The neurosis of the Western male politician and the migrant crisis

@stephenpollard I was saying the other day that we are a bit like Troy and ISIS a bit like the Greeks, but a citadel we ain't. Disturbing.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard We are being invaded, and all the EU can do is ask its member states how many invaders they will invite into their homes.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard The migrant crisis is the unintended consequence of UK foreign policy. UK citizens are also the victims of UK foreign policy

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Feeble response made against the migrant invasion rooted in the effeminacy of Western man, pandering only to female concerns

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Women are anxious to display feminine compassion unmindful of the consequences. Male politicians pander to them shamelessly.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Time to ask ourselves if indiscriminate universal suffrage is a good thing when so many voters are so heedless and venal?

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Western man: absurdly uxorious husband who worships his adulterous wife recklessly borrowing to please her spendthrift ways.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Even now Western governments will pretend to care about migrants when even saying they care will encourage them to come.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard While women are naturally cowardly/hypocritical, why must men pander to them by competing with them in cowardice/hypocrisy?

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Like a woman being deliberately ambiguous, Western politicians now so neurotic they r displaying these traits unthinkingly.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard News values are controlled by women. Even now the BBC reports migrant crisis in an emphatically compassionate way.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Like the working classes, women have the vice of being generous with other people's money, in order to appear compassionate.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard The more compassion is being urged on us, the more silent men become, afraid to upset their spoiled and entitled women.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Women now actually expect great sacrifices to be made by men in general just so that they can feel they are good liberals.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard I am a Eurosceptic, but Europhiles should bear in mind that the EU may well collapse under the weight of the migrant crisis.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard What is the point of joining a club/paying its high fees, when anyone from anywhere can just walk in and use its facilities?

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard All this talk about imbecile/extremists/lunatics trying to get into power when they have already been in power for decades.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard Do yourself, your readers and this country a favour: buy and read this book at http://t.co/CBRTEJ8CFn

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard How long have male MPs been too afraid of criticising the worst kind of women? Since Keith Joseph's Edgbaston speech 1974.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

@stephenpollard The Neurotic Western Male http://t.co/NnJME1NDQM Remember when David Cameron said he was terrified of Mumsnet/Woman's Hour?

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 2, 2015

Simon Sheppard on Neurotic Suspension

A much simpler, and thus better, example of ‘Bystander Apathy’ occurred at a Rotterdam boating lake on 21 August 1993 (the incident features in The Tyranny of Ambiguity; 1st ed. fn. p. 250, 2nd ed. p. 395). A Moroccan girl, Naima Quaghmiri, 9 years old, fell out of a boat in the middle of the shallow lake and noisily drowned. The other girl in the boat, a year or two older, tried to hold her above the water but failed, while approximately two hundred spectators watched. One of the crowd even made a video recording of it. As in the Kitty Genovese case, subsequent newspaper articles discussed whether witnesses should be legally obliged to act, or punished for failing to do so.

The essential mechanism operating here is Neurotic Suspension: being suspended or frozen in a state of neurotic confusion. (Neurosis is here defined in Pavlovian terms as the stress induced when a single stimulus evokes two or more distinct responses.) Neurotic Suspension appears to be particularly strong when collectively expressed, in common with much other crowd behaviour.

My review of Simon Sheppard's Sex and Power: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sex-Power-Manual-Male-Female-Relations/dp/190124024X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377715983&sr=8-1&keywords=simon+sheppard+sex+and+power

Simpering BBC female journalists who coo and simper at migrant swarms: @annaholligan @ManveenRana @BethanyBellBB @wburema #migrantcrisis

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 14, 2015

BBC sends only pro-migrant female journalists to report on migrant swarms

The pornocratic political hierarchy of Britain

Feminazis, Slut Single Mothers, Mumsnet, Women's Hour listeners etc make up the PORNOCRACY > Pussywhipped Prime Minister and pussywhipped MPs > Pussywhipped Archbishop of Canterbury whose Church is stuffed with Commie Pinko Homo Feminazis > social conservatives who are badly represented by moral cowards Nigel Farage and Nick Griffin whose pariah political parties will never ever win an election because they are stuffed with unmarriageable and unfanciable beta-omega males who are the victims of and afraid of Feminazis, Slut Single Mothers, Mumsnet, Women's Hour listeners etc who make up the PORNOCRACY

Only a Secular Koranist Movement can break this deadlock.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html

Justine Roberts gets cold feet about inviting Claire Khaw on Mumsnet web chat

Claire Khaw to be on Mumsnet webchat after Woman's Hour

My advice to Muslims in the West about how to become less hated: by not fearing to be hated even more

https://www.facebook.com/notes/yamin-zakaria/write-to-your-mp-and-others-regarding-the-potential-threat-from-the-far-right/238362692862747

Write to your MP and others regarding the potential threat from the far-right
by Yamin Zakaria (Notes) on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 at 18:17
Below is a copy of the letter that I sent to my local and European MPs, maybe you can alter it and send it to your local MPs (http://www.writetothem.com/)  and create a certain level of public opinion.

------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir/Madam

In light of recent events in Norway, and the subsequent revelations of Anders Breivik’s link with the far-right movement (EDL), we are naturally worried about a potential terrorist act in the United Kingdom.

We would urge the government to take pre-emptive measures under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and curtail the activities of movements like the EDL. This is an excellent opportunity to show that such legislation (PTA) was not construed to be applied selectively against Muslims in the UK. This will help to build bridges and marginalise the radicals on both sides.

The government should look for signs of radicalisation and its sources; hence, those who are particularly violent and vocal in the EDL should be detained in Belmarsh. It might be better to hand them over to the Americans who have acquired a certain level of expertise in interrogation (‘torture’); water-boarding may indeed prove to be useful in saving innocent British lives.

This would send a message that any terrorist or potential terrorist would be subjected to these sorts of preventative measures. In addition, it would be prudent to take measures against the conveyor belt of far-right terrorism by monitoring the voices of BNP, UKIP and other commentators who stoke hate towards the Muslim community. For example, Melanie Phillips is well-known for her venomous comments, and such hate will eventually translate into violence. Would nasty comments towards the black community be tolerated? Hence, why are the Muslims selectively subjected to this kind of treatment?

In this recent case in Norway as well as the Oklahoma bombings, the media initially speculated that the act was the work of the Muslims, tarring the entire community, creating suspicion and doubt. Therefore, the media should also be given clear directives how to deal with sensitive topics so that communities are not divided and ethnic minorities are not marginalised and subjected to verbal assault; the need for this has become self-evident in the light of the recent scandals (hack-gate).

 Yours sincerely

Yamin Zakaria (www.radicalviews.org) 

Below is my response to this Muslim proposal to put the Far Right under observation as stringent as Muslims are currently being subjected to.

Breivik was a loner concerned about immigration, knowing that it would irretrievably change Norway. He did it all himself after he decided that participating in the political process was futile. Writing to your MP or even monitoring the activities of the Far Right won't help either, since Breivik did it ALL BY HIMSELF as did the others who joined a political party, left it, and then went on to plan and commit acts of terrorism ALL BY THEMSELVES.

We are not even allowed to ask what else he could have done to make his point, are we?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/controversial-new-group-for.html

I created a Facebook group asking precisely that question and it was deleted. 

As for the parties you call Far Right, they cannot manage a piss-up in a brewery. Nick Griffin exists to make money out of the white working classes who dislike immigration and do not see why they cannot complain about it without being called evil racist Fascist Nazi extremists. 

If you were white working class and not very educated you might even be a member of the BNP because you wish to assert your right to complain about immigration. 

How would Muslims like their homelands to be full of immigrants while being forbidden to complain about them?

I have already come to the conclusion that the reason why Britain is full of immigrants is simply because if feminism resulting in white British women not having enough children who are brought up by their mothers or taught in their schools to become productive citizens and employees a sane employer might wish to hire. 

Instead of addressing the problems of education and widespread illegitimacy (which would mean

(1) dealing with the teaching unions and perhaps shooting them in front of their families, as Jeremy Clarkson once suggested
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/8930717/Jeremy-Clarksons-execute-strikers-joke-sparks-21000-complaints-to-BBC.html 

(2) criticising the Feminazis such as Dame Jenni Murray (possibly the most evil woman in Britain) as well as her sidekick Jane Garvey at http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007qlvb as well as Justine Roberts and Carrie Longton of Mumsnet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumsnet#History successive governments have in fact conspired to facilitate yet more immigration to appease their voters who are employers who need labour NOW. They cannot wait until after feminism is discredited, or when white British women decide to have enough children and bring them up properly, or when the education system is sorted out.  Michael Gove has been defeated on his proposals to raise standards of education, has he not?  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/michael-gove-forced-into-humiliating-uturn-over-ebacc-8484074.html

The government already know that five years - which is the length of a term in office - is not enough to sort that mess out. So they continue to sweep the dust under the carpet.

The white working classes hate Muslims because Muslims are visible and obviously different, while it is not immediately obvious that one of their own is a promiscuous woman and a mother of illegitimate variously-fathered feral children who go to sink schools and leave without qualifications making them unemployable and only fit for a life of crime and welfare dependency.

It is feminism which has created the need for immigrant labour, by lowering the standards of mothering and education in our Culture of Excuses and Entitlement.

It is easier for the white working classes to hate Muslims than to hate their own women -  however promiscuous - because most men who are not in a position to support a wife or are too mean to pay a prostitute will always welcome a cheap source of sex from any promiscuous female minded to give it to them cheap or free.  Men are only after one thing, after all!

The BNP are not prepared to criticise SSMs because most of their membership are the sons of SSMs. 

It would of course help if Muslims are prepared to criticise SSMs, but I have a feeling most Muslims do not want to be even more disliked than they are already. In this way, Muslims are slowly becoming like Jews, who want to prove that they are superior to every race because they are the only ones who follow the commandments of a moral and omnipotent God. Those who do not follow what their God commands will soon find themselves becoming weak and degenerate, in just the same way that a bright student who is not studious will inevitably fall behind to even an average student who is studious.  In the same way, Muslims will also eventually lose their traditions in an environment that is so clearly hostile to social conservatism ie the institutions of marriage and the family, that British Muslims too will be mocked for coming from the land that is Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland. 

While Muslims who now have the protection of their religion think gay marriage and being unmarried mothers will never happen to them, are they so sure it will not happen to their children and grandchildren? Most Muslims go to the same schools as the white non-Muslims  who are so gay, so promiscuous, so sexually liberated and welfare-dependent after all.

If Muslims want to be less disliked, they will have to demonstrate to the white working classes that it is their lack of religion and family values that makes them weaker than the newly-arrived Muslim immigrant. In short, they will have to warn the people whom they know hate and fear Muslims about the destructiveness of feminism to the institutions of marriage and the family.

However, I am sure no Muslim is prepared to do that. 

I am sure that the instinct of most Muslims is to say of the white non-Muslims whom they know  hate them: "Let them get weaker and more morally rotten, since they hate us so much. Nothing would please us more than to see them rot before our eyes in their stew of moral corruption of alcoholism, sexual liberation and gay marriage - all fueled by liberalism and feminism", while entirely forgetting their duty to enjoin good and forbid evil, as the Koran commands.  

It should be noted that Breivik has been identified as anti-feminist at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/27/breivik-anti-feminism  It is interesting that Muslims refuse to integrate into Western society because they don't want their children and grandchildren to end up as sexually liberated SSMs nor their sons gaily marrying each other nor ending up being divorced and homeless and having to return to live with their parents while deprived of access to their grandchildren by a spiteful ex-daughter-in-law.  The Far Right and Muslims face a common enemy: extremist feminism that desecrates the institutions of marriage and family.  It is the dead weight of feminism (which supports the right of women to be as promiscuous as men) that prevents frightened white men from criticising the worst of their women, who are promiscuous, parasitical and degenerate,even if they are in government and a member of the Cabinet.   The condition of the married white middle class liberal male politician is indeed pitiable and contemptible, for we now have politicians who are these days too afraid of discussing politics.   British Muslims may be forgiven, perhaps, for indulging in what the Germans would call  schadenfreude, and wishing to see the white man, who has bombed and invaded their countries and stolen their oil suffer just a little bit more.  However, what hurts the white man will eventually hurt them too, for they too live in the land of white people.    

I really do not think calling for more restrictions on the free speech of both Muslims and anyone who wishes to complain about immigration is going to help Muslims.  The white working classes need someone to hate for being overtaken and replaced by immigrants.  They need to hate someone whom their own government actually prefers to them.   After all, their own government cares so little about them that it refuses to even warn or advise them for their own good.   The political classes have so much contempt for the white working classes that they would rather throw money at them than tell them a few home truths or risk their careers by offending their slut and bastard voters whom no sane British employer would hire as an employee.

If Muslims want to improve things in Britain rather than merely have their revenge of the Far Right, they should point to the cause of Western malaise, instead of encouraging the government to impose more restrictions on all our freedoms - talk about going native!

Why should Muslims be afraid of offending the worst of women - the unmarried mothers of illegitimate offspring whose children are not a credit to them?  

They have gone native, or forgotten their Islamic duty to enjoin good and forbid evil, as the Koran commands.   Perhaps it is right that Muslims who neglect their duty to Allah do not prosper.  

Or they would go and like https://www.facebook.com/pages/Are-Spinster-Single-Mums-a-burden-on-the-state/417696111659379?fref=ts

Disabled People Against Claire Khaw

Disabled person in wheelchair giving the able-bodied the one-finger salute - used on Riven Vincent's Facebook profile.  Is she biting the hand that feeds her?

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_173403759383478

For some reason Phillip Blond - the theologian and think tanker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_Blond   @Phillip_Blond   http://twitter.com/#!/Phillip_Blond  - is a member of "Disabled People Against Claire Khaw", which I find rather bemusing.   I had no idea that he was suffering from a disability.

Claire Khaw is a Malaysian member of the BNP and a very dangerous woman, in 2009, when David Cameron lost his son, Ivan, Clair Blogged that it was a positive thing because keeping him alive was a waste of public money. She has a bizarre blog where she expresses her insane views, including "reintroduce slavery, make bastardy a disgrace, reintroduce public executions and reintroduce public floggings" ( see interview Here: http://alexlibertarian.blogspot.com/2010/12/claire-khaw-uncovered.html) . Claire has built up a reputation online, Counting politician and journalists among her ‘friends” on face book. She has received a lot of hostility on-line from the public, but it is her views on disability which are the focus of this group on the 5th of March, 2011, 5live interviewed withy Rivern Vincent the mother of a disabled child, Ms Khaw rang up and wanted to ask a question , she then proceeded to argue that the it was fundamentally wrong for the state to0 support Mrs Vincent’s daughter, because it was not economically viable. When challenge about this by everyone including the presente Victoria Derbyshire , Mrs Vincent, another parent, and the MP for Filton and Bradley Stoke, Jack Lopresti (Con), she defended her posistion and went on to state openly that if she gave birth to a disabled child she would reject it and instruct the midwife to ‘get rid of it’. Now I have challenged her about her views and found her response immoral and upsetting,. Some of her replies were as follows: “Art has utility because it gives pleasure. A severely disabled baby cannot possibly give me any pleasure, though it may be very useful to you if you use it for begging money from the government and your friends and family or getting sympathy from everyone you meet.” Or “No one has said they agree with me, but there are others who do agree with me if you read my wall on that day, though they are not in the BNP. Disabled people are really getting above themselves these days.” 

According to blogs and forums, Claire is being touted as the BNP’s candidate for 2012 London Mayoral Elections. This means she will be NO. 1 on the Top-up list for the GLA for the BNP. This woman needs to be challenge. I don’t care what your politics are who you vote for, this is not a political cause, it is about what ideas are acceptable in public lif., Iin calling for a united front against the evil bigotry of this ‘woman’ let’s challenge Claire rout her ‘views’ at every single opportunity . Invite everyone you know, because we will win.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/03/claire-khaw-on-victoria-derbyshire-show.html displays my reasoning in some detail, which I do not need to go into here.

It is tiresome to have to keep repeating that I have not advocated a policy of general extermination of the disabled by the government.

I do not believe that anyone has a right to demand that anyone else pick up the tab for their children, whether able-bodied or disabled.

Having been described as "a very dangerous woman" (as if I were really capable of breaking and entering your home and exterminating your severely disabled baby), I wish to reassure those who are easily frightened to please believe that I do not have the superhuman abilities sometimes attributed to me nor the athleticism of a cat burglar to break into your home to exterminate your disabled baby.

I am Libertarian, not Terminator.

"I don’t care what your politics are who you vote for, this is not a political cause, it is about what ideas are acceptable in public life."

This is of course an issue of CENSORSHIP, which is of course extremely political.   

I have blasphemed and now must be punished.  I have been repeatedly called a Nazi when infanticide is in fact common to many cultures and was around for a long time before Hitler had been heard of.

Predictably, it has been suggested that the BNP (who may or may not make me the 2012 London mayoral candidate) have members and policies that endorse what I have said.  Actually, many of them wished I had not said it because they have quite enough bad press already.  For the record I should make it clear that the BNP manifesto has no policy at all on the disabled as any search at http://communications.bnp.org.uk/ge2010manifesto.pdf would reveal.  This is probably because, like all parties, the BNP do not regard the disabled to constitute a significantly large section of the electorate to come under the BNP radar.

There are many mothers who use their disabled children as an instrument of attention- and sympathy-seeking that makes them somehow beyond criticism.   It is also a way of sorting out the pecking order amongst mothers who do not work.  The more a martyr you are to your children (disabled or not), the higher you are in the pecking order at your coffee mornings.

"You have a disabled child?  Well, I have two!"   

Their disabled children are used as weapon to bully Prime Ministers like Cameron (who used his late son Ivan to show the voting public that the NHS was safe with him).

This mania to have more disabled children and therefore be more worthy of sympathy and respect is just what Mumsnet culture consists of  ie demanding yet more handouts from the government who are so pathetically eager to pander to the female voter.

Riven Vincent is of course Queen of Mumsnet.   http://www.mumsnet.com/special-needs/riven-vincent-statement-on-respite-care

Witness how willingly our so-called alpha males - David Davis and David Cameron - humiliated themselves on Woman's Hour (which is the radio version of Mumsnet) when they suffered Martha Kearney to ask them what kind of underwear they wore.  http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=34195&sectioncode=1

Can you imagine a female politician being asked this question??

So this is how low we have sunk, that our politicians are too afraid of telling the most demanding clients of the welfare state and the most rapacious consumers of welfare - mothers of disabled children - that they too will have to suffer their fair share of the cuts.  

Pandering to the Mothers of the Disabled vote is pretty idiotic anyway, since they are so electorally insignificant.

What a shame the government will not do the obvious and rational thing and pander to the over-burdened taxpayer.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html

Male Western politicians assert their masculinity by starting wars

Which option do you feel more corresponds to Truth and Reality?

Option A

The Liberal West is Good and Great, not economically and morally bankrupt, not warmongers, not hypocrites, not cowards, pursuing a rational, beneficent yet self-interested foreign policy of supporting Israel and spreading liberty, democracy and good government all over the world.

Option B

The PC Liberal Extremist West is Evil and full of pygmy politicians who are morally and financially bankrupt.  They have taken to gambling on unprofitable foreign wars in the hope of distracting themselves from their troubles at home, too intractable for those without moral courage to solve.  Generations of white people have had stupidity and fecklessness bred into them through their welfare state that supports the unnatural ideology of feminism, which is the systematic cultivation of failure and the turning of men into women.   Western male politicians need to go around proving that they are men because the knowledge they have of themselves - that they are afraid of their female voters who are the worst of people because they are parasites, bad mothers, bad employees who promiscuous, stupid, feckless single mothers who are a burden on the state and/or the harridans you find on Mumsnet http://www.mumsnet.com/ - is too humiliating to acknowledge.   They feel compelled to use overwhelming force to bomb and invade other countries to take their minds off from the fact that they are all hopelessly and humiliatingly pussy-whipped by their dreadful women whom they fear with their effeminate cowardice.

Bombing Muslim countries, is just displacement activity to take their minds off the fact that they are afraid of their women. Bombing Libya is a COMPULSION, not a foreign policy objective. Western men feel they have to prove their masculinity because they know they are afraid of their women but too afraid to admit this, even to themselves.

Forgive them, for they know not what they do?

But now they do.  

http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/World_News_3/article_7666.shtml Louis Farrakhan tells it like it is. Superb oratory.   

Victimisation of Brian True-May bad for Race Relations

Brian True-May: forbidden to express his artistic opinion in Totalitarian "Liberal" Britain

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1366331/Midsomer-Murders-producer-Brian-True-May-suspended-TV-boss-victimised.html

If Brian True-May is sacked by Steve Morrison of All 3 Media and other ITV executives involved in deciding his fate, they will have damaged race relations much much more than if the National Front attempted to establish a branch of the Klu Klux Klan and held a meeting in Brixton Town Hall.

Just as long as they know this.

They should know that there many jokes circulating about introducing ethnic minority characters into Midsomers Murders and then having white people murder them.

I really do think the liberals have delighted us for quite long enough.  They are the ideology that conclusively demonstrates that universal suffrage was a bad idea, and that the flaw of representative democracy is that eventually the stupid people will take over, and you will have a Prime Minister afraid of Mumsnetters, who are bad mothers, bad employees, bad wives and mostly promiscuous women who are now single parents who have messed up their lives rattling their begging bowl aggressively and often at the British taxpayer.

The British Prime Minister is afraid of these social parasites because too many of them now have the vote. Not only are they stupid, they are actually capable of breeding more stupid people until the Britain Isles are overwhelmed by a tsunami of poo generated by their collective stupidity.

Mumsnet tweet on 16 March 2011

@MumsnetTowers

Mumsnet Towers

At downing street to celebrate international womens day. Dave C's greeting "Ah here's the terrifying Mumsnet".

That is why we cannot seem to get anything right, from economic policy to social policy, from education policy to foreign policy to following the simple dictates of common sense.

Sacking Brian True-May will bring on a dreadful curse on the politics and politicians of Britain.  It is the matter of utmost public and national interest, but Ed Miliband is silent (despite my Tweet to him about how to become more popular), so is Cunt Cameron and Smeggy Cleggy.

Shut up about Libya and tell us what you think about this most important matter that affects us all in this country, you LibLabCunts!


Sent to information@all3media.com on Thu, 17 March, 2011 8:53:30:

Title: Victimisation of Brian True-May bad for Race Relations

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2011/03/victimisation-of-brian-true-may-bad-for.html

Claire Khaw

BNP Member

PS    To be passed on to all the ITV executives who will be deciding his fate.  

DO NOT IGNORE.

Fremantle Media Director of Marketing Mary Beer seems interested in me

http://www.fremantlemedia.com/Home.aspx

I wonder if it is anything to do with my suggestion I made to Peter Bazalgette for an X FACTOR or BIG BROTHER for philosophers or people who may wish to claim they are wiser than others.  

I think Alan de Botton and Mark Vernon and I would have great fun being Big Brother Housemates.  Other candidates for housemates:

1. Jane Garvey
2. Nick Griffin
3. Nigel Farage
4. Dan Hannan
5. Katharine Birbalsingh
6. Ed Miliband
7. Philip Blond
8. Anjem Choudary
9. Sally Bercow
10. Rabbi Zvi Solomans
11. Dame Edna Everidge
12. Katie Hopkins
13. Peter Mandelson
14. Justine Roberts of Mumsnet
15. Justine Thornton
16. Joan Bakewell

Bound to be a hit, don't you think, Dear Reader?

At least we will know that such a show will be an oik-free zone, however objectionable their views are. 

Unequal Opportunities, BBC2, 20 September 2010, Why UK Education is so crap

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2010/sep/19/john-humphrys-schools-social-class

Typical class war crap the liberal (AKA Commie - let's not mince our words) establishment is blaming the parlous state of British education on. 

http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=371509533894&share_id=103363703060245&comments=1#s103363703060245

Rich kids have access to good schools, private tuition, music lessons and books at home. Poor kids get started with a liberal dose of "progressive" education, one-parent families and are sent to the nearest sink school with other loser kids and loser teachers.

Unofficial Quality Guide to Schools: The fewer male teachers there are the more crap the school is going to be. We all know how disgracefully female-dominated the teaching profession is, and how they conspire to big up the achievements of girls while denigrating and marginalising boys. (Male teachers are probably in daily terror of being accused of sexual harassment or paedophilia by malicious female teachers who take a dislike to them because they dare to disagree with them over anything.) 

With no male role models in either primary or secondary schools for these singly mothered children it is no wonder they go off the rails.

Singly mothered children and single mothers are of course sacred cows that cannot be questioned and criticised, in our totalitarian feminist state.

I bet John Humphrys will not be committing the lese majeste of suggesting that feminism and the female-dominated teaching profession is responsible for the depths of the disgrace that is British education, which is run with the apparent purpose of making the British male even more useless than he already is.

 20 September 2010 at 08:04

Selective education is the answer of course, and the return of grammar schools, but, apparently, these days, if you ask for such a thing you belong to the lunatic fringe or the "Far Right" - both UKIP and the BNP are the only parties you may have heard of offering grammar schools in their manifestos.

Mixed ability teaching compels everyone to go at the pace of the slowest.

This rather explains why no British employer would hire a British school-leaver if they have the option of hiring a non-British employee untainted by a British state education.

Where is the sense of breeding a class of educationally inadequate youngsters and then refusing to do anything about it when the folly of doing so is pointed out?

I wonder if the Far Wrong have any explanations for this insane state of affairs.

20 September 2010  at 08:33

Academy and free schools - not subject to the Freedom of Information Act, are a big fat con, a distraction and another fine example of tinkering around at the edges.

The reason why the Tories won't tackle education properly is because they already know that:

1. 5 years is not long enough to sort the mess that is British education out.

2. they would get all the flak but none of the kudos

3. it would all be reversed at the next election

4. there is no one left in this country to give children a decent education and we would have to hire teachers from Singapore, Zimbabwe etc where they still teach properly and hire armed guards to guarantee their safety

That is why, really, that I conclude that a one-party state is really the only way forward to arrest the apparently irreversible decline facing this country before the British are reduced to resorting to piracy and prostitution as a national occupation.

If John Humphrys does not mention

1. the sheer numbers of singly-mothered children with behavioural problems spoiling it for others,

2. the ideological constraints the liberal teaching profession against anything to do with imposing discipline,

3. the skill at which the female-dominated teaching profession covers up the failure of its policies using opaque and subjective grading criteria resulting in the dilution of academic standards,

because of the predictable ideological constraints of the BBC against questioning feminism leading to female promiscuity leading to single motherhood, then we will know, won't we?

20 September 2010 at 08:44 

Did anyone see UNEQUAL OPPORTUNITIES last night?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00txmtm/Unequal_Opportunities_with_John_Humphrys/

If so, did they notice how it just regurgitated all the problems without proposing a solution, apart from... the one about abolishing all private schools, an idea mooted by a comp-educated schoolgirl in Kirby?

John Humphrys said nothing about

- the quality of teacher training
- the inability to teach the 3 Rs
- the mirage of choice
- the female-dominated teaching profession that is so harmful to boys

If you could only shop at Harrods and could afford to do so every day, would you choose to shop at Morrison's???

A complete and utter waste of time and one-hour.

Yes, abolishing all private schools *is* the only way forward. But wouldn't that require a revolution, though?

So why can't we have school-leavers with just a handful of O levels getting a job at the local newspaper, the way John Humphrys did?

Because they are taught useless rubbish for too many years, and no one in the liberal establishment has the wit or courage to point this out, because that would offend

1. the feminists
2. the female-dominated teaching establishment who so cleverly disguise the failure of their policies with opaque and incomprehensible grading criteria
3. the single mothers who send their unsocialised children to schools to spoil it for others
4. the working mums who want it all and consequently have no time to teach their children any manners
5. the single mothers who bring up their children fatherlessly, and who turn their sons into emasculated men or allow them to become feral youth
6. the single mothers whose daughters notice the queue of unsuitable lovers outside their mother's bedroom and think "what's good enough for my mum is good enough for me", perpetuating a vicious cycle. 

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/education/901058-Education-and-social-mobility I suppose it is pretty obvious why he does not want want to offend the Mumsnetters, who represent the matriarchy that all men must consult and genuflect to.  Mumsnet represents a goodly proportion of single and working mothers who are, because they happen to be middle class, are in effect beyond criticism, however fatuous the views they express.

If you want to know what's wrong with parenthood, children and women in Britain, look no further than Mumsnet! 

We are such "special" people, aren't we, Mumsnet and Nick Clegg?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11287193

0810
Ofsted says nearly half a million children in England, labelled with special needs have been wrongly diagnosed. Jo Shuter, headteacher at Quintin Kynaston School, a secondary school in North London and John Bangs, former assistant general secretary of the NUT discuss the reasons for the high numbers.

0856
At least on-in-five five school children in England are now classed as having special educational needs (SEN), according to Ofsted. Brian Lamb, who chaired an inquiry last year into whether parents had confidence in the SEN system, gives his reaction to the claims.. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8996000/8996159.stm


Special Needs Children should go to special schools. "Special" is a term of insult, now, is it not? A bit like "spastic". It is of course a middle class racket to give their children access to the character-deformining process of whingeing for more money and "special" pleading. Notice how that head teacher refused repeatedly to answer John Humphreys when he repeatedly asked her if she gets more government funding if she has a specially large number of specially educationally needy children. What happens in effect is that these middle class specially educationally needy children get butlers to follow them around and minister to their special needs at the expense of the merely average, who are more likely to be useful citizens of the future.  This teacher and middle class parent racket of Special Needs children disadvantages the average child whose needs are not regarded as special enough to require butlers.     

Give them more money, get more of the specially needy, ie educationally inadequate. Is that what we really want?  


Being the "special" people that the British are, we probably do.  

http://www.educationlawyers.co.uk/ demonstrates what a fucking racket it all is.  

"Reward the inadequate!  Punish the productive!"  this is the rallying liberal cry. 


Well, I guess there is no reason why parasites in turn can't have their own parasites too.  When all the parasites in this country are busily feeding off each other in a unbreakable food chain of parasites who breed and eat other parasites, then this country will finally disappear up its own arsehole.  

Said a perceptive observer:

"For the percentage Ofsted considers are wrongly classified as "special educational requirements" I suspect this could be a money-saving wheeze."

But of course!  The conspiracy between the middle class parents with difficult and thick children and the useless job creating arm in the educational establishment has now been revealed!
 
http://www.mumsnet.com/onlinechats/nick-clegg

Why is Nick Clegg sucking up to these disgraceful representatives of working  British motherhood of the Mumsnet Matriarchy? (The reason is of course that these harridans are now in charge and Cleggeron have to suck up to them real good.)  The most indiscriminately compassionate is the affluent but divorced middle class mum with her educationally-needy "special" child.

Below is an exchange between one of the whingeing mothers asking for more handouts with the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg:  

  MadameDefarge: Apologies if this has already been covered, but have you any policies with regard to the shocking state of SEN provision in schools? Millions must be spent on various agencies, none of whom will talk to each other, heads who run out of SEN budgets, and children who are utterly ignored and failed every single day, even with full statements. Because all SEN school provision devolves onto one teacher who has probably had an afternoon's training, SENCOs who are completely untrained and just general unjoinedupness of the current system. What we do need are named advocates for individual children who take ownership of that child's needs and coordinates all involved parties, and that advocate should ot be school based.


NickClegg:The underachievement of many children with SEN is truly shameful. Our plans to introduce a £2.5bn Pupil Premium would give a massive funding boost to many children with Special Educational Needs, meaning that schools would have more money to provide specialist and one-to-one support. But we realise that when it comes to supporting children with SEN, money isn't everything. We would improve teacher training so the workforce becomes better at detecting SEN and providing appropriate support.

Why have butlers for the weird, thick and behaviorally-challenged children of the professional middle classes with access to lawyers when they could just be sent to "special" schools, out of sight, out of mind and out of trouble?

Too thick to govern is the Cleggeron!  

The Islamic Prohibition Against Usury Good for Britain?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/jul/17/malaysia-gold-dinar-thwart-capitalism



This would prevent bubbles and busts while making the world slow down. The fact that you cannot lend on interest means that you would only lend someone money for a joint enterprise that you believed in.

As for people who want to borrow money they don't have to buy things they don't need, they would be stopped dead in their tracks, and a good thing too.

Capitalism - the creation of desire for the sake of stimulating sales - is inherently wasteful.

What is wasteful is of course environmentally-unfriendly.

Because the state would be small under an Islamic economic system - top rate of income tax would be 20% - there will no culture of bail-outism.

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

No one will actually starve, because the rest of it would be made up through charitable giving to the needy and vulnerable. 

The culture of bail-outism comes of course from the welfare state, which artificially supports feminism. And we all know what women are like in their whingeing for more state handouts and more nannying legislation to bail them out when they have messed up their lives.


I therefore propose that this country:

1. Re-base the currency after the success of The Islamic Revolution of British Nationalism.

2. Draw a line under the disastrous decimal past by returning to Pounds Shillings and Pence.

3. Governments and individuals would be compelled into practising fiscal responsibility by the prohibition against usury, which is designed to prevent irresponsible lending and borrowing by government and individuals.

Sorted!

23 Reasons for repealing the Sex Discrimination Act 1975

because women

1. have too much power
2. are always asking for more state handouts
3. want to mother everything, no matter how useless and costly, because it feeds their sense of self-important and purpose
4. are the people who are stopping the rest of us from getting lower taxes and lighter regulation, because our male politicians take orders from these people who make up the membership of MUMSNET and listeners of WOMAN'S HOUR. (Notice how they are always whingeing,  asking for more state handouts, and more nannying health and safety legislation.  Can you imagine a man asking for smoking to be banned?)
5. who are single mothers are parasitical on the taxpayer when they have no husband to provide for them
6. are in thrall to feminism - an evil unnatural ideology that requires you to pretend that both sexes are capable of doing the same work with equal competence and effectiveness, when they are  clearly not
7. are mostly more irrational than men
8. are more censorious than men
9. are less likely to forgive than men because they are the weaker sex and their feelings are more easily hurt, ie they are more vindictive
10. and their feminine vices have started to infect men.  (Remember when David Milliband said he was "offended" by  the behaviour of Iran when he was Foreign Secretary?  Why does he imagine for a moment that the Iranians or anyone cares about his feelings?  He was talking like a girl and thinking like one too.)
11. are the ones who want more nannying health and safety regulations
12. are the ones who want to be bailed out when they have messed up their lives because they got knocked up by some low-life loser they didn't say no to
13. are not very good at using contraception or deliberately get pregnant to trap the man or the taxpayer into paying for her and her child or children
14. are interfering
15. should do what they are best at and leave the thinking to men or rational women who want greater liberty, fewer laws and lower taxes
16. are the reds on (rather than under) your bed
17. are naturally parastical, as well as cowardly and hypocritical
18. exercising matriarchal degeneracy will lead to terminal matriarchal dementia
19. matriarchal dementia leads to civilisational extinction
20. are only too good at exercising power without responsibility
21. are corrupted by the power they do not deserve to have
22. have emasculated men and forced them to ape the manners and morals of those who have conquered them
23. with too much power are bad for themselves, men, children and the next generation

If you are BNP, you will realise that women are less likely to vote BNP than men, because they think voting BNP detracts from their identity of being compassionate and womanly.  Often, they forbid their husbands from joining the party and can make life very difficult for him.   They tend to reject men who can't compete against foreigners, thinking them low-status, low-income and not worth bothering with.  BNP activists know they have to out themselves very carefully with certain women or risk being rejected in love or at the very least, as sex partners. 

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/

Below are my two contributions to Cleggy's excellent idea.

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/direct-democracy-under-a-narrower-taxpayer-only-franchise/idea-view



No representation without taxation


Only taxpayers who pay a minimum of tax, say £1,000 per annum, will be entitled to vote. 

This would stop most women from voting. 

Women are, as we know, potentially parasitical because they

1.  want to mother everything
2.  find mothering an expression of their nature and identity
3.  know that the more they mother and the more dependent their charges are, the more important they are perceived to be  (You therefore get quite a few mothers "boasting" of their disabled and autistic child and therefore their martyrdom.)
4.  are sentimental, masochistic, hypocritical, irrational, emotional, and often in the dishonourable position of wishing to wound but being afraid to strike, eg single mothers, criminals etc.  They are the most vociferous proponents of bail-outism.
5.  are the ones who are always whingeing for more state handouts.  (If you don't believe me, visit Mumsnet and see them asking for more state assistance because they have messed up their lives through being unmarried mothers, divorced mothers or are messing up their children by becoming bad mothers and messing up their employers by being bad employees suing for sex discrimination at the drop of a hat.)

Notice how our male politicians abase themselves before Mumsnet  and Woman's Hour chasing the female vote.  Imagine if a female politician were asked what kind of knickers she wears  or what her favourite biscuit was, and then mocked because she didn't have an answer ready.  She would soon tell her questioners where to go. 

Having a taxpayer-only only franchise would therefore exclude most women, which would be a good thing because they are always the ones asking for more nannying legislation and state handouts. 

Even if these women were given a sum representing the minimum of tax required to entitle a citizen to become a voter by their husbands, it is a given that most of them would buy something nice to wear with it rather than spend it on exercising their democractic right. 

A society under this government would find most women in wedlock doing only one job: of being a housewife and mother, rather than being a working mum.  This does not imply coercion but choice.  Women are not completely stupid and would vote with their feet to have one occupation rather than two if they did not need the money enough to go out to work. 

Government by Referenda in a One Party State
This need not mean totalitarian government if the party constitution properly protects the rights of freee speech, party position and income of individual members against the leader and his cronies. 

It should be quite clear by now that MPs in fact have no free speech in this country.  Powell, Mercer, Duncan and Grayling were all expelled and demoted by their leader for saying something that incurred the wrath or displeasure of the leader. 

Under this proposed system all who have an interest in politics - whatever their view - have only one party to join.  This means that changing one's mind on totemic policies does not mean career-disaster as one merely cultivates a different set of people within the party with whom one shares common objectives. 

I therefore propose that all differences be settled INTRA party rather than INTER party. 
This would mean that the whips will be retired and all votes by MPs would be free votes, entitling them to vote according to their convictions and principles rather than the behest of their party whip. 

All MPs would have a residential connection with the constituency they represent, and the practice of the national party parachuting in someone disliked by local party would be ended. 

This would actually mean more accountable government doing what the voters want and greater job security for MPs.

Elections would be conducted annually, rather like an AGM where shareholders vote to appoint or reappoint directors, approve accounts, vote for or against resolutions etc. 

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=107

has a draft party constitution losely based on the constitution of the Chinese Communist Party. 

Proportionately More Votes for Proportionately More Taxes

This idea mirrors the power of a shareholder.  It would then become a privilege and an honour to pay tax.  There would be a Register of Voters with the top taxpayer of the year being accorded the title of Taxpayer of the Year with accompanying honours and publicity, if this is what he wishes.

Individual voters would be able to get in touch with each other  to organise campaigns through this Register of Voters, which would be online, rather like http://www.1party4all.co.uk

My idea is important because it would

1. enable a return to rational, smaller government thus safeguarding our liberties and our property
2. give MPs greater job security
3. enable MPs to make decisions that reflect the wishes of the people they represent rather than their party leaders, allowing them to become more popular, respected and better paid
4. rid Britain's politicians of the scourge of the female vote - the cause of matriarchal degeneracy and matriarchal dementia that we are now suffering because women now have too much power. 

Remember, bad motherhood causes the deterioration of the next generation and the degeneration of the nation! 

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world!

Unfortunately, 46% of the hands that rocks the cradle is a promiscuous never-married mother who couldn't find herself a husband or is too short-sighted and foolish to think she does. 

It should also be noted that 70% of our prison population were singly parented. 

It is about time the government discouraged the poor and stupid in the breeding the next generation of feral youth, CHAVs, NEETs and benefit scum mums.  It is after all its role to encourage the prudent taxpayer to marry and have children who will be future taxpayers, in the long-term national interest. 

It is now time for the government to re-examine the role of the women and motherhood if Britain does not want to sink into barbarism and irreversible decline. 
There really is not much time left.   When the percentage of babies born out of wedlock reach 50%, the British would be locked into a vicious cycle of irreversible decline and descent into barbarism. 




http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/repeal-the-sex-discrimination-act-1975-1/idea-view

It basically urges the government to disenfranchise most women - especially the parasitical female - by requiring citizens to pay a minimum of tax before they can vote.


It recommends that the UK dump representative democracy in favour of one-party direct democracy under a narrower taxpayer-only franchise where voters get proportionately more votes if they pay proportionately more tax. 

This has benefits for the government and the governed.  MPs would get better job security and the governed would be better and more rationally governed and given the lower taxes and fewer laws that they actually want.

Why the UK Middle Classes are Fucked

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article1719509.ece

The white working classes have their worst vices of short-termism encouraged, but the white middle classes are fucked too, as a class, but they are too liberal and stupid to admit it.  The middle classes are being fucked by high taxes, and the inability to afford access to a decent education for their children.  Any political party worth its salt would aim their policies shamelessly at the lower middle classes, and offer selective education. Unfortunately, these are the policies of UKIP and BNP and are therefore labelled by the liberal establishment as "extreme".

Toby Young, who thinks Gove's academy schools are going to save people like him, has seen the mirage and is busily pursuing it.  It is a big fat con, I said, and you are being fucked by the cunts of convictionless Conservatism.  And so he has blocked me on Facebook. 

Whisper "racist" and "extremist" into the ears of any member of the spineless middle classes and watch them all run for cover. 

A degenerate matriarchal administration with their eunuch slaves too afraid of condemning unmarried mothers, working mothers and bad employees is running and ruining Western civilisation, ruled by Mumsnet "values", but you won't hear much of that in the liberal media, or even the publications that supposedly support  Conservative values. They too are the eunuchs slaves of the liberal establishment, you see, of Free Love and FemiNazism.

Feminism and National Suicide

All societies who embrace feminism are at the mercy of societies who do not.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7100770.ece

Can you imagine the quality of the offspring these women will have? These older mothers will have their Down's syndrome children and expect the taxpayer to give them a hand-outs and make schools cater to their Special Educational Needs at the expense of your normal child. Their daughters will become the single mothers of tomorrow. They won't be able to control or provide for their fatherless sons who will turn into the NEETs and feral youth of the future.

Remember, you are paying for this CRAP so these dim husbandless feminist women who can't find men to live off live off the earnings of the taxpayer so they and their ilk can breed at your expense and bring down your civilisation at your expense, so they can have a pet to keep themselves happy.

Don't think they don't have any power either. When you see our degenerate and degraded politicians grovelling to them on http://www.mumsnet.com you will know they wield tremendous power since they represent half the electorate - yes, the feckless, irresponsible, and promiscuous and multiplying out of control half of it who want to be bailed out from their own folly at your expense ...

The solution is to indirectly discriminate against women under a political system of taxpayer-only franchise, ie no representation without taxation.

Most women want to be mothers.

Mothers want someone to provide and protect for them and their children.

Take away their child benefit and they will be forced to find husbands before becoming mothers.

Even if they got their husbands to give them the minimum amount of voluntary tax they could pay in order to vote under my proposed system of £1000 per annum, they would mostly want to spend the money on something nice to wear.

Remember, a matriarchy is a society that condones female promiscuity just as a patriarchy condones male promiscuity.

Why do we never hear of matriarchies? Because they all descend into barbarism and savagery (as we are now doing) after destroying themselves, having forgotten how to read or write.

F*ck feminism and choose the lesser evil.