UKIP's Nigel Farage: Police Turning A Blind Eye To Muslim Ghettos, "We've Been Led Very Badly"

Hannity fox news ^ | January 13, 2015 | Sean Hannity & Nick Farage

[Mount Athos]

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS; My next guest says multiculturalism is in fact to blame for the tragic events last week in France. here now to explain is the UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage is with us. You know, it's not just France... they have no-go zone, police are not allowed. Non-Muslims aren't allowed. That to me -- why would France or any other country allow Muslims that have come into the country to basically take over portions of the country? That is madness to me.

NIGEL FARAGE, UKIP LEADER: Yeah, it isn't just France. It's happening right across Europe. We've got no-go zones in most of the French cities. We've been turning a blind eye to preachers of hate that have been coming here from the Middle East and saying things which the rest of us would be arrested for. In parts of Northern England, we've seen a sexual grooming scandal of underage girls committed by Muslim men, in the majority.

We have allowed through massive immigration and not checking the details of those people who have come to our countries -- we have allowed big ghettos to develop.

Let me give you an example. In the United Kingdom there have been tens of thousands of female genital mutilations that have been carried out. Despite that there's not yet been a single prosecution for anybody for carrying out FGM. We even a few years ago had some quite clear examples where the immigration services were actually allowing women to come into Britain from Pakistan and elsewhere to join polygamist marriages, something that is against our law.

It gas got so bad in Britain that the Archbishop of Canterbury, the leader of our church, actually said we should accept Sharia law.

[W.]

The Nazis tried to control the world, and were destroyed.
The communists tried too, and were bankrupted trying to keep up with us.
What it's going to take to get rid of these ragheads, I don't know.

They certainly seem to want blood, and they continue to pick away at us using laws enacted to empower them and leave us with few options except to bend to their will. To be taken down from the inside by a system of anti-American political operatives first installed in our government by a cold-war foe that has been usurped by a new enemy is most distasteful indeed.

Of course, the half-breed in the White hut could capitulate to them, but that would be an end-game maneuver from which there is no retreat, and he and his aren't that strong to counter the most-certain reaction from flyover country. He wants desperately to strangle the flow of information over the internet and wants all the civilian guns, too. Until his side controls those, he will just let things simmer as they have been, with no resolution in sight.

[samtheman]

Great analogy. Liberalism is HIV. Islam is pneumonia.

Without HIV, pneumonia isn’t usually fatal. But when civilization is weakened by liberalism, an easily-beatable scourge like Islam becomes fatal.

[the scotsman]

It was the British who bore the brunt 1916-18. Yes, the Canadians and Aussies were brilliant at Vimy and other battles, but it was the British who attacked Cambrai, it was the British who bore the brunt of the Kaiserschlact and it was the British who bore the brunt of the 100 Days Offensive.

And it was the British army more than any other on either side that led tactical and technological advance 1916: new infantry tactics, use of artillery, the tank, air power. A fact modern historians are rediscovering as they shatter the lions and donkeys myth.

ww2: complete nonsense. The British took the brunt of the hellish battles (inc my grandfather) to capture Caen. Battles undertaken to draw the best German troops to the east so as to allow the Americans to break out. Which is always ignored when Americans criticise Monty and the British. We tied down the best SS and Army units, and almost all the German armour. During the Normandy campaign, units facing the US were moved to face the British!. And Monty used fresher Poles and Canucks because the British were frankly battered and bruised. Wonder why......

The swift post-Falaise British advance into N France, Belgium and S Holland is always ignored by US critics, dosent fit the ‘slow British’ myth.

Arnhem was not, by some margin, the last major British offensive either. You have not only the vicious battle for the Scheldt Estuary (heavily British), but the last massive offensive was in Feb 1945 and the horrendous battle for the Reichswald Forest.

A battle fought in flooded plains against THREE lines of German defence, inc the reserve meant to face the US 9th!. Which had failed to stop the Germans flooding the plain, due to the American defeat in the Hurtgen Forest, which was frankly and sadly nothing short of a slaughter, which made Arnhem look like light casualties and a masterclass in fighting.

You also have British offensives from Oct 44 to Feb 45, through Holland and closing up to the Rhine in Jan, all serious offensives eso the latter, Operation Blackcock, the learing of the Roer Triangle. And lets not forget that Monty turned XXX Corps south to help in the Bulge, 90000 British troops eventually fought in that battle. Not that you’d know it.

Read Charles Whiting’s book about the British in the Bulge battle. Its an eyeopener. It explains Monty ‘ignoring’ American generals (the famous Christ come to cleanse the temple controversy) and shows that Monty had more troops moving more quickly on the 16th and 17th than any US general, from XXX Corps to SAS scouts.

Yes, American troops under British command, like Simpson’s grossly underrated 9th army, took part and certainly helped the British. IMO they are too ignored by both UK and US historians and laymen. But to suggest the British offensives of Sept 44 to Feb 45 and beyond to May 45 relied on heavy US involvement simply cannot be supported.

And to make a comment that the British let others do their dirty work from 1916-18 and 1944-45 is not only nonsense, its offensive to the British soldiers who fought in all those terrible battles, as well as those who died. To quote one old Caen veteran in one of my books: ‘Do people realise just what we went through?...’.

Second battle of the Somme, Cambrai, the Kaiserschlact, the 100 Days Offensive, Amiens, Caen, Arnhem, the Scheldt, the Reischwald Forest. To name just some. We let others do our dirty work?. Utter crap.

[the scotsman]

You are clearly a history nut like me, and well educated in WW1/2. Which makes your nonsense more depressing. I am used to the ‘we saved your ass’ stuff, when I get someone like you, I look forward to enjoying a discussion.

Funny you should mention the 7th, as we had to come to its rescue when it was attacked by Model and driven back. And tbh I am a wee bit tired of hearing how the 82nd and 101st had to fight as infantry for 56 days/8 weeks. The British 6th airborne, the Pegasus lads, had to fight in Normandy as infantry for EIGHTY FOUR DAYS. 12 weeks, 3 months. And they had to do it in the battles for Caen. These men were the first Allied troops in France, yet didn’t return home until after the Falaise Gap was shut.