My class and gender analysis of the decline and fall of the West, caused by sluts and the white man's fear of offending them

It was through joining all a number of political parties that enabled me to arrive at my class and gender analysis of British society and the British political system. I am not going to write a paper on it but it can be briefly summarised as follows:

You can easily divide and rule by creating further divisions within the existing divisions of any society.

The English are a class-ridden society riddled with class rancour, but the English love their class system and love denigrating the classes above and beneath them,.

The biggest unofficial tribe is the "tribe" that is male and female.

This was how I imagine the theory of Yin and Yang was arrived at. Once you get gender relations exactly right you will have order and progress. If you get it wrong you will have strife, chaos and decline.

The only way of balancing the power of each sex is to impose the institution of marriage and regulate the sex instinct of the people. If you let people fuck whoever whatever wherever whenever you will get a bunch of degenerate illegitimate offspring which will be brought up badly by their stupid dysgenic slut mothers, and the next generation will be worse and the subsequent ones even worse, and then the Muslims will take over after the Jews have sucked them dry, or some similar doomsday scenario favoured by antisemites and Islamophobes. Christianity, being now utterly feminised and the Church colonised by Commie Pinko Homos and Feminists is now only a source of income and status for those who wish to subvert the real teachings of the Abrahamic faiths.  The Abrahamic faiths all promote the same moral values viz social conservatism and the prohibition of extramarital sex.

However, since most British women are sluts and most British mothers are SSMs https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379?fref=ts, this means most men are MCSFs http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/all-spossms-are-mcsfs-but-not-all-mcsfs.html and most children are bastards.  These people are unlikely to acquire the moral courage or authority to say or do anything effective against the insane social policies of the liberal political establishment.

No good will come of this because we already know that people get the government they deserve, and sluts and bastards are not a source of good government, nor do they deserve it.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/nation-of-disabled-sluts-and-bastards.html

In the meantime, the legitimately born will easily outdo the illegitimate, perpetuating their superiority and their oppression of the illegitimate, who are economically, socially, culturally, intellectually and genetically inferior.

No nationalist will support marriage even when it is abundantly clear that it is the desecration of this institution which has so fatally compromised the white male.

When you would expect nationalists to care about racial health and hygiene, but they don't and won't and say that the problem is something else, you know the end is nigh.

Nationalists prefers to call this issue a mere obsession of mine, because they know they don't want to do anything about it and are in any case not in a position to do anything about it.  None of them care to examine the nature and purpose of marriage, because most of them are SSM-parented or have themselves impregnated SSMs and are themselves despised, illegitimate and lower class.

And that is why all the other nationalists have the same position on marriage as Nick Griffin's: avoidance and silence.

Being mostly confirmed bachelors or in fact unmarriageable, they already know that they have as much chance of selling marriage as an ugly pock-marked woman has of selling beauty cream. They already know they have lost the game, because they wield no moral authority, for beta-omega males who are scared, stupid and skint are expected to suffer, especially when they are so unfit for purpose that they cannot complete with immigrant labour even in the field of unskilled manual labour. No one cares about these lower class racists whom no sane employer would want to hire.

Nothing will change, nothing will be said, and the white race will carry on sliding down its slippery slope to NIGGERDOM as more and more of their middle class lose their middle class status when their slut daughters present them with bastard grandchildren who are the spawn of a carelessly chosen short-term sex partner who was probably a jobless autistic learning-disabled loser or a drug-addicted criminal they had sex in a toilet with when they went clubbing, whose name they have forgotten if they ever knew it.

The only surprise is that these white men who call themselves nationalists who have already lost everything anyway won't even acknowledge the truth as they lie dying on their death beds ...

Instead, they prefer to whinge about the Jews or how Muslim grooming gangs groom the abandoned daughters of slut mothers, because they are so low they are afraid of offending these SSMs, who would withhold sex as well as votes from them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html

What about the alpha males, the non-plebeian nationalists? They tend to be chinless wonders like Gregory Lauder Frost who is the Treasurer and Vice President of the Tradition Britain Group who apparently loathes feminism so much he will not discuss it, or a celibate Catholic like John Kersey, also Vice President, who urges white men to have large families, or yet another Catholic like its third Vice President Christopher Gillibrand who cannot bear to acknowledge the failure of Christianity. http://www.traditionalbritain.org/about  It is of course Catholics who fear and hate Islam most, but there is nothing else left in the world to reimpose social conservatism now, is there? To expect UKIP or the BNP to ever acquire sufficient moral authority when its leaders are so cowardly and venal as well as painfully shy of discussing sexual morality is rather like waiting for the Second Coming of Christ.

I have often wondered why I have been regarded as persona non grata at TBG meetings without a proper explanation, but I now suspect it is because they hate and fear Secular Koranism http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html, which they cannot bring themselves to discuss without having fits of the vapours.

So there you have it. If you wonder what your civilisation is dying of, it is of sluts and the men who are so afraid of offending parasitical sluts who are the agents degeneracy that they dare not officially and uncompromisingly support the institution of marriage. To do this, they would have to acknowledge that supporting the institution of marriage would logically mean forbidding extramarital sex, and this they will not contemplate doing in the same way that an addict who has no long term incentive to give up will not contemplate giving up his habit, even as he loses his job, his wife, his children, his home and his self-respect.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/john-kersey-and-gregory-lauder-frost.html

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/more-speculation-on-reasons-why-i-am.html

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/what-i-think-of-gregory-lauder-frosts.html

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/why-white-people-are-now-inferior-race.html
Five generations of feckless fuckers

The kind of bad boy sluts AKA "sexually liberated women" go for.
http://metro.co.uk/2014/06/20/jeremy-meeks-worlds-hottest-mugshot-guy-send-women-crazy-on-facebook-4769306/

http://ask.fm/oneparty4all/answer/115145860481
Why do you think notorious serial killers and rapists attract so much female lascivious attention from behind bars? Why are women attracted to sociopaths?

John Kersey and Gregory Lauder Frost are both now Vice Presidents of the Traditional Britain Group

We're extremely pleased to announce that Professor John Kersey has accepted our invitation to become a Vice... http://t.co/VAfoxwT494
— TraditionalBritain (@TradBritGroup) November 2, 2013

Two heads are better than one and I now wonder if I am closer to getting an answer from TBG as to the manner and occasions in which I have behaved like a "loose cannon" causing such consternation and alarm to TBG committee members that they have decided to disable me from commenting on their Facebook page and attending their last two conferences.

John Kersey at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNtsqOKJlzw says white men should have bigger families to compete in numbers against the immigrant population.

Evidently he has not noticed that white British men see marriage as mug's game and those who own property do not wish to have their family homes confiscated by their ex-wives.

More speculation on the reasons why I am persona non grata at Traditional Britain Group

I have thought and thought and thought about why the TBG might wish to exclude me from their meetings.

First, I thought it was racial, and then decided it could not be, since I was made to feel  welcome at dinners of TBG in its former guises.

Then I thought it was because of something I had said, and I do say so many things.  However, because I do say so many things, I am not sure which of the views I have been known to express has caused so much offence and horror.

Despite persistent questioning over an extended period of time, my investigations and requests have yielded nothing I can get my teeth into.

"You are a loose cannon" was the most I got out of Gregory Lauder Frost as you can see at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/what-i-think-of-gregory-lauder-frosts.html when I, even if I were white and male would have refrained from spending nearly an hour advocating the repatriation of non-white British citizens without for once going into the question of how this was to be accomplished.  If he wants voluntary repatriation, then GLF should join the BNP or say he votes BNP.  If he wants forced repatriation he should join the NF or say he votes NF.  But he is only a member of UKIP. I am not saying he has no right to say what he says, mind, merely pointing out that it is not politic now to say such things without expecting to be eviscerated by the liberal media for being so out of touch that he thinks saying that voluntary repatriation was a policy of the Conservative Party in the 1970s is enough to get him off the hook of racism.

In any case, what is the point of asking for things you know will be refused out of hand?  I think GLF confuses complaining with effective activism.

I know I could be accused of doing the same thing myself, but I am always delighted when people challenge me and explain why I think what I do and what I propose to do to make it happen.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/gregory-lauderfrost-exposed-the-tory-fringe-group-leader-with-nazi-sympathies-8755093.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23617555

I speculated that it might have been my antifeminist views that might have caused my exclusion. Indeed, at one time I was convinced that that must have been it, but GLF assured me that they at the TBG were antifeminist too.

• 

  30/10/2013 14:30
  

  Claire Khaw
  

  
  

  Why won't the TBG discuss feminism?

  Is it for the same reason UKIP won't repeal the Equality Act 2010?
• 

  30/10/2013 14:31
  

  Gregory Lauder-Frost
  

  
  

  Because we are traditionalists. We are opposed to feminism. Full stop.

Although this response does not appear to make much sense, it seems that GLF is saying that he and TBG are indeed opposed to feminism.

But if so, then surely I should have been invited to give a talk on the subject myself at the TBG conference?

So what could it be, if the reason for my exclusion was neither because of my race nor my political views?

If one is accused of something it would be helpful to know what exactly one is supposed to have done.  That is the whole point of habeas corpus, after all.  If we are being accused of something terrible then that thing must be specified so that we can make some sort of an attempt to question the validity of that accusation.  I am not saying that they do not have a right to exclude me, but it would be manly and honorable for them to give me a proper reason.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/revealed-the-third-man-in-that-traditional-britain-photo--and-what-he-says-about-the-new-loony-right-8771448.html

A TBG spokesperson confirms Heaton-Gent’s exit from the committee, along with Liam Stokes, an agriculture student, and Henry Hopwood-Phillips, who has described his political views, as “Spengler meets Zizek via UKIP” (Oswald Spengler was a German philosopher; Slavoj Zizek is a Slovenian thinker).

Hopwood-Phillips declines to answer questions. In an email, Stokes says he left the TBG when it became clear it was not “moderate, mainstream, or socially conservative.” Apart from Lauder-Frost, remaining committee members are Louis Welcomme, a Newcastle graduate who did not respond to emails [This is what the BNP do too!], and George Jones, who declines to talk about the TBG “without my lawyer present”.

http://www.traditionalbritain.org/content/searchlight-are-watching-open-letter-reply-henry-hopwood-phillips

You can hear him "sing" at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKlvSnPvHX0

A further snippet in The Independent said of a certain Jack Buckby now a member of Liberty GB an outfit even more rabidly Islamophobic than the BNP:

Jack Buckby is a 20-year-old student once tipped as the next Nick Griffin, the party’s leader. He is also a TBG supporter and was invited to its Rees-Mogg dinner and subsequent AGM. Earlier this year, he was introduced by Griffin at a meeting of the Alliance of European National Movements, a far-right group also supported by France’s Front National.

“I think people view students as generally left-wing but that’s not the case,” he says. “I joined the BNP because it’s one of few places conservative students can go. Conservative Future is packed with left-wingers and dictated to by those with a modern, liberal consensus. It’s not for traditionalists.”

Buckby left the BNP a few months ago when the “open race hatred became unacceptable.” But he agrees with the TBG view that Mrs Lawrence is “totally without merit”. He says he “detests Islam” and fears Britain will become an Islamic state by 2050. In May, he launched Liberty GB. Its “plan to save Britain” includes halting all immigration for five years and abolishing the Human Rights Act.

A prominent recent study supports Buckby’s view that youth politics is veering to the right. 

I do happen to know that Jack Buckby has always been very wary of engaging me in any kind of political discussion right from the beginning.  He has never really made clear what I have said that he found so offensive, but has made his antipathy of me very clear.  

Below is the only recorded communication between Jack and me:

• Conversation started 9 June 2012
• 

  09/06/2012 14:46
  

  Jack Grugel
  

  
  

  What on earth is your problem? Do you get sexual kicks out of spamming people?
• 

  09/06/2012 15:08
  

  Jack Grugel
  

  
  

  I do not wish to have correspondence with you. I do not wish for you to be involved with my pages. I have nothing to learn from you.

  I'll leave you be, and I hope you will just leave me be. I am not interested in what you have to say and I would like to be given a chance with my Nationalist projects without you trying to mess it up for me.

  Put simply - please leave me alone.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/national-culturalism-wont-work-as.html  explains why I don't think his ideas would work.  

Is it possible that TBG would exclude me to please this whippersnapper, I wondered.  Unlikely, I thought.  

As for Henry Hopwood-Phillips, I remember being on quite friendly terms with him on Facebook.  He was an ordinand, I seem to remember.  Indeed, he even sent me rather naughty photos of himself when he sent a photograph of his tumescent member to me on 26 July 2011 as well as a photograph of himself in the buff.  

I actually have no record of what we were saying that led up to it, and some might suspect me of having skilfully and seductively enticed a sexually naive ordinand into compromising himself in this way.  What little I can remember of it was that it was along the lines of "I am so horny, do you know how horny I am, do you want to see how horny I am, what is your email so I can send you a photo of how horny I am?" and I must have said "All right then", and the rest is history, as they say.  

After viewing the photographs, I did advise him to be careful, being an ordinand with his whole life ahead of him, but then said no more about it.  Indeed, I noticed later that he had unfriended me, but thought no more about it, imagining that he must have been embarrassed or offended after I did not play along and send him equally explicit photographs of myself in the nude followed by a close-up of my genitalia. I do remember asking him if this is how young people engage in courtship these days, rather giving away my age.  To this he responded that the girls he tried this on just love this sort of thing.  

The photo sent had a pose somewhat resembling Michelangelo's David but with a rather friendlier expression and an enormously larger member.

Here it is, but cropped:

I fear it might get me into trouble if I displayed the photograph of his tumescent member which I fear would only excite murderous envy in other men, or worse, homosexually arouse them.

I remember complimenting him on his "magnificent erection" and I quite understand how proud he was of it, but it is not politic to do such things, surely.

Even older experienced career male politicians, who really ought to know better, seem addicted to this sort of behaviour.

http://www.trendingcentral.com/london-deputy-mayor-uploads-dick-pics-to-facebook/

http://thedirty.com/2013/07/world-exclusive-anthony-weiner-nude-penis-images-new-york-dont-let-america-down-warning-graphic-images/

Anyway, I thought nothing of this until months later when I found myself disabled from commenting on the TBG Facebook page.  Despite quite extensive and persistent enquiries, I was never given an official reason in the form of "Your views on X was found to be objectionable and we do not wish to associate with you in any way at all."  

Then it dawned upon me that it was probably Harry Hopwood who has been vetting me all this time.   I have had a similar experience at a certain debating society.  At first, they liked me so much that they invited me to become a member, which I accepted because I thought it would be rude to refuse.  When I was blackballed, presumably after one of its members Googled me,  I was in effect told to stay away, which was hardly fair since I never put myself forward to become a member but was in fact invited to become one, and accepted out of politeness.  

I think I have been pretty good not to make anything of his embarrassing photos for all this time, but it irks me to find myself being excluded from meetings for really quite spurious reasons because of the actions of a sexually incontinent young man who subsequently came to see that his reckless behaviour had the potential to embarrass him and the politics he represents.  

Something rather similar happened before I was excluded from yet another right-wing group, and after I had thought I had so graciously and politely declined the advances of one of its committee members too!  Why can't these idiotic and sexually-incontinent men take no for an answer without turning nasty?

They remind me of women who make false and malicious rape allegations against men after having their offer of no-strings sex declined.

None of this would have happened if British men were not so laughably and pathetically sex-obsessed.  This also brings home the point that sexual politics is in fact inseparable from politics.  These days British men and women no longer know how to behave towards each other.  At least the Muslims and Jews whom they so heartily despise do not accuse each other of sexual impropriety with such tedious regularity.  

It is probably not a good idea to send naked photos of yourself to anyone other than your spouse, and even then it is still not advisable.  

This is yet one of those many many ways that British nationalists are always shooting themselves in the foot and then putting their bloody foot in their mouths, while Jews and Muslims snigger at their helplessness, sexual incontinence and suicidal ineptitude.  I am afraid things are now so bad that only a female and foreigner can sort them out now.  

I really am not the sort of woman who feels she has to be more persuasive to men by giving them sex in order to have her ideas accepted.  I am just making the point that the morals and courage of British men are now so low that they have rendered themselves contemptible to any reasonable observer with any sense of decorum, morality and common sense.  I can help them, but only if they do what I say.

All I ask is that they tell me which of my views are so beyond the pale that they render me not fit to attend their meetings when they are themselves already social pariahs.

If the reasons are racial, I would encourage them to say so.

I invite them to consider how much more useful it would be for them if I used my energy and talents to attack the liberal establishment, and I can only attack them more effectively if I have their support and endorsement.

My resentment is particularly directed at BDP Chairman Kevin Scott who also refuses to give me an official reason for my exclusion.  I am not for one moment demanding that they must let me join their party or group, I only ask that they give me a morally and intellectually defensible reason.

If they are honest and admit that their reasons for excluding me are in fact racial, then I promise them I really will shut up and go away.  I just want them to have the courage to say so.

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/EqualityAct/service_providers_association__club__society.pdf

What I think of Gregory Lauder Frost's speech about immigration being a threat to the British nation

It is not that I dispute that GLF has a right to say whatever he wants to say about uncontrolled immigration and what he would like to do about it ie implement repatriation.

There was a time when he was talking about forced repatriation, which led me to ask someone there if he was NF (who do explicitly propose forced repatriation), but I was assured that he was too posh to be NF who are overwhelmingly plebs.

What exasperates me is that these so-called patriots do not seem to know the difference between making a complaint and proposing a course of action.

In his entire speech he does not in any way address the question of what is to be done about it.  Did he say vote BNP?  Or UKIP?  Or even NF?  No, he glorifies the achievements of the white race, says how unfair it is that liberalism seems to have gotten the better of them, and, er, that's it.

The speech was well-received though, particularly from a woman who laughed obediently and raucously at every predictable joke he made.

So this is the shambles of the so-called Far Right, these old men who don't like what is happening and can only complain like the querulous ineffectual old men that they are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjxXUj52m24  is where you can find GLF speaking for nearly an hour without proposing a solution.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23627520 is where you can see how he is blinking like a frightened rabbit when being interrogated by Kirsty Wark about his views on immigration.

My purpose in blogging about this is not to mock the afflicted, but to make known that to TBG I am persona non grata.

While there are many who would point out that I should not be surprised that such an overtly racist group would wish to exclude me, I should point out that I have attended their meetings before and have therefore heard it all before when the TBG dining club (which is what it is really) was once called the Conservative Democrats and then the Baldwin Society when it was run by the late Mike Smith whom I am proud to have called a friend.  GLF and I were not on unfriendly terms and we, together with Andrew Moffat and Sam Swerling, attended Mike's funeral after he tragically committed suicide by throwing himself off Porchester Castle.  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/late-michael-keith-smith.html

It would have been all too easy to dismiss the fact that I was disabled from commenting on the TBG Facebook page or that the TBG Secretary Louis Wellcome was ignoring me for racial reasons.  It may surprise people to hear that out of all the parties I have joined it is people from the BNP who are the people I still see socially and who have become friends and that in my opinion UKIP people are nastier and more full of hate than BNP people.

I have of course tried to discover the official reason why I am now persona non grata, but GLF steadfastly refuses to tell me and pretends it is nothing to do with him by saying that it is not his department, even after persistent questioning with a gap of many months.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/the-fact-that-no-political-party-in_28.html gives the reasons why I think I am now persona non grata.

It is of course disgraceful that these men are too frightened to even tell me why I am persona non grata. Where is the English sense of fair play?  Why are they behaving like cowardly and frightened old women? You would have thought that these men would have the wherewithal to tell me why they want me to sling my hook as they tell me to sling my hook instead of pretending it is nothing to do with them.

Why do I care so much?  I care because I would have relished the opportunity of being one of the speakers at their conference on 19 October, to tell me what I think is the cause of British malaise.  http://www.traditionalbritain.org/content/traditional-britain-group-conference-2013

Only one of the speakers got anywhere near it, and it was the very handsome and Aryan Markus Willinger who has written this rather interesting book at http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/1907166416/ref=olp_pr_see_all_top?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 called Generation Identity.

On sexual matters:

"We reject unrestrained sexuality more than any other generation. This is because for no previous generation in history has true love played such a great role as it does for us. Of all the things that you're devalued and destroyed, you've left us love. Truly, you've never really cared about love. You've despised it and sold it short. But precisely for that reason. you've never launched a frontal assault against it. It remained alive. And it became to our last place of refuge. So here we are this world of loneliness and fleeting happiness; we long for the person who can bring us to safety. It is our highest goal and our greatest happiness to find true love. Yet we are sexually promiscuous, drink hard, and settle for the second best. No one suffers more from this than we ourselves. /.../ The consequences of your 'sexual liberation' have us in a stranglehold. It is impossible to go out even even a day into the world without being greeted by half-naked men and women. All films, advertising, and magazines consciously manipulate sexual desire. So it is that desire grows, often in opposition to our love. When it's over and the wild, alcohol-soaked night is behind us, we regret what we've done. Often we feel sad because of it. This inner struggle, which each of us must win for himself, is also part of our identity. Yet we declare resolutely: we want to win it! A long road may lie for us, but in the end, the love within us will triumph over animalistic desire. For we are generation identity." Generation Identity - Marcus Willinger

A few years ago I was actually shocked at the number of disabled nationalists and nationalists with disabled and illegitimate offspring who wanted my head on a platter for saying what I had said on the Victoria Derbyshire Show. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html  I had expected some sympathy for about how I would deal with my hypothetical severely disabled baby, but not a bit of it: they were as equally horrified as the typical liberal.

I would have thought that if you cared about your race you would care about the quality of your race and be rather keen on maintaining and improving the quality of your race. I would expect that you would be prepared to support marriage as a means of improving or at least maintaining the quality of your race and to be at least concerned about the increasing numbers of your race that now have some disability or other, but not a bit of it.

There is nothing noble about British nationalism at all, but then what did I expect anyway, when it is clear that those most attracted to nationalism are the indigenous who cannot compete with immigrants in the field of unskilled manual labour and who are either too thick to see the role of marriage in maintaining the quality of your race or too cowardly to say so because saying so would offend most of their friends and family who are mostly SSMs https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379, SSM-parented, MCSFs or SPOSSMs http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/all-spossms-are-mcsfs-but-not-all-mcsfs.html?

Most of these men are obviously unmarriageable and must necessarily rely on the charity of sluts because they know they cannot afford the services of a prostitute, let alone take a wife.

While the more plebeian British nationalist with not much education cannot be expected to display aristocratic virtues, I had rather expected GLF and his ilk to do so.  How wrong I was.

Is GLF an MCSF?  I think we should be told.

Why are the men at TBG terrified of discussing feminism?  Are they MCSFs and SPOSSMs to a man?   If so, then that explains everything about why British nationalism as it is currently being represented and run will never get anywhere since they are donkeys being led by donkeys.

Must they rely on foreigners to do everything for them?



I am very happy to include this response from Gregory:

I see on your page that you describe yourself as a satirist.

Could I point out, as you very clearly failed to pick it up from my speech, that I reiterated in it (and also on Newsnight and Radio 5 Live) that I was in favour of the Conservative Party's 1970 General Election Manifesto pledge which promised to halt immigration and encourage voluntary [State]-assisted repatriation, and I said it was needed more today than it ever was in 1970. So you see I did call for action and it was not the NF, the BNP etc I was citing, but the non-Conservative Party.

When I was on Newsnight the delightful BBC thrust the studio lights in my face (not visible to viewers because of the camera filters) and so yes it upset my eyesight. Is your comment meant to be serious political observation when you don't know the half of it?

I have not the faintest idea why you are not allowed on the TBG Wall. Ask Louis Welcomme, the TBG Chairman (not Secretary, as you said), who is the Fat Controller there. Not me. I have not the time to be involved there.

Lastly, I resent being called "old". What will I be in 20 years time? How "old" might you be?

It always interests me that people who claim to be on The Right delight in attacking those on the Right.

To which my response was:

I would be the first to acknowledge that I am no spring chicken.  We are none of us getting any younger, which is why we should get our skates on and do something more than carry on as if we have all the time in the world. 

This exchange continues in the comments which follow. 

Why does the Traditional Britain Group dislike me?

Why has TBG disabled me from commenting on their Facebook page?

Apart from going to a few of their dinners some years back, I have had very little to do with them since the suicide of Mike Smith and after I joined the BNP.

How well I remember my surprise when I heard Gregory Lauder Frost speaking at a dinner I attended saying that forced repatriation must be implemented.

Is he in the NF then, I remember asking someone rather naively.  I was told he was far too posh to be in the NF.

I stopped attending once I accepted the invitation to join the BNP, though I accepted that it was through this dining club (which is what it really is) that put me in touch with other nationalists that eventually led to my invitation to join the BNP.

Since then I have had very little to do with them.  I have no particular interest in attending dinners in which diners preached to the converted without taking political action, in any case.   They were just a toothless dining club, I had concluded, and far too posh to do anything that smacked of genuine and effective political activism.  Imagine my surprise when I found that I had been blocked from following them on Twitter.  I really had no idea that a bunch of crusty old codgers could or would tweet or had discovered me on Twitter to take offence at my tweets.

Why had I taken an interest in TBG after all this time?  Someone had mentioned to me that many of them were into SSPX and that made me prick up my ears.

I checked out their Facebook page and discovered that they are having an all-day conference on 20 October as stated at http://www.eventbrite.com/event/4034557470?ref=ebtnebtckt

I thought I might attend and  posted on their Facebook page I was thinking of doing so but understood they  have some sort of a problem with me as I have been blocked from following them on Twitter.  The next thing I  knew I found myself disabled from commenting altogether.


Tom Price my Facebook friend kindly asked them on my behalf why they were blocking me, and this was the response he received:

Not really sure. All the members of the TBG committee are co-administrators of the page and at least three are very active promoting and moderating it. It may be that someone found her comments beyond the pale. Our Wall is in the public domain and we have to be careful of our public image as our enemies are watching all the time. From time to time numerous comments are removed and if people persist then they are blocked.

I certainly posted nothing at all that could be considered "beyond the pale" and merely asked why they seemed to be having a problem with me when I have had so little to do with them in recent years.

Oh, well.  I have saved myself £30 since they do not want to sell me a ticket, though I would have liked to have met Theodore Dalrymple.