Integration or disintegration: Keir Starmer faces backlash for including flag on electoral campaign

It looks and sounds like a contradiction that people coming to Britain or who have been born see the national symbols as a threat. Why is this happening? The education system might have a lot to do with it. Negative attitudes towards Nation and nationalist are being promoted throughout the education system, thus turning Britons against their own country and their own national identity.

Instead of being encouraged to love the country in which they live, they are being taught to hate the country in which they live and to see the country in which they live as evil. This state of affairs has to change and the time for change is long overdue when Britain might be about to face yet another historical challenge for its survival. 

Ben Wallace: To be or not to be?

For British Secretary of State for Defense Ben Wallace MP the issue is pretty clear: to be or not to be? British politicians have been claiming that after the USA, Britain is the second most powerful country in the world and one wonders on what such claims are based.

Spending less than 2 per cent of the budget on Defense, Britain is below the 2 per cent required by NATO and with less than 80,000 troops the country is behind Germany in terms of capable combattants. Even Margaret Thatcher that is now in history as the one Prime Minister that was at the helm in 1982 when Britain faced Argentina in the South Atlantic was about to mothball the navy right up to the point when the country had to embark in a naval campaign for which NATO resources had to be moved south and private ships had to be used to transport troops. Lucky for Britain that the Harrier jump jets were available and were the key for success as Britain had completely underestimated the amount of resources it needed for such endeavour.

Today, reality tells us that Britain is not fit for war. Britain was not fit for war in Iraq and Britain was not fit for war in Afghanistan. Even when it acted as second fiddle to the US, its failings were immediately apparent. When you send troops to a theatre of war in vehicles that are not fully armoured and were only meant for riot control, you know that something is extremely wrong. As soon as they drove over landmines, British soldiers were turned into mincemeat. Britain's capacity to move troops around was very limited as there were no enough air transport resources and British commanders had to use American aircraft to move around in a theatre of war. 

Talking about the present conflict in Eastern Europe, if you give away British military resources and you don't invest to replace or increase British resources you know, once again, that things are extremely wrong. The country could run out of ammunition in a week. Britain build two very expensive sea mammouths at a huge cost only to realize that they were not fit for purpose. One of the biggest embarrassments were massive ships that were not sea worthy.

It was Ben Wallace that had to counter statements made by Rishi Sunak regarding the deploymenty of British jets in Ukraine stating that sending jets would undermine British security because it would trigger retaliation against the British homeland. But I am sure that it was Ben Wallace's awareness of the present state of the British Armed Forces that pushed him to act without delay to reject the promises made by Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister. Who could be the right Prime Minister if Britain faces the prospect of a protracted European War? I am sure that many Conservatives are asking such question. An opportunistic Boris Johnson? Bureaucracts like Lizz Truss or Rishi Sunak? Lizz Truss herself support a 10 per cent reduction of the British Armed Forces while at the same time trying to sound threatening on the world stage.

Eleven billion Pound might sound like an impressive amount of money, but it is just money. You need to train human resources, you need time. You don't build reliable Armed Forces on the hoof. Politicians and Church leaders seem more interested in promoting homosexuality and social decadence than in promoting a Britain that is fit for purpose and capable of performing in a theatre of war. In a country in which supporting illegal migrants is more important that supporting Britons, you know in which direction the wind is blowing. When local populations rebel against invasion and are labelled 'Far Right extremists', you know that the political system is rotten to the core.

Rotten to the core by militant homosexuality, social decadence and the destruction of British identity, Britain is not fit for purpose.

Marine Le Pen: Il y a une Culture Française

André Malraux - Ministre des Affaires Culturelles

Marine Le Pen: Il y a une Culture Française.

Il y a une culture française malgré les efforts de certain politiciens de gauche qui prétendent qu'il n'y a pas une culture française.

Regardons une page officielle qui nous raconte comment et pourquoi le Ministère des Affaires Culturelles a été né.

Malgré quelques tentatives vite interrompues durant les régimes précédents, le Ministère des Affaires Culturelles est véritablement né en France avec la Cinquième République. Le General de Gaulle conseille en effect à son Premier Ministre Michel Debré de proposer  un ministère à André Malraux:

"Il vous sera utile de garder Malraux. Taillez pour lui un ministère, par example, un regroupement de services que vous pourrez appeler 'Affaires Culturelles'. Malraux donnera du relief à votre gouvernement."

Malraux accepte. Par cette création, actée le 3 fébrier 1959, d'un ministère de plein exercise, le général envoie un signe fort aux Français à savoir que pour lui le rayonnement mondial de la France doit passer aussi par le rayonnement de la culture.

Le décret fondateur du 24 juillet 1959, rédigé par Malraux lui-même, donne à ce ministère la "mission de rendre accessibles les oeuvres capitales de l'humanité, et d'abord de la France, au plus grand nombre possible de Français, d'assurer la plus vaste audience à notre patrimoine culturel et de favoriser la création de l'art et de l'esprit qui l'enrichisse".

Oui, Monsieur Macron, il y une culture française, une identité française, même si nous trouvons ceux qui veulent l'ignorer, l'effacer, la détruire.   

Ali Sonboly: another example of failed integration that ends up in tragedy

Ali Sonboly

When Angela Merkel stood in front of television cameras and stated Multikulti ist tot (Multiculturalism is dead) and everybody living in Germany should speak German language, she should have kept this in mind when promoting flood immigration.

The arrival of more than 2 million people of non Western background in Germany poses a huge challenge for the German society.

Firstly, they have a completely different cultural outlook.

Secondly, more than 99 per cent of all newcomers will have to surmount enormous obstacles and this will mean that they will have to live on benefits for a very long time, putting pressure on housing, health services, transport, education and so forth. The vast majority arrives in Germany without having a clue about German language.

Countless ghetto-like situations will be created and in these ghetto situations, poverty and isolation will lead to crime. Ali Sonboly was born in Germany and grew up in Germany. Before the attack he shouted 'Ich bin Deutsche (I am German), Despite his Iranian background, he felt that he was German because he was born in Germany and lived most of his life in Germany and spoke German language. Despite feeling that he was German, he felt isolated. He is said to have been suffering from mental health issues and that he had also been victim of bullying.

Angela Merkel should know very well the difference between political statements and reality. She should be very much aware of the cultural differences because when she said 'Multikulti is dead' (Multiculturalism is dead) she was stating that Multiculturalism in Germany has been a complete and utter failure leading to the formation of ghettos.

For a woman that seems so aware of the realities of World War Two, she is completely oblivious to the fact of what led to certain events before, during and after World War Two. What led to the pogroms against Jews across Europe and especially in Germany? Jews looked different from the rest of the population. They dressed differently, behave differently, and even spoke a language that was different from the language spoken by the rest of the population. They were bound to be targeted.

Today, the same issues arise regarding those coming from outside Germany and especially regarding Muslims that rather than trying to be like the rest of the population have their own ghetto culture and then again they look different, behave differently and even speak languages that are not the language spoken by the rest of the population. Therefore, like the Jews, Muslims are bound to be targeted.

The issue about the Muslim attire is that the Muslim attire is like a self-imposed Star of David. Jews were forced to identify themselves wearing a Star of David. Muslims self-identify themselves by making themselves look different and make themselves a target.

The expression 'when in Rome do as the Romans do' is the result of centuries of accumulated experiences. If you don't blend in, you are going to be seen as foreign and if you are seen as foreign you are going to be treated differently. Having said that, this is not a phenomenon that affects only German. It happens across the European Continent and also in Britain. Burkas, long beards, peculiar hats and tresses and other attires immediately single people out as those who do not belong.

It if self-evident that Ali Sonboly was desperately trying to have an identity. Despite that fact that he had Iranian background, he wasn't truly Iranian. Despite the fact that he was born in Germany and Germany was the country where he grew up and lived in for 18 years, he wasn't identified as German.

Even successful people like Cassius Clay struggled with issues of identity. He converted to Islam and became Muhammad Ali. In the US, people talk about African Americans. If his family had not been part of the slavery trade that took them to what is today the United States of America, what would be Cassius Clay/Muhammad Ali's name? What about Senator Jesse Jackson or Martin Luther King and countless others? Most of them live today with names given to them by slave owners centuries ago. There are fundamental issues of identity. They have little to do with the African continent. They know for certain that their present names are not the names of the families their ancestors left behind when they were taken away by the Slavery Trade. But they are called African Americans as Ali Sonboly was called German-Iranian. Born in Germany, he lived his life in limbo and lives lived in limbo sooner than later end up in tragedy.

Who actually pulled the trigger of the gun with which Ali Sonboly killed nine people and injured several others?

Politicians, Police Forces and the mass media are trying to find links with what happen in Norway and the events generated by Anders Behring Breivik. In so doing, they completely ignore the realities of flood immigration that leads to issues of identity. René Descartes said: Cogito Ergo Sum (I think, therefore I exist). There is a fundamental relationship between systems of beliefs and social realities.