Majorityrights Central > Category: Media

The British media were doing so well to avoid covering the riots in Stockholm.  No bad news could be tolerated, you see.  Nothing to be allowed to penetrate the carapace of blissful multcultic ignorance.  Not while this UKIP surge was on everyone’s mind.  Then, right out of the blue, a completely savage and random attack by two black Moslems on a serving soldier.  In broad daylight in London.  A virtual beheading.  Rivers of blood.  A sole middle-aged white woman standing up for right.  The Metropolitan Police Service checking Health and Safety regs for twenty minutes before finally showing their faces and shooting the bastards.  The Muslim Council of Great Britain gets in early with a bit of damage limitation.

Cue the media.  Cue their control instincts.  “Comments are closed”.  “Comment removed”.  “Edited by a moderator”.  Meanwhile, nothing will shake our determination to have business as usual blah, blah.  Meanwhile, with lightning speed the EDL Twittered and Facebooked it’s way to Woolwich.  Meanwhile, the media pile in with an anti-white, anti-EDL message.  A handy bit of misdirection.

And so it goes.  Just one DT article carried comments for a very few hours.  You can read them here.

In considering this comment by ukn_leo  

“I have learned so much from reading Leon’s posts, Dan. As someone with natural conservative leanings”…

As someone who has natural conservative leanings as well, I thought a discussion might be useful to move toward a better understanding of what we mean by “conservatism”, and to help European peoples better discern the fraudulent “neo-conservatism” being put across to the public: taking the example of David Mamet’s fraud awakening.

Notice in the clip provided below, the slick, Jewish deception that Mamet, via Hayek, makes with the idea of constraint - to focus on limiting government.

To limit and constrain government is Not a big problem for we true conservatives, but it is not the fundamental point.

The fundamental point of true conservatism is constraint on demographics.

READ MORE...

Another speech from the London Forum earlier this month - Mike Thwait, described as “perhaps the most promising rising British star of the Nationalist Cause”, on how we might use the mass psychology techniques that are used against us.  Video in 4 parts.

Part One

READ MORE...

For the last four or five weeks the Daily Telegraph’s new, relatively open comment policy has been reaping a distasteful reward for the Establishment stick-in-the-muds who normally read the paper.  Dozens of commenters have been encouraged to comment on “issue” threads in an increasingly eye-raising way.  Suddenly, it is possible to say almost anything, and possible, therefore, to influence discourse.

That possibility I suggested to articulate BNP members here a week and a half ago.  They weren’t interested.  But I am.  If any MR readers think it worthwhile operating on these threads as a team, working to stretch the envelope and get the right message out ahead of the misguided one, please feel free to say so.

To give you some idea of the kind of freedom of expression currently available here are four current “issue” threads:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8302637/British-most-concerned-about-immigration.html#dsq-content
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/8304545/The-days-of-doing-deals-with-Muslim-extremists-are-over.html#dsq-content
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100074737/david-cameron-takes-on-the-ideology-of-islamist-extremism/#dsq-content
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100074751/wikileaks-americans-call-leicester-the-most-conservative-islamic-community-in-europe/#dsq-content

Irwin Stelzer can be justly proud of his career.  As his entry at Wikipedia makes clear:

Irwin M. Stelzer (born 1932) is an American economist[1] who is the U.S. economic and business columnist for the Sunday Times, the Courier-Mail, the Guardian and a contributing editor of the Weekly Standard. He is also an occasional contributor to the Daily Telegraph. He resides in London and the United States. Stelzer has served as a managing director of the investment banking firm of Rothschild Inc and was co-founder and president of National Economic Research Associates, Inc which became NERA Economic Consulting and which was subsequently sold to Marsh & McLennan, Inc. He is a signatory of the Henry Jackson Society, a senior director and fellow of the Hudson Institute and has edited and introduced a book on neoconservatism. He is a visiting fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford ...

... he is someone whose writings are taken seriously by powerful men on both sides of the Atlantic, and who is no doubt on first-name terms with many of them.  Today, in the Daily Telegraph, he offered them his view on How to make immigration work in Britain’s interests.  I won’t bore you with the details.  He is, as a man of the Establishment, concerned that “hostility to migrants is sweeping Europe”.  He has a plan.  “Britain can do little to reduce the flow of immigrants” from the EU, he says.  “Immigrants possess skills that are in short supply here, and add billions of pounds to national output,” he says.  But the losers who see their job prospects taken away by immigration and their neighbourhoods transformed could be paid off.  “How so?, he says ... “By requiring employers to bid for the limited number of entry permits, the proceeds to be remitted to the communities on which the immigrant imposes costs, or to HM Treasury.”  He says.

No doubt, “powerful men” will read the column, welcome Stelzer’s little scheme (with reservations, of course), and file it away for some opportune moment when the minister is in melt-down and the briefing paper for tomorrow’s Cabinet is still to be written.  But what of those damned losers in the migration game?  The indigenous, as they seem to be calling themselves these days.  Are they grateful for Mr Stelzer’s ingenuity?  Are their fears and hostility calmed?  Are they looking forward to selling-out to race-replacement for a few thousand quid?

Well, I’ve never seen a thread like this one in any English national daily.  Never.

READ MORE...

by Karl LaForce

I was very incredulous when I first saw this piece.

THE stunned black dad of a newborn, WHITE, baby girl declared yesterday — “I’m sure she’s my kid ... I just don’t know why she’s BLONDE.”

… But as the baby’s older brother and sister - both black - crowded round the “little miracle” at their home in South London, Ben declared: “Of course she’s mine.”

Blue-eyed blonde Nmachi, whose name means “Beauty of God” in the Nigerian couple’s homeland, has baffled genetics experts because neither Ben nor wife Angela have ANY mixed-race family history.

Pale genes skipping generations before cropping up again could have explained the baby’s appearance.

Ben also stressed: “My wife is true to me. Even if she hadn’t been, the baby still wouldn’t look like that.

It is much like several other reports that have appeared in the press over the past few years (for example, the mulato couple that had the twins, one white and one black, or the various white couples who have had a black baby).  Average people of all races see this sort of thing as feel-good human-interest material, so they do not look at it critically.  The automatic presumption is that the people reported to be the parents, are in fact the parents; you know, “momma’s baby, daddy’s maybe”.

READ MORE...

So why would David Aaronovitch justify Joseph McCarthy?

I mean.  Why?

McCarthy: There Were Reds Under the Bed
Sunday, 13:30 on BBC Radio 4 (FM only)

David Aaronovitch thinks the unthinkable about the McCarthy period.

The hunt for the so called ‘Reds under the beds’ during the Cold War is generally regarded as a deeply regrettable blot on U.S history. But the release of classified documents reveals that Joseph McCarthy was right after all about the extent of Soviet infiltration into the highest reaches of the U.S government.

Thanks to the public release of top secret FBI decryptions of Soviet communications, as well as the release under the fifty year rule of FBI records and Soviet archives, we now know that the Communist spying McCarthy fought against was extensive, reaching to the highest level of the State department and the White House.

We reveal that many of McCarthy’s anticommunist investigations were in fact on target. His fears about the effect Soviet infiltration might be having on US foreign policy, particularly in the Far East were also well founded.

The decrypts also reveal that people such as Rosenberg, Alger Hiss and even Robert Oppenheimer were indeed working with the Soviets. We explore why much of this information, available for years to the FBI, was not made public. We also examine how its suppression prevented the prosecution of suspects.

Finally, we explore the extent to which Joseph McCarthy, with his unsavoury methods and smear tactics, could have done himself a disservice, resulting in his name being forever synonymous with paranoia and the ruthless suppression of free speech.

Hearing from former FBI, CIA and KGB operatives as well as formerly blacklisted writers, David Aaronovitch, himself from a family of communists tells the untold story of Soviet influence and espionage in the United States.

The lesson of Ian Tomlinson’s death

... the Establishment does not care that, as a nation, we grow cynical and resentful.  It will do what it wants anyway.

READ MORE...

Five years ago the distinctly loose journalistic cannon that is Rod Liddle opined on things he shouldn’t say about black people.  It was one of those moments when the thought crosses one’s mind, “what does this person think privately?”  Now we know:

Former Today editor Rod Liddle under fire over ‘racist’ posts on football supporters’ website

Former Today programme editor Rod Liddle has been accused of racism after writing a series of inflammatory messages on a football supporters’ website.

Mr Liddle, who now works for The Spectator magazine and is tipped to become the next editor of The Independent, used crude language to argue for the axeing of all black-only organisations.
He also contributed to a debate in which supporters demanded violent attacks on a black footballer.

The 49-year-old left the messages on Millwall Online - an independent website unconnected to the club - under the username ‘monkeymfc’.

The first message was written in October, when he contributed to a debate about whether the BNP should admit non-white members.

He wrote: ‘There’s thousands of organisations catering exclusively to black and asian minorities. **** ‘em, close them down. Why do blacks need a forum of their own? As a power base and cash cow for ****s and in order to perpetuate the myth of widespread discrimination.’

The next day he joined in a thread about a row between Millwall’s Neil Harris and the Ghanaian-English player Kevin Amankwaah, who had accused Harris of racially abusing him - an allegation Harris denies.

After abusive comments about Amankwaah by other users, Liddle writes he has heard Harris’s alleged comment was: ‘**** off you spearchucking African ****.’

Later that month, another comment written by monkeymfc appears in a thread called ‘Channel 4 claiming blacks are thick’, about a documentary alleging racial differences in intelligence.

In comments Liddle strongly denies writing, the contributor says: ‘On average a little under 10 per cent thicker than whites; 15 per cent thicker than east Asians. I thought everyone knew, too. Some argument about cultural bias of tests, but same results come up in US.’

READ MORE...