|
If there was ever a question
of critical importance for the future of western civilization,
then it's how it will cope with the effects of
major racial demographic change as a result of continued
non-European immigration, high reproduction rates
in non-European groups, and low birthrates amongst
white people.
Virtually all European nations
and North America cannot afford to ignore the social
and cultural implications of this eventuality. Given
that white Europeans constitute less than 15% of the
worlds population, and that percentage is falling
annually, there is a sound basis for patriots to be
concerned about their prospects. At the moment the
speed of this change is apparent in cities and urbanized
areas. Already in London [England], population trends
strongly indicate whites will become a minority in
the capital by 2010, and a minority in the UK potentially
by 2100. Across the Atlantic in the USA, people of
European descent are predicted to become a minority
by the middle of the century due to similar factors. Nationalist
parties across Europe are experiencing surges in popularity
in response to public unease about demographic trends
and immigration. Governments have consistently shown
indifference that such trends present a serious danger
to national stability and social cohesion. Politicians
generally fail to acknowledge how race binds a nation
together, and that a substantial proportion of their
kinsmen mainly wish their nation to retain a indigenous
white majority, even if they are not deeply hostile
to other ethnic groups or foreigners in limited numbers.
Politicians are conscious of the powerful emotive
reaction this subject incites in the public arena.
They are reluctant to openly advocate their own racial
groups interests, lest their careers be jeopardized
by accusations of racism from the media or political
adversaries.
The late British MP Enoch
Powell, an outspoken critic of mulitracialism,
learnt this lesson to his personal detriment back
in the 1960s. Meanwhile contemporary leaders like
George W Bush or Tony Blair are unlikely to offer
balanced or objective comments on race and immigration.
Even the chronic influx of illegal immigration on
Americans southern border with Mexico was avoided
in the Bush-Kerry election campaign debates, despite
its dire impact on Americans from a variety of ethnic
backgrounds. In fact, the only ethnic group George
W Bush has pledged unwavering support to have been
Jews. At a May 2004 AIPAC meeting (American Israel
Public Affairs Committee) Bush conveyed approval for
a Jewish ethnic state in Israel in the following quote
"The United States is committed, and I am strongly
committed, to the security of Israel as a vibrant
Jewish state".
Recently in October he further
signed an Orwellian 'Global Antisemitism Bill', which
empowers the State Department to monitor and combat
any harsh criticism or attacks on Jews worldwide.
Since George W Bush knew little about international
affairs when he first entered office in 2000, this
strongly biased support to a foreign nation and diasporic
group strengthens existing claims that US government
policy is influenced by Jews, or neoconservatives
as they are often euphemistically referred to. Well,
if Bush does back Israel as an ethnocentric state,
then why doesn't he or anyother politician in Congress
promote the ethnic self-determination of any other
nation, including his own? After all, aren't politicians
professed egalitarians these days?
Immigration
resistance in Britain
Back in the UK, although race
and immigration ranks low on the policy agenda of the
main political parties, the British
National Party (BNP)
stands as the leading political force striving to thwart
the looming demographic crisis that awaits white British
citizens. Against a backdrop of total legitimacy for
the BNPs
concerns, an assortment of assailants have exerted pressure
to stifle its progress. In late October 2004 the BNPs
bank account was closed for the second time round (by
HSBC), and the party web site suffered a major denial
of service attack from an unknown culprit.
| BNP
members that have publicly revealed their affiliation
have sometimes been threatened with dismissal
from their jobs or professional associations.
|
 |
 |
|
The Hounding
of the BNP
by the Media Establishment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Media
publicity of the BNP
is uniformly dismissive, if not slanderous. Ironically,
the national newspapers themselves publish articles about
asylum seekers or immigrants receiving illicit benefits,
or engaged in racketeering, yet denigrate
the BNP
as extremists for alerting the public about essentially
the same problems. In the minds of the journalists
who occasionally write these articles, its ok to complain
about the problem but somehow immoral to desire to stop
it.
It's hardly surprising that the word immigration
evokes negative connotations in western countries nowadays. The
concept of immigration however is not necessarily historically
harmful in itself. Its proponents would point to how
the United States was successfully built up by it. A neutral
stance against this common argument, is to highlight that
the world has now congealed into well defined nation-states
with delineated boundaries, and that most countries do not
have the capacity for more immigrants without negative repercussions
racially, environmentally, and socially. Britain is already
a full house. In 1999, net immigration reached 185,000,
an all-time record. The Immigration Minister, Barbara Roche
at that time announced plans to attract migrants to fill
specific skills shortages, such as in the computer industry.
[Note: this is pure bs, there is
no need to attract migrants to fill computer jobs, as I
can personally testify being unable to resume computer work
for two years]. Many Americans now believe they
have reached full capacity there, and that further immigration
at current levels will harm the environment. This couldn't
be truer for the UK, which has a severe shortage of affordable
housing. Recently the government formulated plans for 500,000 new homes
in the east of England to meet the demand. Environmental
groups have rejected this proposal, correctly realising
that such a scheme will be another step forward in turning
Britain into a sprawling concrete concourse.
Demographic
change in the USA
Traditional white majority founded nation-states around the
world face the same challenge of adjusting to uneven racial
population growth rates. The United States for example is
usually regarded as being a multi-cultural country, but in
fact for nearly two hundred years of its history it was approximately
90% European with a 10% ethnic population consisting mainly
of blacks descended from slaves imported from Africa, and
a smaller dispersion of Native Americans [Iroquois]
that survived the colonization years. The turning point in
Americas racial future arose in the civil rights era of the
1960s. The Lyndon B Johnson administration passed the landmark
1965
Immigration Act which abolished immigration eligibility
based on national origin. This effectively reduced the number
of European immigrants and opened up the gates to the wider
world. The advocates of the 1965 bill insisted it wouldn't
upset the ethnic balance of the country. A different picture
has emerged now. Today the US population has declined to 72%
white, and houses a fast growing Hispanic population
expected to overtake whites as the largest ethnic group in
a few decades. Many patriotic Americans, especially white
ones, do not eagerly welcome this prospect. Unlike in France
or Britain, there is no mainstream nationalist party in the
USA that can garner the votes of white Americans at the polling
booths. Maybe Americas long tradition of immigration hasn't
compelled dissidents to form a successful political party.
Opposition to large scale immigration and anti-white legislation
has mainly originated from a variety of campaign groups at
state level, and the National Alliance, a pro-white
organisation created by the late physics professor Dr William
Pierce in the early seventies.
 |
The NA
incidentally operates an excellent, accurate daily news
service called NationalVanguard.org
that covers world affairs with racial implications,
and features guest writers articles and reader letters.
It is worth noting that both
the UK and USA share the same social infrastructure
where white race relations are concerned. Both
have media
institutions biased against whites in their coverage
of interracial confrontations, or that refrain from
publicizing that whites have legitimate group interests
in preserving their racial heritage.
Both
have governments that do not listen to public opposition
to immigration, and
both have consumer advertising institutions
that promote disproportionate multiracial representation. |
| The Asylum
Issue |
|
|
 |
Every year thousands of immigrants from poor developing countries
attempt to settle permanently in Britain, many under the pretext
of political asylum. That is, the process by which individuals
may apply for refuge in another country if they can prove
they are being tortured, persecuted, etc due to their politically
related beliefs or activities. The right to seek political
asylum is outlined in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights drafted by the United Nations in 1948. The United
Nations itself was created in 1945, shortly after the end
of the Second World War. Britain signed the 1951 United Nations
Convention and its 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of
Refugees. Later in 1981 the United
States enacted a similar law. These treaties recommend
that asylum seekers granted legal refugee status should enjoy
treatment at least as favorable as that accorded to the indigenous
population. The right to seek asylum doesn't guarantee a state
is forced to offer asylum to every applicant. Interestingly,
the term asylum wasn't used much in colloquial
parlance in Britain until as late as the 1990s. The public
became accustomed to this term from media articles on the
subject i.e. scandal stories of asylum seekers receiving excessive
social security benefits This is surely a clear indication
that a large scale asylum problem didn't exist until this
time. I would suspect many asylum seekers must have learnt
of a right to apply for asylum, even if unaware of its ideological
origins in the UN declaration. The asylum system in reality
is nothing but an alternative method for foreigners to enter
the country by deceitful means. It has been long abused by
applicants, the bulk of applications are bogus.
The cost of supporting asylum seekers in the English county
of Cambridgeshire
alone has totalled £8 million over the last six years. All
this must be paid for by the tax payer, through increased
council tax bills and other forms of government taxation. A
system appealing to the idealistic notion of humanitarian
compassion has in fact caused misery for numerous communities
across the UK that have been inundated with impoverished newcomers.
The rapid metamorphosis of these communities have often forced
existing longtime residents to seek safer sanctuaries elsewhere.
The asylum system may seem fair in principle, but in a world
of never ending conflict there will always be a constant exodus
of refugees to popular destinations. That alone is the most
practical argument against it, along with the cost to the
taxpayer and the social unrest it creates.
Causes
of world migration
First of all, we must understand why such a large mass migration
of people is occurring now in the early 21st century, when
in decades past i.e. in the early years of the 20th century
the numbers were far less conspicuous. There are further explanations
for this besides relaxed immigration controls. Improved transportation
and global communications are a clear cause, though discussions
on immigration tend to overlook the role it has played. But
think for a minute: how did aspiring migrants discover what
countries were the best places to move to, aside from recommendations
by émigré relatives? The invention of the television in the
20th century and its dissemination throughout the entire world
has likely assisted as an educational tool here, allowing
a wider audience to see the opportunities available in foreign
lands. The aviation revolution should be mentioned too. Following
World War II the growth of commercial air travel has drastically
reduced migrant journey times, and opened up a wider array
of destinations. The cost of air travel fell significantly
in real terms during the 1990s, enabling poor migrants a chance
to afford an air ticket to a better life. Not all migrants
pay directly for their tickets however. In extreme cases,
prospective migrants overseas hand over their entire life
savings to smuggling gangs with
dreams of making a fortune in the west. The willingness to
pay such high amounts demonstrates that it's not simply the
poorest of people who desire to leave their homelands for
greener pastures. Desperate immigrants are even prepared to
risk a long harrowing journey hidden in road vehicles. In
2002 58
illegal Chinese entrants suffocated to death while hidden
in a lorry carrying tomatoes at Dover, England. This led to
the conviction of the Dutch lorry driver and Chinese smugglers
who organised the operation.Once immigrants have established
communities in host countries, they often encourage relatives
to join them, tactfully taking advantage of extended citizenship
laws. In the case of Britain, the decline of its empire,
and a common British nationality introduced via the 1948 Nationality
Act throughout its colonies offered many new citizens a passport
by which they could emigrate to the British Isles. Britain
was an attractive magnet for Commonwealth immigrants in the
post-war economic boom. A substantial portion of the original
Afro-Caribbean population in the UK emigrated to England from
Jamaica and other parts of the West Indies during the 1960s.
Many of them settled in inner London and gained employment
with London Transport. The burgeoning world population
has also fuelled migratory urges. As outlined in my essay
Consequences of an overpopulated planet the worlds population
trebled from an estimated 1.6 billion in the early 20th century
to a staggering 6 billion by the year 2001. The bulk of this
rise was amongst Asiatic peoples in Africa and Asia, partly
from medical advances and humanitarian assistance from the
West. However, the rise in fertility rates and human longevity
hasn't necessarily engendered a great improvement in the quality
of life in certain areas there. If that were the case then
there wouldn't be such a strong desire to seek a new life
in wealthier western countries. As a population grows unevenly
across ethnic groups in shared territory, so does rivalry
between them. Africa is still ravaged by conflict between
its numerous ethnic groups, providing a constant source of
refugees to neighbouring states and destinations further afield.
A chronic example was the mass genocide of Rwandans in 1994.
Whites too are undergoing genocide in Africa. After the demise
of the apartheid era in South Africa in 1994, overall crime
has soared, particularly murderous attacks on the shrinking
white community. South African patriot Jan Lamprecht has documented
a catalogue of disasters that have befallen his country on
his 
African Crisis
web site.
| The
wrecking of London |
|
London
Non
White By 2010 |
From a
personal standpoint, I base my opinions on racial trends
not only on firmly accepted facts,
but also on a history of change I have witnessed in
Greater London over the years. Greater London itself
has accommodated a mosaic of ethnic groups for several
decades now. Most of the Black and Asian population
arrived during the fifties and sixties from Commonwealth
countries in the post war boom cited earlier. |
 |
 |
| During
my extensive bus excursions as a boy in the 1980s I
observed distinct ethnic minority communities distributed
across the capital, mainly concentrated in inner London.
These communities didn't particularly concern me at
the time, as their population levels were still relatively
low compared to the white population of London. Furthermore,
there was certainly no feeling in the suburbs that white
areas were threatened with displacement. I held views
on race that would typically be regarded as 'average'. |
 |
 |
| It wasn't
a subject that dominated my thoughts, I understood there
were inherent behavioral differences between the races,
but I didn't contemplate the significance of these differences
because they weren't impacting English society adversely
enough at the time. In later years, the question of
race and white social cohesion elevated to the forefront
of my thoughts as I noticed Londons white population
steadily dwindle due to uneven birth rates, immigration,
miscegenation, and perhaps even white emigration. |
 |
 |
Immigration continued steadily during the Conservative government
led by 'Iron Lady' Margaret Thatcher from 1979-1990, followed
by John Major until 1997. For all practical purposes, the
Conservative party were no tougher on immigration than past
Labour governments, in contrast to the common misperceptions
about them. By the late 1990s the social decay and alienating
atmosphere in many parts of London compelled me to acquire
a heightened sense of racial consciousness, and made me more
sympathetic and curious about white nationalism. Nowadays
when I visit London I can't help but feel a grave sense of
loss from the place it has become. I see fewer and fewer white
English faces aboard the buses, and the ones I do see are
tense and withdrawn. I must confess I am sickened by the proliferation
of white Anglo-Saxon women that have chosen black partners
and sired mixed race children. I can only imagine the majority
of these mindless, naive women do not realise they are wrecking
a future for white children, who will find themselves a minority
in a black and mixed race culture. They cannot grasp the concept
that they are playing a decisive role in shaping the future
.
Sadly some of these women have no love of white beauty or
their own races welfare and integrity. I wouldn't balk at
the odd interracial couple, but the extent to which this has
spread is hastening the eventual demise of whites in London. The
media and advertisers are partly culpable here, as they have
frequently published adverts with black men and white women
in suggestive positions, and of course have suppressed discussion
of rational objections to interracial relationships. I would
say roughly since the late 1980s there has been an accelerating
campaign by the media to instill white guilt and stultify
love of their own race. Typically Hitler and the Nazis have
been the primary method of nurturing this shame, as numerous
television documentaries over the years attest to. As a side
note, Nazi bashing is a favorite pastime of liberals in general.
In the USA, some liberal commentators have even gone as far
to denounce their country as 'Nazi America' for the unwarranted
invasion of Iraq. This comparison may satisfy feeble minds,
but in fact is quite a poor analogy. To begin with, George
W Bush didn't invade Iraq for colonization purposes, neither
does he have any concern for white Americans. If he did have
any racial ideology, as the National Socialists undoubtedly
did, then he certainly wouldn't sanction the ongoing invasion
of illegal invaders from Mexico into his country and casually
grant many of them amnesty to gain citizenship.
Home grown events in England have been
equally effective in nurturing white guilt, even if they don't
outwardly display this agenda. Take the case of Stephen
Lawrence for example. He was an 18 year old black teenager
stabbed to death by white youths at a bus stop in Eltham,
South East London in 1993. The media generated an uproar
in the country because the killers weren't immediately caught
after the incident. The government subsequently commissioned
a lengthy report by Lord MacPherson
which accused the Metropolitan
Police of institutionalised racism for improperly investigating
the case and recommended an overhaul of the 'stop and search'
policy of ethnic minorities (also known in the USA as racial
profiling).
Ten
years later
the media were still
reporting the case. |
 |
 |
The overall effect of Stephens tragic death was an unfairly
demoralized police force, excessive
media coverage on every aspect of it, and an
inculcation in the publics mind that only non-whites
are the targets of race attacks. |
|
Compare this fanfare with 30 year old
Scott Anthony Osbourne, who was kicked to death by three blacks
outside a supermarket in nearby Lewisham in November 2002.
There was no coverage of this shocking murder in the
national press or television whatever. The incident was only
reported by local newspapers like The News Shopper
here,
and the ethnicity of the killers withheld where possible.
The implication is always the same: whenever whites attack
non-whites then it must be racially motivated. When the reverse
is true it is just another crime in the eyes of the media
and judiciary system. To the average person, racism is a moral
stigma that they rarely apply critical thinking to.
A pet gripe of mine is the aggressive and self-hating demeanour
of white teenagers in London that have adopted the speech
and mannerisms of black youth. I would describe these pitiful
hooded white boys as 'Eminem' rebels (the worlds preeminent
white rapper) -- products of a dysfunctional society who see
no positive white social community to identify with. Thus,
as black culture is pervasive in music and fashion now, they
naturally try to conform to the predominant culture around
them. These boys have little sense of self-respect or white
racial responsibility. They exhibit an aspect of a larger
problem of what I classify as 'white self-hate'. This phenomenon
manifests in various ways across all ages. For years,
I haven't been able to work out why so many of my fellow white
Anglo-Saxons in London, and even in the provinces to a lesser
degree, frequently shun each other, and act in a anti-social
manner that works against our collective interests. I've lost
count of the times I've received a sneering glare from a white
person, or found myself ignored by my own kind. This issue
of irrational anti-social behaviour is a complete saga in
itself that I may divulge in future writing. Anyway, to continue
-- the increasingly incidences of intermarriage now apparent
between whites and ethnic minorities are a manifestation of
this self-hate. Really, if white English people had a deeper
love of their own people then they wouldn’t be courting non-whites
in droves. The development of these interracial relationships
cannot be solely explained as ‘individuals’ who just happen
to get on with each other because their personalities are
compatible. If that were true then you’d see Chinese people
arm in arm with Blacks, Indians with Blacks, Polish with Nigerians
or Jews, etc. Occasionally you might see non-whites of different
ethnicities together as friends, but from my careful observations
it’s very rare. Interracial relationships involving whites
inevitably arise because their non-white partners adore the
physical beauty, and/or the traits of generosity and compromise
that are inherent in our race. For example, most people concede
that black men have a preference for white women, just as
oriental women are attracted to white men. A programme I saw
on television several years back confirmed this by stating
1 in 3 black men have a white partner.
Some of
you may wonder why I am bothered about preserving white
society given my diminutive assessment of it; the internal
divisions, the masses of consumer oriented lemmings,
the lack of idealism, and moronic uncultured yobs that
are typical of the housing estate where I now live in
the north west. Why don't I just resign myself and let
it implode on itself from negligence, self-hate, and
irresponsibility? The reason being is that I do have
a love of the best elements of my people; the
polite, morally upright middle classes in the main who
do have self-respect and love of their race. It is this
segment of society that I cherish and hope prevails
during this time of accelerated demographic change.
Being a patriot I also think we should honour our ancestors
struggles to help build the foundations for the quintessential
trappings of society we now take for granted. |
 |
Having unambiguously expressed my concerns for white society
and integrity, please do not infer I abhor all other races,
nor have I only sought to learn about white culture. I'm not
saying this, by the way, out of an urge to declare an obligatory
anti-racist disclaimer. Throughout my life I have regularly
sustained cordial acquaintances with individuals of non-European
extraction. For example, I usually get on well with Indian
and other South Asian peoples, and admire the self-respect
they have for their family, race and culture. I also appreciate
the respect they have for polite middle class English people.
I can also get on with blacks, of West Indian descent usually,
and actually studied black culture during the late 1980s when
I was a college student, and relatively impartial on racial
matters. The revival of rap music at the time (freed
from its former association with breakdancing) by artists
like Public Enemy, NWA, and Ice Cube, enticed me to
learn more about black culture as a whole. It partly inspired
my first holiday to the United States in 1990, when I travelled
by Greyhound bus from Detroit to Los Angeles. As you may know,
rap music 'crossed over' to the mainstream music scene during
the 1990s to become an influential cultural force. The
1990s really was the decade of political correctness in the
English speaking world, especially the United States and Britain.
In Americas buzzwords like 'affirmative action' (preference
to non-white job applicants irrespective of merit ) and 'diversity
is our strength' entered colloquial speech. In Britain there
were similar developments, and racial issues were increasingly
discussed in newspaper articles.
A simple
analogy I can construct on my racial worldview is similar
to that of a father who loves his family. He may actually
like, or even love his neighbors down the road, but
he carries that extra special devotion to his biological
relatives.
Naturally I too have that extra bit of predisposition
to my ethnic family, their heritage, and group interests.
Now that my 'family' is in serious jeopardy, partly
through their own negligence, I cannot refrain
from expressing this concern, and putting their welfare
first.
I have been intrigued with scholarly academic research
on group traits particular to white northern Europeans,
and have read various authors findings. |
HOW
And WHY Whites
Are
Made GUILTY ! |
|
Kevin MacDonald, a California State
University professor who has written a trilogy of books on
Judaism, has suggested that white peoples tendency towards
individualism, low birth rates, monogamy, and a lack of extended
kinship outside of the immediate family may have originated
from their common roots in a harsh, low resource environment.
It was the demanding nature of this environment that required
these behavioural traits to develop as a survival strategy.
Indeed, there is some evidence to indicate that 80% of European
genes share a common ancestry in northern Europe 30,000 -
40,000 years ago, which includes the period of the last ice
age. MacDonald also goes on to say that individualistic
societies (like those of Europeans) are not instinctively
inclined to erect defences against outsiders, unlike the collectivist
social structures in the Middle East and other parts of the
Asiatic world. What this means in other words is that whites
are not unified enough to recognise external threats to their
future well being, and they let their sense of fair play work
against them, practicing a kind of moral altruism.
The future
 |
British
National Party
In
- Prison !! |
|
|
 |
 |
To survive and prosper in the
times ahead, whites need to break free from their evolutionary
shackles that predisposes them to behaviour ill suited to
a competitive multiracial environment.
Firstly, white society at large must grow out of its childish
interpretation of racism and learn that it's not
unreasonable of us to make distinctions between ethnic groups
in order to secure a stable future for white children,
all the while maintaining respectful relations with the
rest of humanity.
They must think of themselves as being part of a
group with a destiny instead of rootless individuals with
obligations only to their egos. Whites deserve to be exposed
to both sides of the coin of the race debate, and not the
shallow one that panders to universal sentimentality pushed
by the media and government. More often than not, however,
whites are intimidated into passivity by the charge of racism,
much like Superman is weakened by Kryptonite. I could talk
about this subject and its facets until the cows go home;
there are volumes of text written on it elsewhere. Ultimately,
the most important question for inquisitive responsible
minds is what can be done to avert the demise of
white society in the UK in the long term, and rest of the
west in this predicament . This is a difficult question
that patriots cannot easily answer as well as they can analyse
the problem. Most reasonable people desire a strategy that
is safe, fair and nice. As the situation continues
to deteriorate, as it surely will in coming years, a
nice solution will be less attainable. At this stage the
most practical measure would be to halt all asylum and immigration,
curtail anti-white/anti-Christian propaganda in education,
broadcasting, and public bodies (such as the ridiculous
decision by the Royal Mail to remove Christian
themes from its Christmas 2003 stamp range), and repeal
politically correct policies that give unfair concessions
to minorities based on race or religion. I'm not a hardcore
separatist at heart though. I still approve of an open door
for all foreign visitors to travel on holiday, as it would
admittedly be mean spirited to bar people from other cultures
from discovering and appreciating ours. To recap,
the underlying foundation of the alarm about the racial
demographic and immigration situation is about preservation,
self-respect and order. This is at odds with the liberal
doctrine that asserts we should "move with the times", or
"come together as one world", and similar superficial excuses.
Ultimately we could encourage all resident ethnic groups
to pursue their autonomous aspirations, rather than the
current modus operandi where whites are discouraged from
an exclusive culture, and are goaded into abandoning loyalty
to their race and heritage.
SOME
of the people who wish to speak with you, may be a danger
to you
But ALL of the people who
would stop you listening, are a danger to you
... Sean Bryson |
The Race Riots 2001 - 2002 -
Chicken - Tikka - Masala - Britain
|
|
Shahid
Malik
"A prominent Labour
party member says he will sue police after being
arrested and allegedly beaten during clashes
in Burnley. Shahid Malik, 33, who sits on Labour's
national executive and is a member of the Commission
for Racial Equality, was hurt during an outbreak
of violence on Monday night."
"Mr Malik, who lives
in Burnley and is the son of the town's deputy
mayor, said he had been trying to stop the violence."
The
UK Race Riots ?
Three separate enquiries in Burnley, Oldham,
and Bradford, have placed the blame firmly at
the door of the Asian Communities. NOT the native
population, and NOT the BNP.
The 40 most wanted
rioters.
|
|
|
