S
tephen Lees, a long-term Conservative activist, has tweeted that all Muslims should be expelled from Britain, and all mosques demolished.
His Tweet came a few minutes after he tweeted a link to a Telegraph article entitled “Head teachers raise ‘serious concerns’ over Islamic school take-over”.
Mr Lees describes himself on Twitter first and foremost as a Tory. His blog site reveals that he has been involved with the party for decades, first delivering leaflets for the Conservatives aged eleven.
He went on to become Secretary of the Coulsdon South Conservatives at the tender age of 17, and, as one of the youngest branch officers in the country, was introduced to Margaret Thatcher at the 1975 Conservative Party Conference. He boasted on Twitter that he has been canvassing in Coulsdon for over 40 years.
Every single Muslim should be expelled from this country — not deported — expelled, and every mosque demolished.
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 2, 2014
@DonnaInSussex Indeed I am a Tory, working for the Party since 1969. So why split the Tory vote and let Labour in?
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 2, 2014
When challenged as to whether his comment was made in earnest, Mr Lees responded “I never say anything I don’t mean”, and appeared relaxed about Muslims being killed for being Muslim:
@DonnaInSussex I never say anything I don’t mean. The races and cultures of the world must compete with each other. The strongest will >
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 3, 2014
@DonnaInSussex < emerge and drive the rest to extinction. That is as it should be.
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 3, 2014
@DonnaInSussex @OliverCooper Are you talking about English converts or wogs who just happen to have been born here? There’s a big difference
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 3, 2014
The National Chairman of the Young Conservatives, Oliver Cooper, took to Twitter to rebut Mr Lees’ statement, calling his position “absurd” and “profoundly un-British”. But it remains to be seen whether the Conservative Party will expel Mr Lees from within their ranks. If they don’t, we must conclude that they are institutionally racist.
UPDATE: He’s still at it!
@DonnaInSussex The fact that there are “British Muslims” is an historical anomaly, created by the 1947 British Nationality Act.
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 3, 2014
@Mikebloke2014 @DonnaInSussex If you’re an English convert to Islam you are mentally ill and should seek help, old boy.
— Stephen Lees (@StephenLees4) May 3, 2014
Photo by Byzantine_K 
Every “single” Muslim? What about the married ones?
“The races and cultures of the world must compete with each other. The strongest will emerge and drive the rest to extinction.” says Stephen Lees.
Mr Lees must have sharp teeth indeed to be happy to live in a world like that.
The apex predator in an environment eventually kills all the other creatures in that environment, and then usually itself.
The apex intelligence in an environment tries to allow every creature to develop to its maximum potential, insofar as it does not inhibit the others from doing so.
It should be pointed out that Islam is not a race, it is an oppressive totalitarian ideology described as a religion.
It is practised by Semite Arabs but not Semite Jews, East Asian Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, but not East Asian Hindus or Sikh Indians, and it is practised by the Malay race, which also practices Buddhism and Christianity; it is practised by some of the African race, while others practice Christianity or Judaism.
Opposition to Islam is NOT racism.
Please feel free to agree with UKIPDAILY or we will removing your comments.
I have made an effort to support this site but I won’t be posting on here again.
There is a serious point to this though – for example, the Koran (9v29) instructs Muslims to forcibly impose a submission tax (“Jizyah”) on unbelievers (specifically Jews and Christians) until “they submit willingly and feel themselves subdued”. Many other examples abound.
Islam is *not* a cuddly religion of Peace, and we have to stop the vacuous politically correct pandering and employ the full force of the law as we would against a modern-day Nazi Party (yeah, yeah, Godwin’s Law, etc)
1. People have a right to express an opinion on immigration. It’s a disgrace that for years we’ve not been allowed to have this conversation and the preferred method for killing the debate has been to publicise extreme opinions and then rush to shout racist.
2. I agree with UKIP’s idea of regaining control of our own borders having having controlled immigration. I am tired of being told that this position is somehow not fit to be debated and simply dismissed as racist.
3. As much as a dislike the evil Tory party Mr Lees represents no-one but himself. Mr Lees ‘the activist’ does not represent the Tories or their policy. If he holds a position in a that party they will get rid of him because what he is saying is not Tory policy.
4. Mr Lees expressing his own view does not give subsequently us the right to dismiss the official Tory position and views of other Parties members as simply beyond the pale.
5. We already know exactly what the Tory position on immigration is. They talk about reducing the flow to thousands but have continued the Labour/EU policy of allowing 100,000’s to come here. In fact given his views I don’t know why Mr Lees would still be a member.
6. Politic is full of cranks. Let get back to debating the policies and forget playing the man.
Sorry but this is a terrible article. It descends to the type of gutter politics that UKIP have been constantly subjected to and which might in some part be responsible for our rise. If you think the man is an idiot ignore him, if you think that he’s wrong stand against him, but don’t try to deny his right to speak by attempting to generate the sort of political correct faux outrage that UKIP have always claimed they were against.
The recent, outrageous demonisation of UKIP in the media has really brought home something that I knew intellectually, but somehow didn’t want to believe.
We all know that the media is controlled by vested interests. The BBC takes money from the EU and also has its pension funds invested in “green” schemes which are heavily reliant on the financial performance of the “renewables” industry – hence the blatant bias in favour of AGW and the EU.
Murdoch et al pander to their respective core readerships but at the same time are cautious to avoid reporting items that are too controversial and which would portray the establishment in too bad a light – MPs expenses are fair game, but real scandals like secret courts and evidence showing that the “war on terror” is not at all what it seems are not touched. And let’s not forget the case of Stephen Lees that you have reported above.
In spite of all that, I think I wanted to believe that journalists are not basically bad people. That their crimes against the truth are only crimes of omission. That they struggle to be honest, only to be thwarted by management. I now see that this is not the case.
I read the Telegraph mainly and in recent weeks the vitriol has come from not just the political editors like Benedict Brogan as one would expect, but a host of others – Iain Martin, Graeme Archer, James Kirkup, Dan Hodges etc.
The spite and hatred behind their stories are almost tangible. No effort at all is made at reasonable assessment. It is a simple case of UKIP = evil. And now we learn of Dan Hodges’ association with the Migration Matters Trust, which was not disclosed by the Telegraph despite their published guidelines.
Where does this leave us? We now know that the media not only omits, but deliberately sets out to deceive. It is not a matter of honest journalists operating under restraints, they actively conspire to mislead us.
A free press has long been considered to be the cornerstone of democracy. When the press actively seeks to subvert that democracy in order to preserve the political establishment then it is no longer free.
Many people claim that the EU is a danger to our democracy. The experience of recent weeks suggests that the danger is much closer to home.