Now visit THIS website ....
Rogues Gallery ...
The
tiniest fraction of those first and
second-generation immigrants who have killed,
raped and otherwise violated British men, women
and children in Britain.
( Just since the Stephen Lawrence case ! )
is represented in the following pages. The whole
world has heard of Stephen !!
But how many of these
had you heard of before today !!
Visit - http://roguesgallery666.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/tiniest-fraction-of-those-first-and.html |
|
Listen to the speech by Kai Murros above, then consider the "Like" and "Retweet" by Labour MP Naz Shah below - THEN VOTE POPULIST
!!
|
Rotherham Scandal: Nick Griffin
Discusses Muslim Grooming in 2004
BBC Journalist Criticises Him - Since the release
of the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual
Exploitation in Rotherham (1997 – 2013) report,
Muslims, the Left, Labour, the BBC, which has a
long record of concealing paedophilia, the
Guardian and others have stated no one knew
thousands of Muslim men were humiliating, beating,
blackmailing, threatening, raping and torturing
poor, vulnerable British girls, some as young as
eleven; as this video shows, they were lying. The
BBC responded to Mr Griffin's claims by conspiring
with West Yorkshire police and the Crown
Prosecution Service to imprison him. Mr Griffin
was right. |
|
|
|
MINORITY RULE: The
Dictatorship of The Minorities in Britain
The best ideas are often very
simple, so is the truth when you find it, the
realization that minority rule had replaced majority
rule in this country was such a moment for me.
We are living in a dictatorship run not by an
individual but by a collection of minority groups that
have by stealth hijacked our political system, our
society, our culture and freedom of choice, with
virtually zero immigration control, all the major
parties have leapfrogged each other to secure the huge
and growing multicultural vote, and with all
opposition silenced by law or political correctness
the SHIELDS handed out to the minorities TO PROTECT
THEM are now being used by them as CLUBS to beat the
majority.
I expect most of you, like me, dread picking up a
newspaper or turning on the television or radio, for
fear of being enraged by another story of someone
abusing the health, or immigration service, or
literally getting away with murder, rape or violence
because some money grabbing lawyer had found a way of
using some section of the so called human rights law
to help them avoid justice.
New words are introduced by these minorities to
collectively label all opposition such as homophobic,
racist and xenophobic, just like making up that word
in a crossword that didn’t really exist to make things
fit.
One of the words we keep putting in the wrong place is
the word right when we mean privilege.
We do this to justify the unfair treatment of the
majority by the minority, and because the majority
naturally don’t like it we then have to make up unfair
laws to force them into going along with things.
I don’t believe it’s a human right to jump a queue, or
gain a promotion or a special consideration because of
the colour of your skin or your religious beliefs, or
your sexual preferences.
I believe it’s a privilege.
I don’t believe it’s a human right to share in another
societies wealth, its health service, it’s education
system, its housing or its welfare benefits when you
have never put anything in.
I believe it’s a privilege.
I don’t understand how it’s correct to have a newspaper
called Black Britain, but not one called White Britain.
I don’t understand how you can have a commission for
racial equality that is run exclusively by non-white
people.
I don’t understand why a march or demonstration by any
minority group is described as a celebration of their
culture, but a march by the majority population to
celebrate their colour or sexuality is instantly branded
as racism or homophobia.
We are not in this situation by the desires of bad men
or women, but by the most dangerous people in any
society “The well intentioned do gooders”
It is easy to fight against a vicious and cruel dictator
their evil is obvious and actually unites people against
them, taking comfort in the fact they are not alone.
It is good intent that has brought misery to millions of
people on housing estates all over the country, with no
protection from the pitiless torments of out of control
youths.
It is good intent that has turned our prisons into soft
touch drug riven universities of crime, feared only by
the innocent who have never been in them and it is good
intent that has destroyed the authority and respect for
the police and the laws they try to uphold.
Our children go to schools where the disruptive bully
runs the classroom, and the ultimate punishment for bad
behaviour is removal to a school with more facilities
and attention than is available to the well behaved left
behind.
We live in a society where the elderly in care are
forced to sell homes they worked for all their lives to
subsidise their care, while limitless amounts are spent
to feed, clothe and shelter illegal immigrants and their
extended families from around the world.
We live in a society where in spite of the pill, and
fourteen other forms of contraception, adoption and
abortion on demand, we still encourage young girls to
have babies without fathers, by providing them with
homes they don’t have to pay for and money they don’t
have to earn whilst making them the envy of their
friends, yet in many instances married couples both go
to work and are not able to see their own children grow
up whilst trying to make ends meet.
I believe as more and more injustice is heaped on the
majority it is simply a matter of time before pent up
rage eventually explodes into civil disorder on a scale
never seen in this country.
If we are to turn back the tide of political correctness
destroying our culture we must empower the silent but
angry majority by offering referendum voting on all
major issues, like levels of immigration, the return of
capital punishment, the re introduction of corporal
punishment, zero tolerance of anti social behaviour and
the abolition of laws that enslave the majority by
giving too much power to the minority, it’s time to say
NO MORE or see this country destroyed from within.
Anon
Obituary ...
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend,
Common Sense, whom has been with us for many years.
No one knows for sure how old he was, since any record
of his birth was long ago lost in bureaucratic red
tape.
He will be remembered as having cultivated such
valuable lessons as knowing when to come in out of the
rain, why the early bird gets the worm, life isn't
always fair, and maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies
(don't spend more than you earn) and reliable
parenting strategies (adults, not children, are in
charge).
His health began to deteriorate
rapidly when well intentioned but overbearing
regulations were set in place.
Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual
harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended
from school for using mouthwash after lunch, and a
teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student, only
worsened his condition. It declined even further when
schools were required to get parental consent to
administer Panadol, sun lotion or a Band Aid to a
student - but could not inform the parents when a
student became pregnant and wanted to have an
abortion.
Common Sense lost ground when
parents attacked teachers for doing the job they
themselves failed to do in disciplining their unruly
children.
Common Sense lost the will to live as the Ten
Commandments became contraband, churches became
businesses, and criminals received better treatment
than their victims.
Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend
yourself from a burglar in your own home and the
burglar can sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live after a
woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee
was hot: she spilled a little in her lap, and was
promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents,
Truth and Trust; his wife, Discretion; his daughter,
Responsibility, and his son, Reason.
He is survived by three
stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, Someone Else is to
Blame, and I'm A Victim.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realised
he was gone.
If you still remember him, pass
this on. If not, join the majority and do nothing.
The Lemming Effect
Or why the very people being damaged the most by “Nu
Labour”
The British White Working Class - Still continue
to vote Labour !?!?
They are victims of a psychological affliction known
as “the lemming effect”.
Lemmings are small rodents who have been known to
follow each other as they charge to their deaths into
raging rivers or off of cliffs.
Lemminghood is an innate psychological phenomenon,
present in most mammals and observable in common
people as well as the most sophisticated and educated
elites.
Lemminghood is not an intellectual phenomenon - it is
psychological.
As such, no socio-economic class is immune to its
strangulating effect.
A grant-seeking university scientist can be a lemming
just as much as a fashion obsessed teen-age girl.
One blindly follows the latest trendy theory while the
other blindly follows the latest trendy clothing
style.
What’s the difference?
Neither can resist the force of nature.
The power to fit in with
one’s social peers can be irresistible. (Religion !)
To a human lemming, the logic behind an opinion
doesn’t count as much as the power and popularity
behind an opinion.
Man, like lemming, behaves collectively.
And it could be no other way.
Naturally, the individual must be equipped with this
trait. Otherwise, the smallest steps toward
civilization could never have been made. Lemminghood
is a survival trait, an inborn instinct in the
majority of people. However, as with all natural
phenomena, this tendency can be manipulated and used
for harmful purposes. It is this lemming effect which
enables entire segments of a society to lose their
sense of judgment all at the same time.
This research paper will likely be wasted on many
lemmings.
For lemmings, denial is a basic psychological defense
mechanism used to not only shield themselves from
unpleasant realities, but also to reassure themselves
that they will still fit within the acceptable range
of opinion held by their peer group.
Lemmings are absolutely terrified at the thought of
being labeled as an “extremist” or a “conspiracy
theorist”.
At all costs, their beliefs must always be on the
“right” side of the issue and conform within the
boundaries of their lemming peers.
Lemmings simply cannot bear the burden of
responsibility, or the discomfort, which comes with
thinking independently.
They’ll resist any efforts to
change their misguided beliefs with all their mental
energy.
Sean Bryson getting threats in
the street from Black opposition in Notting Hill
Today Saturday 17/03/18 at
about 12:50 pm I was walking along Ladbroke Grove
near the tube station, same side towards Malton RD.
When a very short Black man of about 35 who was
walking towards me stated "Watch yourself" as he
passed. He was wearing a dark green hooded outfit.
This is pretty tame stuff, but when taken together
with some of the other "Micky Mouse Treatment" that
I have had in the area recently, it might have some
basis.
On Thursday 15/03/18 a regular watering hole in
Portobello Road (The Distillery)
made it clear that my presence was no longer wanted.
Nothing was said, but the entire staff suddenly made
me feel like the "Anti Christ" Something that
all-encompassing has to have been a management
dictate.
If anything happens to me I would appreciate any of
my supporters taking the appropriate action.
This is probably happening because
recently I have updated my website with some pre
election video material, urging people to VOTE FOR
ANYONE EXCEPT LABOUR. Take a look see !
http://www.seanbryson.com
More details here ... https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1244796
The African Slave
Trade
"The
widespread revulsion which the hideous institution
of slavery inspires today was largely confined to
Western civilisation a century ago, and a century
before that was largely confined to a portion of
British society.
No one seems interested in the epic story of how this
curse that covered the globe and endured for thousands
of years was finally gotten rid of by the West - not
only in Western societies but in other societies
conquered, controlled, or pressured by the West.
The resistance put up by Africans, Asians and Arabs
was monumental in defense of slavery, and lasted for
more than a century. Only the overwhelming military
power of the West enabled it to prevail on this issue,
and only the moral outrage of Western peoples kept
their government's feet to the fire politically to
maintain the pressure against slavery around the
world.
Of course, this is not the kind of story that appeals
to the multiculturalists. If it had been the other way
around - if Asian or African imperialists had stamped
out slavery in Europe - it would still be celebrated,
in story and song, on campuses across America."-
Thomas Sowell,
"Multicultural instruction"
The term 'slave' has
its origins in the word 'slav'.
The slavs, who
inhabited a large part of Eastern
Europe, were taken as slaves by the
Muslims of Spain during the ninth
century AD.
Slavic languages belong to the
Indo-European family.
Customarily,
Slavs are subdivided into East Slavs
(chiefly Russians, Ukrainians, and
Belarusians), West Slavs (chiefly
Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, and Wends, or
Sorbs), and South Slavs (chiefly
Serbs, Croats, Bosnians, Slovenes,
Macedonians, and Montenegrins). |
|
|
Race and immigration in the
West.
Concerned London Patriot, 2004.
If there was ever a
question of critical importance for the future
of western civilization, then it's how it will
cope with the effects of major racial
demographic change as a result of continued
non-European immigration, high reproduction
rates in non-European groups, and low
birthrates amongst white people.
Virtually all European
nations and North America cannot afford to
ignore the social and cultural implications of
this eventuality. Given that white Europeans
constitute less than 15% of the worlds
population, and that percentage is falling
annually, there is a sound basis for patriots
to be concerned about their prospects. At the
moment the speed of this change is apparent in
cities and urbanized areas. Already in London
[England], population trends strongly indicate
whites will become a minority in the capital
by 2010, and a minority in the UK potentially
by 2100. Across the Atlantic in the USA,
people of European descent are predicted to
become a minority by the middle of the century
due to similar factors. Nationalist parties
across Europe are experiencing surges in
popularity in response to public unease about
demographic trends and immigration.
Governments have consistently shown
indifference that such trends present a
serious danger to national stability and
social cohesion. Politicians generally fail to
acknowledge how race binds a nation together,
and that a substantial proportion of their
kinsmen mainly wish their nation to retain a
indigenous white majority, even if they are
not deeply hostile to other ethnic groups or
foreigners in limited numbers. Politicians are
conscious of the powerful emotive reaction
this subject incites in the public arena. They
are reluctant to openly advocate their own
racial groups interests,
lest their careers be jeopardized by
accusations of racism from the media or
political adversaries.
The late British MP Enoch
Powell, an outspoken critic of mulitracialism,
learnt this lesson to his personal detriment
back in the 1960s. Meanwhile contemporary
leaders like George W Bush or Tony Blair are
unlikely to offer balanced or objective
comments on race and immigration.
Even the chronic influx of illegal immigration
on Americans southern border with Mexico was
avoided in the Bush-Kerry election campaign
debates, despite its dire impact on Americans
from a variety of ethnic backgrounds. In fact,
the only ethnic group George W Bush has
pledged unwavering support to have been Jews.
At a May 2004 AIPAC meeting (American Israel
Public Affairs Committee) Bush conveyed
approval for a Jewish ethnic state in Israel
in the following quote "The United States is
committed, and I am strongly committed, to the
security of Israel as a vibrant Jewish state". |
|
Recently in October he further signed an Orwellian
'Global Antisemitism Bill', which empowers the State
Department to monitor and combat any harsh criticism
or attacks on Jews worldwide. Since George W Bush knew
little about international affairs when he first
entered office in 2000, this strongly biased support
to a foreign nation and diasporic group strengthens
existing claims that US government policy is
influenced by Jews, or neoconservatives as they are
often euphemistically referred to.
Well, if Bush does back Israel as an ethnocentric
state, then why doesn't he or anyother politician in
Congress promote the ethnic self-determination of any
other nation, including his own?
After all, aren't politicians professed egalitarians
these days?
Immigration resistance in
Britain
Back in the UK, although race and immigration ranks
low on the policy agenda of the main political
parties, the British National Party (BNP) stands as
the leading political force striving to thwart the
looming demographic crisis that awaits white British
citizens. Against a backdrop of total legitimacy for
the BNPs concerns, an assortment of assailants have
exerted pressure to stifle its progress. In late
October 2004 the BNPs bank account was closed for the
second time round (by HSBC), and the party web site
suffered a major denial of service attack from an
unknown culprit.
BNP members that have publicly revealed their
affiliation have sometimes been threatened with
dismissal from their jobs or professional
associations.
Media publicity of the BNP is uniformly dismissive,
if not slanderous. Ironically, the national newspapers
themselves publish articles about asylum seekers or
immigrants receiving illicit benefits, or engaged in
racketeering, yet denigrate the BNP as extremists for
alerting the public about essentially the same
problems. In the minds of the journalists who
occasionally write these articles, its ok to complain
about the problem but somehow immoral to desire to
stop it.
It's hardly surprising that the word immigration
evokes negative connotations in western countries
nowadays. The concept of immigration however is not
necessarily historically harmful in itself. Its
proponents would point to how the United States was
successfully built up by it. A neutral stance against
this common argument, is to highlight that the world
has now congealed into well defined nation-states with
delineated boundaries, and that most countries do not
have the capacity for more immigrants without negative
repercussions racially, environmentally, and socially.
Britain is already a full house. In 1999, net
immigration reached 185,000, an all-time record. The
Immigration Minister, Barbara Roche at that time
announced plans to attract migrants to fill specific
skills shortages, such as in the computer industry.
[Note: this is pure bs, there is no need to attract
migrants to fill computer jobs, as I can personally
testify being unable to resume computer work for two
years]. Many Americans now believe they have reached
full capacity there, and that further immigration at
current levels will harm the environment. This
couldn't be truer for the UK, which has a severe
shortage of affordable housing. Recently the
government formulated plans for 500,000 new homes in
the east of England to meet the demand. Environmental
groups have rejected this proposal, correctly
realising that such a scheme will be another step
forward in turning Britain into a sprawling concrete
concourse.
Demographic change in the USA
Traditional white majority founded nation-states
around the world face the same challenge of adjusting
to uneven racial population growth rates. The United
States for example is usually regarded as being a
multi-cultural country, but in fact for nearly two
hundred years of its history it was approximately 90%
European with a 10% ethnic population consisting
mainly of blacks descended from slaves imported from
Africa, and a smaller dispersion of Native Americans
[Iroquois] that survived the colonization years. The
turning point in Americas racial future arose in the
civil rights era of the 1960s. The Lyndon B Johnson
administration passed the landmark 1965 Immigration
Act which abolished immigration eligibility based on
national origin. This effectively reduced the number
of European immigrants and opened up the gates to the
wider world. The advocates of the 1965 bill insisted
it wouldn't upset the ethnic balance of the country. A
different picture has emerged now. Today the US
population has declined to 72% white, and houses a
fast growing Hispanic population expected to overtake
whites as the largest ethnic group in a few decades.
Many patriotic Americans, especially white ones, do
not eagerly welcome this prospect. Unlike in France or
Britain, there is no mainstream nationalist party in
the USA that can garner the votes of white Americans
at the polling booths. Maybe Americas long tradition
of immigration hasn't compelled dissidents to form a
successful political party. Opposition to large scale
immigration and anti-white legislation has mainly
originated from a variety of campaign groups at state
level, and the National Alliance, a pro-white
organisation created by the late physics professor Dr
William Pierce in the early seventies.
The NA incidentally operates an excellent, accurate
daily news service called NationalVanguard.org that
covers world affairs with racial implications, and
features guest writers articles and reader letters. It
is worth noting that both the UK and USA share the
same social infrastructure where white race relations
are concerned. Both have media institutions biased
against whites in their coverage of interracial
confrontations, or that refrain from publicizing that
whites have legitimate group interests in preserving
their racial heritage. Both have governments that do
not listen to public opposition to immigration, and
both have consumer advertising institutions that
promote disproportionate multiracial representation.
The Asylum Issue
Every year thousands of immigrants from poor
developing countries attempt to settle permanently in
Britain, many under the pretext of political asylum.
That is, the process by which individuals may apply
for refuge in another country if they can prove they
are being tortured, persecuted, etc due to their
politically related beliefs or activities. The right
to seek political asylum is outlined in Article 14 of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights drafted by
the United Nations in 1948. The United Nations itself
was created in 1945, shortly after the end of the
Second World War. Britain signed the 1951 United
Nations Convention and its 1967 Protocol relating to
the Status of Refugees. Later in 1981 the United
States enacted a similar law. These treaties recommend
that asylum seekers granted legal refugee status
should enjoy treatment at least as favorable as that
accorded to the indigenous population. The right to
seek asylum doesn't guarantee a state is forced to
offer asylum to every applicant. Interestingly, the
term asylum wasn't used much in colloquial parlance in
Britain until as late as the 1990s.
The public became accustomed to this term from media
articles on the subject i.e. scandal stories of asylum
seekers receiving excessive social security benefits
This is surely a clear indication that a large scale
asylum problem didn't exist until this time. I would
suspect many asylum seekers must have learnt of a
right to apply for asylum, even if unaware of its
ideological origins in the UN declaration. The asylum
system in reality is nothing but an alternative method
for foreigners to enter the country by deceitful
means. It has been long abused by applicants, the bulk
of applications are bogus. The cost of supporting
asylum seekers in the English county of Cambridgeshire
alone has totalled £8 million over the last six years.
All this must be paid for by the tax payer, through
increased council tax bills and other forms of
government taxation. A system appealing to the
idealistic notion of humanitarian compassion has in
fact caused misery for numerous communities across the
UK that have been inundated with impoverished
newcomers. The rapid metamorphosis of these
communities have often forced existing longtime
residents to seek safer sanctuaries elsewhere. The
asylum system may seem fair in principle, but in a
world of never ending conflict there will always be a
constant exodus of refugees to popular destinations.
That alone is the most practical argument against it,
along with the cost to the taxpayer and the social
unrest it creates.
Causes of world migration
First of all, we must understand why such a large
mass migration of people is occurring now in the early
21st century, when in decades past i.e. in the early
years of the 20th century the numbers were far less
conspicuous. There are further explanations for this
besides relaxed immigration controls. Improved
transportation and global communications are a clear
cause, though discussions on immigration tend to
overlook the role it has played. But think for a
minute: how did aspiring migrants discover what
countries were the best places to move to, aside from
recommendations by émigré relatives? The invention of
the television in the 20th century and its
dissemination throughout the entire world has likely
assisted as an educational tool here, allowing a wider
audience to see the opportunities available in foreign
lands. The aviation revolution should be mentioned
too. Following World War II the growth of commercial
air travel has drastically reduced migrant journey
times, and opened up a wider array of destinations.
The cost of air travel fell significantly in real
terms during the 1990s, enabling poor migrants a
chance to afford an air ticket to a better life. Not
all migrants pay directly for their tickets however.
In extreme cases, prospective migrants overseas hand
over their entire life savings to smuggling gangs with
dreams of making a fortune in the west. The
willingness to pay such high amounts demonstrates that
it's not simply the poorest of people who desire to
leave their homelands for greener pastures. Desperate
immigrants are even prepared to risk a long harrowing
journey hidden in road vehicles. In 2002 58 illegal
Chinese entrants suffocated to death while hidden in a
lorry carrying tomatoes at Dover, England.
This led to the conviction of the Dutch lorry driver
and Chinese smugglers who organised the operation.Once
immigrants have established communities in host
countries, they often encourage relatives to join
them, tactfully taking advantage of extended
citizenship laws. In the case of Britain, the decline
of its empire, and a common British nationality
introduced via the 1948 Nationality Act throughout its
colonies offered many new citizens a passport by which
they could emigrate to the British Isles. Britain was
an attractive magnet for Commonwealth immigrants in
the post-war economic boom. A substantial portion of
the original Afro-Caribbean population in the UK
emigrated to England from Jamaica and other parts of
the West Indies during the 1960s. Many of them settled
in inner London and gained employment with London
Transport.
The burgeoning world population has also fuelled
migratory urges. As outlined in my essay Consequences
of an overpopulated planet the worlds population
trebled from an estimated 1.6 billion in the early
20th century to a staggering 6 billion by the year
2001. The bulk of this rise was amongst Asiatic
peoples in Africa and Asia, partly from medical
advances and humanitarian assistance from the West.
However, the rise in fertility rates and human
longevity hasn't necessarily engendered a great
improvement in the quality of life in certain areas
there. If that were the case then there wouldn't be
such a strong desire to seek a new life in wealthier
western countries.
As a population grows unevenly across ethnic groups
in shared territory, so does rivalry between them.
Africa is still ravaged by conflict between its
numerous ethnic groups, providing a constant source of
refugees to neighbouring states and destinations
further afield. A chronic example was the mass
genocide of Rwandans in 1994. Whites too are
undergoing genocide in Africa. After the demise of the
apartheid era in South Africa in 1994, overall crime
has soared, particularly murderous attacks on the
shrinking white community. South African patriot Jan
Lamprecht has documented a catalogue of disasters that
have befallen his country on his African Crisis web
site.
From a personal standpoint, I base my opinions on
racial trends not only on firmly accepted facts,
but also on a history of change I have witnessed in
Greater London over the years. Greater London itself
has accommodated a mosaic of ethnic groups for several
decades now. Most of the Black and Asian population
arrived during the fifties and sixties from
Commonwealth countries in the post war boom cited
earlier.
During my extensive bus excursions as a boy in the
1980s I observed distinct ethnic minority communities
distributed across the capital, mainly concentrated in
inner London. These communities didn't particularly
concern me at the time, as their population levels
were still relatively low compared to the white
population of London. Furthermore, there was certainly
no feeling in the suburbs that white areas were
threatened with displacement. I held views on race
that would typically be regarded as 'average'.
It wasn't a subject that dominated my thoughts, I
understood there were inherent behavioral differences
between the races, but I didn't contemplate the
significance of these differences because they weren't
impacting English society adversely enough at the
time. In later years, the question of race and white
social cohesion elevated to the forefront of my
thoughts as I noticed Londons white population
steadily dwindle due to uneven birth rates,
immigration, miscegenation, and perhaps even white
emigration.
Immigration continued steadily during the
Conservative government led by 'Iron Lady' Margaret
Thatcher from 1979-1990, followed by John Major until
1997. For all practical purposes, the Conservative
party were no tougher on immigration than past Labour
governments, in contrast to the common misperceptions
about them. By the late 1990s the social decay and
alienating atmosphere in many parts of London
compelled me to acquire a heightened sense of racial
consciousness, and made me more sympathetic and
curious about white nationalism. Nowadays when I visit
London I can't help but feel a grave sense of loss
from the place it has become. I see fewer and fewer
white English faces aboard the buses, and the ones I
do see are tense and withdrawn. I must confess I am
sickened by the proliferation of white Anglo-Saxon
women that have chosen black partners and sired mixed
race children. I can only imagine the majority of
these mindless, naive women do not realise they are
wrecking a future for white children, who will find
themselves a minority in a black and mixed race
culture. They cannot grasp the concept that they are
playing a decisive role in shaping the future .
Sadly some of these women have no love of white
beauty or their own races welfare and integrity. I
wouldn't balk at the odd interracial couple, but the
extent to which this has spread is hastening the
eventual demise of whites in London. The media and
advertisers are partly culpable here, as they have
frequently published adverts with black men and white
women in suggestive positions, and of course have
suppressed discussion of rational objections to
interracial relationships. I would say roughly since
the late 1980s there has been an accelerating campaign
by the media to instill white guilt and stultify love
of their own race. Typically Hitler and the Nazis have
been the primary method of nurturing this shame, as
numerous television documentaries over the years
attest to.
As a side note, Nazi bashing is a favorite pastime of
liberals in general. In the USA, some liberal
commentators have even gone as far to denounce their
country as 'Nazi America' for the unwarranted invasion
of Iraq. This comparison may satisfy feeble minds, but
in fact is quite a poor analogy. To begin with, George
W Bush didn't invade Iraq for colonization purposes,
neither does he have any concern for white Americans.
If he did have any racial ideology, as the National
Socialists undoubtedly did, then he certainly wouldn't
sanction the ongoing invasion of illegal invaders from
Mexico into his country and casually grant many of
them amnesty to gain citizenship.
Home grown events in England have been equally
effective in nurturing white guilt, even if they don't
outwardly display this agenda. Take the case of
Stephen Lawrence for example. He was an 18 year old
black teenager stabbed to death by white youths at a
bus stop in Eltham, South East London in 1993. The
media generated an uproar in the country because the
killers weren't immediately caught after the incident.
The government subsequently commissioned a lengthy
report by Lord MacPherson which accused the
Metropolitan Police of institutionalised racism for
improperly investigating the case and recommended an
overhaul of the 'stop and search' policy of ethnic
minorities (also known in the USA as racial
profiling).
Ten years later the media were still
reporting the case
The overall effect of Stephens tragic death was an
unfairly demoralized police force, excessive media
coverage on every aspect of it, and an inculcation in
the publics mind that only non-whites are the targets
of race attacks.
Compare this fanfare with 30 year old Scott Anthony
Osbourne, who was kicked to death by three blacks
outside a supermarket in nearby Lewisham in November
2002. There was no coverage of this shocking murder in
the national press or television whatever. The
incident was only reported by local newspapers like
The News Shopper here, and the ethnicity of the
killers withheld where possible. The implication is
always the same: whenever whites attack non-whites
then it must be racially motivated. When the reverse
is true it is just another crime in the eyes of the
media and judiciary system. To the average person,
racism is a moral stigma that they rarely apply
critical thinking to.
White self-hate
A pet gripe of mine is the aggressive and self-hating
demeanour of white teenagers in London that have
adopted the speech and mannerisms of black youth. I
would describe these pitiful hooded white boys as
'Eminem' rebels (the worlds preeminent white rapper)
-- products of a dysfunctional society who see no
positive white social community to identify with.
Thus, as black culture is pervasive in music and
fashion now, they naturally try to conform to the
predominant culture around them. These boys have
little sense of self-respect or white racial
responsibility. They exhibit an aspect of a larger
problem of what I classify as 'white self-hate'. This
phenomenon manifests in various ways across all ages.
For years, I haven't been able to work out why so many
of my fellow white Anglo-Saxons in London, and even in
the provinces to a lesser degree, frequently shun each
other, and act in a anti-social manner that works
against our collective interests. I've lost count of
the times I've received a sneering glare from a white
person, or found myself ignored by my own kind. This
issue of irrational anti-social behaviour is a
complete saga in itself that I may divulge in future
writing. Anyway, to continue -- the increasingly
incidences of intermarriage now apparent between
whites and ethnic minorities are a manifestation of
this self-hate. Really, if white English people had a
deeper love of their own people then they wouldn’t be
courting non-whites in droves.
The development of these interracial relationships
cannot be solely explained as ‘individuals’ who just
happen to get on with each other because their
personalities are compatible. If that were true then
you’d see Chinese people arm in arm with Blacks,
Indians with Blacks, Polish with Nigerians or Jews,
etc. Occasionally you might see non-whites of
different ethnicities together as friends, but from my
careful observations it’s very rare. Interracial
relationships involving whites inevitably arise
because their non-white partners adore the physical
beauty, and/or the traits of generosity and compromise
that are inherent in our race. For example, most
people concede that black men have a preference for
white women, just as oriental women are attracted to
white men.
A programme I saw on television several years back
confirmed this by stating 1 in 3 black men have a
white partner.
Some of you may wonder why I am bothered about
preserving white society given my diminutive
assessment of it; the internal divisions, the masses
of consumer oriented lemmings, the lack of idealism,
and moronic uncultured yobs that are typical of the
housing estate where I now live in the north west. Why
don't I just resign myself and let it implode on
itself from negligence, self-hate, and
irresponsibility? The reason being is that I do have a
love of the best elements of my people; the polite,
morally upright middle classes in the main who do have
self-respect and love of their race. It is this
segment of society that I cherish and hope prevails
during this time of accelerated demographic change.
Being a patriot I also think we should honour our
ancestors struggles to help build the foundations for
the quintessential trappings of society we now take
for granted.
Having unambiguously expressed my concerns for white
society and integrity, please do not infer I abhor all
other races, nor have I only sought to learn about
white culture. I'm not saying this, by the way, out of
an urge to declare an obligatory anti-racist
disclaimer. Throughout my life I have regularly
sustained cordial acquaintances with individuals of
non-European extraction. For example, I usually get on
well with Indian and other South Asian peoples, and
admire the self-respect they have for their family,
race and culture. I also appreciate the respect they
have for polite middle class English people. I can
also get on with blacks, of West Indian descent
usually, and actually studied black culture during the
late 1980s when I was a college student, and
relatively impartial on racial matters. The revival of
rap music at the time (freed from its former
association with breakdancing) by artists like Public
Enemy, NWA, and Ice Cube, enticed me to learn more
about black culture as a whole. It partly inspired my
first holiday to the United States in 1990, when I
travelled by Greyhound bus from Detroit to Los
Angeles. As you may know, rap music 'crossed over' to
the mainstream music scene during the 1990s to become
an influential cultural force. The 1990s really was
the decade of political correctness in the English
speaking world, especially the United States and
Britain. In Americas buzzwords like 'affirmative
action' (preference to non-white job applicants
irrespective of merit ) and 'diversity is our
strength' entered colloquial speech. In Britain there
were similar developments, and racial issues were
increasingly discussed in newspaper articles.
A simple analogy I can construct on my racial
worldview is similar to that of a father who loves his
family. He may actually like, or even love his
neighbors down the road, but he carries that extra
special devotion to his biological relatives.
Naturally I too have that extra bit of predisposition
to my ethnic family, their heritage, and group
interests.
Now that my 'family' is in serious jeopardy, partly
through their own negligence, I cannot refrain from
expressing this concern, and putting their welfare
first.
I have been intrigued with scholarly academic research
on group traits particular to white northern
Europeans, and have read various authors findings.
Kevin MacDonald, a California State University
professor who has written a trilogy of books on
Judaism, has suggested that white peoples tendency
towards individualism, low birth rates, monogamy, and
a lack of extended kinship outside of the immediate
family may have originated from their common roots in
a harsh, low resource environment. It was the
demanding nature of this environment that required
these behavioural traits to develop as a survival
strategy. Indeed, there is some evidence to indicate
that 80% of European genes share a common ancestry in
northern Europe 30,000 - 40,000 years ago, which
includes the period of the last ice age. MacDonald
also goes on to say that individualistic societies
(like those of Europeans) are not instinctively
inclined to erect defences against outsiders, unlike
the collectivist social structures in the Middle East
and other parts of the Asiatic world. What this means
in other words is that whites are not unified enough
to recognise external threats to their future well
being, and they let their sense of fair play work
against them, practicing a kind of moral altruism.
The future
To survive and prosper in the times ahead, whites
need to break free from their evolutionary shackles
that predisposes them to behaviour ill suited to a
competitive multiracial environment.
Firstly, white society at large must grow out of its
childish interpretation of racism and learn that it's
not unreasonable of us to make distinctions between
ethnic groups in order to secure a stable future for
white children, all the while maintaining respectful
relations with the rest of humanity.
They must think of themselves as being part of a
group with a destiny instead of rootless individuals
with obligations only to their egos. Whites deserve to
be exposed to both sides of the coin of the race
debate, and not the shallow one that panders to
universal sentimentality pushed by the media and
government. More often than not, however, whites are
intimidated into passivity by the charge of racism,
much like Superman is weakened by Kryptonite. I could
talk about this subject and its facets until the cows
go home; there are volumes of text written on it
elsewhere. Ultimately, the most important question for
inquisitive responsible minds is what can be done to
avert the demise of white society in the UK in the
long term, and rest of the west in this predicament .
This is a difficult question that patriots cannot
easily answer as well as they can analyse the problem.
Most reasonable people desire a strategy that is safe,
fair and nice. As the situation continues to
deteriorate, as it surely will in coming years, a nice
solution will be less attainable. At this stage the
most practical measure would be to halt all asylum and
immigration, curtail anti-white/anti-Christian
propaganda in education, broadcasting, and public
bodies (such as the ridiculous decision by the Royal
Mail to remove Christian themes from its Christmas
2003 stamp range), and repeal politically correct
policies that give unfair concessions to minorities
based on race or religion. I'm not a hardcore
separatist at heart though. I still approve of an open
door for all foreign visitors to travel on holiday, as
it would admittedly be mean spirited to bar people
from other cultures from discovering and appreciating
ours. To recap, the underlying foundation of the alarm
about the racial demographic and immigration situation
is about preservation, self-respect and order. This is
at odds with the liberal doctrine that asserts we
should "move with the times", or "come together as one
world", and similar superficial excuses. Ultimately we
could encourage all resident ethnic groups to pursue
their autonomous aspirations, rather than the current
modus operandi where whites are discouraged from an
exclusive culture, and are goaded into abandoning
loyalty to their race and heritage.
|