Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Two anthropologists in Arizona appear to share my extinction hypothesis for Neanderthal man

The reason why Neanderthal man died out was because Homo Sapiens discovered marriage before they did.   There, I have said it, and you have read it here FIRST.

I believe that for PC reasons that the division of labour hypothesis was ignored because it would inevitably lead to awkward questions being asked about feminism, which it would be HERESY to question.

Why Neanderthal Man died out is explained at

Neanderthal man lived in a matriarchy (a society that condones female promiscuity eg feminism) while Homo Sapiens lived in a patriarchy (a society that condones male promiscuity and supports the institution of Marriage).

The feminist doctrine of gender equality inevitably makes it promote the idea that women have the right to be as promiscuous as men, ignoring the fact that it is women who get pregnant and are the ones left holding the baby and expected to look after their babies.  Now feminist orthodoxy (which is Communistic in nature and application) decrees that  taxpayers (who are mostly male) are to bail out these Slut Single Mums who have fucked up their lives.  Eventually, this will drag everyone else down to their slut and bastard level.

Indeed, Slut Single Women who have fucked up their lives are currently being glamorised.

Mary F Pols, who allowed a penniless and jobless loser to impregnate her in ACCIDENTALLY ON PURPOSE wrote a book which is now a US sitcom  You gotta hand it to the Americans for having the knack of making depravity wholesome.  Another example is COUGAR TOWN.

It would not be fair to call Neanderthal women "sluts" because a matriarchy - as the Neanderthal society must have been because they had not yet discovered the institution of marriage - would not be familiar with the concepts of sluttery AKA fornication AKA adultery precisely they operated a kind of sexual communism or a free for all fuck fest that we in the West would be all too familiar with.

Patriarchal Homo Sapiens who created the institution of Marriage had men who would take more of an interest in their offspring, stay with the women who bore their children thereby producing progressively better offspring that also retained the culture of their ancestors.   (This made them culturally more sophisticated as well as facilitating social cohesion.)  The patriarchs operated a kind of sexual meritocracy and efficient labour division between male and female roles, which would have been the beginning of Eugenics (an ideology that concerns itself with improving or at the very least maintaining the quality of the generation for that society), while Neanderthal man became progressively more degenerate.  In the end, they died out after the matriarchy (who were slut and bastard people) was easily defeated by the patriarchy (who respected the institution of marriage).

There are lessons to be learnt from this by the slut and bastard governments of the 21st century West, I would have thought, but they are probably too slut and bastard to listen to reason now.

If Britain were rationally governed, John Baron would be Foreign Secretary

A delegation from the International Atomic Energy Agency is due to end its three-day visit to Iran.

Iran's foreign minister has offered to extend the UN nuclear inspectors' visit, hoping their findings would help ease tensions, despite international claims that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons.

Conservative MP John Baron and Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the non-proliferation programme at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, discuss what should happen next.

But we are not, so Hague the Vague remains our warmongering Foreign Secretary.    

Monday, 30 January 2012

No honour amongst thieves. Hester should get his bonus, not be bounced into paying it back cos Tory cunts are cowards

The fact is that Britain is now turning into a cunting Commie shithole even under a Conservative Prime Minister because Cameron - an Etonian shit with no moral compass - has no principles and will not stand up for even the class of people who bankroll him.

Perhaps it will become increasingly obvious that Cameron is nothing more than a Commie Pinko even to the stupid slut and bastard British who hate facing facts.

Cameron now apparently expects clever people to look like fools and losers and take it on the chin when the Tory Party is intimidated by Labour rumblings of class hatred.  I would fucking resign if I were Hester and tell Cameron to find someone better, if he can.

I think even the fat cat class of people who bankroll the Tory Party deserve better than that, and maybe should stop sending their sons to Eton if it keeps turning out shits like Cameron.   

Sunday, 29 January 2012

Scott's Last Expedition at the Natural History Museum

An ultimately dishonest exhibition with nothing mentioned about the long catalogue of bungling by Scott as compared to Amundsen's common sense and efficiency.


  1. was sentimental about eating the dogs in his typical English way when it was quite obvious that they were the best way of having self-transporting fresh meat,
  2. allowed the engineer (who was the only one who could have have fixed those fragile-looking polar exploration vehicles) to be prevented from joining that polar expedition by one of his team for reasons of rank, 
  3. set his base camp in just the wrong place to reach the South Pole because that was the best place for the scientific expedition (Mixed objectives meant a loss of focus on the main objective, which was that of getting there first and coming back alive.)
  4. lugged around 30lb of rock specimens etc etc etc

Why are the English celebrating the life of a bungler? Have they run out of heroes to celebrate? 

It would have been a better exhibition if it had compared Amundsen with Scott more and went into more detail about how Scott fucked up, instead of trying to big up the scientific success of it. 

Maybe the English are now so sad and demented they celebrate bunglers, thinking that would make them feel better. 

Why do they celebrate fools and knaves, especially failed fools and knaves?

Whose damn fool idea was this anyway? reveals that the Exhibition Curator, one Elin Simonssen, is female and is more interested in the DOMESTIC ARRANGEMENTS of Scott's Hut, rather than his mistakes, which I would have thought would be the most important lessons to be learnt from this sad story.   

If you like the idea of walking around what is a model of the hut, looking at the dinner table, looking at where they all slept, what they ate, the design of food containers, crockery, cutlery etc, then this exhibition is for you.   If you just want to know EXACTLY WHAT WENT WRONG, you will find this exhibition of Scott's Domestic Arrangements for Girls certainly NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.   

Why the fuck do the feminazis have to girlify EVERYTHING when there are actually profound moral and logistical lessons to be learnt from this doomed expedition?   

Scott is English amateurism at its worst.  If the English had any pride at all they would be ashamed of Scott, and see his style of leadership - a toxic form of incompetence, stupidity, weakness, arrogance and sentimentality - as dangerously still very much alive and well in 21st century Britain.

Why would they choose to celebrate failure?  Because they are degenerate, demented and depraved, probably, or have allowed women to do their thinking for them.  After all, he was a handsome sort of chap, was he not?

Go, but go only if you are a girl or a girly sort of guy.  If you want to know what went wrong then you might just as well read the excellent Wikipedia entry at

Current legislation makes it safer for parents of dark-skinned children to smack their children than parents of fair-skinned children

Current legislation, enforced under The Children Act of 2004, says parents are allowed to smack their offspring without causing the "reddening of the skin".

Previously they could use "reasonable chastisement" with a judge deciding if they had over-stepped the mark. However, since the 2004 amendments the decision has been left to social workers.

Mr Lammy said a lot of parents in his constituency have been left confused by the changes and were reluctant to physically discipline their children in case they were contacted by social workers.

He added: "The law used to allow 'reasonable chastisement', but current legislation stops actions that lead to a reddening of the skin - which for a lot of my non-white residents isn't really an issue."

Non-white parents could get away with smacking their children more than parents of fair-skinned children, but they still do not.  I think these parents scared of smacking their children must be SSMs.

What to say to your child when it threatens to ring ChildLine

The first courageous thing David Lammy Labour MP has ever said, I was going to say, and then I thought, why is stating the obvious in early 21st century Britain considered "courageous"?

Because we are ruled by a totalitarian and demented matriarchy, is the answer.

If your children threaten to report you to ChildLine tell the little fuckers to go right ahead.  When Social Services come to take them away, they can look forward to a life in care where they will be sexually abused by their carers in their care homes, under-achieve, become drug addicts and be groomed for sex by sex predators of all races, after which they will lead a life of a drug-addicted prostitute, rent boy and porn actor with a goodly admixture of crime, and die young.

Tell them to GO RIGHT AHEAD and make your day.   Little fuckers.

Something tells me that non-white British citizens are getting very fed up indeed with the loony Left Liberalism being exhibited by so many dementedly virulent Feminazis who pussywhip their men until they are flaccid jellies of emasculated submission.  There is therefore a niche in the market if the "Right" offer a non-racist but coherent and socially cohesive ideology that stops this shit right in its tracks.   

Saturday, 28 January 2012

My submission for the 2012 Wolfson Prize (1st Prize £250k)

“If member states leave EMU, what is the best way for the economic process to be managed to provide the soundest foundation for the future growth and prosperity of the current membership?”

My 21 Point Plan for all current members of the EU for future growth and prosperity:

1. Start printing own currency.

2. Withdraw from both the euro and the EU.

3. Institute a barter system to be used while new currency stabilises.

4. Default, but guaranteeing savings only, and let the losses fall where they may.

5. Abolish usury.

6. Cut taxes, deregulate and repeal unnecessarily restrictive PC liberal socialist feminist laws.  Remind people that our freedoms consist of the (a) freedom of association (b) freedom of expression (c) freedom of contract (c) the right to property.

7. Establish citizens’ militias to deal with civil disorder and crime.

8. Establish soup kitchens (which will also serve as unofficial labour exchanges operating the same number-wearing system as Thai brothels in Patpong) so no one starves.

9. Establish brothels so never-married mothers have some means of earning a living with flexible hours.

10. Grant a temporary right to bear arms to respectable non-criminal citizens until things quieten down.

11. Encourage marriage.

12. Decree that no marriage can take place without a marriage contract.

13. Decree that all marriages will now have their terms either renegotiated or be put in a standard default form.

14. Decree that no divorce can take place without blame being apportioned to be reflected in the divorce settlement.

15. Treat never-married mothers as women who are a degree below prostitutes.  If there are two women: a prostitute and a never-married mother, say, a man should give up his seat for a woman who is a prostitute but not a slut single mother (“SSM”).  He gives up his seat to the prostitute first.  Only if the prostitute declines should he give up his seat to the SSM.

16. Repeal totalitarian liberal anti-discrimination thoughtcrime legislation in employment that encourages those who are disabled, of the “wrong” sex orientation, the “wrong” race, the “wrong” sex and the “wrong” age (as far as the employer is concerned) to sue their employer that make businesses reluctant to hire because they cannot easily fire.

17. Praise the masculine virtues of enterprise, risk-taking, courage and reason.

18. Denounce the feminine vices of promiscuity, hypocrisy, cowardice, and irrationality.

19. Destroy feminism as a respectable political orthodoxy, implement Secular Koranism (ie national law infused with Koranic principles) which include capital and corporal punishment, family values, direct democracy - "shura"  - and a 20% flat rate income tax – “khums” to return society to masculine and parental authority and away from the matriarchal dementia that has been inflicted on us, to avoid civilisational extinction.

20. Praise respectable married women for being good wives and mothers while denouncing SSMs.

21. Abolish the welfare state to prevent feminism from ever raising its ugly head again.

I have also entered the Orwell Prize.

My submissions for the 2012 Orwell Prize for blogging are as follows:


Unfortunately for me, Suzanne Moore and Hopi Sen - both with known Labour connections - are this year's judges.  Suzanne Moore (an SSM herself as well as a socialist and feminist) has even started a campaign to get people to block me on twitter and unfriend me on Facebook too, I believe.   I do not therefore expect to make even the longlist if Suzanne gets her way, so winning the Wolfson Prize would be a very nice consolation prize indeed.   

are links that catalogue the evidence of the Orwell Prize Left Liberal bias against me in totalitarian "liberal" Britain.  

Would you let your beloved son marry ....

  1. a woman whose mother committed adultery
  2. a woman whose mother was twice divorced
  3. a woman whose mother had a drink problem
  4. a woman whose mother would be estranged from her daughter at the time of her daughter's death

Blue blood can also be BAD BLOOD, and it is well known that the British aristocracy is now hopelessly degenerate.

When a civilisation rots, it rots from the head downwards.  Now the rot is down to its toes and the stench of public life is acrid with the corruption of the private lives of those who presume to lead us.

What can we expect from the leader of the opposition who did not see fit to marry the mother of his illegitimate children and had to be repeatedly reminded to do so?

What can we expect from the leader of the government who did not see fit to point this out?

The Conservative Party since 2002 has made a point of being nice to Slut Single Mothers. Slut Single Mothers with illegitimate offspring are now called "one-parent families".

In fact when the Conservative Party created the CSA in 1993 it began to officially reward female promiscuity by making it OK not to have a husband before you have a baby, because any man who impregnates a promiscuous female is automatically deemed to want to pay for any baby she has by him when all he wanted was a cheap fuck from a stupid slut.  This is a form of forced marriage, by the way, with all the burdens but none of the pleasures for the male impregnator, but the typical bastard male Briton whose mother is a stupid slut is now too stupid to see this or if he does, too afraid to protest.

Same-sex couples demand the right to call their civil partnerships "marriage" and the Prime Minister is prepared to seriously consider this, to the alarm and distress of the Archbishop of York, who warns that black people these days find the Anglican Church no longer fit for purpose in guiding their morals and leave in droves for the Pentecostal churches.

If white people had an ounce of racial pride, they would feel humiliation and indignation and then determine to do better, but now they feel mostly indifference and apathy.

We already know that the BNP is not interested in matters theological and can only fix its mind on Muslims, immigration and "easy meat white girls" (as described by Jack Straw) whose indifferent and absent single mothers allow to become the victims of non-white sex predators.
The BNP too is just as afraid of criticising Slut Single Mums, if not more, than the LibLabCon it regularly denounces because its members are even more slut and bastard than other parties.   Therefore the BNP are just as guilty of cowardice and hypocrisy, if not more, because its betrayal of the people it claims to represent is deeper and even more reprehensible.

It used to be said that the Church of England was the Conservative Party at prayer, but these days it is the liberal atheist feminist bent on destroying the institution of marriage.

This is what Cameron says about marriage:

Prime Minister David Cameron told the Conservative Party conference last year: "I don't support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I'm a Conservative."
David Cameron is no Conservative.  At any rate he deliberately confuses Conservatism with preserving the status quo, whatever it is, if the challenging of it might prove inconveniently unpopular.   Only unquestioningly tribal Tory loyalists now think Cameron is a Conservative.  This man could not even bring himself to say "Muscular Conservatism" but instead talked about "Muscular Liberalism".

Does this shock you?  Probably not, if you are white, liberal, middle class and have SHIT FOR BRAINS, which the British mostly do these days.

Marriage is a human creation.  Those who believe in God may even call it divine.   Since liberal atheism became the political orthodoxy, marriage has now been systematically desecrated by the liberal political establishment.  However, we desecrate what makes us human (and therefore above lower animals) at our own peril.  Alarmingly, our political establishment is heedless and reckless in its desire to appease the non-taxpaying slut single mums and their bastards who want their fucking fun at the expense of the taxpayer, when, if they were sane and their brains not full of shit, they would realise that the people to appease would be the ones who pay their taxes.  

The British really are a shit for brains people being led by shit for brains politicians with shit for morals with a shit of a future in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland wallowing in their sexual licence like pigs in mud, and don't let anyone tell you any different.   

What to if you are charged with s 5 of the Public Order Act when all you were doing was being insulting

If all you did was tweet or post something on Facebook by no means put your hands up and elect for trial in a magistrates court.  If you do you will inevitably get convicted with no possibility of appeal.

Always elect a trial by jury.

Your lawyer - if he or she is competent - should be able to point out to the court that you were at no time posing a danger to PUBLIC ORDER as you posted whatever you said that was found to be offensive by whoever you were complaining about, and the police we in fact abusing their powers.

So far, it is not an offence to be racist though you might easily think so with stupid reports like this by journalists with no legal knowledge.  At no time did Joshua Cryer pose a danger to public order.   As a law student in his final year at Newcastle University, he should be able to argue that, or get his father to hire a lawyer who can do so on his behalf.

Sadly, it is now too late for Susanne Elliott
because she elected for summary trial, was convicted and apologised.

Don't let shit for brains liberals get away with their totalitarian agenda.

Fight for free speech as if it were your own flesh and your own blood.

No violence is required, only the desire and preparedness to face them down in court.  

When free speech goes, so will reason and common sense and your entire civilisation.

Fight the shit for brains liberal fuckers to the last drop of your blood.  If you can't bring yourself to do this, then the least you can do is elect for a trial by jury if you are charged with this offence when all you did was indulge in common abuse, which should not be a crime deserving of a prison sentence or even be called a crime, should it?

Totalitarian PC legislation WORSENS race relations more quickly than the existence of anti-immigration parties and groups

Lefties reading this should note this simple fact.

Nothing privileges non-whites against the white working classes more than encouraging non-whites to call the police every time racial offence is given by a white.

Nothing causes more racial resentment than the unfair privileging of a minority group on grounds of race at the expense of free speech and the majority indigenous.

Only shit for brains feminised liberals in denial would implement such a policy with increasing ferocity at the expense of the civil liberties and freedom of expression of white Britons.

And only shit for brains liberals will pretend to be surprised when race relations worsen.  

Police now routinely prosecute school yard taunting as a public order offence

Is it racist to find it alarming and irrational that the word "cunt" is these days considered less offensive than "black" as PC liberals do?

Is it homophobic to find it alarmingly irrational that a supposedly Christian and Conservative Prime Minister should seriously consider calling a same sex-relationship "marriage"?

Is being non-PC synonymous with being RATIONAL these days? 

Friday, 27 January 2012

Converts: Has the Muslim Community Failed Them?

David Rosser Owen:

"The answer to the question is "Yes, consistently". And not just failed us, but ignored, marginalised, and excluded us, and willingly presided over our unemployment and poverty: and this in the teeth of the sunnah.

They have imported into this country, which had its own institutions of Islam when they arrived, the attitudes and practices of villages in the Indian Sub-Continent and refused to learn or change.

Years ago, in 1969, my wife and I and a Malay Azhari friend were travelling through east London and were refused permission for my wife to make wudu and pray at a prominent mosque of the area until our friend took the "imam" aside and gave him the dressing down of his life: about five years ago I was asked by a friend whether there were any mosques in London where his (convert) wife and daughter could pray because there were none in Leicester - so nothing much had improved in 40 years in learning the Sunnah of Migrations.

It has been reported to me that there have been "imams" who have taught that goras can't become Muslims, that it is haram to speak English in mosques because it is the language of the devil (and recently that it is haram to speak Welsh in mosques - I've not heard whether Gaelic is haram, yet). 

There was a tragic road traffic accident some years ago when four young men died, one of whom was a convert. The community refused permission for him to be buried along with his mates in the community cemetery because he wasn't a Baruchi Patel. 

An Afro-Caribbean convert friend, who married a woman from a Sub-Continental community and had picked up some Urdu, told me he was tired of over-hearing remarks by his wife's family and friends referring to "that nigger".

It goes on and on, and never does the community seem to learn or want to learn - with some outstanding exceptions."

Wednesday, 25 January 2012

David Duke and his views on Jews. Why do Jews practice family values while encouraging gentiles to be morally degenerate?

In this video, David Duke known to be an antisemite says sexual immorality is bad for white people.  He says the Western media - which is mostly Jewish controlled - conspire or appear to conspire to lure the gentile into sexual immorality through the ideology of liberalism which Jews themselves do not practice.

This breaks up the gentile institutions of marriage and family, weakening them both as nations and as individuals and making them easier to trick and exploit.  

Whatever you think of Muslims, they at least do not encourage sexual immorality.

Jews say "We don't do this sort of thing, but you go right ahead and stew in your own degenerate juices, which we will helpfully replenish, which will weaken your society and make it easier for us to exploit you and trick you."

Muslims say "We don't do this sort of thing, and neither should you."

Jews are not enjoined by their God to forbid what is evil and enjoin what is good. Their only obligation is to their God is to live as Jews and carry on their traditions. Those Jews who do not observe the Sabbath are supposed to be stoned to death, though they no longer do these things now.

In fact, the death penalty for a non-observant Jew is conclusive evidence of their contempt for non-Jews, and a Jew who does not observe the Sabbath is no longer a Jew, and are therefore as good as dead to proper practising Jews, so stone him to death.

What does this remind you of? It reminds me of gangsters who kill you when you try to leave their gang.

The way Jews stay Jews is by observing the Sabbath, you see.

It is all about them them them and to hell with everyone else who is not part of their "gang".

Muslims are however obligated by the Koran to forbid what is evil and enjoin what is good.

The Jewish Version of Love Thy Neighbour (but only if he is a Jew)
Leviticus 19:18
New International Version (NIV)
18 “‘Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.

The Christian Version of Love Thy Neighbour (and he doesn't even have to be a Jew)
Mark 12:31
The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these."

The Muslim version of doing good to all whom you come into contact with, even your slave

YUSUFALI: Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess: For Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious;-
PICKTHAL: And serve Allah. Ascribe no thing as partner unto Him. (Show) kindness unto parents, and unto near kindred, and orphans, and the needy, and unto the neighbour who is of kin (unto you) and the neighbour who is not of kin, and the fellow-traveller and the wayfarer and (the slaves) whom your right hands possess. Lo! Allah loveth not such as are proud and boastful,
SHAKIR: And serve Allah and do not associate any thing with Him and be good to the parents and to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the neighbor of (your) kin and the alien neighbor, and the companion in a journey and the wayfarer and those whom your right hands possess; surely Allah does not love him who is proud, boastful;

No marks for saying which, in your honest opinion, is more inclusive.

No marks for saying which, in your honest opinion, is more ethnocentric ie racially discriminatory.

res ipsa loquitur.

If all the Jews had to live under a theocracy, would they like to live under a Jewish theocracy that has laws that would result in them being stoned and stoning each to death for the crimes mentioned at, or would they prefer to live under a Koranic theocracy that does not have these capital offences or even mention stoning at all?

I am suggesting that the Jews in Israel administer a Koranic theocracy once they have gotten over the shock of having to acknowledge that their own scriptures and laws are clearly inferior to the Koran.

Perhaps the rabbis would like to discuss that amongst themselves now with the Neturei Karta.

Israel must be a theocracy if all the Abrahamic prophecies are to be fulfilled.  For it to remain a secular state means it is a fraud and therefore a colony of the West, which means that the Israel Project will fail.

Let me be clear about this.  I am a Zionist, but only if Israel becomes a THEOCRACY.   Jews are defined by their RELIGION, and it is their adherence to their religion that caused them to be prosecuted over the ages.   Israel cannot therefore be another state of the USA in the Middle East while retaining its divine, moral and political rights to that disputed piece of land.

There will be hell to pay if there is a WW3 over Iran.  The Jews will certainly get the blame, but this time their former protectors will no longer be in a position to protect them.  Let us hope the Israelis and the Jews in high places in the Western world will have the goodness to wish to prevent this and the wisdom to do so.   

Jewish attitudes towards usury


The following quotations are from the Hebrew Bible, 1917 Jewish Publication Society translation:

If thou lend money to any of My people, even to the poor with thee, thou shalt not be to him as a creditor; neither shall ye lay upon him interest. (Exodus, 22:25)[27]

And if thy brother be waxen poor, and his means fail with thee; then thou shalt uphold him: as a stranger and a settler shall he live with thee. Take thou no interest of him or increase; but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee. Thou shalt not give him thy money upon interest, nor give him thy victuals for increase. (Leviticus, 25:35-37)

Thou shalt not lend upon interest to thy brother: interest of money, interest of victuals, interest of any thing that is lent upon interest. Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon interest; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon interest; that the Lord thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thy hand unto, in the land whither thou goest in to possess it. (Deuteronomy, 23:20-21)


The following quotations are English translations from the Qur'an:

Those who charge usury are in the same position as those controlled by the devil's influence. This is because they claim that usury is the same as commerce. However, God permits commerce, and prohibits usury. Thus, whoever heeds this commandment from his Lord, and refrains from usury, he may keep his past earnings, and his judgment rests with God. As for those who persist in usury, they incur Hell, wherein they abide forever (Al-Baqarah 2:275)

God condemns usury, and blesses charities. God dislikes every disbeliever, guilty. Lo! Those who believe and do good works and establish worship and pay the poor-due, their reward is with their Lord and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve. O you who believe, you shall observe God and refrain from all kinds of usury, if you are believers. If you do not, then expect a war from God and His messenger. But if you repent, you may keep your capitals, without inflicting injustice, or incurring injustice. If the debtor is unable to pay, wait for a better time. If you give up the loan as a charity, it would be better for you, if you only knew. (Al-Baqarah 2:276-280)

O you who believe, you shall not take usury, compounded over and over. Observe God, that you may succeed. (Al-'Imran 3:130)

And for practicing usury, which was forbidden, and for consuming the people's money illicitly. We have prepared for the disbelievers among them painful retribution. (Al-Nisa 4:161)

The usury that is practiced to increase some people's wealth, does not gain anything at God. But if people give to charity, seeking God's pleasure, these are the ones who receive their reward many fold. (Ar-Rum 30:39)


  1. Compare and contrast which scripture is more ethnocentric ie racially discriminatory.
  2. Ask yourself how many Jews publicly condemn usury.  
  3. Ask yourself how many Christians publicly condemn usury.
  4. Ask yourself how many Muslims publicly condemn usury.
  5. Ask yourself if the Western debt crisis might have something to do with the practice of usury and its worship of Mammon.

Carlos Cortiglia - 2012 London BNP Mayoral Candidate






If I had proceeded to become the BNP mayoral candidate my leaflet would be full of Chinese slogans.  Now wouldn't that be a publicity stunt and a half?

I would be famous in China too and the darling of Xinhua News Agency ...

Tuesday, 24 January 2012

Nationalism should incorporate the aristocratic and masculine virtues instead of their opposites

I believe the kind of nationalism that would work and appeal to the wider British public is the ideologically inclusive kind that incorporates the aristocratic and masculine virtues of  Courage, Honour and Reason rather than the racially exclusive kind through which the worst of  proletarian and feminine vices of cowardice, hypocrisy, short-termism, irrationality and promiscuity are currently being manifested.  

The Illusion of Representative Democracy

Imagine, if you will, an Israel lobbier on both Left and Right lanes  ...

Monday, 23 January 2012

How Nationalists can elect another leader and form another party

  1. All who want to be leader arrange to meet in order to choose a leader from amongst themselves.
  2. All who want to be leader must vote for someone other than themselves as leader.   
  3. There will be two votes: one amongst the leadership contenders, one amongst their supporters.  Only those present can vote.
  4. Once a leader is elected, a party can then be created, and those currently in the BNP will find it easier to jump ship knowing that there is another ship to jump to.   

I jest.

Some may wonder whom I might vote for.  Andrew Moffat is attractive and posh.  He has also been predictably marginalised by the leadership (doubtless for the cardinal sin of appearing to be leadership material and therefore posing a threat to the incumbent leader) and "has been barred from all meetings and activities in the South East for no good reason," according to Dave Price, former BNP Kent Sub Regional Organiser.   

Sunday, 22 January 2012

Andrew Moffat quasi proscribed by BNP Chairman for having leadership ambitions

"I am disgusted at the treatment meted out to Andrew Moffat, who has been barred from all meetings and activities in the South East for no good reason."
Statement from Dave Price (former Kent Sub-regional Organiser)

Andrew Moffat is a good looking man with an aristocratic bearing, and a crushing handshake.

He cannot prosper within the party because he will doubtless be perceived as a rival to the incumbent leader, which means he will be marginalised, suspended and eventually expelled.  The way forward has been suggested at

Coriolanus - the movie

I suppose the enduring appeal of this story - for anyone with an interest in politics - concerns the sin of pride and the perennial problem of calculating exactly how necessary it is for politician to lower himself to get what he wants from the plebs.

To behave as Coriolanus did was the indulgence every politician fantasises about doing - to insult the great unwashed on whom their careers depend, if they operate in any political environment that pretends to be democratic.

The story of Gaius Martius was of a man who had gone mad with arrogance.  He declares that he would not ask forgiveness from the gods, much less the plebs whom he had insulted.  All Roman generals were required to show their war wounds to the people to gain their favour in order to consul, but this he could not bring himself to do with any humility.  Far worthier men had done the same, he was reminded, but this well-meant advice fell on stony ground.

The fighting scenes were certainly realistic, demonstrating the martial skills of Gaius Martius who, having conquered the Corioles was thenceforth dubbed Coriolanus.

In direct previous contrast to his previous success, Coriolanus showed himself to be the easy victim of the tribunes once back in Rome who wished him ill for his arrogance, and walked into every single trap they set him, revealing his self-indulgent anger and his overweening pride - both deadly sins, of course.

By physically attacking one of the tribunes that was such a trouble to him he ended up exiled from Rome.  In his exile he joined forces with the Volscis, Rome's enemies, to avenge himself on the people of Rome.

This he was persuaded from doing by his mother played by Vanessa Redgrave, who managed to command him even as she was on her knees begging him to spare the people of Rome.  If there is any actress at all who can do "beseech insolently and commandingly" then that actress is Vanessa Redgrave.

One of the little treats of the film is seeing Jon Snow declaiming the Channel 4 news in iambic pentameters.

A peace treaty was signed between Rome and the Volscis.  Gaius Martius returned to his Volscian allies who were understandably miffed that he had deprived them of a victory just because his mum had told him off.  They then surrounded him and killed him Ides of March style after he arrogantly insulted them and called them "slaves".

If his pride had allowed him to think, Coriolanus would have seen that the Volscis would have no further use for him after he had deprived them of their victory over Rome.  If his self regard had been less, he would have thought twice about returning to face their deadly anger.

The moral of the story is as follows.

1.  No man alone however skilled in war is greater than Rome.

2.  No man should dishonour the traditions of his fathers and his city without good reason.

3.  We are nothing without our supporters, cause, party and nation.

4.  We are nothing without our traditions, for it is our traditions that make us distinct from other peoples with other traditions.

5.  Pride is a deadly sin.

Perhaps it was after Coriolanus that the Roman tradition of calling upon a slave to whisper in the ear of the triumphant general began, to remind him that he is only mortal.

After the film we came across a little shop which generated cries of rapturous delight.

Himmler having tea on a chaise longue

We had a very nice tea at Richoux in Piccadilly.

They thought of  going to Hatchards, but I suggested which I think they appreciated more in the end. From the 4th floor in the military history section we saw this rather charming owl on top of one of the buildings in Jermyn Street.   Oddly, the building itself is called Eagle House, rather than Owl House ....

All in all a very cultured and elegant outing by the London Forum whose organiser informs me that we are going to be doing High Culture from now on, because it is so cheering and life-affirming as we work towards a form of nationalism that is also cheering and life affirming as well as moral, moneyed and noble.  I believe the kind of nationalism that would work and appeal to the wider British public is the ideologically inclusive kind that incorporates the aristocratic and masculine virtues rather than the racially exclusive kind through which the worst of  proletarian and feminine vices are manifested. may well be our next cultural outing.

London Forum - 21 January 2012

Ray Sexton  -  ‘ ”Kill, Kill, Kill!”: Stalin’s War of Extermination ‘
Ray Sexton, ‘the man with the dates’, is one of Britain’s most interesting historians and will be discussing one of the twentieth century’s most enigmatic figures.

Ray Sexton is a wonderful story-teller and a retired history teacher.   He brought to mind the memory of my history teacher doing the goose step from the front of the class to the back of the class and back to the front of the class again, before resuming the lesson.   I wonder how Miss Young is these days.

This was essentially about a certain Jewish Russian patriot, skilled in propaganda, who demonised the Germans. was a book by this Jewish Russian patriot.  It was Ilia Ehrenburg who cooked up the idea of "Jewish soap" and said the Nazis would make soap out of Jews, apparently.

The Red Army was brutalised and brutal.  To become a Prisoner of War was to incur a death sentence.  The Russian Air Force would bomb German PoW camps containing Russian prisoners to kill the Russian prisoners who allowed to themselves to be captured.

Russian soldiers were also encouraged to kill non-combatant Germans and rape German women.

What I particularly enjoyed was his description of the Golden Horde slicing through Europe like a hot knife through butter with no resistance whatsoever.  If Batu Khan had not died and obliged them to return to address their duty of electing his successor, they would have carried on, and Europeans would look considerably different to what they are now.  (At this point I was tempted to stand up, turn round, and do the slitty eyed thing at the rest of assembled audience.  I refrained from doing so for reasons of decorum. A nationalist once remarked that in one of my photographs I resemble a Mongol warlord, which I have decided to take as a compliment, which means I will not be galloping after him on my stallion as he proceeds down the high street to decapitate him in one swift skilful swing of my sword ... .)

Ray Sexton is also an expert on the Nazis and I took the opportunity of asking him if he thought the existence of the Madagascar Plan was in itself evidence that the Nazis did not wish to exterminate German Jewry, merely expel them.  In fact, the idea was really to ship them to Israel, he said, and the Palestinian Jews were fighting wars on behalf of the Nazis to bring this about.   (I hope I have got this right.)

Fancy that, the Nazis were Zionists too!

John Howells  -  ‘Eurasianism: A critical analysis’
John Howells, Britain’s foremost authority on the Orthodox Church and all things Slavic, will be talking about ‘Eurasianism’ the set of ideas pioneered by someone he recently met, Russia’s Alexander Dugin

The concept of Eurasianism was not explained properly and man of us were still wondering what it was after the talk was over.  For one brief mad moment, I thought Eurasianism was an exhortation for the mass miscegenation for Europeans and Asians  It is really more "Neo-Conservatism for Russians".

Howells despises the hate speech laws in Russia.  Russian clerics are also state spies who betray the sanctity of the confessional.   I thought he looked very East European (with his beard and his fashionable dark clothes) until someone told me later he was Welsh.

Jonathan Bowden  -  ‘Gabrielle D’Annunzio: The man Mussolini modelled himself on’
Jonathan Bowden, novelist, artist and orator, will be surveying the life and works of ‘The Liberator of Fiume’, one of Italy’s most influential,’ intellectual men of action’.

The heroic and masculine ideal is now lost to the English but still found amongst the Celts.  Bowden was referring to the success of Irish nationalism at the expense of the English.  (The reason why the English are these days a bunch of crybaby effeminates is probably because the English are not actually being oppressed enough and have in any case been softened by decades of slut and bastard welfarism as well as the fact that they no longer learn their own history properly.  Historic British triumphs such as the Battle of Trafalgar or the Battle of Waterloo, the tactics employed, the qualities of courage, heroism and cunning are no longer praised or encouraged in boys of mixed secondary schools.  They are certainly not taught any Latin or Greek which connects the present to the ancient and to the masculine ideas of  nobility, reason, martial courage as well as the humility to accept that we are indeed the playthings of the cruel and capricious gods.   This would be anathema to a female-dominated teaching profession who want a nation of crybabies to pander to, in order to make themselves feel important.)

It was suggested that the success of the British Empire until it carelessly lost virtually all its colonies in a reckless gamble that was WW2 now makes radicalism in British politics unattractive and frightening.   Four centuries of rationalism, empiricism, pragmatism and good order has formed the English character to  instinctively prefer the bland and platitudinous to the commonsensical but radical.  Perhaps, however, when things do become uncomfortable enough, we will get a resurgence of the visionary and the revolutionary in politics.  And perhaps only then will there emerge a political figure of destiny capable of merging the individual with the collective to show the British, who certainly need to be reminded, WHAT IT IS TO BE A MAN, again.

I also want to say how much friendlier Jez Turner the organiser is compared to Troy Southgate who has now banned me from his New Right meetings because he believed the lies told about me by Searchlight that I was a "viper" and a "security risk".   In fact, Jez is a charmer and an excellent host while Troy is just a stuck-up little poseur IMHO.   More people like Jez and fewer people like Troy, please, in nationalist politics.

Interestingly, Jez said afterwards that immigrants perfectly understand the nationalist position and readily concede that they have a point, especially the recently arrived ones who have not been indoctrinated by liberalism.   It is the liberals who are the problem.   One of us was in fact a Muslim, and it was said that in the latest issue of Heritage and Destiny that Muslims are not the problem.  Compare and contrast this to the usual BNP line, who go on about Muslims ad nauseam because they know that its core supporters find abstract ideas like the ones discussed at the London Forum probably alien, troublesome and puzzling.

Apparently, when someone asked the Chairman about me at a BNP meeting, he dismissively referred to me as "a Nazi", I was told by Kieren Trent former leader of BNP Youth, though he did emphasise to me it was only hearsay as he heard it from someone else.   If that is true, then how utterly puerile and ridiculous that the Chairman should say such a thing about me, and adopt the language and tactics of the Left.

Friday, 20 January 2012

A woman's suicide could have been prevented if mental health nurses had not committed "gross failures"

If a woman kills herself then clearly she felt her life is worthless. Why should anyone else suffer for failing to keep her alive? Notice that the Coroner is a female who does not get the idea that while we must not kill, we need not strive officiously to keep alive.

Why I would be the best leader for the British New Right

  1. I am female but anti-feminist.
  2. I am radical but non-racist.
  3. I am more tolerant than the typical liberal.
  4. I am less totalitarian than the typical liberal.
  5. I can take criticism and actively welcome constructive advice.
  6. I am known for my fair-dealing and reliability.
  7. I am libertarian but not a capitalist red in tooth and claw.
  8. I care for the poor but do not want to burden the taxpayer with an unsustainable welfare state.
  9. I understand economics, business and finance.
  10. I understand Islam.
  11. I am legally qualified and know my way round the UK legal system.
  12. I am prepared to adopt the old BNP constitution mutatis mutandis, and wish to continue the noble nationalist tradition of  having a leadership election every year.
  13. I do not want to be leader for as long as I can, only the most exciting and radical caretaker leader there is in the history of British politics.  I believe it is the duty of any leader to find an obvious successor as soon as possible capable of uniting the party and connecting with the British public of all races.
  14. You already know the policies I stand for because I have never been afraid to say what I think, without fear or favour.  I am not afraid to uncompromisingly promote family values by challenging feminism, which has long been destroying the institutions of Marriage and Family, as well as being dangerously anti-eugenic.
  15. I believe in doing business with business and cutting red tape and anti-business regulations.  
  16. I would repeal all totalitarian liberal thoughtcrime anti-discrimination legislation - this means the Equality Act 2010. 
  17. I would introduce a flat rate income tax of 20% and abolish the welfare state while encouraging charitable giving.
  18. No one will pay income tax until their salary is higher than the median wage.
  19. No one who does not pay a minimum of £1000 per annum of income tax will have the vote.
  20. I believe it is the duty of a nationalist to promote the long term national interest without favouring one race over any other and to define the national interest as "a judicious balancing of the conflicting interests of the peoples who make up the nation, for the benefit of the generation yet to be born".
  21. As well as a knowledge of law, politics, history, economics and theology, I also have an interest in philosophy and the aphorism.
  22. I am capable of confusing the enemy because they have never ever come across anything like me before.   
  23. I understand the system.
  24. I can make things happen.
  25. I am good at doing deals.   
  26. I am ideologically creative.
  27. I believe in the getting the balance right between flexibility and strength, unity and inclusion, compromise and principle.   
  28. I have the reluctant respect of white nationalists.
  29. I have the reluctant respect of Muslims.
  30. I have met and known socially many of the liberal intelligentsia.   They are of course not now acknowledging me because of their horror at my views.   I shall drop some names in due course.   
  31. I am known for telling the Truth.
  32. I am known for my unassailable, relentless and ruthless Rationalism.
  33. I understand the Occident and the Orient and am capable of getting the best out of both, for the benefit of the British people.
  34. Britain needs a new and different nationalist leader capable of promoting the nationalist agenda who is not tainted by the past of Nick Griffin but who can do business with nationalists and members of the political establishment.
  35. Britain needs a media-friendly, theologically-knowledgeable and culturally-aware nationalist politician who understands the British peoples, with a knowledge of European culture who can speak more than one language, and I speak Mandarin.
  36. I would run the country and the party in the way that I run my Facebook walls, by allowing free speech to reign.  
  37. Libertarianism and Nationalism are both needed to balance each other out and only I understand how the mechanism for this can be constructed.  
  38. I believe that a Secular Theocracy is possible.
  39. I frighten the Liberal Left while thrilling the Conservative Right of all races.
  40. I actually have both a strategy and a plan.
  41. I have a new and exciting ideology that would blend the radical with the comforting, unite the atheist with the God-fearing, and which, if followed, would return Britain to something that resembles rationally small and moral government.
  42. I know what to do about Israel and have already put it to the Orthodox Jews I know.  They are having this discussion in Israel even now.   I support an Israel that is not a fraud on the world, and therefore I will now urge Israel to become a theocracy.   A secular Israel will always be perceived as a colony of the West and will always be hated for this reason by her Arab neighbours.  44% of Israelis define themselves as secular.   If they left Israel then there would be enough land to share with the displaced Palestinian Arabs.   If they found themselves obliged to install a theocracy they would find that a more humane theocracy would be an Islamic one that would not require the death penalty for the offences listed at  The Koran after all only requires the death penalty where justice requires it.  (Koran 6:151)  If the Jews administer an Islamic theocracy while carrying on with their customary Jewish practices, the Arabs would be mollified and the world look on with wonder and  delight.   The Koranic theocracy in Israel will be the model for the rest of the world to follow and in this way would the reason and good sense of the Koran be burnished and enhanced, instead of the Hadith-encrusted version so hateful to Westerners that is currently being practised in so many backward countries that call themselves Muslim.

Claire Khaw *not* viper at New Right's bosom, more a brassiere ...

This really is scraping the barrel when we know how easy it is to share information on the Net and use the text and images of others simply by copying, cutting and pasting. has my report on the 36th New Right Meeting. was what Matthew Collins cobbled together from my report.

On the strength of this Troy Southgate the paranoid organiser has now told me I am not welcome at the 37th New Right Meeting to be held in February.  That is a shame because when I spoke to him in December he seemed quite prepared to consider the idea of letting me speak.

"Claire Khaw had been allowed by the organisers to take pictures, but also posted a not quite complete report on her own website with the same spelling mistakes that in appeared in the HopeNotHate article and the same illustrations."

I can't find any spelling mistakes in either.

"Khaw is a close associate ... Khaw stood by her man throughout this scandal."

Jeffrey Marshall is very much his own man.   I certainly support Jeffrey and his comments since I am known to have made similar ones on the Victoria Derbyshire Show am particularly anxious that the subject of Libertarian Eugenics and its opposite, Feminism, be discussed as a matter of national urgency along the lines at

"Michael Newland ... 's fairly orthodox economic analysis went over the heads of some of the audience, including Khaw."

I actually admitted to falling asleep.  Had I been awake I would have understood, I like to think.

Pensioner fined £300 for racist Facebook rant against Travellers - Strange and Scary

She was charged under s 38(1) of the Criminal Justice & Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010 - the Scottish equivalent of s 5 of the Public Order Act 1986.

Susanne Elliott should have opted for the solemn procedure under which she would have been entitled to a jury of 15 and NOT fucking apologised.  What the fucking fuck is wrong with stupid British slut and bastard coward scum??

The advantages of a theocracy

Religion is the means by which we achieve social cohesion as a society. It can be an ideology like Fascism, Communism and National Socialism, but ideologies with God have an extra sexiness because the promoter of a theocracy can give her supporters a magic invisible friend each, free, at no cost to her.

The extra sexiness is also that I, an atheist, propose to sell this idea to atheists, agnostics and monotheists and polytheists by wrapping it up in a package of low taxes, law and order through fewer laws, family values, free speech and the national interest.

UK laws that infringe the First Amendment

The offence is created by section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986:

"(1) A person is guilty of an offence if 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,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby."

S 38(1) of the Criminal Justice & Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010

38 Threatening or abusive behaviour

(1) A person (“A”) commits an offence if—
(a) A behaves in a threatening or abusive manner,
(b)the behaviour would be likely to cause a reasonable person to suffer fear or alarm, and
(c) A intends by the behaviour to cause fear or alarm or is reckless as to whether the behaviour would cause fear or alarm.

(2)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under subsection (1) to show that the behaviour was, in the particular circumstances, reasonable.

(3)Subsection (1) applies to—
(a)behaviour of any kind including, in particular, things said or otherwise communicated as well as things done, and
(b)behaviour consisting of—
(i)a single act, or
(ii)a course of conduct.


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thursday, 19 January 2012

The laws I would repeal if I were in power

  1. The European Communities Act 1972
  2. The Equality Act 2010 (which includes the Equal Pay Act 1970, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and three major statutory instruments protecting discrimination in employment on grounds of religion or belief, sexual orientation and age)
  3. The Abolition of the Death Penalty Act 1964
  4. The Human Rights Act 1998
  5. s 5 of the Public Order 1986
  6. the concept of a racially aggravated offence
for starters.

This wish to repeal laws makes me a LIBERTARIAN, get it?  Someone who wants fewer laws and lower taxes than the status quo is by definition a libertarian.   Someone who wants to abolish thoughtcrime is also a libertarian, but these days liberals are so fucked in the heads that they wouldn't recognise THOUGHTCRIME even if it came up to them and sat on their faces.   If you forbid someone from discriminating against a privileged class of people, you are censoring his thought and making a THOUGHTCRIME of his wish to discriminate.

But if you talk about abolishing thoughtcrime and repealing thoughtcrime legislation, you would be accused by the liberals of being an evil extremist Fascist Nazi racist homophobe ageist disablist etc.   That is how they silence their critics and prevent discussion of the existence of liberal THOUGHTCRIME.  They have made white black and black white and the slut and bastard British are too stupid to notice or protest now.   

How a very important message can be lost in a sea of verbiage

You probably need to watch the video and read the report twice to actually get it.

The headlines should have been


then you would have got a bit more of a response, instead of a puzzled blink.

Repealing s 5 of the Public Order Act would affirm free speech in Britain,_alarm_or_distress

That is what I would suggest if I were leader of the BNP.  Shame I am not, isn't it?

Yes, it is indeed a shame that I was expelled just for saying I would neither wish to bring up a severely disabled baby nor pass the cost of its upkeep on to the British taxpayer.  It is a very great shame that a party that is supposedly promoting the interests of white people is too afraid of having a sensible discussion about Eugenics and its sworn enemy Feminism.  

But then the BNP, itself a victim of a lack of free speech, does not itself believe in free speech either and most of its members no longer believe in its existence or practice it.  

And that is why the leader of the BNP - to whom it has not occurred to defend free speech - has said nothing about repealing section 5.  

And that is why the BNP will get precisely NOWHERE.  

Rabbis Rabid over KOSHER JESUS

This should be one to watch as it is deeply revelatory of the conflicted attitude of Jews to Jesus. Jews do think Jesus has caused them a great deal of trouble through the creation of Christianity which inevitably led to antisemitism because the narrative was that they were the ones who got the Romans to execute him.

It would be more helpful if they asked themselves what made Jesus do what he did before they ask themselves what is the correct attitude for a Jew to take about Jesus.

No one discussing the book has read KOSHER JESUS by Rabbi Boteach. The Jews, who cannot have read the book because it not published till 1 February, are just having a hissy fit because they think a more positive attitude towards Jesus would thin out their ranks even more.

If the Jews with to reconcile themselves with Jesus the best way of doing so would be to become Muslim.

Also, the best way for Jews in Israel to reconcile themselves with their Arab neighbours is to run an ISLAMIC theocracy after they have rejected the idea of being a Jewish theocracy. To make the Abrahamic prophecies come true, Israel must be a THEOCRACY for a secular Israel is a fraud and will forever be regarded as a COLONY of the West by its Arab neighbours and the Israelis will have NO PEACE. The most modern form of theocracy would be an ISLAMIC one, for an Islamic theocracy would not entail quite so many people being stoned to death for transgressions the world would regard as trifling. gives a long list of transgressions that would incur the penalty of death by stoning under Jewish law.

I am a Zionist, therefore, but Israel must be a theocracy.

If you had to live under a Jewish, Christian or Islamic theocracy and had no other choice but to live under a theocracy, the most progressive form of theocracy would be the one guided by the Koran, which at least has unity of authorship and is said to be the literal revealed Word of God, unlike the mish-mash of the Bible.
How to establish a secular theocracy
The nature of a modern theocracy
Questions to ask about Israel
Think and Grow Rich author Napoleon Hill promoted Islam!

Islam clearly acknowledges its debt to the two previous monotheist religions without which it would not have been created.

Look upon Islam then as the offspring of Father Judaism and Mother Christ. The previous two are old, ailing and suffering from dementia.  Their offspring however is healthy and capable of great things if more people embrace it, especially the Jews in Israel ....

Wednesday, 18 January 2012

What *is* this quintessence of dust?

What a piece of work is a man. How noble in reason, how infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and admirable, in action how like an Angel, in apprehension how like a god, the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals – and yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me – nor Woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so.”  
 Hamlet Act 3, scene 1, 55–87


Once upon a time there was God and His Creation.

But God was BORED.  All he got all the time from his ungrateful Creation were prayers asking for stuff with never quite enough thank you prayers.  His Creation were a very disappointing lot indeed.

Since He was omnipotent and omniscient, He always knew the Future and remembered everything.  Because God was all-wise, nothing ever surprised Him and, boy, was it BORING.

Indeed, one day He got so bored that He thought He would commit suicide.   No one would notice anyway.  The ones who always denied He existed would never have acknowledge His existence whether He lived or died.  The ones who believed in Him would carry on believing in Him whether He was dead or alive.  The ones who were agnostic just wouldn't care either way.  It really made no difference at all.

But fortunately for God, He remembered just in time that He was omnipotent and could think of a way of amusing Himself without quite killing Himself.

And it was this.

He turned Himself into all of His Creation, but, having divided Himself  up into an infinite number of souls and things, He lost the completeness of His former omniscience.  While the knowledge was still there, somewhere, scattered and spread out, it was flickering and blinking and flashing at very irregular intervals rather than shining strong as it used to do when He was completely in charge as a Singularity.

But this was the WHOLE IDEA.  God, by dividing Himself up into all of His Creation remained with His Creation, but kept the element of forgetfulness as to what was around the corner.  When it happened, there were always quite a few people who would say, "I just knew that was going to happen anyway!", and they are sort of right when they say that, for wisdom enables you to foretell the future.

To help Himself remember important things when He really needed to, God would stick helpful notes in places like people suffering from Alzheimer's putting post-it notes around in their home to remind them to do important things, in the form of Holy Books, with various tribes and nations in different parts of the world.  Sadly, there was never enough people who would read them properly, or interpret the messages and commands sensibly and implement His instructions wisely, for long enough, before slipping into cruelty, chaos, forgetfulness and madness.

By turning Himself into humanity God had given Himself the forgetfulness with which to make life seem fresh, full of danger and adventure again, for eternity is a very long time indeed.

The term "mamzer" clear evidence of the RACISM of Judaism

The Hebrew noun mamzer (Hebrew: ממזר‎) in the Hebrew Bible and Jewish religious law, is a person born from certain forbidden relationships, or the descendant of such a person. A mamzer is someone who is either born of adultery by a married woman, or born of incest (as defined by the Bible), or someone who has a mamzer as a parent. The mamzer status is not synonymous with illegitimacy, since it does not include children whose mother was unmarried.

Easton's Bible Dictionary further defines the Biblical use of "bastard" as:

"In the Old Testament the rendering of the Hebrew word mamzer', which means "polluted." In Deuteronomy 23:2, it occurs in the ordinary sense of illegitimate offspring. In Zechariah 9:6, the word is used in the sense of foreigner. From the history of Jephthah we learn that there were bastard offspring among the Jews (Judges 11:1-7). In Hebrews 12:8, the word (Greek nothoi) is used in its ordinary sense, and denotes those who do not share the privileges of God's children."

God had commanded the Israelites not to intermarry with the nations around them, but they did, and God called their offspring bastards. Many generations had to pass before his progeny could be allowed into the congregation of the Lord, another name for the nation of Israel.

It is interesting that they are always forbidding for others what they practice themselves.  

When you question them about this, they will accuse you antisemitism, when it is really they who hate you.  

It is clear that when you make a point of not marrying a member of another race on pain of disgrace and ostracisation, it must mean you think they are INFERIOR on RACIAL grounds.  res ipsa loquitur.

The Koran proclaims that no race is better than any other, except by their morals and their deeds.

YUSUFALI: O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).
PICKTHAL: O mankind! Lo! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware.
SHAKIR: O you men! surely We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you most careful (of his duty); surely Allah is Knowing, Aware.

Not looking good for the WW3-starting Jew-controlled Christian nations of the West now, is it? has a list of people cursed by God.

What White Christian Islamophobes really think of Muslims but are too afraid to say

"We are Christians, white and wealthy with the nuclear bomb.  They are Muslims, brown and poor who buy their guns from us.  The religion of a bunch of sand niggers has nothing to offer us", the white man thinks.  "They are the backward brown people whose women dress up in black bin bags with slits for eyes who want to blow us up.  There is no need to read the Koran because I already know how much I hate Muslims.  The Koran is also the holy book of people to whom we were once colonial masters.  It is the religion of losers and submitters."


What is this first step?

The Koran is generally acknowledged to be a great work of literature, even by non-Muslims.

It is also said to be the direct word of God.

If that is so, it should be regarded as a contract between God and Man.

It promises to be a warning and a guide for mankind and warrants that its guidance will keep man peaceful and at peace with himself, but only if its directions are followed.

While it is said to be a religion of peace, it is also a religion of war – a war against evil and oppression, idolatry and irrationality, intoxication and sexual licence.

This being so, it would benefit law students to study such a divine contract, whether or not they are Muslim as it would usefully add to their legal knowledge and drafting skills.

Even if Koranic knowledge were acquired reluctantly, just for the utilitarian purpose of passing a law exam and getting a law degree, it is very likely that the law student who goes on to becomes a legal practitioner will apply Koranic principles either consciously or unconsciously when interpreting and applying the law.

An example of this is seen in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson which promoted the Christian principle of love thy neighbour.  The Koran has a similar principle too.

YUSUFALI: Serve Allah, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbours who are near, neighbours who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess: For Allah loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious;-
PICKTHAL: And serve Allah. Ascribe no thing as partner unto Him. (Show) kindness unto parents, and unto near kindred, and orphans, and the needy, and unto the neighbour who is of kin (unto you) and the neighbour who is not of kin, and the fellow-traveller and the wayfarer and (the slaves) whom your right hands possess. Lo! Allah loveth not such as are proud and boastful,
SHAKIR: And serve Allah and do not associate any thing with Him and be good to the parents and to the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the neighbor of (your) kin and the alien neighbor, and the companion in a journey and the wayfarer and those whom your right hands possess; surely Allah does not love him who is proud, boastful;

There will doubtless be skeptics and Islamophobes who will have to be persuaded of the wisdom of adopting such a course, which they will find objectionable and controversial.

To counter them, simply form a Koran Book Club and offer generous prizes to non-Muslims only for essays that confirm what has been said above.

The Clairiphate should be fully mature in about two decades, I predict.