Tuesday, 23 May 2017

THIS IS NO TIPPING-POINT. WE ARE ALL MODERATE MUSLIMS NOW


If the bomber was British,
then this picture shows British values




I thought it would be football. The national religion, Association Football has come a long way, and an attack on a Premier League Stadium would garner dream publicity for the ISIS PR machine, a whole office of which is occupied by Western non-Muslims. But it turns out to be pop music. I imagine security is tighter at Old Trafford and Maine Road. I hadn’t heard of Ariana Grande – I’m 56, for Christ’s sake – but I don’t imagine she is worth as much as the combined City and United squads. You have to look after the talent, including shielding them from the more intrusive members of the press. Although it seems the publication they may have to fear most is not some squalid red-top. It might be the Koran.

One of the most depressing aspects of this latest chapter in what Sadiq Khan might call the everyday life of a big city is the media and political cycle immediately afterwards. Hashtags. Vigils. Vigils with candles. Vigils without candles. Rainbow avatars. Instructions to stand together, pray for Manchester, and carry on as normal. Outrage at Katie Hopkins’s and Tommy Robinson’s Tweets. Return fire as some journo or small-time politico jokes about the attack, or otherwise makes light of it. Blame Islam! Don’t blame Islam! You’re an idiot! No, you’re an idiot!

There are only two important questions, as I see it, following every major attack such as this one. Firstly, was the perpetrator an immigrant? Secondly, is this the tipping-point?

The Islam question is almost becoming secondary. Islam is surely woven into all of this carnage, and the politicians who tell you that this has nothing to do with Islam are simply trying to humiliate you by telling you something both you and they know to be untrue.

The next phase of return fire tends to be the question as to why this latest casino is not being condemned by the Muslim community. Given the fanaticism of some Muslim communities, it may not be quite as simple to denounce your co-religionists as those of us without religion find it to condemn our fellows.

Warnings against Islamophobia will follow as surely as summer follows spring. There will be a few incidents, some real, some hoaxes, which will exercise and agitate the myriad Muslim groups as well as their fellow-travellers in the SJW industry.

Then the media reviewing will begin, and the same stale list of clichés will once again parade like leprous catwalk models. An attack on British values will be claimed, without the claimant considering that very young girls in doubtless sexualized clothing paying a fortune to see a shallow pop star is not the greatest advertisement for British values. Bland, anodyne pleas for community cohesion will go up like the bleating of spring lambs. The blame will be laid at various non-Muslim doorsteps. Trump’s wars. The far-Right. Not enough Muslim actors on TV – I did not invent that last one. Everyone will be blamed but the vicious anarcho-tyrannists who are using Islam and Muslims to further their authoritarian aims.

And the end result is that they now run our lives using their shock-troops to enforce power randomly, without coherent pattern or form. I’ve been at the scene of a major bomb-blast, one of the most infamous in British history. It is terrifying. It is terroristic. After this latest, there will be more security, you will be less free. There will be some police persecution of people who merely write their opinions online. They will be less free. Increasingly, parents will spare themselves a night of stress by not allowing their children to attend these events. They will be less free. Perhaps once the mighty pop music industry begins to take a hit, you might see some progress, but it will be progress insofar as it will be more intimidating-looking policemen carrying out more body searches is progress. The police won’t dare to touch young black men to check if they have a knife, but they will look through your little daughter’s make-up bag at a pop concert. And never forget that pop stars like immigration, or say they do.

The excellent Diana West makes a point of the high standard you would expect from such a writer. She says that we in the West are effectively all now moderate Muslims. There is much in this. Think of how Islam impacts on your life, if you live in the UK. If you live in a city, you will see and hear mosques. Increasingly, Muslim men pray in the street. In Sweden, girls are not leaving home unaccompanied, in Germany none would dare attend an event alone, in Paris there are no-go zones for women. This is all shariah-compliancy. And you are co-erced into respecting all of this, and under no circumstances are you to criticise it. You are moderate Muslims. You might not go to mosque, but your children increasingly are.

Sadiq Khan is a very devious Muslim who may well one day be Prime Minister. He has said that Londoners ‘will see more police officers on the streets’ today. Paradoxically, where this should comfort, it simply causes more distress. As we wait to discover whether the latest suicide bomber was ‘known to the authorities’ those same authorities swarm our streets uselessly, like extras in some science-fiction movie.

Trump has already been attacked by the Liberal-Left for referring to the terrorists as ‘evil losers’. I would criticise his choice of phrase also, but for different reasons. In what sense are the terrorists ‘losing’? I haven’t seen Theresa May’s response, but it isn’t really necessary, is it? A scrabble of vacuous nonsense with a lightly-secreted warning against tarnishing her beloved Brand Islam.

As for any notional tipping-point, what might it look like? Ordinary people don’t have many options bar violence, and the Islam-friendly police ‘services’ will be primed for that. A war on the streets between Muslims and kufr? Again, the police will only be allowed to protect one side.

No, after the dust settles it really will be business as usual. There will be Muslims who despise the actions of this latest martyr because things are already going so well. The media will still be in their ivory towers, beaming out at the peasants. The Left will be planning their next march for free Queer Studies degrees. The election will come and go, and the political class will be the victors.

And a few families will have an empty place at table, if they were ever in the habit of such a quaint ritual as the evening meal.

Sunday, 21 May 2017

MUMMY, WHAT IS THIS MUSEUM PIECE? FREE SPEECH, DARLING.


He's going to fall off that in a minute.
So are you.


Tell it like it is.
Aaron Neville


Much as I hate to blow my own trumpet, I recall my late father telling me that, if you have a trumpet to blow, you may as well do so because no one else is going to blow it for you. For several years, and spread over various weblogs, I have been predicting that the elites would come for the internet. Not literally, of course. It has at least three functions that serve our masters and, increasingly, mistresses, if that is not too gender-specific for you.

Firstly, of course, it allows them to communicate, both to themselves – although they could easily produce a meta-net, and almost certainly have, although not one Hillary Clinton could master – and to help disseminate the nonsense that passes for media news. Also, it assists in keeping the plebs happy with pictures of film stars, sportsball players’ slut girlfriends, and foods that make you thinner.

Secondly, it allows the masses to amuse themselves shopping for things they don’t need. The economies of the West are sclerotic, and it is far easier to shop when you don’t have to face the inconvenience – and occasionally the danger – of going to the mall or shopping centre in person. The internet keeps money changing hands, the lifeblood of any economy.

Thirdly and most recently, it allows new crimes to be invented. This serves the dual purpose of preventing genuine investigative thought, and making it possible to improve the crime figures. Look how many people we have arrested! More crimes solved than ever! It is, of course, easier to kick down the door of a keyboard jockey’s mum’s house than it is to deal with rude boys with knives.

The greatest trick ever played by the elites was convincing intelligent people that acting against their own self-interest was somehow virtuous. Once this looking-glass rule has been applied, the little people are expected to applaud endless immigration, Islam, big government, ‘equality’, transgenderism, and a host of other ruses and ploys and impediments to civilization as though they were good and useful things. And not only is this welcoming applause sought by the elites, it is expected and on its way to becoming mandatory. Eventually, the gauleiters of the West will doubtless wish to see daily footage of ordinary people applauding them manically and grinning psychotically, in the manner of the cattle that pass for people in North Korea. And, even more than this compulsory approval of toxic ideas, any dissent will be severely punished.

The United Nations has long been a vacuous talking shop which increasingly exists solely to criticise and demonise the white races. Now, however, it is chiming with the censorious zeitgeist and becoming involved in the greatest non-military battle of the 21st century; the battle for free speech.

Now that no day of the week seems to remain untouched by being designated the International Day of Something or Other, so recently we had the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Now, we know to a certainty – for the Left have been good enough to tell us – that only white people can be racially discriminatory because it is they who hold power. Incidentally, in countries such as South Africa, where blacks demonstrably wield a terrible and murderous form of power, are whites exempt from being racist?

Blacks are, of course, phenomenally racist, and Muslims are xenophobic to an almost comedic degree. But that is not important to the UN. What is important is that whites keep their mouths shut. Let us peruse a key section of the web page devoted to this day of days;

‘Racial and ethnic profiling is defined as “a reliance by law enforcement, security and border control personnel on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin as a basis for subjecting persons to detailed searches, identity checks and investigations, or for determining whether an individual is engaged in criminal activity,” according to a recent report to the Human Rights Council by the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.’ (Italics added).

Thus, recently in London, so-called ‘stop and search’ procedures have been all but abandoned by the Metropolitan police. Predictably, there has been an orgy of knife murders. But at least the UN ‘Special Rapporteur’ can look on approvingly.

As with all these tawdry declarations, there is a nicely vague area for increasingly authoritarian Western governments to exploit. Above, it is the open-ended phrase ‘related intolerance’. What could it possibly mean? I believe the UK’s Prime Minister, Theresa May, could be able to enlighten us.

‘“We will consider what new criminal offences might need to be created, and what new aggravated offences might need to be established, to defeat the extremists,” the (Tory) manifesto reads.’

We all know what this means. It means we will give Muslims their usual pass, with a few exceptions to create the Pepper’s Ghost of impartiality, and go after whites who indulge in what a German politician recently termed ‘wrong opinion.’

It is coming. Witness the Scotch man who is facing a year in prison for making a rather strange video in which he teaches his pug dog to be a Nazi. Look at Timothy Burton, a member of the political party Liberty GB. He called a Muslim, Fayiz Mughal, a ‘mendacious grievance-mongering Taqiyya-artist in chief’. Mughal is a big cog in the spurious set of liars known as Tell Mama. They lie on a consistent basis about anti-Muslim ‘hate crimes’. For what I think is a brilliant linguistic construction, Burton faces a few weeks in the big house. Kevin Crehan, as we know, died in prison halfway through his sentence of one year for putting bacon on a mosque door. No reason for death has ever been given.

The Investigatory Powers Act can already track your browsing history. It won’t really be used to see if Achmed has looked at bomb-making sites though. It will be used to see if Dave from Burnley has read The Daily Stormer. The BBC now possesses the power to inform your employer if you post wrongthink. Tweets are investigated on a daily basis, while the Rotherham child rapists are being set free from jail. This is all getting very real, and very quickly.

At what point will the little people push back?


Friday, 19 May 2017

TOMMY ROBINSON, LAB RAT OF THE BRITISH POLICE STATE


Was that the truth you just spoke, sir?



Soon we will be needing our jails for political prisoners.

Anthony Burgess, A Clockwork Orange



Here is the news. In the United States, a bear has been observed defecating in a wooded area north of Oregon. In Vatican City in Italy, the Pope has given an interview in which he professes to be of the Catholic faith. And in the United Kingdom, Tommy Robinson has been arrested.

I have written about Tommy – real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – many times before. I have also mentioned myself being mysteriously fired from a job a few weeks after receiving a phone call from the man himself. This time, he has been arrested for the alleged crime of ‘attempted journalism’. If that is actually an imprisonable offence, most of the British media should be in the clink.

This is beyond pathetic. It’s now dangerous. It is not creeping Islamism that should concern us here, but the rise of the British police state. Robinson has been harassed for years now by the shariah-compliant police in the UK, and they will not stop until he is dead. Lacking convenient access to the gallows, the judicial system will simply incarcerate him in a Muslim-dominated prison – as most UK prisons are, unless they are run by blacks – until a Mohammedan does the job for them. He told me he expects to die in prison. He is a truly brave man. All the while he is trying to expose Muslim rape gangs, the police are trying equally hard to entice mentally ill ‘transgender’ people to join their ranks. This is a disgusting world, mired in the excrement of cowardice and appeasement.

In a coincidental piece of timing, the BBC is airing a drama concerning something Tommy’s EDL – you know, the fascists – were instrumental in exposing. The scandal of the Muslim grooming gangs has been expertly detailed in Peter McLoughlin’s book Easy Meat. If you wish to read it, my review of the book is here.

The BBC drama, however, makes no mention of the fact that the paedophile rapists were, in almost each and every case, Muslims. Judge Gerald Clifford, who sentenced the men portrayed in the upcoming drama, stated in his summing-up that the paedophile rapists had treated the girls they abused ‘as though they were worthless and beyond respect’. He added that ‘One of the factors leading to that was the fact that they were not part of your community or religion.’ (Italics added).

However, the BBC have other ideas. The writer of the series, Nicole Taylor, stated that ‘there was no religious basis for this’. Apparently, we now have to have our opinions de judice delivered by BBC scribblers rather than the judiciary, if the opinions of the latter are not to the taste of Guardian readers. She also claimed that she ‘didn’t want to give (the English Defence League) an opportunity’. That would be the same English Defence League who, under the leadership of Tommy Robinson, were instrumental in exposing the Muslim rape gangs in the first place. McLoughlin is detailed and level-headed on this in his book and he has never been sued or prosecuted for one word he published. Did Nicole Taylor read it? Probably not.

The BBC has long disgusted me. This is simply a new twist on an old manoeuvre. They make the series, and it looks as though they are facing up to some tough, meat-hook realities. But they are not. The rapists were Muslims, but the problem will be presented as one of male sexual aggression and patriarchy. These paedophiles were Muslims. But the BBC says that the religion of the men was irrelevant, a mere coincidental aside, petty marginalia. Let’s examine the possibility that they are right.

Recall, if you will, the scandals that ran through the Catholic church in relation to paedophilia. Of course, the BBC at the time mentioned the fact that the priests responsible for the abuse were Catholic at every possible opportunity. Religion was, for them, clearly a factor in this sordid tale. What does this imply? Presumably, that there is some sort of genetic or cultural predisposition among Catholics to want to interfere sexually with young boys. But what does being a Catholic priest guarantee you? A greatly enhanced level of immunity from investigation. So, perhaps it is not the case that Catholic priests have a disposition to abuse children because they are Catholic, but that they sought out their position as Catholic priests because they wanted to abuse children, and were cunning enough to realise that the priesthood would protect their sordid hungers.

So, with our Muslim paedophiles, is it a genetic, cultural or ideological predisposition that motivates the rape gangs? Or have they simply chosen to act out their disgusting desires because they have realised that Britain at present makes them untouchable? Yes and no. A cursory reading of the Koran, and a smattering of imams’ comments on these matters will tell you all you need to know about Muslim attitudes to kufr girls. You may now add this to the Muslim realisation that they will not be bothered by the police, as the police are too busy investigating Katie Hopkins’s latest Tweet. Muslims can get away with what they do because the police won’t fucking touch them.

They’ll touch Tommy Robinson, though. This time, for the ‘crime’ of recording some Muslim paedophiles outside a court room, they arrested him at 4.30 in the morning. When the police pay a visit to our Mohammedan cousins, they do so at a respectable hour, never during Ramadan, never using police dogs – dogs are unclean in Islam – and they have even removed their shoes to raid mosques. So, where are we?

I’ll tell you where. If you watch the video of Tommy’s banned speech at a York University freedom of speech event, towards the end you will see an obnoxious little prick dressed as a policeman. He and his cronies are in the process of throwing Robinson out of a Cambridge pub where he had been watching football on the TV with his wife and young family. Pay special attention to this little bastard. His sneering, bullying body-language speaks of naked authoritarianism. He makes Tommy’s little girls cry. He is aware that he cannot be stopped.

If he was dealing with young blacks or, even more so, Muslims, the tone would have been one of deference and apology. What this all adds up to is that, if you are a white dissident in the UK, you are in real fucking trouble. The modern copper wants to be an authoritarian bully-boy, or bully-girl, or bully-transgender or queer or Dragon-person or whatever. They can’t do that with blacks, or women, or gays, or Muslims. So, straight white boy, they are going to do it to you. You are going to get the fucking lot.

They don’t believe in what they are doing, the police. But they are going to do it anyway. They disgust me. They disgust me because they took the chocolate bar, they willfully ignored their duty to serve and protect the people in favour of bullying the people who represent the least threat to society. And, of course, they are now being sent after those who tell the truth.

I don’t think it will be long now.

Tuesday, 16 May 2017

MADNESS OR METHOD? YOU DECIDE!

The angry foreigner,
looking neither angry nor foreign



Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t…

Shakespeare, Hamlet



I am but mad north-north west.

When the wind is southerly,

I know a hawk from a handsaw.

Ibid.



There is a dissident Right. It exists. It is, as the young people say, a thing. Partly Alt. Right, partly Alt. Lite, partly old-school nationalism, partly old-fashioned Conservatism, it exists primarily because it knows who its common enemy is. It may well be doomed, because it exists largely online, and the elites and their foot-soldiers will be marching up the stairs to take that away from you very, very soon. Virtual space is very much like St. Augustine’s description of where memories reside. A place which is as yet no place. We must use it well, and while we can.

When it comes to this dissident Right, you are either in or you are out. As far as I am concerned, if you are politically engaged and you are not of this movement, as loose as it is, then you are my enemy and you need to keep away from me. The Left are the enemy now. Former goat-herders from the Hindu Kush, or Syrian tailors, or Iraqi guys who scrub the rust off petrol cans are never going to be my enemy because I don’t fucking know any. The people I will fight – and I will, by any means necessary – are the north London, Manhattan, Berlin, Gothenburg, Parisian Liberal-Left who want to destroy the white male west just because they are annoyed, petulant, and keenly aware of their inferiority. They are like a legion of Yoko Onos without their Lennon. They can’t sing, but they want a job in the band. And I have met them and I have seen their faces and I have heard what they have to say. And they are the enemy.

But my people, if such they are, are guilty too, and the mistake seems to me so blindingly obvious that I wonder if I too may have made a mistaken allegiance. I will give you an example.

I have recently taken to watching videos by a Swede who goes by the handle of The Angry Foreigner. You can find him easily enough. I rarely link. If you are already reading this, you are probably not lazy. Except for the police officer who is reading this, who almost certainly is. At least, intellectually lazy. But with a nice pension pot to look forward to as a reward for lying.

The Angry Foreigner is a Swede. He emigrated to Sweden as a young boy from Bosnia, to escape the seemingly endless internecine warfare in that area of the world. He is erudite, sarcastic and funny. He highlights, with impeccable journalistic context and sources, the toxic and deleterious effect that Muslim immigration has had on Sweden. However, and this is very much my point, he keeps describing the importation of an antagonistic alien race as ‘crazy’, ‘mad’, and ‘insane’, and various other terms describing the mentally unhinged.

If you believe that the modern phalanx of governments across the Western world are importing Islam because they are acting from a misguided sense of humanitarianism, and that they cannot see the potential threat to their own cultures and nation-states, and that this represents a level of mental imbalance and not cold cunning, you are a part of the problem and nowhere close to being a part of the solution.

Get this straight in your heads. If you are white, indigenous Europeans, your governments despise you. They wish two things upon you, such is their dissatisfaction with your very existence and success. Firstly, they wish to goad and humiliate you. Ideally, for them, white individuals will lose patience and begin openly to criticize immigration, and even to take to the streets, thus allowing the police to do something other than diversity training and transgender recruitment programs, and persecute you. See the case of Tommy Robinson, below and passim.

Secondly, and as a more long-term program, they wish to replace you. The rate at which Muslims have been shunted into countries whose infrastructure is already creaking and groaning will have several effects. Wealthier European whites will leave, taking their money and potential taxes with them. The infrastructural creaking will get louder. Secondly, the demographics of countries will change, first at a micro-level, but increasingly at a macro-level. Parts of European countries are already Islamised, and this will continue. Thirdly, and as an essential component of anarcho-tyranny, small-scale civil skirmishes will be allowed to take place. These low-level, localized conflicts will gradually link arms. Again, this will allow the police to realise their dream of acting like Brownshirts or the Stern Gang, as well as further allowing governments to accuse whites of racism.

The possibility that this well-co-ordinated regime of malevolent social engineering is just some manifestation of the law of unintended consequences attendant on bureaucratic dumpkopfs is just not feasible. Governments, and the sinister gauleiters of the EU, know to a nicety where their immigration policies are leading.

In addition, George Soros’s ground troops – aka NGOs – are ably assisting the nihilistic influx of immigrants who neither wish to or are able to integrate into what remains of Western society. And Soros may be a brutal and malevolent man, but he and his people are far from stupid.

The Angry Foreigner is erudite and intelligent. He has something of the stand-up comedian about him, and is certainly more naturally amusing then Marcus Brigstocke and the rest of the Leftist sock-puppets who pass for comedians in the UK. His English is impeccable, as is the English of most young Swedes. It is far more competent than the English you will hear spoken in most parts of London.

What I don’t understand is his insistence that immigration policy in Sweden is somehow the result of incompetence. As I have written many times, this is not incompetence. This is what a certain type of competence looks like.

And, whitey, it is not a competence that wishes you well. Soon it will be time either to pack up or put up. You will either be required to have bigger balls, or you will lose them entirely.

Saturday, 13 May 2017

SELF-IDENTIFICATION or, MUMMY’S DRESSING-UP BOX


The chicks with dicks issue



Who Can I Be Now?

Title of a David Bowie boxed set



Dude looks like a lady.

Aerosmith





I like to laugh. It is a legacy from my late father. He was a very funny man who loved to laugh and loved to make others laugh. It is one of the very few things I miss about London, my small coterie of friends with whom I could sit in a pub and roar with laughter. Here, it is mostly Americans who, like Germans, mistake a sense of humour for laughing loudly at their own attempted jokes.

So it is that I find myself grazing on the parched arable of Twitter on the lookout for humorous exchanges and, wherever possible, trying to provide a smile for others. I managed this feat with the following Tweet;

‘Ladies night tonight at the club. I’m swapping gender for free drinks. Tomorrow, I’ll just swap back. Result!’

I know. I missed my calling as a stand-up comic. It stirred up a pleasurable amount of mirth among my Twitter chums, but afterwards a deeper relevance seemed to want to pull on my coat about something…

It is difficult to know just where to begin with transgenderism and its various offshoots, sprouting as they are like mushrooms in a dewy dawn. So, let us look at some antecedents. We are told by the Left - and we will be guided Virgil-like by them here - that race is a social construct. Thus, Rachel Dolazel and Shaun King, two white people with white parents, can elect to be black and we must accept that they are.

So, it’s basically swapsies. This ability to trade in one identity for another, of course, has as its precedent the ability of individuals to convert to another religion from their previous set of beliefs. This at least has the merit of being feasible in the real world, the one we live in despite being told we do not. The highest profile type of conversion, in the West, is from Christianity to Islam.

Now, I have often thought of reciting the shahada, one of the five Islamic pillars of faith, and the stating of which converts the speaker into one of the Islamic faith. Should I ever have to tangle with the UK police, it would be better to have them treat me as a Muslim. This is a simple truth that simply cannot be denied. The UK police are as petrified of having to deal with Muslims as they are of having to deal with young black men. It is a potential career-finisher.

But wait. Surely if I recite the shahada and also self-identify as black, it’s a double-whammy! Plod wouldn’t touch you with a shitty stick! And hang on a sec, a black Muslim woman would be as untouchable as the love-child of a Hindu dalit and Elliot Ness! That, as football commentators say, is the hat-trick!

Why not? If men can now compete with women on the sporting field, if men can now use women’s toilets because they claim to be one themselves, if whites can be blacks and blacks can be Chinese and Aborigines can become Ashkenazi Jews, why can’t I become Fatima M’Bumbo al-coholic?

This is the rabbit hole down which the Left are forcing the West, and the wonderland into which it leads is surely symptomatic of the irreversible decline of that West. There is a poignant moment in the iconic film Withnail & I in which drug-dealer Danny describes the end of the 1960s – as Woodstock was eclipsed by Altamont – as follows; “They’re selling hippy wigs in Woolworth’s.” Funny and sad at the same time, we have gone one better in 2017.

A British police force is issuing new headgear to their officers and PCSOs (Police Community Support Officers). A nod towards terrorism and rocketing knife crime, perhaps? Let’s ask a spokesperson for Northamptonshire Police Force;

‘Not only will the new bump caps offer a better level of protection, the new headgear means that no longer will male and female officers be issued different headgear with varying safety ratings simply on the basis of gender.

Engagement has also shown that having to choose gender-based headgear is a barrier to the non-binary transgender community joining the police force.’

You can imagine the secret thoughts of the writer of that last sentence as being something along the lines of; Fuck right off out of it. I imagine a lot of people in authority - coppers, politicians, journalists, employers, teachers - are having to guard their secret thoughts about transgenderism in order to protect their livelihoods. And they have the new Left to thank for that.

If everything is a social construct, as the academic Leftist screwheads claim (but don’t believe), then anyone can be anything. There is no theoretical limit point to what you can become. Added to this, particularly for the young, there is the bonus that it brings you attention and may even – gasp! – get you into the Valhalla of reality television.

An interesting flashpoint will come when politicians are forced to recite the transgender version of the shahada, and state that they fully support the belief that women can become men and men women. This is not going to fly with the Muslim voting bloc, no mater how much taqiyya the likes of Sadiq Khan throw into the mix. Muslims understand when other Muslims lie to the kufr. It is for the cause. But when non-Muslims start defending transsexuals, expect sparks to fly.

Of course, it gives celebrities something to bleat about in their self-righteous hot-tub of virtue. Talentless punk Emma Watson is already whining about gender-neutral roles. And, because she is famous for playing someone in the film rendition of a crap series of children’s novels, the Liberal media echo chamber will sit up and pant at her driveling outpourings. Where will it all end? Because it will end.

A mad world, my masters. Or mistresses, whichever you self-identify as.

Wednesday, 10 May 2017

WE ARE ALL FASCISTS NOW: WHERE WORDS GO TO DIE

So Sioux me



Do the Mussolini.
Dance the Mussolini.


Deutsche-Amerikanische Freundschaft, Der Mussolini



God knows I’m good.

David Bowie





As is well known to anyone who tangles with the progressive, Millennial Left, the word ‘fascist’ tends to pop out of their mouths in the manner of one of those 1970s dolls whose string you pulled to activate a word or phrase. So it was on Twitter after Le Pen’s defeat in the French presidential election.

One gentleman named Ian Dunt (@IanDunt), whose name could well be Cockney rhyming slang, was of the opinion that it was an excellent morning on Monday because of the thought of ‘all those fascists crying into their breakfasts’. I asked him why Le Pen supporters were ‘fascists’ and, while he did not reply, another virtual SJW known as ‘Frenchie’ (@Frenchie2585) was kind enough to provide illumination in the darkness;

‘MLP is a fascist, anyone voting for her is voting for a fascist, therefore supporting fascism, hence risking being called fascist themselves.’

I think that what strikes one first is the assured tone, as though the writer were using an Aristotelean syllogism with all the confidence and precision of the seasoned logician. Indeed, I replied;

‘That is one of the most amazing Tweets ever. Algebraically, it reads A=A. A=B. B=C. Therefore A=C. No value is given for A, B or C.’

Orwell famously observed that the word ‘fascism’ had become ‘almost entirely meaningless’, and went on to comment on its usage using the dry humour endemic to his work and very much under-appreciated;

‘I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Ghandi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley’s broadcasts, youth hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.’

Women. Got to laugh at that one. You got that right, George. But by now we are familiar with the debased coinage of the word, as though a literal coin has been used so often and sat and jingled in so many pockets that all its distinguishing marks have been worn away, leaving just a smooth, featureless disc with no indication of value.

But the Right, even the Alt. Right, are guilty of the same foolishness. Thus, Antifa are the ‘real fascists’, the Left are the ‘real fascists’, Black Lives Matter are the ‘real fascists’. On and on and on goes the dance, the dancers twirling ever more furiously.

The charge of fascism is vague, then, and seems to be a form of ‘Boo-Hooray Theory’, this being the reductive version of the ethico-linguistic emotivism philosophy advanced by A J Ayer and J L Austin which states that all speech acts reduce to a basic approval or disapproval of the object of the utterance.

There doesn’t seem much to be gained by pointing out that actual, historical fascism was a very limited, localised term originating with Mussolini and the fasces, the martial-agricultural emblem which mutated into the swastika. The word has since acquired the novel new power we know all too well, as  it is flung around like a madman’s excrement.

Accusations of fascism also have to do with one of the emergent phrases from the last decade of conflict between, for want of better terms, Left and Right; Virtue-signalling.

Those who inhabit the tenements of the Millennial Left, as well as those tenured Leftists in the turreted towers of the Western media, despise the phrase, both because they know it is aimed exclusively at them by their enemies and, I suspect, because they subconsciously know it to be accurate. This type of moral preening is best exemplified by Polly Toynbee’s infamous comment, forged in the white heat of an upper-middle-class literary festival, that Left-wingers – specifically Polly’s friends - are ‘just better people’ than Right-wingers. I am sure she came to that incisive conclusion while at her ease with a bottle of something sensational on the terrazza of her Tuscan villa.

Cognitive psychologists often use the term ‘self-serving bias’. This is the tendency of individuals to attribute positive attributes to themselves and, in order to achieve this, to attribute negative attributes to others. This, of course, is at the heart of virtue-signalling. I am good because you are bad, a dialectic of retroactive self-esteem. When I see virtue-signalling – and it is hard to avoid – I am reminded of a scene I once saw in an English supermarket.

A small child was having one of those all-singing, all-dancing temper tantrums, rolling on the floor and bashing his little balled fists on the ground while he screamed and cried. We’ve all seen it. What was interesting was two or three other small children looking on, standing next to their parents and looking extra-angelic as they glanced up at Mummy or Daddy as if to say; So, do you see how good I am? Now, about that chocolate or toy…

I recognise the desire to be liked myself. It is a suggestion from Freudian analysis that when parents split up and divorce – as mine did when I was 17 – the oldest child – which I am – feels a subliminal level of guilt, as though the marital failure were their fault. For years after, I was aware of an aggravated need to be liked by my classmates. It lasted for a good deal of my adult life, too. Now, I sometimes wonder if I have swung to the other pole, and actively attempt to be disliked. Certainly, I have ten times as many enemies in London as I have friends. But I digress.

The one statement that is guaranteed to produce a dissonant and enraged chorus of ‘fascist!’ is that you wish to see less immigration, particularly from Muslim countries. This is the thread that unites, for example, Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen. Wishing to protect your country’s sovereignty, integrity, borders and culture is thus equated with a Hitlerian animus.

This has one glaringly obvious conclusion; Most white people in the Western world are fascists. It is common knowledge that the vast majority of people – ie. everyone bar the elites, Millennials and Muslims, backed by the media – wish to see fewer, if any, Islamic imports. Blacks are starting to realise the implications of another victimhood bloc taking their turf and hanging their Nikes off the local telephone wires. And so we are reaching the point at which the word ‘fascist’ will lose not simply its descriptive function, but that loss will be closely followed by that of its pejorative function.

Perhaps fascism is about to become the new virtue. Where do I apply?

Monday, 8 May 2017

GAY PAREE? NOT FOR LONG AFTER ISLAM WON THE FRENCH ELECTION…

The gentlemen to this chap's right look oddly unimpressed


Well, France, it looks like goodbye rather than au revoir. The conventional wisdom on the Right and Alt. Right is that five years of Macron will come so close to destroying France that Le Pen will stroll into power in 2022. I’m not so sure.

It was too much to expect a Brexit/Trump/Le Pen hat-trick. The globalists are too strong for that. But while the Brexit debate centred around the state’s so-called Project Fear, and the American election further exposed the globalist, Leftist media and deep state propaganda machine, the French election was breathtaking in its level of bias.

The BBC will, of course, be in estrus about Macron. They collectively orgasmed when Hollande won last time around, and he was an utter failure even by European standards. Has any other politician ever had a 4% approval rating? But if Socialism wins, the BBC are a happy bunch of quasi-Communists. I’ve met people who worked for the BBC. They have a sort of existential aroma about them, like entering a bedroom in which a beer-drinking man has farted repeatedly over a long period of time. You feel you need a scalding shower after talking to them.

Jeremy Corbyn has Tweeted his delight that Macron defeated Le Pen’s ‘politics of hate’, seemingly unaware that his second-in-command hates white people, although that is not counted as hatred for reasons discussed in the post below. With this one Tweet, Corbyn shows the total, hypocritical idiocy of the Left.

Another curio in the endless Curiosity Shoppe of Leftist clownthink is that they are supposed to hate globalist bankers, yet they all wet their knickers when France elects one. Like Bertie Wooster, one simply shakes one’s head and passes on.

A further aspect of Macron’s rise to power seems curious until you look beneath the surface, as one always must in these treacherous times. It seems to be common knowledge in France that he is gay. What is odd is that he has covered up this fact, even going so far as to marry a woman who looks like Iggy Pop after a failed facelift. And yet, in the Left-Liberal-dominated times, why would anyone hide the fact that they are gay? I worked with a homosexual in my last job. He was as gay as a yellow feather-duster, and yet pretended otherwise. He used to feign, through frostily gritted teeth, that he was lovestruck over a female estate agent who often visited our place of work. It was about as convincing as Hillary Clinton in leather at a dyke conference. That actually happened, by the way. And then he would literally sigh when some classy guy walked past.

But, surely, these must be the most auspicious times to be what we used to call, as children, a wooly-woofter since Socrates and his Greek chums invented bumming in the first place. Gay Pride events are more or less compulsory, gays fill the TV schedules, and woe betide the politician who wafts even the vaguest scent of homophobia. Old Traumavillians, of course, know full well that I despise homophobia, which actually exists whereas Islamophobia and anti-black racism generally do not, and is widely practiced by both Muslims and blacks. My colourful language is humour, that endangered species. But to return to my point. Like the cleaner I used to work with, why does Macron feel the need to hide his sexuality? Then the shekel dropped…

He needs the Muslim bloc vote. The best way to haemorrhage Mohammedan votes is to cozy up to the gay community. And, of course, he is going to be reinforcing that bloc, claiming to wish to import 200,000 more immigrants per year for the duration of his tenure. They will not be Buddhists, Amish or Zoroastrians.

And here is the unintended consequence for that particular little demographic manoeuvre. As I had to explain patiently to a gay guy on Facebook – now a bouncy castle for Leftist dullards – Muslims really don’t like homosexuality. He had stated that Chechnya was rounding up gays and putting them in camps, appropriately enough. It seemed that, like a lot of Americans I meet, he had the vague idea that the USSR still exists, and that Putin was at the bottom, so to speak, of this gay gulag. I pointed out to him that, in fact, Putin had fought Chechnya and, more importantly, that country is 95% Muslim. I went on to inform him of Muslim homophobia, but he seemed keen to tell me about how white Christians in the USA, apparently, lynch gays. I then appraised him of the shariah no-go zones of London, where he and his boyfriend would likely be beaten up if they hold hands therein. He continued to resist the obvious truth.

I was in Paris at the end of November, 2015, two weeks after the Bataclan massacre. I met my girlfriend for the first time on the Eurostar, and she tells me something I knew anyway. She thought I looked gay. And, gentle reader, looking at photos of that week, I did indeed look as camp as Christmas. Linen suit, checked waistcoat, highly polished brogue boots, clipped moustache, Nazi haircut. Yup, camp as a row of boy scout tents.

Travelling from Gare du Nord to my Air BnB, I inadvertently wandered into a Muslim area. I was, in half an hour, aggressively denied entrance to a bar, ripped off blatantly in another, and further scammed by a Muslima taxi driver. At least women can still drive there, if they are Mohammedan.

What really lingers in the memory, apart from the smell of Muslim parts of Paris, are the open looks of hostility I received from Muslims I passed in the street. Let me tell you something. Muslims really, really don’t like homosexuals. Now there is a closeted gay guy in power who wants to import more of them, it is going to get very nasty for Pierre et Pierre in the city of love.

Curiously, the gay guy I used to work with went to Paris four times a year. He was actually very cultured. I imagine him sitting at an effete Parisian café, reading Proust in the original and sipping coffee from a dainty little cup. As the next five years roll slowly by, his range of options as a boulevardier will gradually dwindle. Gay Paree. For now.

Saturday, 6 May 2017

AFFIRMATIVE INACTION: WHY TOKEN BLACK WOMEN WILL NOT WIN ELECTIONS

Your next Home Secretary?
Good luck with that


Much will have been written about Diane Abbott’s interview with Nick Ferrari. The curious thing that struck me on listening and re-listening to it is that I strongly suspect she was drunk. Not smashed, mind, but almost certainly a couple in, or perhaps still toasted from the night before. Allegedly, she goes missing from time to time with ‘migraine’. I’ve never heard it called that before. Those who know me well will attest that I know whereof I speak, and there was a definite set of indicators which spoke powerfully of an intense lobbying effort from what a friend of mine calls ‘Dame Boozy-Woozy’.

Now, Ferrari’s show used to run between 7am and, I think, 10am, Monday to Friday, and I assume it still does. I have spoken to Ferrari on three occasions. My mother has engaged the great man so many times that they are on first-name terms. He is an amiable man, able to laugh at himself – unlike his colleague James O’Brien, a public school-educated Marxist – and a wily and able radio interviewer.

If you have not yet heard the interview, treat yourself. Abbott treats mathematics with all the dexterity of a chimp with a Rubik’s Cube. She does not know what she is saying, and papers can clearly be heard rustling as she fumbles for a way out. Watch it on YouTube, because Ferrari’s face is a treat, a visual symphony of disbelief. He is thinking what every British person is, or ought to be, thinking; If Labour win, this creature will be Home Secretary.

Abbott is a career racist and, if you would like to be employed in a similar position, white people need not apply. There is no money in it for us as we do the work anyway on a voluntary basis. It’s a little like the gag about dogs.

Q: What does a dog do on his day off?

A: Well, he doesn’t sleep. That’s his job.

There is no money in racism for whites. Well, except the ones who are black stooges. But, for someone like Abbott, it could take you all the way to one of the land’s highest offices. And money? You got it, ma bitch!

The picture that heads this piece is a painting of Abbott. It cost, apparently, over ten thousand pounds. I wonder if you can guess who paid for that. Her comments on race are, I would imagine, familiar to most of you. She has claimed – and this is in the public domain – that the problem with the UK is not immigration, it is white people. Of course, these comments cannot be deemed racist, as Abbott is black, and blacks cannot be racist, as they lack power. Thus spake the Left. Should she become Home Secretary, and thus gain power, would her comments then become racist? It is a conundrum worthy of Zeno.

If she were Home Secretary, would it be the first time in British history that a Prime Minister had previously fucked his Home Secretary? Apparently, Corbyn used to parade Abbott in front of his friends in a sort of tribal virtue-signalling ritual. I’ve known white guys like that. Look at me. I’ve got a black girlfriend. Have you any idea how good that makes me? I personally have had several black girlfriends and it does not make me good – no power on earth could do that – but it made me aware of one thing. With each and every one of them, if I closed my eyes while they were talking, they sounded white.

Diane Abbott is against grammar schools and, indeed, any kind of selective education. Except, perforce, for her own child, who goes to an expensive private school masquerading as a comprehensive. She defended her choice of the ten thousand pounds a year school – you could buy a painting for that - by stating that ‘West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children’. Unless there is an Islington wine bar – she likes the odd bot. of something sensational, allegedly – called The Wall, I fail to see what she means.

Abbott, who as stated would be Home Secretary if Labour win the upcoming general election, is the worst type of race-baiter. She immediately assumed that the Croydon attack on a Kurdish immigrant was the work of whites. If it was, and there were certainly whites involved, they were whites actively participating in the black experience. She went very quiet when the first photographs of black suspects appeared. She is a known acquaintance of a Mr. Lee Jasper, a race-baiter who once stated that the reason young black men are disproportionately represented in gun crime figures in London is due to – wait for it, wait for it – white racism. Abbott herself said, in a throwaway line on the Ferrari interview, that it was a shame young men felt they needed to carry knives to protect themselves. This is the kind of horse-shit that leads to the deaths of the young black men she claims to champion.

It is easy to be glib about Abbott, but there is deeper import here. She is a talentless, bigoted, careerist race-baiter with no more ability than the kind of black council time-wasters that have made my mother’s life a misery in the past, and whose careers have been boosted by their racist appointment. The problem is this. Black people are being given jobs, at the highest level, which many of them are not up to. If you feel you need some token blacks on your Shadow Cabinet, like they used to do in 70s BBC dramas, why not try Dr. Tony Sewell? More or less called an Uncle Tom, or house nigger, by the London blackerati and the whites who adore them, Sewell was cast into the wilderness for saying controversial things such as that blacks need to take on a level of responsibility for their destinies instead of blaming Whitey. But no. Instead, we get Abbott.

There is a General Election looming in the UK which the party fallaciously calling themselves Conservative look set to win. A talented, two-fisted, capable opposition is necessary for the functioning of any government. The office of Home Secretary is one of the highest in the land, and its shadow is concomitantly important. It should not be given to a moron simply because she is a black woman. Labour needs to look further than Islington harpies and Guardian readership. This woman is a fool, and the UK already has far too many of those.

Tuesday, 2 May 2017

BE SEEING YOU: THE LATEST NONSENSE FROM THE BLACK CAUCUS  

Who is Number 1? A white supremacist, I'll bet


A few weeks ago, you may recall, Whitey was informed that milk, and presumably the drinking thereof, was racist. I know. I know. One or two of you may have stopped and looked to see if this is April 1. But, in terms of the semiotics of race relations, this where we at, chillun.
Given that everything white people do or say is racist, even when we are not aware of it, I suppose milk was bound to get its come-uppance, and to have its cone-headed sheet ripped from its white-supremacist face. Cows too must presumably accept their share of the blame for their cow-lonial past and current moo-cro aggressions. Reparations. There’s no udder way. Now I know why our milkman always had a copy of Mein Kampf in his milk float.
But there is a new bad boy in town, all blazing crosses and nooses and strange fruit hanging in the poplar trees. You’ve done it. I’ve done it. All white people have done it. And now we know why. Because oppression of black bodies.
The ‘okay’ sign – a loop formed with thumb and index finger while the remaining digits flare above – was certainly in use when I was a small boy, back in the early 18th century. Had I known it was a sign of racist oppression, I would never, ever have used it, and can only hang my head in shame at the realisation that I did. I will offer the meagre contents of my wallet to the next black chap I see by way of reparations, and urge him to spend it on the largest pair of trousers he can find.
Now, I have recently had a change of heart concerning racism and its attendant semaphore system, the dog whistles black people and their white handlers – oops, I meant ‘enablers’ – hear constantly like the drone of cicadas. Not so long ago, it made me angry that blacks and their white, virtue-signalling stooges could tell me that each small movement I made or phrase I used hid in its black heart the rotting carcass of racism. Now, I pull up a deck-chair, crack a cold one and have a fucking good laugh. We need humour in the end-times, and by Christ does the race-baiting industry – patron saint Barack Obama – provide it in droves. (Note to subs; is ‘droves’ racist? Please check!).
Incidentally, the ‘okay’ sign is used throughout the brilliant 60s cult TV series The Prisoner (see picture above). Curiously, and rather multiculturally, it is first used by a young Japanese girl who drives Number 6 to the local café. It does have the novel twist of the user looking through the loop and saying “Be seeing you”, but is essentially the same sign. Now, it has apparently become the Nazi gang-sign du jour.
Mike Cernovich and Cassandra Fairbanks, two Alt. Right luminaries, made the sign on a visit to The White House, and the wrath of black people everywhere has since been stoked by white journalists eager to use their swarthy stooges to further their white-hating agenda. Now, The Independent – a UK newspaper heading for the iceberg – reports that something called the ‘Anti-Defamation League’ – presumably a Soros sock-puppet – has deemed the sign to be racist. And so it is and must be.
There isn’t much point in looking into the semiotics of what is and is not racist this week. It is more fun trying to predict what will be racist next week. Here are my predictions, runners and riders, for what will be painful reminders of slavery seven days hence:
·        The Wombles
·        Spaghetti
·        Rain
·        Finials. (These are those fascist things on the end of curtain rails that stop your drapes slipping off)
·        Waving at trains
·        Looking in the mirror while brushing your hair
·        Cartoon air-fresheners in cars
·        Ties with spots on
·        My old mum
·        Football boots
You read it here first.
Now, there is a developing industry in the semiotics of racism. I will leave you, gentle and racist reader, with one of my personal favourites from the last, lynch-mob-glorifying week. I have not invented it. I rather pride myself on my powers of literary invocation, but even I lack the sheer sense of narratio fabuloso required for this little cracker.
The University of Oxford, does not, of course, exist. Like Cambridge, Oxford has a collective collegiate system. But you can bet your bottom euro that it has an Equality and Diversity Unit, and you would win the bet. Its once-famous philosophy departments may be withering on the vine – too many dead white males, don’t you know – but the Equality and Diversity Unit is doing a roaring trade and, doubtless, receiving plentiful funding for spouting the multicultural, anti-white gibberish now endemic to all universities. Here is an excerpt from their 2017 Trinity term – that’s a phrase we won’t be seeing for long before it is turned into Mandela term or Mohammed term - newsletter;
‘Sometimes called “micro-aggressions”, subtle, everyday racism can appear trivial. (Note to authors; that’s because it fucking is). But repeated micro-aggressions can be tiring and alienating (and can lead to mental ill-health).’
In passing, we note that the ‘okay’ sign is also the representative of the letter Q in British Sign Language, which is what deaf people use to communicate. So, presumably, every time a deaf person signs ‘Queer’ to another deaf person, they are being racist as well as homophobic. Nice work, O Oxford, home to the oldest university in the known world.
It goes on to list the usual hilarious inventory of naughtiness which white people are always and everywhere guilty of. One of these is failure to make eye-contact with, you know, people of colour, trannies, Dragon-people and all the rest. I have a suggestion, and I hope that, in its way, it can help just a little to heal the wounds cause by racism.
Get your skinny white arses down to Peckham in south London. When you have finished your Starbucks latte, walk around the streets. Now, I want you to make eye-contact with every young black man you see.
When you have been discharged from St. George’s Hospital in Tooting, come back and re-write that fucking article.
Be seeing you.