The Chinese seem to have provided an excellent Olympics, not that I'm really into it, but in the past fortnight, it has been difficult to avoid it. The opening ceremony was a celebration of Chinese culture and history, of course it was cliched and sickly sweet, but for the Chinese it was a moment of pride in their collective achievement.
What is planned for London 2012?
Well, apparently we are to be represented by a troupe of 'dancers' called Zoo Nation, an urban hip hop, rap group!
I know, I know, usually I would be swearing, and I was when I found out, but really is it a surprise? Not really, everything else is polluted with this 'diversity' shit, so why not the Olympics? In fact the bid for the Olympics was full of references to bullshit 'diversity', they had dozens of black and Asian kids in Singapore representing London!
But what an embarrassment, what a humiliation, every nation is allowed to celebrate their culture and history, except us! What a pathetic joke
Guardian article
BNP article
Another Guardian article
Free Republic article
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Baiting the Bear
'Mikheil Saakashvili’s decision to use the opening of the Olympic Games to cover Georgia’s invasion of its breakaway province of South Ossetia must rank in stupidity with Gamal Abdel-Nasser’s decision to close the Straits of Tiran to Israeli ships.
Nasser’s blunder cost him the Sinai in the Six-Day War. Saakashvili’s blunder probably means permanent loss of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
After shelling and attacking what he claims is his own country, killing scores of his own Ossetian citizens and sending tens of thousands fleeing into Russia, Saakashvili’s army was whipped back into Georgia in 48 hours.
Vladimir Putin took the opportunity to kick the Georgian army out of Abkhazia, as well, to bomb Tbilisi and to seize Gori, birthplace of Stalin.
Reveling in his status as an intimate of George Bush, Dick Cheney and John McCain, and America’s lone democratic ally in the Caucasus, Saakashvili thought he could get away with a lightning coup and present the world with a fait accompli.
Mikheil did not reckon on the rage or resolve of the Bear.'
Read the rest here
Nasser’s blunder cost him the Sinai in the Six-Day War. Saakashvili’s blunder probably means permanent loss of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
After shelling and attacking what he claims is his own country, killing scores of his own Ossetian citizens and sending tens of thousands fleeing into Russia, Saakashvili’s army was whipped back into Georgia in 48 hours.
Vladimir Putin took the opportunity to kick the Georgian army out of Abkhazia, as well, to bomb Tbilisi and to seize Gori, birthplace of Stalin.
Reveling in his status as an intimate of George Bush, Dick Cheney and John McCain, and America’s lone democratic ally in the Caucasus, Saakashvili thought he could get away with a lightning coup and present the world with a fait accompli.
Mikheil did not reckon on the rage or resolve of the Bear.'
Read the rest here
Friday, August 15, 2008
Russia and the 'Free World'
George Bush has declared that Russia's actions in Georgia has damaged it's relations with the 'Free World', hmmmmm!
The same Free World where it's governments unleash millions of third world savages on their own people?
The same Free World where the indigenous peoples are banned from objecting to this third world invasion, sponsored by it's governments, and threatened with persecution and imprisonment if they do oppose it?
The same Free World where half of our incomes are stolen by those very same states, much of it to pay for the health, lodgings, employment (or more often unemployment) and education of the same third world invaders?
The same Free World where we are told we have the power to 'change things', when in fact all we have is different versions of the same political prostitutes who are selling their peoples down the river?
Well, if that is the Free World, I want nothing to do with it, Although Russia is not perfect, at least their leaders don't sell their people down the river for a quick buck, at least they don't steal half their incomes to pay for a third world invasion of African and Islamic savages, which they then unleash against their people!
We are being lied to, we are being whored out for the benefit of these political pimps, the same ones who now condemn Russia for protecting their own people, I know who I would rather have rule me!
The same Free World where it's governments unleash millions of third world savages on their own people?
The same Free World where the indigenous peoples are banned from objecting to this third world invasion, sponsored by it's governments, and threatened with persecution and imprisonment if they do oppose it?
The same Free World where half of our incomes are stolen by those very same states, much of it to pay for the health, lodgings, employment (or more often unemployment) and education of the same third world invaders?
The same Free World where we are told we have the power to 'change things', when in fact all we have is different versions of the same political prostitutes who are selling their peoples down the river?
Well, if that is the Free World, I want nothing to do with it, Although Russia is not perfect, at least their leaders don't sell their people down the river for a quick buck, at least they don't steal half their incomes to pay for a third world invasion of African and Islamic savages, which they then unleash against their people!
We are being lied to, we are being whored out for the benefit of these political pimps, the same ones who now condemn Russia for protecting their own people, I know who I would rather have rule me!
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Russophobia and Gerorgia
So, when the Serbs try to reassert their authority over land that is theirs, in fact the historic heart of their nation and chase out the invaders, that is evil and NATO must then bomb the shit out of the Serbs to prevent them to recapture their land!
When Georgia does the very same in Ossetia and the Russians take the place of NATO, then it is Russia that is the bad guy?
So George Bush condemns Russia for 'violating' the territorial sovereignty of Georgia, right! What happened in Iraq in 2003?
What happened in Vietnam in the sixties and seventies?
Did Vietnam or Iraq kill American troops in Kuwait or the Gulf of Tonkin?
Russia borders Georgia, the Ossetians wants nothing to do with Georgia and would prefer to be absorbed by Russia, the Georgians under the insane Saakashvilli attacked Ossetia and Russia responded.
Russia did not 'invade' Georgia as many western papers stated, the retaliated against a cocky Georgia.
Perhaps Saakashvilli thought the Americans would ride to his aid? Perhaps he thought the Russians would stand by and let him humiliate them, he was wrong!
Russia is in the right, perhaps they will use this to crush Georgia and overthrow Saakashvilli, well he can't say it's not partly his fault, can he?
With the Ukraine now making unhelpful statements regarding the Russian naval bases in the Crimea, it seems this may turn into something more dangerous, I hope the Ukrainians are only sabre rattling, because they would not be best serve with a war with Russia.
I am amazed at the naked hatred of Russia I have seen in 'conservative' blogs over the past two days, it seems one rule for us, another for Russia, apparently Russia must swallow all defeats and humiliations without comeback, whilst we, in the west must right every wrong and 'free' all peoples, even against their will! This is arrogance of the highest kind, it is Russia to which we should be looking for hope and protection, it is Russia that has successfully fought and beat Muslims in the recent past, not us, it is Russia that has some of the worlds largest energy reserves, not us, it is Russia that is seeing a Christian renaissance and a rediscovery of it's past, not us!
America seems weak now, it is divided and bankrupt, it's armies are broken and overstretched, it has lost its way in the 'war on terror' and like the rest of the west is being swamped by invading immigrants, Russia is strong, it is Russia we need to look to now, antagonising them now would be a folly of historic proportions.
When Georgia does the very same in Ossetia and the Russians take the place of NATO, then it is Russia that is the bad guy?
So George Bush condemns Russia for 'violating' the territorial sovereignty of Georgia, right! What happened in Iraq in 2003?
What happened in Vietnam in the sixties and seventies?
Did Vietnam or Iraq kill American troops in Kuwait or the Gulf of Tonkin?
Russia borders Georgia, the Ossetians wants nothing to do with Georgia and would prefer to be absorbed by Russia, the Georgians under the insane Saakashvilli attacked Ossetia and Russia responded.
Russia did not 'invade' Georgia as many western papers stated, the retaliated against a cocky Georgia.
Perhaps Saakashvilli thought the Americans would ride to his aid? Perhaps he thought the Russians would stand by and let him humiliate them, he was wrong!
Russia is in the right, perhaps they will use this to crush Georgia and overthrow Saakashvilli, well he can't say it's not partly his fault, can he?
With the Ukraine now making unhelpful statements regarding the Russian naval bases in the Crimea, it seems this may turn into something more dangerous, I hope the Ukrainians are only sabre rattling, because they would not be best serve with a war with Russia.
I am amazed at the naked hatred of Russia I have seen in 'conservative' blogs over the past two days, it seems one rule for us, another for Russia, apparently Russia must swallow all defeats and humiliations without comeback, whilst we, in the west must right every wrong and 'free' all peoples, even against their will! This is arrogance of the highest kind, it is Russia to which we should be looking for hope and protection, it is Russia that has successfully fought and beat Muslims in the recent past, not us, it is Russia that has some of the worlds largest energy reserves, not us, it is Russia that is seeing a Christian renaissance and a rediscovery of it's past, not us!
America seems weak now, it is divided and bankrupt, it's armies are broken and overstretched, it has lost its way in the 'war on terror' and like the rest of the west is being swamped by invading immigrants, Russia is strong, it is Russia we need to look to now, antagonising them now would be a folly of historic proportions.
Friday, August 08, 2008
An idiotic war!
What the hell is wrong with President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia?
Does he think we are going to aid him in his moronic bid for a victory against Russia?
This is insane!
I want nothing to do with a war over 'South Ossetia', I don't care if Georgia owns it or Russia owns it or if it is independent, it is no business of ours! Mr Saakashvilli's attempt to get us involved should be given short shrift, he must be told we will not risk nuclear war over this shitty scrap of Caucasian land. He must also be told in no uncertain terms that he should cease his stupid war and that he must leave power at once.
We must not allow this to go further then Georgia, it is not our fight, we must make that plain now!
Telegraph
The Times
Reuters
Does he think we are going to aid him in his moronic bid for a victory against Russia?
This is insane!
I want nothing to do with a war over 'South Ossetia', I don't care if Georgia owns it or Russia owns it or if it is independent, it is no business of ours! Mr Saakashvilli's attempt to get us involved should be given short shrift, he must be told we will not risk nuclear war over this shitty scrap of Caucasian land. He must also be told in no uncertain terms that he should cease his stupid war and that he must leave power at once.
We must not allow this to go further then Georgia, it is not our fight, we must make that plain now!
Telegraph
The Times
Reuters
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Capital Punishment, the one thing the government hates!
Now we all know how limp wristed the government are, we all know who sleazy and amoral they are, and now we all know as fact, that they love criminals, especially murderers!
You probably all know by now about the honeymooners who were burgled and shot in Antigua, resulting in their deaths. Well, apparently the British government (ie: traitors) have demanded that no one be executed in relation to this DOUBLE murder!
'The British government faces a potential diplomatic row with Antigua over the shooting of the honeymoon couple Catherine and Benjamin Mullany after demanding that anyone convicted of the crime will not face the death penalty.'
What is wrong with these morons?
Why are they so obsessed with some murdering scum who murdered two Britons, once known as their fellow countrymen. I know they made a song and dance about Saddam Hussein's execution, but now it seems that it is government policy, why?
These idiots who rule this country just piss me off so much, why shouldn't some murdering scum get hanged? The majority of people in this country want murderers to be executed, and these arse holes pontificate on our behalf on a subject that they are miles away from us on!
What pompous pricks!
Link
You probably all know by now about the honeymooners who were burgled and shot in Antigua, resulting in their deaths. Well, apparently the British government (ie: traitors) have demanded that no one be executed in relation to this DOUBLE murder!
'The British government faces a potential diplomatic row with Antigua over the shooting of the honeymoon couple Catherine and Benjamin Mullany after demanding that anyone convicted of the crime will not face the death penalty.'
What is wrong with these morons?
Why are they so obsessed with some murdering scum who murdered two Britons, once known as their fellow countrymen. I know they made a song and dance about Saddam Hussein's execution, but now it seems that it is government policy, why?
These idiots who rule this country just piss me off so much, why shouldn't some murdering scum get hanged? The majority of people in this country want murderers to be executed, and these arse holes pontificate on our behalf on a subject that they are miles away from us on!
What pompous pricks!
Link
Sunday, July 27, 2008
The Saxon Code
No crown but ours shall govern here,
No strangers rule with gold or fear,
No plow but ours may slough the loam,
No prow but ours slash the spume,
No hand but ours may bind our kin,
No gods but ours proclaim a sin,
No law but ours may stay a blow,
No hand but ours may draw a bow,
No men but ours may hunt the land,
No sons but ours bear sword in hand,
No word but ours shall we trust,
No flags be flown except of us,
No land but ours do we demand,
No more than what we have farmed,
No strangers slaving on our soil,
No man unpaid or forced to toil,
No heroes praised but ours alone,
No other kin but our blood and bone,
No strangers to tell us who we are,
No obedience to any foreign laws.
Source
No strangers rule with gold or fear,
No plow but ours may slough the loam,
No prow but ours slash the spume,
No hand but ours may bind our kin,
No gods but ours proclaim a sin,
No law but ours may stay a blow,
No hand but ours may draw a bow,
No men but ours may hunt the land,
No sons but ours bear sword in hand,
No word but ours shall we trust,
No flags be flown except of us,
No land but ours do we demand,
No more than what we have farmed,
No strangers slaving on our soil,
No man unpaid or forced to toil,
No heroes praised but ours alone,
No other kin but our blood and bone,
No strangers to tell us who we are,
No obedience to any foreign laws.
Source
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
A sad day!
Well, Radovan Karadzic has finally been caught!
The left are having fits of euphoria, running all the old anti-Serb propaganda, talking of the innocent Muslims, and the nasty Serbs!
They have already condemned Mr Karadzic, even though they insist he will face a trial! Why? The result is already known, they will find him guilty! He opposed elite liberal opinion, he stood by his own people, he waged a war for the survival of the Serbs in Bosnia, and for this, he will be found guilty.
The left don't care if you kill people or have responsibility for thousands or millions of deaths, the only care why you killed them! If, you killed them to return your country to a year zero, or if you killed people to redistribute property or just killed those who opposed you, they don't care, as long as you are a lefty, as long as you have signed up to all the trendy modern causes, they will give you a pass!
If, on the other hand, you fight for your ethnic group, against another ethnic group who also are of a different religion, and you do it for ethnic, national and religious reasons, then any deaths resulting are evil! Look at the difference in treatment between the rulers of China, Vietnam and South Africa on the one side and the Christian Lebanese, Bosnian Serbs, Russians and Kosovan Serbs on the other!
There seems to be a pattern, if you are white, and you fight against blacks then the whites are evil, Rhodesia, Apartheid South Africa and Darfur are examples of this, if you are 'ethnic', but you are Christian and are fighting the Muslims, (Same colour) then it's the Christians you are baddies, the Maronite Christians and Armenians are in this category.
If both are white but one side is Muslim, then they become the default 'goodies' in the MSM and among western governments, who, never missing an opportunity to fuck their own up the arse in favour of Muslims, will align themselves to our enemies!
The MSM reaction to the capture of Mr Karadzic is perverse, as was the treatment of the Serbs in the Yugoslavian wars of the 1990s. We were told day after day, week after week that the Serbs had started the wars, that they were purposefully continuing the wars and were the only ones killing 'innocents'.
And most of us believed it!
Well it is now known that Chechens, Afghans, Iranians and other Muslims were in Bosnia fighting the Serbs, that they would viciously murder the Serbs they captured, video it and use it in pro-Islamic propaganda. Hizbollah, Al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood were in Bosnia, funded not only by their own people, but by Western governments, especially the British and American governments!
Now, I'm sure most of us are quite used to knowing our governments are at best whores, and at worst traitors, but surely this is unbelievable? That the British and American governments were sending money to Iran so that they could fund Hizbollah who were murdering Christian Serbs in Bosnia!
So in effect we were funding Hisbollah! Through our taxes!
But of course, it's always the cartoon baddies that the MSM goes after, never after the traitors in our governments (well, they wouldn't, would they)
And what is ironic, is that we may have to look for many Mr Karadzics in the West to ethnically cleanse us of all the hordes of minorities who reside here and are still coming in!
Who will look the fool then?
The left are having fits of euphoria, running all the old anti-Serb propaganda, talking of the innocent Muslims, and the nasty Serbs!
They have already condemned Mr Karadzic, even though they insist he will face a trial! Why? The result is already known, they will find him guilty! He opposed elite liberal opinion, he stood by his own people, he waged a war for the survival of the Serbs in Bosnia, and for this, he will be found guilty.
The left don't care if you kill people or have responsibility for thousands or millions of deaths, the only care why you killed them! If, you killed them to return your country to a year zero, or if you killed people to redistribute property or just killed those who opposed you, they don't care, as long as you are a lefty, as long as you have signed up to all the trendy modern causes, they will give you a pass!
If, on the other hand, you fight for your ethnic group, against another ethnic group who also are of a different religion, and you do it for ethnic, national and religious reasons, then any deaths resulting are evil! Look at the difference in treatment between the rulers of China, Vietnam and South Africa on the one side and the Christian Lebanese, Bosnian Serbs, Russians and Kosovan Serbs on the other!
There seems to be a pattern, if you are white, and you fight against blacks then the whites are evil, Rhodesia, Apartheid South Africa and Darfur are examples of this, if you are 'ethnic', but you are Christian and are fighting the Muslims, (Same colour) then it's the Christians you are baddies, the Maronite Christians and Armenians are in this category.
If both are white but one side is Muslim, then they become the default 'goodies' in the MSM and among western governments, who, never missing an opportunity to fuck their own up the arse in favour of Muslims, will align themselves to our enemies!
The MSM reaction to the capture of Mr Karadzic is perverse, as was the treatment of the Serbs in the Yugoslavian wars of the 1990s. We were told day after day, week after week that the Serbs had started the wars, that they were purposefully continuing the wars and were the only ones killing 'innocents'.
And most of us believed it!
Well it is now known that Chechens, Afghans, Iranians and other Muslims were in Bosnia fighting the Serbs, that they would viciously murder the Serbs they captured, video it and use it in pro-Islamic propaganda. Hizbollah, Al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood were in Bosnia, funded not only by their own people, but by Western governments, especially the British and American governments!
Now, I'm sure most of us are quite used to knowing our governments are at best whores, and at worst traitors, but surely this is unbelievable? That the British and American governments were sending money to Iran so that they could fund Hizbollah who were murdering Christian Serbs in Bosnia!
So in effect we were funding Hisbollah! Through our taxes!
But of course, it's always the cartoon baddies that the MSM goes after, never after the traitors in our governments (well, they wouldn't, would they)
And what is ironic, is that we may have to look for many Mr Karadzics in the West to ethnically cleanse us of all the hordes of minorities who reside here and are still coming in!
Who will look the fool then?
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Now the fat are 'victims'!!!
When will this non-sense stop?
Well, some lard buts have decided to follow on the coat tails of the rest of the 'diversity' gravy train and demand similar hate laws that would prevent 'discrimination' against fatties in the workplace, on airplanes or out and about. Apparently a new cartoon about lazy fatties has them enraged!
'WALL-E has garnered rave reviews for its satire on consumer culture, in which future humans are depicted as a group of obese gluttons who never leave their padded floating arm chairs.
But one group is not amused - the swelling ranks of fat pride groups, who believe the film propagates anti-obesity hysteria comparable with the quest for the perfect body by the eugenics movement in Nazi Germany. '
Fat Pride? Who would be proud to be fat? And see how they are trying to compare themselves to the Jews? See how us making fun of fatties is suddenly as bad as the Holocaust?
'Fighters for fat rights are calling for legislation to ban weight discrimination in the workplace, denouncing airlines that demand they buy two seats and car manufacturers whose seat belts are too small. '
So, Instead of these fat lard arses paying for 2 seats, I have got to be crushed by their flab if I'm unlucky enough to get seated next to them? Fuck them, all they have to do is stop eating so much shit! Then they have the cheek to demand legislation to prevent doctors demanding that they lose some weight before and operation! Are these people stupid as well?
A large human blob, Ms Wann, the head of the Fat Pride group, condemns the cartoon saying, "It's the classic stereotype that fat people are stupid, smelly, lazy, disgusting and out of control.'
Uhhh, yeah, well fat people ARE stupid, smelly, lazy, disgusting and obviously out of control! That's how they got fat in the first place!!!
I have had the opportunity to be near some fatties in my time, most were smelly due to the folds of fat that they can't wash properly, they are obviously not very active, or they would not be fat, it does seem disgusting to allow one's self to get that big and that gross by eating pretty much non stop for years!
Fatties don't get fat in a fortnight, it takes years of effort, well, years of idleness. Surely it is to be expected?
So, The fatties can go on all they like about 'discrimination', hate speech etc, it does not change the fact that they are lazy, stupid, disgusting and out of control!
All they have to do to lose some weight is eat less shit, eat less overall and walk now and then!
Source
Film: WALL-E
Well, some lard buts have decided to follow on the coat tails of the rest of the 'diversity' gravy train and demand similar hate laws that would prevent 'discrimination' against fatties in the workplace, on airplanes or out and about. Apparently a new cartoon about lazy fatties has them enraged!
'WALL-E has garnered rave reviews for its satire on consumer culture, in which future humans are depicted as a group of obese gluttons who never leave their padded floating arm chairs.
But one group is not amused - the swelling ranks of fat pride groups, who believe the film propagates anti-obesity hysteria comparable with the quest for the perfect body by the eugenics movement in Nazi Germany. '
Fat Pride? Who would be proud to be fat? And see how they are trying to compare themselves to the Jews? See how us making fun of fatties is suddenly as bad as the Holocaust?
'Fighters for fat rights are calling for legislation to ban weight discrimination in the workplace, denouncing airlines that demand they buy two seats and car manufacturers whose seat belts are too small. '
So, Instead of these fat lard arses paying for 2 seats, I have got to be crushed by their flab if I'm unlucky enough to get seated next to them? Fuck them, all they have to do is stop eating so much shit! Then they have the cheek to demand legislation to prevent doctors demanding that they lose some weight before and operation! Are these people stupid as well?
A large human blob, Ms Wann, the head of the Fat Pride group, condemns the cartoon saying, "It's the classic stereotype that fat people are stupid, smelly, lazy, disgusting and out of control.'
Uhhh, yeah, well fat people ARE stupid, smelly, lazy, disgusting and obviously out of control! That's how they got fat in the first place!!!
I have had the opportunity to be near some fatties in my time, most were smelly due to the folds of fat that they can't wash properly, they are obviously not very active, or they would not be fat, it does seem disgusting to allow one's self to get that big and that gross by eating pretty much non stop for years!
Fatties don't get fat in a fortnight, it takes years of effort, well, years of idleness. Surely it is to be expected?
So, The fatties can go on all they like about 'discrimination', hate speech etc, it does not change the fact that they are lazy, stupid, disgusting and out of control!
All they have to do to lose some weight is eat less shit, eat less overall and walk now and then!
Source
Film: WALL-E
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Insanity!
I was made aware of this piece by a friend. Apparently during 'Gay Pride in London, some 'trans people', whatever that means, 'transsexual' or 'transvestite' it does not make completely clear, were offended by a toilet steward.
The story states that some big hairy men in frocks tried to enter the women's toilet at Trafalgar Square, only to be stopped by the sensible steward who rightly decided that a big hairy man in a frock did not a woman make! So he refused entry to the toilets and suggested that they could use the disabled toilets, obviously trying to be helpful, and not wanting to have women screaming at the sight of some big hairy man!
However, this was not enough for the big hairy men in frocks, they demanded to be allowed in, and they wanted and apology for the discrimination shown to them!!!
Well as you can imagine, the big hairy men in frocks got their way, supported by the police!
Tell me this is not a society in terminal decline! When men can pretend to be women and then accuse someone of discrimination when not allowed into a woman's toilet, then you must admit something is very wrong with us!
I can only despair!
Source
The story states that some big hairy men in frocks tried to enter the women's toilet at Trafalgar Square, only to be stopped by the sensible steward who rightly decided that a big hairy man in a frock did not a woman make! So he refused entry to the toilets and suggested that they could use the disabled toilets, obviously trying to be helpful, and not wanting to have women screaming at the sight of some big hairy man!
However, this was not enough for the big hairy men in frocks, they demanded to be allowed in, and they wanted and apology for the discrimination shown to them!!!
Well as you can imagine, the big hairy men in frocks got their way, supported by the police!
Tell me this is not a society in terminal decline! When men can pretend to be women and then accuse someone of discrimination when not allowed into a woman's toilet, then you must admit something is very wrong with us!
I can only despair!
Source
Monday, July 14, 2008
Resumption of service!
Ah well, that took longer then I thought!
It's been an interesting few months, the economy is going into meltdown, our glorious leaders, those imbeciles, are thrashing around feigning that they actually know anything about economics, whilst fucking people up the arse with more taxes, more fines, and debasing the currency in a reckless stupid and shortsighted fashion.
Then Gordon Brown, goes back on Labour's manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on the European Constitution, that lying spiv Brown and that shower of mediocre, treasonous shits that make up the cabinet make up some ridiculous non-sense that the Lisbon Treaty is different from the Constitution. What a crock of shit!
America seems likely to be electing Barrack Obama, some lefty half caste with an axe to grind, someone who's loyalty to the US seems at best, suspect, and whats worse, most of White America seems fine with it!!
Ron Paul was a non-event in the Republican primaries, proving that Americans seem as dedicated to their own destruction as are Europeans, what a sad state of affairs!
A storm is coming, it is the judgement awaiting us for our own craven surrender in the face of aggressive third worlders, for our selling of our birthrights, for our embrace of a destructive nihilism where there is no right, no standard, no morality and no loyalty!
This storm will be lit by the coming economic cataclysm, it will be stoked by the racial and sectarian divides that are the results of the massive and reckless immigration policies, and kept going by our complete detachment from reality!
It is, I believe, a storm we deserve and need!
It's been an interesting few months, the economy is going into meltdown, our glorious leaders, those imbeciles, are thrashing around feigning that they actually know anything about economics, whilst fucking people up the arse with more taxes, more fines, and debasing the currency in a reckless stupid and shortsighted fashion.
Then Gordon Brown, goes back on Labour's manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on the European Constitution, that lying spiv Brown and that shower of mediocre, treasonous shits that make up the cabinet make up some ridiculous non-sense that the Lisbon Treaty is different from the Constitution. What a crock of shit!
America seems likely to be electing Barrack Obama, some lefty half caste with an axe to grind, someone who's loyalty to the US seems at best, suspect, and whats worse, most of White America seems fine with it!!
Ron Paul was a non-event in the Republican primaries, proving that Americans seem as dedicated to their own destruction as are Europeans, what a sad state of affairs!
A storm is coming, it is the judgement awaiting us for our own craven surrender in the face of aggressive third worlders, for our selling of our birthrights, for our embrace of a destructive nihilism where there is no right, no standard, no morality and no loyalty!
This storm will be lit by the coming economic cataclysm, it will be stoked by the racial and sectarian divides that are the results of the massive and reckless immigration policies, and kept going by our complete detachment from reality!
It is, I believe, a storm we deserve and need!
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Fare well!
As anyone who has been viewing this site recently has noticed, I have been off doing other things. I now think this is the right time to stop blogging.
It has been fun, I have learnt many things, conversed with many intelligent people, but now, I'm changing careers and countries and selling my house, so for the next few months I will be busy, after that who knows.
God Bless!
It has been fun, I have learnt many things, conversed with many intelligent people, but now, I'm changing careers and countries and selling my house, so for the next few months I will be busy, after that who knows.
God Bless!
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
A good man died today!
Ian Smith was for 15 years the Prime Minister of Rhodesia, a great African nation that has now been reduced to ruin by a black communist terrorist Robert Mugabe, with the full moral support of the West and it's corrupt leaders.
Ian Smith was a true gentleman, he did not, as his detractors insist, hate black people, he only thought them unable for self rule, and who can now dispute that?
He declared independence from a white hating socialist government, with a declaration much the same as that issued by the Americans two centuries previously, instead of being welcomed into the supposed civilised world, he was smeared and hated, the Americans, the British in league with the Soviets worked hard to bring down this legitimate government, the Soviets, with the full knowledge of the west funded and trained terrorists to murder white farmers and their black farm hands.
Rhodesia was once a wealthy, civilised nation, a proud nation of a few million blacks and three hundred thousand white settlers, the black Rhodesians had at that time one of the highest standards of living in Africa, now they are living in a squalid prison nation, starving to death. But at least they are 'democratic' those white people who destroyed Rhodesia will no doubt say!
Shame on Harold Wilson, shame on Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford and Edward Heath, shame on all of those who sold the people of Rhodesia down the river for mistaken ideology, the lie of 'democracy'.
Long may the memory of Ian Smith live on, may he rest in peace.
Wikipedia's Ian Smith article
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Enoch Powell's 'River of Blood' speach
Note how moderate it really is, and remember how this man was smeared by the establishment who were in fear after he spoke the truth. He was smeared and destroyed, has anyone learned? Apparently not as Nigel Hasitlow has discovered! Much to Cameron's continued shame!
"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.
In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General's Office.
There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.
As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.
The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: "How can its dimensions be reduced?" Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.
The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.
It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week - and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.
Let no one suppose that the flow of dependants will automatically tail off. On the contrary, even at the present admission rate of only 5,000 a year by voucher, there is sufficient for a further 25,000 dependants per annum ad infinitum, without taking into account the huge reservoir of existing relations in this country - and I am making no allowance at all for fraudulent entry. In these circumstances nothing will suffice but that the total inflow for settlement should be reduced at once to negligible proportions, and that the necessary legislative and administrative measures be taken without delay.
I stress the words "for settlement." This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.
I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.
Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party's policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.
Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.
Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects.
The third element of the Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendant should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.
There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it "against discrimination", whether they be leader-writers of the same kidney and sometimes on the same newspapers which year after year in the 1930s tried to blind this country to the rising peril which confronted it, or archbishops who live in palaces, faring delicately with the bedclothes pulled right up over their heads. They have got it exactly and diametrically wrong.
The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.
This is why to enact legislation of the kind before parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match on to gunpowder. The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do.
Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.
Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.
But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.
They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.
In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.
I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:
“Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out.
“The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her 'phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home.
“The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house - at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”
The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.
Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.
But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.
We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population - that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.
Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man's hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:
'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'
All credit to John Stonehouse for having had the insight to perceive that, and the courage to say it.
For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal."
"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.
In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General's Office.
There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.
As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.
The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: "How can its dimensions be reduced?" Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.
The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.
It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week - and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.
Let no one suppose that the flow of dependants will automatically tail off. On the contrary, even at the present admission rate of only 5,000 a year by voucher, there is sufficient for a further 25,000 dependants per annum ad infinitum, without taking into account the huge reservoir of existing relations in this country - and I am making no allowance at all for fraudulent entry. In these circumstances nothing will suffice but that the total inflow for settlement should be reduced at once to negligible proportions, and that the necessary legislative and administrative measures be taken without delay.
I stress the words "for settlement." This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.
I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.
Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party's policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.
Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.
Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects.
The third element of the Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendant should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.
There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it "against discrimination", whether they be leader-writers of the same kidney and sometimes on the same newspapers which year after year in the 1930s tried to blind this country to the rising peril which confronted it, or archbishops who live in palaces, faring delicately with the bedclothes pulled right up over their heads. They have got it exactly and diametrically wrong.
The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.
This is why to enact legislation of the kind before parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match on to gunpowder. The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do.
Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.
Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.
But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.
They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.
In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.
I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:
“Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out.
“The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her 'phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home.
“The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house - at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”
The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.
Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.
But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.
We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population - that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.
Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man's hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:
'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'
All credit to John Stonehouse for having had the insight to perceive that, and the courage to say it.
For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal."
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Why America must vote for Ron Paul!
Americans have only one real choice for president in 2008 and he is Ron Paul! He is the only candidate who will limit government, he is the only candidate who will lower taxes, he is the only man who will attempt to reign in America's reckless spending, borrowing and printing of money.
Most importantly, he is the only candidate who could spark a restoration of the West.
Ron Paul is something unusual for an elected representative, he is honest, decent, honourable, wise, moral and straightforward!
He is a Christian, who is repelled by abortion, he opposes the heavy handedness of government, its theft of people's money (tax) and is committed to the abolition of the IRS, Income Tax, the CIA, FBI, NSA, Dept of Labour, Education, Homeland Security, the Federal Reserve, Dept of Health, etc...
He is committed to getting rid of America's deficit, restoring sound money and pulling all American troops out of ALL foreign fields, not just Iraq and Afghanistan!
Social Welfare and Medicare would be put on a transition to abolision.
He opposes any amnesty of illegal immigrants and will act to build a fence on the Mexican border, he would withdraw from the UN, OAS, NAFTA, WTO, World Bank, NATO and a myriad of other useless international organisations.
This truly is radically different to any other candidate and must be a truer representation of many conservative's views.
Some of these things are stuff I can only dream about, and you Americans have the chance to support him and deliver yourselves from Big Government and socialism for good!
The reason I want Paul to win, is that the example displayed to the rest of the world would inspire so many to ask, "well if the Yanks are getting rid of their Income tax, then why can't we"?
People will ask, "well the Yanks left the UN, what is it actually for"?
If Those United States abolish whole departments of state, then they may ask, "do we actually need these twenty or thirty departments"?
And if a President Paul stops illegal immigration into those United States, people over here may ask, "well if America can stop illegal immigration with a thousand mile border fence and good policing, why can't we do it when we are an island"?
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are lost, they were a long time ago by weak willed and lily livered politicians who can only do something once they have the latest polling results before them. there is no point supporting Guilliani or McCain because they support the war, Guilliani is not exactly someone who supports liberty and McCain is all for illegal immigration and amnesty. Why any conservative would vote for Romney with his doubling of public spending whilst governor of Massachusetts or his legalising of gay marriage is beyond me, he is no conservative.
Paul is the only true conservative, he could inspire us all, he could be exactly what our elites fear and would hate, an honest man of integrity who can't be smeared by this hateful clique.
All this elite desires is our money, power over our lives, the opportunity to control what we think and do, and increasingly the desire to know us inside out, to implement an ID card, not only in the UK but in those United States too. They are even touting plans to put microchips(called RFID) inside of us!!
Most importantly, he is the only candidate who could spark a restoration of the West.
Ron Paul is something unusual for an elected representative, he is honest, decent, honourable, wise, moral and straightforward!
He is a Christian, who is repelled by abortion, he opposes the heavy handedness of government, its theft of people's money (tax) and is committed to the abolition of the IRS, Income Tax, the CIA, FBI, NSA, Dept of Labour, Education, Homeland Security, the Federal Reserve, Dept of Health, etc...
He is committed to getting rid of America's deficit, restoring sound money and pulling all American troops out of ALL foreign fields, not just Iraq and Afghanistan!
Social Welfare and Medicare would be put on a transition to abolision.
He opposes any amnesty of illegal immigrants and will act to build a fence on the Mexican border, he would withdraw from the UN, OAS, NAFTA, WTO, World Bank, NATO and a myriad of other useless international organisations.
This truly is radically different to any other candidate and must be a truer representation of many conservative's views.
Some of these things are stuff I can only dream about, and you Americans have the chance to support him and deliver yourselves from Big Government and socialism for good!
The reason I want Paul to win, is that the example displayed to the rest of the world would inspire so many to ask, "well if the Yanks are getting rid of their Income tax, then why can't we"?
People will ask, "well the Yanks left the UN, what is it actually for"?
If Those United States abolish whole departments of state, then they may ask, "do we actually need these twenty or thirty departments"?
And if a President Paul stops illegal immigration into those United States, people over here may ask, "well if America can stop illegal immigration with a thousand mile border fence and good policing, why can't we do it when we are an island"?
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are lost, they were a long time ago by weak willed and lily livered politicians who can only do something once they have the latest polling results before them. there is no point supporting Guilliani or McCain because they support the war, Guilliani is not exactly someone who supports liberty and McCain is all for illegal immigration and amnesty. Why any conservative would vote for Romney with his doubling of public spending whilst governor of Massachusetts or his legalising of gay marriage is beyond me, he is no conservative.
Paul is the only true conservative, he could inspire us all, he could be exactly what our elites fear and would hate, an honest man of integrity who can't be smeared by this hateful clique.
All this elite desires is our money, power over our lives, the opportunity to control what we think and do, and increasingly the desire to know us inside out, to implement an ID card, not only in the UK but in those United States too. They are even touting plans to put microchips(called RFID) inside of us!!
Already in England, the government is ready to roll out a programme that would be able to track all vehicles in the UK from satellite, they talk about a new 'pay as you drive scheme', but don't bet that they will then abolish the Vehicle Tax once this has been implemented. Every vehicle in the country must now have a black box which records the speed of the vehicle, which can be checked by police at any time.
Now it they can do that with cars, imagine what they could do with us? Implant a chip and hey presto, they will have complete power over our lives. Granted they are probably too stupid to go round being deliberately evil, but you don't have to be smart to fuck someone life up!! Think of all the mistakes government and government agencies make on a regular basis!
Our masters continue to allow massive third world immigration, why? Not only to these people form a very handy pool of loyal votes, patrons of the government, they also are guaranteed to attack us, usually mugging us or raping our women, but the odd time they detonate a bomb on bus or a train, all very convenient for governments, who can grab more power and tell us they are doing this for our good!!!
When we protest we are labelled 'racists', 'homophobes', 'xenophobes', 'right wing nuts', 'mean' and they go on doing exactly what they always wanted to do, namely fuck us sideways.
It all seems so convenient, they unleash these savages on us, we get attacked and then the government, the very same people who unleashed the savages on us, come to our rescue, only there is a price, we must give up some liberty, just a small bit, not a lot, but then this happens year after year, always they come to rescue us from the same thing, the beast they have unleashed on us!
Strange no? Suspicious even?
Our elites are already too powerful, they control the MSM, education and every branch of government. They control the international establishment, trade and currencies. There is little we can do against such raw power and might, but, there is one thing you can do if you are a citizen of those United States, you can vote for Ron Paul and shake things up, this act could undo much that this international elite of slimy backstabbing shits, have worked so hard for over the past 60 years, go on please do us all a favour and vote Ron Paul.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Jean Charles de Menezes
In those days after the bombings of July 7th, 2005, and the attempted bombings on the 21st July, we were on edge, my nerves were shot and when I heard that someone had been shot at Stockwell station I was actually happy, that the police had stopped another possible attack.
In the hours that followed we were told that the shot fellow had been seen running into the station with a bulky winter coat on, that he had vaulted the barriers and had refused to stop when police told him to.
Even when we found out the following day that the wrong guy had been shot, most of us continued to sympathise not with the dead fellow, but with the police, who, we were told, had genuinely believed they had to shoot de Menezes or that he would kill many more people.
Fair enough!
The fringe leftists who criticised the police were held in contempt, "who's side are you on anyway?" we asked, this is to protect us, not them!
I must say, looking at what we now know, how wrong I have been proved, how ashamed I am that I have said and written things about an innocent man, all because I trusted the police, an arm of this corrupt state.
I have believed the police when they reported that de Menezes was being investigated for the rape of some unnamed female, then they made a big point that he was an illegal immigrant (Well, so is half this city, at least he was working and not on welfare like some of them)
But now the Metropolitan Police are on trial, not for the murder of an Innocent man, but for 'breaching health and safety rules', that's great, a small fine at the end, some compo to the families and that should be the end of it?
The police were apparently watching an address in south London, where 'intelligence' what ever that means, indicated that a cell or those close to a cell of terrorists may have stayed. The police sit up to watch those leaving this block of flats, they see Jean Charles leave the building, but because one of the police officers is taking a piss, they can't send an image of de Menezes back to New Scotland Yard for Cressida Dick( the head honcho) to view to see if it matches the image of Hussain Osman, one of the previous days attempted bombers.
So, on one officers say so, Dick (an apt name considering her history in the Metropolitan Police)gave the order to pursue de Menezes and prevent him from entering the Underground.
A team followed him on to a bus, they could see very clearly that he was not wearing a bulky coat, but a light Summer coat, he had no bag with him as he had left it at work the previous day and was on the phone to a friend telling him he was going to be late to a job in Kilburn where he was going to fix a faulty fire alarm.
He got off at Brixton, saw that it was closed and got back on the bus to go to next station, at Stockwell he got off and walked, he did not run, he walked into the station, picked up a metro paper, got out his oyster card and opened the gate strolling down the escalator, check out this link to see Jean Charles de Menezes' last moments of life.
See how he is not running, as we were told, it is the police who run, and after he is shot the public who run up the escalators to get away from some terror they don't wish to see. The accounts given to us, state that some undercover police officers were sitting by de Menezes, that when the armed officers got on the train, the undercover officers yelled to the armed officers, 'he is here', that de Menezes got up and 'went for them', what ever that means? The police held de Meneses, the man with no suicide belt on, as he was wearing a light open summer coat, he had no weapons as he was not carrying anything with him, and he was given no warning at any time.
If he did indeed try to get away, perhaps he had twigged that something was not right about the men about him? Perhaps he thought they were immigration police, and perhaps he struggled, because unlike the Brazilian police most police officers here do not carry guns and if they do, are unlikely to use them?
So the armed police then hold de Menezes down and shoot him, not once or twice or three times but 8 times, seven bullets to his head one to his shoulder, the other 3 shots missed de Menezes, this from the self proclaimed 'crack' firearms unit at point blank range!
Now, I can understand someone killing someone if they believe they are a threat to their life, or the lives of others, but these officers did not at any time even attempt to warm de Menezes, not once! Why? Every scumbag in London will get a police warning even if they are only to get a fine, why was de Menezes just shot, and shot so many times? There was obviously no place for him to have a bomb, no where, he was wearing a light jacket which was open, where the hell did they think think the bomb was? do these officers just randomly shoot people to death for fun or something? Do they have any conscience?
Left: de Menezes, dead on a train carriage, note his jacket!
Jean Charles de Menezes was an illegal immigrant, that is true, but so are millions of others, others who scrounge off my taxes, who mug and rape all round them, who will never work and will only take, take take.
Jean Charles de Menezes was a working man, someone who did not take my taxes, he probably avoided paying tax, but then, so does anyone who can do so, I have little problem with people wanting to keep their own money instead of letting the government steal it.
The police murdered an innocent man, they made mistake after mistake (apparently, the block of flats they were watching, well that 'intelligence' was in fact bogus, so much for 'police intelligence' eh?)
Once they realised that they had murdered an innocent man, the senior management at New Scotland Yard panicked like a bunch of girls! The Commissioner Sir Ian Blair undoubtedly knew that they had killed the wrong man on that very day, even before the statement he gave linking the shooting with the 'ongoing investigation' into the previous days attacks. Blair lied.
The next day when they finally admitted that this was not a terrorist that they had killed but an innocent man, they insisted that the previous days account remained true, even though at that early stage, there were already witnesses making statements insisting de Menezes did not vault the barriers and was not running. The Metropolitan Police continued a lie.
The Met told us there was no CCTV at that station as all CCTV had been removed from all stations due to the investigation of the previous days attempted attacks. Metronet, the company that up keeps the CCTV refuted this and finally the Met were forced to admit, yes there was CCTV, the Met again lied and seems to me were attempting a cover up.
left: Still frames from that fateful day
The Met tried to smear de Menezes with that 'rape' allegation from an unnamed female, they were forced to admit a few months later that there was no truth whatsoever in those allegations, and now a few days ago the Metropolitan Police state that there was cocaine in the blood of de Menezes. Perhaps, but what of it? Many people snort coke, perhaps it was some cocaine based medicine? But here we see the police attempt another smear to justify their wanton and reckless murder of an innocent man and their failure to prevent another terrorist attack just a fortnight after the July 7th attacks.
Apparently, Jean Charles de Menezes resembles this guy? How they figured that is bizarre! What is laughable about this situation, is the police murder an innocent man, yet the scumbag they should have killed just got on a Eurostar train at Waterloo and left the country for Paris! This on the evening after the attempted attacks, and with an All Ports Warning in effect!
It seems to me that we put too much trust in the police, these are the same people who support the the ID card so they can stop us in the street willy nilly, they are the same people who arrest those who don't celebrate homosexual perversion or multi-culturalism, the very thing that allows terrorists into our nation.
They bully decent hardworking people who drive, arresting those who have had a few pints after work or who are going a few miles over the speed limit, and these are the same people who shoot innocent men on the Underground without without having the decency to inform them of their reasons to do so.
The police are not 'for us' any more, they stopped being 'for us ' a long time time ago when they became enforcers for the new socialist state we now live in, they are Blair's men, Brown's men and like them they have become liars and murderers.
Jean Charles de Menezes leaves his mother and father to mourn him, they who live in a poor part of Brazil, who had hoped for so much for their son Jean Charles, they who sent him to live with his uncle in Sao Paolo to study to be an electrician, to leave poverty behind. They will have some money now due to the Met trying to shut them up with some compo, but I think they would rather the Met was not as incompetent as they are, that if they must shoot someone, it will be deserved and if they make a mistake, resignations and prosecutions would commence without all the attempts at smears on the victim and wriggling by the management to get out of an uncomfortable situation.
And me, well, I shall never again assume that the police are trustworthy, I shall never again go along with their smears and lies, I shall endeavour to seek the truth rather then be someone who justifies their mistakes and wrongdoings.
If I could, I would apologise to Jean Charles de Menezes and his family for my ignorant remarks and unjustified smearing of a good man. May God forgive me and may Jean Charles rest in peace.
Jean Charles de Menezes, January 7th 1978 - July 22nd 2005
Links:
Wikipedia Article
de Menezes photo manipulated
Officer 'proud' of squad
Officer knew de Menezes was not the man
Cocaine abuse could have made de Menezes 'paranoid'
The case against the Met
Justice for Jean
In the hours that followed we were told that the shot fellow had been seen running into the station with a bulky winter coat on, that he had vaulted the barriers and had refused to stop when police told him to.
Even when we found out the following day that the wrong guy had been shot, most of us continued to sympathise not with the dead fellow, but with the police, who, we were told, had genuinely believed they had to shoot de Menezes or that he would kill many more people.
Fair enough!
The fringe leftists who criticised the police were held in contempt, "who's side are you on anyway?" we asked, this is to protect us, not them!
I must say, looking at what we now know, how wrong I have been proved, how ashamed I am that I have said and written things about an innocent man, all because I trusted the police, an arm of this corrupt state.
I have believed the police when they reported that de Menezes was being investigated for the rape of some unnamed female, then they made a big point that he was an illegal immigrant (Well, so is half this city, at least he was working and not on welfare like some of them)But now the Metropolitan Police are on trial, not for the murder of an Innocent man, but for 'breaching health and safety rules', that's great, a small fine at the end, some compo to the families and that should be the end of it?
The police were apparently watching an address in south London, where 'intelligence' what ever that means, indicated that a cell or those close to a cell of terrorists may have stayed. The police sit up to watch those leaving this block of flats, they see Jean Charles leave the building, but because one of the police officers is taking a piss, they can't send an image of de Menezes back to New Scotland Yard for Cressida Dick( the head honcho) to view to see if it matches the image of Hussain Osman, one of the previous days attempted bombers.
So, on one officers say so, Dick (an apt name considering her history in the Metropolitan Police)gave the order to pursue de Menezes and prevent him from entering the Underground.
A team followed him on to a bus, they could see very clearly that he was not wearing a bulky coat, but a light Summer coat, he had no bag with him as he had left it at work the previous day and was on the phone to a friend telling him he was going to be late to a job in Kilburn where he was going to fix a faulty fire alarm.
He got off at Brixton, saw that it was closed and got back on the bus to go to next station, at Stockwell he got off and walked, he did not run, he walked into the station, picked up a metro paper, got out his oyster card and opened the gate strolling down the escalator, check out this link to see Jean Charles de Menezes' last moments of life.
See how he is not running, as we were told, it is the police who run, and after he is shot the public who run up the escalators to get away from some terror they don't wish to see. The accounts given to us, state that some undercover police officers were sitting by de Menezes, that when the armed officers got on the train, the undercover officers yelled to the armed officers, 'he is here', that de Menezes got up and 'went for them', what ever that means? The police held de Meneses, the man with no suicide belt on, as he was wearing a light open summer coat, he had no weapons as he was not carrying anything with him, and he was given no warning at any time.
If he did indeed try to get away, perhaps he had twigged that something was not right about the men about him? Perhaps he thought they were immigration police, and perhaps he struggled, because unlike the Brazilian police most police officers here do not carry guns and if they do, are unlikely to use them?
So the armed police then hold de Menezes down and shoot him, not once or twice or three times but 8 times, seven bullets to his head one to his shoulder, the other 3 shots missed de Menezes, this from the self proclaimed 'crack' firearms unit at point blank range!
Now, I can understand someone killing someone if they believe they are a threat to their life, or the lives of others, but these officers did not at any time even attempt to warm de Menezes, not once! Why? Every scumbag in London will get a police warning even if they are only to get a fine, why was de Menezes just shot, and shot so many times? There was obviously no place for him to have a bomb, no where, he was wearing a light jacket which was open, where the hell did they think think the bomb was? do these officers just randomly shoot people to death for fun or something? Do they have any conscience?
Left: de Menezes, dead on a train carriage, note his jacket!Jean Charles de Menezes was an illegal immigrant, that is true, but so are millions of others, others who scrounge off my taxes, who mug and rape all round them, who will never work and will only take, take take.
Jean Charles de Menezes was a working man, someone who did not take my taxes, he probably avoided paying tax, but then, so does anyone who can do so, I have little problem with people wanting to keep their own money instead of letting the government steal it.
The police murdered an innocent man, they made mistake after mistake (apparently, the block of flats they were watching, well that 'intelligence' was in fact bogus, so much for 'police intelligence' eh?)
Once they realised that they had murdered an innocent man, the senior management at New Scotland Yard panicked like a bunch of girls! The Commissioner Sir Ian Blair undoubtedly knew that they had killed the wrong man on that very day, even before the statement he gave linking the shooting with the 'ongoing investigation' into the previous days attacks. Blair lied.
The next day when they finally admitted that this was not a terrorist that they had killed but an innocent man, they insisted that the previous days account remained true, even though at that early stage, there were already witnesses making statements insisting de Menezes did not vault the barriers and was not running. The Metropolitan Police continued a lie.
The Met told us there was no CCTV at that station as all CCTV had been removed from all stations due to the investigation of the previous days attempted attacks. Metronet, the company that up keeps the CCTV refuted this and finally the Met were forced to admit, yes there was CCTV, the Met again lied and seems to me were attempting a cover up.
left: Still frames from that fateful dayThe Met tried to smear de Menezes with that 'rape' allegation from an unnamed female, they were forced to admit a few months later that there was no truth whatsoever in those allegations, and now a few days ago the Metropolitan Police state that there was cocaine in the blood of de Menezes. Perhaps, but what of it? Many people snort coke, perhaps it was some cocaine based medicine? But here we see the police attempt another smear to justify their wanton and reckless murder of an innocent man and their failure to prevent another terrorist attack just a fortnight after the July 7th attacks.
Apparently, Jean Charles de Menezes resembles this guy? How they figured that is bizarre! What is laughable about this situation, is the police murder an innocent man, yet the scumbag they should have killed just got on a Eurostar train at Waterloo and left the country for Paris! This on the evening after the attempted attacks, and with an All Ports Warning in effect!It seems to me that we put too much trust in the police, these are the same people who support the the ID card so they can stop us in the street willy nilly, they are the same people who arrest those who don't celebrate homosexual perversion or multi-culturalism, the very thing that allows terrorists into our nation.
They bully decent hardworking people who drive, arresting those who have had a few pints after work or who are going a few miles over the speed limit, and these are the same people who shoot innocent men on the Underground without without having the decency to inform them of their reasons to do so.
The police are not 'for us' any more, they stopped being 'for us ' a long time time ago when they became enforcers for the new socialist state we now live in, they are Blair's men, Brown's men and like them they have become liars and murderers.
Jean Charles de Menezes leaves his mother and father to mourn him, they who live in a poor part of Brazil, who had hoped for so much for their son Jean Charles, they who sent him to live with his uncle in Sao Paolo to study to be an electrician, to leave poverty behind. They will have some money now due to the Met trying to shut them up with some compo, but I think they would rather the Met was not as incompetent as they are, that if they must shoot someone, it will be deserved and if they make a mistake, resignations and prosecutions would commence without all the attempts at smears on the victim and wriggling by the management to get out of an uncomfortable situation.And me, well, I shall never again assume that the police are trustworthy, I shall never again go along with their smears and lies, I shall endeavour to seek the truth rather then be someone who justifies their mistakes and wrongdoings.
If I could, I would apologise to Jean Charles de Menezes and his family for my ignorant remarks and unjustified smearing of a good man. May God forgive me and may Jean Charles rest in peace.
Jean Charles de Menezes, January 7th 1978 - July 22nd 2005
Links:
Wikipedia Article
de Menezes photo manipulated
Officer 'proud' of squad
Officer knew de Menezes was not the man
Cocaine abuse could have made de Menezes 'paranoid'
The case against the Met
Justice for Jean
Friday, October 12, 2007
Western mediocrity.
I have recently been watching X Factor, the public auditions, and a few weeks ago the BBC did an India season, with various documentaries on India 'celebrating' 60 years of Indian independence.
Usually I would watch neither, as reality TV is off putting at the best of times, and it annoys me when the BBC 'celebrates' another nations anniversary, yet fails to celebrate the 300th anniversary of the Act of Union between England and Scotland which created this nation, but hey ho!
What I found interesting is how trivial this nation has become, how immature and how lacking in ambition are the Britons of today compared to the Indians.
In India, young Indians love their country, they are proud of their history and have real ambitions. Ambitions that will benefit their people and enrich their lives and those of their families.
In contrast, young Britons as seen on the X Factor are sad, fat, ugly, ignorant and completely unaware of how talentless they are. How many times can you hear from these ugly, obese and talentless individuals, "this has always been my dream, this is what I will do" and "I will be back next year, I will prove them wrong"?
The Indians however were aspiring to be engineers, doctors and architects, they were engrossed in study, yes they loved their trashy bollywood movies, but they knew were fantasy and reality lay.
The Brits, having been miseducated for generations by clueless socialists with egalitarian ideology, that taught 'everyone is special' are consumed by their own fantasies of being the next Britney Spears (why anyone would want to be her amazes me) or Christina Aguilera, but minus the looks and voice. Someone has obviously told them they are good, good enough to go on a TV reality show and be chosen to get a contract to sing.
In the Indian documentaries I watched, there was a programme about an Indian school in southern India, they showed the children practising for a local talent competition, some chose to do modern bollywood dance, others more traditional Indian dances, what stuck me was they took this seriously, practised for months and once at the competition were told in no uncertain terms whether they were good or not, the children may have cried, but knew the truth and knew that it was not cruel, but only the truth.
So many of the waddling mounds of flab on the X Factor seemed never to have had any lessons or practice, they seemed to really believe that a 18 stone teenager could get through the auditions, and when told they were not good enough threw a strop and had their equally flabby parents wobble into the audition room to harangue the judges!!!
I was struck, because this seems to me a metaphor for how certain nations are on the rise and others, unknowingly (mainly due to ignorance and idleness) are in decline. Serious nations, as Britain used to be, have good schools, rigorous examinations, disciplined training which results in engineers, doctors, businessmen, risk takers and other productive people. This is how nations manage to conquer empires and become wealthy.
Trivial nations exalt celebrity, mediocrity and ignorance, resulting in poverty and moral squalor. The only reason I can see that Britain is not already poor is because the accumulated wealth of our past is not yet spent, however with Gordon Brown on the case, raising taxes every year and borrowing hundreds of billions every year to throw away on a health service that does not work and on benefits for third world scroungers so that they will continue to vote for him, it may not be long before we find we are broke and end up being a tourist theme park for wealthy and hardworking Chinese and Indians.
How ironic and deserved that would be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
