[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro (L) with other ethnonationalist politicians in Milan, 8th April 2019 / Credit: Olli Kotro Twitter
The Finns Party has signed up to form a pan-European alliance with other political parties, ahead of May’s European elections. The other members are Italy’s League, Denmark’s People’s Party and Germany’s opposition party AfD.
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro joining with Salvini
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro, a candidate in the European Parliament elections, attended Monday afternoon’s announcement in Milan.
“Constructing a better and safer Europe with patriots!” Kotro tweeted.
Their aims are to preserve Europe’s borders, culture and history according to Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini.
The four parties plan to form a distinct group within the European Parliament to challenge the power of centrist parties.
“Together we will fight for a safer Europe with well-protected external borders, less immigration and a stronger cooperation to tackle terrorism and islamisation (sic)” Danish MEP Anders Vistinen wrote on Twitter.
The group needs at least 25 MEPs from seven different EU countries to be formally recognised as an official group in the European Parliament, where they’ll be known as the European Alliance for People and Nations.
At present Europe’s ethno-nationalist political parties are members of different European Parliament groupings, but the new alliance is the first step in Salvini’s attempts to bring them all together under one umbrella.
Interview with László Bogár, economist and university professor, former MP and former State Secretary of Hungary, publicist: “Our region is once again becoming a buffer zone whose geopolitical value is growing steadily”.
At the end of November 2018, Raoul Weiss met with László Bogár in Budapest for a interview without taboos on economical topics. László Bogár is since the regime change a well-known Hungarian economist: he is one of the economists who shaped the Fidesz’ economical policy. Author of 28 books, László Bogár has been State Secretary for political questions of the Ministry of foreign trade relations from 1990 to 1994 and State Secretary at the Office of the Prime Minister under Orbán’s first mandate, from 1998 to 2002. Very critical of the current capitalistic system and of the EU’s evolution, László Bogár is a shining example of what is a Central European “illiberal” economist.
An Intermarium “buffer zone” is none too soon as V4 nations are caught between the massive pincer action of the Russian Federation and Germany. European Solidarity? Sanctions against Russia? Germany has just opened a Mercedes factory in Moscow. Cost: 250 million euro. At the opening was Merkel, Putin and Peter Altmaier, Minister of Economy of Germany - “The Prosperity of Russia is also in the interest of Germany,” declared Altmaier.
Raoul Weiss: László Bogár, what is the economic reality of the V4? Until now, the main trade routes in Central Europe have been the East-West axes. What does Central Europe lack the most in order to assert itself also in the economic field? Are Central European economies not sufficiently complementary? Or is it the lack of North-South infrastructure – be it logistical or financial – to offset the dominance of East-West infrastructures? Finally: assuming that the V4 seeks to develop such infrastructure, to what extent do you think the West will tolerate such an evolution?
It’s all of that at once. There is an analyst of Russian origin on Bloomberg, a guy called Bershidsky, for whom I sometimes go out of my way: he’s a pure liberal, perfectly cynical, but he’s very sharp, he goes straight to the essential; he is the one who coined the phrase “foreign owned countries” to describe such countries. What he’s trying to say is obviously something along the line of:“Dear populists, what kind of game is this? We – the global capital –are your master”. Now, let’s face it: there is a lot of truth in what he says – especially in the case of Hungary. The most cautious were the Czechs. The least prudent, the Slovaks, since after all, Slovakia does not exist: it is a warehouse, partly German, partly French. The very moment these global giants collapse, countries like Slovakia, which are totally at their mercy, could disappear in a few minutes. In concrete terms, Slovakia exports all of its GDP. Of course, this is also the case of Singapore – but not under the same conditions…
In reality, all these countries are in the chains of the same plantation; in each of them, however, an awareness has arisen: they are beginning to understand the problem. Hungary is the country where the resistance is most marked, [for a good reason:] after Slovakia, we Hungarians are the most dependent in the group.
Raoul Weiss: From this point of view, the most independent country would be Poland.
László Bogár: It is indeed Poland. The first reason for that is that everyone was well aware that Poland should have emerged as a clear winner of the Second World War; however, of all the countries in this situation, it is the only one to have been totally treated as a losing country. This is partly true also of Czechoslovakia, but above all of Poland, whose suffering has been appalling, but never received the astronomical compensations to which it was entitled. But, as this implies a huge potential for revolt, we understand better that the Polish church and Poland’s rural society have been treated with more respect than elsewhere …
Raoul Weiss: Then how is it that, even though Poland has a head start in this area, the locomotive of this emancipation movement is rather Hungary…
László Bogár: It’s an intellectual difference, and it’s also about Viktor Orbán’s personality. It is linked to the fact that – even if the same could partly be said about the Poles and Czechs – the Hungarians, during the last three centuries, have been particularly forced to an optimal spiritual production. Not because they would in any case be more inclined than others to turn to things of the spirit, but because they were subjected to shocks, constraints and revolutions of such brutality, that their intellectual sensitivity must have come out of the process increased– I say this without underestimating that of the Czechs, or of the Poles, who have also been confronted with major existential challenges, bearing similar psychological consequences.
Speech by Viktor Orbán at the launch event for the Fidesz – KDNP
European Parliament election programme
Good afternoon,Ladies and Gentlemen,
As I see it I’m the odd one out, because the people who’ve spoken before me are experts in what they spoke about. Even our justice minister, who doesn’t seem at first sight to fit into that category, was an ambassador in Brussels for several years, so he can be classified as a foreign affairs expert. József Szájer is the leader of our parliamentary group in Brussels, and Péter is our foreign affairs minister. Which means I’m the odd man out. So why am I being given the chance to speak?
Dear Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The reason I’m speaking to you now is because this is what we do before a campaign. We review the troops, gather our forces together, unfurl the flag and clarify our aims. If I look around me – not only in this room but around the country – I can confidently say that our political community is self-confident, strong and buoyant. There can be no room for complacency, however, as after all we’re now facing an imminent contest. It was perhaps just last weekend that we staged the Hungarian National Swimming Championships – which in some events seemed more like European championships than simple national championships. After one of the events there, Katinka Hosszú said that it’s marvellous for someone to have a few Olympic gold medals. We have a few electoral victories. It’s marvellous to have self-confidence, and we have no shortage of that. But unfortunately when you step onto that starting block for your next race, what you’ve already achieved is completely irrelevant: the only thing that matters is the race ahead of you at that moment. So this is why I’ve been given the floor: to offer this reminder to our distinguished audience gathered here. I’m happy that we’re together once again.There are many things we should talk about today in relation to Europe, but as the campaign is only just beginning we’ll perhaps have time for that later. We can’t talk about everything today: now at the beginning of the campaign we can only set about stating what is at stake in the election on 26 May. This is despite the fact that there are some exciting current issues: the relationship between the European People’s Party and Fidesz, for instance. I don’t want to talk about this at length, but here perhaps it’s enough to make it clear among ourselves that our future will be decided not by the European People’s Party, but by us ourselves. After the elections we’ll see the direction taken by the European People’s Party. At present it seems to be turning to the left, in a liberal direction: towards liberal European empire-building and a Europe of immigrants. If this is the direction it takes, you can rest assured that we shall not follow. And of course there are the statements by Weber, which give a jolt to the spirits and national self-esteem. No wonder more and more people are succinctly saying and writing what our direction should be: out. I’d like to ask for patience, and for us to decide later at the right time, based on our national interests.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Let’s face up to the fact that past elections to the European Parliament never seemed to be of pivotal importance. In essence they were meant to decide whether the President of the European Commission came from the Right or the Left. This hasn’t always been as easy as it sounds. There’s this Jean-Claude Juncker, for instance: we thought he was a man of the Right, but we found ourselves presented with an orthodox European socialist, who bears decisive responsibility for Brexit, the migration invasion and the increasingly serious conflict between Central and Western Europe. What is at stake today, however, is more than the election of a single individual. Today we are indeed approaching a historic election: at the end of May Europe will choose a future for itself. The stakes are not whether there will be more conservative or socialist representatives in Brussels; now millions of Europeans will be deciding on a matter that is far more important than party politics. What is at stake is whether the leaders of the EU will be pro-immigration or anti-immigration. We will decide on whether Europe will continue to belong to Europeans, or be given over to masses of people from different cultures and different civilisations: what the French have called “population replacement”. We will be deciding on whether to defend our Christian European culture or to submit to multiculturalism. Taking all this into consideration, it’s no surprise that the fault line between the opposing sides is not defined by the classic value systems of the Right and the Left. Look at the V4 countries and their prime ministers, for example: each of us is in a different grouping in the European Parliament. I cannot even say that all four of us are on the same side ideologically. We have a liberal, a socialist, a People’s Party politician and a conservative; there couldn’t be any more than that, because there are only four of us! But we agree on one fundamental issue: we want to preserve Europe and our countries as we have always known them. As the old teaching has it: “In essentials unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things charity. ”On 26 May, Dear Friends, the matter we will be voting on is an essential one: at stake is the existence of our Christian civilisation. Let’s remember, when the European Union was formed – I mean let’s remember what we read about it –it had a big soul and a small body. Today the situation is reversed: it has a shrinking soul and an ever-expanding body. How did we get here? How did we get to the point at which this question would even arise? How did we get to the point at which we have to fight for our way of life, our form of existence and our natural habitat on our own continent?
This document has been updated! The most recent version of this document (v4) was posted on 2011 August 15. View the most recent version doi:10.1038/npre.2010.5003.3; IPBS, UMR 5089, Toulouse, France, PDF (2.7 MB); Document Type: Manuscript. Date: Received 25 November 2010 14:31 UTC; Posted 29 November 2010
Tags: speciation mechanisms inbreeding group level selection extinction mutation load
Abstract:
Whilst the principle of adaptive evolution is unanimously recognised as being caused by the process of natural selection favouring the survival and/or reproduction of individuals having acquired new advantageous traits, a consensus has proven much harder to find regarding the actual origin of species. Indeed, since speciation corresponds to the establishment of reproductive barriers, it is difficult to see how it could bring a selective advantage because it amounts to a restriction in the opportunities to breed with as many and/or as diverse partners as possible. In this regard, Darwin himself did not believe that reproductive barriers could be selected for, and today most evolutionary biologists still believe that speciation can only occur through a process of separation allowing two populations to diverge sufficiently to become infertile with one another. I do, however, take the view that, if so much speciation has occurred, and still occurs around us, it cannot be a consequence of passive drift but must result from a selection process, whereby it is advantageous for groups of individuals to reproduce preferentially with one another and reduce their breeding with the rest of the population.
In this essay, I propose a model whereby new species arise by “budding” from an ancestral stock, via a process of inbreeding among small numbers of individuals, driven by the occurrence of advantageous recessive mutations. Since the phenotypes associated to such mutations can only be retained in the context of inbreeding, it is the pressure of the ancestral stock which will promote additional reproductive barriers, and ultimately result in complete separation of a new species. I thus contend that the phenomenon of speciation would be driven by mutations resulting in the advantageous loss of certain functions, whilst adaptive evolution would correspond to gains of function that would, most of the time be dominant.
A very important further advantage of inbreeding is that it reduces the accumulation of recessive mutations in genomes. A consequence of the model proposed is that the existence of species would correspond to a metastable equilibrium between inbreeding and outbreeding, with excessive inbreeding promoting speciation, and excessive outbreeding resulting in irreversible accumulation of recessive mutations that could ultimately only lead to the species extinction.
Discussion
Comments:
0 comments
Share:
(Login to share with a colleague)
Additional information
Posted by DanielS on Saturday, 06 April 2019 09:19.
Matteo Salvini and Marine Le Pen had a cordial meeting earlier this week, in which they discussed their ‘common sense revolution’ to overtake the EU for native European nationalist purposes.
The leaders are thinking about holding a joint rally to close the campaign for the European elections and “announce the start of a new Europe”, according to the sources
“If you invest your tuppence wisely in the bank, safe and sound,
Soon that tuppence safely invested in the bank will compound,
And you’ll achieve that sense of conquest as your affluence expands
In the hands of the directors who invest as propriety demands.”
— “Mary Poppins,” 1964
When “Mary Poppins” was made into a movie in 1964, Mr. Banks’ advice to his son was sound. The banks were then paying more than 5% interest on deposits, enough to double young Michael’s investment every 14 years.
Now, however, the average savings account pays only 0.10% annually—that’s one-tenth of 1%—and many of the country’s biggest banks pay less than that. If you were to put $5,000 in a regular Bank of America savings account (paying 0.01%) today, in a year you would have collected only 50 cents in interest.
That’s true for most of us, but banks themselves are earning 2.4% on their deposits at the Federal Reserve. These deposits, called “excess reserves,” include the reserves the banks got from our deposits, and on which they are paying almost nothing; and unlike with our deposits, there is no $250,000 cap on the sums banks can stash at the Fed amassing interest. A whopping $1.5 trillion in reserves are now sitting in Fed reserve accounts. The Fed rebates its profits to the government after deducting its costs, and interest paid to banks is one of those costs. That means we, the taxpayers, are paying $36 billion annually to private banks for the privilege of parking their excess reserves at one of the most secure banks in the world—parking them, rather than lending them out.
The banks are getting these outsize returns while taking absolutely no risk, because the Fed, as “lender of last resort,” cannot go bankrupt. This is not true for other depositors, including large institutions such as the pension funds that hold our retirement money.
The great American poet TS Elliot (pictured) began his epic poem, “The Waste Land” with the words “April is the cruellest month”; further on he states, “London Bridge is falling down, falling down, falling down”. Unfortunately, only Greg Johnson knows what Elliot was talking about.
This April will be cruel for those who were looking forward to Britain leaving the European Union. But having waited 46 years to ‘get our country back’, another two months is not so bad.
The Brexiteers are obsessed with the idea of nationality, but we Britons are Europeans by blood, culture. If we leave the EU we will probably rejoin in a few year’s time. It’s not a perfect institution but it’s a step in the right direction - towards European unity.
Ten Points for Action
In 1973 Action Party (Union Movement) published its manifesto “Ten Points For Action”.
1. Action to Build Houses
We want Action to solve the housing problem. It should be taken out of the hands of local authorities and entrusted to Government leadership, with powers to mass produce houses and flats like an “operation of war”, turning out homes as arms and munitions were mass-produced in time of war.
2. Stop The Land and Rent Rackets
Give the Government powers to acquire land at pre-boom prices and to finance housing by low-interest charges on all non-essential and luxury buildings. Such action would bring down house prices and rents and at last provide good but cheap housing for all.
3. Stop Immigration - Start Repatriation
We want Action to ease the pressure on housing and other social problems (like the reintroduction of diseases unknown in Britain for hundreds of years) by stopping all further immigration and by repatriating all post-war immigrants to good jobs and conditions in their homelands to which prosperity has been restored by using the surplus wealth and production of united Europe. But Britain could make a start now before the complete union of Europe is achieved.
Remember that we have been advocating this policy since 1952, long before any of those now saying the same sort of thing - without the means to carry it out.
4. A Choice in Education and Health
We want Action to build good schools, colleges, universities and hospitals, just as we would mass produce houses and flats. Parents should have a choice of schools for their children. We should not be taxed to provide those health services we will never use (maternity benefits for confirmed bachelors!) but free to pay in proportion to our requirements.
5. Free Speech - Law and Order
We want Action to ensure freedom of speech for everyone, guaranteed by the Government, which has a duty to maintain law and order in the State and to take effective action against mob violence, which today denies freedom of expression to any views of which its agitators disapprove. Let us maintain local police forces with their local knowledge and experience but let us supplement them with a highly-trained, well-equipped, mobile national police force, to put down organised crime and to maintain public order.
We would ensure freedom of the Press for both newspapers and the public. Any man who felt himself misrepresented in the Press should be guaranteed (by law) equal space to reply in the newspaper concerned. This would free the public of the expense of seeking justice through costly libel action and free the newspapers from the legal blackmail of a threatened libel action by some unscrupulous racketeer.
6. Capital Punishment
The death penalty should be restored to the statute book, to be used sparingly in the case of premeditated murder. The Court of Appeal should have a solemn duty to recommend a reprieve if in any doubt. The sentence should be carried out not by hanging but by a quick and painless injection, or by some other humane method.
7. Action in Europe
To put these policies into practice Britain must advance beyond the concept of a so-called united Europe and Common Market to which the Conservative Party has at last been converted and which the Labour Party still opposes. We must advance quickly to ‘Europe a Nation’, which we have advocated since 1948. We stand for a union of all Europe. our former white Dominions and southern Africa, a great “third force” in the world, independent of both America and Russia.
This “third force” should have a central government for its defence, the economy, finance and scientific development, with power to raise wages and control prices as production increases for a guaranteed market, insulated against unfair competition from the rest of the world.
We need a European army, equipped with the most modern weapons, to defend our continent against attack from any quarter. This should be financed on a European budget instead of each small country straining its economy to finance its own defence.
8. National and Regional Governments
There should be independent national and regional governments for each European country and the main regions. This would enable England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and other European countries and regions to have their own parliaments for internal affairs and for the preservation of their national and regional cultures.
9. The Irish Problem
The ultimate solution to the Irish problem is the union of that country within a united Europe. But the bloodshed must first be brought to an end by a free vote on a county basis in each of the Six Counties and a subsequent rearrangement of the border. The bulk of the Catholic population in the North would then be ruled (as is their wish) from Dublin, with a lessening of present tensions, the IRA would lose its bases in the North and the British Army would have a much shorter border to patrol against infiltration from the South. In this improved situation, agreement could more easily be reached on the eventual union of Ireland, with the rights of the then Protestant minority protected and guaranteed by European government.
10. Government of National Union
We stand for a government of national union and effective action, drawn from the whole nation; from the professions and the trade unions, arts and science, the law, and the armed forces. Government elected by the whole people alone should govern. It should have power to lead the economy, raising wages and controlling prices as science increased production. Then we will have cooperation instead of conflict in industry.
We want Action to halt the ‘brain drain’ and to arouse a new spirit of national service in our British people, by relating all reward directly to skill, effort, initiative and responsibility. There should be “great reward for great service”, crowned by higher pensions drawn from the wealth of the new economic system, as the reward in old age for those who had loyally served the nation throughout their lives.
Nearly fifty years later, many of these problems and their solutions remain the same, but some things have changed. The mass repatriation of immigrants is no longer possible because there are far too many of them; the old Dominions have found new markets; peace has been established in Ireland by the Good Friday Agreement; taxation has been modernised, and the Brexit fiasco has shown that a Government of National Unity is more relevant than ever. Oswald Mosley died in 1980 and the last issue of his newspaper ‘Action’ was issued in 1992. But his books are still in print and the ideology of Union Movement is propagated by the Friends of Mosley website: http://www.oswaldmosley.com
Science to the Rescue
We are trashing our environment at such a rate that some scientists think that it’s already too late to save the planet. The latest warning concerns the insects on which we rely to fertilise our crops. Most of the world’s leaders now accept that something has to be done but the leader of the so-called Free World, Donald Trump, is reopening coal mines and drilling for gas and oil. He wants the coalminer’s votes and he doesn’t care about the consequences of pollution.
President Donald Trump will not be around when our planet is turned into a desert. But our children and our children’s children will inherit seas full of plastic waste and land contaminated with chemicals. Trump will not be president forever. He may win the next election with his tax cuts and promises to stop immigration, but the founders of the United States had the good sense to limit a president to two terms.
Politicians have never been much good. It has always been the scientists and engineers who have saved us in times of trouble. Politicians did nothing about the unsanitary conditions that existed in the nineteenth century. Contaminated water spread diseases until the great engineer Joseph Bazalgette (pictured) provided clean water and efficient sewage.
It was scientists, not politicians, who gave us the Industrial Revolution, improved agricultural output and discovered modern medicines including antibiotics. And it was engineers who built the railways, conquered the oceans and the skies and eventually got us to the Moon. This resulted in pollution but it wasn’t until the Fifties that governments have started to protect the environment.
If our World is to be saved it will be by scientists, not politicians. In fact, we may even develop computers that will consign parliaments to the scrapheap. Government by algorithm may seem far-fetched but it couldn’t be worse than the shambles of Westminster. Computer programs driven by data are not prejudiced, they are not lazy, they cannot be bribed, and they always do their best.
The Things They Say
British prime ministers are great liars. Harold Wilson devalued the pound but said that it would not effect “the pound in your pocket”. He knew perfectly well that it would directly effect everyone but his calm, pipe smoking image was reassuring. Margaret Thatcher said that she understood peoples fears of being “swamped” by immigration. Tony Blair warned us of “weapons of mass destruction”. And Theresa May starts every statement with the words “let me make this very clear, before deliberately confusing us.
Another trick is to damn us with faint praise. Before criticising the National Health Service, Nigel Farage paid tribute to the dedication of the medical staff. He would probably like to privatize the entire service but he dare not say so.
The Good Friday Agreement is another source of mendacity. Most people are thankful that peace has reigned for twenty years but there is a twisted minority that hates the Irish. They say that they want no borders in Ireland but given the chance, they would bring back border posts, guard dogs, and armed soldiers patrolling the streets.
Immigration is another subject that turns men and women into liars. When they say that they value the contribution made by immigrants, they really mean that they would like to round them up and throw them out of the country. But such a statement would never be made.
They have twisted the truth so much that nobody knows what they are talking about. Dedicated racists masquerade as liberals and lifelong pro-Europeans, like Theresa May, pretend to be Brexiteers. If they were selling soap powder instead of policies they would be charged under the Trade Description Act. Unfortunately, it doesn’t cover politicians.
In South America, in the good old days, they used to shoot lying politicians at regular intervals. This kept them on their toes until the next revolution. We are far too enlightened to follow their example but we must find a way of getting our representatives to tell the truth.
Opinions
Every month I invite those wishing to get off my mailing list to reply with the word ‘delete’. This is a requirement of the Data Protection Act, So far, less than 10% have asked to be deleted. I thank the 90% who are interested in my opinions.
Those who unsubscribe usually object to my allegedly liberal views. I am opposed to non-European immigration, but I am not obsessed by Race and I reject the Jewish conspiracy theory. The Deleted are usually patriots who have been radicalised by writers such as AK Chesterton (pictured). The following paragraph is from an essay he wrote for the British Union Journal in 1936 entitled “The Apotheosis of the Jew”.
“It is now that the Jew stands on the verge of world domination. Accepted by society in its decadence he is able to move among highly placed people and pull political strings for the international financiers; in return, he can conspire with his fellow radicals all over the world to pull financial strings for the politicians. So long as his essential “Jewishness” is concealed there is no mischief which he cannot encompass by the subtle exercise of his power; no market he cannot ‘rig’, no government he cannot crash, no foreign relationship he cannot foul, and with skill and patience no war he cannot engineer. The whole world stretches before him as his promised land.”
AK Chesterton was right about the Jews being powerful in the USA and Europe but they hardly figure in Asia. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Malaysian and Indian businessmen are as greedy as their Western counterparts, but none of them is Jewish. AK would have appreciated the story about the two Jews who were passing a Church. A large notice said: “Convert to Christianity and get £100. Abe went into the Church leaving Saul outside. When he returned, Saul asked him if he had converted. He said “yes, I am now a baptised Christian. “So what about the £100”. “Money, money, money”, said Abe, “that’s all you Jews think about.”
Of course, there are some readers that I don’t want. Brenton Tarrant, the Australian terrorists who killed fifty worshippers in New Zealand, is not a White Nationalist hero, he is a psychopathic killer and a suspected Mossad agent.
Alan Welfare RIP
Alan Welfare, a Former Union Movement member and lifelong Mosley supporter, died of a stroke at Weston-Super-Mare on February 28th. Here he is seen, in the background, at another funeral. He will be sadly missed by his comrades.
Jeff Wallder writes
Alan joined the Movement as a teenager in the 1960s and was an active member. He was always good company, great sense of humour and a gentleman. He did his best to prevent the decline of the country he loved and remained loyal to Mosley and to Europe until the very end. To him, we extend the full arm salute.
Terry Wilson writes
Alan was a dear friend and former neighbour who helped rejuvenate the League of St George. He had a great sense of humour and was loyal to Mosley, UM, the LSG and the vision of Europe a Nation. At demos when the reds shouted at him “Nazi”, he would calmly reply: “I am not a Nazi, I am a Fascist.” A true and loyal comrade. Our thoughts go out to Debbie, Tristan and Mikela.
Nation Revisited
All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. This blog is protected by the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19: “We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share ideas with other people.”
Comments
Use the facility at the end of this blog to leave a comment and read what others have to say.
The Finns Party’s Olli Kotro joining with Salvini
An Intermarium “buffer zone” is none too soon as V4 nations are caught between the massive pincer action of the Russian Federation and Germany. European Solidarity? Sanctions against Russia? Germany has just opened a Mercedes factory in Moscow. Cost: 250 million euro. At the opening was Merkel, Putin and Peter Altmaier, Minister of Economy of Germany - “The Prosperity of Russia is also in the interest of Germany,” declared Altmaier.
