Posted by Friedrich Braun on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:15 | #

“... He is not racist, he argues. He does not believe that whites are superior. He believes that races are different and that multiculturalism is a recipe for disaster. He opposes miscegenation “because most people want their grandchildren to look basically like them”. If the liberal elite had its way, the world would become “a giant melting pot turning out coffee-coloured citizens by the million”.”

Are you satisfied or happy with this answer, GW? Do you believe that he could have said something else, more to the point, perhaps? How would you have answered it?

Personally, I prefer Jean-Marie Le Pen’s answer to similiar questions that he doesn’t believe in the equality of races.

Posted by john on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:44 | #

Nick’s intuition regarding how far the party can go under his leadership is sound. I voted for him years ago and it’s the best vote I’l ever make.
I haven’t met Nick Cass but if he’s up for leadership in the future he’ll get my vote.

Posted by JB on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 05:06 | #

F.Braun:

Personally, I prefer Jean-Marie Le Pen’s answer to similiar questions that he doesn’t believe in the equality of races.

herr Braun you will be disappointed :

though Le Pen once said he believed in the inequality of the races it was in the context of olympic sports, he said blacks aren’t good swimmers but they’re good runners and that’s a biological/genetic difference.

Le Pen has never overtly opposed miscegenation on grounds of the white race being superior. In his speech a month ago in Lyon (or Marseille) he said that although he personally has no problem with two people from different races falling in love and making children together he is opposed to métissage as a policy or a moral value. He said (quoting from my memory I don’t have the exact words) : “what will the globalists and the left ask next ? that every white person must marry a black person and vice versa to create this giant utopian melting pot that will make all of our problems disappear ?”

No one at the top of the FN has overtly expressed opposition to miscegenation per se and they deny any charge of racism throwned at them. Bruno Gollnish one of the FN leaders is married to a japanese woman that I believe he met when he was a teacher in Japan and from what I understand they made three children together.

There are a few token arabs and blacks in the FN but it’s generally understood that the motive for the FN vote is to keep the country french - and white. Whether or not they want to recognize that the FN leaders know that their electoral base isn’t numerous enough for them to gain power so they have been talking about a lot of other problems and issues than immigration to broaden their appeal. Of the four main candidates in the election only Le Pen was opposed to the european constitution and Louis Aliot (of the FN) in a recent debate on TV said that this will be a big factor in the vote because the media and the elected politicians were all for the EU constitution but it was rejected by 55 % of the people. We’ll see in a few days

Posted by Friedrich Braun on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 06:03 | #

You’re referring to his latest affirmation (made in 2006) on the “inequality of races” when he gave the example of African runners as generally superior to Whites. However, in 1996 he clearly said at his summer “university” (for FN youth) that he didn’t believe in the equality of races (beyond merely the athletic sphere), and for which he was fined 10 000 F. At any rate, he’s on record going farther than Griffin on this question.

Novembre 1998 : condamné par le tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre à 10 000 F de dommages et intérêts à l’Union des étudiants juifs de France pour avoir déclaré « Je crois à l’inégalité des races », lors de l’université d’été du FN, le 30 août 1996 (Le Monde, 27 novembre 1998). http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Marie_Le_Pen

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:48 | #

Another thread begging “The Existential Question” has been initiated at the Daily Mail - subject immigration/emigration during the Blair years.

The Mail readership can be characterised as sub-university, “received opinon” quality.  It is politically naive.  But there are more good, socially conservative instincts on display every day than a Guardian-watcher will encounter in a lifetime.

In many ways, the Mail is the repository of the soul of England.  We’ll see if it stirs itself to protest its racial decline today.

Posted by Meritocracy and Blind Obedience on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:40 | #

The Mail is one of the few gentile-owned operations, if I’ve read correctly.

Posted by go nick! on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:19 | #

Friedrich,
If I may, I believe Mr Griffin’s prefacing his opions with “I’m not racist but…” is quite wise. The term “racist”, no matter how little we think of it, is still one of the most defaming and discrediting labels by which one can be called in the public sphere. Luckily, Nick can claim he isn’t racist and then proceed to say “racist” things like that he thinks races are different and multiculturalism is a bad idea. It is much easier to create good public opinion this way than by first deconstructing the libel and trying to expose it for the sham word it is, then epousing his beliefs.

Posted by Englander on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 10:52 | #

The Mail often runs stories about how worried it is about the BNP and far-right success in Europe.  They are not friends of our cause.

Posted by Maguire on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:29 | #

“( * To the guy who runs the “Inverted World” web-site:  yes there are exceptions:  something like five Jews worldwide…”

Spot on.  These miniscule Jewish cabals mushroom any time an issue is in controversy and the Tribe is collectively on the anti-white side. 

“Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership” is the classic example in the USA.  What does this group achieve?  No one is stopping these Jews from joining either of the two effective national 2d Amendment lobbies.  These are the National Rifle Association and the Gun Owners of America. 

The JPFO achieves nothing.  The JPFO’s real goal is deflecting the spotlight from the activities of 99.99% of organized Jewry in subverting the 2d Amendment.  It exists solely to provide driveling idiots an excuse to say “not all Jews…”

The so-called “America First Party” is another example.  The “America First Party (except for Israel)” better describes this ineffective group. 

The same can be said for the prominence Peter Brimelow gives Jewish writers in vDare.  True reality about immigration would be reflected if the Kevin MacDonald School and Jews reversed their relative prominence in vDare’s pages.

Maguire

Posted by Kenelm Digby on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:49 | #

Everyone should click-on to the Daily Mail link that Guessedworker so kindly provided.
Look at that photograph.
That believe it or not, is a snap-shot of an English street, (most probably in London), and not a shot of a street in Lahore, Karachi, or New Delhi.
As a Londoner I can vouch to the authenticity of that photograph to any sceptic ot there - I pass much the same thing every day.
Following on from the Mail article, my own personal belief is that due non-Wite births and the number of English moving out added to the mass immigration of non-Whites, Britain will be majority non-White in 30 years’ time at the most.
I’ve no hard and fast stastics to back me up (those provided by the Home Office are worthless), but more of a ‘gut-feeling’ bsed on personal observation and reading of the statistrics bearing in mindthat a large proportion of births these days must be non-White.
Essentially my method is that of the seasoned ‘form-judge’ of the horse-racing world.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:54 | #

Classic Fred, that.

Kenelm,

We would all like statistical certainty.  Why do you suppose our masters go to such lengths to avoid making public what they know?  It is part of the effort to present a fait accompli before too many of us wake up, and perfectly demonstrates their traitorous nature.

As all of us here must know, there is a race underway between the effort to marginalise, dispossess and deracinate the natives on the one hand and the awakening of the beast on the other.  Stats, if we had them, would only tell us how well the bastards are doing in that respect.  To assess the rest of the equation one has no choice but to resort to your style of ready-reckoning, which means assessing the BNP and its electoral reach, and the state of elite confidence in general (it is not currently as confident as it has been).

There is a problem with the latter, however.  Tough new immigration measures by this or that Home Secretary or Immigration Minister are ten a penny, and aren’t designed to have any material effect anyway.  That link is from six long years ago and is an only too familiar tale:-

The number of people claiming asylum in Britain hit an all-time high of more than 76,000 last year, according to the Home Office.

The figures suggest that tough new measures from Home Secretary Jack Straw to cut the figures have failed to reduce 1999’s tally of 71,160.

The 76,040 applications made in 2000 could represent around 100,000 individuals, as many asylum seekers arrive with their families.

But shadow home secretary Ann Widdecombe said she would be tabling parliamentary questions about suggestions that the Home Office’s figures were misleading.

Almost 10,200 were granted asylum as refugees in 2000, nearly 2,400 more than in 1999.

However, a further 11,000 were given exceptional leave to remain and some 3,300 won appeals against being thrown out of the country.

Crucially, of the 76,850 refused asylum - including some from the huge backlog - more than 49,000 appealed and thousands of cases are still to be determined.

The Home Office says its backlog of all applications was reduced from more than 100,000 to 66,000 last year.

The main countries of origin were Iraq, Iran, Sri Lanka, the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Somalia.

But Channel 4 News highlighted the cases of what it estimated could be up to 18,000 people who were officially listed as having been refused asylum last year but were, for various reasons, allowed to stay.

After initially having had their applications turned down, they persuaded the Home Office to reconsider the decision prior to the formal appeal hearing, the programme claimed.

Ms Widdecombe said: “I propose immediately to table questions . . . because if the statistics are either being fiddled, or are so entirely flawed that they are not reliable, then there is a public interest in knowing that.”

But the Home Office dismissed the programme’s claims.

“We reject absolutely the assertion that there is some sort of secret asylum statistics black hole,” a spokesman said.

... the sound of elite crisis-containment.  Listen well.  When the crocodile tears turn to squeals of pain we’ll know they know they can’t contain it any longer.

Posted by gangsta1gnxp on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:55 | #

In many ways, the Mail is the repository of the soul of England.  We’ll see if it stirs itself to protest its racial decline today.

Not on current form it won’t. The Mail has the usual quota of Chosen on board, joined the Stephen Lawrence hysteria with that ‘So sue us’ headline aimed at the alleged murderers, and plugs the PC ‘domestic violence’ and ‘Remember the Holocaust’ lines regularly.  Mad Mel isn’t on the right side of some questions for our sake.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:57 | #

It has a million middle-class readers.  What would you call them?

Posted by Matra on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 16:26 | #

It’s easy for us to criticise the moderation of Griffin and Le Pen’s recent overtures to non-whites but electoral politics is very different from cyberspace. Our people are so brainwashed that the kinds of things said here or even at VDare would cause a kneejerk negative reaction amongst most whites - especially females and the young.

About a month ago in the UK a rather typical Englishman was telling me how fed up he was with foreigners, particularly Poles and blacks, out of control crime and the Americanisation of Britain. Why not vote BNP I said? They’re fascists he spat out.  Who is to blame? The Yanks, the EU, and especially the Tory Tony Blair. A return to Old Labour is Britain’s only hope. He’s not the only Englishman I know who thinks this way. Even if the Conservative Party adopted BNP immigration policies working class hatred of “the rich” would rule out voting Conservative. Given the task at hand I’m willing to give Griffin some slack.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:28 | #

Matra,

Yes, you are right about the opinions of the majority today.  It takes years to shift opinion.  But even so, that is not really the problem long-term.  It’s that change has to be underpinned by something more than mere racial awareness.  It will require a philosophy to sustain the process of national reclaimation through the timescale that will involve.

The BNP is without philosophical thought.  It, and nationalism generally, is useful as a means of halting Western suicidalism.  But the serious work of couching survivalism in a new set of ideas that flow from and in accordance with our ethnic interests is scarcely begun in the English-speaking world.

Posted by Friedrich Braun on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:37 | #

” In no way was he “implying” a candidate with Sarkozy’s Hungarian, Greek, and Jewish ancestry who advocated the right policies for France was disqualified on grounds of that ancestry:  in no way whatsoever.”

FS, since you speak French, I’m sending you an interview where Le Pen clearly states that Sarkozy’s cosmopolitan ancestry (Hungarian, Greek, and Jewish) disqualifies him from becoming president of the French Republic. It’s not solely a question of his ideas and track record. http://www.frontnational.com/jdb_detail.php?id=60

Posted by gongstar on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 19:08 | #

It has a million middle-class readers.  What would you call them?

I’d call them not very bright, or they wouldn’t be Mail readers. They should be able to see through the manipulation the paper practises on them. That Stephen Lawrence headline was a particularly disgusting example. And here we have the BNP mentioned twice and dutifully prefixed twice with ‘racist’:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/dailymail.html?in_article_id=449446&in_page_id=1790

The Mail will turn ‘race-realist’ or whatever you want to call it when it’s safe (and profitable) to do so, but it won’t lead the way.

Posted by Desmond Jones on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 19:43 | #

I’ll have to disagree with my learned friend. Racial awareness, not politics is the key. Even in post-war Canada, the extreme left of the political spectrum still believed that racial differences were inherent.

Among these Anglo-Canadian activists, revulsion against gross violations of human rights, such as the murderous anti-Semitism of the Nazis, could not eradicate overnight age-old prejudices against particular ‘racial’ or ethnic minorities or notions of Anglo-Saxon superiority and the need to maintain the British character of Canada. Moral outrage against violent and extreme forms of discrimination may have prevented some of these well-intentioned individuals from thinking about the existence of - and hence the need to combat - subtler forms of discrimination in Canada. Many human rights activists, however, continued to believe that there were inherent differences among people based on ‘race.’ In effect, this meant that they sometimes endorsed discriminatory policies, especially concerning immigration.

The attitudes of the Reverend Claris Silcox illustrate the restrictive notions of human rights among Anglo-Canadian activists.  Silcox’s arguments for keeping out ‘Negroes,’ ‘Orientals,’ and ‘southern Europeans’ reveal the influence of racialist notions. Although the ‘Negro’ could become accustomed to the rigours of the Canadian climate, he was allegedly much better adapted to ‘a more tropical environment.’ Since there were still vast, empty areas of the world suitable for ‘Negro settlement,’ but in which white men could not survive, Canada should be reserved for whites, such as refugees from Nazi Europe, who, as a ‘race,’ had demonstrated their ability to attain a ‘far more advanced level of culture’ than had ‘Negroes.’ Silcox also argued that the ‘Oriental’ (e.g., the Japanese immigrant) would threaten the standard of living of Canadians, since he ‘has learned out of long experience how to adjust himself to a situation of relative population saturation, and this has affected not alone his capacity to survive on a fairly low general standard of living such as the white man would be unwilling to endure, but also his psychological reactions to life and its meaning.’ Silcox believed that southern Europeans should also be kept out of Canada, since by virtue of the climate, religion, and language, they were more suited for Latin America, where, again, northern Europeans would find it difficult to survive.

Culture can be questioned. Blair layed the blame for recent black on black killings in London at the feet of the hip/hop culture. Criticism of culture is acceptable because culture, allegedly, can be changed. However, as soon as someone suggests that these differences are inherent, a position widely accepted even fifty years ago, you’ve crossed a bridge too far. And as Matra suggested, it is only the very aged who will entertain that position.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:01 | #

To the gang or gong or sta,

It is self-evident that the Daily Mail does not select for high IQ.  Still, it is a proxy for a certain significant portion of England that extends far beyond the paper, of course, and its regular circulation.  It is the portion that produced The Few and the emerging Victorian middle class.  It is the portion that has been least beholden to modern, Marxised received wisdom, for which the Correct and the conventional have roundly hated it.  “The Daily Mail” has become a term of abuse among the Guardianistas for precisely that reason.  Daily Mail-reading people - whom I know better than most, and probably better than you do - are part of my England, and I have no way of eschewing them even if I wanted to.

But I don’t.  They, as much as the working man with his copy of The Sun and his fascination for Kylie Minogue and Benidorm, are part of the same ethnic animal as me, and share the same fate and the same interest.

This is the sense in which I speak of the Daily Mail - not that of its editorial policy or its subservience to the pervasive nostrums of our age.  I am sorry if I did not make this clear enough, but I trust it is clear now.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:06 | #

Desmond,

You are I are not at variance.  I am merely pointing out that the racial awareness required to kickstart the reclamation process won’t see it through to its conclusion.  Moral doubts and hardships will fill the spaces that should be occupied by philosophy.  Consider the vice-grip in which liberalism has, until now, held the ordinary mind.  That is what is needed, since that is the fate of ordinary minds, in the long effort that must be made to restore to us our rights.

Otherwise I agree with you.

Posted by JB on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:42 | #

Braun:

At any rate, he’s on record going farther than Griffin on this question.

perhaps but he doesn’t mind working with Gollnish who’s made three children with a japanese woman. So don’t expect the FN to establish anti-miscenegation laws if they become the government of France. The FN isn’t overtly or official racial.

Novembre 1998 : condamné par le tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre à 10 000 F de dommages et intérêts à l’Union des étudiants juifs de France pour avoir déclaré « Je crois à l’inégalité des races », lors de l’université d’été du FN, le 30 août 1996 (Le Monde, 27 novembre 1998).

funny how he had to pay “damages” to a jewish group for saying he didn’t believe in racial equality

FredScrooby:

In no way was he “implying” a candidate with Sarkozy’s Hungarian, Greek, and Jewish ancestry who advocated the right policies for France was disqualified on grounds of that ancestry:  in no way whatsoever.

you’re right but Sarkozy has been playing this “I’m a children of immigrants” song for a while to which Le Pen replied recently that unlike him who boast of being a foreigner he was the candidate of the soil (candidat du terroir).

Sarkozy is a phony though guy the media has built in their efforts to bury the FN. One man whose name I forgot, the head of a polling company, said that he refuses to do business with the FN for ethical reasons (pour des raisons d’éthique citoyenne) so you can bet those polls giving Le Pen 13 % a week before the vote are bs, it’s a ploy by the leftists who run these agencies to discourage nationalists by making them believe Le Pen can’t possibly be in the second round of the elections. 5 years ago Le Pen was in the 4th position according to the polls yet he was 2nd on election day.

Posted by An Englishman on Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:00 | #

Desmond jones

“However, as soon as someone suggests that these differences are inherent, a position widely accepted even fifty years ago, you’ve crossed a bridge too far. And as Matra suggested, it is only the very aged who will entertain that position.”

I have become a regular browser of this site recently.  Whilst many of the views expressed are not in accord with my own, I do find it an interesting read and an interesting overall perspective.

I am far from ‘very aged’, yet have been won over to the viewpoint that differences are inherent, by brave souls who argued such, and argued very well, on the Guardian talkboard - of all places.  I subsequently did some further investigation on my own, which is how I found this site.

Perhaps, I am more open to such arguments having experienced the joys of living in a multiethnic society up close.  Perhaps I am more open to such arguments because I have not been subjected to a liberal arts education.  But I would be surprised if I am the only one who can be won over by evidence and reason.

Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sat, 21 Apr 2007 00:05 | #

“perhaps but he doesn’t mind working with Gollnish who’s made three children with a japanese woman. So don’t expect the FN to establish anti-miscenegation laws if they become the government of France. The FN isn’t overtly or official racial.”

Can you point out a political party in the West that is better on immigration and race than FN? FN isn’t perfect but it’s the best we’ve got.

Gollnisch is problematic, no doubt about it. I wouldn’t vote for him under any circumstance.

Posted by calyen on Sat, 21 Apr 2007 03:28 | #

Guessedworker

Of course the problem with trying to gauge opinion from the Daily Mail comments section is that it is so heavily moderated only a handful of mixed comments get through. It’s easier to tell changes by viewing the Guardian site ironically.

Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sat, 21 Apr 2007 06:13 | #

“Le Pen: Bien-sûr que non:  ce sont des Français.  Mais ils n’ont pas l’intention d’être Président de la République.  Il s’agit — j’ai visé le candidat de la Présidence de la République parce qu’il me paraît que pour être candidat de la Présidence de la République il faut avoir un certain nombre de qualités dont celle d’appartenir le plus possible — ça fait une comparaison entre Sarkozy et moi, voilà — lui, il dit qu’il est très fier d’être d’origine hongroise; moi, je suis très fier d’être d’origine française.”

What do you think he’s saying here? By raising the issue of Sarkozy’s lack of French ancestry, he’s saying that it’s an important element that should normally disqualify him from getting elected as president.

Posted by Maguire on Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:25 | #

To Guessedworker,

“The BNP is without philosophical thought.  It, and nationalism generally, is useful as a means of halting Western suicidalism.  But the serious work of couching survivalism in a new set of ideas that flow from and in accordance with our ethnic interests is scarcely begun in the English-speaking world.”

I can’t comment on the philosophical condition of the BNP.  Otherwise I agree with this completely.  A material implementation has to follow the spiritual awakening.  Otherwise we’ll remain as a purely philosophical/religious group. 

The entire moral purpose of legitimate civil ‘government’ is to provide for the security and healthy physical propagation of the next generations of white people.  The existing Judeo-Regime is of course uninterested in this for whites, or for anyone else outside of maintaining a propaganda image among its subject populations.

But we have to be interested in this.  It’s our very purpose and justification for existence.  We will never outcompete the Regime in nihilistic hedonism.  That is its stock in trade.

This is an old identity crisis in the pro-white movement seen in the American Nazi Party split following Rockwell.  Matt Kohl’s solution was to follow Savitri Devi and define the Movement in purely esoteric spiritual terms. 

William Pierce viewed the problem in terms of spreading enough secular political propaganda to initiate ‘something’.  Probably ‘Ragnarok’ in some form.  What Pierce envisioned afterwards was as undefined as the world following Ragnarok.  Thus followed the National Alliance corps of newspaper and pulp advertising delivery boys. 

A ‘Third Positionist’ from 1970 named H. Michael Barrett outlined a different concept he named “Pioneer Little Europe”.  Of the three paths Barrett’s is the only one that leads to a functioning civil society able to carry out the task of propagating future white generations.

I wouldn’t begin to prescribe for the UK or mainland Europe.  That work is for white people there who are far more familiar with the nuances of their particular local situations.

I can speak to North America.  This continent is still EMPTY compared to Europe or south and east Asia.  In addition to abundant land outside the metropolitan areas, the existing consumer society extrudes megatonnages of effectively free scrap that are really semi-finished raw materials.  Easily used if one knows how to use them.

Deep suburbia and rural America are where the bulk of white families presently live.  White politics and economics in North America have to take account of this in both strategic goals and tactical implementations.  In some senses we are far in advance of Europe socially and structurally.  For instance, the phenomenon of ‘white suburbia’ and the urban city core as a non-white wasteland.  The last couple of decades of African and Asian immigration have unfortunately educated many Europeans in the dynamics of how this develops. 

Maguire

Posted by gongstar on Sat, 21 Apr 2007 18:43 | #

GuessedWorker—

This is the sense in which I speak of the Daily Mail - not that of its editorial policy or its subservience to the pervasive nostrums of our age.  I am sorry if I did not make this clear enough, but I trust it is clear now.

Yes. I’m not part of the group myself and don’t instinctively sympathize with it, but the further I travel from my previous liberalism the more I see its virtues. The Guardianistas’ attitude is “making mock o’ uniforms that guard you while you sleep”. Come to think of it, Rhodesia was Dailimailia:

My own impression, on first visiting the country in 1978, was that it was far from being the moral cesspit that had been made out. Nevertheless, newspapers like the Guardian and the Observer, and countless Labour and Liberal MPs, told us otherwise. On Mugabe’s election, the Left sang his praises. Tony Benn (then on the far Left of the Labour Party, now the nation’s favourite grandfather) wrote in his diaries that he could not ‘remember anything giving me so much plea-sure for a long time’.

In truth, there was already ample evidence of Mugabe’s ruthlessness in the civil war that had raged in Rhodesia.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/columnists/columnists.html?in_article_id=418180&in_page_id=1772&in_author_id=244

Posted by JB on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 02:53 | #

Fred Scrooby:

What I draw from this interview is that Le Pen is responding to Sarkozy’s constantly saying how proud he is of his Hungarian ancestry, evidently trying to make of his immigrant ancestry an advantage over Le Pen the full-blooded Frenchman.

here’s a quote from Sarkozy’s book. He exhibits his immigré pedigree as if it made him more modern or somehow better and at the end of the book he wishes a France where the term rooted frenchmen (français de souche) wouldn’t exist anymore, which is in other words the usual bs about everybody being french except the french

http://www.vdfr95.com/Journal92/editorial_92.htm

Dans son livre de juillet 2006, Témoignage, Sarkozy commence par vanter ses origines immigrées, comme si elles lui donnaient une supériorité sur les pauvres indigènes que nous sommes, et conclut l’ouvrage par ces mots : “Je pense que les Français attendent une France d’après. (...) C’est une France où l’expression “Français de souche” aura disparu.” (p. 280).

“I think that the french are waiting for a after-France (...) A France where the expression ‘rooted frechnmen’ will have disappeared” -Nicolas Sarkozy

I’ve read that his wife Cecilia once boasted of not having one drop of french blood.

Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 02:58 | #

His wife is Spanish and Russian. My little Schnauzer is more French than either of them.

Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:31 | #

“Not meaning to quibble, but I’d have no hesitation at all in voting for someone who was the right candidate no matter his, her, or its race, color, religion, or species or those of his, her, or its spouse or offspring.”

I have problems with the sincerity of a candidate who claims to have the ethnic genetic interests of my group at heart but who’s personal life doesn’t reflect that concern. Gollnisch’s relationship is part and parcel of the problem. Genocide in the bed chamber is still genocide.