Who is "Samuel Young MP" who claimed that the late Christina Annesley accused him of grooming her online?

Christina Annesley, the only person who ever made false accusations against me of grooming her online, has died at 23. wow.
— Samuel Young MP (@50degreesam) January 22, 2015

.@50degreesam While you're tweeting this bullshit, a mother's working out how to get her daughter's body home. Show some decorum, you wanker
— Will McHoebag (@WillMcHoebag) January 22, 2015

Me:   So what happened between you and Christina Annesley?

He:    Nothing exciting, I followed her on twitter a couple of years ago, once I complimented her on some article she'd written...
and she basically went ape shit and complained I was trying to get with her. At the time I just blocked and left it at that
But I didn't forget, and the selfish reaction to a bona fide compliment still hurt.

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christina-annesley/62/987/37b

http://ask.fm/chrstinadarling
I did ask her a few questions almost two years ago non-anonymously and you can find them if you scroll right back, if you care enough and can be bothered.

http://www.ybf.org.uk/2015/01/rip-christina-annesley/

Thailand backpacker death: Christina Annesley in mystery death on double Brit-murder island
Koh Tao = Triple Brit-murder island?

Thailand backpacker death: Christina Annesley in mystery death on double Brit ... - http://t.co/03Xq2a0CkF http://t.co/pnlL6epE5A
— Thailand Travel Tips (@thailand_tips) January 22, 2015

@thailand_tips What thoughts go through people's minds when they read of a British backpacker dying on a Thai beach resort? Sex and drugs.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) January 22, 2015

The hysterical reaction to my asking this question can be found at https://twitter.com/DavidSidney/status/558268512729595904

.@DailyMirror "As yet there has been no mention of the cause of death" is misleading. http://t.co/sUtUhCMCxf pic.twitter.com/JTXRWOLDY8
— Gareth Corfield (@GazTheJourno) January 22, 2015

@GazTheJourno @DailyMirror I don't see how her parents would know how she died until they get a death certificate.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) January 22, 2015

Liveblogging this & associating it w/ rape & murder based on pure speculation is so distasteful http://t.co/cp1bBrvJzo
— Nilam Atodaria (@NilamAtodaria) January 22, 2015

@ntfem can't you just let me grieve for my friend?
— Laura McEvoy (@le_mcevoy) January 22, 2015

@le_mcevoy You have the rest of your life to grieve for your friend. Speculating and gossiping is a sign of interest.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) January 22, 2015

@le_mcevoy If you died under similar circumstances I think you would prefer it if people speculated and gossiped than said nothing at all.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) January 22, 2015

@le_mcevoy Dead people are public property anyway, legally speaking and all the more so if you are a tweeter.
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) January 22, 2015

Leon Brittan and Christina Annesley died on the same day?
— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) January 22, 2015

https://www.facebook.com/toriesdoitbetter?fref=ts

Libertarian ‘free spirit’ found by resort staff after seeking treatment for chest infection

Christina Annesley tweeted: 'Am now lying on a sunbed with an alcopop and a bucketload of Tramadol, so feeling a bit better.'

Alcohol can cause a serious reaction when combined with these medications. Symptoms of this reaction can include: breathlessness headaches chest pain skin flushing increased, or irregular, heartbeat lightheadedness nausea and vomiting 

UKIP unlikely to propose repealing the Equality Act 2010 because "women have taken over UKIP"

http://www.staretheridge.co.uk/interview-on-new-style-radio-98-7fm/ The fact that this smug self-satisfied disabled woman is in a position of influence in UKIP talking about her disabilities and PTSD glorying in her victimhood means that UKIP is not about to propose to repeal the Equality Act 2010.  Nigel Farage has said on Woman's Hour that UKIP has been taken over by women, and most women would hate the idea of repealing the Equality Act which also contains the Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay Acts.

The Equality Act, as Star Etheridge knows perfectly well, also contains the Disability Discrimination Act.

All anti-discrimination legislation serve to burden British businesses with unnecessary costs.  Only big business has the necessary resources and personnel to comply with such intrusive and unnecessary legislation that only serves to make British businesses less able to compete internationally.

Repealing the Equality Act would cut off one of the legs of feminism, and, because it is really thought-crime legislation, it should also be repealed on libertarian grounds.  UKIP claim to be a libertarian party but apparently do not recognise thought-crime legislation when they see it.  Of all things that would be offensive to libertarians, you would have thought that thought-crime legislation of all things would be offensive to libertarians, but you would think wrong.  

Dan Hannan MEP to give him credit has said he would repeal the Equality Act 2010 in a crowded room last November during the launch of Conservatives for Liberty http://con4lib.com, so all hope is not lost, otherwise it will only be the BNP who will say in their manifesto that they would repeal it.  In fact, these days they can probably only bring themselves to say they will repeal just the Race Relations Act part of it.

Star Etheridge, UKIP Disabality Spokeswoman who would not want to repeal the Equality Act 2010.  It seems UKIP have been taken over by women like her.
http://www.staretheridge.co.uk/

UKIP too afraid of controversy to repeal the Equality Act, yet claims to be a party of libertarians

CK to Lynda Roughley  12:27  14/11/13
Hi Lynda.  Claire Khaw here.  Is Godfrey Bloom interested in raising his profile?  I have a few ideas.

Lynda Roughley to CK  12:34  14/11/13
Hi, where are you from?  I suspect he isn't though ideas are always useful of course.

CK to Lynda Roughley  12:48  14/11/13
I am not a member of a party but a Eurosceptic blogger.  My view is that Farage should be more adventurous in pushing the envelope of debate on domestic matters.  I think talking about setting up a UKIP debating society nationwide would create interest.

Lynda Roughley to CK  12:51 14/11/13
We already do really, they are the UKIP branches.  Meanwhile we concentrate more and more on domestic issues.

CK to Lynda Roughley 12:53  14/11/13
Are there any plans to repeal the Equality Act 2010, Lynda?

Lynda Roughley to CK  13:01  14/11/13
We can't repeal anything till we are in power.

CK to Lynda Roughley 13:05  14/11/13
You could say in your manifesto that you would repeal the Equality Act if UKIP come to power!  Are there any plans to do so, Lynda?



After my response to her idiotic answer, I heard nothing further.

CK to Godfrey Bloom  13:24  14/11/13
Would you happen to know what the UKIP leadership's view is on the repeal of the Equality Act 2010?

Godfrey Bloom to CK  15:56  14/11/13
To be brutally frank the UKIP policy is as follows:

1.      Leave the EU
2.      Strict immigration policy
3.      Bring back grammar schools
4.      Support fracking, bin wind turbines

All very good. There is nothing else, which is why I left in despair.


It was at this event http://www.dashtory.org/2013/10/cfl-event-review.html that the libertarian Dan Hannan MEP answered YES to my question: Would he repeal the Equality Act 2010?

It is of course this legislation that contains all the hallmarks of Orwellian thoughtcrime http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughtcrime, for what is discrimination but the active exercise of thought and what is hate but an emotion that can only be felt by thought?   And what is hate speech but the prohibition of the expression of certain emotions and thoughts?  

Thinking aloud about setting up a Nationalist Unity Party

1. Would Peter Rushton consider joining David Jones and Claire Khaw in a Nationalist Unity Party intended to unite Civic and Ethno-Nationalists?
2. If so, he should bear in mind that David are both are libertarian and anti-statist and our over-riding aims would be to lower taxes and repeal laws, and certainly the totalitarian Equality Act 2010.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_Act,_2010  
3. David and I are also anti-feminist and pro-family values and therefore in favour of the restoration of parental and male authority the lack of which has resulted in the sorry state the West now finds itself.
4. This Party is meant to be a Counter-Revolutionary Party to the Sex Revolution, which was what let in Feminism.  Feminism unapologetically promotes female promiscuity, and consequently degeneracy, widespread illegitimacy, which corrupts the characters of men by making them think and behave like women in a Culture of Excuses and Entitlement, and has provably accelerated the decline and fall of the West.   
5. Such a party would be run on the basis of a triumvirate.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumvirate   Nationalism after all needs to be give the impression that it is a broad church.
6. The idea is to have a workable combination of male and female, the young and the mature, town and country, white and non-white, that is pro-enterprise but that also cares about the condition of the poor and the establishment of a strong and flourishing meritocracy that is racially neutral.  

It is my considered view that Western malaise can be attributed to feminism and its toxic effects of destroying  the family through no-fault divorce and consequently male and parental authority.  All any foreign settlers in the West have to do in the West is to continue practising family values themselves while the West destroys itself and fritters away its inheritance on wine, women, gambling and song.   In short, it is her considered view that it is feminism rather than the presence of Jews and Muslims that is responsible for the West's moral, economic and intellectual decline.  

As G K Chesterton said, "When we cease to believe in God we will start believing in anything."   Liberalism, Feminism and the Glorification of Female Promiscuity are now the deities the White Man worships.   It is no surprise therefore that he is now sunk so low that they need a female and a foreigner to be the one to point out these brutal home truths that they are now too much in denial to acknowledge.

Denial is a particularly feminine trait, is it not?      

I really think that with me in the mix, such a nationalist unity party would get the publicity it needs to thrive and flourish.   I do not mean to be egotistical, but a female and a foreigner in a white nationalist party would have a certain novelty value that would make the liberal media ask questions, in spite of the NUJ commandment to NEVER report favourably on nationalists.   http://www.reportingthebnp.org/

There is no one in the country better placed than I to promote the nationalist cause,  Now, all I need is your support and your co-operation without which nothing much can happen.  Even if you HATE the idea, I urge you to discuss it with as many nationalists as you can.   

Peter Rushton now appears on RT.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JdZ45b6YL0 

'Mossad agrees Iran has no nuke bomb plot'

The laws I would repeal if I were in power

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

for starters.

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

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

The inexorable logic of a one-party state

This is so that Church of England clergy and members of the Police Force are not prevented from joining a political party of their choice.  

No member of the BNP may become a member of the NUJ.

If they are, under the current rules they would be sacked or have their union membership terminated.

Just because you are not taken out and shot in front of your family does not mean you have freedom of speech.  Social ostracisation, loss of business opportunities and loss of employment are very compelling reasons restraining you from expressing a political view, and all political views are controversial, by their very nature.  

Just remember that in Britain we have no free speech, no freedom of belief and no freedom of contract.  

Just remember that the The Freedom Association - supposedly a libertarian organisation - does not even notice THOUGHTCRIME when it comes up to them and smacks them in the face.   If they do notice they  dare not defend liberties that our ancestors would have taken for granted because they too have been cowed by the establishment.

Just as long as you know, Dear Reader.   

Fascist or Libertarian?

"There should only be as many laws that are consistent with a society that is both law-abiding and jealous of its liberties."

Claire Khaw uncovered by the Libertarian Alex Ellis Roswell

http://alexlibertarian.blogspot.com/2010/12/claire-khaw-uncovered.html

A bit amateurish and full of spelling mistakes, but never mind. 

The one about me being BNP "chief" and "director" by London Spin is much more gratifying http://www.londonspinonline.com/2010/12/bnp-chief-hits-back-at-tfa.html and I also appreciated the trouble Ben Woodhams took to lambast me at http://benwoodhams.wordpress.com/2010/06/12/claire_khaw/

Sunday Sermon: On Liberty

Previous generations enjoyed more freedom of speech, contract and association than we do.

This means our freedoms have in fact been eroded but most of us are too dumb to notice or too apathetic to care.

The strongest statement I can make as a libertarian is to join the BNP, in order to stand up for their right to say what they believe to be the truth - ie that they do not like immigration and utterly fail to see how it has benefited people like them - without being smeared as evil Nazi Fascist Racist extremists.
 
Only those who assert their rights deserve liberty. The views of the ones who wait to be allowed to speak come from an inferior source.

Most of our MPs and those in the political establishment do not deserve to be in government and should not be trusted to represent anyone, because they can be so easily cowed into apologising and resigning for speaking what they think is the truth when asked by someone who is a traitor to their cause to do so.  That traitor to their cause is, tragically and ironically, their own leader.

David Cameron does not mean Conservatism well.  He is like a cushion who bears the imprint of the person who last sat on him - in this case New Labour, who started two unprofitable and unwinnable wars in the name of the British people, who legalised "marriage" for same-sex couples, who are the enemy of selective traditional education and who are too frightened to criticise single mothers who are going forth and multiplying,  increasing the burden of the taxpayer while lowering standards of education and morality with every little bastard that is born in this country every minute of every day.  

These days around 50% of babies are born out of wedlock and 70% of the UK prison population were singly-parented. 

The constitution of the Conservative Party allows David Cameron to say that Conservatism is whatever he says Conservatism is.  If he says Conservatism is Socialism, then it is.  If he says the Big Society is smaller government, then it is, even if it is a lie. If he says he supports marriage while refusing to condemn single mummery because Theresa May has forbidden Tories to be nasty to them, then that policy cannot be questioned, derided or challenged. 

Tories have shit for brains and piss for guts, just like New Labour.  Destination Third World hellhole remains on course.

Where else can you expect our political establishment to lead us to if the supposed alpha male of the British nation - our Prime Minister David Cameron no less -  is too cowardly and hypocritical to even condemn the sluts, slags and slapper single mums who are a burden on the state and who are even now in the process of multiplying themselves?

As I said, the Tories are shit for brains piss for guts limp-dicks, all of them - even the ones who call themselves Libertarians.

We will never return to rationally small government while British  men are afraid of losing the votes of slut and slapper British women.

Classifying the political spectrum rationally

http://www.tfa.net/the_freedom_association/2010/09/rhys-jones-questions-the-new-political-spectrum.html


The most rational way to classify the political spectrum is to go from Libertarian to Statist. In other words, low tax and light regulation to high tax and heavy regulation.

Nothing else makes sense, because Left and Right are both capable of authoritarianism and totalitarianism.

If it is involves either more regulation or more taxes, it is called "statist".

If it is a proposal to repeal a law or regulation or would save the taxpayer money, then it would be called "libertarian".

I am suggesting that we go through all the policies of every political party, categorising every policy in this way, and then grade each party's policies according to their statist or libertarian tendencies.

It is a very simple process. Hardly rocket science.

Deng Xiaoping - the discreet Libertarian who was officially Communist

"Let the state do what the state must do for the good of the nation, and let the people do what they are able to do for themselves."

It was the late Deng Xiaoping who said that. Pretty libertarian for a communist, eh?

The sacking of Professor Nutt, Libertarian Eugenics and the National Interest

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewmcfbrown/100015335/will-the-sacking-of-professor-david-nutt-deter-other-scientists-from-advising-government/

Legalise all drugs.

Treat those who commit crimes while intoxicated and addicted more harshly than those who are not.

In short, intoxication and addiction in a criminal is treated as an aggravating factor attracting a higher penalty.

Three strikes and the death penalty kicks in.

The debate centres on the concept of harm. The truth is that not all of us have equally addictive personalities. Some of us can try any number of hard and drugs and still be OK.

And there are those who are addicted to over-eating. These people should just be allowed to eat until they go pop, and this includes their children too.

Since obesity is a feature of an affluent society with a history of welfarism where the poor, ignorant and unemployed can sit around watching daytime TV and eat themselves fat, a Libertarian minimum state would instantly solve the problem of underclass obesity by abolishing the welfare state.

This exemplifies one of the main planks of Libertarian Eugenics. It is better than the state sterilising and euthanasing people. You just let them destroy themselves.

Cigarettes and drink can cause more quantifiable long term harm to health than Ecstasy and cannabis, of course.

But what is harm? Societal harm or individual harm?

And how is it quantified?

Why would someone's ill health matter to society if there is no NHS?

Is the NHS beneficial to Britain's long-term future?

Civilisations and nations have risen and flourished without a free health service, so I rather think not.


http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=143
Vote: Should Professor Nutt have been sacked?


As Claire said at http://jdc325.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/shoot-the-messenger-when-evidence-and-policy-clash/#comment-4713 "... what Alan Johnson wants is not evidence-based policy but policy-based evidence."

Thoughtcrime, Hate Crime and Equality before the Law

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8316646.stm

Why has gay bashing risen by 20% in London, ie in the Tower Hamlets - a predominantly Muslim area? Is it because the Muslims (whose Koran informs them that homosexual acts are sinful) are beating up gays more than any other group?

Is it anything to do with the increasingly militancy of homosexuals and how they are perceived to be a sort of gay mafia taking over the country and given special privileges, and the "gayer than Labour" message the Tories are trying to give?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/10/nick-boles-tory-ppc-foisted-on-grantham.html

When two groups protected by PC legislation are in conflict with each other, who wins?

Hate Crime (ie assaulting or killing someone because you hate them) attracts a higher penalty than if you did not particularly hate them.

Why on earth would you attack or kill someone if you did not hate them?

So, attacking a homosexual, disabled person or someone on religious or racial grounds, would attract a higher penalty than if you attacked a member of the BNP, would it?

How does this square with the principle of equality before the law?

It's official then, is it, that here in the UK there is no equality before the law?

There is a very simple Libertarian solution to this: repeal all hate crime, which is but thoughtcrime. If you punish properly those who kill and attack others, then there would be no problem, would it?

It is just possible that our legislators have got their knickers in a twist and have had their knickers in a twist for a very long time.

How to save The Observer

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article6737876.ece

Why don't put all the best journalists in one amalgamated publication using The Guardian design but call it The Observing Guardian of The Times & Telegraph?

There would then be one national broadsheet but it would be a publication that prides itself on its diversity of views.

There would always be two leaders: one expressing the Libertarian View and the other the Puritanical View.

NB: Libertarians want lower taxes and fewer laws, and Puritans want to tax everything in sight provided they are not the ones paying for it, and want to ban everything they disapprove of.

I really think this could work!

Repealing laws would make Britain more Islamic and libertarian

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1197478/Sharia-law-UK--How-Islam-dispensing-justice-side-British-courts.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson


Perhaps lawyers reading this who know their Koran could propose legislation to be repealed only, to make Britain both more Islamic and also more libertarian.

It would actually please everybody, except those who want big government, high taxes and the continued funding by taxpayers of the unproductive.

Intelligent questions by lawyers especially welcome.

Racism and what it really means

Racism is our understandable wish to think we can judge a book by its cover. It is lazy thinking and the desire to embrace lazy generalisations.

"They/You are all the same" is a manifestation of this.

"You always do X (eg leave the toilet seat up)" is another.

"You are always being X (eg late)" is yet another.

It might be generally true but is not true all the time. A good example is the selecting of a spouse on the basis of his or her probable racial characteristics. On the other hand, they are not to be entirely discounted either.

We tread the thin line of a tightrope but would like a more secure and well-trodden path. For these reasons, we embrace broad generalisations and racial prejudice as a kind of comfort blanket, thinking that these rules will guide us in our assessment of the likely behaviour of a particular person or a group of people.

It amused me no end to see a cleaning agency proudly calling itself "Polish Cleaners" as if being Polish were a guarantee of quality, service and a keen price.

The point is that it is, as yet, NOT illegal to be racist, only to act on racially discriminatory reasons (which may be rational or irrational and have a happy or unhappy outcome).

Powell was dead against the Race Relations Act 1976 outlawing racial discrimination.

Being a Libertarian, I am dead against all anti-discrimination legislation, which are examples of totalitarian liberal legislation fulfilling all the conditions of "thoughtcrime".