Vote at

http://www.1party4all.co.uk

Nigel Hastilow says he wants to do nothing to harm the Conservative Party of which he is still a member and confirms that he wants a Conservative government.

What is the point of remaining loyal to a Party led by a leader infamous for his lack of policies and principles, who predictably had him sacked the moment he voiced the genuine concerns of his prospective constituents?

Does this mean he lacks the qualities to be either a career politician (because he spoke the truth) or a conviction politician (because he apologised for speaking the truth)?

Did he BLUNDER into this controversy without a strategy?

Is it good riddance to someone who will only enrage his masters for not toeing the party line and disappoint his constituents for not sticking to his guns?

LINK FOR LIVE INTERVIEW:
http://www.thestirrer.co.uk/hastilow-0711071.html

“Nigel Hastilow, forced to quit as a Conservative candidate in the Black Country after endorsing Enoch Powell’s views on immigration has insisted – “I’m no racist.” But in his only full-length, unedited interview since the controversy broke, he admitted to Stirrer TV it was a mistake to use Powell’s name to support his argument.

Looking weary after days of being hounded by the media, Hastilow explained that he has no issue with anyone’s skin colour, religion, or heritage – what concerns him is the growing population of the country and the infrastructure needed to sustain it.

He also launched a broadside against the welfare state, which sustains 1.7 million unemployed even though (as thousands of Poles have discovered) there are clearly jobs available.

Although he has been courted by UKIP and the BNP and encouraged to stand as an independent, Hastilow said that he was still a Conservative member and would do nothing to hurt the party.”

Enoch Powell in his flowery way, was warning against all the above types of thing. Beacuse he was right, how does that make his remarks racist??

From an economic point of view, I agree with you.

But Powell was not referring to economics, he was concerned with the racial tension being created and the forced dismemberment of native society.

His speech seems to be more and more remembered, particularly starting from the Brixton, Moss Side and Toxteth riots of the early 1980s, up to riots in Bradford in 2001 and the 7/7 attacks in 2005.

Powell’s challenge was to the unfettered multiculturalism endemic in the government of the day, which still persists even when the chairman of the CRE has become a critic, stating we are “sleepwalking towards segregation”.

In that sense I don’t really see a connection with the telephone, the seed drill, or the internet.