Monday, 31 May 2010

Victims of the silence

Johan Strydom (South Africa) and Shane McClellan (USA)

A few days ago hundreds of mourners gathered to grieve following the death of Johan Strydom, who was murdered at his farm near Parys in South Africa's Free State on the 15th of May. Strydom's popularity in life was clear from the numbers attending his funeral, many standing in the doorway of the overcrowded Dutch Hervormd Church in Parys as there were insufficient chairs to seat them all.

Johan Strydom's funeral

Now further details of the violent nature of the amiable Afrikaner farmer's death after he was hijacked at his farm gate have been revealed. Strydom suffered a burst liver, damage to his skull, and extensive “dragging injuries", following being chained face down behind his truck and dragged around his farm by one ankle. Medical reports reveal that he was alive whilst being dragged.

This is the second incident this year where a white South African has been carjacked, tied behind his own vehicle and then dragged. A young man was the victim of just such an attack only a few moths ago in that increasingly violent country. He survived, but with injuries which will take years to recover, if they ever do.

Unless you live in South Africa, this is most probably the first you have heard of either of these cases, indeed few in South Africa know of the first incident, as it has gone virtually unreported. I only know of it because I was sent photographs of the young man's injuries, which I can not possibly publish here, and which I will probably never forget having seen.

However, as with so many of the horrors which have happened in South Africa in recent years, such as the ghastly, probably muti related, murders of 77 year old Alice Lotter and her 57 year old daughter Helen, who's horrific torture included their genitals being mutilated with shards of broken glass, before, whilst still alive their breasts were cut off and used to write anti-white hate slogans on the walls, news of anti-white hate crime continues to be suppressed.

Compare this with the case of James Byrd jnr. Who was tied to the back of a truck in Texas and dragged to his death in very similar circumstances to the two cases in South Africa this year, the only difference being that Byrd was black and his attackers were white. It was because of the colour combination Byrd's murder became a world wide news story, and “teachable event” in every school across America, and it is equally because of the colour combination that the South African hate crimes are being suppressed.

It is not just news from South Africa which is deliberately not reported, the press is also silent about anti-white hate crimes closer to home. Infamously within the Nationalist community, but almost unknown in the wider US population, the the savage 2007 rape and murder of Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian by five African Americans went almost unreported outside Knoxville where they took place, even while one by one their rapists and killers were tried and convicted, the most recent case ending this month. Similar limited reporting applied to the 2002 slaying of four young whites (a fifth escaped by playing dead) by African American brothers Jonathan and Reginald Carr, or more recently to the killings in Pearcy reported here by

However, these cases only scratch the surface of the epidemic of anti-white hate crimes across America, which the police are not permitted to prosecute as hate crimes, because the victims are from a group denied hate crime protection (white people), and which the media refuses to report outside the local news, if they report them at all.

Only this week Shane McClellan a 16 year old white youth was allegedly kidnapped and beaten for hours by a group of black men, who Shane claims used repeated racial slurs and told him they were doing it because he was white. Maybe that is why the case has hardly been reported outside the local Seattle news.

Shane's father, Tim McClellan said he barely recognized his son after the brutal assault, adding "I didn't know if he was alive or dead,"

Of course, at this stage, allegations remain allegations, however, can you just imagine how those two propaganda organs of which Joseph Goebbels would be proud, CNN and MSNBC, would be screaming had such allegations been made by a black person against a group of whites. (Remember Duke Lacrosse?)

Even when cases do make the national news, such as the carjacking and murder of North Carolina student Eve Carson by two black youths the race of her attackers is treated as incidental. (I wonder how many black women were carjacked let alone murdered by white gangs in recent years? None, I'd guess, otherwise we would certainly have heard of it.)

Likewise, when committed white Obama supporter Kirsten Brydum was shot dead whilst spreading the word of “Change” in a black neighbourhood of New Orleans, in 2008 she was reported as being "in the wrong place at the wrong time". No mainstream news organisation in America would dare to add that any time is the wrong time for a white person, let alone a white woman, to be in a black area – alone or otherwise.

If you lived on a remote Island in the South Atlantic and you read the crime news on the main US news websites, you could be forgiven for believing that violent crime in America was a multi-racial activity, with, if anything, whites being marginally more prone to criminal activity than other races. Indeed, if you ignored the news and formed your opinion of criminal perpetration on the basis of what you see in US Cop shows, you would be led to believe that crime in general is an overwhelmingly a white perpetrator activity.

However, the truth is very different from the carefully nurtured fiction. here are some figures:

In 2006, the incarceration rate in state or federal prison or jail for men was 1,384 per 100,000 residents, for women 134 per 100,000 residents. The rate for white men was 736 per 100,000, for black men 4,789 per 100,000, for Hispanic men 1,862 per 100,000. The rate for white women was 94 per 100,000, for black women 358 per 100,000, and for Hispanic women 152 per 100,000. (i)

Of the 249,400 state prison inmates serving time for drug offenses at year end 2004, 112,500 (45.1%) were black, 51,800 (20.8%) were Hispanic, and 65,900 (26.4%) were white. (ii)

At midyear 2006 more black men (836,800) were in custody in State or Federal prison or local jail than white men (718,100) or Hispanic men (426,900). Black men comprised 41% of the more than 2 million men in custody, and black men age 20 to 29 comprised 15.5% of all men in custody on June 30, 2006. my source, which I have quoted below, and which I am quoting verbatim states "Relative to their numbers in the general population, about 4.8% of all black men were in custody at midyear 2006, compared to about 0.7% of white men and 1.9% of Hispanic men. Overall, black men were incarcerated at 6.5 times the rate of white men. The incarceration rate for black men was highest among black men age 25 to 29. About 11.7% of black males in this age group were incarcerated on June 30, 2006. Across age groups black men were between 5.7 and 8.5 times more likely than white men to be incarcerated." (iii)

As you read that, you can almost hear the cry, “That is because of racism within the legal system and the fact that more blacks live in poverty and social deprivation!”

Wrong on both counts.

The reality is that politically correct law enforcement bends over backwards to avoid racial profiling, as shown by the shrieks of horror by various senior policemen following the new Arizona law requirements to merely check the legal status of suspects. Meanwhile courts in America go to great lengths not to disadvantage black or Hispanic defendants, whereas statistically, black and mixed race juries are significantly less likely to convict black defendants, especially if the victim was white, than white jurors are in the case of white defendants (iv)

The claim that poverty is the reason why more blacks offend also does not stand up to scrutiny. According to the most recent reliable figures (okay Wikipedia) the population of America stands at around 308,672,000 66% of whom (roughly 203,723,520) are white, 14% (about 43,214,080) are African American and 15% (46,300,800) are Hispanic, the remaining 5% being made up of groups such as Asians, Native Americans and Pacific Islanders.

When it comes to poverty the figures state that “only” 8.2% of the US white population live in poverty, compared to 24.7% of blacks. (v) This statistical imbalance is frequently used by liberals to excuse the higher numerical rates of offending amongst blacks and Hispanics. However, this is entirely misleading, and does not make any sense when you actually look at the ethnic make up of those living in poverty.

8.2% of 203,723,520 means that 16,705,328 white Americans are living in poverty, whereas despite the much quoted higher percentage rate 24.7% of 43,214,080 means that 10,673,877 are living in poverty, a significantly smaller number of people.

If poverty was the key to offending you would expect to see whites committing 16 crimes for every 10 committed by black people, however, outside the whacky parallel universe, as portrayed by CBS, that is not what we see.

Likewise, hate crimes are, to a massively disproportionate degree, something which happens to white people, that truth is merely hidden by legal system which refuses to call such crimes by their true name and by a media which fails to report them.

What we see in America we are seeing here in Europe, yet we are not allowed to say so.

We have reached a point in our society where the truth can not be acknowledged if it does not comply with an ideological narrative, despite the fact that the narrative is a lie. It is the silence of the reporters which gives succour to the lie and imperils its victims, for how many lives could have been saved had they had, at least been warned of the danger?


(i)Source: Sabol, William J., PhD, Minton, Todd D., and Harrison, Paige M., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2006 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, June 2007), NCJ217675, p. 9, Table 14.
(ii)Source: Sabol, William J., PhD, Couture, Heather, and Harrison, Paige M., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2006 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, December 2007), NCJ219416, p. 24, Appendix Table 9.
(iii) Source: Sabol, William J., PhD, Minton, Todd D., and Harrison, Paige M., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2006 (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, June 2007), NCJ217675, p. 9.

Hat Tip: Censor Bugbear, Dina, Jenny and Anon

Shooting the wrong target

I will not be joining other sites, including the BNP, in attacking ex-Treasury Secretary David Laws, who resigned at the weekend following the revelations that he had for a number of years been claiming expenses to pay rent on a room in a house owned by a rather handsome young man whom, it now transpires, is his domestic partner. This was against the rules as members of Parliament are no longer allowed to claim expenses for property leased or rented from spouses or partners.

David Laws' resignation is significant because he is the first member of the new coalition government to fall victim of the scandal surrounding MP's expenses, and because of his position in the new government. Had Laws been Minister for Culture or Fisheries it would not have been a big issue. However, as Chief Secretary to The Treasury, Laws would have played a huge role in attempts to deal with the country's astronomical New Labour and mass immigration fuelled deficit. Laws would have been the person in charge of implementing the massive spending cuts which will have to be made, and significantly, who would, and would not, be in receipt of tax payer's funds.

That is why Laws had to go, it was his proposed role in the new government which made his position untenable. After all, if you run a company, it is one thing to find that someone in Marketing has been fiddling their expenses, but a very different thing when that person is the Internal Auditor.

Laws is guilty of hypocrisy, and he is guilty of cowardice, this is 2010, he was a Liberal Democrat MP , who cares if he is gay? Seemingly he cared, and that is really rather sad.

However, when it comes to the act of claiming money to cover his living expenses, it is hard to escape the conclusion that, had David Laws been open about his sexuality, or had his partner been a woman, he would have been fully within his rights to claim his share of a joint mortgage. Laws is after all a member of parliament with a constituency in the South West of England, in excess of a hundred miles from London, making it impossible for him to commute after a late night session in Parliament. He is in the position that the second home allowance was designed for.

Under current rules Members of Parliament are fully entitled to claim for his living expenses, and £40,000 over eight years is relatively modest in terms of London rents. However stupidly David Laws acted, in fairness it does appear that his primary motive was to protect his privacy rather than enrich himself from public coffers.

The same can certainly not be said about many of his contemporaries. Some cases are currently before the courts, and verdicts have not yet been reached, but if the allegations are correct. What Laws did bears no comparison to for instance claiming mortgage repayments for a non-existent mortgage, as one ex-MP is accused of doing. At least Laws lived where he was claiming for and the scandal does not approach that of the Labour peeress who allegedly claimed £100,000 in rent for a flat, she never even visited, let alone lived in, and then escaped prosecution on “a technicality” - the “technicality” presumably being that she is Asian.

David Law's also did not express total contempt for the British tax-payer by claiming for home cinemas, duck houses and moat cleaning. He is not in the same league as some of the crooks and scoundrels in Parliament.

What we have is a man who could not come to terms with his own sexuality, if he had done he so, and then claimed the money he was fully entitled to claim, he would almost certainly still be in his job.

Within the wider public there is a lot of sympathy for David Laws, who is seen to have acted honourably by resigning so speedily, also the general perception is that this is a private matter. Like many others, before, this happened I thought that Laws appeared one of the best of the new coalition ministers, who appeared genuinely prepared to put party affiliation aside for the good of the country, and I doubt I am alone in feeling genuinely sorry for him.

Therefore, with the greatest of respect to my fellow bloggers, many of whom I admire considerably, by attacking David Laws we AGAIN appear to be shooting at the wrong target.

It will do us no good to appear to be exploiting the situation, and worse, if it appears we are attacking him because of his sexuality, and that will inevitably be the allegation made against us by some, that will very likely lose us far more support than it gains.

What has happened is a major blow to the new coalition government, it exposes, once again the scandal which is MPs expenses and it also raises questions over the judgement of both Cameron and Clegg, were they really not aware that Laws was being less than open about his domestic arrangements, and not think to check whether he was being any more forthright about his expenses?. However, although David Laws was stupid, hypocritical and had to go, he was far from being one of the worst offenders, in fact he is nowhere close.

Wednesday, 26 May 2010

In search of Sarah Palin

If you have 45 minutes to an hour to spare, you might find it interesting to click here and watch a speech given by Sarah Palin to an audience in Denver Colorado. British viewers may find the rather folksy nature of Palin's exchange with the audience at the beginning of the speech a little saccharine for our taste, however, this is vital for an American politician seeking to connect emotionally with her audience, and I am sure you will think differently once she gets into the full blooded body of her speech.

I also recommend that you take the time to watch the panel discussion at the end.

You may not like what she says, you might not agree with it, however, if you are honest you will agree that what you will see is a very bright, very interesting and very impressive political performance.

You will also how different Sarah Palin is from how she is portrayed by the media. The press lie about Palin, they deliberately misrepresent Palin and her abilities, and we are left asking why. Why does this woman frighten the controlled media so much?

Hat Tip: Dr. D

Killing for Convenience

A report issued this week reveals that there has been a slight decrease in the number of abortions performed in Britain. The total number which took place in 2009 was 189,100 down from 195,296 in 2008. The fall is obviously good news, as far as it goes, and has been welcomed by the Department of Health, however, it has to be acknowledged that even the reduced figure is the equivalent of the population of Portsmouth, or three times the number killed in the bombing of Hiroshima. Irrespective of the tiny drop, in the two year period between January 2008 and December 2009 the number of lives eradicated amounted to just a few thousand short of the total population of Bristol.

Just over 3,800 of the procedures performed last year were on girls under the age of 16, however, the huge majority, over 185,00 were performed on adult woman. Some will have been the victims of rape, others will have been emergencies, where the woman's life was at risk, and in just over 2,000 of the cases, the child, had it lived, would have been disabled. However, as is always the case, these types of abortions, which are always held up as examples to justify why legalised abortion is so essential, will have accounted for a small minority of the total.

By a significant majority most abortions carried out last year, as in every year, will have fallen into the category which can reasonably be described as killing for convenience where the child is unplanned, unwanted or likely to cause a complication in the mother's life.

It is odd that this is allowed to happen in a society as child-centric as ours where so many people's lives are ruled by the well being of their children, and live in daily terror of a significantly exaggerated fear of paedophiles. However, we have somehow managed to separate children from foetuses in our mind, as if they are different creatures, rather than the same being who has merely moved from one environment to another. The pro-choice lobby, it seems have successfully managed to convince people that if you can't yet see a human being, it is a disposable commodity, and that a foetus, no matter how fully formed is not really a child.

We live in a society where a woman's right to choose, or in some instances, to change her mind, is considered of greater importance than the lives of hundreds of thousands of children.

Worse than that, in a troubling number of cases it does not appear to matter how many times a woman may wish to exercise her right of choice. As I have stated here before, for most of these women the abortion is the second choice, given that she had already had the choice not to have unprotected sex. However, beyond that the report reveals a quite disturbing statistic. Almost 3,700 of the women who had abortions in Britain last year have had at least four terminations. In fact 48 of them have had seven or more abortions.

Surely it defies credibility that all these women been raped four or more times (even if you believe that rape justifies terminating a healthy child for the sins of its father) or that they have been unlucky enough to face so many life threatening medical emergencies when they happen to be pregnant.

Certainly some will have had reoccurring complications and others will for genetic reasons will have produced disabled foetuses, but surely these will have been a minority

For whatever their reasons, thousands of women in this country appear to have chosen to repeatedly terminate the lives of their unborn children.

How can that be justified?

It is hard to escape the suspicion that a minimum of 15,000 children fell victim to serial killers in 2009, and, as this happened in the health service, we as tax payers aided and abetted in those killings.

Monday, 24 May 2010

South African cop held for attempted farm murder

A female police constable from the South African Police Crime Prevention Unit has been arrested for attempted murder – a suspect in a foiled farm attack carried out 333km from her duty station. In addition an ex-cop whose vehicle she was driving, also is sought as a suspect.

The allegedly targeted farmer apparently heard gunshots on his premises and saw three people entering through the gate gunshot was fired at him, in response he drew his own firearm and shot back.

The suspects fled on foot.

The officer was later apprehended with what is described as "incriminating evidence" in the back of a white truck belonging to a retired policeman

Further details at Censor Bugbear and News 24

Thanks to Dina and Carl

Sunday, 23 May 2010

The voice of the British Resistance

Thinking Rationally About Immigration

By Dr. D

Who should be admitted to live in our countries? We are told often how much immigrants contribute to our countries, both economically and culturally. We all hear the old saw about, “we are a nation of immigrants,” which is truly ludicrous in the UK but less so in other nations of the Anglosphere. We are told that we have a positive need for immigrants, even though our eyes and common sense tell us otherwise. Finally, we are sent on guilt trips, saying that we have a moral obligation to accept immigrants.

In a recent article by Johann Hari in The Independent titled “Islamists, their victims, and hypocrisy,” some aspects of this question are examined . In his article, Hari discusses the cases of two recent applications for asylum in the UK that have rejected, and two known Pakistani al–Qa’ida members who are going to be allowed to remain in the UK. One asylum application refused is from a young lesbian (age 27) in Iran who fears for her life and thought she should be allowed to come to the UK where she could live freely. The second refused asylum application is from a 29 year old Pakistani man who has written atheist tracts online, and now fears for his life in Pakistan. He thinks he should be allowed to come to the UK where he can be free to pursue his atheism. Each of those refused were told to stay where they were and “live discrete lives.” Hari says that the trial that determined that the two al–Qa’ida members were such was “a Kafka–trial” where the defendants were not allowed to hear the evidence against them. This seems like a strange allegation to level at a trial that the defendants essentially won, event though they were convicted. They seem to have achieved all substantive goals, so I’m not sure what more was wanted.

Hari then goes on to make a strong argument that, when people in the West deal justly and mercifully with Muslims, it has a far bigger impact on them than any other way we might deal with them. Somehow, he has shifted the argument to be about whether to torture or not, which really is not the same question as whether to admit immigrants or not, but in Hari’s mind, it seems to be the same. And then he comes to his closing paragraph, which I quote:

Brave, bold voices like Kiana and Amit’s do more to undermine Islamic fundamentalism than a thousand bomber–planes that only vindicate the Bin Laden narrative for so many. By sending these remarkable dissidents to die, we aren’t only betraying them – we are endangering ourselves.

It is a nice summation of his argument, and it has some truth in it, but we need to examine it further. (Kiana and Amit were the two who were refuse entry into the UK.) These two people are definitely the products of their own societies. They have taken their stands (lesbianism, atheism) in defiance of their societies of their own free will. I do not for a moment wish to deny them that choice, but I do wish to emphasize that it is their choice, and that their choice has consequences that are their own to bear. Those consequences should not become the burden of anyone else, and most especially not of any other nation.

With respect to Hari’s contention that they will do so much more good if they live, I have to say that they will do the most good if they live in their own societies, rather than hiding in the safety of the West. They should not be in the West, creating ill will for us with the Muslim world, but rather they should be in the Muslim world working reform there. The only way the Muslim world will change is when Muslims make that change; it will not happen from the outside. How many Muslims do you think Ayaan Hirsi reaches?

It is right that these people were denied entry into the UK; they made choices and they must live with the consequences of those choices. It would also be right, if it has been correctly determined that the other two are truly members of al–Qa’ida, which was a choice on their part, to face the consequences of that choice. Life is full of choices, and we do not get to start over, but rather we have to continue to play our hand, based on our previous choices, including mistakes.

But back to the original question, who should be admitted to live in our countries? Long ago, when more rational thinking prevailed on all subjects, and particularly on matters of national sovereignty, nations made decisions about whom to admit as immigrants on the basis of the interests of the host nation. Generally speaking, the host nation considered the assets that the would–be immigrant would bring to the host nation in terms of wealth, knowledge, various skills, and some times simply brute force manpower. But it was the needs of the host nation that determined whether the immigrant was accepted, not the desires of the immigrant.

I am sure that the word refugee has been in the English language for a very long time, but I think it really began to have major significance after WW I. There were large number of dislocated people in Europe, more than ever before, with the breakup of the Hapsburg Empire and the Ottoman Empire. All of this expanded many fold after WW II with more displaced people all over the world. The idea of refugees has be employed to play on Christian sympathies to permanently accept people from all over the world into our nations, bringing completely misfit elements into our societies. This continues apace today at an accelerating rate today with many coming from Africa and the Middle East. I think it is necessary to ask the question, “are these people truly refugees, or are they time bombs, waiting to explode?”

There are parts of the world where on–going warfare has been the norm forever. This is true in parts of Africa and elsewhere. If you pluck someone up from there, it is probably correct to call that person a “refugee” in some sense. But moving those people somewhere else in the world does not make them peaceful, civilized people, it just moves the war somewhere else. We have seen this with the large numbers of Somalis transported to Minnesota who are now terrorizing the people of Minneapolis–St. Paul just like they were back in Somalia. They did not all become Americans of Swedish and Norwegian descent when they landed in Minnesota, strange to say, and Garrison Kellior does not know what to say about them being the good liberal that he is.

Since the earliest colonial days in America, people have immigrated to the US. For a long time, there were no restrictions at all on who could come, but eventually laws were passed limiting the number who could come each year from each country. At almost any point along either the northern or southern border of the US, you can literally simply walk across the border; there are no physical barriers at all in most places. For most of our history, there has been no problem, with either of our neighbors, and there is still no problem with Canada. Mexico is a different matter, however.

Mexico has vast internal problems, and rather than seek to solve their own problems, their solution has been to send much of their population to the US to earn money to send back to Mexico. This has been going on for at least forty years with the connivance of the US government as well. The US government has simply stopped enforcing the immigration laws, although the laws remain on the books. As a consequence, many thousands of Mexicans stream into the US illegally every day. They often come in as “mules” carrying illegal drugs, but then go on to take low skill jobs at low wages that are often paid in cash. In most cases, no taxes are paid on these wages, and it is an entirely off the record transaction. Much of the money is sent back to Mexico by wire transfer. They live on food stamps and various types of welfare in many cases, they use the hospital emergency rooms for all of their healthcare needs (they cannot be turned away there, even if they say they cannot pay), they often turn to thievery, rape, and murder. Even those that “succeed” in the sense that they find stable employment and establish a home, usually do not learn English and develop no loyalty at all to the US, always thinking of themselves only as Mexicans even to the third and fourth generations.

Some will have heard of the new Arizona immigration law that has caused quite a furor. I have read the whole law, all seventeen pages of it. It is very bland reading, and it simply says, in very plain English, that local law enforcement is authorized and indeed required to enforce the federal immigration law. It does not permit any of the undue stops or searches that people are so upset about, indeed they are prohibited. People say, “but it might be enforced that way.” Well, yes, a policeman might stop you any time and mistreat you, but how often does it happen? There are severe penalties for the policeman that does such things. The state of Arizona is simply trying to protect its people, to do the job that the federal government has long neglected to do. The citizens of Arizona have been subject to the most amazing dangers and harassments and this is long overdue.

With regard to the central question of whom should be admitted to our countries, I would like to adduce two principal statements:

1. We should only admit those who bring a positive benefit to the host country. There is no obligation to admit anyone at anytime, no matter what their pleading may be. Life is unfair, we have to live the life we are given.

2. The people of the third world, the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, etc., must all stay where they are and fix their own broken societies. Anglo–Saxons cannot do it for them. They would not accept it if we tried, and we should not feel that we have any obligation to try. This does not mean that we should not be willing to help in moderation, but the prime responsibility rest squarely with them. We discourage them from doing this most necessary task if we shelter them in our countries.

Saturday, 22 May 2010

Echoes from a different world

I had occasion to visit St Thomas Hospital, across the Thames from Westminster, this week. As one of the main central London hospitals, and presumably the one to which they would rush most injured politicians in the event of a missile strike during prime minister's question time, it is now a vast warren of different sections and departments addressing different medical conditions and built at different times over the last 130 years.

With its 1970's facade it doesn't appear a historical site, however, in fact there has been a Thomas's hospital in the area for some eight hundred years, early accounts from 1215 AD name the hospital, then located in Southwark, after Thomas Beckett, the accounts refer to it then as “ancient”, although it was probably founded in 1173, when Beckett was canonised, However, it may have dated back to as early as 1106 when the St Mary Overie Priory was established.

Over the centuries the hospital went through many changes, the St Thomas Hospital Training school was established in 1550 when Guys Hospital was built at nearby London Bridge.

Hence it is an institution with a considerable amount of English history behind it.

The new St Thomas's hospital opened in 1860

The modern hospital in its current location at Lambeth, by the river and within sight of the Houses of Parliament, was built in the 1860's in an area historically known as Stangate. It has of course expanded considerably since that time. However, my own visits took me to one of the earliest parts of the hospital, the South Wing, around which other extensions have since been built.

At the centre of that wing is the mid-Victorian “Great hall” at the end of which are various statues of medical luminaries such as Florence Nightingale and eminent surgeons of the day.

In the corridors around the Great Hall are what I assume were once children's wards, but which now house specialist sections such as sleep disorders and allergy treatment rooms. What struck me was that along the passageways between the sections the walls are decorated with beautifully painted murals depicting scenes from English and European fairy tales. Pictures placed there to delight and comfort generations of English children with images of Jack the Giant Killer, The Babes in the Wood and The Princess and the Pea (above - so sensitive was the princesses fair skin she could feel the hard pea despite all the mattresses - not very PC that is it?) painted as if in water-colour, as they would have been in the books which our grandparents, and indeed maybe our parents once read.

Of course, it would not be permissible now to decorate the walls of a public building with such images, for they are far too European, the children and fairies in them are too rosy cheeked, their lips too red and, most damningly their skin is too white.

The culture they evoke, the ancient culture they call back to, is our culture, European, Anglo-Saxon culture, history, myth and legend, beautiful, ethereal timeless and by the hour, by the day, slipping further from us.

When such projects are undertaken today the inclusion of diversity and multiculturalism would be mandatory. No matter that the structure is in England, nothing must be permitted to reflect the ancient native English culture unfettered by the alien and imported ones. Were anything resembling those walls to unveiled today, not only would the shrieks of “EWWW migh God, it's soowe disgustingly WHITE!!” be heard from Belsize Park to Dulwich, but the authorities would probably become involved, and someone would be prosecuted.

Of course it would never get to that point, the guardians of the new flame would take charge at planning stage.

A committee would be formed to ensure diversity and ethnic representation and veto any fairy tales which did not comply the current regulation of free expression. Little Red Riding hood would be unlikely to get passed the censors, she would be found guilty of stereotyping those famously gentle and vegetarian creatures, wolves, whilst Jack the Giant Killer would be banned for certain on account of heightism. Babes in the Wood might just be okay, although the malevolence of the white villains, the nasty uncle and his underlings, might be exaggerated while the babes themselves would probably end up mixed race.

Jack and Jill would probably be one of the few Nursery Rhymes to make it through on account of the fact that it is the clumsy white male who falls and breaks his crown, whilst Jill's “tumbling” would become clever athletics which enable the smart (now Muslim feminist) Jill to avoid the same fate as her inferior male counterpart. (And you don't want to know how they would almost certainly adapt Goldlocks and the Three bears)

In place of those rejected politically incorrect European fairy tales would depictions of scenes from tales allegedly passed down by word of mouth through generations of Asian tribes, or found written in Aramaic script on crumbling parchment in Timbuktu, but, more likely actually made up in a studio flat in Cricklewood a few weeks earlier.

Instead of Jack and the Beanstalk we would see young Abdul Hasib and the his magic pomegranate dancing before a beaming and peace loving Mohamed. The Little Mermaid would be replaced by Tabita Malika the little African girl who saved her village from the evil white Boer people with the help of Naasir the sacred hippopotamus.

Or maybe they would insist on some contemporary fairy tales, and we would be confronted by little Sayyid and his designer suicide belt, the enchanting Isha with the burka that doubled as a time machine, and brave Julius who sang a special song to make all the naughty white people disappear.

You say I jest yet the sad fact is you know that panels such as those which decorate the walls of the old St Thomas's hospital South Wing would not be allowed in any publicly funded building built in Britain today, not because of fashion, not because of taste but because of politics. In a modern privately funded building such imagery would be mocked, derided and condemned. There would be an outcry amongst the Guardianista, a Channel 4 documentary would be made about racism in design and maybe even questions would be asked in Parliament ("I call upon my honourable friend, the minister for cultural reassignment, to share my outrage at the saddening and lamentable lack of new order approved diversity in the design of .......") It simply would not happen.

However, it would not be thus everywhere. Now let me take you on a journey, to a newly built children's hospital in Lagos, Entebbe or Nairobi, to a Gujarati orphanage, a maternity ward in Algiers or a Children's school in Rawalpindi. Let us imagine, these buildings have just been completed, maybe paid for out of the UK aid budget, and those running them decide that in order to make them attractive to children, the walls should be decorated with images depicting scenes from local legends and folk tales.

Now what do you imagine would happen if some committee came along and announced that they could not just feature images from local African or Asian culture, as that wasn't inclusive or multicultural enough. If they were going to depict images from local children's stories, they would have to also include “The little Prince”, “Sleeping Beauty” and of course “Snow White”. Alternatively, the whole project would have to be abandoned and the walls adorned with Telly Tubbies or strange one eyes blobs like our Olympic mascots which wouldn't offend white Europeans.

You know exactly what would happen, there would be an outcry, it would be called “racism”, “imperialism”, “Colonialism” and an outrageous attack on the local culture.

Of course, there would be no such committee, and no such suggestion, the locals would happily go ahead and paint their walls with images from their culture, their history and their fairy tales, as indeed they should. Then white people, including those who would be so mortally offended had Hans Christian Andersen adorned modern hospitals back home would have cooed in delight at the local culture.

It is only our history, our culture and our fairy tales which must be cast away forgotten and abandoned, it is only we who must welcome multiculturalism and the replacement of all that we are. The fable covered walls in the older parts of St Thomas's hospital remind us of a time when we were different when we valued who we were and remembered where we came from.

They carry echoes from another time, almost from another world, the sound grows fainter, but can still be heard if we choose to listen, and we must listen to those echoes before they, like so much else we once treasured and have now lost, fall silent.

Surviving Enoch's Prophecy

By Mister Fox

People are too frightened to speak about what is being done to them and their families or express their fears for the future. If they live near immigrants they blot anxiety out and pretend everything is alright. If someone gets mugged or raped nearby they are relieved because it did not happen to them. They avoid subways and many other hides for muggers that the planners built into their stupid housing schemes. You only have to go a couple of miles from affected areas and people are oblivious to what is happening because the elites are browbeating them into thinking things are fine. If they have had experience of the reality when they go to unaffected areas they won't speak about it for fear of condemnation. They are frightened to look into the future and what natural care they have for their children has to be repressed.

As Enoch put it:"Have you ever wondered, perhaps, why opinions which the majority of people quite naturally hold are, if anyone dares express them publicly, denounced as 'controversial, 'extremist', 'explosive', 'disgraceful', and overwhelmed with a violence and venom quite unknown to debate on mere political issues? It is because the whole power of the aggressor depends upon preventing people from seeing what is happening and from saying what they see."

There are characteristic features of invasion: immigrants and their descendants are taking over our communities and our religious symbols are being replaced mainly by Muslim symbols: churches converted to mosques and Christians forbidden to wear crucifixes at work! Contemporary elites must know what Sharia Law is and are aware of the widespread child-rape of young British girls by Muslim communities yet they are delivering our women into servitude under Sharia Law. Many evil Judges campaign for it. In December 2008 the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips, told the London Muslim Council he was willing to have Sharia law in this country, so long as it did not conflict with the laws of England and Wales , or lead to the imposition of severe physical punishments. In the same month evil Lady Butler-Sloss, England 's first female Appeal Court judge, called for ministers to change the law for Muslims, so that a decree absolute could not be issued by a civil court until evidence had been obtained of a Sharia divorce. Delivering women to Sharia Law is a cruel wicked act. This is encouraged by dishonourable Christian leaders like the Archbishop of Canterbury. (1)

Enoch warned of The Enemy Within and that our internal enemies could not believe their luck with mass immigration. It gave them the forces of revolution. It is not outside forces that threatened us but traitors who pretend to act in our interests while they surrender us to Islam. This process can be researched under under "Eurabia". The Revolutionary Vanguard is not poised to strike but in power!

What was to come was predicted by Enoch who saw similar symptoms in Northern Ireland: “Yet even though that picture is dark and darkening, there is one factor which has not yet been injected... That factor is firearms and explosives. With communities which are so divided nothing can prevent the injection of explosives which we know perfectly well from experience in other parts of the United Kingdom and the world. At first there will be horrified astonishment, and inquiry as to what we have done wrong that such things should be happening. Then there will be feverish endeavour to find methods to allay the supposed grievances which lie behind the violence. Then follows exploitation by those who use violence of the ascendancy they have thus gained over the majority and over authority. The thing goes forward, acting and reacting, until a position is reached in which—I shall dare say it—compared with those areas, Belfast today will seem an enviable place.” (2)

The open war begun on July 2005 when Young Muslims blew up London buses. There are hundreds of investigations being undertaken into Muslim "terrorists" but the elites are still importing them at half a million a year!(3)

Enoch warned: “Then there are the 'no-go' areas ... areas in the United Kingdom where the Queen's writ does not run ... If these areas were described as what they are—namely, pockets of territory occupied by the enemy, as surely as if they had been captured and held by parachute troops—then perhaps it would be realised how preposterous is the situation. In fact the policy of refraining from the re-establishment of civil government in these areas is as wise as it would be to leave enemy posts undisturbed behind one's lines.” (4) This situation has been brought mainland Britain by the elites.

The same corrupt elites have passed race laws and established a totalitarian bureaucracy under the doublespeak title of Equalities and Human Rights Commission to suppress the rebellion of indigenous people and to allow immigrants to replace us. Even during the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq the elites were encouraging them to immigrate. What would people have thought during the last war if 1500 Germans a week were being allowed into the country?

To prevent the masses realising what is happening the elites invent misleading terms for terrorists like “ Un-Islamic activity” when it is a war carried out against us from within.

The EU is importing hostile Muslim youth to Europe – prepare for the racial-civil wars of Europe. Nothing happens in politics by accident, and this is the greatest treason in history.

Roughly 80% of the population are opposed to immigration and always have been and for over thirty years this has been shown in opinion polls!. Recently Gordon Brown admitted there is a consensus among mainstream parties in favour of immigration. The dominant political elites are at war with the native population. Immigration has no legitimacy and we have both a moral and legal duty to reverse it. Its complicated by each different group hating each other - Somalians hating West Indians; Pakistanis hating Indians; West Indians and Somalians hating Asians; Indians hating West Indians; Poles hating Russians and Latvians. There are historical examples of one group invading but our contemporary situation is several ethnic groups deliberately brought here and all waging war against us in different ways. Yet each way clearly shows the nature of the attacks which are masked by terms like “Black on White crime but are actually race wars against Whites. The number of White woman assaulted, raped and murdered by Blacks is so high it can only be described as a Race War. The widespread gang-rapes of White girls often as young as 12 by older Muslims is an act of War by different means – guerrilla war. (5)

There has been much censorship to impose the dispossession on native people. Like China our elites use official censorship to prevent rebellion through the internet! An Internet censorship bill passed the House of Commons allows government to restrict and filter any website that is deemed to be undesirable for public consumption." This is not through the Lords yet but as they are placemen it will probably go through.

The Sunday Times ( London ) June 11, 2006 reported that Rear Admiral Chris Parry, a senior military strategist has warned that “Europe, including Britain , could be undermined by large immigrant groups with little allegiance to their host countries—a “reverse colonisation” as Parry described it. These groups would stay connected to their homelands by the internet and cheap flight. The warnings by Parry of what could threaten Britain over the next 30 years were delivered to senior officers and industry experts at a conference ... “Globalisation makes assimilation seem redundant and old-fashioned … the process acts as a sort of reverse colonisation, where groups of people are self-contained, going back and forth between their countries, exploiting sophisticated networks and using instant communication on phones and the internet.” Lord Boyce, the former chief of the defence staff, welcomed Parry’s analysis. “Bringing it together in this way shows we have some very serious challenges ahead,” he said. “The real problem is getting them taken seriously at the top of the government.” How have the decadent, emasculate authorities responded?

Chief of the Armed forces, General Sir David Richards, launched an organisation for Muslims in the armed forces - The Armed Forces Muslim Association. How many al-Qaeda supporters are in the British military? There are at least 8 in the police and the police refuse to remove them!(6)

The violent ethnic cleansing of Whites in Zimbabwe and South Africa is beginning here. Because the media keep the truth from the public we only find it on the fringes: I got this revealing information from Jack Black’s “I am an Englishman” blog.

It becomes obvious if you research the real figures that we Whites are victims of a vicious race war.

I had correspondence from a young man who was a firm supporter of multi-racialism until the EDL demonstration against the Dudley mosque and went to look. When he got within a quarter of a mile he was issued with a Dispersement Order by the police. Later as he made his way back he encountered roving gangs of young Muslim males tooled up with knives and Machetes hunting anyone white with a short haircut or union flag on their clothing. The elites have created open warfare throughout Europe but the media suppress that knowledge and mislead people into thinking things are working out.

The police attack the EDL with truncheons funnelling them into tight wedges as at Hillsborough. In Leeds they continued to attack them while they were falling over each other. Just in case anyone was in any doubt whatsoever about the double standards and discrimination afforded to the white, Christian population of this country two EDL supporters staged a rooftop protest against Dudley mosque being foisted on local people over the Bank Holiday Weekend. They were charged with offences including Burglary, intent to cause Criminal Damage and Incitement of Religious Hatred.

They appeared in court one with broken arm sustained during or after arrest, the other a black eye. Witnesses confirmed they made no attempt to resist arrest and the police were extremely 'heavy handed'. Yet when Muslims chased the tough-guy police calling them cowards and poofs they ran away. (6)

Those who believe in civil disobedience be careful: In “Scared Yet,” on the “England Expects” blog, Libertarian Party leader Ian Parker-Joseph revealed that the M.O.D. were asking military personnel: “Will you open fire on UK citizens?… In a stunning conversation with a friend, who is a serving member of the Armed Forces, over the weekend, it was revealed that transfers to regiments and other units in the UK on home duties are being undertaken by the MOD based upon whether an individual was prepared to ‘open fire’ on UK citizens during civil disturbances.” This is corroborated by Dr. Richard North who revealed that the M.O.D. was buying up “unusually large quantities of tear gas and other riot equipment.”

We are part of a wider genocide: In Britain members of the ruling elites have admitted it. Andrew Neather admitted it and Migration Watch had secret government documents released under the freedom of Information Act are bases for another Nuremberg trial! Imposed Multi-Racialism with the admitted intention of the physical destruction of Whites is an organized crime against humanity. The humiliation, dispossession and gradual destruction of Whites, from Canada to Sweden to Africa is : The largest campaign of ethnic cleansing in recorded history.

The lessons we derive from the foregoing are firstly, the need to move close together. In a sense we are pioneers in our own country and need to relocate and form new communities of self defence. In view of the tyrannical power over the internet our enemy government are going to take we need to develop lines of communication between our communities. If large roads become impassable use bicycles especially with carriers.

Muslim vigilantes drive around an area just outside the territory they are taking over and threatening dissolute types like alcoholics, drunks and prostitutes as they clean up the area for their people to move into. They also claiming territory by opening mosques which, as well as cultural and community centres, are ideological training grounds for street soldiers. The imposition all over the country of no-go areas is prohibiting Whites from entering their territory. Like us they need areas of their own where they can bring their children up within their own cultural womb so they make life difficult for resident Whites to drive them out and, as the police and council authorities are on their side against local Whites, the Whites move out. This is euphemistically called “White flight.”

Alternating governments are aspects of one elite and have been acting illegally under the UN Genocide Act which nullifies any obligation to maintain the multi-racial state. In 2000 The Guardian predicted a white minority Britain by 2100, thus tacitly accepting our replacement. Around 8 years ago The Birmingham Post quoted a former senior Central TV official as saying we must prepare people for Muslims to become the majority. Jans Orbeck former Swedish PM admitted Muslims would take over.

Now this will surprise many but the key to our survival is by co-operating with other endangered groups like the Jewish communities. In January 2009 Muslims marched through European cities chanting “Jews to the gas” but the media played it down thus allowing it to fester. The difficulty at the moment is that Jewish people still think White Christians are their enemy but mass immigration of Muslims has changed everything. The historical difficulties between our two peoples is not so important while Muslims physically attack Jews in France and Malmo, Sweden and Norway and take our countries off us. As an expedient we have to co-operate for our common defence. The elites are made up of both White and Jewish people and both are destroying their people.

The Financial Times of 21 November 2003 reported that the EU's racism watchdog shelved a report on anti-Semitism because it found Muslims and pro-Palestinian groups were perpetrating most racist attacks. The report, "was judged inflammatory" and buried. "The decision not to publish was a political decision." The page from the paper is no longer available online! (7) This same EU has developed The European-Mediterranian Partnership to encourage mass Muslim immigratiomn and replace European peoples and culture by mass immigration of Muslims and a policy of Islamification. This partnership of the EU and Arab countries around the Mediterranean surrounds Israel with hostile countries, gives millions to Palestinian organisations as well as encouraging the mass immigration of Muslims into Europe and replacing indigenous Europeans as well as replacing our culture by an official programme of Islamification. Don't take my word for it research it for yourselves.

Recent figures from the Department of Education reveal that 43.1 percent of primary school pupils and 30.3 percent of secondary school pupils speak English as their second language.

These are mainly “eastern European immigrants and a rising birth rate among non-English-speaking Asian families.” They will be exaggerating eastern European immigration to hide the Third World aspect of the invasion.

For example, Bradford, which is being colonised by Pakistanis has had over 1,200 new non-English-speaking school children arriving in the last 12 months. There are nearly a million schoolchildren in Britain who do not have English as their first language. This causes English-speaking parents to withdraw their children and move to “English” schools.

The ethnic cleansing of non-Muslims in Luton shows police complicity. The Muslims target people from all races and are trying to ethnically clear West Indians in Bury Park by throwing bricks through their windows. The police have been ignoring it, but TV showed a residents meeting with episcopalian Bishop Blake asking the police what they were going to do about it. The police have “Hate Crime officers” to harry and persecute any who try to oppose what Muslims are doing!

See - Bedfordshire on Sunday 13/01/2008 and Luton on Sunday 16/01/2008

As far back as 1954 Judge William Clothier called on the government to send immigrants back. He was presiding over a trial of a Black immigrant who tried to drive A White tenant out. Whites are the main sufferers in the whole immigration saga.

How are we to cope with this?

We begin by asking ourselves questions. Will our children get a better education away from immigrant schools? Will they be safer from the knife and gun crime perpetrated by immigrants? What influence could we exert from outside? Is it worth risking getting mugged or stabbed on the tube commuting to city jobs? Businesses are cheaper to run outside cities.

As a supplement to political activism we need to be part of and represent our communities. To provide help and advice to those affected by the anti-White policies of the elites, tap into the problems of local people and open advice surgeries. This will take time and money but we represent our community not the Established elites. Rather than trying to take the elites at their own game, fight on our own ground. Help those who get displaced by immigrants, those who the state discriminate against. Don't just tell their stories, represent them.

Promote the work on the main website and involve the loyal bloggers in countering the biased media representation, showing what it is to be part of a community-based movement. Concentrate energy on things we can change, for this is going to be a long haul. We are already being ethnically cleansed and must not passively submit and must take control by moving out and rallying ourselves and, like Jewish people do, boycott immigrant shops and use only our own. Get children educated in white schools or Home School so they don't get brainwashed, de-cultured or turned into sexual perverts by State education.

They are our children and our responsibility and we should be planning a decent future for them. One day the children will want children and there'll be nowhere safe to go. We have to get involved in every aspect of life - local organisations, folk societies, school governors and home schooling and start our own credit unions. We need to form committees like alternative councils with proper banking and verified officers and proper banking to counter having our communities taken off us.

To be practical we must consider the logistics we will need. The arteries of goods and supply are now housed in large warehouses near motorways and hence to outlying areas. This is something for us to do when the race war breaks into organised fighting. There are fields and allotments to buy in the country. It would be a bit like the “Dig for Britain” campaign in the Second War all available land was utilised for growing food.

We must stop squandering money on the shallow distractions the media and adverts encourage, like expensive and unnecessary cosmetics. Young White women are naturally beautiful and don’t need to slap this expensive rubbish over their faces nor do you have to squander your resources on clubbing, booze and dope. We are misled by politician, football, TV, and adverts for shallow re-assurances like –have your boobs expanded. They are constantly advertising marked-up cosmetics. Save the money and invest in your communities and future generations. Set out to be economically powerful and through communal credit unions open your own shops.

A related problem is the serious financial problems in the EU and our massive debt indicates we might go the way of Greece.(8) This is a major major issue. Economics brings down systems faster than grievances about social policy. For they put up with anything if they have cash and this is how welfare entitlements are used to manage the population. A breakdown in the single currency would unleash powerful political forces. The global market is to the detriment of workers in the advanced nations - global corporations use labour from the cheapest labour markets. Immigrants have been used as cheap labour since immigration started and that is why the NHS and London Transport brought them in. It saved them improving conditions and paying a reasonable wage.

We are in the position immigrants were when they first came. They worked hard and pooled resources to start buying houses, first, in run down areas like Upper Parliament Street in Liverpool and Chapletown in Leeds which had been fashionable large houses in the inner cities. The working classes had been moved onto large estates and the middle classes were in the suburbs. The immigrants began penetrating the centres of cities like London which are the most economically and culturally important.

They have been putting down roots and encourage their children to study for the professions and get into positions of influence and jobs that yield a pension because they believe in building for the future not escape from life. We have to think communally and build up the strength of our communities as mutual support structures like extended families.

The ownership of land gives power to these rival communities. When the authorities bend the rules to allow them to take things off us they are allowing new people to take over. The authorities over ride local communities to give power and influence to immigrants by preferential planning permission.

The new Planning Guidelines state that the interests of ‘Travellers’ should take precedence over our( settled) communities. They already have priority for getting their children into popular schools and treatment on the NHS. Now, they are to be enabled to build caravan sites on green belt land, and this dispossesses people remote from immigrant areas.

An idea was put forward in The Spectator of 17th December 2005 by Conservative philosopher Roger Scruton: “Neighbours should club together to buy small parcels of land from any desperate farming neighbour, thereafter renting it back to him at a peppercorn rent. This we have done in our neighbourhood, so saving ourselves both from travellers and agribusiness, by injecting needed capital into a family farm… If we wish to retain our countryside, it is up to us who live there to make the necessary sacrifices.” This applies to forming collectives to buy property in our towns and cities.

There is a positive, wholesome vision in this which offers a proper future for the children. It is one of rebuilding our communities and offering preference in housing and employment to our own people as a matter of priority because they share our ancestory. We must start a fund like The Jewish National Fund to restore British neighbourhoods. We should invite our diaspora: Australians, Canadians to return. As they themselves are victims of Ethnic Cleansing Zimbabweans and South Africans should be asked to return to Britain for their sake as well as ours. The government won’t like it but as they are trying to destroy us we must ignore them.(9) We need to discuss our mutual safety with Jewish communities and found a community defence force to protect our people based on the Jewish community defence force the CST.

Speech in the House of Commons on the consequences of immigration (24 May, 1976), published in A Nation or No Nation? Six Years in British Politics (Elliot Right Way Books, 1977), p. 161.
Speech in the House of Commons on the consequences of immigration (24 May, 1976), from A Nation or No Nation? Six Years in British Politics (Elliot Right Way Books, 1977), p. 161.

Friday, 21 May 2010

Culture Shock

One striking element of the recent conflict unfolding on the streets of Bangkok has been the reaction of the English middle classes to the death and bloodshed on the streets of the Thai capital. “How could this be happening in the land of smiles?” they cry “What has happened to the charming and delightful Thai people we met when were were there?”

They can't believe what they are seeing because these scenes bear no comparison to Thailand, the popular holiday destination, they thought they knew.

Of course they never knew the real Thailand, they may have visited it many times, thought they loved it, dreamed of living there and praised the 'wonderful culture' to their friends upon their return, but they never really saw Thailand.

These same smug and comfortable people who, safe in their leafy sanctuaries have applauded the arrival of the invading immigrant hoards, as the bringers of low cost domestic staff, easier access to authentic ethnic cuisine and “culture Darling, such wonderful enriching culture”, have not the faintest idea of the truth of the cultures over which they swoon.

Every year you see them returning from their three weeks of luxurious indulgence in Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, the Gambia or Mombasa gushing about the wonderful culture and the delightful, friendly and happy people. We the miserable, bigoted English “could learn so much” from the “simple, contented and smiling world” they have just visited, or so they tell us. Each time you want to scream at them “Of course they smiled at you, you dumb bastard, you had just given them three months off season income in return for some beads and bits of coconut husk which their six year old was up half the night stringing together!".

The hatreds and tensions exploding now in Thailand have been simmering there for decades, but James and Chloe from Hoxton never saw them as they clapped their hands and tapped their feet to the local music in the way that embarrassing middle class English prats always do, grinning like morons as they imbibe the four or five star version of what they imagine is ethnic culture.

They see what the deeply dishonest glossy brochures tells them they will see, they see what they want to see, but what they don't see is the truth. They don't see the brutality, the violence and the hatreds which fill the lives of those living full time in the theme parks they jet in and out of every summer. Hidden from them is the corruption, the tiny battered corpses, the child abuse, the raped and battered women, the sweatshops and slavery (yes I mean slavery) not to mention the filth and decay which is the reality lurking behind the smiles.

Some even go back to the same place year after year, yet never really see it.

Some, of course, do see it, but they are the liars who, when they are raped, would rather deny they have been raped than admit the colour of their rapists. However, others, like the woman I know who recently returned from Cape Town and declared South African crime rates a myth because she has got through a two week visit without being car-jacked or murdered, believe the lies they are told, and only see a made up world.

Can we really blame the ageing Hippy mother of 15 year old Scarlet Keeling who's raped and battered body washed-up on an idyllic Goan beach in February 2008, for believing that it was perfectly safe to leave her teenage daughter in the care of a 25 year old ethnic boyfriend she had only just met?. This was Goa after all, the Utopia of the flower children, the paradise of the Lonely Planet guide generation, and only beautiful things happen in paradise.

Maybe to some degree this sort of blindness is nothing new, to our grandmothers' generation Rangoon and Mandalay were where the flying fishes played and people went to drink cocktails on sun soaked verandas, not brutalised outposts of one of the most vicious dictatorships on the planet. In the 1960's the Lebanon was a playground for the rich and beautiful, nothing like the war weary and battle scarred land it has become.

However, the difference was, previous generations, much as they may have loved different and far away cultures, real or imagined, still loved their own culture, back at home at least as much. It had not yet become a fashionable display of class and style to laud another culture, or even what one imagines another culture to be, over one's own. To earlier generations the thought of replacing their home culture with a foreign one would have been anathema.

Earlier generations also seemed to understand the principles of import and export better than the current one, and did not imagine it was necessary to import a population in order to share the tastes and pleasures of other lands. “We so love the diversity of food!!” cackle the chattering classes in defence of mass migration, speaking as if the tea, which Britons drank for centuries without considering it necessary to grant citizenship to half of India, grew in the fields of Shropshire, or that the bananas, which had been widely on sale in Britain sixty years before the docking of the Windrush, thrived around the oast houses of Kent.

When you import a people you do not gain the Holiday hotel fantasy of their culture or the vision of a land which you can buy for 2,000 Thai baht a night in Phuket, The foreigners arriving in their droves are not the beaming natives who draped garlands round your necks and danced for you with beads around their ankles in exchange for British pounds. When people are imported with their products there is a lot more to diversity than foodstuff and fabrics. What is arriving at our shores is the reality of alien culture, the one appearing on the blood spattered streets of Bangkok, Nairobi, Mogadishu and Islamabad not the picture postcard pretence sold to you by Kuoni Tours.

The other madness which merges incongruously with the asinine belief that importing cultures where child slavery, child rape, acid attacks, homophobic murder, honour killing, gang rape, political corruption, electoral fraud, xenophobia, savage animal cruelty, female, and sometimes male, genital mutilation, muti killings, kidnapping, decapitations, male rape and torture together with any number of other horrors are every day events, and which are so cruel and dangerous we can not with humanity return terrorist suspects to them, enriches Britain, is the fantasy that when people from such cultures arrive here, they will automatically become part of British society and adopt British values.

That they will, in effect become "British".

When Newsreaders aggressively and incessantly fire the word “British” at us, as if from rapid reloading machine guns, when reporting stories Asian children being kidnapped and held for ransom in Pakistan, or, as with today's tragic news item, Asian families being murdered on account of some marriage dispute whilst in Asia, we are supposed to obediently accept that these are British people who have struck unlucky whilst holidaying over seas.

When men walking down North London streets have acid poured down their throats because they romanced someone else's wife, and when girls are beaten to death by their fathers (or maybe buried alive by them) for loving the wrong man, we would be denounced as racists if we do not insist that white people do these things too.

When official figures slip out revealing that 92% of gang rape suspects in London are non-white we are obliged to blame white British society rather than point to the facts that:

* in the lands where the 92% originate gang rape is endemic

* the white 8% were part of mixed race gangs, not gangs of white rapists

As falsehood piles upon lie, we are are told, and required to believe that our immigrant communities suffer continuing racial violence, yet it is we, the host community, and not they who fear to walk our streets.

Our country, indeed our continent, is in the worst economic state it has ever been in in peace time, yet we are expected to enthusiastically agree when liars tell us that the mass immigration they have forced upon us has brought great economic benefits.

Yet, despair as you may, there are those who still believe it.

Much like our cousins in America, where the myths of popular belief are in some ways even further removed from reality, we in Europe live in the age where truth is rejected in favour of fantasies and downright lies. Most of our people believe not in the world as it is but as they want it to be, and amongst the worst lies are the ones they tell themselves.

I fear for them, for one day they must wake, and when they do the culture shock may well kill them.

Monday, 17 May 2010

Farm Murders - Update

I said yesterday that I would provide further information in relation to the killing of Johannes Strydom at the weekend. Sadly some very disturbing details have been released regarding this murder, it would appear that Mr Strydom was initially attacked with an iron bar, then chains were attached to his ankles and he was dragged behind his truck to his store room where his body was left.

News story here

According to the news report he was dead when he was dragged, let us hope that he was, as being South Africa he may well have been dragged quite some distance.

However, if he was alive, this will have been the second such attack on a white South African in recent weeks. A few weeks ago a young white South African was carjacked. There are around 16,000 violent carjackings a year in South Africa, and this was a particularly violent one, the young man was attached to the back of his car and dragged along the road. He survived, but with injuries, the photographs of which I will never, ever forget.


In addition I regret that I failed to report the murder of farmer Robert Botha which occurred on the 10th of May at his farm in Kameeldrift West near Pretoria. Mr Botha had been stabbed five times through the heart and had also suffered knife wounds to the face and arms, the latter presumably being defensive wounds.

News story

The killing of Robert Botha comes just a fortnight after the killing 40 year old farmer Chris Botha which I reported last month.

These killings bring the total number of farm killings since the end of Apartheid to at least 3.107.

Meanwhile 61 year old farmer Jeffrey Wicks is recovering from injuries he sustained when confronted by intruders in his hope at the end of April



Thanks to Dina and Jenny W

Sunday, 16 May 2010

Potchefstroom farmer killed

Three men were arrested on Sunday in connection with the murder of a 40-year-old farmer from Potchefstroom, Johannes (Boetie) Strydom was attacked at the gate of his farm, Naderfontein, on Saturday at about 13:00. The attackers are believed to have tied Strydom with chains and beaten him to death with a blunt object. His body was dragged into the garage and his truck and mobile phone stolen.

News source

I will provide further details as I receive them.

Related story: AWB blame latest farm attack on ANC

Thanks to Birdman and Carl

The threat to the Western male

I make no pretense other than that this article is purely speculative, I have no current scientific evidence to support the hypothesis which I shall put before you. However, that is inevitably the way in our current world, if one seeks to examine theories which travel beyond the strictly enforced boundaries of permitted orthodoxy and to question the inflexible dogmas governing currently acceptable truths.

Outside the realms of what is permitted there is no science, there is no research, established doctrines can not be questioned, and no funds are available to support anyone who dares to do so.

Therefore, when asking questions such as those I am about to ask, the only option is to speculate, for in doing so, one has entered a domain where science dare not go. This is hardly surprising, the penalty for transgression can be severe. Cruel examples have been made of those scientists and writers who tried to enter no-man's land, the savaging of Herrnstein and Murray in the 1990's and the more recent reputation destroying demonisation heaped on Nobel Prize winning Dr James Watson for daring to speak against the doctrines of our age, will have warned others of the fate awaiting those who fail to obey.

Therefore, I make no apology for being unable to support my speculation with current science, for we live in an age where were a scientist to provide such support, or even Investigate the possibility, he would, of course, never be permitted to work again.

The topic I wish to discuss, but can not support with scientific data is what may actually be the cause of the falling fertility rates amongst some sections of Western Society. Over recent years none of us can have missed the articles which keep appearing in newspapers and magazines reporting the drop in fertility rates amongst Western Males. A recent report indicated that many as one in five healthy young men between the ages of 18 and 25 produce abnormally low sperm counts.

This report was greeted by the somewhat feigned hysteria by the Daily Mail with the warning that men, as a group, could become infertile within a few generations. Clearly if this were true it would lead to the death of the human race, given that scientists have not yet mastered the manufacture of human sperm from radishes, bananas or ocean plankton, which would enable the continued survival of the Sapphic Utopia which some man haters dream might follow.

However, given exploding birth rates worldwide, it would appear that this phenomenon is only effecting Western males, there is certainly no evidence of falling fertility rates in the third world, in fact, very much the reverse would seem to apply. So, if we are to believe what we are being told, it is among white European males that sperm counts are dropping and fertility problems are increasing, however, is that really what is happening?

The newspaper reports focus on the male, because it is fashionable to belittle men, especially white men, but in fact the report states that the problem with male fertility “starts within the womb”, so, in fact, whatever is going on actually effects both sexes. Something is happening within the pregnant female body which is impacting on the fertility of the male child. What can that be?

Naturally scientists, researching within the parameters in which it is permissible for them to research, are seeking to identify environmental factors.

Of course many were quick to blame science's favourite villain, tobacco. Mothers who smoke, they claimed, were having an effect on the fertility of their unborn male child. However, this claim does not make sense, male infertility is increasing, whist smoking has been on the decline for decades. Smoking mothers did not hinder the baby boomers who were born to a generation who had smoked their way through the war and the (truly) “never had it so good” 1950's. A child born in 1955 was considerably more likely to have a mother who smoked, and smoked through pregnancy, than would be the case with a child born in 1985, yet it is amongst the children born in the late 1980's and 1990's, after smoking mothers became pariahs, that male sperm counts are falling.

In addition, in the same period smoking rates began to grow in the third world, especially in places like China and India where instead of causing fertility problems, the governments have employed progressively more desperate measures to control birth rates. Would the Chinese, amongst the most enthusiastic smokers on the planet, have had to introduce a one child per family rule, if there was a problem with Chinese infertility.

Other scientists have pointed to pollution as a possible cause, however, once again, why is it that the problem if disproportionately impacting on the West when parts of the Far East, for instance, experience far higher levels of “modern day” pollution than most of the West, and have done so for decades, without any evident fall in fertility rates.

Of course there are many other factors which could be at the root of the problem, but in an increasingly globalised world, it would be difficult to identify many environmental factor which exclusively effects a distinct section of Western society. It certainly isn't effecting all Western communities, as the booming growth in the Muslim community demonstrates.

There are, however, behavioural factors, and one behavioural factor in particular which has, in recent decades, impacted on White western society to a significantly greater degree than it has impacted on any other racial group on the planet. That factor is the instance of inter-racial sex and the production of mixed race children.

In no other part of the world have distinct racial groups mixed sexually to anything like the degree they have in the West, at least the White section of the west (Muslim families on the other hand have been known to murder daughters who so much as look at a member of a different race – whereas white girls are all but accused of racism if they do not jump into bed with the first black youth to call them “bitch”).

It is not just the girls, in Europe it is quite common to see a white man with an Asian woman, however, in Asia this is a very rare phenomenon, whilst liaisons between Asians and Africans are all but non-existent . In the Middle East, marrying members of other racial groups is very much a taboo, whereas in Africa, with the exception of the Cape Coloured group of mixed Asians, Africans and whites, interracial sex is almost unheard of, at least on a consensual basis.

It is the racist White Westerners alone who have willingly, and in increasing numbers, mixed their blood with other races, the same is not true in the homelands of those we have been mating with. It is now we, the white westerners who are experiencing fertility problems, whilst birth rates are soaring elsewhere in the world. Is there a connection?.

Scientist working in the Victorian age would have said there was a connection. Towards the end of the 19th Century and well into the early 20th Century it was a commonly held scientific belief, based largely on studies of interaction between whites and freed black slaves in North America, that interbreeding between races led to sterility by the third or fourth generation. Such beliefs have long since been decried as “racist” and few if any are the scientists who would dare voice such an opinion, but does that necessarily mean they were untrue?

There is much which is condemned as racism, not all of it is untrue.

I am, of course, speaking the unspeakable here, but that won't be the first time. The very suggestion that interracial sex could have serious and long term genetic problems is so unacceptable to the zealots of the modern orthodoxy, that no researcher would be permitted to investigate the possibility, and any who merely suggested it would be driven out of the profession.

But what if it is true?

It has long been claimed that race is nothing more than a social construct, however, recent findings suggest that may not be entirely the case. It has recently been discovered that all Europeans and most North Asians have around 4% Neanderthal in their DVA, however, black Africans have no Neanderthal DNA whatsoever. This in itself is evidence of a genetic difference, what else will science discover in future years?

The fact that one in five Western males are experiencing fertility problems would sadly fit with the number who are likely to have have some form of recently introduced mixed race ancestry, however distant, so the suggestion is not so very far fetched.

As I said, this is merely speculation based in an area where modern science fears to tread. As such I have no evidence to support my hypothesis, however, I submit to you that the theory fits the facts and is less easy to dismiss than some more popular explanations.

If it is correct, however, then science may be, for reasons of political correctness, deliberately ignoring a situation, resulting from deliberate government policy, which could not only have a devastating impact on our racial group but could mark the end of Western Society.