Muammar Al Khadafi

Panorama has a very interesting episode - somewhat politically correct, of course, what else would you expect - on child beggars.

Read between the lines a little, we're granted a picture of endemic begging, exploitation of Britain, and authorities who appear to be doing very little about it.

On the one hand an equality spokeswoman tells us it is wrong to associate any one group with criminality, yet moments before the BBC commentator had pointed directly to the ethnic origins of the majority of child beggars.

"For 2,000 years we've been living off begging" says one local Gypsy boss in Romania.

The same speaker tells us that the British state gives people benefits, so they save it up to buy villas and houses back in Romania.

Well worth a watch, we can see much that is wrong with Britain today.

A system which makes us prone to exploitation by anyone in the world, political correctness tying hands - we've the usual calls for sensitivity when investigating people from certain communities as it harms community cohesion - and of course the word racism comes up.

Of course nobody considers the obvious point when talking about child slavery and exploitation - that our pathetic system all but encourages that by making Britain and the British taxpayer rich pickings. Just look at all the nice houses and flashy cars in Romania to see how profitable exploiting Britain is.

Arrest away, deport a few, feel sorry for the children by all means. But, if authorities are serious about protecting these children then the entire system must change so that Britain is no longer a cash cow for every foreigner who is willing to do anything in order to rip off the UK, and who knows that they can do so with little in the way of consequences.

Panorama, BBC iPlayer - Here

What a strange week in the world of jobs and unemployment.

On the one hand ConDem are proposing that jobseekers should prove that they've spent so many hours a day looking for work, on the other hand ConDem are also proposing that companies should reveal the numbers of foreign workers whom they employ*.

Anyone see an obvious link there?

For the easiest first, yes, some companies - far too many companies - use cheaper, foreign labour, and cloak it under the excuse of no skilled Britons, Britons are workshy, all the usual bag of make believe. Politicians allowed it to hapen though, and continue to do nothing.

But, whereas the actual numbers may make for an interesting story if true figures are revealed, what will ConDem do with it?

Are they going to order a quota of Brits must be employed with a company? Surely they could, there's precedent with equalities legislation demanding public bodies employ a given number of minority staff, and allowing them to discriminate (positively of course!) in order to reach these targets.

Will they extend that to, for example, all those food shops on the high street where you'll never, ever see a white face other than as a drunken customer?

Of course not, they'll do nothing with the figures, indeed they'll probably choose to hush them up just to hide the reality of the mass scramble for jobs which has seen the British worker disenfranchised.

It will be a pointless paper exercise, and change nothing, it will cost our money, and it will not get one more Brit into a job.

Even if they did do something like that, are they going to boot everyone out of Britain - including those EU workers who enjoy free movement of labour - or just boot them on to the dole queues?

Take your guess, what's your answer, prizes to be won. Only, not if you're British. On the one hand you'll have no jobs, on the other you'll pay for foreigners with no jobs. In fact, either way, you'll probably end up winning both those booby prizes.

Waste of time, move along, nothing to see here, more hollow and pointless shenanigans from the ConDem conspiracy.

Which, brings us to jobseekers having to put in X amount of hours a day in order to get benefits.

Is someone going to check, we've staff and money in the benefits system to do that?

Do companies keep records? I've worked a number of places where speculative CV's went in the bin, no reply sent back. For speculative phonecalls you get a polite sorry, nothing at the moment, send your CV (and read above for what happens when you do).

If companies do keep records, are they going to want to put up with random DSS spotchecks adding to their running costs?

Will we stop the benefits of anyone who cannot speak English, therefore has no chance of meeting the hours requirement since they are unable to communicate with employers on spec?

It's unworkable, and it's beside the point.

God knows how many foreign workers we have now, between legal and illegal not even the government knows, but we do have over 2 million unemployed.

British jobs for British workers, it's as simple as that.

Want to reduce unemployment? Make hiring of foreign workers uncompetitive (eg a tax on companies for using foreign labour). Impose stiff penalties for those using illegal foreign labour - such as jail sentences, not trifling civil fines from UKBA.

Train British people to do British jobs, and create a system whereby British people get priority to do British jobs.

Of course, we can't, Europe won't let us, equalities law won't let us, the human flood will continue and the British worker will become increasingly marginalised and unemployed.

And, all the while, we'll be told it's because the British worker is too workshy or too stupid.

Some may well be, but anyone believing that applies to 2 million people (less whatever of that is foreign unemployment claimants) needs their heads read.

Britain suffers from a surplus of workers and a deficit of jobs - and yet still continues to import workers!

Tackle that, or else any benefit reforms to force people to spend X hours seeking jobs are pointless, the jobs are not there, they've already been taken.

Most of Britain wants to work, those who won't should be penalised - but measures like this are idiocy when the simple fact is that many Britons are denied the chance to work by a moronic system which makes foreign labour more attractive and in plentiful supply, not to mention an education system which is broken.

It is not the unemployeds fault that the labour market is flooded with foreign workers, and that the economy is collapsing.

Why penalise them when it is the politicians, ConDem and Labour alike, who should be having their benefits stopped for not putting in the hours on what should be their primary concern, namely that of caring for Britain and the British people?

*Seems even a day is a long time in politics, looks like ConDem have already dropped the idea between it airing on Monday morning, and this article being posted Tuesday evening.

Britains continuing role as the benefits Riviera of the world is again confirmed as details emerge that we are paying £42million a year in child benefit abroad - mostly to those living in Eastern Europe.

Topping the list of recipients is Poland, which a recent study said was a better place to live than Britain - in fact Britain came bottom - and is it any wonder why when Polish families, with much lower cost of living, are being subsidised by the British taxpayer.

Over £2 million a month in your money goes to claimants in Poland. Child benefit there amounts to £3.30 per week per child, whereas by claiming in Britain it soars to £20.30 for the first child, and £14.75 for each additional child, paid for by you.

Once again Britain is financing a foreign population whilst preaching austerity and cutbacks at home.

Full Story - Express

Todays Daily Mail has a very interesting investigation of polygamous marriage within the UK - aka bigamy that authorities turn a blind eye to, and fund via the benefits system simply because of who it is committing the bigamy.

"Although the Government says there are only 1,000 such bigamous or polygamous unions in the UK, two experienced Lancashire social workers — one of Indian-English heritage and the other with Pakistani origins — told me that, although it’s difficult to be precise, in their estimation the figure is closer to 20,000."

20,000! And we're funding that, treating them as single mothers and paying for our own colonisation.

"To avoid breaking Britain’s matrimony laws, the men marry their extra ‘wives’ in an Islamic Nikah ceremony, either in their own homes or a mosque".

Of course, and our laws are stupid enough to allow that, and not to create new legislation to tackle it. It's all about who is doing it, not whether it is acceptable in Britain or not.

"Every single man of my age who I bump into seems to have a third, fourth or fifth wife. The issue is going unreported but in the Asian communities this is becoming a way of life. I think the number of polygamous relationships must be 20,000" says Tariq Ali, of Project BME.

Yes, it is going unreported, authority has no desire to admit to what is going on, to what is tacitly supported and endorsed via our benefits system and official indifference.

"Officially, bigamy and polygamy are punishable by up to seven years in prison. It was declared illegal in England and Wales in 1604, when the Parliament of James I took action to restrain ‘evil persons’ marrying more than one wife — on penalty of death. But officialdom now turns a blind eye because of cultural sensitivities".

It's always cultural sensitivities, otherwise known as thou shalt not dare challenge anything which Britains enriching minorities do, they are above and beyond the law, we must excuse their actions on the grounds of sensitivity and turn a blind eye every time.

Full story in the Daily Mail - what on earth has our Britain become, it is Britain no longer, it is a disparate mess of competing cultures who flout the law and societal norms with impunity.

Benefit claimants who cannot afford food will be referred to charity food banks by Job Centres as poverty in Britain continues to increase.

The scheme, which brings to mind startling images of soup kitchens and the great depression, will see the Trussell Trust dealing with referred benefits claimants, who can get food for three days.

Demand on the Trussell Trust, a Christian charity, is increasing at an alarming rate - it currently operates 70 food banks, and is set to open another 60 food banks over the next 6 months.

It is estimated that they will provide food for somewhere in the region of 100,000 people this year.

Poverty UK, where people must rely on charity in order to eat, it's a damning indictment of societies failings when these conditions can exist in modern Britain, and the government does nothing save for refer people to charity.

100,000 people reliant on charity to eat within Britain really is a terrible statistic, what a ruined nation we have become. With our ever growing population it will only get worse as well.

Is that the Big Society in action, where government knows there's a big problem but it's not their problem, charities can pick up the pieces of our ruined nation?

Meanwhile though, providing food for abroad, paid for using taxpayer money, appears to be no problem.

Just one recent post on the Department for International Development website tells us that we're providing food for 1.36 million people in Ethiopia, 800,000 in Somalia, and hundreds of thousands more people in Kenya.

We've people going hungry and reliant on charity in the UK, and the numbers are increasing - yet, the UK taxpayer is paying for millions of people abroad to eat.

Does that make sense?

Hunger at home, food for abroad, is that a pledge any party would campaign on?

They ought to, because that's the reality of the Britain around us today, feeding the world but failing our own people.

Poverty and hunger is fast becoming a feature of modern Britain, and yet the politicians eyes - and our money - are elsewhere.

Whilst people in Britain go hungry and are saved from starvation only by the intervention of charity it is clear that we have got our priorities completely wrong, and that there is something fundamentally broken with us as a nation and a society.

God bless dopey Dave Cameron and the rest of ConDem, their latest and greatest plan appears to be allowing Jobcentre Plus staff to force jobseekers who can't speak English on to courses - which we're paying for of course - to learn the language.

What a solution, arm them better to compete for jobs we haven't got, wonderful thinking.

Good luck with that though Dave, the human rights rulings will flow thick and fast, it's discrimination you know!

Besides, what difference does it really make?

We'll still be colonised, we'll still see foreign workers taking most of our jobs, just now we'll have some more jobseekers who - thanks to us paying to teach them - will be able to speak English.

If that's all we want to achieve then how about something simple - all JSA forms in English only, all interviews conducted in English only, all signing on to be done in English only, no interpreters allowed.

You want benefits then you learn English off your own back, you pay for it.

If you can't be bothered then no more benefits, simple as.

Apply the same to every other benefit, including housing benefit.

You want to bet there won't be a flood of immigrants who will suddenly find the energy and means to learn English then?

Of course, it's all a pointless exercise anyway. Whether or not our colonisers speak English we're still being subjected to a population change which is unprecedented.

We're still witnessing our nation changed beyond all recognition, our population swell, and the indigenous be utterly dispossessed within our own land.

Whether they say 'giro' in English, Polish, Urdu, or Pakistani, it all adds up to the same thing, and that is that we are paying to support those who are colonising our nation and displacing the indigenous.

Forcing the English language on people is just adding a lick of paint to the idea of invasion and colonisation, the end result is the same.

Colonisation continues. Most will only use English when they have to anyway, and even if they adopted it as their primary tongue it wouldn't change a thing save that colonisation could take place over conversation in English.

Imposing English is a diversion, nothing more, no different than some nations banning burkas - it's nothing more than window dressing as the same old problems continue and the indigenous march towards minority status.

Well, it took someone born in Lahore to say it – probably the only way to escape the accusations of racism that would pour in thick and fast if anyone else spoke out – but Baroness Shreela Flather has stated a truth that we’ve all known, and many of us have warned about, for years.

Some foreigners – and she singles out Pakistanis and Bangladeshis – are having more children because it brings them benefits and a bigger house.

“The minority communities in this country, particularly the Pakistanis and the Bangladeshis, have a very large number of children and the attraction is the large number of benefits that follow the child....Nobody likes to accept that, nobody likes to talk about it because it is supposed to be very politically incorrect”.

Just one rephrase, nobody is allowed to talk about that, cries of racism are what would greet our words. It’s not that people don’t like to, it’s that the PC system has stifled all debate.

You’ll put them in a tricky position though, a peer born in Lahore mentioning Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. They’ll probably just bury it without a mention, the racism card would be a tough one to play.

Many of us have been saying it for years though, we have seen huge families subsidised by the British taxpayer, watched as in effect we pay for our own colonisation.

The perfect system was created for immigrants to have children like it was going out of fashion, where they would be rewarded for this, and by God have many taken advantage of Britain’s stupidity.

It is by no coincidence that we see birth rates falling among the indigenous, yet going through the roof for certain minority groups – we’ve handed them every incentive.

Britain has, quite simply, encouraged peoples from the world over to settle here, and once here has given them every encouragement to raise huge families.

We hand reward after reward to our colonisers, and we are forbidden from saying a thing about it because to do so would be racist.

As for doing anything about it, well, racist too, there’s the EHRC and human rights waiting in the wings.

Who can really blame the immigrants, it is the idiocy of those who subverted the system into a politically correct monolith pandering to every minority need which has led us to here.

A moronic system which functions to impose diversity and the decline of the indigenous, that’s exactly what we have in the UK.

Thinking that foreign cultures would suddenly adapt to British ways and have miniscule families, especially when there are financial incentives to breed like rabbits, is symptomatic of the ludicrous idea of integration which has been foisted on us.

It is not by accident that the system was created whereby we were forced to allow millions into Britain, and then we handed them every incentive to raise huge families, it was a deliberate move and part of the attempts to create a multicultural society.

We witnessed a perfect storm of immigration, encouragement to immigrants to have large families, and it being taboo for the British people to speak of it.

Those conditions did not occur by accident, nor do they remain in place by accident.

Benefits and babies are another arm in the colonisation of the UK, we’re paying the costs incurred along the way to our own demise as a people.