Cameron and the Anti-White Alliance

Posted by Guest Blogger on Sunday, 01 March 2009 17:42.

By David Hamilton

On Tommy Boyd’s talkRadio show of 17 February, Weyman Bennett described David Cameron as a supporter of the Marxist UAF! Are the Conservatives, we wonder,  still the patriotic party or a Con that pretends to support the nation but, when in power, will carry on with the work of the Labour Party? Bennett accused the BNP of violence but at 2008 Red White Blue, 33 arrests were recorded - including left wing thugs throwing rocks at children and elderly people. Yet no members or supporters of the BNP were arrested. What is Cameron doing with people like that if he is a Tory?

The Daily Mail of 22 January reported his speaking to think tank Demos, which is running The Progressive Conservatism Project to develop policies and ideas that are radical. Conservatives are now pursuing progressive goals like social justice, social mobility and an end to poverty, all of them once left-wing . How, they ask, can these be achieved through “conservative” means? They are turning the Conservative party into a neo-Marxist outfit like Nulab!

Cameron said his party wants to abolish child poverty and increase social mobility. He listed the aims of ‘progressive Conservatism’ as:-

1. Fair society
2. Green environment
3. Safety for citizens
4. Equal opportunity

... and said:

‘Yes, they are ends that we share with people in the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrat Party and right across the mainstream political spectrum. But no, we do not agree about how best to achieve those ends.”

What people fail to understand is that the Conservative Party is no longer conservative. They should be done under Advertising Standards laws or they should change their name. They are another aspect of the PC Ideology Party. You cannot “change” the fundamental tenets of Conservatism but you can become something else behind the name. In 1991 the party got rid of the remaining traditionalists when it purged the Monday Club to make it another vehicle of neo-Marxism, PC and to serve the Globalists’ agenda.

What do traditional Conservatives believe? American Conservative Robert Nisbet (1966):

“The ethos of Conservatism is tradition…...defence of social tradition and emphasis on the values of community, kinship, hierarchy, authority, and religion; add also Conservatism’s premonition of social chaos surmounted by absolute power once individuals have become wrenched from the context of these values by the forces of liberalism and radicalism. The Conservatives began with the reality of the institutional order as they found it, the order bequeathed by history.”

The sense of belonging to a people and a putting of their interests first was shown by Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi’s Indianisation policies, commenced about 1962, in which Europeans were asked to leave their posts on the basis of race. Indigenous Indians are still given preference in India - in fact, we wouldn’t be allowed in, and if we did get in, we wouldn’t be eligible for anything. Even the Africanisation policies of Robert Mugabe, cruel and brutal though they are, and evidence that Africans cannot run a modern society, accord with this principle. Zanu PF see Zimbabwe as theirs.  Likewise the ANC in South Africa. Their Africanisation policies are racist, but multi-racialists and anti-racists support racist policies if they are against “white people”! In Europe, too, the principle has been applied in the past. There was an expulsion of over 10 million people between 1945 and 1948 on the basis of race and nationality.

Every country puts the interests of its own first, but our Establishment wants to see the indigenous British dispossessed in their own country. Why don’t the elites just admit they hate us and want to destroy us?

In September(2008) , in a speech to the Israeli parliament, Gordon Brown called on the nations of the world to ensure that our era becomes the century of the global community. He looked forward to:

a time when - by moving from conflict to harmony - we make a reality of the vision of a global society in which we create global civic institutions that turn words of friendship into bonds of human solidarity stronger than any divisions between us.

David Cameron is also a servant of the elites pushing for globalism. During his visit to Rwanda last summer, while there was severe flooding in his Whitney, Oxfordshire constituency, he showed which people he supported:

“There is no domestic or foreign any more. In this world today, we are all in it together.”

Most of his main ideological concerns are the same as the other elites and, as Brown has shown, a main part of the globalist vision is the creation of a new corporate and political network which would operate beyond nations.

The Utopians believed that harmony could be made on earth not heaven by world government. H. G. Wells, the science fiction writer and socialist philosopher, was an advocate of a “permanent world congress” and specialised international agencies which would end the nation state. Patriotism, he believed, was “mere flag-waving with no constructive duties”.

Now the dreamers are in power and doing it through deceit and manipulation. Cameron visited Bolton on Monday 5th January 2009 and addressed a more than 1,000 leading members of the Asian community, at the Reebok Stadium. Cameron ignored the indigenous population. He announced:

“We have hitherto been able to rise to the challenge and sustain our coherence and unity. We have done so through a combination of a steadfast faith in our institutions and values, such as freedom under the rule of law, pluralism and tolerance … and because society – not only the majority community but the minority community too – was prepared to stand together as one. There is no reason to think we cannot do the same today.”

But he knows that under the EU, the “Rule of Law” and the other values he cited like “our institutions” are being scrapped. Very hypocritical!

The one-sided view of racism which ignores the horrendous crimes our people are subjected to, including the routine raping of our little girls by older Muslim gangs is typical of the caste.

British politics have been run by Utopians, optimists and Romantic Idealists since WWII - look at the practical consequences. The Utopians brought millions of immigrants to make our lives “better” and, still say it – Cameron is one of them..  In his 2007 party conference speech Cameron spoke without notes to suggest his possession of deeply felt beliefs. Yet he was clearly reciting a script which said nothing. He asked the audience, “What do I believe?” and answered himself, “I am by nature an optimist.” We assume his answer meant, “ Everything will turn out well in the end.”

Like other “Caste” elites he has no sense of duty or honour - his political career comes first. Small differences aside the Libs, Labs, and Cons, have the same ideology and Cameron in the speech signalled that he belongs: “I think our diverse and multi-racial society is a huge benefit for Britain.” Anything less and his career is over.

He joined in the Persecution of Prince Harry, demonstrating that the non-Conservatives not only won’t defend our people’s norms but won’t defend the monarchy either, as has been the party’s tradition. They are the same as the other two mainstream parties.  They are servants of the intellectual and cultural elites and commerce.  They are the creatures of the media. They are one with the attack upon our ways and traditions to prepare us for Utopia.

Like all Utopians, Cameron is an optimist about the ultimate conclusion of British society in a multi-racial, one-world. Prospective Prime Ministers don’t question dominant state- ideology - they slot into it.  Like the others, he says what he has to to get elected, not what is needed to save the country. The common features of this ilk are Political Correctness, ambition and cowardice, all of which prevents them addressing the real problems which beset us. They try to convince us that if we also fantasise that things will turn out well, they will. But things only work out well when done well.

Optimists can’t solve problems that optimists have created. They thought the multiracial society would work because they thought it would. Even though their Utopia is a nightmare, they will not face it. Rather, they make us the scapegoats for everything that goes wrong by applying to us the all-purpose pejorative “racism”, a special category for whites only.

The media puff up Cameron as they puffed up Gordon Brown and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Politicians are always pictured in mid-flow with their hands frozen in some expressive gesture so as to suggest that they are authority figures when, really, they are weak and inadequate. The Daily Telegraph said the speech: “…explained in detail his vision of how to change Britain.” It did no such thing.

It was the same script we get from all Establishment politicians - changing this and changing that. But they never make a real point about what they are going to change - what into what, why and how? Our inadequate leaders haven’t got what it takes, and just hope something will turn up.

Nothing will turn up. What they call change is more of the same in a different guise. They mean repackaging. They’ve set us on this course and they’re determined to see it through, and there will be no change until Establishment liars, cowards and parasites have been replaced by people for whom self-interest is not the prime motivating factor.

Like Obama’s inaugural speech Cameron’s vision to the conference had no substance: “We need change for the long term, hope for our country and optimism for the next generation…” Mere buzz-words: “…change …long term …hope …our country …optimism …next generation,” but no ‘detailed’ explanation of the vision that the Telegraph praised.

The only thing he stated with certainty was that he supports mass immigration:

“I think this country has benefited immeasurably from immigration”.

If immigration isn’t the problem, what is? He enlightened us:

“I want to tell you what’s wrong with our country and I want to explain what I am going to do to put it right …if we really want to tackle crime, if we really want to make our society stronger then you have got to make families stronger and society more responsible …we must make our country safer and greener and give people more freedom and control of their lives…”

Families …stronger …responsible …our country …safer …greener … freedom : more buzz-words without meaning.

The population does not have the same ideologically-informed view of society. They have to be browbeaten by moral lectures and corralled by totalitarian laws and a politicised police. Few indeed share his view that immigration has benefited Britain “immeasurably”, and were they “free” and not frightened of being persecuted by the state, most people would say so.

What Cameron really means is that he wants people to be free to say what the “caste” want them to say, and to have control over their lives so that the “caste” can manage them in the way they want to.

His knee jerk response to the faux pas of Patrick Mercer and Nigel Hastilow show what this “freedom” means - persecution of dissidents.

A new kind of Tory? In his 68 minute long conference speech ostensibly about British society he didn’t refer to our Christian traditions or the threat that Islam poses to them. He is on the other side. He interpreted the worries over immigration as concern about the effect it has on services, education, health, housing, and ignored the more important effect it is having on British culture and the dispossession of ethnic Britons. Then he enthused about what he thinks important – persuading ethnic groups to become Tories. He told the audience they must:

“get out amongst Britain’s ethnic minority communities and find the brightest, the best and the most talented and get them in.”

One of “...the brightest, the best and the most talented” members of “…the ethnics” is Baroness Warsi. He was so impressed by Warsi that he wanted her on board at any price. And when she failed to make it and lost to Labour’s Shahid Malik in the 2005 general election he had her made a Baroness to encourage other Asians. She became minister responsible for ‘cohesion’.

We’re in safe hands. Cameron told the conference

“I am proud that I can stand here with the first Muslim woman of a Shadow Cabinet or Cabinet in Sayeeda Warsi, who will be a great talent for our party and our country.”

Baroness Warsi is a former immigration lawyer. She was involved with Operation Black Vote and the left wing pro-immigration Joseph Rowntree Trust. Last year she was co-author of a report that made the case for allowing refused asylum seekers to enter the economy.

She is his Lord Ahmed, who Blair appointed to the House of Lords, swearing his oath of allegiance to Queen and Country on the Koran. Ahmed was both the first Muslim to be appointed to the Lords, and the first Lord to lead delegations on behalf of the British government to Saudi Arabia for the Haj, or Muslim pilgrimage.

In February 2005 he hosted a book launch for Israel Shamir at the House of Lords, where the latter launched into a fundamentalist Muslims tirade against Zionists. This fawning on immigrants presents us as weak and afraid of them which is what emboldened Ahmed to threaten to mobilise 10,000 Muslims to stop Geert Wilders entering The Palace of Westminster! Jacqui Smith, Home secretary banned Wilders!

In May 2007 Cameron stayed with a Muslim family in Birmingham and wrote in the Observer of 13th may 2007:

“Last week, I spent two days staying with Abdullah and Shahida Rehman and their family in Birmingham. The experience has strengthened my conviction about the right way to build a more cohesive Britain… by using the word ‘Islamist’ to describe the threat, we actually help do the terrorist ideologues’ work for them, confirming to many impressionable young Muslim men that to be a ‘good Muslim’, you have to support their evil campaign.”

Cameron’s argument that otherwise peaceful Muslims can be persuaded to embrace terrorism by the mere association of the words ‘Islamist’ and ‘threat’ is either absurd or the ultimate in unintentional truths.

He uses us whites as scapegoats:

“Many British Asians see a society that hardly inspires them to integrate. Indeed, they see aspects of modern Britain which are a threat to the values they hold dear - values which we should all hold dear.”

It’s our fault, again. I should have guessed.

“First, a concerted attack on racism and soft bigotry. You can’t even start to talk about a truly integrated society while people are suffering racist insults and abuse, as many still are in our country on a daily basis. We must also be careful about the language we use.

No Muslim I’ve ever met is offended by Christmas, or supports its replacement with ‘Winterval’. But many Muslims I’ve talked to about these issues are deeply offended by the use of the word ‘Islamic’ or ‘Islamist’ to describe the terrorist threat we face today” like Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith’s call to describe Muslim terrorism as “anti-Islamic activity.”

Cameron revealed the establishment agenda to de-culture as well as dispossess us:

“Not for the first time, I found myself thinking that it is mainstream Britain which needs to integrate more with the British Asian way of life, not the other way around.”

To help shift society in this direction Cameron set up the Conservative Muslim Forum, a sort of Tory equivalent of the National Black Police Association, which ‘advises’ the Conservative Party on how best to assimilate us to Muslims. The CMF wants the compulsory history curriculum in schools changed to give full recognition to the

“…massive contribution (sic) that Islam has made to the development of Western civilisation”

… and the “caste” is introducing the same agenda into our schools and teaching our children to see 7/7 through the eyes of the bombers! This is teaching our children to submit to Islam and to cover the terrorists in glory.

Recently, Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari head of the Muslim Council of Britain was calling for Britain to adopt Islamic customs, and labelling us Nazis for daring to question the infinite benefits of Islam. Good old Tory values! Conservative Cameron concludes that British society is collapsing because it’s not sufficiently Asian:

“We have a responsibility to change to accommodate immigrants so they fit in”. He’s made this perfectly clear which is why the Conservative Muslim Forum and the Muslim Council of Britain are emboldened to demand that Britain change to take account of their ways and laud their achievements.

Cameron’s false Conservatives, like Labour, are increasing the influence of Islam on this country.

Lets end by reminding ourselves what a traditional Tory is: On May 24 1929, Stanley Baldwin, three times Prime Minister, said :“Let us keep this thought ever in our mind: “that each one of us, so far as in him lies, will strive to keep these islands a fit nursery for Our Race”.



Comments:


1

Posted by Bill on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 19:48 | #

BNP notching up a gear or 3.

Thanks to BNP poster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KTZro4QlAY


2

Posted by John on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:05 | #

and the “caste” is introducing the same agenda into our schools and teaching our children to see 7/7 through the eyes of the bombers!

It seems odd to me that a Muslim leader would want to teach Muslim children anything about the perspective of Mossad/MI6.


3

Posted by Jewed American 'Liberators' on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:23 | #

Liberators indeed - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1GrdTakvl8&feature=related

Spreading freedom far and wide!


4

Posted by Armor on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:22 | #

What people fail to understand is that the Conservative Party is no longer conservative. (—DH)

And the Labour Party is no longer the “Labour” Party !

Labour: A social class comprising those who do manual labor or work for wages


5

Posted by Bill on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:22 | #

Britain, in the opening weeks of 2009 is undergoing a transformation in terms of disquiet and perceived simmering discontent.

There is little doubt this marked change of gear has been triggered by the roller coaster unravelling of what started as the credit crunch and has now emerged into a full blown recession.

I detect a determined mood is now building among the British people, and it has not gone unnoticed by our political elites.  So it came as no surprise when the daily press ran an article sourced by the Metropolitan Police to the effect that they (police) are warning the establishment of an almost certain risk of widespread unrest in our major cities this coming summer.

What interests me most in this article is that it points out Britain’s middle classes have become sufficiently pissed off to join in any such demonstrations and could be exploited by known activists who the police think will become engaged in the protests.

The article reported the government had drawn up contingency plans to deal with such disruption but were worried about the sheer numbers that could be involved.

So there you have it, no matter from which angle I view this unfolding canvas I also see confrontation looming in the non too distant future.

There are suggestions in the press that our government did not see the BNP gaining such solid support, so really it’s a double whammy.  Brown didn’t see hurricane Katrina in the shape of the economic crisis coming and to top that he didn’t see the coming of the BNP juggernaut that is about to hit our streets.  Perhaps Brown was looking through the wrong end of the telescope with his unseeing eye. (Bit like Nelson?)

The next phase of the battle is being drawn, the BNP are upping the anti and going on the offensive, the elites will have no alternative other than to try and defend their actions (which they cannot) hopefully this will awaken the many from their torpor.

We are moving (hopefully) into to a period of unprecedented debate, the establishment, with their brow beating political correctness has silenced the people’s voice, that is now over, the elites will have no alternative than to come out and defend themselves.

To try and second guess where all this is leading boggles the mind, but there’s one thing for sure, I’m glad Brown and Co. are not getting it all there own way.

How totalitarian will the totalitarians get?


6

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:19 | #

Further to Bill’s comment that we are moving into a period of unprecedented debate, Geert Wilders has called for the dismantling of Europe’s hate-speech laws and the adoption of a constitutional rule for Europe analagous to the U.S.‘s First Amendment to the Constitution which stipulates that the federal government shall not abridge freedom of speech.

Here is the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights#Amendments ]


7

Posted by Armor on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:31 | #

Geert Wilders has called for the dismantling of Europe’s hate-speech laws

I thought he was friend with Jewish neoconservatives !


8

Posted by Armor on Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:34 | #

friends


9

Posted by Bill on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:20 | #

Do you remember a conversation we had some while back about increasing the capacity of Britain’s prisons?  This is when John Reid was home secretary.

If I remember correctly, Reid estimated that by 2012?  Britain would need to increase its prison capacity by several thousand.  No reason was given as to why.  I thought at the time, what do they know that they’re not telling us.  I suspected they were expecting civil unrest and would need the extra capacity to incarcerate the dissidents.

The Home Office also announced more prisons were programmed to built, each with a capacity of 2500 prisoners.  They gave them a name, Titan (I think)

Also at that time, I mentioned the building of (I think by Halliburton?) a network of large internment camps strategically dotted around the US.  It didn’t seem to raise much interest here at the time but I suspect these camps are awaiting their guests for exactly the same reasons as in Britain.  The US authorities are expecting trouble in the streets.

The pieces of the jigsaw are coming together.


10

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:56 | #

“I thought he was friend with Jewish neoconservatives !”  (—Armor)

The preponderance of wealthy and politically influential Jewry will very strongly oppose dismantling the hate-speech laws because they want nothing interfering with either the race-replacement or the Islamification of Europe currently underway.  It’s taken them two hundred years to get to this point and they’re not about to let victory slip from their grasp.  They see both the replacement of European Civilization with Islam and the replacement of Euro races with non-whites as pluses for Jewry and for Israel.  Call them category A.

Smaller factions of Jews, ones far less wealthy than the above and exerting essentially zero political influence, see things differently.  They seem to be divided into those Jews who see:

B) an Islamic Europe as good for Jews but race-replacement of Euros as bad for Jews, or

C) an Islamic Europe as bad for Jews but race-replacement of Euros as good for Jews, or

D) both as bad for Jews.

Jews in categories B, C, and D will support repeal of hate-speech laws only on condition that 1) criticism of Jews and 2) questioning of the Holocau$t continue to be outlawed.  The Jews in categories B, C, and D are, however, politically impotent so their views count for naught.  The Jews of category A are the ones whose views count:  they’re incomperably more wealthy, numerous, powerful, and influential.  And they want Euros and European Civilization out of the picture.  Permanently.


11

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:58 | #

incomparably


12

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:19 | #

Speaking of the BNP, guess which party Peter Hitchens just did a hatchet-job on the other day?

Please Listen To Me, Or You’ll Get Something Much Worse

[…] I believe in pluralism, liberty of speech, freedom of the press, tolerance, the rule of law, an adversarial parliament, an independent civil service.  I believe it is possible to persuade and to be persuaded, to make and to admit mistakes. I am opposed to violence in politics.  I am even more opposed to racial bigotry.  This […] sums up quite clearly why I shall always loathe the BNP […] and why I would never have anything to do with it, will always oppose it and would probably have to fly the country if it ever came to power.  I differ fundamentally from it and draw my ideas from another tradition. […]

To the liberal elite, I would add: “If you scorn my warnings about the effects of mass immigration, unchecked crime and disorder, penal taxation to finance needless empires of client workers, undisciplined education, state-sponsored immorality and the rest, then you will in the end deliver a large part of the electorate, so frustrated that they won’t care any more about words like ‘Nazi’ and ‘Fascist’, into the hands of unscrupulous demagogues, who will employ these causes to seek power and may eventually destroy you — and me — completely.”

I used to say:  “It is all very well, during this period of artificial prosperity, to rely on people not caring enough.  But if that prosperity ever ends, it will be much, much more dangerous”.

Now I think I can leave off the last bit.  That is why I was so alarmed by the outbreak of “British Jobs for British Workers” protests.  For a growing number of people prosperity is a thing of the past.  I am by no means sure it will ever come back.  I fear that what is happening to us now is a permanent descent into the league of poorer, less stable countries.

I have also […] more than once opposed attempts to suppress and persecute the BNP, because freedom of speech only exists when you give it to people you despise.  […]

It is an old ploy, I suppose, the threat of something worse in the background to make yourself look more acceptable.  But I have always meant every word.  I am genuinely alarmed that this country might eventually incubate some sort of national socialist populist force, trashing liberty in the name of order and patriotism, thanks to the appalling combination of ill-educated ignorance and increasingly justified discontent created by the policies of the liberal elite.

[…] the BNP bandwagon has moved south, and last week scored an alarming and possibly significant victory in formerly Labour-held council seat in Swanley, roughly where Kent and Greater London meet.

[…] The local MP, Tory Michael Fallon, one of the more intelligent Conservatives, commented:  “It’s a more general frustration at the failure of government to address quality of life issues — petty crime, vandalism, housing, jobs.  All the main parties have got to address these more vigorously.”

Peter Hain, a former Labour cabinet minister, said:  “It is areas when Labour has traditionally been strong, like Swanley, where the BNP has been making a great deal of headway and exploiting fears and spreading their racist and fascist beliefs.”

Well spotted, those two. But as things stand, both your parties have nothing to say to the disenchanted. […]

[Six years ago I wrote the following, about the BNP:]  “Yet it is hard to match one half of this picture with the other. On the one hand is a cunning and skilful vote machine, on the other ingrained and discredited racial theories, Holocaust-deniers, nose measurers and violent oafs.  It is a measure of the profoundly dismal state of British politics that such a party exists or that any decent person should feel able to vote for it.”

[…] I didn’t think then, and I don’t think now, that [Nick Griffin] has it in him to make a national breakthrough.  But I do think he has the wit to go quite a long way in that direction.

I don’t at all discount suggestions that the BNP might win a seat or two in the European “Parliament” elections, and I think they could appear quite prominently in a lot of local council polls.  As to whether they can break into the Westminster Parliament, ask me in six months or so when we have begun to grasp just how bad the economic crisis is, and just how little the conventional parties can do about it.  I’m not saying, by the way, that the BNP can do anything about it either.  People will vote for it because it’s not one of the old parties, in much the same way that the chronically ill, disappointed by conventional medicine, will turn to fringe quacks at the end, on the grounds that they can’t be any worse.

I think the BNP’s progress has been slower and less incremental than I thought [six years ago].  But there’s no doubt of two things.  One is that for many people the “Nazi” jibe now just bounces off.  The other is that intelligent Labour politicians, such as the thoughtful and original Jon Cruddas, are genuinely worried about votes sliding off in this direction.

Cruddas knows from his own Dagenham constituency just how quickly Labour voters can switch to the BNP.  I think he also knows that his party’s political correctness is at the heart of the problem, and I suspect he realises that he cannot defeat that.  By the way, Mr Cruddas is one of the few remaining Labour MPs who hasn’t sold his soul to Brussels.  Labour resistance to the EU is an important political tradition going back to Hugh Gaitskell through Peter Shore and Tony Benn, and often forgotten these days.

I don’t think such voters would ever have gone to the Tories.  The tribal loathing of the Tories is endemic in Labour, and will not go away.  It’s one of the reasons I am convinced that David Cameron cannot get an overall majority in a United Kingdom election.  Even if Labour loses, he will not necessarily win.  Labour unpopularity just won’t convert into Tory popularity, or even grudging Tory votes.

What’s needed, as I say over and over again, is a party that isn’t the Tories but is genuinely conservative, neither bigoted nor politically correct.  Such a party could not only give the country a chance of revival.  It would be the only guaranteed democratic way to stop the BNP.

( http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2009/02/please-listen-to-me-or-youll-get-something-much-worse.html )


13

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:39 | #

The following are some of the comments on the Peter Hitchens article:

Here are some especially pertinent Articles of the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  The native British may or may not qualify as “indigenous” according to this Declaration but it doesn’t matter.  The spirit of the Declaration certainly applies to them.  And the “creepy” BNP are the only party to uphold it for the native British.  Q.E.D.

Article 7

1.  Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person.

2.  Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group.

Article 8

1.  Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture.

2.  States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for:

—Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities;

—Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources;

—Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights;

—Any form of forced assimilation or integration;

—Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.

Article 9

Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned.  No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right.

Article 10

Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories.  No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return.

Posted by: Cogito

______

Guy,

I read in the Sunday Times […] a few years ago that George Bush Jr and Tony Bliar first met at some oil magnates castle in Scotland while Blair was still a student.  What a strange coincidence that their subsequent lives should turn out as they did […].  [Scroob note:  what this letter-writer means is it was no coincidence:  see his next sentence] I’m pretty convinced that we have our leaders chosen for us and that we get to vote from a pre-prepared list of options.  Notice how David Davis was removed.  The Tories weren’t picking a leader, the next prime minister was being chosen and I suspect Davis was not sufficiently malleable and so was unsuitable even though he was very popular with the public and even with labour voters.  What was the background behind Davis’s strange resignation last year?  We are supposed to believe he lost his grip and went mad.  Personally I don’t buy that one.

Posted by: steve

______

You say if BNP ever get in government you will leave the country, well I have left the country because of the way Labour has sold our country out to ethinic minorities, gays, lesbians and terrorists not to mention the EU.  Thankfully you and I only get one vote each which is how a democracy works but it’s a real shame the BNP dont have the advantage of having a column in a national newspaper.  Maybe if they did they could print their views alongside yours and people of this democracy could make up their own minds.  Change is coming:  you can’t fool all the people all of the time.  When BNP get enough seats for you to decide to leave I will return and hopefully it won’t be too late to save our once great country.

Posted by: Martin Westlake

______

It’s all very well, being all liberal and nicey-nicey to half-a-million-odd foreigners.  But this stance, unchecked, has now progressed to the point where 20% of the population is non-British and growing rapidly.  It is quite likely that in the lifetimes of our children Britain will be a Moslem-dominated country.  This utter betrayal has been carried out at the hands of the creepiest gang of backboneless third-rate nobodies this country has ever had for leaders since King John.

So far as I can see the BNP now simply thinks that the British are entitled to their ethnic identity as are other peoples.  Native Americans hang onto their identity, as do the Israelis.  The Japanese aren’t importing millions of foreigners.  The Chinese, probably the most intelligent people on the planet with the exception of Ashkenazi Jews, are proud to be Han.  Why should the British and the BNP be blamed if they want the same for themselves?

The BNP believes that our culture is superior to others, and they are right, certainly the culture until recently.  They do not necessarily believe that the British are intellectually superior but even if the British were as thick as bricks it wouldn’t matter:  they are our own!

This might come as a surprise to Mr Hitchens but on the whole people prefer to live and have their being amongst their own kind, and I mean racially as well as religiously and culturally.  The existence of ethnic “areas” and white flight goes to prove this, as does the existence of ethnic nation-states in the first place.  England would never have existed in the first place had it not been for the racial/cultural/religious affinities between its founding peopes.

If you accept that, and that societies work best where people have an ethnic blood relationship, you agree with the BNP. 

This simple fact of human nature has escaped our rulers, but not the BNP.  […]

Posted by: Tim o’ Thee

______

“....his creepy party worry me so profoundly.”

I’d save your angst and worry for something more significant, Peter.  Our fiat worthless paper currencies are circling the water flushing down the pan on their way to the sewer.  Our walking-dead banks are insolvent if not actually bankrupt and are only “functioning” (barely) because of a neverending supply of taxpayer money shovelled at them by a deranged maniac.  China, Russia, Japan, Germany and the Gulf States are quietly making their own arrangements — a basket of new world currencies even as the US and UK slide into the murk of third world status with impending blood in the streets.  JP Morgan Chase, the holder of a monolithic interest rate swap derivatives position (aggregate 87 trillion so far) has been officially exempted from the usual accounting and securities disclosure obligations and is propping up the US dollar.  This same fine upstanding bank is hugely implicated too in gold price manipulation with mind boggling short positions.  This chicanery will not last and when it all implodes, as it will, most likely around early 2010, you won’t care either way if the BNP or a filthy mouthed marxist thug from Searchlight is in power because the world as you know it will lie in shreds at your feet.

The Civil Contingencies Act is widely debated on many forums including the BNP website, so you need to get out and about a bit more if you believe you are the only one to realize its implications.  Do you understand the implications of ACPO (Assoc. of Chief Police Officers) being a Limited company?  They are exempt from the FOI Act as I discovered.  In other words our chief police officers are beyond scrutiny by the public yet they are in charge of the accreditation scheme that selects private individuals for powers of arrest and detention.  You’re living in Stasi Britain, Peter.  Never mind the facsists, marxists and other oiks.

If I were you I’d apply for a job at the Guardian.  It will be the only paper still standing when all this is over — and still trawling for £30,000+ a year one-legged lesbian outreach workers I’m sure.

I don’t read your column often, and post even less, so remember what I say, won’t you Peter.

Posted by: emmie

______

Hi Peter,

Very perceptive of you back then in early 2003.  I am a 43-year-old degreed, educated professional with a house in the country in Gloucestershire.  Probably not your image of a BNP member but I am and have been for 12 months.  Never before have I been a card carrying member of any political party.

The reason people are flocking to the BNP is as you say:  the main parties stopped listening to the people and now the people don’t listen to them.  Watch this space come June 4th and beyond.  Time for the people to have their say.

Posted by: SimonJ

______

Of course the BNP thrives on the failure of mainstream parties, it is becoming the only party that speaks about the things that matter to the general public.  Opposing unlimited entry of imigrants into the country dosen’t make one a racist but a realist.  In this time of financial meltdown people are naturally worried about their futures and that of their children.  When I see (as I have) immigrants given preference for the jobs that may be available, is it any wonder that those affected look for an alternative answer (misplaced though it may be) in a party that seems to have the policies for them.  I am too old to work now (73yrs old) but I ask myself if I would be voting for the BNP were I affected by lack of employment.  I don’t want to answer my own question — I might get a shock.

Posted by: waine


14

Posted by Glyn R on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:42 | #

Is this hope for America? Or a wind-up?

http://www.americannationalparty.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_National_Party
American National Party - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Source: en.wikipedia.org
The American National Party is an off-shoot of the BNP in the United States of America. It establishes a similar ideology to the BNP. It is a relatively new political party.


15

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 03:42 | #

More comments on the Hitchens piece:

Guy,

I too watched the implosion of UKIP and was similarly suspicious.  Any party that stands against the status quo must be genuine at the top to be able to withstand being infiltrated.

How long before they “discover” child porn on Nick Griffin’s computer or he has a mysterious heart attack or even gets assassinated.  Or maybe they’ll change the voting system, etc. etc.

I wouldn’t be that keen on being the leader of the BNP myself.

Even though we are a supposed democracy, power politics is still the dirty business it always was.

I’ve noticed a few cases of troublesome people having heart attacks — Steve Thorburn, Robin Cook, James Goldsmith ....

Posted by: steve

______

I was amazed when my husband said he would vote BNP if we had a candidate.  Thought he’d lost his senses.  But that’s what happens when people are pushed to the edge, and think there’s no alternative.  Labour has destroyed this country and all it stood for.

I was a regular viewer of Robert Kilroy-Silk’s morning TV viewer which was taken off-air because he “insulted” the Saudis by stating the truth about their Islamic sharia-based regime.  Kilroy’s programme aired all the areas of concern that people are so angry about in the way Labour have run the country into the ground, particularly the anger about mass immigration, the privileging of immigrants for housing, the lies about “multiculturalism.”  Kilroy was jeered at by the liberal left “intelligentsia.”  If Kilroy had his programme back on TV now it would be the most popular programme on TV.  He was spot on about the Saudis, Islamism and the threat to our traditional British values and our way of life.  Kilroy was ahead of his time.

Unfortunately all that is left to me now is to choose between the odious BNP and the appeasing Lab/Con/Lib — or maybe UKIP, who have no policies apart from the ones on the EU which I agree with.  Time to start a new party, Peter.

Posted by: Brenda Williams

______

Nope, no smoking gun at all, there are merely allegations, so really I shouldn’t have mentioned it — but I can’t resist, I really would like to know why these things happen — I am a member of UKIP and that sudden implosion at such a vital time is downright peculiar.  I am convinced that any Party that looks like threatening the status quo will be sabotaged.  Maybe this is too pessimistic, but then again, can anybody think of one Front Bench representative in the entire Parliament who supports withdrawal from the EU?

There isn’t even a single national newspaper, “left” or “right” that supports withdrawal from the EU.

So — what IS going on?

Posted by: Guy Reid-Brown

______

Peter, I do genuinely feel sorry for you.  You do remember a Tory party that used to be what you want it to be.  You are not racist (I’m quite sure) and would not want to support any party that did seem to be racist.  Yet you have no options left except to plead with the Tory party to be something you must know perfectly well is never going to happen.  Because you believe the BNP to be racist you attach all sorts of “creeps, misfits and racists” in “a tiny sect of seriously strange people, odder than the Mormons.”  Well — you go about attacking what you see to be racism, as you like.  Although your view seriously doesn’t square with the view of the Registrar of Political Parties that would not allow the BNP registration if its policies were illegal (racism is illegal!).  Personally I don’t think ending mass immigration, deporting illegal immigrants and immigrants who commit serious criminal acts is “racist.”  But then you think you know more about the sort of people in the BNP and their “hidden agendas.”  How can I argue with that — after all, a hidden agenda is .... well ... hidden, isn’t it?  But I can’t help but think that the people you fear should not be the BNP but the people who are already in power — and I don’t just mean Labour! — and have created all the trappings of a facist state in our once free country.

Posted by: Cllr Chris Cooke

______

The mass invasion of our country has been supported by the Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties.  Do you honestly believe a vote for any of these three will bring change?  In particular, do you think any of them will face up to the danger of Islam?  60 years ago we didn’t have a measurable Muslim population.  Do you think their invasion has brought us any benefits?

Do you support the ethnic cleansing of the English from large parts of some cities and their replacement with Afro Caribeans/Africans/Asians?

Is it so wrong to wish for the self government that the likes of India and Pakistan achieved 60 years ago?  Quite understandably they didn’t want to be ruled by the British minority in their country.  So why should we be expected to endure minority rule here?

Who do you suggest we vote for?

Posted by: Andrew Parfitt

______

You sir, are a sham. Most of your articles are in complete agreement with the BNP, obviously hoping to drive the revolting peasants into the arms of Blue Labour.  But the country has sunk to such depths that the peasants are now beyond the Tories and seek real help to turn things around.  Maybe Nick Griffin once did a Nazi salute as a young National Front member, but we’ve all done stupid things when we were young, particluarly most of the Labour cabinet who were members of the British Communist Party.  The man has grown and the BNP are not Nazis but virile anti-fascist supporters of freedom, Christendom and the British way of life.

Posted by: Jake

 

______

I suspect the BNP will always be vilified in the papers.  I bet if you read their manifesto they advocate similar rules governing press ownership as prevail in the USA.  That is only a US citizen can own a US newspaper and no one can own more than one.  [Scroob note:  that second rule doesn’t exist in the U.S. (I don’t know about the first).  These sound like excellent rules.  We should adopt them in the States.

The news media should have allowed us to have David Davis as conservative leader rather than parachuting in that useful idiot Cameron.  The tories were bullied into having Cameron because Davis wasn’t “one of our chaps” and would probably stand up for the country with a huge popular mandate.  Couldn’t have that could we.

Give us sensible genuine democracy and the BNP will fade away.  Instead we have a choice of voting for anyone on the approved list.  Who gets on that list is controlled elsewhere.

My local Labour MP is the party’s (read the establishment’s) representative in the constituency.  He doesn’t think independently and can’t.  He toes the party line which is decided by the likes of Murdoch, Mittal, Mandelson, etc., globalists to a man.  If he were to try to genuinely represent his constituents he would lose any hope of career advancement and would probably find himself deselected.

The only threat posed by the BNP that counts is to the globalist establishment:  the “people who matter” don’t like it — only they are allowed to control us, through their political parties.  Apparently they don’t own the BNP, which is a very good reason to vote for it.  However, I’m sure that if 60% of the electorate voted BNP only 20% of those votes would be counted.  If the rise of the BNP continues, just see how fast they move to an electronic voting system [Scroob note:  in other words, a voting system that’s easier to tamper with].

Posted by: steve

______

John Cruddass is in fear of losing his seat to the BNP in what could be a general election in just a few months.  Hitchins praises up Cruddass and does a trashy cheap tabloid style hatchet job on the BNP!

Let us take a closer look at Cruddass who Peter so admires —

How John Cruddas voted on key issues since 2001:

—Has never voted on a transparent Parliament.
—Voted for introducing ID cards.
—Voted very strongly for introducing foundation hospitals.
—Voted strongly for Labour’s anti-terrorism laws.
—Voted very strongly for the Iraq war.
—Voted very strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war.
—Voted very strongly for the hunting ban.

Is this really a man you admire Peter?  Oh dear!

Posted by: james c joans


16

Posted by Svigor on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 05:47 | #

Scrooby, Hitchens reminds me of what I was thinking about a few days ago.  Some posters here stated that WN fantasies about WNs coming to power are just that, fantasies, and they’ll never come to pass, etc.

Well, they’re right.  WNs never will come to power.  If WN ever gains ground (say, a million dedicated Euro men in America, leading inevitably to critical mass and widespread WNism), the western elite will simply co-opt it.  They’ll grit their teeth and give up on mass importation of wage slaves.

The only way this won’t happen, is if they stick to their guns and refuse to change their position, which they will NEVER do, because principle is at the very bottom of their list.  There’s no way they’d go down with the ideological ship, and give over power to a bunch of unwashed deck hands.  Zero chance.

And that’s the only way real WNs would ever take power, I think.

But who cares?  I’m not in this to be secdef or ambassador to Lithuania.  If they actually co-opt our ideas, it’s still a win.


17

Posted by Bill on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:17 | #

Is the alliance being stress tested.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/4903470/Is-a-form-of-state-capitalism-really-what-Gordon


18

Posted by Lurker on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:24 | #

Hitchens in his own way, like Sailer, has gone just about as far as he can without falling into the abyss of WN or something like it. He is still part of the mainstream even if liberal/leftists mostly regard him as a conservative loon.


19

Posted by Guessedworker on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:57 | #

Fred,

On the subject of the BNP and the press, a fair article - actually fair to the party, all things considered - appeared a few days ago in the centre-left Independent.

Again the comments by nationalists are very strong and forthright, and also, I felt, coalescing around certain argumentational principles.  The charge of reverse-racism is appearing regularly, which is promising since the other side has no reply.  Also, the understanding that race-replacement is not an accident, but is the goal of the elites is now widespread, and that’s a good thing, too.

I am starting to comment on suitable threads to the effect that nationalist politics won’t prove stable unless they are rooted in the understanding that nationalism itself is an instinct before it is idea, and an idea before it is a political movement.  I’m also making the point that the BNP can only get so far with its present leadership clique and its decidedly middle-brow activist base.  It has to attract the educated middle-class to progress at the national level, because power is, and will remain, the preserve of the educated.


20

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:04 | #

”Also, the understanding that race-replacement is not an accident, but is the goal of the elites is now widespread, and that’s a good thing, too.”  (—GW)

Yes an understanding of that is key to any ability to grasp the whole of what’s going on.  There is a plan to mulattoize white populations which means of course a plan to mulattoize the white races themselves.  One reason the piece by the BNP’s Joe Priestley — which I excerpted in another thread here,

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ed_balls_confession_of_systemic_anti_white_racism/#c70013

was so outstandingly good is the way in which Priestley doesn’t mince words or pull any punches in stating this fact.  And yes, I too have noticed folk are starting to catch on to this crucial foundational aspect of what’s going on, namely that a central core of the other side’s movers and shakers, be they Jews, or communists, or homos, or clueless kum-bay-ah-type women, or just pig-ignorant or bought or hate-filled-against-their-own-race Euro fellow travelers, and so forth, actually, explicitly in their own minds, want to engineer the termination of the white races of this planet through mulattoization.  You go around saying that and people think you’re insane but THERE IS NO OTHER WAY, SIMPLY NO OTHER WAY WHATSOEVER, TO INTERPRET WHAT’S GOING ON TAKEN IN ITS TOTALITY.

No other way:  the signs that this is the intent are unmistakable and, once you begin to catch on, crystal-clear and all around you.  And the more that’s understood, the better for our side.  And again, explicitness on that is one reason the Priestley piece was so outstanding, one among many.


21

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:21 | #

Again, our side ultimately cannot avoid explicitness on:  1) race (the fact that there are indeed human races and they have such-and-such inborn characteristics that the mathematical Law of Large Numbers makes it impossible to change when dealing, if not with isolated individuals of this or that race, then surely with racial aggregates:  you’re fighting against mathematical laws of nature, laws of reality like the law of gravity, and you are NOT going to change them:  the laws of races considered not as isolated individuals of a given race but in their racial aggregates are like the laws of gravity and as unchangeable no matter what politics-based denials and wishful thinking Jews, communists, or clueless “left-wing” women come up with; 2) the by now obvious and undeniable explicit intention of the other side’s to actually race-replace the planet’s white races (a bizarre charge?  yes most definitely, BUT TRUE and any white who doesn’t want to be on the receiving end of genocide HAD BETTER WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE AND BE DAMN QUICK ABOUT IT BECAUSE TIME’S RUNNING OUT!); 3) the role of the Jews.

No matter how much we would prefer NOT to have to be explicit about the above three things, ultimately we CANNOT AVOID IT.

Sorry.  We can do it as delicately as possible, as diplomatically as possible, as non-threatening as possible, but we have to do it in the final analysis.  The reason we have to is anything short of explicitness on those matters the other side will find ways to get around and we’ll be perpetually “back to square one” as the European races continue their mad rush to extinction.


22

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:29 | #

as non-threateningly as possible

By the way, failure to understand the need to be explicit on those three points is what has kept the paleocons perpetually at square one.


23

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:38 | #

Excellent news:

Haider’s party came out in first place in yesterday’s regional election in Carinthia (Austria),

http://www.fdesouche.com/articles/28323 ,

and it was reported yesterday that Geert Wilders’ party is now running in first place in Dutch voter opinion polls,

http://www.fdesouche.com/articles/28340 .


24

Posted by SM on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 19:36 | #

>Hitchens in his own way, like Sailer, has gone just about as far as he can without falling into the abyss of WN or something like it. He is still part of the mainstream even if liberal/leftists mostly regard him as a conservative loon.

Hitchens is against islam (and now immingration?) because of his radical liberal instinct to protect wimmins (from what they have comming).

FYI.

His ilks schpiel is bate and switch using you as cannon fodder (once again).


25

Posted by Armor on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 20:56 | #

From the BNP piece, written by J.Priestley, quoted by F.Scrooby :

Politicians, power brokers, celebrities, and mainstream-media types have staked their reputations (read fortunes) on their sick lie and its bastard child multiracial multicultural Britain.  The maintenance of the lie is all that separates them from ruin; without it they’d be irrelevant.  They are the status quo and everything they do is aimed at holding that position; they have no choice but to maintain the lie.

Some of them want to destroy us. Some of them maintain the lie because they don’t know better, lack morals, are intellectually shallow or don’t know how to retreat. I wish I knew who is who. It isn’t a monolithic group.

For the second group, what Priestly describes could be called “fuite en avant” in French: fleeing in the wrong direction, continuing even faster on a collision course because it seems easier than to jump off the train.

Our economy and our society aren’t working because they’re founded on an ideological fallacy, universal equality and the theory of the interchangeability of man.

About the use of the word ‘equality’ in the media, in state constitutions, and everywhere :

I think what we should say is that different people/races have equal or unequal abilities. If we say that people themselves are equal or unequal, it makes no sense. For me, equality among people means equality in social status: it is something we are given by society, not something we have in us.

I do not believe that people are interchangeable and I think Africans should stay in Africa (or in Mississipi and Guadeloupe). But I am still an egalitarian: I believe in some equality of status and income in my own country. I think it’s better if every one receives more or less the same level of respect in public and if income disparity is not too big.

In order to convey the idea that, in spite of physical differences, all people and all races have the same level of intelligence, morality, empathy for others, creativity, aggressiveness, and so on, I would say that all people are the same inside. I would say they are identical, not equal. Equal only applies to social status or to a particular quality. If someone is equal to me in size, intelligence, and every other aspect, I will say he is identical to me, not equal to me. Equal makes me think of mathematics. The problem is that identicalness sounds awkward, and identity already means something else. Equality is easier to use.

For example:
Nobody knows what to make of the claim that “all men are created equal”. Jefferson should have said that all men are the same at birth (absurd!). Or he should have said that all men should be given equal status (if possible).


26

Posted by Selous Scout on Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:56 | #

Haider’s party came out in first place in yesterday’s regional election in Carinthia (Austria),

http://www.fdesouche.com/articles/28323 ,

and it was reported yesterday that Geert Wilders’ party is now running in first place in Dutch voter opinion polls,

http://www.fdesouche.com/articles/28340.

This indeed is excellent news and certain to provoke the European power elites to retaliation.  How long before the next European civil war?


27

Posted by Fred Scrooby on Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:47 | #

Good log-entry subject over at Mangan’s:

http://mangans.blogspot.com/2009/02/your-anti-racist-seal-of-approval.html

I read every comment.  Quite a good thread as far as it went but the virtually zero mention of (fill in the blank) _______ gave it an emasculated, not-going-to-get-very-far, ineffective, missing-the-bullseye, slightly unserious feel. 

But hey it’s better than nothing, I don’t demand the world right off the bat, these things take time, I know that, I’m not greedy, I’ll wait.  In the meantime it is very much to Mangan’s credit that he even broached the subject.

We’re inching forward.  We’re not standing still.


28

Posted by Lurker on Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:56 | #

His ilks schpiel is bate and switch using you as cannon fodder (once again).

I’m not sure quite how that follows from what I’ve said.

Maybe he is really saying what he actually means, not using a smokescreen

Otoh I think Hitchens has written about topics in such a way that with one last push he might fall into the WN camp. He says just enough to appease the mainstream, I really don’t know, it’s at least possible though.

Over emphasis on Islam, on the culture of Muslims, is for me a red herring, a fall back position for liberals and their handlers. But it has dangers for them, a step away from the pure open borders, flat earth kool-aid.


29

Posted by silver (himself) on Tue, 03 Mar 2009 19:55 | #

But hey it’s better than nothing, I don’t demand the world right off the bat, these things take time, I know that, I’m not greedy, I’ll wait.  In the meantime it is very much to Mangan’s credit that he even broached the subject.

Mangan doesn’t get it at all.  You get the impression he thinks he gets it but he certainly doesn’t get it.  It’s hard for people in mixed marriage with mixed children to get it.  Mangan doesn’t even want to try.  (That’s why the Austers love people like him.)  The reality is Mangan is still a long way from reaching behind his head and scratching the back of his neck, grimacing and saying to himself, “Shit, I never really saw it like that.  I never meant to help replace my race.  Look, you can’t ask me to hate my own kids, but the fact is… I screwed up.”  Far from it.  There he is recommending that a “possible solution” for white men being unable to find white woman to marry is to marry Asians.  Does not get it.  And yet he has a long post permanently displayed on his front page explaining his “racial consciousness.”  (His reply was a feeble attempt at sarcasm about having lost his “racialist street-cred.”  Good one!)  But if you want people like him on board—and why shouldn’t you?—then he needs to have it explained to him.  Then he can do whatever he will, but at least he won’t be acting in ignorance.  Then you’ll actually find out what he’s made of.


30

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:26 | #

Another Inmdependent article on the BNP’s electoral prospects, this time by the hard-leftist Mark Seddon.

Not many comments, but again the BNP supporters rule the thread.  The left seems to have no idea at all how to respond, and largely absents itself.


31

Posted by Bill on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:52 | #

Make of this what you will.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158981/Labour-waged-war-sense-Britishness-say-Tories.html


32

Posted by Bill on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:03 | #

I should have added this to above - no matter.

Could it be ?  Wishful thinking.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/simonheffer/4934431/Its-the-Europhiles-versus-reality-and-reality-is-going-to-win.html

Double whammy in one day!.


33

Posted by Dasein on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 12:51 | #

Make of this what you will.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1158981/Labour-waged-war-sense-Britishness-say-Tories.html

He’s offering one half of a false dichotomy: either racial aliens are to be allowed or encouraged to remain separate (multiculturalism), or they are to become integrated (mongrelized with the British).

He will accuse ministers of a ‘decade of ranking people as members of neatly categorised ethnic, religious or social groups, rather than treating everyone as an individual in their own right.

The only thing perverse was the ranking.  The mongrelized Brit will become the new ideal.  People like this are more dangerous than the far-left loons because they give people a racially destructive outlet for their justified anger.  This is why we need to rescue people who are in danger of becoming neocons (for example, by stuffing neocon books in libraries and bookstores with leaflets leading them to sites like MR, or posting in mainstream conservative forums, as many here do).


34

Posted by Bill on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 21:55 | #

At a BNP fund raising event in Batley Yorshire on Sunday, Chairman Nick Griffin said during his speech that the liberal elite are conducting a campaign based on a super race theory.  British whites especially, the English, had become the new Jews.

http://bnp.org.uk/2009/03/bnptv-report-from-sunday’s-battle-for-britain-roadshow/

Warning - the video stubbornly refuses to continue beyond the 7 min mark.  Maybe you’ll have better luck.


35

Posted by Bill on Wed, 04 Mar 2009 21:59 | #

Sorry! above.

British whites, especially the English, had become the new Jews.


36

Posted by Glyn Roach on Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:09 | #

This is a similar view from this website.

http://isupporttheresistance.blogspot.com/2009/01/lebensraum-and-improving-racial-stock.html


37

Posted by Re:Glyn Roach on Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:34 | #

That’s a good post Glyn Roach, but the Nazi-esque rhetoric in it should be toned down lest pro-White activists continue to be compared to or smeared as Nazis who are, according to the Jewish owned mass media and Jew-infested academia, The Height of All Evil (TM).


38

Posted by Re:Bill on Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:38 | #

British whites, especially the English, had become the new Jews.

Quite true - the UK, especially England, is a Jew-infested country through and through - read: http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/the_afghan_church/#c70632 - though resistance to the Anglo-Jewish establishment is still somewhat strong amongst some Scottish and Irish folk.


39

Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:44 | #

Glyn,

That is the unedited draft of David Hamilton’s article which we published - properly scripted - on 19th October last year.  Green Arrow helped David technically with the set-up of his own blog-archive, and I guess the unedited versions of David’s pieces appear there as a consequence.

Green Arrow is, shall we say, not a thinking man.  Judging from his pathetic efforts to interpose himself as a mediator at the beginning of the EiE affair, notwithstanding the fact that he had zero credibility with the leadership clique, he appears to be terribly keen to lever himself into the BNP heirarchy.  Frankly, keeness of that sort deserves to fail.


40

Posted by Glyn Roach on Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:38 | #

I apologise for my mistake.  These articles get copied and pasted exverywhere and I posted the wrong one.  Sorry.


41

Posted by Bill on Fri, 06 Mar 2009 10:47 | #

Auster says….

“However, when I contemplate today’s systematic campaign, organized and backed by all the ruling powers of society, to put down, demonize, disempower, and marginalize the white race, I think it is shaping up as the greatest crime in the history of mankind.”

5 March 2008 02.27pm



Post a comment:


Name: (required)

Email: (required but not displayed)

URL: (optional)

Note: You should copy your comment to the clipboard or paste it somewhere before submitting it, so that it will not be lost if the session times out.

Remember me


Next entry: Strange bedfellows - Protests against the Durban II conference
Previous entry: Didactic Discourse : Dugin to Dogs

image of the day

Existential Issues

DNA Nations

Categories

Contributors

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer.

Links

Endorsement 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

Comments

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sun, 22 Dec 2024 01:03. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:14. (View)

anonymous commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle continued for comments after 1000' on Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 19 Dec 2024 01:11. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 21:35. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 20:51. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 19:49. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sat, 14 Dec 2024 18:47. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 23:29. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 22:01. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:52. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:17. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 12 Dec 2024 14:23. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Sun, 08 Dec 2024 14:19. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 20:13. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Fri, 06 Dec 2024 01:08. (View)

James Marr commented in entry 'Out of foundation and into the mind-body problem, part four' on Wed, 04 Dec 2024 19:00. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Mon, 02 Dec 2024 23:41. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 21:20. (View)

James Bowery commented in entry 'The journey to The Hague revisited, part 1' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 17:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 13:34. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 30 Nov 2024 04:44. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 29 Nov 2024 01:45. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 23:49. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 01:33. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:02. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'News of Daniel' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 17:12. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:53. (View)

Al Ross commented in entry 'Olukemi Olufunto Adegoke Badenoch wins Tory leadership election' on Wed, 27 Nov 2024 04:56. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Tue, 26 Nov 2024 02:10. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Mon, 25 Nov 2024 02:05. (View)

Manc commented in entry 'Trout Mask Replica' on Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Sat, 23 Nov 2024 01:32. (View)

Thorn commented in entry 'Trump will 'arm Ukraine to the teeth' if Putin won't negotiate ceasefire' on Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:28. (View)

affection-tone