Controversial new group for nationalists and anyone concerned over immigration and Anders Breivik's terrorism deleted by Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/groups/442600132448329/permalink/442700125771663/

It is called the "What Else Was Anders Breivik Supposed To Have Done Instead?" Group.

Liberals!  Please tell us exactly what Breivik was supposed to have done instead!

I think I am doing what he could have done instead and hope that, in time, I will be show that the pen (or they keyboard!) is mightier than the sword or bomb.

What I am doing:

1. Explicitly questioning and challenging feminism
2. Urging all the Eurosceptic parties to question and challenge feminism.
3. Discovering that they are all too scared so now I have to do everything for these pathetic, infantilised, cowardly and hypocritical white men
4. Urging you to picket UKIP at their Birmingham Conference on 20-21 September. Suggested slogans for you to chant outside Birmingham Town Hall: "Claire Khaw, Claire Khaw, Claire Khaw!  For Marriage, For Race,  For Nation!"  We can do the Breivik salute too.  That will really really really piss them off.   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NB-vGZOc1xA

Kevin Forts describes Breivik's act as "heroic" because it demonstrates "nationalism and a moral conscience.  He is fighting Cultural Marxism and the Islamisisation of Norway.  He found the most rational way to accomplish that was through terrorist actions in Oslo and Uttoya."

He was asked how someone living in Massachusetts, USA, could support the killing of little children.   

Forts:  

"Because I believe he used it as an unprecedented attack and I don't believe it will occur again.  I believe that it was atrocious but necessary in that there is now a raised awareness of this as a result of the executions in Uttoya and Oslo."

The journalist asked him if he thought that the sacrifice of little children [But they were adolescents in a political party, not "little children"!] was necessary.   

Forts:  

"It was a sacrifice that is not necessary again.   Militant activity is not necessary as a result of this unprecedented act.   He said that he achieved and operation of extraordinary and unprecedented accomplishment so it is not necessary again, so now we can just look at his political platform rather than his atrocious actions. 

I believe that he is a nationalist and a patriot and not the terrorist Neo-Nazi that the media portray him to be.  

I believe that Breivik is a rational man who committed atrocious but necessary actions.   

Now, all you see is the shock, and all you see is the gore in Uttoya and Oslo, but you do not see the  political ramifications that it will come to in the future.  At that point it will become impossible to hate Breivik, and you will see that he was acting in a matter of a pre-emptive war."

A courageous and articulate young man.

Predictably, the Facebook group has been closed down just for daring to ask this unanswerable question.   But don't forget to keep asking it, folks, and remember, nationalists, that it is only I who can competently and courageously argue the case properly for you.

Are any of your nationalist parties touching the subject with a bargepole?  No, of course not.   I have to do it all while the white man cowers in the corner, and dares not ask the question the liberals cannot answer.  Their only answer they have to your question is "Shut up".

For some reason, however, neither UKIP nor the BNP will have me in their party, and I don't think it is because of race reasons.

If you want me to do all I can for you, then you have to pester the leadership to let me back in.

Either the BNP or UKIP will do, nationalists.   I'm not really fussy.  Once I am in, it will be my intention to merge both parties so it has a fighting chance of defeating the LibDems by the next election.

So email your party  now to demand why I am not a member of it.

mail@ukip.org if you are UKIP  demanding to know why I am not a member.

If you are BNP email all the addresses below for maximum impact.


membership@bnp.org.uk

northwest@bnp.org.uk
eastmidsro@bnp.org.uk
easterninfo@bnp.org.uk
ondon@bnp.org.uk
northeast@bnp.org.uk
scotland@bnp.org.uk
southwest@bnp.org.uk
ulster@bnp.org.uk
wales@bnp.org.uk
westmids@bnp.org.uk
yorkshire@bnp.org.uk

They already know who I am anyway.

You should come to Birmingham to meet me and lobby UKIP for more pro-family policies on 20-21 September.

See you outside Birmingham Town Hall!

My answer to the question "Claire, do you admire the Oslo killer?"

It would appear that Breivik felt that there was no other way as all the anti-immigration parties in Europe are marginalised, despised and ignored. It would appear that he felt it was necessary to do what he did in order to get the attention, not just of the Norwegians, but the entire Western world and all the European peoples.

Being a former member of two anti-immigration parties, I am well aware of how hopelessly ineffective they are.

By the time BNP and UKIP get their acts together, there will be even more immigrants, more single mothers, and more useless jobless welfare-dependent bastards with a crap state education that no one wants to hire.

It may well be that Breivic felt that there was a certain urgency in being both dramatic and unignorable that could not wait till the next election.

You see, if something is agreed to be necessary, then it follows that it is moral.

Necessary for what, you ask.

Necessary to stop Europe becoming a part of an Islamic empire after it is finished being part of the EU liberal feminist empire.


I am glad he had the moral discernment not to take it out on the Muslims but instead targeted the people who are members of the party that led them in and won't stop letting them in no matter how much the locals complain. If you are going to kill people, you might as well kill the people who are most to blame for your troubles, and Breivik thought this was the liberal political establishment who have been pooh-poohing the concerns of ordinary people for decades now. Indeed, anyone expressing concern to them is automatically labelled a bigot and a racist, until people are afraid to discuss the subject or unless they don't mind being called evil, extremist, Nazi, Fascist bigots.

This means that while people, especially politicians, are afraid to discuss this subject properly, the problem gets worse and more intractable until the people are presented with a fait accompli.


Breivic only wanted Norway to operate an immigration policy similar to the South Koreans and Japanese, apparently, which sounds pretty moderate to me, unless we are to call the Japanese and South Koreans 'extremist'. 


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/norway/8657473/Norway-killings-Breivik-posted-hate-filled-video-on-YouTube-hours-before-attacks.html

Brievik says he wants to see a Europe modelled on the nations of Japan and South Korea, which he says represent a system “not far from cultural conservatism and nationalism at its best”.

Breivic only wanted Norway to operate an immigration policy similar to the South Koreans and Japanese, apparently. Perhaps these days that is considered 'extremist' by our demented liberal political classes?

'Admire' is perhaps a dangerous word to use in view of the violence used and the numbers killed, but if Breivic has by his actions made the liberal governments of Europe re-examine their policy of tolerating if not actively encouraging uncontrolled immigration while suppressing any criticism of this policy, and if it was the only way to make the governments of Europe re-examine this policy of encouraging social unrest, then perhaps his ruthlessness was necessary.   If this was indeed necessary, then perhaps it could be said that it is admirable.  Perhaps, then, the intransigence and arrogance of the liberal establishment in refusing to discuss topic properly and of vilifying those who dare to complain about immigration as evil and racist should take some of the blame for the violence Breivic felt was necessary to use in order to achieve his aim of having a full and frank debate about immigration.  It may be that the hypocritical and cowardly liberal establishment will even now continue to refuse to debate this matter and continue to demonise and suppress those who complain about immigration, but with even more illiberal ruthlessness than before.  


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2084895,00.html#ixzz1T8KYj9PE

Around 2000, I realized that the democratic struggle against the Islamization of Europe, and European multiculturalism, was lost. It is simply not possible to compete with democratic regimes that import millions of voters. 40 years of dialogue with the cultural Marxists / multiculturalists had ended up as a disaster. It would now only take 50-70 years before we, Europeans, were the minority. So I decided to explore alternative forms of opposition. But the biggest problem then was that there were no options for me at all.  

"Anders Behring Breivik walked the walk you only talk"

http://www.occidentaldissent.com/2011/07/25/knights-templar-honesty-and-hypocrisy/

If only I had written this provocative piece.  Since someone else beat me to it, I can do no better than link it here.

Both the Left and the Right will be making political capital out of this. It will be a test of wits to see who does this better.

While only a fool or a terrorist would openly advocate violence, there is nothing to stop anyone from using this event to advance our respective causes. 

The Left will use it to say: 

"Breivic is a terrorist, a religious fanatic, an anti-feminist, and an Islamophobe, who was racist and evil, and therefore those who agree with any, some or all of his views are also religious fanatics, Islamophobes, racist, evil who should be monitored, suppressed and intimidated."

The Right will say: 

"This is what happens when you persecute, vilify and marginalise us so much that some of us will resort to terrorism because we know that the cards in our political system are stacked against us under the current system and we will never make our voice heard if we play by the rules of the Liberal Left."