I think the most interesting thing about the following site is Mark Green’s webcast video interviews, but I’m sure the book is worth a look too:

This is the sort of thing that I believe Osama Bin Laden was referring to when he declared that the West would undergo an “ideological collapse” if it invaded Iraq for Israel.

By David Hamilton

Slowly, and the elites hope imperceptibly, we are being brought under repressive state control operated by not only the police but also bureaucrats.  It goes largely unnoticed because the new laws and regulations seem unconnected, and journalists and opposition politicians are part of the same ruling caste.  But if you look at the new laws and regulations as a trend rather than independent Acts it becomes clear.

“Your papers please” is a phrase associated with Hitler’s Gestapo at a time when people without papers were taken to detention centres.  But it is beginning here. The Daily Mail of 21st March 2007:-

British citizens will be quizzed on up to 200 different pieces of personal information in a 30 minute grilling when they apply for a passport.  Those who fail to convince the bureaucrats they are who they say will be denied a travel document or face a full investigation by anti-fraud experts.  There is no formal appeal process.

Peter Mandelson, the European Trade Commissioner, once said: “We are now entering the post-democratic age.”  To put it more directly: an era of the totalitarian control of people by the state.  Politically, w are in the grip of a narrow ruling elite, an “Ideological Caste” that admits only those into power with the same views, and expels in disgrace any who dissent, as in the public humiliation and sacking of leading scientist Dr.James Watson.

The Ideological Caste is the emergent elite of the Cultural Marxist era.  They do very well out of it … earning vast sums of money, living in the best areas, sending their children to the best schools.  But impose equality on the rest of us.  They claim to be correcting centuries of unfairness.  But they police our thoughts and oppress us if our views different from theirs.

READ MORE...

From the Daily Telegraph:-

Los Angeles is becoming a “Third World city” with immigrants making up half its workforce, says a new study. A third of immigrants have not graduated from high school and 60 per cent do not speak English fluently, the Migration Policy Institute [they mean the National Center on Immigrant Integration - Ed] found.

It said this left immigrants ill-equipped to fill California’s fastest-growing occupations, such as computer software engineering and nursing. The organisation added that as the so-called baby boomers reach retirement age, a similar pattern will spread across the US.

Ernesto Cortes Jr, of the Industrial Areas Foundation, a think-tank that specialises on social change, claimed Los Angeles was at a crossroads.

“The question is are we going to be a 21st century city with shared prosperity, or a Third World city with an elite group on top and most on near poverty wages?” he said.

Lynn and Vanhanen already have the answer to that.  But, then, so have we.  It seems that the only people who haven’t are sitting in government offices.

As one of these, the NCII cleaves unquestioningly to the official line.  It’s LA report (pdf) is a typical government document, full of the presumption of men who are not paid to think.  The word gang does not appear in it.  Nor does the word crime.  Nor does the word trust.  There are only challenges.  Lots of them.  As in ..

... Los Angeles is not only on the leading edge due to demographic change, it is also on the leading edge of the many unresolved immigrant integration issues facing our nation and the cities and states where immigrants now reside.  The future vitality of the Los Angeles economy and the body politic depends on immigrants and their children - and on the investments made in integrating them into the mainstream of civic life and the economy.

And there are opportunities, too.  As in ...

As it engages and responds to the opportunities and challenges these trends present, Los Angeles is illuminating the path for other localities and policymakers at all levels of government who are beginning to grapple with the imperative of immigrant integration and the ad hoc nature of most responses so far.

and, my favourite ...

A strategy that builds on demography and catalyzes informed engagement of immigrants and other stakeholders could create the energy and focus needed to address the challenges and opportunities posed by integration issues, and, at the same time, build a vibrant and more cohesive Los Angeles community.

What this report really says in its 74 windy and repetitive pages can be reduced to one sentence ...

The government machine is institutionally incapable of absorbing evidence contrary to its foundational belief in the imminence of the multiracial paradise.

That’s it.  There isn’t any more.

Ironically, the degree to which the collapse of trust and racial balkanisation can be countered is the degree to which LA eventually becomes a Mexican city.  It might be pretty quick - the report states that in 2000, 36% of the LA population was foreign born, but 55% of the children were second generation.

And what will the NCII write about then?

As with the story cited in “New York Times Bid To Make Obama Genuflect More?” and its (end of article) admission that “almost all the jobs lost by men in the 25 to 54 age group have been lost by whites”, it will come as no surprise to my readers here at MR that there is a New TB threat: Global ties bring an ancient disease to Silicon Valley.

However, when the source is the primary newspaper of Silicon Valley, the San Jose Mercury News, we are compelled to inquire:

What’s the agenda?

Is this yet another bid to make Obama, a clear vectorist, genuflect more?  Plausibly except for one thing: 

Vectorism is Holocaustianity‘s central (if unspoken) dogma for gentiles (and sacrificial Jews in diaspora), and the San Jose Mercury News is clearly targeting those outside of Israel.  This seems more than just another ploy for political extortion by the Theocracy.

Is this the harbinger of a fundamental schism within the Western power structure?

READ MORE...

The Daily Mail is a ghastly little rag.  It makes its money by throwing tidbits to the apoplectic classes.  Apoplectica - never an attractive demographic, but also never slow on the patriotic uptake - duly responds with much harrumphing and general, if meaningless, indignation.

Master valve open.  Hot air released.  Situation normal.

It’s a curious kind of handcart for the ride to hell.  But since 2001 the Mail has been able to boast among its columnists the doyen of thinking cart-pullers, Peter Hitchens.  It even gave him his own

blog

soapbox.

Hitchens, of course, is famously conflicted with his brother Christopher, the infinitely more successful and recently-Jewish one-time Bilderberger and liberal galáctico.  One can only imagine with what disdain the bibulous god-basher must view his brother’s professional domicile in right-wing populism.  But I’ve a sneaking suspicion that matters took a serious turn for the worse over the cornflakes this morning.

The headline won’t have helped: Was World War Two just as pointless and self-defeating as Iraq, asks Peter Hitchens.

READ MORE...

Here is the full text of Enoch Powell’s speech to the Annual General Meeting of the West Midlands Area Conservative Political Centre, at the Midland Hotel, Birmingham on 20th April 1968.

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature. One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.

Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: “If only,” they love to think, “if only people wouldn’t talk about it, it probably wouldn’t happen.” Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.

At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.

A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries. After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: “If I had the money to go, I wouldn’t stay in this country.” I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn’t last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: “I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan’t be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years’ time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.”

I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?

The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children. I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.

READ MORE...

A study by Professor John-Dylan Haynes, who is the Bernstein Professor of Computational Neuroscience at the Max Planck Institute, has cast fresh doubt upon the existence of free will.

Unconscious decisions in the brain

Already several seconds before we consciously make a decision its outcome can be predicted from unconscious activity in the brain. This is shown by a study of scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, in collaboration with the Charité University Hospital and the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Berlin. The researchers from the group of Professor John-Dylan Haynes used a brain scanner to investigate what happens in the human brain just before a decision is made. “Many processes in the brain occur automatically and without involvement of our consciousness. This prevents our mind from being overloaded by simple routine tasks. But when it comes to decisions we tend to assume they are made by our conscious mind. This is questioned by our current findings.”

... In the study participants could freely decide if they wanted to press a button with their left or right hand. They were free to make this decision whenever they wanted, but had to remember at which time they felt they had made up their mind. The aim of the experiment was to find out what happens in the brain in the period just before person felt the decision was made. The researchers found that it was possible to predict from brain signals which option participants would take already seven seconds before they consciously made their decision. Normally researchers look what happens when the decision is made, but not what happens several seconds before. The fact that decisions can be predicted so long before they are made is a striking finding.

This unprecedented prediction of a free decision was made possible by sophisticated computer programs that were trained to recognize typical brain activity patterns preceding each of the two choices. Micropatterns of activity in frontopolar cortex were predictive of the choices even before participants knew which option they were going to choose. The decision could not be predicted perfectly, but prediction was clearly above chance. This suggests that the decision is unconsciously prepared ahead of time but the final decision might still be reversible.

... Haynes and colleagues now show that brain activity predicts even up to 7 seconds ahead of time how a person is going to decide. But they also warn that the study does not finally rule out free will: “Our study shows that decisions are unconsciously prepared much longer than previously thought. But we do not know yet where the final decision is made. Especially we still need to investigate whether a decision prepared by these brain areas can still be reversed.”

READ MORE...

From “Discerning the Ancestry of European Americans in Genetic Association Studies”: