The UAF and the Memory of our Servicemen and Women

24 Jun

The ignorant and hypocritical UAF must be prevented from claiming ownership of our war memorials and the memory of our war dead. It is the universal right of citizens of this country to honour our war dead. We must sideline the UAF and assert this right and duty. After all, we owe this to them since they died for us.

The UAF, or ironically, Unite Against Fascism, have positioned themselves as defenders of war memorials against the English Defence League and the ‘far-right’ in general; what they expect the EDL to do with the war memorials, apart from laying wreaths, is unclear. It is clear however that the EDL, or the BNP, could not be a greater threat to the memory of our servicemen and women than the UAF and their odious allies.

The UAF believe that they have the right to determine access to war memorials. In Oxford UAF activists, clambering over a war memorial for a picture, jeered and intimidated anyone who tried to lay wreaths on the war memorial. These members of the public were not even members of the EDL, or at least there was no reason to believe that there were, since they were apparently lacking any insignia to identify them with the EDL or any other organisation or parties; they were seemingly members of the public who wanted to remember our brave serviceman. This a right that extends to all of us, regardless of whether the bourgious students within the UAF agree or not.


The memorial itself was damaged because they trampled on the flowers and one young woman, who no doubt who has had a comfortable upbringing that she owes to our serviceman, tried to run away with half the flowers ( So clearly, according to the UAF, more harm would be done by laying wreaths on the memorial by patriotic members of the public than by the UAF desecrating it. Logic is not a strong point of the UAF.

The UAF justify this by claiming that our serviceman fought against fascism. They did, amongst other causes. But they did not fight against fascism in order for fascism to be introduced by idiots calling themselves ‘antifascist’. Remember, it was Winston Churchill that said that fascists in the future will call themselves antifascists.

They also wrongly imply that anyone who is patriotic or nationalistic is fascist. Patriotism is merely pride in our country, and by extension, our war dead, and nationalism is the belief that the particular national group overrides international attachments; nothing about authoritarianism or hatred of others is necessarily implied. In fact, fascism is closer to socialism in its authoritarianism.

Why Our Serviceman Fought For Us

Their self appointed war memorial guardian status is undermined by the fact that they do not understand as to why our servicemen fought for us. They fought for our freedom; a concept that the UAF clearly have trouble understanding since they possess the same understanding of freedom that would have existed amongst the regime of the former East Germany. A Liberal Democrat councillor of Oxford criticised the group for their desecration of the war memorial; in turn they called for his resignation with an online petition on the basis that he is not a ”fit representative for Oxford’s wonderful multicultural society’ despite Oxford being a traditional Christian English city. The implication is clear : no-one should by occupy office unless the UAF approve. Recognising irony is clearly something that the UAF find difficult.

An aspect of freedom is the right to protest. They believe that they possess the right since they are the first to cry fascism when the police prevent them attempting to exercise their apparent democratic right to beat their opponents into a bloody pulp. Remember, they define ‘democracy’ as the Stasi did in East Germany. In the recent demonstrations in the centre of London the UAF, and other assorted Leftist weirdos, decided that the British National Party did not have the right to protest against the presence of Islamist hate preachers in Britain. After all, these Islamists help to swell the ranks of the ‘anti-fascist’ movement. They could not claim that the BNP were acting violently since there is no sign of this; the violence was all on the ‘anti-fascist’ side ( That fact that all 58 arrests were amongst the ‘anti-fascist’ side illustrates this.

There are actually members and supporters of the British National Party that fought fascism or are descended from those that did; there are many members of the UAF composite groups, such as the Socialist Workers Party, that implicitly or, in the Palestinian context explicitly, peddle anti-Semitism. Ironic then that the UAF consider themselves on the anti-fascist side of a Manichean conflict between good and evil. Not to mention the connection between their Islamist allies, the Muslim Brotherhood and…fascism (

In 1942 the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and member of the Muslim Brotherhood, al-Husayni, actually went to Germany in order to meet Adolf Hitler. In 1937 he had initially approached the Nazi regime because he wanted to rid Palestine of Jewish immigrants. He received funding from the Nazi regime; was instrumental in the creation of a Bosniak division of the SS, was made a SS Gruppenfuhrer and implicated in atrocities. After the war he was heavily involved within the Palestinian movement. There are actually pictures on this individual in the presence of Nazis and looking very happy about it too (

Thus the UAF are selective in what they choose to remember about respective groups. In the case of the ‘far-right’ they can recall non-existent connections to Nazism and Fascism, while conveniently ‘forgetting’ dubious connections of their Islamist allies. What gives these people the right to decide who can approach war memorials and who cannot? Our servicemen did not fight for Islamists, or anybody else, to be able to undermine our freedoms and way of life.

Islamist Allies

They do not understand that it is hypocritical to represent themselves as the defenders of the memories of our war dead when they give prominent positions to individuals who actively seek to destroy the very basis of our social and political structure. The vice chairman of the UAF is Azad Ali, the community affairs co-ordinator for the poisonous IFE, or Islamic Forum of Europe who believe that the European social and cultural basis should be supplanted by Islam. Not exactly in accordance with the deaths of our servicemen and women in the name of preserving our social and cultural basis. Thus, the UAF claim to defend the memories of our serviceman while at the same giving prominent positions to those intending to destroy everything that has been fought for.

Ali has also argued on his blog that attacks on British troops in Iraq were justified ( This means therefore that the UAF think it is acceptable to associate with people that believe that killing British soldiers is justified. Either that or they posses selective hearing or interpretation of Azad Ali’s poison.

If such people want to desecrate our war memorials then the UAF seem to see their role as granting permission to such people, and even orchestrate such sacrilage themselves ( After all, according to their apparent reasoning, if anyone who hates this country wants to do something then it must be justified because we are all evil. This is why they teamed up with a load of Islamists and proceeded to destroy wreaths and flowers on a memorial to Lee Rigby and throw them into an angry crowd of patriots. One thing they lack is shame, clearly. If you are the UAF then the logic is simple – people who support our troops are ‘fascist’, fascists must be opposed so therefore you must do the opposite of what these ‘fascists’ want to do. This simple-minded contrarianism lays at the heart of what the UAF does.

The ‘far-right’ supports the defence of our way of life so therefore our way of life must be opposed; the ‘far-right’ opposes Islamists so therefore the Islamists must be supported; the ‘far-right’ wants to honour our war dead so therefore the ‘far-right’ must be prevented from laying wreaths at the memorials to our war dead; and so on. Such contrarianism enables those vacuous ‘anti-fascists’ to believe that they stand for something as opposed to negatively opposing anything to do with the defence of this country. In a way it is a sort of projected self-loathing; they see themselves, the indigenous ones anyway, in the institutions of this country and its traditions and therefore reject it. They reject it because their, generally, prosperous backgrounds sits uncomfortably with their socialist beliefs; hence why they dress like tramps in order to, apparently, fit in with the working class (thus illustrating their ignorance of the working class whom they patronise). This allows their self-loathing to stand alongside their narcissism. It is this narcissism that creates the impression that they are entitled to control access to war memorials and to determine who can and cannot use the freedoms our servicemen have fought and died for.

Socialism is at the heart of the UAF. Its leadership is drawn from various far-left parties such as the Marxist-Leninist Socialist Workers Party, the Socialist Party and various other social misfits ( Many of these organisation were hoping that the Soviet Union would invade Britain – in the process, of course, in the event of conventional military resistance, they would have been hoping that our servicemen would have failed. This would make them traitors; traitors who claim to ‘defend’ our memorials from ‘fascists’ laying wreaths.

It is because of these socialist beliefs that the UAF and its feeder organisations wish to undermine this society on the basis that it is a ‘fascist’ and ‘capitalist’ society. The role of the armed forces is to defend the country and society that they serve; this would mean therefore that the UAF oppose what the armed forces are fighting for. It is a sign of their stupidity that in effect they are advocating the removal of the foundations that they are standing on because if this foundation is removed then they fall like the rest of us. The armed forces, since the members of the UAF are generally parts of this society and depend on it, are fighting for the interests of these ‘anti-fascists’ whom seek to desecrate their memory and ally themselves with Islamists who want British soldiers dead.

They pick up a load of useful idiots alongside the way. David Cameron was a founding signatory of the UAF. It must be asked as to what information was presented to Cameron prior to him signing up because the UAF is clearly filled with groups and individuals who hate toffs such as Cameron. So Cameron is a useful idiot of an organisation that are themselves useful idiots of the Islamic movement, such as the IFE, that want to rid Britain of patriotic resistance to Islamification of this country. If this country becomes Islamic then the far-left members, and any other non or moderate Muslim, must question as to how their other campaigns like homosexual rights are going to fare. We are therefore dealing with an organisation that cannot recognise inconsistencies and contradictions and instead concentrate blindly on their contrarian agenda like a bull to a red rag.

It is patriots that represent the legacy of our servicemen; it has been patriotism that has been an overwhelming motive for our servicemen. In order to honour them we must not only recognise the sheer unimportance of a bunch of dressed down middle-class kids but openly defend our historic institutions and culture from being undermined. We must defend the right of those who want to honour our servicemen. We must defend the right of patriots to protest against Islamist hate preachers even if they are allies of the UAF because our servicemen fought for this right. We must take a pro-active role as citizens to defend our war memorials and the war dead from socialist desecration.

It is clear therefore that anybody who cares about the memory of our servicemen and the freedoms that they fought for must take a robust stand against the ironically named ‘anti-fascists’. Why should a bunch of middle-class students and other assorted individuals, many odious, be able to dictate to the rest of us? They are blind, misinformed and allied to groups that want our troops dead and anything they fought for to be destroyed. Their self-claimed role as gate-keepers must be openly ridiculed, and our right to honour our war dead to be vigorously defended. They fought for us all and we all have a right to honour them.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: