Still needing to be admired by the liberal elite, Vanity Blair - the Jesus of Shallow - will use “British” black newspaper New Nation to make his tired pitch for sainthood:-

It is hard to believe that what would now be a crime against humanity was legal at the time.  Personally I believe the bicentenary [of Wilberforce’s Abolition - Ed] offers us a chance not just to say how profoundly shameful the slave trade was - how we condemn its existence utterly and praise those who fought for its abolition, but also to express our deep sorrow that it ever happened, that it ever could have happened and to rejoice at the different and better times we live in today.

... According to notes seen in the possession of Baroness Amos, the Lead of the House of Lords, earlier this month, the Prime Minister wanted to make a bold gesture that will be ‘internationally recognised’. He will back a United Nations resolution by Caribbean countries to honour those who died at the hands of international slave traders.

The notes suggested that Blair was willing to accommodate the requests of many campaigners and is ‘prepared to go further than [he is] being asked to’ on the issue of an apology.

One of the aforementioned campaigners is Rendezvous for Victory.  Two years ago these people announced that they were intending to lean on Her Majesty the Queen for an apology.  Evidently, they meant Her Majesty the queen of Downing Street.  But it isn’t an apology for the past they want.  That’s not enough.  It’s an apology, and more, for the present:-

... joint co-ordinator, Kofi Mawuli Klu, said he was disappointed by Blair’s suggestion that slavery is a thing of the past: ‘He’s missed the point. They do not understand contemporary enslavement. There is nothing in this statement about the enduring legacy of slavery in terms of racism and global injustice.’

Klu criticised the absence of the word ‘sorry’, claiming: ‘It’s adding insult to the lingering injuries of the enslavement of African people by the European ruling classes. The message is that if you commit crimes against African people you cannot be held responsible; even when you acknowledge that you have done wrong, you do not feel it necessary to apologise.’

Contemporary enslavement!  With all due allowance for his ignorance of English, Klu’s clucking can only be read as a desire to apply an eternal half-nelson on the European and white American conscience.  He is a race warrior politic enough to confine his remarks here to the European ruling class.  But those guys were laid to earth two or three centuries ago, and the modern Jacobins are hardly a shoe-in for Klu’s “You”.

“You”, of course, means good old you and me.  As Michael Wharton’s Prof Kiosk would scream, “We are all guilty.”  Blair can don the shining raiment of pure conscience and regard himself in the mirror of international plaudit.  But he is only encouraging blacks to believe that their lowly circumstance in Western society was, is and always will be the white man’s doing.  It’s the perfect environmentalism of victimhood ... an escapist illusion where none of the heritable prolixities and capacities we see in blacks all the time can intrude, and where, therefore, there is no end to the sacrifices we must offer until we simply cease to be.

With all the idiocy about some spy who someone killed saturating the news (apparently for no better reason than some Jewish criminals care about him) it is easy to miss another, far more important piece of news involving Russia and Putin:  Ukrainians are petitioning the UN to recognize the Holodomor as an act of genocide and Putin’s Russian-nationalistic regime is fighting it.  I’m sympathetic to Putin’s regime’s struggle to fight off the on-going genocide against the Russian nation—genocide which is denied continually—but Putin is in error here.  It was not “Russians” that committed the Holodomor genocide, it was Communists—a viciously anti-nationalist gang that took their ideology of destroying nations (the real definition of genocide under the Geneva Convention) to the extremes represented by the Holodomor—and quite probably trigged Hitler’s rise to power in nearby Germany.

Putin needs to simply repudiate the genocidal antinationalists of the world, including Stalin, and continue the very difficult work of saving his Russian nation from the current genocide.

The Litvinenko poisoning has, and with what terrible, slow inevitability, become the Litvinenko murder, and is well on its way to becoming the Litvinenko Affair.

How much the public will be told from herein is, to say the least, moot.  Both the British and Russian secret services have become involved, we are told.  Both involvements, though, may be more diversionary than truly investigative.

Mr Litvinenko himself was in no doubt as to who his killers were, and then there is this:-

Chemists said that a fatal dose of polonium could only be produced artificially, by a particle accelerator or nuclear reactor.

“This is not some random killing. This is not a tool chosen by a group of amateurs. These people had some serious resources behind them,” Dr Andrea Sella, a lecturer in chemistry at University College London, told Reuters.

So what, in the shark-infested waters of international diplomacy, does the Litvinenko murder portend?

Probably not that much, after all the cloak and dagger stuff has receded from the headlines.  It isn’t in Britain’s national interest to humiliate Putin and find a radioactive FSB hand in the killing.  An effective police investigation could prove disastrous.  One can already hear the seasoned Foreign Office Russophiles proclaiming, “What, just so Blair at the Met can claim to keep the streets of London free from the FSB!”  No one will reply that Russian state gangsterism impacts on our global interests - consider the dioxin-scarred features of the Ukrainian leader, Victor Yushchenko - and now there is some leverage against it.

The plain truth is that we need considerably greater cooperation with Mr Putin, gangster or no.  Our main interest is energy.  Until recently Britain imported only modest volumes of gas from Russia.  That will almost certainly change if security of supply can be established.  If.  The Ukrainian experience in January 2006, when the pipeline from the east was shut down for purely political reasons, is holding us back now.  Only a reliable, cooperative Russia can encourage our trust, but Russia itself must be encouraged to that end.

Then there is the Iranian nuclear problem, and the question of a regnant Iran regardless of that.  Being America’s second best little buddy doesn’t auger very well for influencing Nejad.  Russia has influence in Tehran.  It is also a vital ally in resisting terrorism, for which sound working relations with the FSB are a prerequisite.

So all in all we shouldn’t expect too much clarity from the Litvinenko investigation.  It will, I believe, leave a bitter taste in many mouths.  But diplomacy was ever thus.

The Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, has told African and European government ministers that they must accept high levels of cross-border migration.

Mr Gaddafi told ministers gathered for a conference on migration from Africa to the EU that resisting migration “is like rowing against the stream”.

“The current populations of the world are originally migrants.”

... “Political borders, official papers and identities set for every group of people are new, artificial things not recognised by nature.

“Land is the property of everyone, and God commands all human beings to migrate on Earth to seek a living, which is their right,” he said.

From an amazing BBC News report on the EU-Africa Ministerial Conference on Migration and Development Issues, which wound up today in nice Muammar’s capital.  Do you think nice Muammar means that the land of his Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya belongs to me?

Probably not.

Muammar doesn’t see things that way.  Indeed, this Conference was devoted wholly to expressing the “African position” on migration and development.  And the issues that interest African leaders are:-

1) The unimpeded flow of successful migrants’ remittances,

2) A European focus from a human rights perspective,

3) European investment in Africa to counter the effects of the “brain drain”!

In a nutshell: take our people, send us your cash.

The Conference blurb announced that the pre-Conference experts’ meeting would:-

... bring together migration experts from African countries and the EU, the Permanent Representatives’ Council (PRC) of the AU, the RECs, the AU Commission, the European Commission, and a restricted number of institutions of the United Nations system, international organizations and NGOs specialized in migration and development issues.

No surprise, then, that these shindigs crop up pretty regularly ... like just last July.  And absolutely no surprise that the rights and interests of the native peoples (and tax-payers) of Europe go unvoiced by any of these soulless transnationals.

Stories that begin with the words, “You couldn’t make this up,” abound, I know.  But this one has that extra something: swanism. 

It began when a gentleman whose home overlooked West Shore boating pool in the seaside town of Llandudno, North Wales looked out of his window and:-

saw Miah, a former restaurant owner who came to Britain from Bangladesh 40 years ago, rolling around on the grass with the swan’s wing on the ground next to him.

The alarmed gentleman called the police who duly arrived to find 52-year-old Shamshu Miah with blood on his clothes and feathers in his beard.

They confronted Bangladeshi-born Miah, who told the police: “I am a Muslim, I am fasting, I had to eat.

“I was hungry, I had to eat the swan. I killed it, I stabbed it.

“I did nothing wrong, it was just a bird, I needed to eat.”

It is forbidden for Muslims to eat during daylight hours over the Islamic month of Ramadan.

One of the officers told Miah it was illegal to kill a swan because it was the property of the Queen, to which Miah replied: “I hate the Queen, I hate this country.”

Psychiatric reports indicated Miah was not mentally ill at the time of the attack.  But we must be, to abide with Miah for 40 years.

Reporting on a scientific “discovery” “published simultaneously in three leading science journals by scientists from 13 different research centres in Britain and America” The UK Independent Online reports that:

The findings mean that instead of humanity being 99.9 per cent identical, as previously believed, we are at least 10 times more different between one another than once thought…

So, let’s try to be rational about this:  Since the 1960s, the so called “authorities” have been telling young coeds in their college classes that their choice of mates among males genetically distant from them (let’s take for example, many of the “authorities” themselves, like Lewontin) was of little consequence because in addition to there being “no such thing as race”, the genetic distance between humans was disappearingly small.  This during the largest waste of potential fertility among women of European ancestry in history and the most intense campaign of propaganda to encourage outbreeding choices among those women by virtually all leaders of media and academia—among those who stood to benefit reproductively by this propaganda during an era of emerging de facto polygyny (misnamed by those same “authorities” as “serial monogamy”).

Rape, including passive participation in gang-rape, does deserve the death penalty and this does qualify as massive gang-rape-by-fraud.

No, I don’t believe for a moment that it would have taken this long for this information to come forth if the media and academia “authorities” had not been as distantly related to their victims, aka “students”.

Yes, genetic advances have forced the issue somewhat but the real driver here is the fact that technologically amplified mixing of populations has gotten so far out of hand that the former ersatz “authorities” are trying to back peddle now that they’re finding themselves suffering from the kind of genocide they once could impose on us with impunity.

I just did a spot of that, and came up with this - at no.4 in a list of 159,000:-

MajorityRights.com: A site for the discussion of issues affecting ...
Alon Ziv has to be insane if he believes that the broad-nosed and masculine mixed-race woman looks better. The average American white woman, shown above and ...
majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/C45/ - 60k - 20 Nov 2006 - Cached - Similar pages

“Insane” ... “broad-nosed and masculine mixed-race women” ...  You see, you can get your POV out there.  AND nullify the outrageous racism of our opponents.

Apologies, btw, to the two Alon Zivs above us who are, respectively, in the geology and computer science fields.  No apologies, obviously, to the man who encourages us to bed a Bantu.

One of the toughest nuts for WN in America to crack is the pervasive and powerful idea of cultural assimilation.  The tenacity with which Euro-Americans cling to the myth was demostrated conclusively today in Quinnipiac University’s nationwide poll of US voter attitudes on illegal immigration.

By a 69 - 27 percent margin, American voters say illegal immigrants should be allowed into a guest worker program with the ability to work toward citizenship over a period of several years, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

Republicans support the guest worker to citizenship path 66 - 31 percent, while Democrats back it 73 - 23 percent and independent voters back it 71 - 24 percent

It’s not that voters don’t understand the invasive nature of Mexican immigration:-

Building a 700-mile fence on the U.S.-Mexican border is “enough for now,” 24 percent of voters say, but 71 percent say, “additional measures are needed from Congress to deal with illegal immigrants entering the country.”

... but once in the country the illegal has it all his own way.  It’s interesting that sentiment against his employers, as expressed to the pollsters, runs strong.  But the illegal himself is surrounded by some golden haze of mythic Americana.  He is placed beyond punishment.

Looking at the subsidiary matters resolved in Arizona last week it is clear that actual experience of illegal Mexican immigrants produces a concrete change in attitude.  But further afield, none of that counts for anything and the myth of assimilated America conquers all.