Wednesday, 31 August 2011

Remembering Beslan Seven Years On

 Seven years ago today the siege at a school in Beslan North Ossettia by Islamic militants, who took over 1,100 hostages, began.  The siege ended three days later with the death of over 334 hostages, 186 of them children. Many more were injured and a number remain missing.   This, like the many other such crimes, must never be forgotten.


 

The Shooting Has Begun - Part 1

By Mister Fox

During the 1981 riots Enoch explained that the way to find out what was going on was to read European media because British media obfuscates the truth. Those riots he pointed out were attacks on the police.  At the heart of the recent riots there were also attacks on the police which included firing at them with handguns in Birmingham. The media behave like the media in the Soviet Union where what the ideology said was happening was pushed by media rather than what was really happening. Russians were constantly told there was no crime in Russia.

There have been many warnings since immigration began but senior police chose to keep crime figures secret to further their own careers and kid the public that everything was working out when it was not.

The first Parliamentary debate on immigration was on the 5th of November 1954. John Hynd Labour M.P. in Sheffield said the colour bar in Sheffield dance halls because of knife fights was justified. Both Hynd and another Labour M.P., James Johnson, called for a committee of enquiry to be set up and speakers repeatedly asked the Government to take action but Henry Hopkinson(c), Minister of State at the Colonial Office told them “the matter is receiving urgent attention.” He did admit that he had received many letters from worried M.P.’s on both sides.

Winston Churchill battled in cabinet against appeasers but was old and ailing. Harold Macmillan entered in his diary for January 20th 1955: "More discussion about the West Indian immigrants. A Bill is being drafted - but it's not an easy problem. P.M. thinks 'Keep England White' a good slogan!” The bill was not ready till June 1955, two months after Churchill had to stand down.

Peter Hennessy, 'Having It So Good - Britain in the Fifties' (Allen Lane, 2006) p 224

Hennessy's reference is: Peter Catterall (ed.), 'The Macmillan Diaries: The Cabinet Years, 1950-1957' Macmillan. 2003 p 382

The fifth Marquess of Salisbury wrote to Viscount Swinton in 1954: “I should not be satisfied with the legislation which you suggest. I feel that it would only be tinkering with what is really becoming a fundamental problem for us all, though it is only beginning to push its ugly head above the surface of politics. The figures which we have been given make it clear that we are faced with a problem which, though at present it may be only a cloud the size of a man’s hand, may easily come to fill the whole political horizon …With each year that passes, and with the general improvement with methods of transportation, the flow increases. Indeed, if something is not done to check it now, I should not be at all surprised if the problem became quite unmanageable in twenty or thirty-years time. We might well be faced with very much the same type of appalling issue that is now causing such great difficulties for the United States.”

In a 1965 debate Cyril Osborne, who had begun his campaign against mass immigration in 1954, said:” Our children and our grandchildren will curse us for our moral cowardice. The conflict these great men foresaw has arrived.

Birmingham Chief Constable Chris Sims announced at a press conference on 20th August:   “ I have taken the decision... perhaps an unusual decision ...  I want to to release into the public domain... footage showing people firing into lines of police officers...evidence of several gunmen, evidence of a level of planning.  What we are looking at is a concerted attempt to kill or injure police officers... it is also a threat to the wider community.” (2)

I am truly sorry about this danger to the lives of police officers but what did senior police officers, media and politicians expect?  This is the coming to fruition of years of appeasement of ethnics. 
During the 1981 riots politicians and media tried to pretend they were not Black but "Youth" riots because some Whites joined in.

Enoch explained the way to find the cause was like in medical science when trying to discover the cause of an epidemic: look for the common denominator. The common denominator is that the riots originated in Black areas. The way to understand the cause is to compare their behaviour here with that in Jamaica, Somalia, American cities and Africa.  (3)You have your answer.

The inner contradiction will soon be evident: despite the media trying to pretend it is not race based, there will be appeasement of the Black community, politicians will call for more handouts, faux-experts like Ted Candle will seek to scapegoat Whites.

The media smooth things over, adapt events to the official racial-equality ideology and show a disproportionate number of pictures of Whites. The excuse that it is caused by poverty is a hundred years old and a bit quaint now. The idea that it is racism that keeps people down is silly because as this essay shows ethnics get preferential treatment. Furthermore, rioters and looters didn’t look angry or oppressed but were enjoying themselves and looking happy.

The areas these shootings occurred are notorious mugging areas were Whites are not safe to walk unless they know you. These are the Newtown and Aston areas breeding ground of Birmingham's two notorious Black gangs The Johnsons and The Burger Boys. These are substitute families.
I worked in this area 17 years ago and it was well-known then that young “gangstas” carried guns.  In fact the notorious killing of a young Black girl by her brother happened in Aston. (4)
The local authorities, including the police, have allowed these gangs to take over areas and businesses and not won their support but their contempt.  People hate weakness in others.

The sad reality is that the local authorities are creating this situation by allowing it to develop.  On Sunday nights on Broad Street in Birmingham a local bar put on R&B nights. This music is very popular with young Blacks and the gangstas and this city-centre venue caters for them.  The door staff have to be changed as they would be targets walking through the streets and would be waited for outside for even minor transgressions like not letting certain people in.  They are replaced by Black door staff from a different area. It is being changed to a “members only” event to prevent innocent people blundering in and being beaten. They have knife arches outside to detect metal and only serve drinks in plastic not glass.  White women go there but it would not be safe for White men.

Outside the bar the door staff put up barriers to stop them getting out and running riot.  But what is highly dangerous is when the gangstas try to take guns in with them. The police respond with armed police officers brandishing machine guns who line the gangstas on the floor handcuff their hands behind their backs and take their guns off them. Recently, the violence was so bad that they had a police helicopter circling above the venue.  But this is never reported.

The local authorities conspire to keep it from the public.  The police, local council, the editors of the 3 principle Birmingham newspapers and The Broad Street Marshalls keep it quiet.

There has always been ample evidence that trying to force different racial groups together leads to conflict and mutual hatreds, so the authorities have no excuses.

There were racial battles in 1948 between 31 July and 2 August in Liverpool, in Deptford on the 18th July; and Birmingham between the 6th and 8th of August 1949.  The idealists ignored those as they had racial battles in 1919 in Liverpool and Cardiff.  They do so out of fear of standing up against the orthodox view (PC) and being pilloried.

Enoch told the House of Commons the consequences of immigration on 24 May, 1976:  "Yet even though that picture is dark and darkening, there is one factor which has not yet been injected. I do not know whether it will be tomorrow, or next year, or in five years; but it will come. 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."

Published in A Nation or No Nation? Six Years in British Politics (Elliot Right Way Books, 1977), p. 161

The situation in Birmingham is the same in immigrant areas all over the country.  In Edmonton  north London on  Thursday 25th of August a police van was petrol bombed for no reason. (5)
 I watched the London news on ITN and it never mentioned it. Another article in the Guardian is interesting as the Welsh want demographic change to be taken into account when building new homes. (6)

There are secondary causes.  In a Newsnight discussion David Starkey, put the riots down to the corrupting influence of particular type of Black culture. (7) He was attacked on the programme even by the supposedly neutral presenter Emily Maitlis and later by another partial senior BBC figure, Robert Peston. Then a 100 academics wrote a letter attacking him to The Telegraph.

Academic historians are establishment ideologues not objective investigators.  Starkey had “ Disgraced the academic world”, they claimed?  The academic world has been in disgrace for a long time. The treatment of Dr James Watson after his "controversial" remarks stands out as a particularly strong sign of how institutions that are supposed to be about facts and truth have been promoting the orthodox ideology as in Communist countries. Rather than refute any of Watson's claims they attacked him personally, even suggesting he was going senile, and David Starkey's hero David Lammy criticised him ideologically, but not on factual grounds. This Nobel prize winner, co-discover of DNA was being insulted by semi-educated journalists. Now the same thing is happening to Starkey because broke the most important Establishment taboo. The 100 signatures mean nothing; facts to do not change because weak-minded and biased people want them to. The truth is not a democracy where you can collect signatures to decide what really went on. The signatories resort to assumptions:

The 100 academics attacking Starkey recalls the Nazi's - "100 scientists against Einstein", pamphlet. This is intimidation and academic bullying. These 100 intellectual lightweights are showing their anti-White credentials as Soviet intellectuals denounced  others.

How do these 'academics' know that Starkey's wrong when they have the "No Platform Policy" endorsed by the NUS, and their use of UAF thugs to silence politically incorrect speakers at universities? Academic progress is supposed to be achieved by hearing opposing viewpoints?
If this find this type of Black culture is difficult to define, how do people know what to put in "Black History Month" or MOBO?
A classic example of their bias is that "academics" at the LSE have attacked him. Is this the LSE that took a £1.5 million bung from Saif Gadaffi for a plagiarised PHD and allowed him to deliver the Ralph Milliband memorial lecture on "Democracy in Libya"?

Starkey never blamed race for the problems as the elites blame Whites.  They are racist against Whites.  Racism hopes to blame problems on a racial scapegoat. If the Hutus have a bad crop, it must be because of the Tutsi; if there are race riots in England it must be because of White racism.
Nationalism says that our most basic form of political order is advanced tribalism: people are united by culture, heritage, language, customs, values and descent from ancestors not political ideology, like “capitalist democracy” versus “socialist authoritarianism,” Rule of Law (which they are suspending to cope with problems of immigration).
There are currently 20,000 diseased Africans in this country with AIDS but the elites never any health warnings to young girls not to sleep with them.  That is both irresponsible in failing to protect the innocent and also shows hatred for their own ordinary people.

A factor that is never considered is the constant and consistent stirring up of race hatred against Whites in Blacks by the corrupt elites who are making ordinary people pay for their own feelings of shame at our past and our history. They do this by continually promoting a perverse interpretation of slavery and to make sure they have stirred up hatred against Whites they open up museums to further push erroneous view of our part in the slave trade and incite more hatred. This is racism pure and simple.

Nationalism is something every ethnic group can use to their advantage but in their own countries otherwise with masses of immigrants that have a different culture and genetic heritage you find the ethnic warfare we have starting here.  This is part of a worldwide reaction against Globalism as multi racial states voluntarily break down into Ethno Nationalist groups. In small numbers people adapt but with mass immigration in such a short time you get serious ethnic wars and dispossession. Ask the Tutsis, Hutus and Native Americans. (8)
 ___________________________________



Tuesday, 30 August 2011

The Beeb does it again


See the BBC's latest lying hatchet job on the EDL at the Gates of Vienna by Clicking Here

___________________________
Q: How can you tell a BBC newsreader is lying: A: They are conscious and looking at a camera


___________
Hat Tip: Mister Fox

Friday, 26 August 2011

Richard Barnbrook: “If only they’d listened ….”

By Richard Barnbrook

From what was once a total of over 100 councillors, the BNP now only has a meagre 9. And from having been in credit to the sum of some £2.3 million, the Party is said have debts of £700 000. Sad to say, back as far as the autumn of 2006, I saw that there were problems which eventually led to the difficulties that are now besetting the Party and that have resulted in its regression.

But be warned, this is not just a brief write-up but a good 30-minute read! I’m putting it up, because we need to look at what went wrong for the good of our country, so that we can hopefully put things right. But above all, we need to forge a new way forward involving all nationalist/patriotic groups. Because there are so many like-thinkers out there, from all colours of the political spectrum- disaffected Labour supporters, Conservatives and others- nationalists who need to find a voice.

In 1999 when I first joined the Party it was due to Nick Griffin winning the leadership challenge. At the time he had the charisma, the flair and the vision.

I had left the Labour Party in 1986 because under Kinnock, the values that I then adhered to were saying nothing to a new Britain, a Britain where education had become worthless, a Britain where the health system was overloaded and already showing signs of cracking and inability to cope with an increased population. At the same time, there was a decline in Britain’s economic and fiscal soundness. It was a nation that not even Enoch Powell could have predicted would have emerged with such velocity and speed. This was the mid 1980s when Margaret Thatcher had started to bring the incompetence of the unions, with their lack of vision, under control which I give her credit for. But she widened the doors to the immigration crisis and sealed our fate with the cheap gimmick of clawing back pennies from Europe, rather than expelling the Brussells bureaucrats from our shores. She should have kicked the EEC out of Britain when she had the chance. Because the majority of the problems we face today, together with the inability to do anything to counteract them, stem from our accursed membership of the EU.

Having left the Labour Party, I then decided to go about the continuation of my career both in the arts and education. While in the secondary education system of London, working on short-term contracts in failing schools, I was brought into schools across London as a trouble-fixer prior to OFSTED inspections, in such areas as Greenwich, Lewisham, Bexleyheath, Newham, Neasden and Tower Hamlets amongst others.

It wasn’t until 1997 and the election of a Labour government that I saw within the following three years a total desperation and despondency amongst the communities in London that felt dejected and let down by seeing their desires and aspirations being dashed once again. I thus felt I had to take up the political cudgel. It took me three years to determine where best my voice could be heard by representation through a political party. After several attempts and deep deliberation, I finally got in contact with the BNP of the nearest branch and group to where I lived in Lewisham, which was the Bexley branch. The reason I finally decided to go to the BNP meeting was that Nick Griffin had won the leadership challenge. Marching through the streets of London was not the way forward at that time.
Click here to continue reading 

Thursday, 25 August 2011

Farmer stoned to death in shallow grave

White South African Farmer Thinus Uitenweerde died horribly, after being stabbed in the stomach he was tied up and then, whilst still alive and conscious Mr. Uitenweerde was placed in a shallow grave where he was stoned to death.

The assailants, both young black men, then proceeded to rape Mr, Uitenweerde's 85 year old mother Bella whilst brutalising and kicking his physically disabled wife Magriet.  The two frail women were were then tied up and were left for twenty hours before they were discovered.

The deeply traumatised Mrs Bella Uitenweerde said she decided to go public with her story: "It was horribly difficult but I cannot take it back. It was horrible.'

Her daughter Mrs Anneline Steyn said: "my brother was stabbed in the stomach, tied up, and dragged to the grave his murderers had prepared. He was dumped alive inside his grave and stoned to death with the large sandstone boulders with which our (historic) family homesteads were built.He was lying on his stomach with his head in the sand. His skull was crushed. After my brother was murdered, the attackers turned on my mother and sister-in-law. "My 85-year old mother was attacked inside the house, tied up and raped by both murderers of her son.' They used the bandages she ties around her ankles and wrists against arthritis to cover up her mouth and face. People must be told everything. We want this (these attacks against the Boers) to stop'.

Report at Censor Bugbear Reports

___________________

Thanks to BR for drawing this to my attention

Tuesday, 23 August 2011

Response to Cameron's Statement to the House of Commons



By: Frank Ellis

The Full Text of a Speech Delivered by Dr Frank Ellis to a Conservative Party Association in North Yorkshire in which he responds, among other things, to the Loss of Direction in the Conservative Party and the Failure of the Prime Minister, David Cameron, MP, to address the root Causes of the Urban Rioting and Rapine in his Address to the House of Commons on 11th August 2011.
__________

Ladies and Gentlemen!

Just after the first wave of urban savagery hit parts of London, I was contacted by a member of your Conservative Party Association with the request that I address an audience consisting of Conservative Party members. The individual who contacted me had read some of my earlier material on the themes of multiculturalism and the race problem in England. He told me that my views were very much in line with many of his fellow Conservative Party Association members and he asked me whether I would agree to address the problem and why there was such a huge divide between the parliamentary Conservative Party and the rank and file on questions of race, immigration and black crime.

The fact that this meeting is taking place in a large, beautiful, farm building rather than in the accommodation of your local association bears witness to the fact that the Conservative Party has indeed lost its way; that it has become a party divorced from its rank and file members; a party which colludes in the destruction of the United Kingdom and above all England.  If the Conservative Party led by David Cameron still believed in the primacy of the English nation and stood in awe of the freedoms which we have wrought for ourselves over the centuries, the organiser of this meeting would not have been obliged to ask a farmer for the use of this building. We would have convened in the local party offices or some other official venue.

But we do not live in normal times. So determined is the leadership of the Conservative Party to impose the alien cult of multiculturalism on the indigenous people – that is people like you and me by the way – and to purge the Conservative Party of all dissenters that all opposition is silenced, mocked and demonised. In 2011, any member of the parliamentary Conservative Party who stood up and publicly, loudly, rationally and truthfully attacked the insane levels of immigration, the anti-white cult of multiculturalism and the profound threat to this country posed by the massive shift in non-white population levels would be deselected and abandoned. So Conservative Party Members of Parliament tremble in cowardly silence fearful of losing their jobs. They know as well as I do what is happening and say nothing. They watch even as their Motherland is defiled and abused, treated like a whore. Even worse, some of them believe in the cult. Members of the parliamentary Conservative Party who remain silent in the face of the threat to our country have effectively abandoned their posts in the presence of the enemy. So it falls to others to speak out. I am of the English blood; I am a Norman bastard; I shall speak out.

The great, Russian writer and patriot Alexander Solzhenitsyn warned us that man must not live by the Lie. What is true for a man is true for a nation.  Let me spell out the brutal truth: multiculturalism is slowly and remorselessly destroying England. In fact the tempo of destruction may actually be increasing. Unchecked, mass legal/illegal immigration continues its deadly work, tearing our society apart; Marxists and multiculturalists continue unchallenged to spread their poison in our schools and universities; and non-white demography threatens completely to overwhelm us. Even in the aftermath of the urban rioting and rapine which blighted London and other cities David Cameron cannot bring himself to acknowledge that race and mass non-white immigration are some of the primary aggravating factors, in some ways they are the sole factors in this mayhem.

At every possible opportunity, from start to finish, David Cameron obfuscates, evades and denies the aggravating part played by race in his address to the House of Commons on 11th August 2011. He tells us that the trouble began when the police shot dead a one Mark Duggan. Why should the fact that the police shot dead this person be connected with the violence that followed?  David Cameron tells us that opportunist gangs exploited Duggan’s death; that ‘The police faced lawbreaking on the streets on a scale not seen for decades’: and all because one person is shot dead by the police? And is there any connection between this latest bout of murderous mayhem and previous ones? Is there a common denominator whereof David Cameron remains silent? I detect the obvious lie, the obvious attempt to deceive the public – not the House of Commons, its members know the truth – when David Cameron tells us that there are ‘deeper problems that have led such a hard core of young people to decide to carry out such appalling criminality’. The problems do not have deep causes they have just been buried too deeply for too long and ignored for too long.  Periodically they erupt. This is the latest – and I can assure you not the last – eruption.

Crime, David Cameron insists, has ‘a context’. In this context the problem of race cannot be ignored. David Cameron says that: ‘This is not about poverty, it’s about culture. A culture that glorifies violence, shows disrespect to authority, and says everything about rights and nothing about responsibilities. In too many cases, the parents of these children – if they are still around – don’t care where their children are or who they are with, let along what they are doing’ While this is an accurate portrait of the underclass per se it is especially accurate with regard to the black underclass. Violent street crime in London – shootings and stabbings – is essentially a black problem and we did not need the latest bout of murder and mayhem to tell us that. If David Cameron disputes this then I ask him to provide specific details of the people who ‘earn money through crime, particularly drugs and are bound together by an imposed loyalty to an authoritarian gang leader’ and who ‘blighted life on their estates with gang on gang murders ands unprovoked attacks on innocent bystanders’.

Endless commissions and inquiries are not needed to tell us the causes. The causes are painfully clear. Very large numbers of unemployed and unemployable blacks are the root cause of the riots and the overwhelming cause of violence on the streets of London. They rioted and engaged in rapine for obvious reasons. They want material goods for which they are not prepared to work so rioting is exploited in order to steal these goods. It is irrelevant to say that indigenous whites were also involved. Blacks were massively overrepresented among the, how should I put it, ‘rioting and looting community’. Had such large numbers of blacks not been present, or had the bulk of the rioters and thieves been white, the police would have cracked down much harder and sooner.

The reason the police did not react swiftly and ruthlessly to such large-scale and widespread manifestations of black, ghetto-style savagery was because the perpetrators were black not white. This is the bitter legacy of the poisonous Macpherson Report (1999). The climate of touchie-feelie, so-called ‘culturally-sensitive’ policing merely emboldens the black mob. Behind the black mob stand black councillors and other officials ever ready to scream racism. The inhibiting effects exercised by these accusations or the threat thereof have, again, been clear for some time. The Macpherson Report and everything associated with it are part of the ‘phoney human rights concerns’ that David Cameron clams will not be permitted to get in the way. So I call on David Cameron publicly to denounce the Macpherson Report and its works.

Mass, non-white immigration has been a catastrophe for England and the worst is yet to come. Violence and mayhem are bad enough but the real threat is in the projected increase in the non-indigenous population. This is where democracy works against the indigenous people. David Cameron and most Tories grasp the brute numbers, the cultural upheaval and the implications well enough yet these are problems which none of them can bear to face. A responsible government would initiate the necessary measures, short, medium and long term in order to ameliorate the worst effects of mass, non-white immigration. Immediate deportation of all illegal immigrants and an emphatic declaration that there shall be no amnesty for illegal immigrants (criminals) in any circumstances would be good beginnings. Again, David Cameron and his party show no sign that they are willing to tackle the range of problems. A responsible government and previous governments would of course not have permitted the present situation to have arisen in the first place. But that is where we are.

I will offer you a vision of England if nothing is done to stem the immigrant invasion:

(i). whole areas of England which are still rural will be concreted over in order to house immigrants. Do not assume that Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and National Park status will prevent this from happening. Cameron already wants to relax planning controls on Green Belts in order to house aliens. Aliens will be housed at the expense of the English countryside. Worse still the burden of paying for this high density housing will fall on the indigenous population. Large housing estates – 3,000 to 5,000 units - specifically intended for non-whites will be built in the countryside. There shall be no right of appeal on any grounds since the requirement to bring “diversity” to the countryside is deemed to be paramount. Farmers and other landowners who refused to sell land targeted for mass building would be served compulsory purchase orders. “Diversity” comes first;

(ii). water meters will be imposed on all properties. Large non-white immigrant families will receive water at a much lower tariff than indigenous whites. There will be similar schemes applied to electricity and gas;

(iii). immigrant numbers will translate into political power. There will be – there already is - a sordid, treacherous scramble for non-white votes by the three main parties. The interests of whites will be sacrificed where there is any electoral advantage to be gained by, say, the Conservative Party;

(iv). overcrowding, noise and pollution will make many of our cities – and not just the large ones – and medium-sized towns unbearable places in which to live and work. Expect even small villages to have “diversity” quotas imposed on them with all that that means;

(v). our large cities and towns will experience a huge increase in crime and violence, mainly from racially specific gangs, but also from non-affiliated immigrants;

(vi). specific policies of affirmative action and equal opportunities legislation modelled on American legislation will be enacted;

(vii). manifestations of any English national identity will continue to be demonised and in some cases criminalised (every other nationalism and tribal identity will be celebrated);

(viii). there will be a government-sponsored campaign to promote mixed-race marriages and households;

(ix). high-concentration Muslim cities in England will be invited to apply for semi-autonomous status. This will be the first step to full regional independence – free of any controls exercised by Westminster – and the eventual creation of the Confederation of Autonomous Muslim States. The Confederation will be recognised by the European Union since similar Muslim Autonomous Regions will by then have been created in France, Germany and Sweden. Expect the Confederation to make a declaration of independence within ten year of its founding. War with England will be inevitable and the European Union will impose a solution, by force if necessary, which is acceptable to the Confederation of Autonomous Muslim States but one which will be at the expense of the white, Christian/post-Christian indigenous population;

(x). in 2015 Magna Carta will be denounced as one of the most evil documents ever written;

(xi). your children will become a persecuted minority in their own country.

I claim the glory of Agincourt, Trafalgar and the Battle of Britain as my birthright and I accept the shame of Dunkirk and Singapore. I will not share my birthright with aliens. England is our land and our land must be ours. Shame and glory make a nation: shame is the punishment for failing to honour the covenant with our past, with what it means to be English; glory is a reminder of what can be achieved when the nation knows itself and her people are unafraid to be themselves, to revel in their national being. Shame and glory, good and evil, light and dark are some of the eternal truths with which we must live. They are the challenges that shape us and mould us. But a nation that denies its history, its language, culture, folkways; that mocks its heroes and heroines will be brought low and made easy meat for those who have no love for England.

I hope you are very worried. You should be. The ways of history are not always straight. Let us hope it is not too late to be delivered from the pestilence that threatens to overwhelm us. If you want to prevent this catastrophe then bestir your conscience and ask yourself why you still vote for a Conservative Party that prostrates itself before aliens; that hates you; that despises you; that taxes you to pay for aliens and the feckless; that sneers at your love of your great history; that wants to trample England and her people into the dust in pursuit of its hideous multiculturalism; that has betrayed you; and that actively works towards the day when England has been devoured by the United States of Europe.

Thank you very much for the invitation and good luck with the harvest.

God bless you all: and God bless England

Frank Ellis

Burning Britain and the Three-Times Treachery of Liberalism

Edmund Burke

By Tim Heydon

"People  will not look forward to posterity who never look backward to their ancestors" - Edmund Burke. (‘Reflections on the French Revolution’  Dent, 1955,(Everyman edition), p 31.)

Edmund Burke , the great conservative political philosopher of the era of the French Revolution, has been rejected by modern Toryism, There is much in Burke which nationalists might object to or  would want to  modify, such as the strength of his elitism.

Nevertheless, in many respects, including his rejection of ‘equality’ as against nature (‘A monstrous fiction’), his views and attitudes resonate with our own in a way that they don’t with Cameroonian Toryism and its  fellow-travellers. We should claim him for ourselves as a key intellectual progenitor.

Whilst a conservative, Burke’s view of  society is actually more modern because more realistic than that of the social engineers. For their vision is of a rationally ordered society which  functions like some great well-oiled machine. It is a vision in which the life of humanity can be structured  in manufactured states like the European Union by those with the power to do so.  This vision of society as mechanistic and scientifically improvable derives ultimately from Newton’s  view of the universe as operating like a machine through  inflexible natural laws.  This view had an overwhelming influence on the thinking of the French  Revolutionaries and continues with ‘progressives’ today.

The State is not a Machine to be built by Leftist / Liberal Intellectuals.  It is Organic

Burke, though, considered society to be ‘one family, one body, one heart and soul".  It was not to be thought of as something to be ordered and structured in machine-like fashion.  Rather it is organic. It is a living thing in which we the individuals are merely cells.  Thus while the individual may die, the larger body carries on. So we must never reject tradition because this represents the ancient wisdom of our race. It is the fruit of the empirical experience of the ages; it is what works.

We should always distrust abstract reason, of the sort indulged in by the liberal /leftist ‘intellectual’ social engineers of our day, because "the individual is foolish. The multitude is foolish; but the species is wise....as a species it almost always acts right'  (Works and Correspondence, vol X, (1852), p 97).

Our rights are not dreamt up from some abstract principle but are inherited from our ancestors (ie are inherent in our ethnicity) and it is for us to transmit them to our posterity.   ’We have," Burke said, "an inheritable crown; an inheritable peerage; and a house of commons and a people inheriting privileges, franchises, and liberties, from a long line of ancestors." Indeed, "it has been the uniform policy of our constitution to claim and assert our liberties, as an entailed inheritance derived to us from our forefathers, and to be transmitted to our posterity; as an estate specially belonging to the people of this kingdom without any reference whatever to any other more general or prior right."

Burke’s organic view of the state /society fits in very nicely with a modern view of the universe as, not static in a Newtonian sense, but where even galaxies and perhaps the universe itself are born, live and die in an organic rather than in an unchanging  mechanistic fashion. It is also more in keeping with a universe in which events are the result of the emerging possibilities of Quantum Physics rather than Newtonian determinism. Burke’s  organic opinion of society; his  view of the generations owing obligations to each other and his references to ‘the race’ as integral to society seems to  assume an essentially ethnic perspective well in keeping with nationalist thinking.

Remembering  Burke as Britain Burns

Modern society views the past as obsolete. It is an encumbrance to the future.  Dynamic change must destroy the old to build the new in what Burke called "a liberal descent." He  warned of  "unsocial, uncivil, unconnected chaos" and demanded respect for institutions on the same grounds as for men: "on account of their age and on account of those from whom they are descended".

Society is a Contract between the Living, the Dead and the Unborn.

Burke affirmed that society was a contract between the living, the dead and those who are yet to be born.  By this definition, Liberals  including Cameroonian Tories have betrayed our past . They have betrayed our present.  And they have betrayed our future. They have broken the sacred contract between the generations because they believe in nothing except the self, whilst we are faithful to that contract and believe in something greater than ourselves: our country, its people, its culture, the primacy of its traditional religion and much else besides.

The Betrayal of Our Past

In spite of the ludicrous historical perversions of left liberalism which lyingly try to force a multiracial history on Britain, until recently one of the  most racially culturally and religiously homogenous nations  ever (but which unwittingly confirm the importance of ancestry in national identity), this country was built by the  ancestors of the native British. They built it, they struggled, they bled, not for the benefit of foreigners, but for themselves and for their progeny and their progeny - ourselves, their heirs.  By destroying our traditions in favour of a continental –style manufactured arrangement in Europe and handing this country over to any Ahmed, Mohammed or Leroy, our present leadership has betrayed that trust and that  legacy.

Burke said,
‘The fair mansion of civilisation which we enjoy was not built with our hands, and our hands must refrain from polluting it. Being mere life-tenants, we have no business to cut off the entail, or to commit waste on the inheritance.’  This is what Burke explains as "one of the first and most leading principles on which the commonwealth and the laws are consecrated." To deny it is to reduce men to the condition of the "flies of a summer"

The WW11 Generation would not have fought if they could have seen how their beloved Country has been polluted

One of the saddest news items of recent years was the report of the sense of betrayal of those who fought the Second World War as obtained by the research for a book. ‘This isn’t the Britain we fought for,’ say the 
unknown warriors of WW11’, read the Daily Mail headline of 21st November 2009.  

‘Sarah Robinson was just at teenager when WW11 broke out. She endured the Blitz, watching for fires  during Luftwaffe air raids armed with a bucket of sand. Often she would walk ten miles home from work in the blackout with bombs falling around her.  As soon as she turned 18, she joined the Royal Navy to do her bit for the war effort. Hers was small part in a huge, history-making enterprise, and her contribution epitomises her generation’s sense of service and sacrifice.

‘But was it worth it? Her answer –and the answer of many of her contemporaries, now in their 80’s and 90’s -is a resounding no.’

‘They despise what has become of the Britain they once fought to save.  ‘’It’s not our country any more,’’ they say in sorrow and in anger. Sarah harks back to the days when ‘’people kept the laws and were polite and courteous. We didn’t have much money, but we were contented and happy.
’People whistled and sang. There was still the United Kingdom, our country, which we fought for, our freedom , our democracy. But where is it now?’’

The Betrayal of the Present

The betrayal of the past breaks the contract with it, but the present also betrays itself. For when it could have been the heir to the great tradition, the wisdom of our ancestors, it opted instead to reject it in favour of - what?  Of belief in nothingness; nothing except the self and its gratifications.  When it could have had ideals of service and self –sacrifice; belief in  belonging to a greater whole  at it heart it now has self-fulfilment in things. The results of this materialism lie in the balkanisation of our country and smoking in towns and cities across the nation - fires that Hitler would have been proud of.  This is secular nihilism and liberal individualism in action. It is a nothingness which feels it owes nothing to the past except  contempt.

The Betrayal of the Future

The burning rubble, the colonised country, the tramping underfoot of our culture, our religion and traditions in favour of those of elsewhere - these are what are a now to be bequeathed to our children and their children. The ‘me’ generation which gives not a hoot for the future because it doesn’t believe in anything, even for many in having children at all, has squandered their inheritance. 

Like the multicultural, multiracial slum that Britain has become, the evils  of the Credit Crunch will be our children’s inheritance. They are the result of the economics of the ‘me’ generation which ran up towering debts in living for today. It is our children (if any) and their children who will pay.

The widespread riots this country has seen recently, the product of Burke’s ‘liberal descent’ and the mad, French Revolutionary emphasis on an unattainable and unjustifiable ‘Equality’ which discounts ‘Liberty’ never mind  ‘Fraternity’ may prove a turning point in our history when people begin to realise that Leftist Liberalism is a disaster for civilised life and begin to move away from this brand of ideology back to Burkean empiricism and the wisdom of our traditions. Let us hope so.

South Africa



By Mike Wilson



South Africa – the name conjures up visions of white colonialism, riches of diamonds and gold, beautiful cities, beautiful people, rich farmlands and technical innovation.

A strong and vibrant country with a modern army and air force and an air of expectancy, handed down from Afrikaner father to son, that their land would be the greatest in the whole continent.

Well it does to me and this is what the country used to be like when I lived there 40 years ago. Johannesburg was a thriving metropolis of great buildings and the frenzied rush of people going about their affairs much like any other major city in the world.

It was such a powerhouse of people, ideas and innovations and the strong Boer mentality over rode all.

Today Johannesburg appears to be a run down shanty town with decrepit buildings, boarded up windows, filthy garbage riddled streets and squalor everywhere.

What happened?

The infamous pass laws were rescinded in the early 90’s and the black man took over the country.

This utopia, this land of riches, this gemstone in the crown of the continent is now like so many other African nations, a struggling mix of different tribes coming to terms with life in the 21st century.

Unfortunately for these black Africans, they have not been able to rise above tribal culture and are cursed with a background that has not reached the stage which would enable them to mentally grasp all the requirements that are needed to administer a complex and busy country.

From being the underdog to being the dominant force today has created major schisms within the overall South African society.

There is an ongoing payback mentality that encourages blacks to take from the whites in many different ways. In one way the houses of white people are regularly burgled and effects stolen. This is not done covertly and gangs of blacks regularly threaten households .In another way there is what is now called ‘Black Empowerment’ or BEE where blacks are given preference over whites for available jobs. This stupid practice gives the unskilled African peasant direct involvement in manning the infrastructure support that runs the country. As a consequence the major power supply company Eskom is unable to maintain its equipment as most of the trained skilled white staff are no longer employed. This has caused frequent power supply problems so that they had to rely on power shedding or in other words maintaining power to select parts of their industry rather than all consumers who need it.

The current junior leader of the ANC, Julius Malema, keeps telling his followers to kill the Boer, one man one bullet. He has recently been found guilty of inciting racial hatred and fined 50,000 Rand for his troubles. Not that this has changed his tactic one iota and on a recent trip to Zimbabwe he went out of his way to repeat the phrase to all who would listen.

Over 3,000 white farmers have been murdered since the ANC took over in a deliberate government policy to get whites to give up their land. From being a rich farming country under white rule South Africa now faces the prospect of importing food to feed the masses. Many whites claim that there is now a policy of genocide levelled against Boer farmers as a result of the ANC policy to grab land. This is the same process that started in Zimbabwe and will have the same result.

On a recent trip to Zimbabwe there were talks between Mugabe and Malema on how to take over the remaining land still in the hands of white minorities. Now there is also talk of the mining industry which made SA very rich, being nationalised for the benefit of the black politicians.

Law and order is a thing of the past now. There is no law of protection for whites and no laws for the blacks to abide by. Even Jacob Zuma the current leader of the ANC had a number of rape and corruption charges levelled against him by the then law and order anti- corruption team called the Scorpions. The ANC had an easy answer to all this, they simply disbanded the unit and the charges were dropped!
In fact many of the black policemen supposedly upholding what little law and order is left, are themselves involved in burglarising, raping and armed robberies. The number of deaths of whites has been unrecorded although the litany of deaths occurs on a daily basis.

Many people felt that with the advent of black rule and empowerment blacks and whites would be able to sit together and maintain a strong and prosperous country that would continue to be the envy of Sub Saharan Africa. Today the situation is so bad that the country is becoming another Zimbabwe and whites are powerless to stop it but can only look on in horror as their once great country crumbles about them.
Due to the political process of giving to the black at the expense of the white there are now 450,000 white people living below the poverty line in shanty towns around the country. The majority of these people are from Afrikaans backgrounds who would normally be the underclass looking after fairly menial jobs, railway workers, cleaners etc. Since those jobs are now taken by blacks these unfortunate men, women and children have no recourse but to become part of the homeless generation, forgotten by more affluent whites as well as the black government. Even some soup kitchens that were set up by well minded individuals have been closed by bureaucrats who say that the whites must fend for themselves. It’s only the help from other whites that keeps these unfortunate people with some form of subsistence.

White liberalism is to blame for the problems affecting South Africa and the fall of the white Governments pre 1994. The world saw a country with blacks being oppressed and demanded change for the betterment of the black population. Just like Rhodesia several years earlier. Today, who has benefited from these changes? Certainly not the blacks as the majority of them are now far worse off than ever they were under white rule. Again, the classic example is Zimbabwe under the megalomaniac Mugabe who has robbed his country blind whilst 98% of his followers still live in shantytowns without the benefits of modern civilisation and in abject poverty.

Every one of the ruling politicians in South Africa lives a life of wealth and privilege, with the latest cars, biggest houses in the best suburbs etc., yet their followers are very much worse off than they were when the whites ruled the country.

Apart from the trashing of cities which have become sleazy rubbish dumps the hospital services are almost non existent. It’s hard to accept that the country that pioneered the first heart transplant under Dr. Christian Barnard has now a run down medical service which once used to be the envy of the world.

Everything about the country today smacks of total incompetence with inmates running the asylum for the rest of the inmates who just have no idea what is going on.

The murder of Eugene Terreblanche may be just the last nail in the coffin of apathy that has affected the white liberals in this broken country.

Indeed, apathy is probably the correct word to describe how the rest of the world views this former nation. It just seems that the power brokers amongst civilised nations are just sitting on the sidelines waiting for the continent to implode before they go back in perhaps 40 years time or so, and pick up the pieces once more. Although by that time the Chinese will have probably got in first and blacks will have a far stronger, stricter and nastier overseer than the whites ever were.

Saturday, 20 August 2011

Architecture and Community

By David Hamilton
First published at Amerika.org

The basis of human amity and enmity is heritage, and from this comes culture which is like an emotional womb that civilizes people and nurtures them in traditional mores and values.

Architecture is part of that culture. Co-operation as well as division is nullified or established in the local and national character that stems from it.

The closely knit, organic, custom-oriented form of communal living that corresponds to traditional society is coming apart and being replaced by individualism, impersonality and contractualism which arise from volition and personal interest rather than from the complex of affective states, habits, and traditions that underlie community. These bring benefits for the cosmopolitan elites but a sense of loss and futility to the population as a whole.

After the Second World War Socialism became intellectually dominant — a sense of shame at our past and achievements was inculcated in the population, and led to an ineluctable weakening of national identity.

The elites began to dismantle England and refashion it. Social engineering was general and started to be used in architecture and planning as much as in education and entertainment. Its aim was to change the physical and mental environment, and thereby change people, who were seen as plastic and malleable. The theory was that planned council estates could change people for the better.

The Country Planning Act 1947 was an Act of Parliament passed by Clement Atlee’s Socialist government and came into effect on 1 July 1948 with the Town and Country Planning(Scotland) 1947 Act. It was a Socialist Act to plan and rebuild our world and bring Social Engineering into town planning. To separate us from our history and traditions and refashion us for “The New Jerusalem.”

The fundamental requirement of the Act was to establish the requirement for planning permission for land development; ownership alone was no longer enough to develop the land. Power was being transferred to local authorities and therefore local elites.

Marxism was intellectually fashionable before the war as the ruling classes were effete and could not counter it. In 1938, Leeds City Council built Quarry Hill Flats to commemorate the Marxist insurrection against the government in Karl Mark Hof, Vienna in 1934. It was the largest housing scheme in the country and used the latest ideas and techniques. The flats had solid fuel ranges, electric lighting, the latest refuse disposal system and communal facilities. But, the steel frame and concrete clad construction was faulty, and the flats had to be demolished in 1978.

Park Hill flats in Sheffield was a Marxist utopian development in 1962. They are of the “Streets in the Sky” copied from the eastern Bloc. They broke from developing along natural lines and keeping to essentials for community like houses in rows at ground level and built artificial “streets” outside the front doors of tower block flats. Milk floats would go up in service lifts and on to the ‘streets’, deliver the milk, go back into the service lift and up to the next floor. Reality came home when a child was knocked over and killed by a float in the unsuitable street area.

Liverpool communities with Liverpool identities were dispossessed to New Towns — rationalist, Utopian schemes. The theory was from the Corbusian model of “uniformity in the part, variety in the whole,” which was necessary to produce the “house machine” or “A machine for living in.”

These schemes often emphasized pedestrian movement, as envisaged in Corbusier’s theoretic “Radiant City”or his “Unite” development in Marseilles. The new town of Skelmersdale was designed to separate vehicles from pedestrians with a system of courtyard layouts and cul-de-sacs emerging off spine streets, which led to disproportionate costs in street cleaning, refuse collection, ground and street furniture maintenance and, particularly, policing. It was built on an old coalfield and around a series of deep clefts in the moor side that go down into the middle of the town, which means that extensive ground remediation and stabilisation was and is required for any construction.

It was built using innovative and experimental techniques -– but these were deeply flawed, requiring expensive remedies. Many houses had central heating outlets in the ceiling. The fact that heat rises was ignored, so the bedrooms were heated moderately well but not the downstairs rooms. And it is possible to punch a hand through walls because the houses’ metal frames are corroded and the concrete slabs have collapsed.

Imposing change in people’s physical environments creates feelings of futility and self-loathing. It had a similar effect on the Canadian Innu, who were moved by the government into specially built estates. The Innu were forcibly transformed into Canadians, just as Britons are being forcibly transformed into ‘citizens of the world’ and like us, the Innu had their past erased and are being offered nothing for the future – despair has set in, as it is setting in on Britain’s sink estates. The Innu were dispossessed by a different ethnic group Canadians (Globalists) whereas we are being dispossessed by our own elected representatives (Globalists). As with our youngsters the deculturation of the Innu manifests in drug and alcohol abuse and petty crime.

Many of our young people are aimless, lacking in self-respect, without tradition or a sense of being part of something. Many of them prey on their own people. There have always been people at the bottom of the pile, but they used to develop within a cultural tradition to which they belonged. Most Young people do not misbehave out of endemic wickedness, but because they have been decultured and are lacking the moral scaffolding provided by a vigorous and thriving culture. Pride and self-worth are replaced by despair and self-loathing. This is one of the reasons people use drugs to escape the pain of living in such places.

People’s instincts to bond with their land and people are thwarted by buildings that separate them from one another and are not physically conducive to developing community spirit — the sense of belonging and of knowing with whom you belong.

A nation and its communities is an extended family: a nation is a group of people who identify with one another and believe in a common ancestral origin. The bonding process through which all nations pass is not merely cultural, but to also biological through intermarriage, yet the culture moulds community and transmits the appropriate ways of behaving.

Our once familiar Urbiscapes are having their sense of balance and harmony destroyed and replaced by muddles – jumbles of skyscrapers that are not in relation to their surrounds but disjointed, not in harmony.

Through a combination of social, cultural, political and environmental pressures, many young people in this country are being dissociated from their national identity, severed from civilizing structures that their ancestors could take for granted. Buildings need to develop from traditions and renew those traditions with the sense of familiarity to helping civilise young people and minimise the attacks on their own people we now have.

Architecture is presented as an aesthetic matter: which period is more beautiful or pleasing than other periods; does a particular building have aesthetic merit or should it be demolished? But architecture embodies our history and represents where our forebears were born and raised; yet contemporary architecture has a negative affect on our communities as it dissociates local people from their towns and cities. This is the atomisation of communities.

People get a sense of belonging and even identity from their architectural surroundings.

Our town and city centres are being changed from the warm, welcoming places of historic buildings, into disjointed, jumbles, that dissociate people from their home towns and communities. There is more to architecture and town planning than the aesthetic appearance. We must discuss what cliques of commercial elites are doing to our physical environment and to try to create the right climate for the continuity of traditional towns and cities by buildings that have cultural meaning.

The spirit of the contemporary age is expressed in contemporary architecture, while history and identity are expressed in historic architecture. Town and city centres, or Urbiscapes, as I call them, are being turned into jumbles of buildings without harmony or balance; the buildings being erected have no relation to those around them and are unpleasant muddles. Culture aids identity and to be healthy people need to be brought up in it to fit in properly.

If you talk to local people they tell how appalled they are at what is being imposed on them. Architecture is part of our culture and in a world that is decultured people have to search for roots – to be anchored in something deep and important that invests our lives with meaning and stability. A young Indian woman told me how a visit to India to see her grandparents had put her in touch with her culture. I explained that that is why I go to historic (traditional) towns. It seems strange doesn’t it? A man in his own country having to search for his culture!

This is about our identity, which is a reciprocal relationship between people and the places in which they live. Building on what we have in a similar scale and style maintains continuity and helps to focus culture and identity. National and local governments alike are destroying places that are sanctioned by time and use, where communities have grown up and grown together.

The emergence of Modern Man was optimistic with a sense of release from dark prejudices but this has left people bereft with a sense of loss. They form artificial communities like gangs and prey on other people. Modern rationalism and architecture is part of what had liberated people from closed societies. The eradication of old restraints prompted a vision of society in which the parochialisms and animosities of a world founded upon kinship, village, and church would be abolished but led to loss and futility.

The coldness of modern cities is depressing, causes unhappiness and a sense of loss and dissociates people who lose touch with their roots and environments, whereas the use of traditional buildings maintains the town’s core identity and gives local people a definite sense of history, identity, belonging, and well-being.

An important factor is the break from traditional form. As T.S.Eliot explained tradition is renewed but altered by new additions like steps through time which is how change is normally effected, not by grand schemes that break the tradition and do not fit into their surroundings. This adds to the deculturation of local people who cease to feel they belong. Architecture needs to grow from tradition which helps anchor people in their community.

This architectural deculturation of our towns and cities causes a sense of futility, of no future, as it removes a lot of the grounding people need to thrive. But the use of traditional buildings maintains the local identity and gives local people a definite sense of belonging and well-being; a positiveness and a belief in the future which is lacking in decultured young people.

Tower blocks, office buildings, places dominated by them repel and dissociate local people.

New buildings are standard, international and cold with no relation the traditional buildings that engendered affection in people and rooted them in their cities. You could be anywhere.

Standard new buildings are beginning to overwhelm the warmer, more attractive old ones and councils need to rebuild some of the beautiful old ones they demolished to strengthen local identity.

Tourists can not understand why we are destroying our culture. But we are not. It is imposed on us by local councils which have no true legitimacy to do this and most of it must be reversed by rebuilding our beautiful buildings in facsimile. 

Sunday, 14 August 2011

ISN’T IT TIME TO TELL THE TRUTH?


By Mike Wilson

I have been watching videos of the violence, destruction and looting of parts of London and other British cities and I am quite sickened by the way the establishment is reporting this in newspapers and web sites around the world.

Limp wristed British media commentators pussy footing around the problem as usual and refusing to call a spade a spade or in this instance a black. Why do the TV journalists bend over backwards trying to whitewash the black thugs that took part in the recent riots and even go so far as to put words in the mouths of people being interviewed that possibly some of the looters and arsonists were white?

It shows the level to which British media has sunk when it tries to denigrate its white citizens and disregard the thuggery and anti- social behaviour of blacks. Why are these so called journalists so cowed that they are unable to report the truth? Is it perhaps that they fear for their future prospects if they appear to denigrate certain sections of the community as being basic thugs and hoodlums and that this would put them at odds with the establishment which is desperate to show just what an enhancement to the white race are these misunderstood minorities?

It seems strange to me that the British public can continue to be hoodwinked in this manner and continue to accept these ridiculous stories without asking the right questions as to who was at fault. The establishment will continue to promote the cause of blacks because it is trying to debase British society with this influx of low intelligence, low morality , speed breeders whose only role is to dilute British opinion and intelligence and to breed us out of existence.

There is no doubt that once the riots started, elements of the brainless white community also became involved. Let’s face it, these delinquents probably have the same IQ as the blacks but to try and place the problems on the white community is just a smokescreen to avoid the truth.

Isn’t it about time the average Briton stood up for himself and voted out of existence these political parties that have no future plans for the country other than to do the bidding  of the European Oligarchy  that wants to turn this country into another refuge for mindless voters to do as they are told?

Saturday, 13 August 2011

Free Norman Scarth

Whatever the truth of this story, no civilised society should treat a man of Mr. Scarth's age in this way.


_____________________

A Truthful Historian ?!!


Readers in the UK may want to watch the BBC iplayer version of last nights edition of Newsnight, in particular the section about 13 or 14 minutes in featuring a studio discussion regarding the recent riots, between Historian David Starkey, some token black woman and an arrogant, politically correct, little twerp who wrote a book called “Chavs” and hosted by the oh so right on auto-cutie Emily Maitlis. (readers outside the UK can view the relevant section of the show on YouTube here  - you may even wish to leave a comment)

Starkey started, controversially enough by announcing that Enoch Powell's prophesy had, in part come true, but then her went on to really set the discussion alight by stating that the whites who got involved in the rioting had "adopted black culture".  The token black woman and the twerp began attacking him immediately, clearly shocked that anyone would dare make a truthful statement about race on British television.  The twerp had obviously been reading up on Allinskey, as he even attempted to mock a man who is acknowledged as one of Britain's most eminent historians, but he did not succeed in leaving a mark.

Starkey held his ground, pointing out the disproportionate involvement of blacks in Street crime and the manner in which black culture, particularly rap music glorifies the very behaviour we have seen in the last week. For a while, the unavoidable impression was of a gruff and elderly bear, tied to a post but still landing a series of well aimed blows on a pack of yapping hounds.

However, unsurprisingly Maitlis soon abandoned any pretence of impartiality. and after first joining the yapping hounds in their attack on Starkey, brought the discussion to a swift end, no doubt afraid that further truths might be told about events which the media are busily seeking to reinvent.

Sadly, Starkey's television career has now been severely damaged if not killed off all together. In all likelihood any future historical documentaries about Tudor history or the British monarchy, will be presented by more obedient historians such as Simon Schama, assuming he can force himself to stop kissing Barack Obama's bottom long enough to present a show, or the younger and prettier Tristram Hunt (albeit, unlike Schama, Hunt has occasionally let a non-PC fact slip through).

However, David Starkey can at least comfort himself that he has done an honourable thing, and spoken the truth on British television, a rare thing these days. Unfortunately though, he may never be permitted to do so again.
___________________________
New reports:  Daily Mail, Telegraph, Guardian 

Thursday, 11 August 2011

Whiteout

 
Anyone who has watched the British TV news today or read the papers will know that the censoring has begun.

When the recent rioting broke out, it was so unexpected, and there was such pressure to get film and photographs out and onto our TV screens, that the media did not have time to sanitise the images we were allowed to see in the usual way, therefore, for once, and very briefly, we were afforded a glimpse of the truth.

Now that things have calmed down, it is business as usual and the media is busily re-writing history. Much of the film seen at the weekend has vanished and will never be seen again.  Meanwhile, the focus has been fixed firmly on the small number of white people you have been charged with public order offences.  In fact at least one news report this evening only showed white mugshots.

At the same time film is rapidly vanishing from YouTube, who are doing their usual censorship job.

Therefore it is very important that those of you who did save images or download film which the media let slip through at the weekend, keep them safe, as they may become very rare, and provide some of the only surviving records of what actually happened in London over the last six days.

Pravda (Channel 4) and the UK Police state 2011

Alex Thompson reporting from the pretend war zone 

When Asian and Turkish people gather to protect their shops and businesses against rioters, they are praised by the media for "protecting their community".  Meanwhile, white hating liberal's like Christina Odone, a woman's who's one time editorship of the Catholic Herald reduced it to something mostly suitable for lining a parrot's cage, write articles like this, praising the immigrants for, as she puts it, “loving this country more than we do”.

Meanwhile when whites assemble to protect their communities, such as happened in Eltham, they are called “thugs” and “vigilantes”.  Police arrive en-masse and deliberately, albeit relatively unsuccessfully, attempt to provoke violence, in order to cause a "white riot", whilst the lying scum from Channel 4, who had obviously been invited to the show, produce a dishonest and misleading report like this one.      

On the TV news report, it was claimed that white residents "attacked the police" however, despite the presence of TV cameras, this was not shown, in fact apart from close up film of one broken bottle (who knows who threw it, or when), no evidence of violence was shown. It was also claimed that people were shouting "racist abuse" although this was also not shown.

There was no trouble in Eltham, the police attempted to provoke white residents into violence for propaganda purposes, however, apart from, maybe, on frustrated bottle thrower, they did not succeed. Meanwhile so called “journalists” attempted draw an equivalence between the predominantly black rioters, and the peaceful white residents of Eltham.

This is what passes for “truth”, "justice" and “news reporting” in England in 2011. 
__________________

Related (and amusing) article on Simon Darby's site here.

Wednesday, 10 August 2011

Frank Ellis responds to David Cameron's statement on the London Riots


To: Mr David Cameron, Prime Minister MP
Date: 10th August 2011 A.D.
Re: An Open Letter to the Prime Minister Concerning his Statement (9th August 2011) on the London Riots


Dear Mr Cameron

The pillaging, theft and other forms of degenerate behaviour which have blighted and polluted the streets of London and other English cities, and which at the time of writing still threaten us, arise from three distinct yet interconnected causes: the huge growth of a welfare state and with it the growth of a massive parasite underclass; mass, uncontrolled, non-white immigration; and the attack upon moral and intellectual standards.

If over decades it becomes possible to exist on transfer payments from those who work and pay taxes, any incentive to work is destroyed. I say “exist” but from a purely material point of view a life on transfer payments means that sexually delinquent women can have child after child at the expense of the taxpayer and receive all the means necessary to feed and clothe their children often from a whole series of fathers. These mothers and their children have no interest in education. They have been encouraged to believe that they have an entitlement to the fruits of other people’s labour.

Mass, uncontrolled, non-white immigration adds enormously to the problems already created by reckless welfare statism. Since so many blacks are unemployed and unemployable they are totally dependent on transfer payments (other people’s money). Blacks in these situations do not derive any sense of achievement from the pursuit of knowledge and self-improvement but from violence and rapine. The low-IQ horizons of the mongrel mob are betrayed by the objects they steal: electronic goods, trainers and alcohol. As always, these are the objects lusted after by la racaille. Remember the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina?

Over the last 40 years all levels of education, the public sector, and religious institutions such as the Church of England and government itself have been contaminated by moral and intellectual relativism. At first these institutions were themselves under attack: now they are the attackers and destroyers of decency; the purveyors of filth and lies; the supporters of degenerate behaviour; they have declared war on those who adhere to the notions of good and evil, who try to do the decent thing for themselves and their families. According to these pernicious doctrines there can be no right or wrong; there are no standards; there are no privileged perspectives; the victim is no better than the murderer. If some black commits rape or some other crime there is no shortage of various self-appointed experts, typically white, ready to concoct a whole range of implausible ad hoc explanations and justifications for criminal behaviour all of which are intended to weaken the burden of guilt. In fact, guilt has been rendered redundant. Being told that you are not responsible for your actions is a very attractive message for those who are none too bright and who are predisposed to steal, to rob, to rape and to mug (Of course, we all know that personal responsibility is a white prejudice).

By far the most damaging consequences of the attack on moral and intellectual standards are seen in the way the police react to crime committed by blacks and other non-white immigrants. This is a direct result of TheMacpherson Report and its Marxist attacks on the police and, indeed, on England’s other institutions. As an urgent practical and symbolic measure the government must publicly denounce the Macpherson Report: it is a viciously anti-white racist document. It had very little to do with ascertaining the way the police conducted a murder investigation. Its purpose was to intimidate and to demonise those who resisted the Neo-Marxist cult of multiculturalism and to impose the cult on the public sector. The effects of the Macpherson Report have been especially damaging on the middle and higher strata of the police where to voice any criticism of Macphersonism is to finish a career. So those that get promoted and rewarded are the careerists, those who know full well that the Macpherson Report is litany of anti-white hatred and filth but who go along with it because it is professionally rewarding for them to do so. These are the senior police officers who debase themselves by pandering to this thing called “the black community” rather than to make it quite clear that violence and lawlessness will invite a swift and ruthless response or who in the aftermath of the publication of the Macpherson Report grovelled and wallowed in self-incrimination in order to win favour with the Labour government. I also recall that William Hague accepted the recommendations of the Macpherson Report in full. Is that still the case?

Large areas of urban housing largely occupied by non-white immigrants – they are not communities in any normal sense of the word – cannot be rebuilt. True, buildings and infrastructure can be rebuilt – yet again – but a community requires trust and cohesion: multiculturalism destroys trust and cohesion. This is the inescapable conclusion of the latest set of riots and indeed has been obvious since the immigrant invasion started in 1948.

As an immediate response to rioters and looters, and in order to restore public confidence, the police must use lethal force. Rioters and looters who do not disperse when warned must be shot dead. Thereafter rioters and looters are to be shot on sight. Curfews must be also enforced. Violators are to be shot on sight. Innocent citizens caught up in the terrifying circumstances of rioting and trying to protect their loved ones, their livelihoods and property should be left in no doubt at all that they have the right – the obligation – to take all proportionate and reasonable measures, including lethal force, in order to defend themselves. All these measures can be communicated via the monopoly media and Internet. Clearly, given the extent to which the police have been rendered ineffective by the Left, or have in some circumstances colluded with their Marxist tormentors, no person in his right mind can possibly expect to rely on the police. Unless and until the police are permitted to free themselves from the ideological shackles of Macphersonism they will be remain part of the problem, an enemy of rational, fair but firm policing.

The ineffectiveness of the politically-correct police, the cowardly denials of the political class when confronted with the repeated, savage failures of multiculturalism and the white man’s failure to defend himself and his ancient land, all bode very ill for England. Have we, the English, now reached the moment of reckoning? Do we finally relinquish control of England to the Third-World masses that have been permitted to swarm into our country and whose every base action is defended by white Quislings or will we fight back?

We have to face up to the fact that England cannot ever regain her composure, her sense of being at ease with herself, if large numbers of non-whites are permitted to remain here, never mind the ones who continue to enter this country. In addition to the measures I recommended to you earlier in the year (see my letter dated 9th February 2011) I would suggest that every consideration be given to encouraging repatriation by generous resettlement grants.

My own view is that if certain measures are not taken, and taken soon, the risk of a race/civil war in England rises dramatically. Various scenarios are possible: the manipulation of black rioters to destabilise the cities with the aim of causing massive economic damage; and luring the police during a riot into pre-planned ambush zones, with the aim of killing as many police officers as possible by means of small arms and explosives. Such developments would not, I believe, remain uncontested by the white indigenous population. The rise of an English National Liberation Army (ENLA) inspired, in part, by the IRA and Protestant groups is a real possibility. Something of a joke in the 1950s and 1960s, the IRA was reborn with zeal and a sense of mission in 1968/1969. The rest is history. You would be ill-advised to discount the possibility of its happening in England.

Yours sincerely

Frank Ellis