Thursday, 30 April 2015

The rationale of honour killing explained

Pregnant 10-year-old girl 'denied life-saving abortion after being raped by her stepfather'

Any mother who takes up with a man who rapes her 10 year old daughter must ipso facto be a SHIT mother and a slut.

A slut is a woman who suffers because her promiscuity. Promiscuity is choosing one's sex partners badly and suffering for one's bad choices.

Any daughter of any SHIT mother must ipso facto inherit her SHIT genes.

Would you marry a woman who was knocked up by her step father when she was 10? NOPE.

Would you marry a woman who married a man who raped and impregnated her daughter? NOPE.

If you were a mother, would you want your son to take up with such a woman? NOPE.


I would have the mother's husband executed to draw a line under this.

I mean, even if you were the mother you would secretly be relieved if your daughter "disappears", wouldn't you?

Imagine all the guilt you would have to deal with and all the arguments you would have with her.

"Mum, you have to say yes to whatever I ask cos you were the one who married the man who raped and impregnated me when I was ten. " 

Intolerable and insufferable.

Just imagine yourself to be the father of the woman whose daughter was raped by her husband. You would want your grand-daughter dead too, wouldn't you, so your daughter could start again instead of being dragged down by her raped daughter and the bastard spawn of her raped daughter?

What if your daughter with the raped daughter wants to keep the offspring of her raped daughter who is also the offspring of your late son-in-law?

You could disown her, but you may just prefer it if she and her daughter and her grandchild disappeared off the face of the earth too, or at least moved far far away, wouldn't you?

If she won't go, she and your raped and impregnated granddaughter and her grand-daughter's bastard spawn would be like three albatrosses round your neck, wouldn't they?

The disgrace would be total if you allowed this: the mockery and disdain of all your community and the contempt of your peers. If you had any position in this community at all it would all be lost, because of your slut of a daughter who chose to get knocked-up by the wrong man and then married even more of a wrong 'un who raped and impregnated her daughter who is also your "damaged goods"granddaughter.

What would you be mocked for?

For having lost control of your women, of course.

Western men wouldn't get any of this, of course.

Wednesday, 29 April 2015

A talk I attended at the British Academy about hung Parliaments

This is something I know that he likes to say and I find his complacency infuriating. There will come a time when our luck runs out and lenders stop lending to us because they know we are being run by clueless lunatics or the unbelievably complacent.

I just want to feel well-governed. Listening to Prime Minister's Question Time is not hearing the clamorous voices of liberty, as Peter Hennessy says, but seeing that those who are supposed to be governing you wasting their time and energy putting on a show for themselves that you have no wish to see because it depressing, confusing, boring and pointless.

The one question I wanted to ask them all was "Wouldn't it just be easier if we just had a one party state? We already have a de facto one party state, we might as well have a de jure one.

Ancient Athens and Republican Rome were effectively one-party states, weren't they?

We also know how Athens destroyed itself too. The Athenian equivalent of NATO and/or the EU was of course the Delian League.

Why can't the political classes devote their time and energy talking about real issues of government rather than sweeping them under the carpet and playing around with the rules?

Democracy has not been good for Britain when you think how much it has lost as a consequence of of the operation of democracy, explained at

The enemies of society are sluts and socialists, the enemies of the British Plaid Cymru, the SNP and the English Democrats

Tuesday, 28 April 2015

New parents had to defend decision to have baby with same condition as dad

Who are the psychopaths? Muslim terrorists or liberals?

Crime and Punishment focuses on the mental anguish and moral dilemmas of Rodion Raskolnikov, an impoverished ex-student in St. Petersburg who formulates and executes a plan to kill an unscrupulous pawnbroker for her cash. Raskolnikov argues that with the pawnbroker's money he can perform good deeds to counterbalance the crime, while ridding the world of a worthless vermin. He also commits this murder to test his own hypothesis that some people are naturally capable of such things, and even have the right to do them. Several times throughout the novel, Raskolnikov justifies his actions by comparing himself with Napoleon Bonaparte, believing that murder is permissible in pursuit of a higher purpose.

Anjem Choudary and his followers speak fondly of Omar Bakri Mohammed

Old white men in UKIP and even Ulstermen are joining the queue to kowtow to queers

Why would anyone vote for British politicians who now spend their lives apparently endlessly queuing up to kowtow to queers?

This moral rottenness has now reached Northern Ireland, as you can see at though they still reject gay marriage. But for how long can these frightened emasculated elderly Ulstermen continue to hold the fort of social conservatism against a tsunami of sluts and sexual liberation and support the principle of marriage (which means forbidding extramarital sex)? Not much longer, I don't think. 

UKIP are known to be a party of homophobes. They try to deny this, but cannot quite stop their candidates letting their masks slip, but perhaps this could be turned to their advantage as Conservative voters who are angry about gay marriage vote UKIP to avenge themselves against David Cameron whose idea it was.

Compare and contrast their cowardly and mealy-mouthed disapproval of LGBTs with someone like Anjem Choudary who says the death penalty should follow a conviction of a homosexual act. 

He said: 'If a man likes another man, it can happen, but if you go on to fulfil your desire, if it is proved, then there is a punishment to follow. You don't stone to death unless there are four eyewitnesses. It is a very stringent procedure.

'There are some people who are attracted to donkeys but that does not mean it is right.'

I however only propose to fine homosexuals £100 if caught cottaging if they are photographed in flagrante delicto, so to speak, and believe stoning them to death is more than just a bit harsh. 

If Muslims do not vote they should at least spoil their ballot papers and write rude things about democracy such as "Death to Democracy, Long Live the Caliph" or something similar. It would just be boring if they just stayed home. I therefore urge Muslims inclined to follow Choudary's advice to at least go into the polling booth to spoil their ballot paper, or even vote UKIP because they are the party least out of harmony with Koranic principles.  

UKIP want an EU referendum which is consistent with Shura.

UKIP were against gay marriage, which is consistent with 4:15 and 4:16 of the Koran. 

It is disgusting that UKIP are just like the frightened and emasculated old white Ulstermen showing a reluctance to kowtow to queers, but at least they are showing a noticeable reluctance in queueing up to to kowtow to them. 

Monday, 27 April 2015

CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE judgment against Lutfur Rahman an establishment stitch-up

"Lutfur Rahman is only banned from participating in the Tower Hamlets Mayoral Election, I believe." - According to the press, he might also be disqualified from practising as a solicitor, his pre-politics profession.

How do you know he was tried in the Civil Division?

The police and prosecutors

The police are responsible for investigating any allegations of electoral fraud. Every police force in the UK has an identified Single Point of Contact Officer (or SPOC) for electoral fraud, who provides specialist support and advice to investigators.

Prosecuting authorities (the Crown Prosecution Service in England and Wales, the Crown Office in Scotland, and the Public Prosecution Service in Northern Ireland) are responsible for taking cases of alleged electoral fraud to court. They work closely with police forces to examine evidence about alleged electoral fraud before deciding whether or not to bring a prosecution.

None of this happened while the conditions for setting aside an election are stated below:

12. The legislation provides that the outcome of an election may be challenged on
the grounds of an undue election, an undue return, that the candidate was at the
time of election disqualified or that the election was voided by corrupt or illegal

13. In summary, taking into account Part 3 of the RPA 1983 and relevant case law, the grounds for challenging an election are that:

• an error was made by an electoral official that affected the result or at least
meant that ‘the election was not conducted so as to be substantially in
accordance’ with the rules (under this ground, the election court is able to
conduct a scrutiny of ballot papers to ascertain which candidate has the majority
of lawful votes);

• corrupt or illegal practices were committed by a candidate or his or her agent or
‘such practices so extensively prevailed in an election that they may reasonably
be supposed to have affected the result’;

• the successful candidate was disqualified.

None of these were satisfied either, yet Lutfur Rahman was "convicted" anyway.

Now, the police are busily gathering evidence.

This is rather like eating your cake before you have even got the ingredients and then baking it. 

Henrik Ibsen's GHOSTS is a metaphor for the West destroying itself through LUST and SLUTS

The destructive power of an unwise, wilful and interfering woman: NO ADDED FEMINISM REQUIRED

Was this woman responsible for the ferocity of the hatred the Russians felt for the Czar and by extension the Russian Revolution?

Would the Russians still have their Royal Family if their last Czarina had married this man instead?

Does voting make voters stupid?

Sunday, 26 April 2015

Does the BBC have a moral and national responsibility to discuss UK foreign policy?

Saturday, 25 April 2015

Lutfur Rahman's Grounds for Appeal

Mr Mawrey's 200 page judgment against Lutfur Rahman

I should have said "If the police do not CHARGE him after finding no evidence".

In his 200-page judgment on Rahman, Mawrey pointed out that although the election court is a civil hearing, “the criminal standard of proof, namely proof beyond reasonable doubt” is applied. Candidates, unless “a mitigating factor is established”, are deemed responsible for the acts and omissions of their agents.

Er, was there actually a jury to decide whether Lutfur Rahman was guilty beyond reasonable doubt, or just Mr Mawrey alone deciding that the accused was guilty beyond all reasonable doubt?

Saying something doesn't make it so!

The whole affair is a nettle of nonsense on stilts.

But turning towards an even more serious matter, what sort of a curry dinner should Lutfur Rahman buy me for giving him all this free legal advice, and in which restaurant in Tower Hamlets should this curry dinner take place? In one of Mr Azmal Hussain's four esteemed restaurants in Brick Lane? It should be a late curry dinner and we should arrive at the restaurant no earlier than 22:55 hours and see what time Mr Hussain stops taking our orders and throws us out on the streets ...