Nanny Knows Best

Nanny Knows Best
Dedicated to exposing, and resisting, the all pervasive nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of Britain.

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Lunartic House

Lunartic HouseThose of you unfamiliar with the joys of Croydon; its fine architecture, beautiful central thoroughfares (such as Dingwall Road) and popular/thriving shopping centres (such as Centrale, which has an occupancy rate of less then 50%) should take a look at my special site dedicated to Croydon www.croydoniscrap.com.

Oddly enough, whenever I write to the council about the decaying infrastructure of Croydon they never answer; even the local "dead cat in tree" rags have stopped mentioning the site.

I wonder why?

Anyhoo, in addition to the joys that I describe in full technicolour detail on that site, Croydon hosts the Home Office's main immigration centre at Lunar House ("affectionately" known as Lunartic House by us locals).

As we all know Nanny takes pride in her work to integrate various religions, races and creeds under one unifying concept of Britishness. Therefore it was with great pride, as a Croydon resident, that I read about Nanny employing a leading member of an extremist Islamic group in Lunartic House.

Abid Javaid is a "senior executive officer" in the IT department at the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (in Lunartic House), this processes asylum and visa applications.

In addition to his role in helping people become British, Javaid is also an activist in the fundamentalist Islamic group Hizb-ut Tahrir. This "organ" does not believe in democracy, but instead wants a worldwide Islamic state under Shariah law.

Is it British to be anti democratic?

Blairy Poppins asked for the group, which calls for Jews to be murdered, to be banned last year.

Patrick Mercer, Tory party Homeland Security spokesman, has noted that the position that Javid holds is a tad sensitive.

Quote:

"I am amazed that this man has managed to infiltrate

such a sensitive government department.

I find it deeply worrying.

This is an insidious and dangerous organisation

that is clearly trying to worm its way into as many

government organisations as possible.

In August 2005, the Prime Minister said that these people should be banned.

Now, less than 18 months later, they are,

to all intents and purposes, legal.

This is a clandestine organisation

which seeks to infiltrate wherever it can.

This is further proof, if any were needed,

that both the IND and the Home Office are unfit for purpose
."

Lunartic House has in the past offered a premium service to migrants if they agreed to perform sexual favours.

That's the spirit guys!

Hundreds of thousands of claims for visas and asylum are stacked in cardboard boxes, and the IND has been accused of losing track of applicants.

In other words it is a shite organisation, and symbolic of the failure of Nanny and her minions to run anything remotely resembling a piss up in a brewery.

A Home Office spokesman helpfully said:

"Home Office civil servants are expected to abide

by Home Office rules governing their conduct.

They are also subject to the Civil Service code
."

Now you know why it is called Lunartic House!

By the way, if there is anyone from the media reading this who wants to help me kick Croydon council up the backside; I would be very grateful if you could do a piece on my Croydon website.

5 comments:

  1. "Home Office civil servants are expected to abide by Home Office rules governing their conduct.

    They are also subject to the Civil Service code."

    And the above does what exactly?
    They're EXPECTED is not good enough and he works in IT as well, think of ID cards and other sensitive databases, yeah well done (slow hand clap)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:54 PM

    "Is it British to be anti democratic? "

    Unfortunately it is. Your site proves it week after week.

    Ask a local government officer. Or a member of the H&S gestapo. Or Ofsted. Or any of the million other quangos. Ask a member of the government how many people voted for the policies they are pursuing. Then ask if anyone was ever given the opportunity to vote on said policies....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Big Al5:09 PM

    Fluff on crime. Fluff on the causes of crime.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Did this chap walk in and ask for a job?
    Was it "suggested" to him that he should apply for this job?
    Who interviewed him?
    So many questions.
    Not so many answers
    Who carries the can?
    Probably the doorman who let him in.
    Typical b**** up once again.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Grant1:00 PM

    As regular contributors will know it is not my style to be contrarian ;-) BUT ...

    At least in this bloke's case we know where he is most of the time - unless it turns out he is on a fully paid leave of absence due to stress or something.

    And his activities can be monitored ... uh, maybe. If they employ anyone who knows how to do it.

    Still think Big Al's observation is sot on though.

    But with the BLiar and Chancer show on the road they could not risk being any tougher on crime could they? Might be caught on their own net.

    ReplyDelete