating and controlling Blacks.

Hall doesn’t seem to like success unless it is ‘authentically Black‘……and even when it is ‘Authentically Black‘ as in Rap, he claims that is just an unwelcome stereotype.

The final ironic statement about that very definitely Black music, Rap and Hip Hop, was this….

‘Now this is unacceptable…this is not who we are.’



It bubbled up again recently in this piece about ‘Native American’ art…

#BBCTrending: Fashion Week controversy over Native design

Native American fashion designer Bethany Yellowtail posted a comparison of a dress she had released last year and a design shown this week by London-based KTZ.

“The dress as stated on my website embodies a Crow design from my great great grandmother…funny I didn’t realize @ktz_official knew the Yellowtails or the Crow people,” she writes.

“It’s one thing for designers to be unoriginal and knock off other peoples designs but what happens when you blatantly take cultural valuable designs from Indigenous people? Let’s find out….#CanANativeLive #boycott #KTZ #ktzofficial #boycottKTZ”


Judge for yourself…

Two dresses


Personally I think she is talking out of her papoose.


We also had the subject on Woman’s Hour (10:30) a while back and Jane Garvey was excruciatingly apologetic for being white as she went on to discuss ‘White people stealing Black culture’…..we also hear a lot about those ‘Pale, male and stale’ whites who apparently control everything such as award ceremonies…and are racist…because they are white.  So racist, sexist and dismissive of a culture in one small phrase on Women’s Hour.

On cultural theft (35 mins in)…Garvey wants to know what makes Black people angry….apparently it’s Iggy Azalea who is ‘deeply offensive and racist’ for singing rap in a ‘Black’ style…it’s colonialisation all over again, a sense of entitlement to something she doesn’t have permission to use….even Myley Cyrus using Black backing singers is cultural theft, ‘accessorizing Black’.



We hear that Black cultural styles aren’t attractive on Black people and are only popularised when whites adopt them….that’s bad we learn….er….if it’s not attractive on Black people why then do white people then adopt a style that is so ‘unattractive’?

They talk of Big Butts on White women…But are J-Lo or Kim Kardashian white?  Can’t say Big Butts,  Black or White, get the vote with anyone I know in the real world.



Garvey goes along with the narrative and feeds in her own thoughts to keep it going.

Iggy Azalea is deeply offensive Garvey suggests.

Dreadlocks on White people are also Haram…..Mainstream media can’t stomach dreadlocks on Black people and they only become acceptable when Whites start to use them.

Garvey says ‘No wonder you feel so offended…I totally get that!’

However again…can’t think of anyone who thinks White people look good in Dreads…and indeed just watched ‘The Inbetweeners 2′ andone of the biggest dicks in the film had Dreads…and was, obviously, white.



It could just be that dreadlocks are just weird whatever colour skin you have and very few people can carry them off with any style.




Happily though, the media might be changing we are told.

‘Times are changing and about time too’  Garvey expresses in relief.


The BBC of course never changes its tune.

I would suggest that all this talk about cultural theft and appropriation of Black style is highly divisive and hardly inline with the BBC’s supposed task of ensuring ‘social cohesion’… It looks more like the BBC is intent on sowing discord and disharmony and inciting anger against white people for some imagined racial crime.

I am guessing that a Black person singing an Italian opera, in Italian, is not classed as ‘cultural appropriation’ by the BBC…..and Vincent Osborne is your typical ghetto boy, ain’t he just….



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

A Peculiar Kind Of Racism


The BBC, as with the 5 year old HSBC story that they disinterred to support Labour’s narrative on tax evasion, has timed to perfection a hatchet job on UKIP using the words of  UKIP councillor Rozanne Duncan to tar the whole party by association with what the BBC wants you to believe are racist beliefs of this woman……this ‘documentary’ has been held back for quite a while and only released as near to the election as ‘decently’ possible without seeming to be obviously a politically motivated stitch up…..

The BBC leaked news of the tone of her words back in December without admitting what she had actually said….

Rozanne Duncan is understood to have used highly racially offensive language during filming for a BBC documentary to be broadcast in February.


This of course led to a lot of speculation….made use of politically by UKIP’s rivals…

It is believed the comments were made on a new BBC programme.

Craig Mackinlay, Conservative candidate for South Thanet, said: “Ukip is the party that just keeps on giving, there seems to be something every week.

“Finding out what was actually said is the bit I’m looking forward to.

“Ukip don’t throw people out, they usually let them get away with it.

“For her to have been thrown out this must have been very bad.”


Political game playing by the BBC to let this fester and then release the actual film so much nearer the election when they hope people will still have it in their memory and link UKIP to ‘racism’…….



We know that Rozanne Duncan had to leave UKIP and the Telegraph showed the sort of reaction that must please the BBC immensely as it condemns the woman as a racist…a ‘ranter’, and an ‘extraordinary’ one  at that…

The moment a UK Independence Party councillor ended her career with an extraordinary racist rant is to be broadcast nationwide on Sunday for the first time.


However a measured and more thoughtful listener would have made a completely different judgement.

Duncan is clearly upset that she has such feelings and is mystified as to why she has them…and note only Black people make her uncomfortable…she had no problem with Asians or anyone else.

She also expressed concern about Black people getting bullied and picked on in a majority white location.

She says she wasn’t used to black people having grown up in the 40’s and 50’s….but she says that ‘that’s no justification at all [for her feelings]’s really bizarre’.


It is a shame the BBC have decided to ‘weaponise’ this woman’s admission, such as it is, and crucify her in order to attack UKIP.

She is clearly not racist in what we would generally accept as the meaning of the term, a deliberate hatred of someone because of their race, she just has innate, subconscious feelings that she can’t fathom and is entirely embarrassed by….perhaps she did have a traumatic experience in her youth?  No benefit of the doubt from the BBC Inquisition.

Others were traumatised by Santa in their youth…and suffer ‘Santaphobia’



“Santaphobia” is (apparently) the term for a persistent fear of Santa Claus usually caused by coming into close proximity (by no doubt sitting on his knee) at Christmastime. It’s not genetic, so one child in a family can have it while their brother or sister may not.’


The woman who is terrified of SANTA: 28-year-old suffers panic attacks at sight of Father Christmas after she was forced to sit on his knee as a child


Shameful of the BBC to hang her out to dry and ruin her life for their political ends.

In effect what the BBC has done is no different to the racism they claim to abhor….attacking a woman because she is in UKIP regardless of her genuine difficulty with her unwanted feelings….which are in complete contrast to her other expressed attitudes towards other races.

Did she use ‘ highly racially offensive language during filming for a BBC documentary’  as the BBC claim?   Or did she just admit the look of Black people made her feel uncomfortable?

The use of the word ‘Negro’ is a throwback to her generation when it would have been in general, and accepted use.  Maybe offensive to many today but for her it is just a word and not intended to be offensive….and consider Cumberbatch when he used ‘coloured’….how is that offensive when Blacks themselves use the phrase ‘People of Colour’?  Words are political weapons these days used to vilify and attack people with the label ‘racist’….a label that is the kiss of death of course in ‘decent society’.

In contrast you may have heard Woman’s Hour a couple of weeks back talking about supposed ‘cultural appropriation’ (more of which later) and the phrase ‘male, pale and stale’ being bandied freely about……so sexist, racist and dismissive all in one little phrase….never mind that the talk was all about Whitey not being allowed to use ‘Black’ culture.

And yet…it was a laugh for the girls.









Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

More Brainwashing Needed!


Interesting reaction to this BBC Tweet……Not the one the BBC hoped for I imagine……

Fears grow for ‘Syria-bound’ girls























Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone

Fears Grow For Paris Bound Chelsea Supporters

Relatives of the three missing London boys believed to be heading to Paris have pleaded for them to come home.

The boys travelled to Paris on Tuesday. It is feared they may be planning to join Front National extremists in Paris.

One of the boy’s family said they understood he wanted to help those suffering attacks from Islamist fanatics in Paris but said Paris was “a dangerous place”.

The family said they were “feeling completely distressed”.

The three London boys who all supported Chelsea Football Club, travelled to Paris by train on Tuesday after telling their parents they were going out for the day to watch Chelsea play in the Champions League.

Football managers from clubs across the country have issued a statement pleading with the boys to come home.

Supporters at the  London club were asked to come forward if they had any information to help the boys return home safely.

A Club spokesman said the trio, who have been described as “straight-A students”, had been manipulated, possibly influenced by the heightened atmosphere around the subject of immigration during the run up to the election, much of it possibly due to the dangerous attitudes promulgated by Nigel Farage and UKIP.

He said: “They have been misled. I do not know what was promised to them. If they do go to Paris, it ‘s like a war zone and there are serious ramifications for going in to a war zone.”

He continued “Our understanding is the family didn’t have any idea and the children didn’t leave any clues and even their school, which is quite a good school in this borough, they don’t have any clue as to why these three boys just suddenly left.

“They might have some other friends and people don’t know whether they were radicalised online or by some individuals physically.”

“It’s a mystery for the community.”

Police said the boys had previously been  interviewed by officers after another boy from their supporters club went to Paris in January, but nothing had indicated they were at risk and their disappearance had come as a great surprise.

In a statement, one family said: “We miss you terribly and are extremely worried about you.

“Paris is a dangerous place and we don’t want you to go there. Get in touch with the police and they will help to bring you home.”

“We understand that you have strong feelings and want to help those you believe are suffering in Paris.

“You can help from home, you don’t have to put yourself in danger. Please don’t cross the border.”

The family said: “In your absence, we, as a family, are feeling completely distressed and cannot make sense of why you left home.

“Due to the speculation that you may be travelling towards Paris, we are extremely worried about your safety.”

David Cameron says the disappearance of three London boys feared to be heading to Paris to join the Front National extremists is “deeply concerning”.

He said “Our authorities will do everything we can to help these boys.”

“But it does make a broader point which is the fight against racism is not just one that we can wage by the police and border control.

“It needs every school, every university, every college, every community to recognise they have a role to play.

“We all have a role to play in stopping people from having their minds poisoned by this appalling xenophobic hatred.”

Police have issued images taken from CCTV of the boys they want to speak to:

Chelsea fans sought by police


Detectives said the priority was to find the boys and “make sure they are safe”.

The families of the boys rejected claims that they had become radicalised saying there was “no concrete evidence” of this.

The Metropolitan Police said the investigation has been taken over by the South East Counter Racism Unit.

“They have strong international links which places them in the best position to pursue the investigation overseas and try to find the boys and bring them home,” a force spokesman said.

“We will continue to work closely with the families and the community in London.”

A police spokesman said it was a “really sensitive investigation” and they were doing “everything nationally and internationally” to find the boys.

He said: “We suspect they may have been influenced by others to leave the UK.”

Jim Blarney from the London Sporting Academy said there was “absolutely not” any radicalisation at the Academy.

“I’m 100% confident – with the head and the senior leadership team and the whole school – that we’ve done everything to put in measures that safeguard all the children that attend the school,” he said.

Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said: “The idea of young British boys setting off to Paris is very disturbing, and shows that more action is urgently needed to stop young people being drawn into extremism and conflict.”

Those with information can call the free Anti-Racism Hotline number on 0800 789 321.







Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someone