|
|
|
On an interesting election night Thursday’s tranche of local authority elections, which comprised about 37% of the country’s council seats, have delivered a withering if hardly unpredicted verdict on Gordon Brown and his exhausted administration. At 24% of the total of votes cast, Labour is languishing in third place behind the LibDems (25%) and twenty points adrift of David Cameron’s Tories. In general election terms such dominance could deliver Cameron a parliamentary majority in the range of 150 seats. Labour will now slowly, but slowly come to terms with its two available choices:- 1. The high-risk strategy of dumping Brown within the next twelve months to give young master Balls time to win the public over, or 2. Running with Brown in the knowledge that the 2010 election cannot be won, while accepting that the zeitgeist has shifted away from them and a lengthy period of self-examination must be entered upon before change is made. In this event Harriet Harman would shoulder the task of temporary party leader, as Margaret Beckett did after the sudden death of John Smith in 1994. I think the party will choose the second option, and I will predict now that the run-off for the leadership will be between Ed Balls and John Cruddas, with David Miliband as the kingmaker. Either way, it will be Cameron in Downing Street. That is clear. Now let’s look briefly at the Tories approach to their 2010 shoe-in. The hard work of self-reinvention is done. The next two years can be spent looking like a government in waiting, while the public prove to Brown that their disaffection is, as the lady said, not for turning. Cameron will do no more than he has to. He will avoid policy definition for as long as possible. He will travel to meet “world leaders”. He will rely upon his opponent’s continuing unpopularity, and will not be disappointed. The good news from a nationalist perspective is that Cameron will not be so hard-pressed that he has to talk tough on immigration, as Michael Howard did in 2005. Nor, of course, does he have to contemplate a Sarko-style destruction of a potentially dangerous nationalist foe. The BNP is not remotely dangerous to him. A case of “Ken is dead. Long live the Ken effect” Meanwhile, the victory of Cameron’s friend Boris Johnson over Ken Livingstone in the London Mayoral race - by 12 comfortable percentage points on a record 45% turnout - opens up few possibilities for change, I think. Boris is all about consensus-building, and the consensus is that “the world in one city” is something wonderful and beyond criticism. Or would be if only transport worked better and there was less waste at County Hall. Boris was elected by the leafy suburbs and the glitzy city-centre, where “enrichment” means ethnic restaurants and expensive shops owned by Indians. In Tory parlance, the quiet, unassuming supporter who has struggled patiently with Livingstone’s administrative excesses like the Congestion Charge has simply come home to a Conservative Party that has “changed”. Change means a waiver to racial displacement and dispossession because it is poor taste and “nasty” to talk about it. Anyway, the party’s supporters were lost down the long years of defeat to Blair, not to the BNP. The ones who worry about race are captive voters, and they can be ignored. So where it really matters, what Boris offers is what Ken offered. “You can’t out-ethnic me” he told one pushy black interlocutor on the hustings. But what of the British National Party? Are there any signs on the wind that this Tory insouciance might be found out by the long-awaited and elusive rising wave of voter support for nationalism? 100 up in the country at large, Barnbrook claims London Assembly seat The BNP has announced on its website that the poll produced some useful progress.
That last sentence is something I shall endeavour to investigate later, because the below the water-line progress of the party is a more reliable indicator of its health than the clutch of headline-grabbing first places. However, it looks pretty good generally: slow but solid progress of a kind that will not easily be swept away. One has to seriously question, however, how it is that the unprecented concentration on immigration issues in the mainstream media does not translate into more vigorous voter support for the BNP at election time. And that at a time when the Labour Party vote is crumbling so dramatically. The loss of so many experienced activists last November must have told, and some of the closer second places might well have been converted to firsts had Griffin not handled the affair so disastrously. But I think there’s more to the electoral performance issue than that, and it was demonstrated vividly in the battle for the capital. In the London Assembly the expectation was always that the party could cross the 5% threshhold which would win it a seat on the Assembly Top-Up List, and release some sorely needed central funding. Well, since the National Front put up a candidate for the London Assembly seat of leafy, middle-class Bromley & Bexley, and the fellow won over 5%, it wasn’t asking too much of the BNP to follow suite. It did, winning 5.4% and giving Richard Barnbrook the honour of being the party’s first candidate elected to a significant representative body. He takes one of the two seats formerly held by UKIP, who performed poorly on the night (as did the new anti-Union party, English Democrats). Well, the first things to say is that Richard Barnbrook’s speech after the announcement of the Mayoral result, in which he was placed fifth on 2.89% of first votes, was an utter embarrassment. As his turn to speak came all the other candidates left the platform - a literal exhibition, I suppose, of the longstanding mainstream “no platform” policy. That presented Barnbrook with a golden opportunity to out-maneouvre them with a few wisely chosen, generous words. Why, then, deliver yourself of a graceless, incoherent rant? Why confirm in the public mind the image of an evil party and an aggressive little man incapable of aspiring to the standards of public conduct expected from an elected representative? Well, yes, in the run-up to the poll he and his fiancee had suffered the behaviour of the abominably yellow Daily Mail (not content to rely upon its more subtle campaigning). But, again, the appropriate riposte has to be one of forebearance. That’s how to win the sympathy of the public. And the winning of public sympathy IS the issue. It is plainly one thing for potential supporters to be very worried about the future of their town or city, or country. It is another for them to vote for the British National Party. If they are seriously interested in progress - and that is not necessarily the case in every instance - party strategists need to accept that the character issue is key. The quality of those at the top of the party IS nationalism’s stopping point. We know the media will be hostile. We know the Establishment will place every obstruction it possibly can in the way of party progress. These things are not going to change. Indeed, as public disaffection with the MultiCult mounts, as it must, there will be more counter-balancing hostility and more obstructions. The only possible take-off point for change, therefore, lies in the party’s handling of these challenges. In the liberals’ den Now, by way of an experiment, I took my own version of a high-moral nationalist position onto three colourful Guardian threads in the immediate run up to the May 1st poll. The idea was to see how it could weather the inevitable emotional and intellectual attacks it would receive. This was not the first time I have tried this. So far, I’ve had my right to challenge the prevailing orthodoxy at the Guardian’s woefully mistitled on-line opinion section, Comment is Free, withdrawn four times, and I have never received an explanation. I am not going to burden you with a blow-by-blow account of the three pre-poll endeavours. Anyone interested can shortcut the very long threads on each article, and search for the handle I used, which was “Ordinary”. The first article was by an Indian bird who seems to have some interest in those tawdry anti-racist rock concerts of past and present. The second article was an inviting anti-BNP screed by the egregiously Zionist Greville Janner. I received some support from two Jewish gentlemen, which does not surprise me. There have been fractures in British Jewry on the question of how to live with the natives dating back to the arrival of German and east European Jewish refugees in the 1930s. The third article was by the talentless musician and, these days, wealthy country gentleman domiciled in the overwhelmingly white county of my birth, Billy Bragg. Invitingly, it was about not leaving the “definition” of English “identity” to the “far right”. The opposition on all three was relentlessly Godwinesque and offensive, but hardly overwhelming from an intellectual standpoint. Strawmen and misrepresentations aplenty were attacked. But I took no meaningful damage. My central point - that the English have a moral right to and natural interest in continuity - was effectively gainsaid by no one. From this I am encouraged to draw the conclusion that it is possible to outmaneouvre the Establishment on moral grounds. Is that the message that the British public is waiting to hear from nationalists? I believe it is. Comments:2
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 03 May 2008 16:40 | # A couple of thoughts: First, the heartiest, loudest, most joyous CONGRATULATIONS TO THE BNP ON A JOB WELL DONE!!! Since the results came out I’ve felt GREAT, just FANTASTIC! I LOVE YOU, BNP, LOVE YOU, LOVE YOU, LOVE YOU! Yesterday as I was looking up the results at Google I kept seeing the BNP referred to by newspapers and news agencies as “far right” and similar lies — no surprise there of course, as that’s what the MSM always call anyone to the left of Johan Hari — when not calling them far worse — and we always knew it, naturally. But seeing it plastered all over google like that yesterday (when I looked up “British election results BNP” what came up were the results going back several years mixed together with the new ones, so you saw many years’ worth of this sort of labeling of the party on each google page) impressed on me the importance of our side and BNP in particular refusing any such labels pinned on us by the other side. We’re not, and the BNP isn’t, “far right” or “far” anything. We’re middle-of-the-roaders exactly as we were in the year 1955 and as far as I’m concerned it’s still 1955. We must never acquiesce in the BNP’s being called “far right” or “far” anything. It’s strictly middle-of-the-road, neither “left” nor “right.” It’s “center,” a “centrist” party. Third thing, despite what is probably an accurate and justifiable estimation by GW of how Barnbrook did (“poorly”) in his post-victory speech (I haven’t seen the speech) — and this is not the first time GW has criticized Barnbrook a bit harshly and, who knows, maybe rightly? — I can’t help liking the guy, liking him a lot even. (I also can’t help liking Nick Griffin, while admitting he’s caused problems.) Couldn’t Barnbrook benefit from a bit of coaching? I’m sure he could and I hope the party will provide some for him. If he smoothens out a few rough edges I see him having the potential to go far politically. But all in all, A FANTASTIC RESULT FOR THE BNP!!! THREE CHEERS! 3
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sat, 03 May 2008 17:57 | # I’m still suspicious about what physically happens to BNP votes, because they’re making less progess than I would expect.
Talentless would be an improvement. He looks very pleased with himself in his photo, like the gentleman from the London Jewish Forum.
The LGF will have been pleased with many of the responses you got:
But do you want to?
Also pictured on the LJF site:
It’s not only his Zionism that’s egregious: so’s his physiognomy. 4
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 03 May 2008 19:33 | # Nux, For a time I was thinking about totting up all the wild insults and overt hate-mongering on each of those three threads, to see which was the most verbally violent. Decided there was too much to count. One soon gets a feeling that all this noise is covering over a great, febrile nervousness. People like Questionnaire, who made the comment you have cited, seem to be living very close to the precipice. If the wind were to blow from the other direction they could throw over everything in an instant and switch with shocking speed to the new set of required truths. The reality of their psyches is their emotional violence, not their political principles. It’s all religion with them. They ascribe to themselves qualities of compassion and conscience to which they are complete strangers. In past times they would have carried the straw to the witch’s stake. They are, frankly, camp guard material. 5
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 03 May 2008 21:56 | # The Jewish asshole in the photos Nux posted, holding that T-shirt up which reads “Rasism isn’t kosher” needs to be asked how Israel, which without any doubt whatsoever he supports to the hilt, came into existence and maintains its existence a national socialist apartheid state. What a stupid pathetic schmuck who hasn’t a clue as to how people are sitting here looking at his inflammatory, irresponsible hypocrisy and provocation. The Jews have a screw loose. This asshole hasn’t a clue as to what he’s playing with, or that the fire he’s irresponsibly nay insanely trying to set will burn up the Jews as badly as or worse than it will the ones he’s targeting once his fanning of the flames, his and Jews like him, succeeds in causing another Jewish-lit conflagration, number how many in the series? Umpteen? Must be something like that. The Jews don’t ever stop. I wish arrogant Jewish stupidity and sickening Jewish destructiveness weren’t kosher, but unfortunately they are, all too much so. As for racism? His feebleminded T-shirt is sadly mistaken: racism’s as kosher as it gets. 6
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 03 May 2008 22:02 | # I’m gonna have that T-shirt printed up: in large print, saying, “I wish arrogant Jewish stupidity and sickening Jewish destructiveness weren’t kosher, but unfortunately they are, all too much so.” Put ‘em on sale — make a million dollars, probably. 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 03 May 2008 22:12 | # As for Red Ken, one glance at his face, whether in that photo or anywhere else I’ve seen it, makes my blood run cold. This guy, to me, gives off a vibe of deep evil, I dunno — maybe I’m imagining it ... nobody could be that dread-inspiring. 8
Posted by Salopian on Sat, 03 May 2008 22:58 | # To this outsider, the BNP always seem to do just well enough (or not quite badly enough) to keep Nick Griffin and pals in their nice little earner. Sterling work by local activists seems to be scuppered by cock-ups and lack of support. Does this seem fair? Any lurking BNP-ers care to comment? Stoke is the interesting one. Steady campaigning by Batkin and co. since 1999. Slow organic growth, now second biggest party with 9 seats. Seems to avoided the one step forward, two steps back of Burnley, Bradford et al. What is the difference there? And how is it to be reproduced? The BNP should have several Stoke-like councils by now. 9
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sat, 03 May 2008 23:01 | # Remember, the BNP have gone from twenty council seats exactly 24 months ago to a hundred today: quintupled in two years! Actually even a bit better, counting the significance of Barnbrook’s London Assembly achievement! Will the MSM acknowledge this or begin to ask whether perhaps they’ve gotten it wrong all these years? Of course not: it’ll be dead silence except for solemn warnings about and denunciations of the “far right” and likely the beginning of a dirty tricks strategy. No matter: it’s upward and onward for our side and stagnation then collapse for theirs. I have no doubt but that not a few of their stalwarts are keeping escape routes open and I refer literally to plans for quick departure from the country in the event of something rapid such as we saw unfold during the dazzling weeks in 1989 when the Eastern-European communist edifice suddenly crumbled. 10
Posted by Bill on Sun, 04 May 2008 09:32 | # Just a thought on a Sunday morning. Could Boris be our man? 11
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 04 May 2008 11:12 | # Bill, Don’t even entertain the thought. From the lead story in today’s Independent on Sunday:-
Cameron. meanwhile, has this to say (from the same article):-
Neither of them, of course, would react any less intolerantly than all those Guardianistas did to my feeble advocacy of the Englishman’s moral right to England. All are liberals in a fervently anti-nationalist liberal milieu steered steadfastly towards the death of nation by an internationalist class. 12
Posted by Bill on Sun, 04 May 2008 12:39 | # Tipping Point or Defining moment? GW, I was just idly clicking hither and thither (as you do) just to get the flavour of the aftermath, (as it were) not expecting anything other than what has already been said. Then I read the Times piece about revealed meetings Boris had had with various people, and I felt I was reading something I hadn’t met before, talk of sacking Met-chief Blair for instance, looking for evidence of corruption concerning the cheeky chappy, all heartening stuff really. Then I had a look at a Guardian report (analysis really) of the new lab project meltdown, brutally honest I thought (some of it at least) To an essentially political amateur (me) this post election thing (especially with regard to the BNP) has been difficult to get a handle on. To be honest, I expected better for the BNP, and am struggling to fathom why they haven’t done better, especially in London, where enrichment has been so lavish. Bad vibes really. Life is punctuated with defining moments, we all experience them. Somehow, and I don’t really know why, we as a nation, are experiencing right now a defining moment, or as I recently posted, a tipping point (take your choice) - to me, it is almost palpable. As regards Boris, I’ll be viewing him closely, for a while at least. 13
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 May 2008 13:14 | #
I dunno Bill, I don’t get bad vibes from that election outcome, not at all, only good ones. Bill don’t you agree the BNP is steadily gaining strength? These things don’t happen over night. As for why they didn’t do even better than they did, which would be a lot to ask considering they did so well, I think part of it must have been the internal disarray caused by that flap some months back between Griffin and that faction his people mistreated, that finally split off. That squabble all by itself must have set timetables back considerably. If by “bad vibes” you’re referring to this suspicion on the part of some about Griffin’s having been compromised by the government, who can know? I like Griffin as I’ve said, but if there’s a lingering cloud over him along these lines he should resign the leadership of course: the party’s success comes before all else, and it’s so much bigger than even two years ago, potential new leadership talent surely exists within its ranks. 14
Posted by Lurker on Sun, 04 May 2008 13:54 | # Laban’s take: http://ukcommentators.blogspot.com/2008/05/labans-election-roundup.html is that the BNP share of the vote in London hardly went up but there was a bigger turnout, so the actual BNP vote went from 90k to 130k. 15
Posted by Bloke on Sun, 04 May 2008 15:26 | # According to comments at Guido Fawkes the UKIP candidate mentioned 400,000 votes spoilt or gone astray. The BNP has now picked up on this story: http://www.bnp.org.uk/2008/05/04/400000-votes-spoilt-was-robert-mugabe-in-london-on-thursday-night/ Guessedworker - “One soon gets a feeling that all this noise is covering over a great, febrile nervousness. “ Yeah I get that impression too. Strange isn’t it? What do they know that isn’t obvious to the man in the street? I thought door knocking and talking to the great unwashed wasn’t done anymore and theses days its all focus groups and telephone polling. But then again so many lefties have always been a bit barking imagining secret Nazis everywhere. I think you might be wrong about Questionairre, Laban Tall has tangled with him and done a bit of research on him. From memory he is an academic at a North East University and may be a bit of an old school tanker marxist. He is fully aware of the destruction of a once cohesive working class culture but blames marketing (Bernays) and modern capitalism rather than Cultural Marxism. I think he has a point, it seems fairly coherent, but ignores other (politically inconvenient) malign influences such as our Frankfurt School friends. Like Bill, I am a political amateur, and have only drifted over to viewing the websites of the dark side 16
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 May 2008 16:22 | #
So are we all, Bloke.
Welcome to the dark side then! And thank you for your thoughts — we surely need all the help we can get figuring this mess out! 17
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 May 2008 16:57 | # Clicking on Bloke’s link to the BNP site just now I noticed Barnbrook’s acceptance speech posted, and watched it (click near the upper right-hand corner of the BNP home page, in a little video box). All right, it could have been better from a few points of view BUT I don’t think it was as bad as GW thought. In fact, its main flaw wasn’t so much the display of raw emotion — which I as a part-wog actually found endearing (as, I somehow feel sure, will come as no surprise to Nux Gnomica ...), contrary to the way staid Brits must have reacted — but rather a few purely physical and easily corrected aspects to the delivery: he did no small amount of slurring of his pronunciation, which is easy enough to correct — he didn’t slur at all in other videos of his I’ve seen, so it must have been the emotion of the occasion — and he didn’t stand fully erect but let his head sort of slouch forward or hang down a bit, also easily avoided for next time. And he spoke fast, too fast. Slower and more measured would of course have been better, also something easily remembered for next time. So, the worst defects were ones easily correctable. As for the content, yes of course as GW says he missed an opportunity, a golden opportunity, to show himself in an elevated, statesmanlike, forbearing light and that’s regrettable. But it’s also understandable considering all he and the party (and his fiancée) have been dragged through by the filthy moral lepers of the other side. That’s all I have to say on the matter: I see what could be improved and I have no doubt he’ll work on improving it. He continues to be someone I like and respect enormously, as I do his brave, patriotic, and good fiancée. 18
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 May 2008 17:13 | # The other creeps and moral lepers walking off the stage as his, Barnbrook’s, turn came to speak was a genuinely filthy gesture on their part, sickening, far worse of course than any defect he displayed in his delivery or content, and by itself, completely apart from the other sources of emotion on this occasion, might understandably fluster someone on the spur of the moment who wasn’t expecting such insulting, appalling, undemocratic behavior. These others who prate constantly about democracy show by almost everything they do their mailed-fisted totalitarianism. There was one person on that stage who respected democracy, just one, and fittingly enough he was left alone by the totalitarians to deliver his speech. So in that regard it actually turned out as it should have: it’s not appropriate for cleanness to be surrounded by dirt. 19
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 04 May 2008 17:42 | # Bloke, Thanks for the link. I am certain that any candidate or party to the election can request the Electoral Commission to re-examine spoilt papers, and make a complaint to the Metropolitan Police if rigging is suspected. Thanks also for the tip on Questionnaire. I’m hoping he will want to come out to play again sometime. 20
Posted by Bill on Sun, 04 May 2008 19:46 | # Aftermath – Bill’s Ramble Bill “Could Boris be our man?” GW. “Don’t even entertain the thought” I hear you GW - What I cannot get my head around is this, there are 60 million British people that go to make up the population of these Isles, and not one, repeat not one, of the ruling elite class has stepped up to the plate. I simply cannot believe there is no one out there who will take the job on. Quote of the day. Boris. “Don’t try and out ethnic me mate” (or some such) Fred. “To be honest, I expected better for the BNP, and am struggling to fathom why they haven’t done better, especially in London, where enrichment has been so lavish. Bad vibes really.” (—Bill) I hear you too Fred, my esteem for the BNP also knows no bounds, my admiration goes out to all of them, no matter what capacity, and I’m the first to admit I haven’t got the balls to do what they do, all I can do is hunker down and spread the word. Having said that, my ardent wish is, if and when the time comes, I pray I shall not let my nation’s people down. I think a few million have said that to themselves over the centuries. I receive flak when I say the BNP should have done better. I agree entirely with what you say in this regard, perhaps I should try and qualify. The defining moment I was talking about is the British people have overwhelmingly expressed their disgust at the new labour version of RR and have given them a good kicking, New Labour are holed below the waterline and from now on are history. This being so, my question is why did the voters look to the Tories for salvation and not the BNP Sarkozi style? The trouble is for me I do not know the voting logistics appertaining in London, by that I mean for example, where a BNP candidate was standing against a Conservative, where did the anti RR votes go? by the looks of it they went to the Tories (I don’t really know) Obviously, if there was no BNP candidate standing, the Tory would have received most of the anti RR vote. When I use the term anti RR vote I am addressing this audience, it goes without saying that the average punter out there wouldn’t have clue of such a translation. In the prevailing mood of the election, where a BNP candidate was standing against a Conservative, then I would have expected a better showing for the BNP. The BNP website has improved beyond recognition, have they got the reaction time faster? It does seem faster to me, the content is interesting and varied, the postings are pretty good, the site is colourful without being garish in fact the BNP seem to have just about got it right, so why do I feel that when I log out there is something missing? Ah! it is here that I get on my hobby horse, for which I have also been castigated. Very briefly, I do not think there is any mileage in the BNP not telling it like it is, if I were a comparative newcomer to the BNP site and had read it from cover to cover I would leave the site pretty much in the dark as at the beginning. That’s my beef. There are no explanations for what is going on, where has all this stuff come from? Who is behind it and why? What does it mean for us all? I suppose I could go on but you get the point. In other words, (I will get some stick for this) Most of what appears on the BNP website wouldn’t look out of place in any morning tabloid. To sum up, it is obvious the electorate will have to experience much greater pain and discomfort before they will cast their eyes in the direction of the BNP, I suppose it was always on the cards, trouble is, it will take several years which we can ill afford - time is of the essence. Perhaps the BNP are doing so well we can lift our heads and see beyond the parochial. We are not alone, does this mean we not in control of our own destiny? We are part of a larger entity known as globalism, even if we succeed at local level how would this be viewed by the global big boys - Kosova? First things first though, eh? 21
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 May 2008 19:50 | # From Simon Darby’s blog: possible ballot tampering, some reflections, a bigger view of the acceptance speech and I must say I like it more each time I see it — its faults seem minor and easy to forgive in comparison to the overall context, what is at stake, and the source of legitimate emotion (and on second viewing it’s clear he’s not “slouching his head or hanging it down” as I unfairly characterized it earlier, but stooping slightly to get closer to the microphones which were set a little too low for his height), and “praise from labour.” 22
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 04 May 2008 20:01 | #
Excellent point, Bill, but do you know that Nick Griffin has explained all of this stuff you refer to there, all of it in detail and without exception, in his longer pieces and in his speeches? Yes. I haven’t time right at the moment to look for where they must be archived at the web-site (have to step out for a moment) but I’m sure they’re there. The official BNP explanations for all the crap that’s going on are on record among the site’s archives, certainly. In fact, Griffin’s excellent job of explaining precisely that sort of thing is a big part of why I like him so much. 23
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sun, 04 May 2008 20:14 | #
Yes, they’ve been given permission by higher authority to hate the heretic and do so with gusto. But, like you, I sense nervousness beneath the shouting.
Just as New Labour are full of camp-commandant material. 24
Posted by bloke on Sun, 04 May 2008 20:18 | # Thanks for your welcome Fred. I agree with you about Barnbrook. I didn’t notice his speech there, but after you pointed it out, I clicked on the link. I’ve read bits and pieces about him including an interview in the MSM but this is the first time I’ve heard him speak. I like him. I think he is a very good candidate for London. He has a matey everyman style which I’ve seen in Australian politicians which is something I like and wished we had more of. He did have emotion/passion but that is often a good thing. One has only to think of Princess Di and Tony Blair to see how passion and emotion are something that can be used well in this day and age. There was no teleprompter and he seemed to be speaking off the cuff and I think he did a reasonable job. It could be improved of course, but I dont see much reason for massive criticism. Certainly he wasn’t George Galloway Vs the US Senate, but that was different circumstances, and Galloway is one hell of a public speaker and has had plenty of practice. He came across to me as a human being. A human being who is passionate and angry and that is fine by me. Certainly, to me, he was a hell of a lot better than most of the professional slime bag politicians we have. At least he believes in something, and has obviously gone through great difficulties because of his beliefs and the party he represents. I admire and respect that. I suspect Guessedworker would have preferred someone more like Enoch Powell with more gravitas, but I don’t think that would go down well in today’s London political marketplace and that style would be too easy for the left/mainstream to mock. IMHO, London and the South East are quite different culturally from the rest of the UK. London and the South East have probably got more in common culturally (in some respects) with the Dutch (or at least Hollanders) than with the rest of Britain. Barnbrook quite possibly wouldn’t be such a good candidate in West Yorks or the Midlands, but a good candidate for London. Guessedworker, I didn’t know you were from Darzet, 25
Posted by ben tillman on Sun, 04 May 2008 22:05 | # A nice line from one of the Guardian threads: I am about as Dry as an economist can get without blowing away but as I have said before, most of us want to live in a community, not in an economy. 26
Posted by Nobby on Sun, 04 May 2008 23:42 | # Looks like it could be out with the Brit-hating Scot called Brown and in with a marxist jew called Miliband. MILIBAND URGED TO DEPOSE BROWN God help us. 27
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 05 May 2008 00:16 | # Bloke, Born in Poole, raised and educated in Sarf London, watched the Palace on Saturdays, quit the smoke in 72 for Surrey then Sussex. I suppose my disappointment in Barnbrook reflects my impatience with the BNP generally. On Laban’s thread, the now wide awake Guardian Apostate made the astute observation that “it seems to me they have been in a long drawn out battle with ‘the reds’ and it’s become a bit personal.” I think this could explain the attitude displayed by Barnbrook. I don’t think it excuses it, not on national TV. We are talking about the leadership of our people here. Such an ambition belongs to men of the highest calibre, moral as well as political. There is a well-worn complaint among Griffin’s opponents that he has assiduously expelled the people who might have what it takes to challenge him. Perhaps that’s where the problem lies. In any event, it is on the puny shoulders of such men as Griffin and Barnbrook, with their Islamophobia, their philosophical incoherence and anti-intellectualism, that responsibility currently sits for the salvation of England. Forgive me for harbouring doubts. 28
Posted by Bloke on Mon, 05 May 2008 11:31 | # GW I am always willing to concede I may be wrong. Maybe I lack imagination but I am having difficulty picturing what Barnbrook’s replacement and/or replacement speech would have looked like. All that pops into my head is Enoch Powell and Rivers of Blood. You haven’t said this is what you think it should have looked like, but if that is the case, one of the problems is, where do you find such people? Do people of the calibre of Powell exist these days? The only possibility I can think of may be Frank Eliss, (perhaps demonstrating the seriousness of the problem) but I have no idea of how he comes across on camera and in any case he said he felt the BNP were too left wing for his taste - although I expect he meant in terms of economic policy. The top universities in recent years have produced geniuses of the calibre of Boris Johnson and Seamus Milne. Bojo has a likeable Jeremy Clarkson quality to him but he doesn’t seem to be elder statesman material and Seamus Milne… Quite possibly if there were someone of Enoch Powell’s stature around , nowadays they would leave University and go off and run a hedge fund or something and avoid politics altogether. In any case, is it wise to have the brains on display? Sometimes they don’t look too good. Although lefties blame Thatcher for almost everything that is wrong with the world, the truth is she was just the front, the acceptable and electable public face. The brains behind Thatcherism was Keith Joseph. This may fit the KMac model but on the other hand maybe Keith Joseph just recognised his own limitations and knew that Margaret Thatcher would get the votes but the mad monk would just be ridiculed. This is rather like a conversation between an engineer and a salesman. The engineer says he has built this great machine that can do this and that and is the answer to so many problems. The salesman says, well thats great but if it don’t look pretty and the public thinks it might be weird, they ain’t gonna buy it. You’ve got to sell this stuff. Barnbrook came across to me in his interview and with that speech as a regular bloke. I can imagine having a pint with him in the pub and feeling totally at ease. I can’t say that of Jack Straw, Milliband, Gordon Brown or even Boris Johnson. I think Barnbrook may have good potential as a populist politician and he doesn’t have to be an intellectual, he just needs to be able to fend off the likes of Paxman. The BNPs internal troubles are interesting and you seem to be suggesting that Griffen is deliberately leading them up a blind alley on behalf of MI5 and the powers that be. I think you got this from the leader of the Libertarian Alliance, whose name escapes me at this moment. Maybe. One of the problems I have with this is that MI5 seem to run everything. Lefties think they run the SWP. The vast areas of life they are supposed to control would require some serious manpower. Yet we don’t live in a Stasi style police state do we? It may seem to be going in that direction but I don’t expect a knock on the door at any moment followed by a trip to the gulag just for making this post and many others like it. That is not to say I would rule this (security service involvement as a possibility) out. I am familiar with gladio, I also understand Griffen was chummy with some people who were involved in it. I also think the biggest 9/11 conspiracy is the official version and anyone who believes it hasn’t been paying attention. And, there were aspects of 7/7 that were interesting, but I think it is often too easy to jump to false conclusions. You might be wrong. What is it that makes Guardian Apostate “wide awake” in your view? What does “wide awake” mean? 29
Posted by Bloke on Mon, 05 May 2008 11:46 | # The last paragraph should read “the biggest 9/11 conspiracy theory” 30
Posted by Foxbark on Mon, 05 May 2008 13:00 | # What really f*cked Labour up was the Inheritance Tax. Anyway, of the defeat - “IT’S THE IMMIGRATION STUPID.” I am amazed that of all the TV post-mortems and Brown public blubbings no-one, but no-one has mentioned immigration which amongst my circle is THE big issue. 31
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 May 2008 13:37 | # Foxbark began by saying it was the Inheritance Tax that sank Labour and ended by saying “IT’S THE IMMIGRATION, STUPID!” Which was it, the tax or immigration? (I know which I think.) And can any of the gentlemen here explain why the last sentence in Foxbark’s comment is the case? Be specific, please: the Jews control the media and want immigration so are ordering the media to keep mum about it and let it continue? Big Business & Industry control the media and want immigration so are ordering the media to keep mum about it and let it continue? We here are wrong and the common folk are NOT concerned about immigration and furthermore view anyone who is as a Nazi so it would be suicide for any newspaper’s circulation or TV station’s ratings to dwell on it? None of the above? 32
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 05 May 2008 14:45 | # What I think Foxbark said, Fred, is that Brown’s ascending entry to Downing Street last year, which was to be crowned by a bold decision to seek legitimacy via a November election, was scuppered by the Tory’s announcement - highly popular among the house-owning public - that they would address the iniquity of Inheritance Tax. Brown revealed himself there and then to be the classic heavyweight fighter with a glass jaw. Labour’s local election weak spot was not that, however. Remember, we are talking about their supporters who switched or stayed at home - not middle-class folks who are upset at the Lisbon Treaty signing or the damned Midlothian Question or even the credit crunch and the beginnings of a drop in house prices. No, for them, but not for the Tories because they are not in power, it was immigration. You have to understand that immigration is not simply a race-replacment issue. For the working-class, including settled immigrant communities, it is primarily an issue of employment at subsistence wages, or no employment at all. “The economy stupid” is now an immigration issue. But all that said, the moral prohibition on voting for the BNP still holds. If that’s what Foxbark is saying, more or less, then I can agree with him. Bloke, On the subject of Guardian Apostate, he seems to me now to have moved beyond Laban’s very carefully staked-out ground. I regard Laban as he regards himself, I think: as an encourager of and a conduit for apostates from the left. He has not developed an interest in the metapolitical, ie, he hasn’t moved beyond the conventional left-right analysis. When people begin to understand what that movement augers (a qualitatively different value system) then they have the right to claim the status of the awoken. A classic example - and there are many - is Lurker, who provided the link to Laban’s article. I first encountered him on Samizdata threads probably five years ago. He used to bite a few critically radical and so-so pompous libertarian ankles, but only lightly and not in such a way that he would cop the sort of abuse I did. I imagine he is banned there now! That’s progress for you. GA might not have gone the whole nine yards yet, it’s true, but he is showing that he can do it in ways that Laban probably can’t. So perhaps I am running ahead of his progress but, well, you know, there’s more joy on the radical right over one sinner that repenteth than over ninety and nine just liberals who manage a vote for Boris. 33
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 May 2008 14:49 | # Anyone see anything to dislike in Richard Barnbrook’s content or delivery in this video from eighteen months ago? I know what I think: I’m extremely impressed. I think his content and delivery in this particular video could hardly be better, could hardly be improved upon, apart from minor stuff such as talking too fast in spots, for example (he even slurs over his own name in his opening lines, so you can’t make it out). If this man can smoothen down a few admittedly rough edges — and he can, of course, with minimal coaching of the sort all American politicians receive from professional coaches — he has potential in my view. Whatever small defects he has can be ironed out but the qualities he has — “Bloke” touched on a few of them — are ones that cannot be coached: you either have them or you don’t. Barnbrook has them. What he lacks is a sort of reflective subtlety: his forte are his sincerity, simplicity, common decency, and directness. But despite what he lacks, I see him as having potential. I like this man. 34
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 05 May 2008 17:52 | #
Right I do understand that — as does Johann Hari, of all people, earning praise thereby from Peter Brimelow: see here: http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2008/05/04/bnp-wins-seat-in-london-assembly/ Of course, as is needless to point out to battle-scarred veterans of MajorityRights.com, the down side of that is brought out today in a log entry by JWH (who is also commenting on Johann Hari’s piece):
( http://westbiop.blogspot.com/2008/05/price-of-proximate.html ) Not for the average guy, for whom this race business is probably a little too tricky to negotiate without making mistakes — a little too fraught with pitfalls — but for the thinkers, the ones who are broadly on our side, who are extremely concerned about what is going on — men like Laban Tall, Fjordman, and Paul Belien for example — there’s no getting around what JWH says in that log entry, and others of course have said as well, including Peter Brimelow, who said, using a metaphor: where immigration and the national question are concerned, sooner or later “the racial nettle must be grasped.” You can’t get around it: the only way around is through, as the saying goes. That “nettle” metaphor is apt because race is an unpleasant thing to grasp. But sooner or later race must be taken in hand, grasped, and mastered — mastered intellectually and mastered politically so that we dominate it, and no longer it us. Therefore, no matter how much this particular nettle stings, we might as well grasp it and get it over with, nay we must grasp it. 36
Posted by Bill on Mon, 05 May 2008 22:09 | # Challenge for BNP leadership These comments pretty much express my sentiments here - Bill Fertile ground just waiting for us ”It must also be considered that gauging from the performance and percentage of the BNP vote in these latest set of elections, that include some worthy victories, the potential to make major breakthroughs across the country is simply not being exploited as it should. The electorate are very angry with the Establishment and crying out to be given the right encouragement and motivation to vote for us, yet time and time again the opportunity goes begging and we do not convert this energy into clever and astute active politics which will ultimately lead to large-scale election wins. The Labour Party have been absolutely trounced in this years elections, they lost a staggering 9 councils and 298 councillors; and bloody good riddance to them as well. However, the Tories made huge gains in many places; so the Establishment bubble has in reality simply been pressed and forced across to a different part of that very same Establishment! Griffin scores own goals – our Party suffers ”I am in no way taking anything away from the hard fought victories that the Party activists achieved this year, on the contrary, a great many members and activists worked extremely hard as they always do come rain or shine; they all deserve a huge amount of respect from every one of us. However, we have to face up to the reality of the situation, and that situation is that we will never in a hundred years make any significant dent whatsoever in the Establishment of Lib-Lab-Con by only making a few local gains here and there once a year. If there is one luxury we do not have, it is time. 37
Posted by Revolution Harry on Mon, 05 May 2008 23:05 | # I’m far from convinced by the arguments of the Voice of Change group. I’m not sure they’d do much better in the current climate. In fact for all the accusations they level against Nick Griffin I think he’s one of the main reasons for the party’s current success against the odds. My conclusion is that the only honest thing they could do is set up their own party. If they are really that much better it would soon become self evident. The fact that they don’t and continue to snipe against the BNP, at inopportune moments, makes me smell a rat. 38
Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 05 May 2008 23:44 | # Harry, It’s a matter of letting go of the hand of nurse, I suppose. Griffin appears to be nationalism’s greatest asset, and the best chance for our survival. And while certain facts demonstrate that he is a liability, there is still this great void of uncertainty into which a step sans Griffin would entail. So one understands the reluctance. Nonetheless, it is always best when time is of the essence to act sooner rather than later. Five years, ten years down the road, when the demographics are even more difficult, the controlling hand of the state more pervasive and nationalist progress still at snail’s pace, we will look back on an unwillingness to act now as a great failure of nerve. Now, the following is my view, and it is not one that I am going to change. Any BNP members who happen across this site and read this can, if they wish, take themselves away and write me off as a dreamer. I quite expect they will, because they have invested everything in the belief that they can change the world through the kind of activism they do now. That I challenge. So ... the future of nationalism in this country lies in the early development of two historical strategies:- 1. The popular argument, the argument that is taken out onto the streets, must be for the morality of survival, and the moral right of the English to England. We must tell our people the truth about their children’s future as things stand, and about the deep injustice of it and the rightness of their natural anger and revulsion at what has been and is being done to us. Morality is the key. The people must be inspired to understand that their natural feelings for their own people are noble, and the system that says it is shameful must be swept away. 2. There must, however, be more to it than presentation and those political calculations which always go into the serious pursuit of power. Only high intellectualism ... only a genuine, underlying philosophy of volkish rights and interests which, in toto, describe a revolutionary alternative to advanced liberalism can provide the motive power for the long-run programme of salvation that our people need. Such a philosophy, which does not exist as a single entity today, must encompass economics, justice, representation and the function and dispensation of power. Frankly, any lesser approach to the problem of survival amounts to intellectual negligence. For thinking people understand that more, much more is required than is being delivered by nationalism today. I challenge anybody in or out of the BNP to show that I am wrong. 39
Posted by Bill on Tue, 06 May 2008 07:36 | # I have talked about the prevailing mood before, during, and now after the local elections. For me, the overarching mood has been one of disappointment, I have had difficulty articulating exactly why I should be feeling this way, but as my post above indicates, (although not my words,) do accurately reflect my feelings on the aftermath of the BNP performance. At some point during the last few days, the scale fell and I realised the BNP in this guise are not fulfilling their potential, not by a long way. I thought it must be me, (for I am an half empty person,) but it seems there are others out there who share my concerns. Anyone who has read my posts knows why I feel as I do, and here I will repeat, until they (BNP) start and tell it as it is, then they are going nowhere fast. The BNP’s whole strategy at the top is aimed in the wrong direction and has been ever since I have taken an interest in them. (about four years) GW. You know I’m no intellectual, so really am unable to contribute much in that regard, but as regards the philosophical side of things what you suggest shouldn’t be too difficult, to any sane person, the existing world view philosophy of Liberalism is insanity gone mad, and plain people are shouting in their millions “Look! the Emperor is naked.” I use the term collective insanity. For starters, I think we should grab our language back, our opponents have hijacked our beautiful language into something evil, words don’t mean the same any more, in fact it’s like the Wizard of Oz, “Toto - we’re not in Kansas any more”. Yes, the BNP could continue along its present path and make steady progress (quiet revolution.) but is it lacking in urgency and direction? By the very nature of the increasing demographics, gains will be made along with support, trouble is, the demography bit is so painstakingly slow, and by extension is the countering of it. In the end, when one’s very survival is at stake, nature kicks in and basic instincts take over, anything else is like being at a meeting of the entertainment committee aboard the Titanic, discussing party arrangements to celebrate its maiden voyage. As always, when taking pot shots at the BNP, I reflect who the hell am I to criticise, whatever they decide, whatever their future – I wish them well. 40
Posted by Foxbark on Tue, 06 May 2008 11:38 | # Guessedworker says that Boris is ‘not quite English’ (or words to that effect), be that is it may, (and it is true), somehow Boris looks, acts and talks more English than most of the English. 41
Posted by Foxbark on Tue, 06 May 2008 11:46 | # If anyone here watched the BBC Television news last night, they would have seen the supposedly ‘impartial’, ‘independent ’ hard-hitting’ BBC News team sweetly obliging HM Government by generously airing a propaganda video of a publicity stunt (it was billed as an ‘immigration raid’ on a chicken farm’) in which swarms of beefy, gruff, butch ‘immigration officials’ swwoped down on the said chicken farm and carted off a load of hapless illegals - all for the benefit of convieniently placed cameras of course. 42
Posted by Bill on Tue, 06 May 2008 12:18 | # Boris the Quintessential Englishman As I was saying, I was idly stroking the keyboard on a quiet Sunday morning, not looking for anything in particular, when this thought came into my head that Boris could be our man. I suppose I must have seen something that triggered a subliminal flash in my head, it startled me it was so clear clear - funny that. We’re living in crazy times, and Boris seems a crazy sort of chap, I know next to nothing about him except what you see on TV, but you never know. 43
Posted by Captainchaos on Tue, 06 May 2008 14:10 | # It would be prudent to have SPECIFIC new leaders waiting in the wings of the BNP to take over for Griffin before Griffin is dispenced with - if indeed it is necessary to the future progress of the party to dispense with him at all. Griffin has excellent mental agility, debating skills, and public speaking ability; these are not easy to come by. Barnbrook certainly isn’t up to snuff. I believe it is Griffin’s conscious strategy NOT to talk about the whole truth that has even allowed the minimal success the party has enjoyed so far, the man has an instinct for propaganda. 44
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 06 May 2008 14:14 | # Oh dear, I’m back in trouble with the Guardian moderator. Probably the black one. The following comment was wiped from this thread to an article by an Indian woman, Rupa Huq, who is big on anti-racism and the wicked BNP:-
45
Posted by Bloke on Tue, 06 May 2008 16:24 | # Rupa Huq eh? Blimey, be careful she doesn’t outsmart you. Back on topic, is it not possible, that if Griffen takes the BNP more mainstream, he may lose his core support, the NF may move into the space he left behind and he may find his new middle class mainstream support quite fickle? The exact mistake NuLabour have made. 46
Posted by Guessedworker on Tue, 06 May 2008 17:20 | # A Cambridge sociologist? Not normally a problem. This one doesn’t want to try anyway. My follow-up comment has also been deleted:-
47
Posted by Bloke on Tue, 06 May 2008 18:01 | # I understand Rupa has a PhD in pop music. She probably knows an awful lot about the evolution of hip hop and other important matters. I’m just saying, just be careful out there… :^) 48
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 06 May 2008 23:00 | # The hatchet job on Richard Barnbrook contained in this sickening piece, http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3228 , by some asshole named Millar over at BrusselsJournal.com, nearly gave me a severe case of projectile vomiting just now. Don’t anyone read it unless you’ve taken a stiff dose of anti-emetic — and change out of your good clothes: change into your gardening clothes. Look, that piece was unacceptable for a blog anywhere to the sane side of the Guardian, yet it was published at BrusselsJournal.com?? I have enormous respect for Paul Belien but helping to make the above hatchet job nauseating was Millar’s snidely smug dismissal of the idea that for Britons who, unconsulted and unwilling, are having race-replacement shoved down their throat, explicit racial concerns are somehow illegitimate! That’s not only not right, it’s diametrically opposed to what’s right. It’s as wrong as wrong can be. Paul Belien needs to request from this race-replacement advocate, Millar, an explanation, a retraction, or a resignation from the blog’s staff lest BrusselsJournal.com find itself classified as become part of the pro-race-replacement blogosphere. 49
Posted by Bloke on Wed, 07 May 2008 20:54 | # GW Just to be clear. My lasts 2 posts (apart from the bit about the BNP going more mainstream) were meant to be lighthearted. I think Rupa is a bit of a lightweight. She received a serious pasting on CIF recently and heaven help me I even feel sorry for her. 50
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 08 May 2008 00:16 | # I was all set to really rip into the Evening Standard, really let them have it, and Tories in general along with them, for referring to the BNP as a “far-right party” in this article today. The BNP is a middle of the road party, a centrist party, not “far right,” not “far” anything. Centrist. Middle of the road. Representing ordinary middle of the road folk. Anyone referring to it as “far right” is in my view part of the race-replacement industry. Here’s the piece:
As my fingers were hovering over the keyboard, my brain synapses firing, my emotions getting keyed up, and I was on the verge of starting to type something that would’ve thrown Nux Gnomica into a twitching, foaming conniption fit, my eye wandered down to the selection of letters the site had chosen to put on the front page, as representative of those it had received, and it was as if an instant calm came over me. Here are the letters:
I guess the Evening Standard chaps aren’t bad guys after all ... (sorry for nearly flying off the handle, guys ... Good thing I saw those letters in the nick of time!) 51
Posted by Bill on Thu, 08 May 2008 17:44 | # New Labour RIP. The dust of Britain’s local elections is beginning to settle, shapes and forms are beginning to emerge let us see what we can see. The good people of Britain have soundly rejected the new Labour version of liberalism, maybe they were a bit fickle inasmuch that when the good times stopped, the liberal dream became a nightmare, get’em outa here! Can we safely say it will not return? - I think we can. I was just thinking the other day of what the new Labour project consisted of, I made a few notes, something like this. New Labour is an amalgam of the isms, I can recognise Fascism as in corporatism - big business. I can recognise Socialism as in redistribution (or is that progressivism these days) I can recognise Marxism as in Political correctness and RR. I can recognise postmodernism as in relativism and equality. Is can recognise all of the above in Liberalism. What does that leave us with, only Conservatism and Nationalism, no - I didn’t recognise either of them in new Labour. To continue. The new Labour project is lying horizontal, toes pointing skyward, the idea being pushed by the media that it was Cameron who dun it, is beyond a joke, do they, (media) really believe we’re that stupid? I think they do and I think they’re right. The plain fact is, an unworkable ideology run by a bunch of misfits, coupled to a regime of unforced errors and self inflicted wounds were the reasons that consigned the nu Lab project to the morgue. Which leads me to the BNP. Despite the public revulsion of what the Brown government was all about, the BNP were not capable of taking full advantage, it was to the other establishment party the disenchanted transferred their preference, leaving an air of frustration in the BNP camp. As I write, there is even more despondency in the BNP camp as news of a further challenge to their leader is announced. It is too early to predict where British nationalism is heading, will the BNP morph into something completely different, I think it will have to. The global Liberal torch is about to be handed over to Dave, who will ensure a seamless transition to the elites New World Order, will it be a re-run of the French experience, will Dave be Britain’s Sarkozi? All of those disenchanted who have invested in Cameron are not going to be very happy when they see Blair MKII in action, I might suggest that Cameron will not see out a full term and TSWHTF. I’ve just finished reading a piece in the DT that poshness is back in fashion, the pedigree of Dave and Boris does not come much higher, posh is cool. It’s more than 45 years since such breeding was at the summit of British politics, then it was Lord Alec Douglas Hume (14th Earl of Home) who was briefly Conservative prime minister back in 1963. I remember him well, could grouse moor politics be returning, they do say, what goes round comes round. In another comment over at the Guardian’s CIF, if any proof was needed that we’re going belly up then it this comment by Seumas Milne, “New Labour is finished. The fight is over what replaces it.” When the Guardian prints stuff like this, then you know Britain is on the skids. Britain (and America) is in deep doo-doo, in Britain, these elections have shown that we are adrift in no-man’s land, (we haven’t been here before) the political consensus has nowhere to go, I haven’t a clue where it is heading, the only strategy that is predictable will be coming from the media, who against all the odds will continue pressing for RR, if the BNP weren’t heading for another bout of bloodletting I’d bet they would clean up within the next ten years, perhaps less. As usual when I take a look around for the bigger picture, I see the usual suspects looming in the rear view mirror, among them, in no particular order are, Western politics is now in the post democratic stage and in crisis, the march to globalism continues, the EU is forever looming closer, America is flying apart, the West is dying and being resettled, everything is peaking, prices are rocketing, the world’s climate is getting hotter, $200 oil is forecast within two years, in fact there are lot of balls in the air that collectively or even singly could scupper the well laid plans of mice and men. 52
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 08 May 2008 22:35 | # That’s a pretty fair summary, Bill. If I may attach a pair of wings to certain aspects of it ... The emergent theme from mainstream politics and from global economics is elite world domination. There is a problem approaching, however. The left-right strategy of tension is showing signs of electoral transparency. Many if not most now of us know that there’s no difference between Candidate A and Candidate B. The questions from an elites perspective are whether voter gullibleness can permanently outstay voter cynicism, and what happens if it doesn’t? At the moment the public is still gullibly swing-voting, but only because the Party in power is so bloody awful they’ll do anything to get rid of it. They are not voting for political ideas any longer, and that could prove fatal eventually. Already, Belgians have discovered that they don’t need a government running things at all. French voters have twigged that Sarkozy is not remotely as advertised, but is just another grasping little elitist. The British electorate will rapidly twig that Prime Minister David Cameron is every bit as anti-democratic as Blair and Brown. If Americans get Obama heaven knows what disillusion awaits. Politics itself is looking very like a cadaver, and will not be capable of re-heats ad infinitum. So what does happen if cynicism overcomes gullibleness? Obviously, a demand arises for real politics. It was always known, of course, that European peoples would grasp for some nationalist air before the end. The expectation was that control of the political connector between nationalism and the drowning Europeans would last the course. And so that’s where the real battle must be fought. Can nationalism be wrested away from its present exemplars, in all their ham-fisted, anti-intellectual, anti-productive, amateurish and naive “glory”? Because if it can, there is a chance for us. The world, then is splitting apart. The official narrative of democracy and progress, individual freedom and human rights is revealing itself as a simple cover for the super-concentration of power and wealth. Pushed down into a dispossessed and deracinated enslavement, the people grasp for a helping hand. Who will extend it to them? 53
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 09 May 2008 17:24 | # Meanwhile, Gordon Brown and Labour have very probably lost the support of Rupert Murdoch. Wresting “the soaraway Sun” away from the political opposition has become part and parcel of power politics in Britain. What will slip off the public’s radar as Labour’s power slowly, irrevocably dissipates over the next two years? The slavish adherence to political correctness? Or to the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights? But is that what Cameron really wants? The present dispensation is coercive but stable, which surely suits every mainstream pol. 54
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Fri, 09 May 2008 18:33 | #
You’ve moved beyond the bounds of acceptable discourse when you talk the truth in a calm, reasonable and unanswerable fashion on CIF. Even from her own POV Huq is wrong. Her only claim to distinction is that she ticks diversity boxes. The more “diversity” there is here, the more her market value falls. This sort of worthless academic work isn’t going to survive the wrecking of the country:
55
Posted by Englander on Fri, 09 May 2008 19:07 | # Guessedworker said:
I’m not sure how much you ‘get out there’ and become privy to the opinions of the masses, but how much frustration with the race replacing status quo do you really see in your dealings with people, and how widely spread do you think it is? 56
Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 09 May 2008 19:19 | # Never mind Rupa. How about blowing it with Livingstone. The following comment appeared on the page for about ten minutes, I would guess. Factwise, it owes a great deal to the Livingstone material on the I am an Englishman website, a link to which was posted here by the esteemed owner. Sadly, facts are not part of the Guardian’s moderation criteria but “personal attacks on the writer” are. This, I suppose, qualifies:-
57
Posted by Bill on Fri, 09 May 2008 21:53 | # Thanks GW. The coming battle – Postmodern reality TV. v the people. The only thing now propping up the whole house of cards is that screen in the corner of the living room. Seriously, society and the present hologram of politics would collapse if it weren’t for the MSM, for we are in the age of postmodernism where image, smoke and mirrors trumps reality. I remember vividly (1949) as a child, marvelling at the fluorescent tube in the corner. (9”) We are now in the 4th.generation of lifetime television viewing and in my mind, there is no doubt that with today’s sophisticated broadcasting techniques, we as a society are well and truly conditioned by the small screen, I’m not really keen on the term brainwashed but it is descriptive of our condition. The power of television is truly Orwellian, television has long replaced the family unit and we are now but passive participants in the TV discourse. There are no adequate words to describe the influence of the shaping of countless millions of minds by television, we have sucked on the teat for so long that we have no opinions other than those shaped by the MSM. It will be interesting to see how the media play the upcoming Crewe by-election. Crewe is heavily oversubscribed with EU plumbers, public services are stretched to the limit, and guess what, on tonight’s news the hot issue of the Crewe election will be the 10p tax. The media are already setting the agenda and the parameters of the discussion; let’s just see how this pans out. How much longer can the MSM go on hoodwinking the viewer, telling them what a wonderful world diversity is, it is asking to suspend belief that they (media) can continue to fool all of the people all of the time. I’m a great believer in reality, when the chips are down reality concentrates the mind wonderfully. Again, we are approaching the unknown, the MSM has not been called upon before to deliver the impossible, this inevitable oncoming battle will decide the outcome, as this is where your question (So what does happen if cynicism overcomes gullibleness?) will be answered. But does all of this matter? Not so much where now politics as where now our civilisation? We in the West have been too clever for our own good, we, (mankind) have taken this one off technological civilisation as far as we can, our civilisation and way of life peaked some time ago, we have tried every permutation there is, there’s no more to be had – it’s finished and the only way forward is back. Even the beating heart of capitalism is in a death spiral from which it cannot recover. My favourite line is that events rarely follow the script, and in this regard I would think it’s a safe bet that peak oil will scupper any planned rescue for western civilisation, to say nothing of sufficient food provision for an expanding world population. How long do I give it? Maybe until the last quarter of this century, (if that) then it’s back to the future. Maybe the elites figured this out long ago, and have been preparing for this moment (globalism) for years, the last throw of the dice - as for us lesser mortals all we can do is watch it all unravel - incidentally, have you read ‘The Planned Collapse of America which incorporates the ‘Changing Images of Man’? A simple Google search will reward. 58
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 10 May 2008 00:01 | # Englander, I meant what I said. There is a caveat. Businesswise I move in some pretty hard-nosed circles: the steel industry, construction, agriculture. Not areas overly populated by guilt-ridden liberals. But take your time to establish mutual trust, and ask the right question in the right way, and you will find in plenty of other places that our countrymen are still capable of healthy thinking. Sure, they have picked up Establishment beliefs and opinions, and these have to be quietly circumvented. Lots of them are fatalistic and have no hope. But Nature works the same in us all, and there is plenty of common ground to be unearthed if one moves with care. I’ve never met any one in person who “celebrates diversity” or thinks London is fabulously “enriched”. It’s just fluff from lightweight media types and ambitious and unprincipled politicians. 60
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sat, 10 May 2008 12:06 | #
And no-one, apart from the frothing moonbats on the genocidal far right, has picked him up for it. It’s obviously okay for politicians to be turn reality on its head, so long as a PC end is served:
61
Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 10 May 2008 13:26 | # Best of all, it has to be GENUINELY racist to blame black murders on “white kids”. The ex-Mayor demonstrated that he is either a pathological liar or mentally ill. Being “mistaken” doesn’t enter the frame. Hope he reads this and sues me. 62
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Sun, 11 May 2008 10:35 | #
Pathological lying is the basis of his cult. Another of its lies is that racism is confined to whites. The cult wants to win power rather than arrive at the truth, so lies are perfectly in order. 63
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 11 May 2008 12:23 | # And must one be mentally ill, or at least a sociopath, to belong to the cult? Is, in the Durkheimian sense, such sociopathology a direct result of the instability, familial and societal, instilled through two world wars, and therefore confined to the generations immediately affected? If so, if that’s all it is, then the later generation of Europeans are suffering solely from (the genuinely original sin of) suggestibility. In others words, man’s superficial personality - the sum of the acquired - is plastic and can be formed and, to an extent, reformed. The damage done to those who were NOT war’s orphans (in the general sense, ie, my father’s and my generation, born between, say, 1900 and 1970) could be reversible by a sustained change in the zeitgeist. But let’s factor in one other formidable difficulty here. Involving, as it has, the destruction of the nuclear family and the worship of materialism as well, I suppose, as the collapse of traditional spirituality, the pursuit of hyper-individualism from the 1960s onward has produced more societal instability and more sociopaths per square inch than even world war. In fact, I would also add the deculturalisation of whites, much akin to Aussie Aboriginals, to that list of harm producers. So the later generation - Tom Sunic’s Homo americanus - is NOT sound material. This is the state to which liberalism and a few evil men have brought us. And this, however fatalistic and pessimistic is makes us feel, is the estate from which we have to fashion survival. 64
Posted by Bill on Sun, 11 May 2008 13:53 | # Is this all there is? “We in the West have been too clever for our own good, we, (mankind) have taken this one off technological civilisation as far as we can, our civilisation and way of life peaked some time ago, we have tried every permutation there is, there’s no more to be had – it’s finished and the only way forward is back.” - Bill. Liberalism is the last throw of the dice, (in this one off technological civilisation) it has failed. People now realise if Liberalism is as good as it gets, then you can stuff it, count me out. In other words it just ain’t worth fighting for, we have begun the end of the beginning. What comes after is a much smaller world, how far humankind reverts back is any one’s guess, just to hazard a guess, in Europe, 500 - 1000 years. The beauty of this debate is that anyone can join in, you don’t have to be an Einstein, this situation is unique in the history of man - anyone can guess how many sweets there are in the jar? BTW, have any modern studies ever been made, (“And must one be mentally ill, or at least a sociopath, to belong to the cult?”) You know, DNA, Genes. etc. 65
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Mon, 12 May 2008 09:46 | # And must one be mentally ill, or at least a sociopath, to belong to the cult? It’s a question of definition. Livingstone is certainly not psychologically normal, but I wouldn’t say he’s mentally ill. He’d have done less harm if he had been, because he wouldn’t have been able to function so well for so long. I suspect there’s some non-English or non-British genetics at work, as there so often is in our politics. He wants power and the cult is his route. Is, in the Durkheimian sense, such sociopathology a direct result of the instability, familial and societal, instilled through two world wars, and therefore confined to the generations immediately affected? The psychology has been around for a long time: Then the idiot who praises, with enthusiastic tone, I’ve Got a Little List, W. S. Gilbert Back in England, Carlyle found some surprising allies in his attack on those who invoked brotherhood to attack slavery. These included Charles Dickens. In a chapter of Bleak House titled “Telescopic Philanthropy” Dickens ridicules a Mrs. Jellaby who neglects her family for the good of Africans in “Borrio-boola-Gha.” On the cover of the serial version of Bleak House, we see Mrs. Jellaby holding two black children. 66
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Tue, 13 May 2008 17:01 | # The satire is now reality. White politicians have to imitate Mrs Jellaby to demonstrate their suitability for power:
Very reassuring for the chosen people who matter. 67
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 14 May 2008 03:04 | # My explanation of the phenomenon noticed by Nux above: The Jews, big contributors to party coffers both Tory and Labour, lay down conditions like any other contributor, lest the financial spigot be turned off, and their main condition is the man they back must endlessly demonstrate his enthusiasm for race-replacement. The Jewish political contributors must see this enthusiasm constantly demonstrated or they grow suspicious and get the feeling they’re not getting their money’s worth. The candidate doesn’t want that because then his funds will be cut off and will simply go to someone else. Race-replacement of Euros is, to the Jew, the most important thing in the universe after Israel’s well-being. It’s more important than communism, and we all know how important communism has traditionally been for the Jews — communism has traditionally been like life and death for them, they love it so much. Well, race-replacement of Euros is, for them, even more important. A major reason communism has traditionally been so big with Jews is precisely the promise it holds out of a raceless nationless borderless world (along with a classless religionless propertyless sexless world). (Imagine how messed up a person’s brain must be who wants to live in a classless propertyless religionless nationless borderless world in which everyone pretends races don’t exist or male-female differences either: you have to be really fucked up in the head to want to live in that kind of world. People who want that are not normal people.) In other words, the prospect of government-enforced race-replacement is a big part of what has traditionally attracted the Jews so strongly to communism in the first place: in their brains race-replacement of Euros as a goal is “anterior to” communism; comes before it; is in fact primordial. It’s the fundamental thing Jews are after, the thing which, in part, gives communism its importance in their eyes, the thing without which communism might be an object of indifference to them, or at least something far less attractive. These Jews who so enthusiastically declare themselves Marxists, Stalinists, and Trotskyists are Marxists, Stalinists, and Trotskyists in significant degree because they think Marxism, Stalinism, and Trotskyism hold out promise of getting Euros race-replaced. Take these Jews, the ones having this mentality — namely, the mentality that race-replacement of Euros is of primordial importance — and make them political campaign contributors. They’re obviously going to require frequent and blatant demonstrations that the party they back and the candidate they back with their hard-earned money won’t let them down on race-replacement. They’re buying race-replacement with their money. The candidate who accepts their money will deliver that which he knows is expected of him: that which has been bought and paid for. That was what Tony Blair delivered: he was one-hundred percent bought and owned. 68
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Wed, 14 May 2008 03:20 | # Here‘s a man, a certain Michael Huntsman who blogs at BrusselsJournal.com, who somehow manages to write an entire piece scathingly critical of Brown and Blair without a single mention of the immigration issue or the role it so clearly and undeniably played in the election outcome. He pins blame exclusively on “the economy.” Nothing else. Solely because of “the economy” there’s “the stench of death about Brown,” and “Blair had the good luck to get out in the nick of time, while the getting was good.” That’s it. The economy. There’s no other reason for Labour’s rout. None. You have to ask yourself sometimes whether some of these people, some of these “pundits,” are consciously lying to themselves and to the public or are actually that blind, deaf, and dumb? I think they’re consiously lying to themselves and the public. They’re too small-minded and too small-hearted to face the unpleasant central truth about excessive incompatible immigration, the inescapable nightmarish truth, the truth Enoch had the guts to face and give whole speeches about — they lack the intellect and the stomach for it, can’t face it, their nerves aren’t steady enough, and facing it does require steady nerves — so they consciously lie, consciously pretend not to see the 800 lb gorilla in the living room. Oh they know the 800 lb gorilla is there all right. They’re just determined not to admit it. That’s the pitiful way their brains work. Hey if it’s that they’re signing their real names, no problem: just “disappear” the real name and start over with a pen name. Let people think you’re a different person or something. You could even write two different kinds of columns, one under your real name for telling lies and one under your pen name for telling the truth. That being the case, how do they in good conscience claim the status of pundit, they who knowingly avoid pronouncing the truth that is so blinding? How do they look at themselves in the mirror? How do they sleep nights? How do they look their wives in the eye every day? Don’t you have to have self-respect to do that, look your wife in the eye? I know I couldn’t if I didn’t have it. 69
Posted by Captainchaos on Wed, 14 May 2008 04:28 | # Fred, You should post this comment or a similar one at The Brussels Journal, I would love to see the bastards squirm. Their false descent makes me sick. 70
Posted by Bill on Wed, 14 May 2008 08:12 | # The torch continues on its journey. Inspired stuff Fred, one of your best. Here in Britain, the architects , the media and their legion of useful idiots now know the years of new labour and their loathsome regime has hit the buffers, they (MSM) realise, that every last drop of RR has been squeezed from the new Labour project it is over, finito, kaput. So what to do? Gordon Brown becomes the fall guy, he has become the sacrificial lamb to the slaughter, forget Blair, forget the entire media who have been cheer leading from the word go, dump on Gordo and switch to plan B. When Cameron became Tory leader, one of the first people to seek an urgent audience with him was one Rupert Murdoch. From reports in the press, Mr Murdoch was anxious to be reassured that Dave was a safe pair of hands on immigration, which Dave duly pledged, “Leave it to me Rupert,” - thus reassured, Murdoch went his way. So the RR torch will be ceremoniously and seamlessly handed to Dave and wished God speed, and it here that the MSM comes into its own, for they will have to put in a herculean effort to steer the restless masses from any thought of RR. This task of keeping the herd looking the other way is, and will continue to be an uphill struggle, every effort, every trick in the book, every lie, every nuance will be employed to this end, for at all costs the herd’s attention must be diverted. So from now on, the topic of immigration in the BBC will be studiously avoided at election times. It occurred to me that now Brown and new Labour are being consigned to history, Britain has become effectively a one party state, (forget Nick Clegg) for I cannot see Labour arising from the ashes any time soon, still, I don’t suppose it is any different from when Thatcher was destroyed. Nature abhors a vacuum, and there is a mega vacuum out there, at these last elections it is Dave that is filling this vacuum, perhaps history has ordained the final leg of the RR torch rests with Cameron - but if Cameron goes belly up who else is there? - the beat goes on. 71
Posted by 357 on Wed, 14 May 2008 15:04 | # “White politicians have to imitate Mrs Jellaby to demonstrate their suitability for power” Are white politicians so stupid as to think public displays of affection for blacks will acually ingratiate themselves with blacks? They need to learn once and for all there is no inoculation that will protect them from the inevitable charge of racism. The mantra that states “If you’re white, you’re a racist” will always be in effect no matter what. If you try to please everyone, you end up pleasing no one. A prime example is the Clintons here in the USA. They were the darlings of the left. Blacks adored them. They even referred to Bill Clinton as “the first black President.” Hillery had the reputation as a champion for the “black cause.” Then along came the odious reality of black solidarity as evidenced by the appearance of Barrack Obama on the scene. “B.O.” is creating quite a confusing stench for the delusional white-liberals. All of a sudden, for some inexplicable reason (haha), Bill and Hillery are accused of behaving like white racists! The white-racism charge is used as the explanation as to why B.O. enjoys 92% black support at the polls. They would like us to beleive that if it weren’t for the Clintons’ supposed playing of the race card, blacks would be more equally split in their support between Obama and Hillary. Yeah right, only a white liberal indoctrinated in multiculturalism could beleive such nonsence. It’s amazing how fast the dynamic of Negroid EGI kicks in. It’s equally amazing how fast whites in power positions move to obfuscate and cover-up that fact. It doesn’t fit into their multicultural utopian fantasy so they ignore it and hope it all goes away. 72
Posted by Nux Gnomica on Thu, 15 May 2008 21:20 | #
No, it isn’t primarily aimed at blacks, who are merely a means to an end. He needs to demonstrate to Jews and their mercenaries that he will not protect white interests. Blacks, as the furthest in both appearance and nature from whites, are the ideal race to pose with.
Old Etonian Cameron would never let his children go to school with the blacks he uses for photo ops. Nor will Old anti-Etonian Paul Weller:
73
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 16 May 2008 04:41 | # Gordon Brown can fool some of the people all the time, and he can fool all of the people some of the time, but, amazingly, he can’t seem to fool Vdare.com’s Brenda Walker once, not one single time! Or ... I take that back ... Perhaps not so amazingly ... 74
Posted by 357 on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:39 | # “No, it isn’t primarily aimed at blacks, who are merely a means to an end. He needs to demonstrate to Jews and their mercenaries that he will not protect white interests. Blacks, as the furthest in both appearance and nature from whites, are the ideal race to pose with.” Right you are, Nux. Dig a little deeper under the surface and you’ll uncover the fear that motivates white public figures to act in ways that go contrary to their own EGI. First and foremost they fear bad press. A ‘press’ almost completely monopolized by Jews. Hence, they must act off the Jewish authored PC script or else! Everyone knows that a politician, or any other prominent figures’ reputation can be destroyed in a mere 24 hour news cycle…so they do, in all actuality have much to fear. Until we wrestle the contol of the mass media out of the hands of Jews; those that are openly hostile to Euro EGI, little will change. This oppressive situation we find ourselves living under reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode “It’s a Good Life” starring Billy Mummy. He plays a monstrous young boy who has mysterious mental abilities which enable him to destroy people in the most hideous ways. Everyone around him lived in a constant state of fear. In order to avoid the wrath of the little boy, they had to feign a smile and project what he deemed to be “happy thoughts.” If he detected anyone around him of harboring “bad thoughts,” he would invariably ‘send them out into the cornfield’ never to be seen again. 75
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 16 May 2008 14:01 | #
Exactly correct. 76
Posted by Alex on Wed, 09 Jul 2008 02:53 | #
A link to the full article The United States of Europe published in the April, 1898 edition of The North American Review pg 510-512 77
Posted by Alex on Wed, 09 Jul 2008 03:32 | # To his great credit the rather brilliant writer of the above excerpt (in the context of the article) was decrying what he was already seeing develop and did not desire it for Europe. Presumably he did not desire what he described for those living in the US either. It’s a great article and well worth the time spent reading its three pages.
‘The United States of Europe’ 78
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:20 | # Good commentary by Millar on the very serious problem of harrassment and worse (job loss, career ruination, defamation and enforced social estrangement, financial penalties, deliberate systematic social punishments of acquaintances, colleagues, and family members for guilt by association, etc.), of ordinary Brits for the heinous crime of membership in the BNP: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/3430 This was largely how things were enforced in the old Soviet Bloc: in Soviet Russia you weren’t at first sent straight to jail (or to a psychiatric hospital to undergo chemical lobotomy) for, let’s say, being a practicing Christian because they had better ways for first-time offenders (you only got jail and the pre-frontal lobotomy if you were a repeat offender): once word got out you as a first offender were actually into that, all of the social penalties now applied to BNP members, and more, were applied to you in spades, such that you couldn’t hope to have a decent apartment anywhere, or any career advancement no matter your qualifications, or even simply any decent job; your government-dependent wage or, more likely in such a case, your unemployment stipend, would plummet directly through the floor in value (leaving you with the sort of wage or stipend that obliged you to live on one meal a day of thin broth, two cabbage leaves, and black ersatz bread made not from wheat but from the equivalent of factory sawdust, no meat ever, and insufficient heat for the winter and zero hot-water plumbing wintertime or summer, no indoor toilet plumbing, working electricity a rare luxury, no ability to purchase books, no entertainment, and so on); your kids had no chance of higher education (even if they made a point of denouncing you to the authorities) or good jobs either, you were one-hundred-percent shunned because anyone who didn’t shun you fell prey to identical treatment for guilt by association, and so on. Now, isn’t it interesting that precisely when the E.U. is <strike>manned</strike> insect infested by insects who to a significant extent were communists and comsymps before 1989-91, and precisely when Jews today as a group are riding the crest of tsunami of Jewish power of a magnitude not only unprecedented but undreamt-of just forty-five years ago let alone sixty years ago at WW-II’s close — isn’t it interesting that the exact same methods of social punishment, identically the same psy-ops/social-pricing methods, are being honed to perfection and brought to bear against those who dare to resist the New Régime being imposed today as the communists and Jews perfected for use against the dissenters in the Workers’ Paradise Régime from 1917 when New York City’s Jewish bankers imposed it on Russia, to ‘89-‘91 when the Russian people finally threw it off their backs? Hmmm, let’s see ... communists and Jews in power in both places, over there then, and over here now, as when a dog dies, the way the Soviet Union did, his fleas all quit the dead body and seek a new dog to infest, infest in the exact same way ... could there be some tie-in? Nah, that would be far too easy, far too obvious ... must be some other explanation ..... or maybe just pure coincidence? That must be it — pure coincidence ..... 79
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 11 Aug 2008 17:44 | # British National Party TV is here! I just watched some: it’s excellent. For a list of their offerings click on “Menu,” bottom-right just underneath the screen, then on “Browse On-Demand Library.” (Hat tip) Post a comment:
Next entry: Obama’s Grandmother and related issues
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
relatively recently partly due to the mainstream/lefts inability to answer basic questions that would occur to anyone who is not willfully blind who has experienced the joys of the multiculti wonderland. Also, its obvious the mainstream/left are full of shit on these issues and are covering up.
Article
Posted by InternalExile on Sat, 03 May 2008 15:29 | #
I was surprised to see this headline
FIRST CONSERVATIVE ELECTED LONDON MAYOR IN 30 YEARS… ( via Drudge the Jew )
I really don’t know what conservatism means in such a time a this, I do know what neo-conservative means and I strongly suspect that is the club Mr. Johnson belongs to.
I’ll miss Red Ken, he was entertaining, I think that’s the best we can hope for today, considering the frightening alternatives.