Friday, 26 August 2011

If Britain had been an Islamic state operating a system of direct democracy before WW2 Britain would not have lost its empire

Direct democracy is the only form of democracy worth discussing. That was the purest form of democracy as practised by the Ancient Greeks, and it is this version that the Koran recommends.

The Ancient Greeks voted on what laws to pass and what laws to repeal and whether to go to war.

Governments who consult the governed fare better than the rest because they can at least have a proper debate, take responsibility for whatever was decided and move on, while we cannot, because we feel abused, marginalised, ignored and betrayed.

Imagine, if the British had been asked about WW2, would Britain have lost its empire that was acquired with so much blood, sweat and tears by their ancestors?

But Churchill threw it all away because he wanted to be a war leader.

It was he who frittered away the inheritance of the British people.

When people like John Tyndall (who founded the BNP) complained with words to the effect after the war that Britain lost her empire for ignoble reasons and only gained the ignoble rewards of liberal decadence ie feminism, sexual licence, the emasculation and the disgusting feminisation of the white man and the uncontrolled immigration that would change the character of this nation forever, he was branded a Nazi and discredited by the liberal media.

After WW2 and after the loss of its empire, Britain could only comfort itself with the welfare state and the soft sweet luxuries of sexual liberation and easy divorce. But what did the welfare state that supported feminism and sexual licence do to the British ultimately?

The welfare state led to family breakdown, single parenthood, widespread illegitimacy, fatherlessness, ever lowering standards of education and morality, the worship of Mammon in the form of our sex and shopping society.

In short, the welfare state fueled by rampant consumerism created a culture of irresponsible borrowing and lending by government and individuals, the boom-bust cycle, all of which eventually led to the credit crunch affecting the entire Western world, who are now economically, morally bankrupt and heartily despised.

Perhaps it was ordained for the British to suffer the presence of Muslims, and to watch the people they regarded as a brown inferior race with a primitive religion surpass them in numbers, wealth and achievement in such a short space of time.

In the recent riots of England, whites joined in with the blacks to loot the shops of the browns, who are mostly the people these days who do any real business and who have property to protect.

It just shows you the strength and superiority of those who practise family values supported by marriage, compared to those once racially superior white affluent liberal atheists who thought they were above that sort of thing, but who are now effeminate reptiles and dogs, without honour and without shame, degraded and utterly contemptible in their cowardice and hypocrisy both in their domestic and foreign policy.

Imagine the kind of people who think the rest of the world is stupid enough to believe that they are invading another country for the good that country!   Their own people may be stupid enough to believe that, but it is sheer ignorance and arrogance to think others not subject to the British education system would be quite so susceptible to this sort of liberal claptrap.

Staggering, they will soon fall down on the pavement dead drunk, but not after vomiting and involuntarily defecating in the manner of drunks who really have had too much to drink, after all the partying they have had.  The rest of the world waits patiently, ready to kick their head in when this happens.

The lower the morals of women, the lower the morals of men.  And the morals of white working class slut, slag and slapper is very low indeed as they necessarily must be to have so many variously-fathered illegitimate children at the expense of the taxpayer in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland.

Around half the children born in Britain are now born out of wedlock.

Think of how low the morals of the male political establishment must be, if they are afraid to criticise these sluts, slags and slappers who have variously-fathered bastards at the expense of the taxpayer.  It is no surprise that they do the things they now do in the world.  One can only hope that China and Russia eventually work up the courage to stop these fools and knaves in their tracks, with one neatly planted sucker punch, for the sake of world peace and to put an end to the toxic ideology of liberalism, which has delighted us for quite long enough.

Wednesday, 24 August 2011

Hitler on Religion and why Christianity must not be killed but allowed to die, to be replaced by Islam

"Trying to take a long view of things, is it conceivable that one could find anything durable in a falsehood?

I'm convinced that any pact with the Church can offer only a provisional benefit, for sooner or later the scientific spirit will disclose the harmful nature of such a compromise.

Thus the state will have based its existence on a foundation that will one day collapse.

Being weighed down by a superstitious past, men are afraid of things that can't, or can't yet, be explained - that is to say, of the unknown.   If anyone has needs of a metaphysical nature, I can't satisfy them with the Party's Programme."

It is not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches.   The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.  A slow death has something comforting about it.

The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advances of science.  Religion will have to make more and more concessions.   Gradually, the myths crumble.  All that's left to prove in nature is that there is no frontier between the organic and inorganic.

Originally, religion was merely meant as prop for human communities.  It was means, not an end in itself.   It's only gradually that it became transformed in this direction with the object of maintaining the rule of priests, who can only live to the detriment of society collectively.  [NB: The Koran does not encourage a priesthood.  It encourages us all to read the Koran and to exercise our reason while interpreting it.]

The instructions of a hygienic nature that most religions give, contributed to foundation of organised communities.   The precepts ordering people to wash, to avoid certain drinks, to fast at appointed dates, to take exercise, to rise with the sun, to climb to the top of the minaret - all these were obligations invented by intelligent people.   The exhortation to fight courageously is also self-explanatory.   Observe, by the way, as a corollary, the Muslim was promised a paradise, peopled with houris, where wine flowed in streams, a real earthly paradise.   The Christians, on the other hand, declare themselves satisfied if after life they are allowed to sing hallelujahs!

The more Christianity clings to its dogmas, the quicker it will decline [because science has already impregnated humanity].

It is possible to satisfy the needs of an inner life by an intimate communion with nature, or by knowledge of the past.

Only a minority, however, can at the present stage of the mind's development, can feel the respect inspired by the unknown, and thus satisfy the metaphysical needs of the soul.   The average human being has the same needs but can satisfy them only by elementary means.   That's particularly true of women, as also of peasants who impotently watch the destruction of their crops.   The person whose life tends towards simplification is thirsty for belief and dimly clings to it with all his strength.

Nobody has the right to deprive simple people of their childish certainties until they have acquired others that are more reasonable.  Indeed, it's important that the higher belief should be well established in them before the lower belief has been removed.  We must finally achieve this.   But it would serve no purpose to replace an old belief by a new one that would merely fill the place left vacant by its predecessor.

Nothing dies unless it is moribund.

There was a time when the ancient world was divided between systems of philosophy and the worship of idols.   It is not desirable that the humanity should be stultified and the only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.

A movement like ours must not let itself be drawn into metaphysical digressions.   It must stick to the spirit of exact science.   It is not the Party's function to be a counterfeit to religion.

Science cannot lie, for it is always striving according to the momentary state of knowledge to deduce what is true.  When it makes a mistake, it does so in good faith.   It is Christianity that is the liar.   It is in perpetual conflict with itself.

If at this moment we were to eliminate religions by force, the people would unanimously beseech us for a new form of worship."  

Why Hitler despised Christianity and was probably sympathetic to Islam

Hitler post mortem has given the Jews the means by which to hang themselves. He didn't think much of Christianity and believed that it would die if ignored.

I believe that Hitler found Islam appealing. Napoleon carried the Koran with him for guidance and inspiration, and so too did Lawrence of Arabia. It is already clear that Nietzsche was right that Christianity is the religion for women and slaves. This is because most Christians are cowards and hypocrites, who dare not forbid what is evil, hiding under the cloak of what they think is mercy, compassion and tolerance, but which is nothing more than a disguise for inaction, hypocrisy and cowardice.

Women wish to wound but are afraid to strike, women wish the ends but not the means, but Western man is now hopelessly feminised and liberalised.  They have been conditioned to be as cowardly, vindictive and as hypocritical as women because in the West now you gain more privileges the more pathetic, stupid, weak and feckless you are.

The Jews have adopted the ways of a manipulative woman as they necessarily must do because they remain a minority and have not the strength of numbers, and thrive on promoting Christian European guilt.  (It is after all true that belief in totalitarian Trinitarian Christianity - the belief that if you didn't believe Christ is God you would go to hell - made Christians behave in a totally crazy way when they did taken their religion seriously.)

Jews recommend liberalism to the gentile in the same way that a wife who wants to kill her husband would ply him with cream while declining to partake, saying she must watch her figure.  She would not go so far as to poison him, but killing him with cream would be quite acceptable to her conscience.

But for Hitler, there would be no State of Israel.  Israel is therefore a poisoned chalice bequeathed to the Jews from Hitler, by Hitler from beyond the grave.  This post mortem gift from Hitler to the Jews will result in what Hitler predicted would happen:

  1. The discrediting of International Jewry and their motives when they recommend another dose of liberal poison chief of which is Keynsian economic policy of spend and gamble with money you do not have, doubling your money until you go bust..
  2. The death of Christianity, which is not fit for the purpose of promoting social cohesion, nor that of enjoining good and forbidding evil.  If ignored it will eventually die, Hitler predicted.

Islam would then move into the vacuum.

The writing is on the wall, but only the wise can decipher it.

Questions for anyone who calls me a racist or anti-semite

  1. Are Jews a race or followers of a religion?
  2. In what way am I racist? 
  3. When you call me racist, are you not confusing anti-Semitism with racism?
  4. When you call me an anti-Semite, are you not confusing anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism?
  5. In what way am I an anti-Semite? For saying things that you find offensive?
  6. Are Jews protected from being offended? 
  7. If Jews are protected from being offended, why might this be?
  8. If not for the Holocaust, would Jews have been given the privilege of having their feelings protected from offence by totalitarian anti-Holocaust Denial legislation?
  9. If Jews are indeed protected from offence when they can accuse you of racism, Holocaust Denial, anti-Semitism and of being an evil Nazi Fascist extremist the moment you say that the establishment of the State of Israel has caused rather a lot of trouble and bloodshed, is this due to the submissiveness, cowardice, stupidity and hypocrisy of the gentile or is it because there is a Jewish conspiracy?
  10. Was Hitler a Zionist?   
  11. But for Hitler, would the State of Israel have been established?
  12. Is it possible that Zionists would one day be properly grateful to Hitler for giving them Israel or would they one day come to realise that what Hitler gave them was in fact a poisoned chalice?
  13. Is Israel bad for Jews because it just makes everyone hate them more?
  14. Is Israel bad for Christians?
  15. Is Israel bad for Muslims?
  16. If Israel is indeed bad for Jews, Christians and Muslims, all over the world, then what?
  17. Judaism = Thesis; Christianty = Antithesis; Islam = Synthesis.  True or false?

Thursday, 18 August 2011

Vote for Claire Khaw to win the Total Politics Awards 2011 as Top Blogger

For those of you who would like to vote for me in the Total Politics Awards 2011 at

may I recommend the following answer?

Q1. Please name your favourite political blog sites in order of preference and select the categories you think each one belongs in:

1. Voice of Reason - Right wing, Libertarian, non aligned
2. Battlefield of Love - Right wing, Libertarian, non-aligned
3. Old Holborn - Libertarian, non-alighed
4. James Delingpole - Right wing, Libertarian, Green
5. Katharine Birbalsingh - Conservative

Q2. Please name your favourite individual political bloggers in order of preference and select the categories you think each one belongs in:

1. Claire Khaw - Right wing, Libertarian, Non-aligned
2. Old Holborn - Libertarian
3. James Delingpole - Libertarian, Green
4. Joan Smith - Left Wing
5. Katharine Birbalsnigh - Conservative

Q3. Who is your favourite political tweeter and why?

Claire Khaw for her ability to entertain, explain and enrage as well as her charm, her courage and her wisdom (or words to that effect).

This is to save you time should you wish to vote for me. Thank you all so very much!

Anti-Slut Campaign in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland after the riots

"Don't howl Starkey down. Gangsta culture is a poison spreading among youths of all races"
(For 'gangsta culture' read 'SLUT SINGLE MUM culture')

I am already known for being the victim of a BNP single mum with disabled children who got the Chairman to expel me from the party by kicking up a fuss when I pointed out to her that eugenics had always been discreetly practised before the welfare state and asked her why it was not her fault when she became a single mum after she was impregnated by a violent criminal who was not her husband. I am also known for challenging the likes of Ed West (whom I believe may have sired illegitimate children and is refusing to marry their mother),  Norman Wells of Family Youth Concern who persist in calling a spade a spatula and who tells me that his organisation is not in the business of bashing single mums.  (If it is not in the business of bashing single mums and feel thoroughly ashamed of themselves, then what the hell is his organisation for?  He could not answer, nor would he tell me what he thought was the preventing his organisation from being more successful because he would have had to use the dreaded F word - FEMINISM.)

Most important and egregious of all are those in the Tory Party such as Theresa Twat May and Cunt Cameron who have betrayed the principles of Conservatism and encouraged, as long ago as 2002, slut single mothers to breed at taxpayers' expense.

My sacrifice is already known. I refuse to cower before the worst of women and the worst of people. So all I have to do now is challenge them into having a public debate. Patience and persistence, not disorderly retreat and unprincipled apologies to the stupid, promiscuous, irresponsible and arrogant, who do not deserve it.

If I can count on the support of this rare group of people called right-thinking members of society - even if it is a grudging "I agree with her views though not with her choice of words"- then things can be taken further.

But I already know that scummy, emasculated, cowardly and hypocritical educated white middle class men will be too fearful of incurring the wrath of the feminazis. In this matter only the Muslims dare challenge feminism while the Jews, Christians and even the BNP cower before the slut single mum who multiply like cancer cells and turn their civilisation into the degraded degenerate demented stinking mess that it is Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland.  (Yes, feminism causes paedophilia too.)

Not even the BNP - can you believe that? Not even an ORTHODOX Rabbi will say anything against slut single mums encouraged by successive governments to breed at the expense of the taxpayer.

The Jews behave like cunning manipulative women who prevaricate and don't show their hand on account of their being a despised and persecuted minority while Christianity is the religion of slaves and women, and we cannot expect much from those with the mentality of slaves and whose heads are stuffed with feminine preoccupations and sensibilities, can we?

I can therefore only count on the Muslims now to support me in this, it would appear.  The Koran after all commands them to man up and enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, but will they be too Westernised and Anglilcised and therefore too feeble-minded and feeble-spirited by now to do even this?

We can only wait and pray and see.   It was after all the Muslim community - the ones who had all the shops to loot - who suffered the most.  Whites are now as scummy mummily single-parented as blacks, these days, and that was really the point that David Starkey was trying to make.  Three of their brave young men got mown down by CHAV bastard scum the spawn of slut single mums.   Will they at least challenge feminism?  After all, they now live here and ought to care what happens to this society, if only out of self-interest.

Over to you, Muslim Council of Britain and Association of British Muslims.  

Wednesday, 17 August 2011

Why British men are kneeling before their deity of the slut single mum, fearful of blaspheming against feminism and female promiscuity, propitiating her with a sexual favour in an attempt to take her wrath away ...

Ed West's egregiously confused blog post is probably testament to the fact that he is so afraid of the feminazis getting him that he has confused the matriarchy with polygamy in his nervousness.  To be polygamous, one has to take be able to legally take more than one wife, not impregnate more than one woman.  That should ahve been quite obvious to an educated man like him, but, strangely and sadly, Ed West affects not to notice this or really cannot understand the difference himself. Possibly, Telegraph readers these days are now to feminised and dumbed-down themselves to notice any errors of reasoning.

In a matriarchy, it pays women to be promiscuous.  In a matriarchy, extra-marital sex is condoned and even rewarding for the woman.  The man who has sex with a woman to whom he is not marred is deemed to want to pay for any bastard he sires even if it is quite clear that he wished no such thing.  A man who has sex with a woman not his wife who indicates that she is prepared to have no-strings sex with him simply wants to have sex, not make a baby with her and pay for it until it is 16 or until it has finished full-time education.

A woman who has sex with a man thinking he wants to pay for any offspring sired as a result of that union is arguably an imbecile, and imbeciles should be spayed for the greater good so that the national gene pool is not contaminated by imbecility, one would have thought.

But liberals are hardly known for the rationality of their thinking processes these days.  Most of the time  cannot even explain their bizarre behaviour to themselves, much less to their critics and challengers.  Indeed, it is all they can do to repeat their mindless mantra of indiscriminate compassion and endless tolerance of everything that  is harmful to society.

It is therefore no surprise that the women who go forth and multiply and bring forth illegitimate offspring - the bastard spawn of stupid sluts (a pleonasm like tuna fish) - turn out to be depraved, degraded and criminal who enjoy a spot of looting, arson, assault and murder whenever the opportunity allows.

What is surprising is really the effeminate and neurotic cowardice of the educated white middle class British male, who fear to criticise the slut single mum - apart from the noble exception of Kevin Myers based in Belfast at  This is probably because he fears his female friends and relations who are also single mums and perhaps his male friends and family who were singly-parented.

Strangely and sadly, Norman Wells of the charity Family Education Trust that was set up for the purpose of promoting family values supported by marriage declared to me on 16 August 2011 that his organisation does not exist to "bash single mums".  What on earth is it for then, when so many commentators like Ed West are so deeply fearful of offending the slut single mum who spawns bastards at taxpayers' expense?

It is possible that Ed West fears to denounce them because he has not married the mother of his illegitimate children because he sees no need to do so, rather like Ed Miliband, never found the time and inclination to do so until he became leader of the Labour Party.

Ed West may fear his 'common law wife' or a feminazi superior at the Telegraph, but what excuse has Norman Wells got for not doing his job properly?  What excuse has he got for fearing the slut single mum who is encouraged to breed by successive governments at taxpayers' expense?   There are after all plenty of organisations that say they promote family values supported by marriage, but dare not go the whole hog of condemning feminism and Never Married Single Mothers ("NMSMs").  They skirt around the issues and beat about the bush, talking in their mealy-mouthed way about 'absent fathers'  and such abstract ideas as 'parenting', 'discipline' that are beyond the wit of dumbed-down inhabitants of Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland to grasp unless demonstrated in parenting classes at the further expense of the taxpayer, content that they they have written the requisite number of words even if none of them criticise the slut single mum who breeds bastards at taxpayers' expense.

Perhaps the sheer numbers of sluts and bastards in Britain is alone enough to emasculate and feminise men like Norman Wells and Ed West.  If so, the prognosis is very bleak indeed.  It means that the cancer has spread to all the major organs - the balls and the guts - and has now reached the brain.

The patient is therefore terminal and funerary arrangements ought to be made now, for the stinking rotten body of liberal feminism that will soon be consigned to oblivion and his illegitimate offspring pauperised, disgraced, taken to the orphanage, later to be sexually exploited and enslaved by an uncaring 'carer'.

Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland with its cowardly new race of feral and feminised men, skint, scared and stupid, should therefore prepare themselves for the new New Age in which Tomorrow most certainly does NOT belong to them.  

An Atheist Argument for a Theocracy

"The Little People need to believe in their Santa of Little People for not everyone can be Nietzscheans. The little and the lame need their crutches and therefore the strong and the swift must give it to them, as parents pander to the sensibilities and susceptibilities of children. It would be callous not to allow the Little People their certainties and their comforts. Indeed, even the swift and strong sometimes feel small and become lame, and God is indeed greater than His Creator, who is Man. Therein lies the secret of the literal translation of 'Allahu akbar' -  'God is greater than His Creation [and His Creator (who is Man)].'  "

This is probably the most profound thing I will ever say in my entire life.   Deconstructing and reconstructing God in one paragraph is not something for the faint-hearted and the diffident, certainly.  I wonder, though, how many who read these words are capable of grasping its implications. 

Friday, 12 August 2011

A philosophical offer Slavoj Zizek should not refuse

Dear Dr Zizek


I have a theory that you would probably do better as a comedian than a philosopher because so much of what you say is so excellently funny.  I have myself done a bit of stand-up comedy myself in my time, but it is harder to be funny and remember all your lines than just to talk for about an hour about your favourite subject to a captive audience, so I understand.   

Having admired you greatly for a few days, I have decided that I would like to interview you during which I shall seriously consider whether or not I will offer myself to you, should you find me sufficiently attractive.

I have this theory that no man resist sex from a woman, provided she is not actually repulsive or obviously diseased.  

I would also like you to answer a few questions, before or after sex, as you wish.

These questions will centre around the question of the mislabelling of you as a philosopher of the Left when you are in fact a philosopher of the Right.  I regard myself as a philosopher of the Right since I am currently promoting  the idea of the one-party state for Britain.  This would make me a National Socialist, I believe, or perhaps even a Communist, in the Chinese sense of the term.

I will be giving a talk on the subject of consciousness and why this question is important to take place on 16 November 2011 in Kingston on Thames.  Details at
In this talk I intend to demonstrate why Western philosophy is a complete waste of time.   

I do hope you will be able to attend.  If you are looking for overnight accommodation, I may be able to help you should I not find you actually repulsive in person.   

are links that should give you a flavour of what I am about.   I should also mention that I was expelled from the BNP in July for things said on the Victoria Derbyshire Show that was found offensive by the disabled and their single mum.  The transcript of what I said is at

I would very much like to know if you approve of their decision from a philosophical point of view.  

If you do not love me already and want to have sex with me right this very moment, I hope I shall have the opportunity of persuading you in person, subject to my not finding you actually repulsive.  

To assist you in deciding whether you would like to accept my offer of no-strings sex, you could friend me on Facebook and meet all my friends who want me to meet you too.   

Yours philosophically

Claire Khaw

Wednesday, 10 August 2011

Mixed-race Conservative teacher prefers to blame race rather than slut single mums for rioting bastards

I once drew the attention of Ms Birbalsingh to the role of slut single mums who breed bastards as a reason why educational and moral standards might be deteriorating in this country, but she wasn't having any of it.

The lower the morals of women, the lower the morals of men, and British motherhood is, as we all know, pretty shite in the light of recent reports of feral mums who don't even teach their own children their own names.

Some of you may even remember a woman called Fiona McKeown who thought nothing of letting her under-aged daughter have sex with a tour guide she had just met in India, who had no qualms about leaving her behind with her new found boyfriend and who was subsequently found gang-raped and dead in Goa.  

And then there is of course the infamous mother of Baby P.   Their names and deeds of these icons of British motherhood are legend.  The only surprise is that not more British men and women are ashamed, but the British are now a race without shame, without honour, without pride and without grace to whom the Truth is regarded as something like Holy Water to a vampire.   ("It burns!  It burns!   AIEEEEE!")

Is it because Ms Birbalsingh is a woman and a feminist, and most of her girlfriends are slut single mums that she even now denies the role of the slut single mum in breeding the rioting bastards?  Is  Ms Birbalsingh perhaps thinking of becoming a single mother herself, as there are probably no suitable men in this country any longer left for her to marry?

I think we should be told.  

I think we should be told if Ms Birbalsingh is denying that the hand that rocks the cradle is the hand of the slut, slag and slapper single mum and that the cradle contains the next generation of bastard rioters.  

If she would only say so, then we would know exactly what to think of her and truth-denying, truth-obscuring women like her in positions of power and influence in this country.  Cunt Theresa Fucking May comes to mind, for it was she who encouraged slut single mums to breed their bastards in 2002.  In 2004 she even redefined the meaning of the slut single mum and started calling them "single parent families".

Sack her, Cameron, sack that fucking pissing cunt of a Home Secretary if you know what's good for you.    

A Khavian Vision of a Khavian Britain

  1. Conduct public executions of rioters to attract tourists to watch our superior facilities and superior executions from all over the world.
  2. Legalise brothels as a job creation scheme for slut single mums after repealing anti-discrimination legislation (ie the Equality Act).
  3. Broadcast on TV on a pay per view basis public executions.
  4. Establish The Games so that bastard spawn of slut single mums can participate in gladiatorial combat to be held in football and sports stadia nationwide.
  5. Public executions to be held on village greens and town squares viewable from pub premises will be pleasing to breweries and publicans.  (A selection of methods will be available, eg beheadings by the sword and using the guillotine, gallows, stocks, pillory etc.  It is contemplated that crucifixion be used for especially evil liberal warmongers.)
  6. Citizens' militia to keep order on British streets including fining drunken pedestrians
  7. Many public and televised executions could be turned into drama documentaries, chat shows and game shows.   
  8. Corporal punishment can be commercialised and monetised by throwing missiles at convicted criminals and charging people to throw these missiles at them, paying per missile.   These missiles will be crafted to cause significant non-lethal pain and suffering.  Proceeds of missiles would go to both victims of crime and the government.  
  9. Reintroduce slavery to sell criminal bastards and sluts single mums abroad.  This will give them a chance to see the world, extend their horizons, learn another language and even turn over a new leaf.  
  10. Instead of Social Workers (who would be abolished) we would have Slave Visitors to see that slaves are not routinely abused.  (Another job creation scheme.)
  11. Ownership of the slaves will vest in the state who will hire out these slaves as cheap labour to employers who are forbidden to abuse or damage government property, both in this country and abroad.  
  12. A state channel will be created exclusively for state propaganda purposes.  (Non-state channels will be allowed to exist.)
  13. A state newspaper will be published (both broadsheet and tabloid) exclusively for state propaganda purposes.  (Non-state publications will be permitted to exist.)
This list may be added to as and when more ideas come to me.

If the above are considered too radical, I have a watered-down version below:

  1. repeal the Equality Act
  2.  repeal the European Communities Act
  3. repeal the Human Rights Act
  4. repeal the Abolition of the Death Penalty Act
  5. split up and sell off the BBC
  6. abolish the aggravated offence against PC protected groups
  7. make it a requirement to have a marriage contract before people can get married.
  8. abolish Inheritance Tax
  9. abolish the civil partnership 
  10. abolish gay marriage
  11. abolish no-fault divorce
  12. make it a constitutional right not to have a flat rate income tax of higher than 20%

Last but not least, we must reassert the principle of treating the accused as innocent till proven guilty after a fair trial, which we are all losing sight of in midst the media-manufactured paedo-hysteria that the nation is currently being overwhelmed by. explains a little more.



Monday, 8 August 2011

Curfews and a policy of shoot to kill to stop disorder from spreading required

I am well used to my advice being ignored, and ignored it will be, of course.  

It was only a matter of time and the whole thing of riots in the summer in the West was entirely predictable. The disorder that started in Tottenham Hale is now spreading and Cameron even now refuses to come back from his Tuscan villa, thinking it is enough PR for him to go back to the cafe and give 5 euros as a tip to the Italian waitress he did not tip on his last visit.  Pathetic.  

The Home Secretary should now be ordering the police to shoot to kill as a warning to others and impose curfews, but I know she will faff around like a girl, wringing her hands and fussing ineffectually. 

Too bad our Armed Forces - who would be more usefully employed here - are being killed in Muslim lands for the reputations of Bush, Blair, Brown, Cameron, Clegg and general Neoconnery - in other words for NOTHING.  

Well, let the disorder SPREAD. What will be, as a result of liberal incompetence, will be.   

Sunday, 7 August 2011

UKIP prohibition against ex-BNP members ULTRA VIRES

The membership provision in the UKIP constitution states:


4.1 Membership is open to UK citizens and resident foreign nationals over the age of 16 years who share its aims and who are not members of any other political party or organisation membership of which the National Executive Committee ("NEC") has declared is incompatible with membership of the Party.   Associate membership may be made available if thought appropriate to persons not qualified under the preceding sentences.

4.2 If a member of UKIP subsequently joins such a party or organisation which the NEC has declared to be incompatible with membership of the Party, or if the member is found to be a member of such a party or organisation then their membership of the Party will be automatically revoked.

4.3 If a member of UKIP is a member of an organisation or party which has been declared to be incompatible with the membership of UKIP by the NEC during the currency of their membership of the Party then that member will be given 28 days within which to leave the said incompatible organisation or party.  If he or she fails to provide evidence of such withdrawal to the Party Secretary within 28 days his membership of the Party will be automatically revoked.

The above provisions state that someone who is not a member of a political party which the NEC has declared is incompatible with membership of UKIP could join UKIP.   

The prohibition found at, which states:

Membership is not available to anyone who is or has previously been a member of

  1. the British National Party, 
  2. National Front,
  3.  British Freedom Party, 
  4. British People's Party, 
  5. English Defence League, 
  6. Britain First or 
  7. the UK First Party. 

Any applications made from people who are or have been members of these organisations will be refused, and any subscriptions collected will be refunded.

By applying for membership you certify that you are not and have never been a member of either of these parties.

is, because it incorporates an additional condition not stated in the UKIP constitution which is also retrospective, ultra vires.

2012 UKIP London Mayoral Candidates: Paul Oakley clearly front runner

UKIP's front-running 2012 London Mayoral Candidate: Paul  Oakley has the list prospective UKIP 2012 London mayoral candidates.

I have voted for Paul Oakley and wish him every success. It is a shame it took him so long to move from Tory to UKIP. He was the one who tore up the Maastricht Treaty at a Young Conservatives meeting in 1993.

Claire Khaw on August 7, 2011 at 12:02 pm said of DAVID COBURN:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Obviously reading speech which is rather unprofessional.

Claire Khaw on August 7, 2011 at 12:10 pm said of MICHAEL CORBY:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Reading from speech so rather unprofessional. Delivery rather manic and aggressive because of frantic nodding for purpose of emphasis.

Claire Khaw on August 7, 2011 at 12:15 pm said of MICHAEL McGOUGH:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
I have met Michael McGough a few times and know what a nice man he is, but the speech was clearly read, and read without much conviction. The swaying shoulders suggested a certain infirmity of purpose.

Claire Khaw on August 7, 2011 at 12:21 pm said of WINSTON McKENZIE:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
UKIP’s prospective Mayor of Rap has all the gestures and vocabulary of gangsta rap. FRIGHTENING.

Claire Khaw on August 7, 2011 at 12:25 pm said of LAWRENCE WEBB:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Good looking chap but delivery rather hesitant and dull.

Claire Khaw on August 7, 2011 at 12:34 pm said of PAUL OAKLEY:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
PHWOAR. Says all the rights things and presses all the right buttons with his skinhead good looks and his recklessly generous offer to donate half his mayoral salary to charity. He ends with a seductive promise of consultative humility. Did you know how once tore up the Maastricht Treaty with his BARE HANDS as a Young Conservative? Only Claire Khaw (whose wedding he attended) could beat him now, and she wouldn’t feel the need to promise to donate half her mayoral salary either.

There is however a question mark on Paul's political judgement and ability to work with other Eurosceptics in other parties.

Below is his response when I asked him if he cared to point out to the powers that be in UKIP that the prohibition against ex-BNP members from joining is in fact ultra vires at

"Nope! I haven't studied the background to this so am not sure that I agree with your interpretation. Anyway - I support the policy for two reasons. Firstly, I'm not interested in racial politics in the slightest and don't want UKIP being tainted with it. Secondly, if there was an open-door policy for BNP members then the left would inevitably jump on this to divert attention from the prime reason for the existence of UKIP: to get us out of the EU. In short, I can't see any advantage at all to us in admitting BNP members. In fact, it would be disadvantage all the way. Sorry Claire."

It is of course no surprise at all that Paul should think this way. It took him long enough to move over to UKIP (which he only did this year), suggesting that he is a hesitant kind of man, afraid to take risks and venture out of his political comfort zone. He was a Eurosceptic and we met in 1993 during Bill Cash MP's campaign to oppose the Maastricht Treaty in the House of Lords Committee Stage.  He also thought Michael Howard was a good man to lead the Conservative Party even as I said that his slow sly smile would not serve him well in a country that is neurotically both consciously and unconsciously anti-Semitic.

He opposed the death penalty and probably still opposes it now.

Perhaps he is one of those people who prefer the Eurosceptic movement to be divided and ineffective and sees no long term harm in this. Perhaps he thinks UKIP alone is capable of being a viable opposition to the LibLabCon all by itself.

Perhaps he is one of those many white middle class men in British politics who is terrified of being called a racist and therefore easily intimidated by the Liberal Left.

If so, then one must call into question his judgement, his courage and his ability to respond swiftly and ruthlessly in a fast-changing and increasingly volatile political environment, foreign and domestic.

Friday, 5 August 2011

What is the difference between National Socialism and Fascism?

  1. One is known to be German and the other Italian.
  2. One thought it had a very bad Jewish problem, but the other wasn't too bothered about Jews.

My Facebook friend Constantin von Hoffmeister said:

"National Socialism postulates that the state should serve the people. Fascism postulates that the people should serve the state. National Socialism places the people (nation) above everything else. Fascism places the state above everything else (even the nation)."

I think it rather profound way of saying that it is a distinction without a difference.  

Thursday, 4 August 2011

Should there be a worldwide campaign to give young men like Chris Hurst the right to raise their right arm?

How strange and sad that Chris Hurst had to go all the way to Hungary to be able to raise his right arm.  He thought he was safe when he was finally in Hungary in a crowded room with other young people who wanted to raise their right arm too, but he was not, for a Sun journalist at the music festival photographed and filmed him doing this terrible thing!   

Other races in other nations will wonder what on earth the fuss was all about, but they do not understand the taboos and restrictions of 21st century Totalitarian Liberal Matriarchal Britain, where doing such things are simply not allowed and will result in severe punishment.  

I am sorry this happened to Chris Hurst - the now expelled BNP West London Organiser - with whom I have always got along and quite like. To be honest I am not surprised that he should want to attend such an event and am not particularly shocked. My right arm rises slightly from my keyboard in commiseration.

I was once described satirically as a "BNP chief" - which is the mark of Cain, apparently. This means the media are going to target you and the party is going to expel you when you are targeted. Mind you, the party never stand up for any of their activists and treat them as disposable as soiled toilet paper the moment there is a hint of trouble.  

You would have thought that a party like the BNP would court a bit of controversy or be seen to defend the privacy, free speech and free association of their top activists, but it seems that the incumbent Chairman is intent on behaving exactly like David Cameron or Ted Heath, who will dump anyone in the party that gets a bad press no matter how longstanding or how hardworking, without any attempt to be fair or defend them.   

It is enough that enough people are offended and are squealing loudly enough.   

I once found myself doing a Mexican wave in a Madonna concert just because everyone else was doing the same thing. Maybe the Roman salute has the same effect when everyone else around you is doing the same thing.

However, if I were, I think I might just be impelled to do whatever the crowd is doing, just to fit in.  

Chris went all the way to Hungary so he could let his hair down and raise his right arm at a music festival in the company of young people who wanted to do the same naughty thing.

I feel it is a great shame that one has to go all the way to Hungary to raise one's right arm with like-minded people these days.  And even then you have your face all over the FRONT PAGE of the Sun ...

Apparently, in this country you could ge arrested on public order offences just for sieg heiling. 

I could hardly believe it, but that is what the law says.,_alarm_or_distress

A person is guilty of an offence if, with intent to cause a person harassment, alarm or distress, he:(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting
thereby causing that or another person harassment, alarm or distress.

So, if you cause your girlfriend or your wife distress in public, you are arguably guilty of an imprisonable offence in easily offended Britain, it would appear.  

Perhaps next time David Cameron wants to lecture the Chinese on their human rights, it will be pointed out to him that in Liberal Britain it can be a crime to raise your right arm.

I am thinking of starting a campaign for the right of the British to raise their right arm but imagine most people will be too afraid. 

Perhaps it is time for China to lecture the British Prime Minister on its human rights record.

Wednesday, 3 August 2011

Ain't no way to treat a dictator no way

Only the stupid and vindictive liberal thinks this is a good way of getting dictators to step down.  From now on dictators will know to cling to power for dear life or be put before a kangaroo court the moment they give up power.

Well, that's liberalism for you.     

Tuesday, 2 August 2011

The Liberalisation and Feminisation of the BNP and the Girlification of British Nationalism

The BNP courts the Female Vote with its girly logo

Nick Griffin tweeted on 27 July 2011:

"What defence v coming wave of anti-nationalist, pro-Islam hate & repression? High profile demos on popular issues, positive community action, improved electionering techniques. And rejection of negativity inherent in neo-con created, anti-ethnic, internationalist civic 'nationalism'."

What are we to make of this?  I think this means he is retreating further from discussing ideology because he fears schism and criticism.

This means he is not giving up ethno-nationalism (when civic nationalism is enough to do the job).  It is necessary for the BNP to cleanse itself of racism in order to be treated as a serious political force.  A non-racist nationalist party will also have the freedom to say more 'rightwing' things too, but Nick Griffin is not one to take too many chances.  Even Eddy Butler, now his arch enemy, has also gone native ie liberal.  He even told me that he would have suspended (though not expelled) me for saying what I had said on the Victoria Derbyshire Show.

Anyone who says anything controversial will be expelled, as I was, when all I did was point out that eugenics has always been discreetly practised before the welfare state.

This was because I had offended the female vote, which the BNP has apparently now set its heart on.  The BNP are now chasing the female vote as the liberal oligarchy have done for so many decades.  Chasing the female vote was what has brought Western civilisation to its knees, in case you didn't know.

The BNP member who got me expelled was herself a single mother with disabled offspring, who was so offended by what I have been saying about the disabled and the single mother that she campaigned to have me expelled.  It was only during my suspension that I discovered how many single mothers there were in the BNP with disabled offspring.

We have had the girilfication of science and now we have the girlification of the BNP.  No good will come out of it, when you think of how our education system has fared under its female-dominated teaching profession, who are responsible for the degraded state of the white race, who are getting progressively (pun intended) more degraded with each successive generation of slut and bastard parentage.  It is no surprise that they cannot get their little feminised bastard heads round the principle of Free Speech.

Women don't get Free Speech and don't see the point of it because it upsets them.  Men, you would have thought, ought to be robust enough to withstand being told a few home truths, but apparently not, not these days anyway.

Those who say they do say words to the effect of  "No, but yeah, but no ... " in their Vicky Pollard way.

Those support Free Speech, but not my right to exercise it without being punished for it, apparently.  These are the people who complain about the lack of Free Speech.  (Do they even know what a principle is?  They probably think it is something that gets you into trouble and to be abandoned at the first sign of trouble, like a hot brick or a hot potato.)

Since 2002 the Conservative Party has not dared to criticise single mothers after Theresa May The Chief Matriarch of the Conservative Party decreed that this was no longer to be done.  This would explain why nearly half the babies born in Britain these days are born out of wedlock these days and why over 50% of UK GDP still consists of public spending despite the cuts in public spending, because there are so many single mums who are a burden on the state with a vote.

Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland is now more bastard than legitimate and more Communist than Capitalist.

Why is Britain embracing the failed ideology of Communism when the formerly Communist countries are doing so well under Capitalism?  I blame matriarchal dementia.

It is matriarchal dementia that does the equivalent of cultivating cancer cells and paying them to multiply at taxpayers' expense.  It is matriarchal dementia that makes all the political parties afraid to criticise cancer cells for multiplying at taxpayers' expense, because most voters these days are single mothers and/or were singly parented.

It is matriarchal dementia that is turning the entire white race into White Trash, worldwide.

The liberal oligarchy are now firmly in charge and what's left of Conservatism is skulking about in UKIP and the BNP, but even they no longer dare promote family values supported by marriage.

Without the institutions of Marriage and Family, no culture can be transmitted or a sense of national idenitity fostered.  This means the Muslims will refuse to integrate into the culture of Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland and do their own thing while quietly taking over while the White Trash drink, drug and fuck themselves silly till they become the new niggers of the world.  

But some black people such as my Facebook friend Lex Dras understands what single motherhood is doing to the Black American and is trying to do something about it, and I wish him well.

In the meantime the BNP will keep shtumm about the depredations of feminism for the white man and expel anyone who offends the female vote.  With such a strategy how can it fail to fail?  

Things are now so bad that even the Left want the BNP to do better as can be heard at

Imagine, the Liberal Left worrying about the state of the BNP and wanting it to do better!  Things must be really really really bad.  

They actually want the BNP to do better so that Britain does not get its own Breivik thinking that only direct action such as mass murdering members of the Labour Party is the only way to make a point about immigration.

If only the BNP could be made to understand its role in society, but the cancer has already spread to the balls and brain of the BNP, and they in their dementia now think they are a member of the pussywhipped liberal establishment and take on the same airs and graces of not discussing ideology and not saying anything controversial.

The role of the BNP is to oppose the Liberal Oligarchy and say what people really think but are afraid to say.  Instead, they are showing every signs of merging their ideology into the homogenised filth that is what passes for liberalism now.  

A plea for female speakers on the subject of Happiness

Happines: does Feminism make us happy or would Fascism make us happier?

Does feminism make us unhappy?  Could Fascism make us happy?

Is not Fascism in the early 21st century merely genuine Conservatism demonised by the Liberal Left?  

Compassionate Camoronian Conservatism (who is part of the Liberal Left Oligarchy - the political cartel who control the market and conspire to reduce the competition Socialism, Big Society remains Big Government, and even the IMF are dropping heavy hints that we should be cutting taxes.

Public spending still over half of GDP.  Public spending is set to remain at 50.1% of GDP in 2011.

Are the Liberal Left making us unhappy?  They made Anders Breivik and the Muslims who blew themselves up on 7/7 very very unhappy indeed.  Is it time to show the Liberal Left how unhappy they have made us?  Communism was abandoned by the countries that took it up, so why is the West now embracing it?  Communism always follows a failure of government.  Has Western government failed?  If so, will its failure be followed by War and Revolution?  The West has started several wars abroad.  Will revolution now follow at home?

Should the female speaker be a member of the liberal political establishment when they are the ones who have made us so unhappy?

Would Claire Khaw, who is female, be an entertaining and enlightening speaker on this subject?