Friday, 29 June 2012

Anthony Birch on the liberal capacity for self-deception

"The media conditions white British people to think that all blacks are just like Andy Peters, then when they venture into areas like Harlesden or Brixton after dark they suddenly get mugged by reality. That said I know liberals who even when they are mugged by reality, they remain liberals. The human capacity for self-deception is practically unlimited."

The BNP and Jeremy Kyle

If the BNP had any sense they would demand that Jeremy Kyle includes ethnic minorities behaving badly.

Or ban the show on the ground that it incites hatred against white people.  

But they don't. If they had any I would be leader by now.

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

How am I soft on paedo scum just cos I don't say hang them?

I set out below my position on what I think is the appropriate punishment for various sex offenders.

Rape (zina-be-onf) is related to adultery, has the same proof requirements, and is punishable by death by hanging. In Iran, for most part, convictions are made either by confession or "judge's knowledge", rather than witnesses. 10-15% of executions in Iran are for rape.

In many cases the rape victim settles the case by accepting compensation (jirah) in exchange for withdrawing the charges or forgiving the rapist. This is similar to diyyeh, but equal to a woman's dowry. A woman can also receive diyya for injuries sustained. Normally the rapist still faces tazir penalties, such as 99 lashes and jail time for immoral acts, and often faces further penalties for other crimes committed alongside the rape, such as kidnapping, assault, and disruption of public order.

I actually think this makes a lot of sense.  A rape victim should be compensated with enough money to make her half wish he would do it again.   

3. The return of Capital punishment for Murders, Paedophiles and treason.

4. The Restoration of Corporal punishment for serious violent offenders, persistent burglars, sex pests and drug dealers.

This is disgracefully illiterate ("murders" should be "murderers") and also suggests that quite a few liberal Europhiliac politicians would be in line for execution if the England First Party ever came to power.

For crimes of extreme violence such as aggravated rape, murder and terrorist offences, the National Front would introduce the death penalty.

This is  a bit better.

The BNP will reintroduce capital punishment for drug dealers, child murderers, multiple murderers, murderers of policemen on duty and terrorists where guilt is proven beyond all doubt.
This is closest to my position.

Penalties of hundreds of lashes were imposed for the gravest offences, including sedition and mutiny. The prisoner was rowed 'round the fleet in an open boat and received a number of his lashes at each ship in turn, for as long as the surgeon allowed. Sentences often took months or years to complete, depending on how much a man was expected to bear at a time. Normally 250–500 lashes was when a man taking this punishment would kill him, as infections would spread."

Someone was suggesting that flogging is a bit of a soft option.

Since adulterers and fornicators already get 100 lashes in the Koran, I propose that rapists of adult women get 200, rapists of females below the age of consent get 300, and rapists of girls who have not even started their periods get 400.

Rev Richard Coles says Christ is in favour of gay marriage

RC:  It’s funny, I often think Christian ethics can be reduced to the simple injunction to grow up.

CK:  @RevRichardColes thinks Christianity is about supporting #gaymarriage and being generally "gay".

CK:  I mean "gay" in the sense of schoolchildren telling each other not to be so "gay".

CK:  When school children say to each other "Don't be so gay" they mean "don't be so stupid."

CK:  Perhaps Christian ethics should be more than just the bits a gay clergyman likes about the Bible?

CK:  Can you substantiate your view that Christian ethics support #gaymarriage?

CK:  Do Christian ethics support #gaymarriage?

RC:  In my view, yes.

CK:  Christian ethics would be the 10 Commandments, wouldn't it?

RC:  A bit more to it than the decalogue.

CK:  Go on?

RC:  Christinas believe that the Law inherited from Jewish tradition is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. Law + grace.

CK:  What on earth does that mean?

RC:  That the Law is not repudiated by fulfilled with the coming of Jesus and we now live by grace, not Law.

CK:  I would really like to know what you mean by this in plain English.

RC:  Jesus is not the Law, in its rigour and exactness and detail. He is its fulfilment, in his boundless grace.

CK:  How can you 'fulfil' a law if you do not follow it?

RC:  How can a reality be "inaugurated"?

CK:  No idea how reality can be inaugurated in the person of Jesus Christ. Can you give an example?

RC:  there is no other example. It is sui generis.

CK:  You are just talking nonsense then.

CK:  A link explaining how to go about making Christ "inaugurate" a reality would be nice.

RC:  ὥστε εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις 2 Corinthians 5.17

CK: means NOTHING.

RC:   It’s an epistle, and points to the New Creation in Christ, which may help you with the inauguration thing.

CK:  What is this "New Creation in Christ"?

RC:   New way of living, through the the new relationship we have to God and each other in Christ.

CK:  What was the old way of living?

RC:  A life of atomised individuality, endless competition, anxiety, delusion and futility.

CK:  Are you saying that the Hebrews lived life thus?

CK:  You still haven't explained how and why the Bible supports #gaymarriage.

CK:  You still haven't explained, how the Bible, which condemns sodomy, supports #gaymarriage.

RC:  We could start at Genesis 2.18.

CK:  How does Genesis 2.18 support gay marriage?

RC:  It suggests that it is God’s will that we should not be lonely.

CK:  To not be lonely does not mean "be sodomites and lesbians".

RC:  No, but I think it does mean that to seek to bear the beams of love in our little space might be graceful.

  1. Do you think Rev Richard Coles is talking nonsense?  (There is only one correct answer.)
  2. How can something said to be an abomination in the Old Testament be endorsed as gay marriage by the Archbishop of Canterbury and Rev Richard Coles who is homosexual?  
  3. Does this not amount to sanctifying a sin?  This would be evil, surely?
  4. Can the Archbishop of Canterbury give a better account of himself than this?   No, the old cunt actually says active homosexual relationships are "comparable to marriage" in the eyes of God
  5. Why doesn't someone ask them what the hell these fucking Commie Pinko Homos in the Anglican Church think they are doing by talking the shit that they do?  Extramarital sex causes degeneracy and all the Abrahamic faiths, which condemn extramarital sex, are Eugenic in purpose and nature.   
  6. There is no doubt about the superiority of Judaism.   At least the Lord Chief Rabbi follows his religion because he spoke against gay marriage at
  7. Or the superiority of Islam or Sikhism to the cunting prating Commie Pinko shits who are Anglican clergymen and support gay marriage and women bishops.
Feminism AKA Sexual Liberation AKA Free Love AKA casual sex AKA same sex sex AKA tolerance of widespread illegitimacy, spreads degeneracy, as you will already have seen.   

Tuesday, 26 June 2012

NO BRAINER SOLUTION: keep libraries and pools, scrap dementia suffers and the learning disabled

The Local Government Association is warning that by 2020, local councils are going to have to spend virtually all their money on adult social care and emptying the bins. Tony Travers, local government expert at the LSE, and Sir Merrick Cockell, chair of the LGA, debate the issue.

Social care should be completely scrapped while keeping pools and libraries open.

Dementia suffers and the learning disabled should be put down if all they are going to do is be mad and silly as well as a charge on the state.

Dementia sufferers and the learning disabled should only be kept alive if their loved ones and charities are prepared to do so.

What is the point of keeping alive dementia sufferers and the learning disabled at the expense of the taxpayer? Exactly: there is no reason.

Yes, yes, yes. If I suffer from dementia and become learning disabled you have my permission to put me down.

It is also undignified and not much fun to be abused by your carers.

Starving yourself is also an option.  The benefit of this is that you will get quite a lot of attention while doing so.

If  there is enough demand, proper facilities can be made to move you into ie Starving Rooms where you will be well looked after and visitors allowed to visit you in a pleasant environment, but in which you will neither be fed nor watered, until you are dead.

Monday, 25 June 2012

Higher rate of illegitimacy in the UK linked to crap England team

In football, England is behind Portugal, Spain and Italy.

This is due to the higher rates of illegitimacy in Britain.   That is why we are such useless sluts and bastards who will never amount to anything, and having nothing to look forward to but decline and fall, extinction and death, criminality and barbarism, in a vicious circle of ever lowering standards of education and sport and ever lowering standards of morality ....

But most Britons these days are too stupid to care or too frightened to challenge the feminists.

Harriet Sergeant does not condemn the causes of crime and gang culture - SLUT SINGLE MUMS

Titillating photograph of Harriet Sergeant and her boys from the hood gives publicity to her potboiler that does NOT condemn illegitimacy

Below is what she says about illegitimacy:

Despite the huge amount of evidence of the harm this causes children (mothers of children on the “at risk” register, for example, are five times more likely to be single teenage mothers), the Labour government made single motherhood an attractive proposition.

Since 1997 a single mother of two children has seen her benefits increase by 85%. We watched the effects of that policy play out on our streets every night last week.

To accuse these young girls of being feckless is unjust. They are merely responding to the economics of the situation. They are as much victims of the crisis in our schools and the perverse influence of benefits as teenage boys. What future is there for a girl who leaves school without a qualification? Whereas boys take to crime, girls get pregnant.

Ministers talk of family breakdown, but there is no family to break down. More than half of single mothers have never lived with a boyfriend. The state has taken over the role of both husband and employer.

Take just one example: single mothers. Mash’s older sister, a single mother of 22, admitted she would love to get married: “But all the men I know are in prison or deal drugs. I don’t know one man with a job.”

Like all the people and organisations she complains about, Harriet Sergeant only proposes to deal with the SYMPTOMS but not the causes, probably because she a dirty rotten feminist IN DENIAL about the causes of crime and gang culture - stupid sluts opening their legs at the drop of a pair of trousers and disdaining to practice effective contraception because they want to progress on the slut ladder of becoming a welfare mum with variously fathered feral bastards which the taxpaying men of Paedo Bastard Britain Fatso Slutland are too limp-dicked to protest.

Harriet Sergeant - tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime?  Not bloody likely.   She is a woman after all, and will probably defend to the death the right of sluts to have babies at the expense of the taxpayer because she is a woman herself.  She has a son, but does she care enough about him to denounce feminism?

Nope, nothing here either about what to do with scummy slut single mums who breed their verminous spawn who will become the criminals of the next generation.  Not a dicky bird.

Maybe the next one, eh?

Her book is now being serialised in the Mail, so give her a chance.  She may possibly get round to mentioning SLUT SINGLE MUMS which I suspect her feminine feminist sympathies will probably prevent her from criticising.  She probably has quite a few friends who are also slut single mums and she doesn't want to hurt their feelings.  Girls stick together at the expense of boys, even mothers who have sons want to keep all the feminist privileges they have acquired at the expense of men, even if that will fuck up their sons' futures and the future of their own country.

That's shitty stinking fucking evil feminist ideology for you, eh?

If nothing about criticising slut single mums come out in the other parts of her serialised book, perhaps some might think she deserves the fate of Marie Antoinette whom she so strikingly resembles.

Harriet says there is a whole chapter devoted to the subject of single mums in her book, out 12 July.   I will make a point of popping into Waterstone's to see if there is anything at all constructive being proposed about dealing with the causes and consequences of state-sponsored slut single mummery. has a book written by Harriet with a chapter devoted to single mums, from page 19.   Nothing was proposed however, about stigmatising these women or even endorsing the Just Say No recommendation of Nadine Dorries MP.

Let us hope the chapter on single mums in her new book is rather more constructive.  Then I will happily eat my words and hat about Harriet being an evil feminist who refuses to criticise the morals of British women just because she is one herself.

I may even attend the book launch, if I am not escorted off the premises by her minders who may consist of members the gang she has been hanging out with.   If so, I may even buy a copy and ask her to to dedicate it 'To Claire "Robespierre" Khaw, With love and best wishes from Harriet "Marie Antoinette" Sergeant'

When Enoch Powell talked about a nation busily engaged in heaping up their own funeral pyre, he didn't know the half of it.  

Saturday, 23 June 2012

Grammar is the logic of language and the British are largely illogical and immoral

A sign of degeneracy is the NUMBER OF people who say "the amount of people" with no one noticing or daring to correct them.

That is why the immigrants (who are not mostly sluts and bastards) keep coming. Most people who learn English as a foreign language know not to say "amount of people" and say instead "number of people".

Or they have their fathers who are around to correct them.

Or their elders do, without being stabbed in the face or accused of being paedos.

Friday, 22 June 2012

Tax avoiders should not apologise, but most people are wimps in slut and bastard Britain

and too stupid and scared to argue the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion..  

Sluts and bastards tend to be stupid and scared as well as cowardly and hypocritical.

It is a moral contagion that has spread and spread in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland until there are no decent men around any more worth marrying, if you are not just a slut who should be just fucked and forgotten and left to bring up your bastard at the expense of the taxpayer.  

Most of the men of Britain think in terms of the rational coward, ie like a woman.  Therefore even the brightest of them have now convinced themselves that the only rational position to take is that of cowardice and hypocrisy, for their weak characters cannot bear the thought of being ostracised by their female friends and being deprived of sex with a slut.

That is how men become women.  

To get a decent man you would probably have to convert to Islam to find a decent man prepared to marry you who will take his marriage vows seriously.

Carr has been with girlfriend Karoline Copping since 2001.  You can bet your bottom dollar that he will be too frightened to marry her.  

This man gave up his Catholic faith after reading a book by Dawkins.  Pathetic, huh?  

Jimmy Carr with Karoline Copping whom he does not appear to wish to marry though they have been cohabiting since 2001.  He is probably too afraid of being divorced by her and having to give her half his fortune.  She will probably be reduced to getting pregnant accidentally on purpose and be a MOBFOB, and perhaps, eventually an SSM.

That is how even the wealthy and successful men of Britain think now.   Their morals are really no better than the lowest forms of scum ie completely absent.  

If I were dictator and running Britain under the principles of Secular Koranism, there would be a flat rate income tax of 20%.

20%, you will note, is also the standard charge of hedge funds.  20% is the magic number, because it is the most you can charge people  and expect them to willingly pay it.  

The wealthy will also be enjoined to charity, and given honours and privileges for so doing.

Thursday, 21 June 2012

Lib Dems and Tories too afraid to support Gove's educational reforms because they are slut-fearing cowards and hypocrites

They are of course afraid of strikes being called by the Commie Pinko Homo Feminista Slut and Bastard teaching unions.

In any case, there is no one available to teach children to that standard any more in dumbed down Slut and Bastard Paedo Britain.

The best thing to do with the teaching unions is to pass a law requiring that the unions remove members who

  1. are illegitimate
  2. have illegitimate children

unless they sign a declaration condemning Slut Single Mothers and support the raising of educational standards through traditional methods of teaching.

There is also the Jeremy Clarkson Solution of shooting strikers in front of their illegitimate children.

How to solve the problem of the 6M mentally ill British

Stigmatise, stigmatise, stigmatise.

The whole thing is a fucking racket anyway to con money out of the mentally insecure and their government.

The more you tolerate them the more there will be of the mentally-ill to tolerate.

Our Culture of Excuses has its origins in tolerance of crap like this.  They used to be locked up in institutions and now, after tolerating them, MPs are now coming out as mentally ill.

Before too long it will be COMPULSORY to be mentally ill to become an MP as well as being a fool and a knave.

Feeling the blues is not a mental illness.  There are often perfectly good reasons for you to be blue if you feel the future is bleak, a loved one has died and you have been dumped.

The pain means you should do something about it rather than medicate.

Also, calling forms of bad behaviour mental illness, especially in children, just allows the shit mothers of Britain excuse themselves for their shit parenting and medicate them at the expense of the taxpayer if they are slut single mums who are a burden on the state, or their unfortunate husbands who do not know that their wife is a shit mum who cannot bring up his children properly. Are they even his, he should wonder.   Most British women are sluts after all, in this country of compulsory fornication.  Time to get a DNA test?

As far as I am concerned, the only form of mental illness we should take account of is actual insanity, when people hear the voice of God telling them to go and kill people, or are permanently and fundamentally mistaken about the some important fact.   (This would include our political establishment, interestingly.)

Everything else is just bad behaviour, bad parenting, stupidity, fecklessness, lack of character and a bad nature.

To remoralilse the British and give them better mental health, bring back religion and scare the hell into of them.

I would be the person to consult about a new religion for the British, as I have been directing my mind to this question for a long time now.

First, disestablish the Church of England (which is full of dangerous Commie Pinko Liberal Homosexualists and Feminists).

Secondly, establish the Mosque of Britain which will have Anglican forms of worship (including hymns and carols and pews and dog collars), but without all the trinitarian crap and the clergymen who shamelessly promote gay marriage, like the Archbishop of Cunt and Reverend Richard Coles who has the dullest and most pointless show on Radio 4 but is paid to do so by the matriarchal BBC because he is gay and shamelessly promotes gay marriage, which is the sort of crap white middle class liberals and the women who run the BBC approve of.

Everything in the Book of Common Prayer that does not contradict the Koran should be used again, especially the scarier and more condemnatory bits.  

I can Nazi

Why nationalists should discuss eugenics

It is disgusting how doctors spoil the pregnancies of women by mistakenly telling them that their foetus might have something wrong with it, or even causing a perfectly healthy baby to be aborted because it was wrongly identified as Down's Syndrome or having some foetal abnormality.

If the law allowed infanticide by the parents of an unwanted and disabled baby then this disgusting practice of spoiling the pregnancies of women would end.

My cousin, an older mother, was offered an amniocentesis. She declined and was given a terrible time. In the end she had a healthy child, but her pregnancy was ruined by anxiety and fear.

While people condemn me for proposing this, they display no compassion and respect at all for the mother whose pregnancy is ruined by negligent medical personnel who are gagging to perform intrusive and unnecessary medical tests on mothers at the expense of the taxpayer.

My proposal would be cheaper and better for all concerned, but the benighted and hypocritical British are too irrational to even accept my reasoning.

I would expect a man to see my reasoning, but these days most of them have turned to women with their knee-jerk responses to the liberal imperative to be compassionate at all costs.

It is worse when they are supposed to be NATIONALISTS, and a nationalist is supposed to care about the long-term national interest.

Actually, these days a nationalist is someone who is just wants the other races to leave their country, even if it is AGAINST the national interest to do so.

The long-term national interest is not served by making parents bring up unviable babies at the taxpayers' expense when most of the British are now DEGENERATE, ie they are stupider, weaker, illegitimate, have mental health issues, suffer from obesity and are pretty much educationally subnormal when compared to other countries whose people are mostly NOT singly-parented, who are always being invited by the UK government to come here and do the jobs the white working classes cannot do because they are too busy claiming welfare and knocking up the next generation of illegitimate and unemployable NEETs.

If I had a severely disabled baby I would not demand that my husband pay to bring it up out of his taxed income.

If I had a severely disabled baby I would want a husband capable of telling me he doesn't want it, if I am too maternal and irrational to say so myself.

Perhaps that is why so many of the British are now disabled, mentally unstable, obese, welfare-dependent and unemployable.

British employers will understandably not want to hire disabled workers, but the British Nationalist does not care, as long as they can demand that I be expelled from the party just for saying I do not want to bring up severely disabled offspring who will NEVER AMOUNT TO ANYTHING OR MAKE ANYTHING OF THEMSELVES.

I would say that the white working classes are even less able to bring up their disabled children than the middle classes.

I think most British nationalists expect the taxpayer to pay for the disabled children of the working classes.

But how can you be working class if you are disabled?

Why should ANYONE else pay for the disabled children of the working classes who will never be able to work if their parents cannot do so themselves?

It is completely INSANE.

The British nationalist probably thinks nationalism is about giving the white working classes who don't like immigration exactly what they want, whether it is good for the long-term national interest or not.

I beg to disagree.

Too bad Nick Griffin is too scared to tell them any differently. Otherwise, he will be completely on his own after having been abandoned by the BNP core supporters whom he will have fatally offended.

Most people who think of themselves as working class no longer work because no sane British employer would want to hire them. Why don't we just be honest and call them the LOWER CLASSES?

Why is British nationalism about representing these people? What hope can there be for nationalism if it only identifies itself with angry losers who cannot compete with foreign labour even in the field of unskilled manual labour??

The problem about British nationalism is therefore the problem of CLASS.  If UKIP were all racist they would probably get away with it because of their class.

What the voting public cannot stand is the idea of voting for a party that is both lower class and racist even if they agree with most of their policies.

It is therefore interesting to know that anyone genuinely patriotic who joins the BNP will find UKIP membership forever closed to him, leaving him with no other option but the useless and anodyne English Democrats and the even more untouchable and socially retarded NF who still insist on repatriating non-white British citizens.

For this reason the BNP should go civic nationalist, but Nick Griffin will do no such thing because he knows that this restriction from joining UKIP will make anyone of any talent still in the BNP less likely to challenge him on anything.

After all, anyone who crosses him will be finished in nationalism, and they will be expelled from their social club which they mistakenly think is fit for the purpose of being a political party.

The problem of British nationalism is therefore easily solved.

Go civic, discuss eugenics (ie reconsecrate the institution of Marriage by denouncing the evil and irrational  destructiveness of anti-eugenic feminism) and have me as your leader.  This would attract the educated, firm of mind and well-healed who do not flee and cower, like UKIP, the moment the R word is used against them.

I will transform the image of British nationalism and turn the British into a people who are rational, robust and resourceful, as their ancestors were, rather than the race of obese, sexually-diseased, fertility-impaired, mentally ill, learning and physically disabled illegitimate sex-addicted PC homosexuals they have now become.  All these problems can be laid at the disgraced and degenerate door of FEMINISM.

Satirical references have been made about my resemblance to Davros by my political ally David Jones, but I regard that as a compliment.

If we form a party we will call it the Herbert Spencer Party of British Nationalism, so people will know exactly what we stand for.

Do not believe any stories about me being racist.   I do not have a single racist bone in my body.  If you are a voting citizen of this country and think that the lunatics are already in charge, I urge you to get in touch if you want to be involved in the establishment of a rationally small government, with lower taxes and fewer laws, which will herald the return of male and parental authority and end the rule of insane anti-eugenic feminist harridans.   

If you have children - whether legitimate or illegitimate - you would want a better future for them with a better quality of partner than you yourself have managed to find, would you not?

How can you have a better future when no political party dares to discuss the abysmal quality of the British gene pool?

Even the Muslims have become degenerate because they are so disgusted with the depravity of the locals that they refuse to breed with them and feel forced to marry and breed with their first cousins, which leads to birth defects that the NHS has to deal with.

This is a message to all the British citizens of all races who want the country turn over a new leaf from their slut and bastard ways and want to have in charge politicians to be capable of discussing difficult moral issues publicly, who know the meaning of free speech (which will be protected under the new constitution I have in mind) and are prepared to stand up for it.

Get your country back from the lunatics, SMASH FEMINISM.  

Go and discuss feminism with someone.  That is all you need to do.  Get this shit ideology exposed for the shit ideology that it is.   

Sunday, 17 June 2012

The cowardice of Jews, Christians and Muslims in challenging the extremist liberals who want gay marriage

Rabbi Zvi Solomons' letter to the Jewish Chronicle on 15 June 2012:

I note the silence of my colleagues over the gay marriage debate. This is understandable but avoids more serious issues which need fixing, whilst giving the impression that this does not apply to us as much as to other religious groups.

Reform needs to take account of the failure to protect those who have only a religious marriage without registering civilly. In other religions, except for the Quakers and CofE, there is no opportunity for civil registration at the time of the wedding. This means that Muslim, Sikh or Hindu weddings may not protect the bride and groom in the event of marriage breakup. I propose a solution. Let everyone be legally required to register a civil partnership. This would bring equality in the law without using a charged term, "marriage" and restore marriage to its original place, at the heart of belief, leaving it up to every group to decide whether they wish to call it by that name and to whom it may apply.

This Orthodox Rabbi does not object to the civil partnership, it seems.  If he does not, he would appear not to be taking into account the teachings of his own scripture. says homosexuals should be stoned to death. demonstrates that the Bible disapproves of homosexuality.  This means, dear reader, that both Judaism and Christianity ought to disapprove of homosexuality!

Yet the Archbishop of Canterbury, widely known to be a Red with a third rate mind says active homosexual relationships are comparable to marriage in the eyes of God.

Sometimes, one just longs to for the good old days when heretics were burnt at the stake.

Even the Muslims have gone native.

While demonstrates that Koran disapproves of homosexuality, we have this nonsense below by Mona Siddiqui, who appears to have forgotten her own scriptures, just like Jews and Christians who have tried to fit in with the demented matriarchy that was created by liberalism and feminism. has what she really said.

Below is a parody of what she said.

Mona Siddiqui, Professor of Islamic and Inter-Religious Studies, Assistant Principal for Religion and Society, New College on the Mound, University of Edinburgh  

Thursday, 14 June, 2012, 08:15 AM - Sex, Siddiqui
Rating 4 out of 5 (Highly platitudinous)

Gay marriage: right or wrong? It's a simple, straightforward question. So Let me be absolutely clear in my opinion. I want to state, categorically, leaving no room for doubt, that I'm unambiguously sitting on the fence on this one. 

You didn't really think I was going be foolish enough to give a simple, straightforward answer did you? Lord Singh might do that, but I'm a professor and far too clever to fall for that one.

In Islam, marriage is a civil contract between consenting adults. It's not a sacrament. So, on this important and controversial topic, we fully intend to firmly keep our heads down and wait for it all to blow over. Let some other religion be called homophobic for a change.

I will just say enough about marriage being about, love, commitment, intimacy and life long partnership, to make it sound as if my liberal credentials allow for gay marriage. On the other hand, I'll sympathise with those of any particular religion who don't have my enlightened views. 

This is what Thought For The Day is all about: saying, on the one hand, and then on the other hand, dropping hints in both directions and keeping one's own opinion safely to oneself.

It is obvious that all the Abrahamic faiths remain incorrigibly homophobic.  Liberals tell us it is sinful to be homophobic while adherents of the Abrahamic faiths who read and understand their scripture as well as practice their religion would have to acknowledge that it is the practice of sodomy that is sinful.

Who is right?

As I am an atheist, I would like to resolve this impartially.

Kant has this idea of the unversalisability.  If something is OK if everyone else does it, then it is OK, eg being polite, honest and refraining from killing people for fun.

If something is not OK if everybody does it, then it is immoral.   If everyone had extramarital sex then there would be widespread family breakdown and children with terrible childhoods of physical and sexual abuse, which his what we have now.  If everyone were gay, then there wouldn't be much of a next generation to speak of, since, no matter how pleasurable, all homosexual couplings are sterile.

They can now adopt, of course, but not that many of them want to, and it is doubtful that they are really the best people to parent children.

The term homophobia, suggesting that those who hate and fear homosexuals are irrational and neurotic, is really a bit of a propaganda trick.  It is the widespread tolerance of extramarital sex - which includes homo sex - that has led to the proposal by the supposedly socially conservative Conservative Party to think it politically and morally acceptable to promote gay marriage.

Gay marriage, I would suggest, is analogous to the dead canary of a coal miner.  The dead canary will not cause the miner to die, but it augurs ill for the miner if he does not change direction.

Too bad then that none of the religious leaders of any of the Abrahamic faiths have the courage of their convictions to denounce this proposal of Cameron's , because they are too anxious to fit with the current political orthodoxy.

What is the current political orthodoxy?  Atheist feminist extremist PC liberalism that goes against Nature and Reason.   Indeed, it delights in flouting EVERYTHING that the Abrahamic faiths say, because it thinks it can, without fear of the consequences, so heedless are they and arrogant. They think the fact that they are white and liberal alone is enough to protect from the consequences of their actions.

But pride comes before a fall.  

Saturday, 16 June 2012

The necessity, utility and morality of libertarian eugenics

My most eye-catching idea is my absolute refusal to back down from the moral necessity for the practice of eugenics, if you care for the long-term health of your society, as you should if you are a nationalist. My most infamous idea is my proposal to legalise infanticide if committed by the parents of unwanted disabled babies.

Yet, when reduced to its bare essentials, people will see that it is not really so objectionable, since all I propose to do is give parents the OPTION of doing so. There is no compulsion and no prohibition.

There is no danger of this option being exercised by parents to a degree that would prevent the continuing existence of the British peoples, and it is therefore on this Kantian ground perfectly moral.

The people who object will mostly be women who see the potential in raising their status at public expense by parading themselves with their disabled charges - the more pathetic they are, the greater their immunity from criticism.

In this way is the labour of the productive being wasted on the unproductive, by the supremacy of women over men in these matters of caring.

It is therefore time that men now remind women that whoever pays the piper calls the tune.  That is all they need to do to reassert their masculine authority over the feminine tendency to waste their maternal instincts on hopeless cases that will only result in more hopeless cases being born, creating an ever-increasing vicious circle of degeneracy, poverty and decline.  

MPs can be mentally ill says liberal establishment suffering from dementia

List of MPs who want the mentally ill to become MPs

  1. Kevan Jones 
  2. Charles Walker
  3. Sarah Wollaston
  4. Andrea Leadsom
  5. Paul Burstow 
  6. Gavin Barwell
  7. Robert Buckland
  8. Nicky Morgan

The first four admit to having been mentally ill.  Should we not despise and distrust MPs who are stupid enough to admit to mental illness and believe they can make political capital out of their mental illness?   

Perhaps they think the voter is mad and silly enough to want to lower even further the despicably low quality of the typical politician of dumbed down slut and bastard Britain, but I think we can make them pay for it come next election.  

I shall not forget the Ignominious Eight.   

Why is taxpayers' money being used to enrich lawyers?

Who was the person at the Welsh local authority who decided to waste taxpayers' money FEMALE?

I think we should be told.

Thursday, 14 June 2012

What Cameron should do after the Leveson Enquiry

  1. Pass a law whereby no non-British citizen not ordinary resident in Britain may own a newspaper or TV channel.
  2. Compulsorily purchase whatever publication and TV channel Rupert Murdoch still owns that is based in the UK.
  3. Pass a law whereby the state has a state publication and a state TV channel in competition with the other media that is not state-owned.  
  4. Sell off the BBC together with whatever that is left of what Rupert Murdoch and other foreign owners own of any form of media based in the UK to British buyers.   
  5. As for respecting the privacy of the intended victims of the press, I can do no better than recommend that the following verse in the Koran should be our guide:

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Let not some men among you laugh at others: It may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor let some women laugh at others: It may be that the (latter are better than the (former): Nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other, nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness, (to be used of one) after he has believed: And those who do not desist are (indeed) doing wrong. 
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Let not a folk deride a folk who may be better than they (are), not let women (deride) women who may be better than they are; neither defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. Bad is the name of lewdness after faith. And whoso turneth not in repentance, such are evil-doers. 
SHAKIR: O you who believe! let not (one) people laugh at (another) people perchance they may be better than they, nor let women (laugh) at (other) women, perchance they may be better than they; and do not find fault with your own people nor call one another by nicknames; evil is a bad name after faith, and whoever does not turn, these it is that are the unjust.

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible): for suspicion in some cases is a sin: And spy not on each other behind their backs. Would any of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Nay, ye would abhor it...But fear Allah: For Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful. 
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Shun much suspicion; for lo! some suspicion is a crime. And spy not, neither backbite one another. Would one of you love to eat the flesh of his dead brother? Ye abhor that (so abhor the other)! And keep your duty (to Allah). Lo! Allah is Relenting, Merciful. 
SHAKIR: O you who believe! avoid most of suspicion, for surely suspicion in some cases is a sin, and do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Does one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? But you abhor it; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, surely Allah is Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful.

Hoping that the British will take up the fight against feminism is analogous to ....

expecting a patient with a gangrenous limb to cut his own limb off.

It has to be done, and done by a female and a foreigner too. Some things can only be done by a foreigner.

Jonah and the Whale by Pieter Lastman

Unlike Jonah, I came willingly to this country and arrived at Heathrow Airport, and did not board another vessel going the other way until the crew threw me off.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus makes a reference to Jonah when he was asked for a miraculous sign by the Pharisees and teachers of the Law. Jesus implies that Jonah's restoration after three days inside the great whale prefigures His own resurection.

But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:
For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
—Gospel of Matthew, chapter 12 verses 39-41

Imbecilic Parish Councillor wants to ban Nazi uniforms at WW2 re-enactment.

Should Nazi uniforms be banned at an event that is about WW2?  Parish Councillor Thorne in dumbed-down Britain thinks so.  So the Nazis were NOTHING do to with WW2 then??  

I bet you could advertise the event in Germany and get lots of young handsome Germans to come here who would enjoy strutting round an English village in their Nazi uniform, seig heiling merrily to their each other.

There could be special prize for the best Eva and Adolf couple too, and you can imagine pairs of them walking arm in arm enjoying the show, smiling and waving to one and all.

A prize should be awarded for the best Hitler impersonation.

Perhaps a Nuremberg rally could be re-enacted too while they were at it?

What fun that would be!

I would love to go to report on such an event.

Triumph of the Will as can be seen at will give you an idea of the cinematic event I have in mind that will be re-enacted in the North of England, but in English.

Perhaps the Lord Chief Rabbi could be prevailed upon to preside over events and be MC so the organisers do not have to deal with constant accusations of antisemitism.

To ban Nazi uniforms at a WW2 re-enactment would be the equivalent of asking Disney to ban cartoons.  Parish Councillor Barry Thorne and others of his ilk should be told to go and boil their heads.   

Wednesday, 13 June 2012

More state nannying by the profligate Cameron

My comment:

The government does not appear to realise that prevention is better than cure. Far cheaper would be to propose the lashing of Slut Single Mums 100 times (as instructed by the Koran) and the threat to sell any badly brought up children as slaves to China, together with their useless degenerate parents, thus boosting British exports. In fact, the British could start exporting their Slut Single Mums just like in the good old days when they sold opium to the Chinese, in order to destroy their civilisation.
was deleted.  

A Peter Buss said:

A truly awful comment which ought to have no place on a site like this.

My response:

I am sorry you do not appreciate Swiftian satire. Degeneracy in Britain caused by the widespread tolerance of slut single mums has caused the alarming dumbing down of Conservatives too.

Friday, 8 June 2012

Lying scum promote homosexuality and degeneracy while matriarchal Western governments lie back and think of England

"She deliberately had her associates recruit participants to obtain a pool of subjects who understood what her ‘experiment’ was about and how it was to be used to achieve a political goal in transforming society. Hooker had no clinical experience in the field or in the scientific method to be employed, had obvious bias, and provided no details about her procedure. The inadequacy of her research was even acknowledged by the journal that published it.""She deliberately had her associates recruit participants to obtain a pool of subjects who understood what her ‘experiment’ was about and how it was to be used to achieve a political goal in transforming society. Hooker had no clinical experience in the field or in the scientific method to be employed, had obvious bias, and provided no details about her procedure. The inadequacy of her research was even acknowledged by the journal that published it."

‎"homosexuality is not a stable trait and that it tends spontaneously to convert into heterosexuality as an individual gets older; that sexual identity is not fixed at adolescence but continues to change over the course of life and that there is no evidence for homosexuality being innate."

‎"ALL studies reflecting the opposite opinion had a methodological flaw in that they compared the wellbeing of children in homosexual households to those raised in difficult circumstances such as single-parent households that resulted from divorce. None of the studies compared children raised by homosexual parents to children with two heterosexual parents in a stable, loving marriage."

Fucking LYING shitting SCUM.

‎"girls raised in homosexual households are more likely to be more aggressive, boys are likely to be less masculine and that both girls and boys engage in sexual experimentation at earlier ages and are more sexually promiscuous. As a result children reared by gay couples have gender confusion and are put at high risk for sexually transmitted diseases."

‎"homosexually behaving teens and young adults suffer increased rates of depression, anxiety, eating disorders, addictions and suicidal thoughts. And in the case of boys who adopt a homosexual lifestyle because of the influence of their same-sex parents, Cretella said, they face a 30% chance of being dead or HIV-positive by the age of 30."

"Homosexuals tend to recklessly and unjustly label all those who oppose homosexual activity as “homophobic” - the term "homophobia" itself intended to denote a disorder. In this way they seek to impose their own disordered behaviour and lifestyle on society under the guise of tolerance."

Why do these sick people promote degeneracy and sin?  Why does Cameron the Cuntservative who conserves the worst of liberal feminist shit promote degeneracy and sin?  Does he even know?  Can that piece of filthy Etonian shit even explain it to us, or will he leave Tim Montgomerie to do it for him?

Who the fuck do these people think they are and what do they think they are doing??

Gay people don't even want it.  The whole shitty exercise is not even going to get Cunt Cameron enough votes to save his cooked goose at the next election.

I think this just means that they haven't the foggiest idea what they are trying to do.   If Cameron's head explodes into a fountain of poo because it is now too full of shit to keep it all in, it might just be a blessing, for him and us.  

I urge stupid gay people not to marry each other, because, come the backlash, they will know who you are and where you live.

What gay people who want to live together should do is campaign to abolish inheritance tax, so that when the civil partnership and gay marriage are swept away in the coming backlash, you can leave property to your gay lover without incurring a 40% tax.

Wednesday, 6 June 2012

The monarchy serves no other purpose than to be a national ornament and a national soap opera

But that is reason enough to keep it going.

As long as the ornament serves the purpose of  being ornamental, as long as enough people follow the national soap opera, then the British monarchy is serving its purpose.


As long as monarchy exists, so will the class-envious rancorous Republicans who wish to abolish it.  These tend to be lower class leftists or disappointed nationalists and Europsceptics who seem to think it was the role of the Queen to rescue them from the defects of their corrupt political establishment which is now nearly wholly infested by fools and knaves.

It is not the role of an old woman whose job is to keep her views to herself and who cannot even vote to save the nation.  Sadly, these ignorant little men who cannot grasp the concept of a constitutional monarchy expect to be saved from their corrupt political system by a little old lady whose job it is to keep quiet about her political views.

These men have so little imagination that they cannot grasp that no constitutional monarch would wish to have the constitutional monarchy abolished under his or her watch.

Even if the Queen did exactly as these rancorous Republicans would wish, ie refused to sign treaties, refused to read Queen's Speeches, and found the monarchy abolished, she would get no gratitude from these class-hating rancorous men, who have no use for ornaments and would only stick them up their bums or their noses or just choke on them like toddlers who put everything into their mouths.

Anyone who finds himself or  herself born into the position of being a constitutional monarch would instinctively wish to preserve this role for himself or herself and wish to pass it on to their first-born male heir, and quite right too.

It is to be wondered at the number of legally-trained people who ought to know better than to keep moaning that the Queen is useless because she has not acted to promote the political agenda that they would wish.

It would appear that the virtues of duty and tradition are no longer held in any regard or even understood by the New Briton whose basest instincts are to envy those above them and oppress those beneath them, displaying their ignorance and inability to grasp that it is the role of a constitutional monarch to be politically neutral.  However often and loudly and patiently I explain to them the role of the constitutional monarch, which is to keep her political views to herself and go about her duties dutifully and cheerfully, they declare, again and again, mulishly and uncomprehendingly, that the Queen is not what she ought to be unless she does something that she ought not to do, which is to promote a political agenda that would mire the monarchy in bias and controversy.

Royal neutrality in politics became cemented from around the start of the reign of Queen Victoria

These New British Republicans merely wish to mindlessly destroy anything and everything that is good and noble about the past, and have it all replaced with gay marriage.

If only the current monarch could only just send these fools to the Tower for beheading they would be much happier and more respectful of the monarchy.  It is after all the only language mules and ignoramuses understand.   

David Jones on how feminism is a nationalist issue


I recently read a tedious and protracted argument on the Facebook page of a London BNP friend of mine, a local organiser. This friend is a decent, hardworking activist who travelled up to Newcastle Upon Tyne, which cost (him a Kings Ransom), to have his say at one of the regular "Unity Meetings". I will not go into the details of the argument, though it appears that nearly every nationalist meeting not organised by the BNP itself is billed as a Unity Meetings, including this one which I could not attend for work reasons.

The meeting was apparently a success, in the sense that everybody had their say, was civil and had a good time. The "crisis of leadership" was discussed at length and the long catalogue of complaints against BNP Chairman, Nick Griffin, were regurgitated for the umpteenth time.

Blogger Claire Khaw had a fair amount to say, and had a long list of questions typed out concerning how nationalists can deal with the issue of feminism, single parenthood and the collapse of marriage.

To my mind it is quite reasonable to expect nationalists, who concern themselves with the long-term future of the British people, to address the matter of;

- Generation after generation of people who will be brought up without a mother and a father.

- Atrocious economic circumstances and tax system which penalise married couples, whilst encouraging separation for benefits purposes.

- The push to destroy families by encouraging family courts and social workers to treat fathers with contempt, as is frequently the case.

- The lack of "marriage contracts" in this increasingly atheist age, aimed at eliminating gold-digging women and potential cheating men from the institution of marriage - that is not a point about religion, these are a good idea from any perspective.

- A status quo that encourages mothers to abandon their children and seek employment (and partially disincentivise the men from being bread winners), trading their cherished chance to spend time raising their kids for the prospect of money to spoil their kids with out of guilt.

- The lack of discipline in young kids encouraged by stupid "anti smacking guidelines" and liberal teachers encouraging their spoilt pupils to ring the Police on their parents.

Those are all pretty sound issues to be taking up, and deal with problems that will destroy our society if not redressed with the same certainty as a foreign invasion or mass immigration. Deep down i suspect you know I'm correct here, I am not talking about anything wacky here, just common sense family values, raising kids correctly - that kind of thing. It shouldn't be too difficult to articulate this in a way that gains popular support if you really believe in the logic of it.

However it appears that nationalists seem no more to want to address this matter anymore than they do their "crisis of leadership".

They remind me of a group of frightened abseilers who won't take that first step down over the cliff edge and certainly won't be the ones to go first.

Hows this for a deal then?

Since there is little I can do to influence the "crisis of leadership" (ie find a new leader, found/ build a big party etc, owing to my lack of a spare £100'000 of a grand lying around) how about we get to work on the second issue - fighting for the idea of family?

This November, assuming nothing stops me, I intend to stand for election (as an independent) in a local by-election in my local Town Council area on precisely these issues.

The question is this, will you support me?

David Jones,
Independent Pennine Nationalist,
Todmorden, East Lancashire.

Saturday, 2 June 2012

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 8

"It' not fair the way so many people are prejudiced against racists."

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 7

"The blacks and pakis are to serious in here..dare I say it I think they should lighten up."

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 6

I am not a racist I am an ethnic tribalist!!. Racism is a crime and crime is for black people.

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 5

I remember when I visited Bradford last year, I constantly felt like a Rice Krispie in a box of Coco Pops.

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 4

A [member of a race you dislike] has been run over by a reversing car.

Police are appealing for the driver to come forward.

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 3

Did anybody watch Crimewatch on the BBC last night?  I really enjoyed it.

Can’t wait for an English edition.

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 2

My daughter was called in to see the headmaster at our grandsons’s school yesterday because he’s been making racist jibes at the black children.

We were absolutely horrified, we’ve always told him not to speak to them.

Racist Joke by Robert Durden 1

I am not going to call myself a racist any more - I am an ethnic tribalist.

Why Asian and Muslim parents think white middle class parents and their children are SCUM

No wonder the Muslims and Asians refuse to let their children have anything to do with the children of depraved white parents after school, who even now affirm their right to view their porn at all costs. White middle class liberals certainly know where their priorities lie.

Curiously, Ruth Dudley Edwards praises Jenny McCartney for her piece, which she calls a "sane reflection", when she has done nothing more than wring her hands.