|
|
|
Violence by proxy - the preferred politics of a cowardly Establishment by David Hamilton I wrote an article sixteen months ago on how the establishment dehumanises people who threaten their privileged lives. The ruling ideological caste have no answer to our arguments. So they use not only character assassination but also encourage physical violence against their critics. They do not like having their corruption exposed. It is usually done indirectly so they can keep up the appearance of respectability. But evil Peter Hain, who did so much to bring about famine and genocide in Zimbabwe and South Africa respectively, never apologizes. He, presumably, is delighted with what his career of advocating confrontation has achieved. He is trying to do the same here and make himself rich at the same time by corruptly trousering £130 grand:
Everyone can see how it works. He dehumanises Nick Griffin and his party by calling them “racists” and “fascists”. The gang of Unite Against Fascism thugs attack their hate objects and get to feel perfectly fine about harming them? The Mirror of 10/6/09 twisted the truth to present victims of politically motivated violence to be the perpetrators. What sick, corrupt liars are their journos.
In fact, no demonstrators are allowed anywhere near Parliament. On this occasion, though, the police stood over the road watching. There is always a high visibility policing in and around Parliament Square, and many carry machine guns. They’ve got High Definition CCTV cameras all over the streets that can tell the time on someone’s wristwatch. This demo will have been recorded and monitored from many angles, and the Police nearby would have been immediately informed. I suggest we all complain to the Metropolitan police. Surely our representatives should have armed security - as enjoyed by other elected officials. They are clearly unable to rely on the police. Furthermore, the media presented the incident involving the UAF activist Anna Heath’s attempt to block Griffin’s path in such a way as to show the BNP security man in a bad light. In fact, he behaved very professionally. One of the assailants had a House of Commons Visitors pass on his lapel - there was obviously collusion from a mainstream party worker. The Labour party is largely responsible for the funding of UAF and Searchlight magazine. Despite the ridiculous claims of UAF activists to represent the will of the majority, it is the Labour Party they truly represent. One of the Establishment tricks is to pick on the membership rules of the BNP as if we should have nothing to ourselves. This is part of destroying us as a people:
The last paragraph is hypocritical and shows them as dishonest. How many white lawyers are in the Society of Black Lawyers? I think The BNP is exempt from the Race Relations Act 1976, as amended by the Race Relations Amendment Act 2000. Its membership constitutes a group of more than 25 members whose main purpose is to provide services to a particular racial group - the Indigenous British. Here’s a little something from the website of Mr Herbert’s “racist” organisation:
The question arises as to how the political and media elites arrive at the belief that it is acceptable to commission and excuse violence against the BNP. As the elites promote our decadence and decay they are affected themselves, and this leads them to wider corruption. They have no sense of honour or duty and are base-minded. A statesman would not stoop so low as to involve himself with the likes of UAF and Searchlight in the first place, but these moral inferiors are born to it. I have just been listening to Virgin Radio’s Geoff Lloyd dutifully playing his part in the co-ordinated attack upon the BNP by dredging the NF past of some. This is the presenter who a couple of years ago joked about heroin use in an attempt to normalise it ... “Smack the vein”! They are all ethically and morally corrupt. It was the BNP’s Michael Barnbrook who exposed Conservative MP Derek Conway and started the expenses scams ball rolling. A major part of the BNP European campaign was against the corruption of the elites. “Punish the Pigs” was the slogan. But the elites want to keep their positions. So, naturally enough, they reach for the nearest lie. Are the media, like the politicians, scared the BNP will expose them too? Polly Toynbee does very well out of the liberal-left political consensus. She saw this in the British nationalism:
Richard Littlejohn seemed to see Asian child abuse in them, like the missing Blackpool girl whom it is thought was sexually-abused and, possibly, chopped up and put in Kebabs for the customers of a kebab outlet!
He reportedly earns £800,000 a year and lives in Florida. But he’s hardly alone in that respect. David Dimbleby was chairman of the Council For The Preservation of Rural England, a worthwhile organisation. But it shouldn’t be forgotten that he was preserving the countryside he and other elites live in. He has not expressed much interest in preservation when Asylum Centres have been planned in fine rural areas, and local residents have mounted protests because they, too, want to preserve their surroundings and the quality of their life. The, the elites berate us for wanting to preserve what we know and love, and tell us if we don’t allow acquisce in the immigrant project we are all Hitlers! The rich, of course, hob-knob with each other, and their idea of diversity is the sons of very rich foreigners who attend Eton with their own. While it occurs to me, Anthony Lynton Blair was a Fettes boy, not an Etonian. But his expenses records have now been accidentally shredded! The exposure of Muslim child-grooming contributed to the BNP’s victory in our northern English cities. It was to avoid race battles that the Labour Party issued a directive ordering the police and media not to alert the public. There are senior policemen who should be prosecuted for complicity with Muslims in sexually abusing young white girls. As an institution the press are liberal-Socialist. Individually, journalists want to keep their jobs. So they toe the line. The media put a great deal of money and effort into their anti-BNP campaign, with every newspaper - even The Publican, Accountancy Age and Caterer & Housekeeper - joining the biased fray. But because of the Internet - BNP website, blogs and activists on the ground, the party could do enough to get over the real story. The press campaign of hatred destroys the illusion of a fair and unbiased media, and the NUJ is still the closed shop that it was. Media hacks are used to keeping the message that they convey simple and sweet (KISS it’s called in the trade). Using whatever slander they could find, they came out with all guns blazing. It has not been media reporting as such, but a marketing communications exercise, with all journos giving short and negative messages and repeating the message at certain intervals - the sort of “journalism” used in China- a proven form of marketing. We are not up against journalism but, a marketing onslaught. The BBC’s impartiality is bogus. Nick Robinson repeated character assassination off the net about Andrew Brons having an unsavoury past. Here is one you can do at home. Type Alistair Darling, Jack Straw, Harriet Harman, Peter Hain, David Cameron (ex Bullingdon Boy thug) into a search engine? Don’t trust the media. Question every statement and look people up for yourselves. If the media had wanted they could have exposed the extremist pasts of Labour ministers and destroyed the party, but they share the same ideology and are on the same side. On Radio Four on EU elections broadcast Simon Hughes stated that thy would have to start exposing the BNP’s argument such as exploding their myth that asylum seekers get new houses etc. This, he claimed, is not true. Its more or less true, though. In fact it is asylum “getters” who are gifted this massively preferential treatment. Hughes was deceiving the public. They always deceive us - never tell us what they have planned for us because they are must at all costs avoid our righteous anger. In Hughes’ case, he wants to submit us to Muslims. Individuals like Hughes who go along with this sort of thing are guilty of betraying their own children and grandchildren. They can not counter this nor any other nationalist argument. They are now saying that we must be exposed by debate. But they have nothing to offer now their tired ideology no longer fits reality. The violence the Labour Party commissions through the UAF is the result. They can justify it because they repeat the same old cliches of “racism” and “hate, and because they repeat them they believe them! This is cowardly, of course. But it is intellectually easy. They do really believe that a “white Britain” is intrinsically bad. They have been found out. The BNP are exposing their criminal neglect of their people. They denounce us, but they do not live in it. They feel morally superior to us, but they are also degrading us and creating a spurious superiority! They are having our exclusive culture, territory and communities taken from us. As we have seen with Australian Aboriginals and Native Americans these actions drain the indigenous people of their spirit. Our elites acknowledge the phenomenon of culture shock in relation to white colonial expansionism. But we have suffered thirty years of culture war, and they do not acknowledge that! Our failure to reproduce is a symptom of losing morale - “what is the point of reproducing? We have no future.” When men are proud they want more of themselves. They reproduce their strength in their offspring. What the Caste are doing is making us feel bad about ourselves and the shame goes with our ethnicity, our history and our culture. Our attitude to the world around is taught to be cringing, always nice and apologetic. Women don’t want men like that, and turn to other ethnic groups (who they have been taught are better lovers and more reliable mates). What Edmund Burke, Winston Churchill and Stanley Baldwin would have instantly understood is what English nationalists now, and nationalists in every European living space, have such difficulty in communicating. Today, if your core message is self preservation you are accused of fascism and racism by default. That is a mere step away from calling the BNP a “Nazi party”, from whence it degenerates into referring to them as “thugs”. These great advocates of non-judgementalism have passed judgement upon us without ever allowing us to explain our position, or give voice to our duty to preserve our people and their cultures and religious traditions. The BNP will evolve into a viable twenty-first century nationalist party, and others in the organic nations of Europe should do likewise because these will be the only bulwark against encroaching invasion. The BNP must win power sufficient to reverse the fate set out for us. The native Hawaiians were a Polynesian people who have been nearly exterminated because they lost power over their own destiny. The BNP must weather the violence and the lies, and win that power back. Comments:2
Posted by James Bowery on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:19 | # Paleontologist, are you implying that David Hamilton is another name for GW? 3
Posted by DRS on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:26 | # Paleontologist has displayed an inability to observe the authors name. LOL 4
Posted by Bill on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:25 | # For every action there is reaction. We have recently already seen the results of Britain’s first reaction in the epic struggle that is upon us. How many definitive reactions are allocated in such a struggle upon which we have embarked I do not know, but I suspect we have seen the first of the many to come. The conclusion of our first definitive reaction culminated in the EU elections last week end, this culmination of events was nothing more than a natural reaction built up over more than a decade of assault of multicultural liberalism - and its attendant parallel oppressive social regime against it’s people. It has taken more than a decade for this reaction to generate a sufficient head of steam by the people to lock horns with the enablers of this multicultural assault - the liberal political establishment. Seamlessly the country has entered the next stage of the coming struggle. Each side is pawing and snorting for dominance, the people’s champion, the underdog BNP is at distinct disadvantage as the elite have their hands on the levers of state power. This stage of the struggle is tantalising as to where next? It is amply evident that the mischievous corrupt elites have been waging a ruthless propaganda campaign against the BNP using all the media apparatus at their command. Slurs and labelling of the BNP as beyond the pale has been the principle weapon used by the establishment so far, but as the election climaxed with the gaining of two EU parliamentary seats by the BNP, the mood of the conflict escalated to one of bitterness and vitriol. It is clear the political establishment have no conscience regarding the use of violence when it comes to the BNP and its supporters, no enemy to the left and no tolerance to the right seems to be the clarion call. Leftist violence is never far away when the BNP assemble about their lawful purpose, it has also become clear that the police are reluctant to intervene when the BNP are subjected to violence and menace. This state of affairs is totally unacceptable in a law abiding so called democratic nation, the people are nonplussed that such behaviour is overtly condoned by the powers that be. This is an indication to the appalling depths that this current government has sunk in the space of a few short years. There is deep resentment abroad; people are becoming deeply perturbed, for how much longer is this casual acceptance of repressive violence against law abiding people by leftist thugs to be tolerated? There are signs on the blogosphere that there is an emerging reaction against this behaviour, the question being asked, if the police won’t protect us, who will? Where is all this leading so early in the proceedings? Is this provocative stance by the elite a deliberate ploy? LeeBarnes is on a similar theme over at http://leejohnbarnes.blogspot.com/ Quote of the day. A 23 year old leftist female engaged in the fracas at the BNP press conference at Westminster was quoted as saying “I find the views of the BNP and their supporters unacceptable” Wow! Get you. 5
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:57 | # Paleontologist, First, you betray an eagerness to condemn that does not bode well for a profitable exchange. Second, David Hamilton wrote this piece, not me, and he is a journalist by trade. He writes powerfully and insightfully about the national events and actors he observes. He is wise enough not to pursue my weakness for writing political analysis. Third, you have been born eighty years too late and four thousand miles too far west to prosecute the very boorish argument that breaking heads and windows is “the answer”. Or that power “grows out of the barrel of a gun”, or somesuch. Actually, life is more complex and interesting than that. Self-sacrifice and principled resistance grows there, and it is more powerful than any shattering of glass or breaking of heads, more powerful than any short-lived display of cold steel. For sacrifice and principle irrigate the will of the people to be free, which is also the will to be, certain and indomitable. Those who think they can win by transforming our brothers into uniformed automatons are missing the knowledge of what it means to be a European. 6
Posted by Paleontologist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:53 | # Sorry, James, wasn’t writing about GW, but DH (“moral inferiors”, “morally corrupt”), who plays the same losing game. Apologies. 7
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:17 | # I just watched that infuriating video for a second time. Those genocidalists who unhesitatingly used street violence to deprive others of their right to express their opinions in a public press conference are playing with fire. These people on the other side who did that, these deliberate and coldly calculating violence-fomenters, they push and they push and they push, trying to foment violence, then when the oppressed finally push back in purest self-defense too long-deferred, the genocidalists howl “fascists!” and “violence!” They may learn one day that they’re not the only ones who can play that game — two can play, and if the day comes when decent people who’ve had enough finally turn on them out of desperation and pent-up rage with, as one commenter here once put it to a taunting Mexican, a fury they can’t even imagine, they’ll have only themselves to blame. I abhor violence in the pursuit of the ends we now strive to achieve, and therefore I ask the other side start it. If they persist in starting it, ............... the too-long-oppressed will know how to defend themselves, and let’s just leave it there ................. 8
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:20 | #
I abhor violence in the pursuit of the ends we now strive to achieve, and therefore I ask the other side not to start it. 9
Posted by Raskolnikov on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 02:46 | # ” If the bigger parties and the BBC didn’t stifle debate on everything from immigration to violent crime, the BNP wouldn’t exist, except as a gang of twisted, sex-starved skinheads plotting above a kebab shop.” Well, I’m in the BNP and I have to admit, I am sex-starved. But I don’t blame immigrants for that. 10
Posted by Bill on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:42 | # When, after much puzzlement and resentment at seeing my world disintegrate before my eyes, I decided that I would set out to discover why this was. I would guess this was about four years ago. Not being very worldly in the politcal sense, or any sense come to think about it, I started off with two certainties in my mind. The first certainty was, whatever it was going on in my life which was puzzling and disconcerting me so much, the capitalist class muat have ok’ed it. The second certainty was, it was no use looking to the media for any clues or explanation, for there was a complete ban on all public discussion on immigration - save that from official sources. So it was to the Internet I must look. The only reason why I am telling you this because I’ve just read this article in the Telegraph by a household name journalist Jeff Randall. Within just four years, the media has gone from ‘How much immigration enriches us to’ ....above link. The signs of the collapse have taken 0 to 60 in seconds. The speed at which this turnabout has taken place is breathtaking, as the BNP are saying, the cracks in the dam have appeared. (actually they are saying the dams have burst) but perhaps that is being a bit premature. Incidentally, do you know what the code word was for ‘Dams Gone’? Could any of us have imagined that within such a short space of time, the elites grand strategy would be lying in ruins - I think not. Remember the grand old Duke of York. Oh, the grand old Duke of York, And this I think, is where we are. 11
Posted by q on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:16 | # From one of the comments under the article which Bill linked to in his above post:
Here in the USA the almost exact set of events occurred. The difference is: Our Immigration debacle came in 1965 ... and the so called “conservative party” - the Republicans, have acted worse than the Conservative Party in Britain. The so called “conservatives” in the Republican party didn’t just sit back and do almost nothing about massive immigration. No! They actively, without compunction, promoted and encouraged massive immigration as evidenced by two terms of G W Bush, and the pro amnesty, pro immigration positions of the unappealing unelectable John McCain. Those two “compassionate conservatives” paved the way for the election of B. Hussein - by FAR the most leftist president this country has yet to experience. Amnesty for the illegal aliens will undoubtedly become a reality during his term(s) as Community Organizer In Chief. 12
Posted by SM on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:17 | #
Protectionism then policy. (Capitalism and democracy = doom, just like the jesus thing wound up equaling.) I don’t know more details, for the mess is beneath me. BUT I do know that this ‘ENGLISH’ (not ‘European’)—and colony—morality brain-plaque and hypocrisy is our end. (Roman ejecta zones—England, and France. A unique kind of chaos reigned there, because of the peculiar new situation: literate close monitored tribal in-fighting… England and France: The cultures with the two most warped languages. Language is how we organize our ideas… Britain and France: The two cultures with the dysgenics inducing warped revolutions reciting convoluted ‘just so’ ideas. Coincidence?...) ——————— If right wing websites are responsible for violence—as we are about to hear much on—then certainly the liberal media is responsible for that violence too. A premise is a premise and it should apply in all instances. But it won’t. That is where political power comes. That is where economic protectionism comes in: Use it to destroy the liberal big tent. (The fact I have to explain this at all to “intellectuals” doesn’t bode well.) Violence will needed too, as applicable. (Then long term solutions entail grappling with the things that make men and monkeys compete and oust each other in the first place. Stuff that I apparently can not explain adequately.) 13
Posted by maxsnafu on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:57 | # I wonder how many people will watch this and not get the joke. 14
Posted by q on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:23 | #
I think it’s safe to say, here in America, about 53% won’t get the joke. The same percentage of the broad electorate that voted for President Hussein. 16
Posted by Wandrin on Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:40 | # Bill, Good post.
I think we’re still a long way from winning but yes it goes to show how what’s been done to us has been done by stealth and deceit - the enemy’s main power is in the electronic media and that power is both incredibly strong and incredibly fragile - cracking the red media dam that holds back people’s natural survival instincts is the key in my opinion. 17
Posted by Bill on Sat, 13 Jun 2009 06:30 | # Max Hastings goes in and delivers another bouncing bomb. First thing that caught my eye in this morning’s Mail. I’m not a fan of Hastings, but he’s caused a few more cracks to the immigration dam with a devastatingly accurate delivery of another Barnes Wallis’s special. Who else is circling - eager to add to the carnage.
18
Posted by Bill on Sat, 13 Jun 2009 06:36 | # Bill - just above. Don’t know why that link address was duplicated, must be getting trigger happy. 19
Posted by Bill on Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:39 | # Wandrin. 09.40pm 12.06.2009 “I think we’re still a long way from winning but yes it goes to show how what’s been done to us has been done by stealth and deceit - the enemy’s main power is in the electronic media and that power is both incredibly strong and incredibly fragile - cracking the red media dam that holds back people’s natural survival instincts is the key in my opinion.” Bill says. I wrote a piece about the deception of the media on another blog recently. I posted it anonymously. I decided to retrieve it and post it here, after all it is mine. But I’m not sure of the ethics on this. Anyway, here it is. I didn’t give it a title, I shall remedy that now. Illusion of democracy and the role of the media. There has always been a parallel government in existence, how else would the political class circumvent democracy which they only see as a mere inconvenience to getting things done and maintaining their privileged status? We have long reached the point where the political class themselves can no longer conceal this charade of illusion and democratic choice from the people. The task of deception and delivery of the compliant masses to the politicians is contracted out to the professionals in the media. The media fashions our outlook and gives us our culture and opinions on everything. When questions are raised, we parrot the answer they gave us in the first place. This is most skilfully and professionally done. For tens of millions, the screen is the parallel life for which they suspend belief and prefer. Their lives are devoid of purpose or meaning and so they absorb themselves daily into the bread and circuses of distraction television. How sad their lives are so empty that virtual reality is preferable to their own real lives. News, politics, consumerist life style, sport, sex, game shows, reality TV, celebrity, alarmism, is shaped, nuanced, spun, fashioned, sliced and diced and spoon-fed to the viewer 24/7 and all dutifully absorbed by the recipient. The result is a dutiful, brainwashed compliant citizen with no mind of it’s own – delivered on a plate to our political class. You need look no further as to why our civilisation can be so hoodwinked into believing anything required of them by their political class. The media always tells them the truth. When the media bangs endlessly on about Cameron Brown, Brown Cameron, the Red team Blue team, Labour Conservative, Obama McCain, Democrat Republican, it doesn’t matter it’s all a game of make belief and the people always lose. Nothing changes. The diet of deceit with a smiley face is endless, our people are so dumbed down they are confused and disorientated. That’s as it should be, for the plates of deception must be kept spinning. Brown is owned, as are all politicians, they’ve been vetted and have ticked all the right boxes. Their allegiance is not to the people, their allegiance lies elsewhere. Bits are flying off our political system at an alarming rate, the writing is on the wall and it is all about to come to an end. Even the culprits themselves know this. The party’s over! The mould is broke, there’s no plan ‘B’ – unless you’re into conspiracies that is. I needn’t go on, you get the picture. The next election will see the end of what is. Which just leaves the question of what arises from the ashes, as someone here has already pointed out. 20
Posted by Wandrin on Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:09 | # Bill, Yup, that blinking eyed box in the corner of the room has been the syringe injecting poison into us since the 50s. Orwell probably predicted it, and if he didn’t he probably would have if he’d had the time. 21
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:27 | # GW, how do you feel about Cameron’s support of the thugs at UAF? http://www.uaf.org.uk/aboutUAF.asp?choice=4 As someone so publicly associated with UAF he needs to make clear what he thinks about the approach UAF is taking. The European political class is congratulating itself at holding the tide of nationalism at low double-digits. I’d say that these results don’t look too bad given that these parties are excluded from the public discourse and that even a mild dissenter for the liberal multiculit consensus such as Geert Wilders has been banned from Britain and is undergoing prosecution for hate speech in the Netherlands. I note that the EU political class is talking of shutting down nationalist parties by using the legal system or by denying them public funding to which they are entitled. The EU elites think nothing of subverting democracy when the people vote the wrong way. What a double-talking totalitarian dystopia the EU has become. All this talk about stopping fascism while using fascist tactics must strike people as very odd. 22
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:29 | # ...dissenter *from* the liberal multiculti consensus… 23
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:46 | # Friedrich, It’s good that Cameron associates himself and his party with these creatures. The English electorate must now go through eight or nine years of Tory government. They must come to understand that the political class is one, and is hostile to them. They must sicken of the revolving door of Establishment power. The UAF is a fine recruiter for the BNP. There is an article in the Independent this morning titled “An audience with a racist”: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/an-audience-with-a-racist-1704679.html It is written by a black journalist. This is also good. Let the English see more blacks telling them that they are racist for wanting to live. Let the situation become as intolerable as possible. All gist to the nationalist mill. 24
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:53 | # I note that the EU political class is talking of shutting down nationalist parties by using the legal system or by denying them public funding to which they are entitled. In Britain the Establishment is currently working on its own tack. Harriet Harman is a introducing legal requirement for the party to admit non-whites - that one will be interesting! Meanwhile, the NUJ is trying to find a solution to reporting “the racists”: 25
Posted by Gudmund on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 13:05 | # The social contract works both ways. The elite class reneged on the agreement long ago, but the commoners have been remarkably slow on picking up that they are being betrayed (say, 100 years too slow? 200?). The governments of Euro homelands and colonies never fail to prove their illegitimacy. There was a time when Euroman would have cared enough to do something about it. Even if everyone could agree that the present government isn’t legitimate, there would still be the issue of lack of political will - this situation is especially palpable in the USA. Americans are so complacent that they’ve no will to change anything - at least the ‘60s had it’s rebellious zeal, whereas now if there’s a war going on that Americans don’t like they just ignore it (Iraq, Afghanistan have been on low flame since ‘06). The American boob is oblivious to reality. Add to that the American tendency to just go along with all the vapid messages shat out with regularity by the various arms of Pravda-US, and you’ve got quite a dilemma on your hands. Whites need a serious dose of vitality and where that will come from I cannot guess. 26
Posted by Wandrin on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:28 | # Friedrich,
Yes, having policies that are seen as reasonable or at least legitimate but which at the same time are completely unacceptable to the enemy guarantees attacks from the elite that seem wrong to the public. By placing themselves in the grey area between the public face of the enemy (fairness, equality, multicult) and the true face of the enemy (genocidal anti-white hatred) they drive a wedge into the red culture. The enemy either has to ignore it completely and hope their media cultural dominance will outweigh the efforts of volunteer foot-soldiers and their leaflets, or they have to mount ever more extreme attacks that run the risk of massively back-firing.
It’s mostly the same in the UK but because we’re smaller and more crowded we’re getting to the point where people of lower income levels have their backs against the wall. There’s nowhere they can afford to run which isn’t just as bad. America has space so it’s easier for people to move away from the invading tide. 27
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 20:01 | # This might sound rather naive, GW, but why do you think that the B.N.P. is the object of so much deranged hatred in the U.K.? If I were a B.N.P. pol I’d fear for my life. The masses are continuously conditioned by the Establishment to view the B.N.P. as subhuman monsters, dangerous pond scum. It can only be a moral and ethical duty to do whatever it takes to stop them. This is where the B.N.P. should frame their aims in the language of morality. In other words, to turn the tables on the Establishment. Have they been doing it? Is there enough intellectual depth in the B.N.P. to take away the Establishment’s weapon and use it against it? 28
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 20:39 | # Nick Griffin should seriously consider making a bullet-stopping kevlar undervest part of his regular wardrobe. From what I gather, they’re less bulky than they used to be, so it needn’t be apparent he’s got the thing on if his jackets are a half-size “over.” 29
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:24 | # The left and nonwhite campaign to displace the white British is becoming explicit And when it has become fully explicit, so that no one can deny it, what will the Peter Hitchenses and Melanie Phillipses of the world, who oppose multiculturalism but also loathe the very idea of whiteness, do? Whose side will they be on? Philip M., a BNP member who ran for a local council seat in the recent elections, writes: This is an e mail I sent to a thread at the Guardian website following an article by the (Asian) Briton Sunny Hundal about the BNP victory: The other day I watched the Dr Alice Roberts BBC series “the incredible journey” about the migrations of humans around the world. In the episode about the expansion into Europe she repeatedly used the term “European” to refer to the white people who colonised this continent. What would happen if Sunny, or other ethnic minorities, took issue with this, and insisted that as citizens of Europe they felt excluded by the use of this term and demanded that when we referred to Europeans we had to mean all people living in Europe, not just whites? The effect of course would be to obfuscate the meaning of the word, rendering it useless as a racial description, and turning it instead into a mere description of geography and citizenship. Whites would find that they no longer possessed a term they could use to describe only themselves, and would find it impossible to talk about their collective past or express a collective identity. They would be denied the ability clearly to see their own past, and without a past would have no future. That Sunny and others will do exactly this is beyond doubt, as they have already done exactly this to the term “British,” rendering it useless as a racial, ethnic description of the historic peoples of these islands, and in the process deliberately confusing our sense of ourselves and our history—they have destroyed our group identity whilst demanding the very same thing for their own racial and ethnic groups. Nick Griffin’s point about the black Robin Hood on the BBC should be seen in this context. It is a frightening propaganda exercize by those who wish to destroy our identity and confuse young ethnic Britons as to the true historic North-European nature of this land. Those on this thread who roll their eyes and say, “It doesn’t matter,” are showing a breathtaking double standard, given that they demand racial sensitivity be shown to every other group in Britain concerning the depiction of their past. It only doesn’t matter because in their eyes, the British people don’t matter and the truth doesn’t matter. On the thread on London’s BNP blog one blogger wrote This is the true face of the “colourblind” Marxist, and it is anti-white and anti-British to its rotten core. For the record I was proud to stand for the BNP in the local elections and will continue to do so regardless of the tedious pejoratives Sunny and his anti-white friends can think of. 30
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:39 | # There can be no doubt but that in the innermost core of those forces pushing excessive incompatible immigration — pushing it and protecting from those who oppose it — are a group of individuals explicitly in their own minds attempting to achieve race-replacement of the Euro peoples. This is absolutely beyond question. The aim is the doing away with of the Euro races. 31
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:43 | # England: The Peasants are Revolting By Sean Gabb So far as I can tell from England, the American media gives little real coverage to events in the United Kingdom. Either events are not covered at all, or they are covered without enough context to give them meaning. I think this has been the case with the results of the European elections and the House of Commons expenses scandal that is said to have led to these election results. The European Elections Let me begin with the facts. On Thursday the 4th June 2009, the British people voted in elections to the European Parliament. This is supposed to be the legislative body of the European Union, and it has around 750 Members, of whom 78 are from Britain. It has no meaningful functions, and its only effect is to give a democratic veneer to a multinational federation that cannot by its nature be democratically governed. Despite the best efforts of the pro-Establishment BBC, hardly anyone takes European elections as other than an excuse to pass judgement on the government of the day. The results came out on Sunday, 7th June. The ruling Labour Party, with 15.7 per cent, got its lowest share of the vote in any national election since 1918. The Conservatives won the largest share, with 27.7 per cent. They are celebrating their victory—but this is hardly the sort of percentage share of the vote that promises a Commons majority in a general election. It may be that the 16.5 per cent won by the UK Independence Party would probably go to the Conservatives in a general election. But it did not go to them in the European elections. The result may have been to complete the disintegration of the Labour Government. Already in trouble, the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, may now have little choice but to resign. The main shock, however, has been the election of Nick Griffin and one other British National Party candidate to the European Parliament. The BNP stands for a complete halt to non-white immigration, expulsion of illegal immigrants and voluntary repatriation of non-whites legally here. It also believes in an end to multiculturalism and political correctness, and in withdrawal from the European Union. These were the first victories for the BNP in any national election, and they have been greeted by the British media and political class with hysterical rage. The favoured explanation is that the BNP—plus UKIP and the other small parties that did so well in the European elections—is to blame the House of Commons expenses scandal. The idea that people might have voted as they did because they liked what they saw cannot be entertained. The Expenses Scandal But, rather than just sneer at its use as smokescreen, let me explain something about the expenses scandal. Members of the House of Commons are allowed to claim expenses that are “wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred for the performance of a Member’s parliamentary duties.” This is supposed to mean that a Member who lives in Scotland or some other distant part of the country can claim for the cost of running a second home in London, and for travel between London and his constituency. Because payment of expenses has been confidential, and because receipts have not always been required, the system has been open to abuse. For several years, occasional stories have been appearing in the establishment media about abuses of the House of Commons expenses system that amount to fraud. These have been only occasional stories. They have usually caused a few days of comment, and then been forgotten. Then, The Daily Telegraph obtained a disc giving a million pages of expenses claims going back over the past four years. Every day since the 8th May 2009, The Daily Telegraph has been publishing details of the more lurid and fraudulent claims. Examples of these claims have been: * Nominating and renominating second homes. As said, expenses are paid to cover the costs of running a second home. Running costs include renovations. Members have used the rules to designate as their second home whichever of their two properties was most in need of work. This might be their home in London or in their constituency. Many have then nominated their other property as their second home to claim for a fresh set of renovations. * Subsidised property development. Several Members have pushed these rules to the limit. They have bought derelict properties, nominated them as second homes to claim the full cost of improvements, then have sold them at profits that are free of tax. * Subsidised luxury. Even without profiting from a rising property market, Members have been claiming for expenses not reasonably incurred for the performance of their parliamentary duties. The Daily Telegraph has published details of claims for landscape gardening, for tampons, for cosmetics, for trouser presses—even for court fines and for charitable donations. * Possible fraud. Several Members have been caught overclaiming for Council Tax, or claiming for payments on mortgages already paid off. In a disclosure separate from The Daily Telegraph publications, one senior Minister was shown to have claimed for the cost of renting pornographic videos for her husband. It is likely that some of the non-receipted expenses were for prostitution services or the purchase of recreational drugs. There are many other examples. But the four given are of the same nature as the others. The results of The Daily Telegraph disclosures have been—depending on who you are—catastrophic or highly entertaining. Promising careers have been blighted. Distinguished careers—that is, “distinguished” within the rules of the political game—have been cut short in corruption scandals that will forever put all else in the shade. So far, about a dozen Members of the House of Commons have announced that they will not stand again at the next election, or have been blocked by their parties from standing again. The Home Secretary has resigned from the Government. The Communities Secretary has resigned It is possible that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be sacked within the next few days. Other Ministers will probably leave the Government. The Speaker of the House of Commons has been forced to resign. Dozens—perhaps hundreds—of Members are expected to lose their seats at the next election, as an angry electorate delivers its own verdict on the general scandal. The Real Causes of Disenchantment Now, the expenses scandal may have been the immediate cause of current electoral upsets. But no one who is honest or can think longer than four minutes at a time will regard it as anything approaching the ultimate cause. The British people are outraged—that much is certain. The stories published have shown a grossness of behaviour we used to think confined to the political classes of lesser foreign countries. On the other hand, the total cost of the illegitimate claims—even including those merely questionable—does not amount to more than a few million pounds. Since 1997, our Labour Government has burned its way through two trillion pounds of our tax money. This has been mostly used to buy Labour votes or to oppress us—usually both. During this time, the Government has put an ancient and highly successful Constitution through the shredder. It has abolished common law protections of liberty, and replaced them with the powers and institutions a police state. It has limited its own political accountability by alienating national sovereignty to the European Union. It has engaged us in wars of imperial aggression against Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq. It has also encouraged legal immigration on an unprecedented scale, and done nothing about a possibly greater illegal immigration. According to official figures, the non-white population of the United Kingdom is about five per cent. The probable figure may be as high as 20 per cent. The Government statisticians themselves admit that the figure may pass 50 per cent as early as 2040. This immigration has been facilitated by positive discrimination and hate crime laws that give preferential treatment to the newcomers and suppress complaints. If it has raised gross domestic product, and if it may have raised the living standards of the middle classes, the immigration has noticeably reduced the living standards of the working classes. And it has raised obvious questions about the survival of at least the English people and their liberal institutions. We have put up with all of this and more. The Labour Government has won two further elections since 1997. There have been no riots. There has been no irresistible rise of new political forces. Now, if the whole political establishment appears on the brink of public rejection, we are supposed to think is because a few dozen Members of Parliament have been fiddling their expenses. The reason for this, I suspect, is that the expenses scandal has been seized on by the people as the surrogate for the far greater complaints already mentioned. These cannot easily be made in public. Some cannot be made because it would be illegal to make them—or, if not illegal, making them would be attended by informal sanctions. Most cannot be made because it is almost impossible to breakthrough the wall of lies behind which our rulers have sheltered themselves. For years now—and the Conservatives were nearly as bad in this respect—British Governments have been refusing to tell the truth about their actions or intentions. Every lunatic or evil change has been accompanied by the flow of unpersuasive but unanswerable chatter most of us can remember from childhood. To take one example of this, there is the European Constitution. Back in 2005, the European Union decided to sweep away the tangle of treaties and lesser agreements under which it operated and replace them with a single constitution. This was an impenetrable document, but appeared to bring about the final transfer of sovereignty from the Member States to the European Union. It was rejected by the French and Dutch in referenda. It was then withdrawn. In Britain, the three main parties solemnly promised before the general election of that year that they would not sign up to a revived constitution until after the British people had been consulted in a referendum. In 2008, the Constitution was edited into the Treaty of Lisbon. This appears to achieve exactly the same as the Constitution by amending earlier treaties. It is shorter than the Constitution, (which runs over 400 pages [PDF]) but also still more opaque. This was rammed through Parliament by the British Government, with support from the Liberal Democrats. The justification was that the election promises had governed the Constitution, not another treaty. Every Government Minister and every Liberal Democrat leader joined in the fraud—and did so with arguments that could only be countered by a closer reading and understanding of the relevant documents than any normal person could reasonably be expected to make. And the Conservative opposition has been little better. For electoral reasons, it made a great show of insisting on the promised referendum. It then promised to hold a referendum if it won the next election. This promise, however, seems to have been limited to a referendum if, after the next election, the Treaty has not come into effect following ratification by all the Member States of the European Union. When asked what they would do if the Treaty had already come into effect, the Conservative leaders have refused to give a straight answer. A decent construction can be put on this refusal to make the further promise. But decent constructions can no longer be credibly made of any promise made by any of the main British parties. We could not shake these people on their smug, emollient drivel about the European Union or mass-immigration, or handing out unimaginable amounts of our money to privileged banking interests. But we can take hold of them and rub their noses in the dirt of their expenses claims. Those are things anyone can understand—and that no one can credibly defend. We are like the child who has been lectured into silence over having his dog put to sleep and his best friend excluded from the house and his pockets searched every night—but whose parents have now broken a clear promise to watch him play in the school pantomime. We are angry, and what would otherwise be the pettiness of what has made us angry is no longer important. What Will Happen Next? A further question is what will come out of all this. Labour has done badly, and its days in government may be numbered. The Conservatives will almost certainly win the next general election, and the only reasonable question asked is how big will be their majority. But none of this may be very important. The Conservatives are part of the political cartel that rules my country. They cannot be worse than Labour. But they will almost certainly be little better. They may take enough of the hard choices to stop the country from disintegrating in the short term. But the longer term problems will not be addressed. What we have at the moment, therefore, is not a revolution—as some of the newspapers have claimed—but a peasants’ revolt. We have grievances. But we lack the organised articulating body for those grievances that will bring about meaningful change. This may, though, be one of the precursors of revolution. It may be our equivalent of the Diamond Necklace Scandal in ancien regime France. That did not bring on the Great Revolution. But it did prepare the way by showing the greed and stupidity of the people who ruled France. It is to be hoped—though not necessarily expected—that the longer term result of what has just happened will be to enable the emergence of new political forces in the United Kingdom—or perhaps just in England. I do not think these have yet made an appearance. I voted for the United Kingdom Independence Party. But this is a protest party. It has neither the personnel nor the ideology for mounting a challenge capable of overturning the established order of things. Several people I know voted for the British National Party, and are rejoicing in its successes. This party has the best leader any nationalist party in England has had since the Establishment itself stopped being recognisably pro-British. He is clever. He is articulate. He is brave. He and his party, nevertheless, are tainted by their national socialist past. Too many of the party’s leading members have said or done things that most people in this country regard as disreputable. Whatever successes it may now be celebrating, I do not think the British National Party has much of a future. Or, if it does have a future, this must be under a new and untainted leadership. 32
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:44 | # However, just because I cannot see where it will lead, I can take pleasure in watching the modern equivalent of the Peasants’ Revolt, and hope that it will ultimately lead us out of the gutter into which our political class has dumped the British people. Dr. Sean Gabb [Email him] is a writer, academic, broadcaster and Director of the Libertarian Alliance in England. His monograph Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back is downloadable here. For his account of the Property and Freedom Society’s 2008 conference in Bodrum, Turkey, click here. 33
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:47 | # Leftists Rabid Over BNP Victories The Labour Party in Britain and other leftist stooges are throwing tantrums today after the British National Party (BNP) won two seats in the European Parliament. The BNP, invariably portrayed by the lock-step British press as “racist”, “xenophobic”, and even “neo-nazi,” nevertheless overcame a relentless smear campaign to chalk up enough votes in Northern England to send two members to the EU. BNP leader Nick Griffin will represent the North West region and Andrew Brons becomes the MP for the Yorkshire and Humber area. Reaction from the Liberal/Labour is best described as grief stricken. Overall, Labour fell to third place with less than 15% of the vote, followed by the Liberals. The United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP), another rightish nationalist party, took second place with 17.5%, behind the Tories with over 28% of the vote. But the deepest wound was the two seats picked up by the BNP. Harriet Harman, deputy Labour leader, was galled and puckered over the BNP victory: “I think people will be absolutely dismayed, I think it is horrific that we have representing Britain in the European Parliament people who think that black people and people of Asian origin have no place in this country.” Another Labour mouthpiece, Yvette Cooper, described the BNP triumph as “”very sad day for democracy.” (Comrade Cooper! The BNP was VOTED IN! But democracy only counts when the Left is in power.) The C of CC extends a hearty congratulations to Nick Griffin, Andrew Brons, and the British National Party for their victories in England and the EU. Congratulations also to the other Right Wing and Conservative parties throughout Europe. 34
Posted by Guessedworker on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 22:55 | # Friedrich: Is there enough intellectual depth in the B.N.P. to take away the Establishment’s weapon and use it against it? I don’t know. But the fact that the question has to be asked is something to ponder, no? 35
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:36 | # Well, I ask because I don’t follow British politics as closely as you. However, it seems to me that making the case for survival doesn’t sound like a particularly onerous task intellectually speaking. 36
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:49 | # A natural result of decades of a vicious hate-campaign. This is the type of hysterical climate that the Establishment has created. If Griffin gets killed, the Establishment will have blood on its hands. Outside, protesters could be heard chanting: “Hitler, Griffin and Le Pen. Nazi scum never again. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/3338890/UK-demonstrators-trap-Le-Pen-in-car.html Nick Griffin now wears a bullet-proof vest: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/elections/article6493540.ece 37
Posted by q on Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:59 | #
Mr. Braun, don’t you think it’s more likely Nick Griffin will be assassinated via media smears (i.e. character assassination) rather than bullets? I do. 38
Posted by Friedrich Braun on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:07 | # No, I think that there’s a 50/50 chance that Griffin will be killed. He’s constantly portrayed as Satan or worse, a Nazi. And as all know, killing a Nazi is a moral duty. That was basically the logic behind Fortuyn’s murder. 39
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 01:11 | #
And Haider’s. 40
Posted by Bill on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 05:46 | # Friedrich Braun wrote: 14.06.2009 11.07 “No, I think that there’s a 50/50 chance that Griffin will be killed. He’s constantly portrayed as Satan or worse, a Nazi. And as all know, killing a Nazi is a moral duty. That was basically the logic behind Fortuyn’s murder.” Bill replies. Hey! Wake up! To them we’re all Nazis. That’s why they want to get rid of us, that’s why they’re getting rid of us. 41
Posted by Talmud says..."Kill the best gentiles" on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:18 | #
The Jewish Talmud demands: “Kill the best gentiles” (Tob Shebbe Goyim Harog) Jews and their lackeys seek to murder/assassinate/poison/imprison/etc any and all potential opposition (especially leaders or would-be leaders) before it can gain even a foothold with which to challenge Jewish hegemony. 42
Posted by Bill on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:19 | # Another thing that is obvious to me is that the establishment is controlling us by suffocating us with new laws by the day, by the hour, by the minute. If they don’t like what we’re doing then they make it illegal. There is no better way to paralyse a society than to envelop it in a legal spiders web. Carry on at this rate they will pass a law against breathing and that should seal our fate. A wholesale mass campaign of non co-operation against the system would see such a mindset off within a week. 43
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:14 | #
Vladimir Bukovsky had a similar idea:
See also Bukovsky’s excellent video presentation, here: 44
Posted by John on Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:02 | #
If Nick Griffin is assassinated, it will be by a (genuine) lone nut. Killing Nick Griffin (by any other means than an “accident” or “natural causes”) would be one of the more stupid mistakes they could make and possibly ignite a firestorm all over Europe. 45
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Thu, 25 Jun 2009 06:43 | # John Wadham, without doubt a Labour Party hack carefully chosen for the bureaucratic post he occupies based on his publicly or privately demonstrated devotion to white-race genocide, who is knowingly working for the completion of the racial-marxist genocide-of-whites program, ominously threatens Nick Griffin and the BNP with a law that apparently can be used to simply outlaw any political party that doesn’t favor the genocide of the white race (“if you can’t beat them at the polls, simply outlaw them!”): http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1184614595?bctid=27290927001 . If this attack on democracy and on the will of the people by the likes of this race-replacing Labour-Party hack and those hidden from view pushing him forward goes ahead, the good people of the nation will need to descend into the streets and, by peaceful demonstrations, non-violently make known their displeasure at the outrageous way one political party, Labour, taking advantage of laws intended for another civic purpose entirely, is attempting to in effect outlaw any political party that disagrees with the current race-replacement régime. Attacking the BNP in this way is an outrage against democracy: suppose the people finally decide they do not want race-replacement but a restoration of their previous more racially homogeneous society, and vote accordingly? What then, is that not to be allowed? Is their democratic preference to be outlawed via the circuitous route of outlawing of the arrangement of party membership affairs and party hiring practices in the only way which accords with that political perspective? To do so, to undemocratically “get at” a rival party in this way, is overt totalitarianism and intolerable. In a democracy the adoption of a law cannot automatically entail the outlawing of the possibility of democratic political opposition to that law. Any law such as Wadham refers to obviously has to explicitly or implicitly make an exemption for political parties which oppose such laws — oppose them for example in this case, the case of the BNP, on the principle that the excesses they lead to are bad for the indigenous population, which are legitimate grounds for opposing them — must make an exemption for political parties which oppose such laws and arrange party membership rolls and hiring practices accordingly. Otherwise what you have is, in effect, one political party, namely Labour in this case, simply outlawing its political rivals. To pass certain laws and set up certain régimes while leaving the way open for the effective expression of political opposition to said laws and régimes is one thing; to pass laws and set up régimes and at the same time cleverly block the effective expression of political opposition to said laws and régimes is another. If this manner of bringing down the BNP goes forward, and if the courts demonstrate they are naught but the toadies of the Labour Party marxists, the good people must descend into the streets as they did in Luton and peacefully, non-violently show that they aren’t going to take it any more. They must now show that the days of the totalitarians are at long last numbered and this oppression is going to come to an end. Send the oppressors, as Vladimir Bukovsky recommends, fleeing to the Bahamas! 46
Posted by Bill on Thu, 25 Jun 2009 08:35 | # Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 25, 2009, 05:43 AM | # .....“If this attack on democracy and on the will of the people by the likes of this race-replacing Labour-Party hack and those hidden from view pushing him forward goes ahead, the good people of the nation will need to descend into the streets and, by peaceful demonstrations, non-violently make known their displeasure at the outrageous way one political party,”...... Well said Fred. You know, it really is staggering, here we have in the public arena, an official declaration of war by the establishment against the BNP. What they are saying (unequivocally) is, if you don’t do as we say you will outlawed and your organisation banned, your leaders will be incarcerated. How much outrage has been shown by the public at large? Where are the blaring headlines? Where is the BBC’s moral outrage at such a proposal? Nowhere, that’s where, nobody could give a damn. I posted recently, that Liberalism will legislate away any restistance to its ethos, no matter what, and if that fails they will resort to even more drastic measures. Millions are rooting for Andy Murray, millions are booing at the MP’s expense claims, millions wannabe a celebrity, millions just couldn’t give a sh*t - and no-one can explain this phenomenon. Even here, where armageddon is being raked over and over, the subject of the BNP being outlawed hardly raises an eyebrow. Why is Western civilisation so indifferent to its fate? I’ve opined my ideas repeatedly but they never gained even a reply, never mind traction. It’s a funny old world. 48
Posted by james on Thu, 25 Nov 2010 05:06 | # Some ideas that the BNP need ,to competely screw your enemys, 1 Make it policy to have balance in genetic form,as well as deversity based on I, not us,2 have black hybids in your party, ect, 50 eye colours 50 hair colours,ect Churchill, when he went to nazi germany in the 30s, he was asked why he did not believe that all people be blonde blue eyed, he said this is not the nature of anglo celts, now why not applie the same logic to negros, for if (xy)+2=is truth then (yx)-2 , ha ha.3 make your children dominate over the mud races= ( conformity with in the conformity is their nature), that you have blue green gray ,as well as 30 eye colours over the brown eyes , same with hair colours,( devesity with in the conformity of race is our nature),I REIGNS SUPREME OVER US IN ALL ITS FORMS, hows that for something far more powerful than equality, EQUITY,=50 50 ISM, the Greek idea of the medium ,the letter M with 13 letters on both sides, rather than the shite concept of the merdock media.The British have never believed in the American doctrine of good intensions,as seen by the likes of new labour conser, liers we are far more blunt than that, bluntness is this, 2+2=4 orwell. maths is truth,In fact what is funny is that his way of thinking was dominate in the UK for 500 hundred years , the British Empire ,was based on maths,his is what hitler, stalin, mugabe, mo, as well as all forms of wankers on this earth ,ect UAF search dark, UK kGB.(,starzi british police officer-) forget. O by the way we British, Nationists do has a sence of fun beware of when we mock you,)Hilters only got one balls ,but the Mohammidites have none at all.Bow down with your arse in the air towards mecca = bow down with your nazi salute towards germania, mein kamph= koran, both of these books ,useful to wipe my BNP bum, I think ?lLETS HAVE A NICE FIRE IN LONDON as the bnp, Burn the koran and mein kamph at the same time, as with the swaztica and the crestent fucken moon.We will also invite the JEWS along, so that YHVVH, BASED IN THE TANAKH,may destroy them were ever they are found, based on the fact the he is the god of justice, vengence, an mercy, HAVE AN UNPLEASENT SORT, FUTURE, ISLAMISTS. Post a comment:
Next entry: MARGOLIS ‘NEO-NAZI’?
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) |
Posted by Paleontologist on Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:16 | #
Violence by proxy - the preferred politics of ANY Establishment.
GW consistently displays his inability to grasp the reality of how to effect social and political change in the modern era. He condemns, condemns, condemns, failing to ever once sit down and analyze successful tactics and then bring them to the realm of reality - reification, so to speak. His vaunted “morals” live in the ether. They live in the minds of a few fossils who’ve never figured out how to win, but are proud to feel above those who have and did.