Translate

Saturday, 30 January 2010

Recommended changes to the BNP constitution

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bnp-gets-last-chance-to-scrap-whitesonly-policy-1882127.html

SECTION 1: POLITICAL OBJECTIVES

1) The British National Party shall be a political party which shall be referred to throughout the rest of this Constitution as "the party".

2) The political objectives of the party are set out in the following Statement of Principles'.

(a) The British National Party is a party of British Nationalism, committed to the principle of national sovereignty in all British affairs. It is pledged to the restoration of the unity and integrity of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. It believes that the indigenous peoples of the entire British Isles, and their descendants overseas, form a single brotherhood of peoples, and is pledged therefore to adapt or create political, cultural, economic and military institutions with the aim of fostering the closest possible partnership between these peoples.

(b) The British National Party stands for the preservation of the national and ethnic character of the British people and is wholly opposed to any form of racial integration between British and non-European peoples. It is therefore committed to stemming and reversing the tide of non-white immigration and to restoring, by legal changes, negotiation and consent, the overwhelmingly white makeup of the British population that existed in Britain prior to 1948.

RECOMMENDED REPLACEMENT:

The British National Party is a democratic nationalist party. Nationalism is an ideology of National Interest and British Nationalist Party is the party of the British National Interest.

Nationalism rejects all ideologies that do not serve the long term British National Interest. The Party rejects the incoherent classification of ideologies of the “Right” and “Left” and is only concerned with exhorting what is good and forbidding what is evil, what works and what does not.

Nationalism is in essence pragmatic and responsive to change, and strives to pass on these characteristics to citizens at large, desiring to make them robust, rational and resourceful.

The Nation is necessarily an abstract concept that encompasses the greater good of the greatest number of British citizens, in the long term, and this necessarily requires its political thinkers to think in centuries, not in terms of short-term gains or the narrow self-interest of certain groups.

The Party recognizes that furthering or protecting the interests of a particular group, class, religion or race will be divisive, although it will strive to correct any inequitable inequalities which exist and which cause resentment and strife amongst the peoples of Britain.

All people value liberty and the concomitant of this is personal responsibility. In pursuit of good government, British Nationalism will strive to strike the right balance that will be perceived to be just by the majority.

The Party believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.



Vote: Should the BNP change its racially divisive constitution to something more inclusive to maximise its votes?

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=148

Chilcot Enquiry should be an lllegal Wars Tribunal

There might have been a point to the Chilcot Enquiry if it ends in the execution of all who voted for the war. That would be an object lesson to leaders who propose wars, start wars and conduct aggressive vanity wars that are subsequently lost at great cost the nation's coffers and international reputation.

Friday, 29 January 2010

Invading "Afraq" is like ....

Invading "Afraq" is like having a bad day at work and kicking the dog and/or shouting at the missus and/or kids when you get home.

The US and UK did all of the above and are now finding that the dog needs to be taken to the vet, the missus is filing for divorce and the kids have reported you to Social Services for child abuse.

Anger is indeed a deadly sin.

MUTINY IN AFGHANISTAN

http://bnp.org.uk/tag/afghanistan-war/

You stick your finger somewhere hot. It gets burnt. You say OUCH. The instinct would be to WITHDRAW your finger PRONTO, but in our strange new world, we cannot, for some reason, because we have to preserve the reputations of our already discredited politicians. So have to wait another 18 months to do so while our hand is being roasted ....

In the meantime, parties who were against the war from the beginning are too cowardly to suggest that troops who are on leave go AWOL and troops who are on active service MUTINY in what is after all an ILLEGAL war.

In the meantime, also, a US President who doesn't understand the first thing about economics is talking about spending as if he were about to offer another bottle of gin to somebody already dying of alcohol poisoning.

A clever Jew used to be Chairman of the Fed. Now a stupid Jew who indiscreetly and arrogantly talked of throwing money out of helicopters has been re-appointed.

The Americans have clearly been losing their marbles for a while now. Now they have lost most of their marbles and most of their money and are about to become a Banana Republic.

And still they spend taxpayers money to preserve Bush and NeoConnery.

And the British poodle along unquestioningly.

Strange but true, dementia and doom.


The conference in London yesterday on Afghanistan was an unofficial but unmistakable admission of defeat. We have lost but we need to stay there and get killed for another 18 months so we can pretend we haven't lost and most important of all, haven't lost face. Soldiers who die from now on die to save the reputations of Bush, Blair and Brown. At the expense of the taxpayer. Time to go AWOL and mutiny? I would have thought so.

So, are the BNP going to ask for yet more donations from their hard-pressed members to end the war or are they actually going to tell the troops to go AWOL if they are on leave or MUTINY if they are already in Afghanistan? It is after all an ILLEGAL war and white boys are just dying for Bush, Blair and Brown who are yesterday's men. I think they are just gonna pussyfoot round this crap like the pussies they are, and ask for more money from their members rather than risk any trouble.

This project — which some sources said would cost the British taxpayer an additional £72 million — would see a programme of “job creation” in Afghanistan and the paying of Taliban soldiers to stop fighting and “defend their own villages.”

The mad plan proposes that at least 12,500 Taliban fighters will be paid cash to stop fighting because they have “nothing else to do.”

According to the Department for International Development, British taxpayers are already committed to £510 million in direct aid to Afghanistan over the next four years.

This money is mostly channelled through the Afghan government — which means they spend it on what they want. In this way, the new “peace plan” will see former Taliban fighters such as five senior Taliban regime figures and associates of Mullah Omar (who were all mysteriously removed from a United Nations’ sanctions list yesterday) given jobs, paid for by the British taxpayer.

The removal of former confidants of Mullah Omar from the UN sanctions list is a clear indicator that the Afghan government will now try to bring back the Taliban into the central government as a partner.

This move is endorsed by both Tory and Labour parties who both fail to see that this defeats the objective of their illegal war in the first place.

What the latest “plan” means is that:

- The original illegal invasion has now been made pointless;

- 250 British soldiers have died for nothing;

- The billions which the taxpayer has paid out for the war will now be topped off with further millions to pay out cash to the Taliban fighters who killed those British soldiers;

- The Taliban will end up back in the Afghan government, which only keeps going because of the already existing British taxpayer-supplied foreign aid grants.


All this money and all those lives SQUANDERED on an ILLEGAL war that we were bound to lose anyway.

If the war SHOULD be ended then it MUST be ended.

If it MUST be ended it must be ended AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

If it must be ended as soon as possible then it means exactly that, not pussyfooting around crap just like all the other parties.




Vote: Should the BNP recommend mutiny to the troops in Afghanistan to end the war as soon as possible?

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=147

Wednesday, 27 January 2010

TV show called DICTATOR

If only we could set up experimental communities made up of volunteers for experimental dictatorships using a variety of ideologies eg Islamic, Communist, Latham Libertarian, Khavian Realist or Feminist Fascist. It is not that hard to set up, surely?

We can then get the governed volunteers to give marks out of ten at regular intervals to gauge the popularity of the dictator and the success of his or indeed her policies.

If they can do Big Brother and I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here, I don't see why they can't do this.

Whose shoulders should I tap to bring this brilliant new idea to their attention?

The guests should consist of Claire Khaw's Amazing [But Unemployed Facebook Friends Who Are Glorious and Great]

Saturday, 23 January 2010

Liberal foreign and domestic policies responsible for the mess we are in

Now that we have established that even the stupid, the ignorant can be evil, and that you can kill with compassion as you can kill a cat with cream, we can now go on the offensive with those stupid, ignorant, arrogant LIBERALS.

Watch them blame their own, ie Social Services, for the inadequate toxic parenting of the Depraved Delinquents because their policies have allowed such people to BREED WITH IMPUNITY AT TAXPAYERS' EXPENSE.

Liberal policies have mostly killed the working class and turned most of them into BENEFIT SCUM.

Liberals support feminism which supports female promiscuity which causes family breakdown and single parenthood and is responsible for ever-lowering standards of education and behaviour.

Even now they are just wringing their hands. Some us are even denying that there is a problem at all, THE BASTARDS.

But if you say anything about discouraging single mums or complain about immigration, you are a Nazi Fascist Racist Extremist.

Not only did they have a toxic domestic policy which has turned the working class into BENEFIT SCUM, they had a toxic foreign policy which explains why the terrorists want us to bomb us to kingdom come.

But if you say that, they can probably get you for ENCOURAGING TERRORISM, if you suggest that the terrorists may have a point because we are America's Poodle and America is the Poodle of Israel?

Can someone explain to me why it is in the interests of any of us - Jew or Christian, Muslim or non-Muslim - to die for Israel, after the next terrorist spectacular for which we have now been alerted?

http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/british-terror-alert-raised-to-severe-2028456.html

They are now behaving like demented old women who dare not look at themselves in the mirror and who will scratch your eyes out if you suggest anything like that.

But they are just weak, mad women, aren't they? Out of ideas, out of arguments and running out of time and excuses.

Friday, 22 January 2010

RBS funding Kraft's hostile takeover of Cadbury's

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=amRorkpBoYzQ

More selling of the family silver.

"We must be mad, literally mad ... It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre."

Female shock troops of the Chinese Army

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG3dPnD1SGo

"Talent shows are necessary when recruiting women," Commander Wang Qian of the People's Liberation Army told a press conference in Haidian, "because female solders are a special element of the armed forces. As of this month, the standard army interview for women will consist of a short self-introduction, then a question-and-answer period, followed by a talent show during which the applicant can dance, sing, or display other skills. There are more female applicants than there are places, and the PLA doesn't only want woman who are intelligent, we want candidates who are great in every field."

Some aspiring female officers objected when they were told that they (unlike male applicants) would be required to display a physical talent as part of their interview. "I was shocked by the new talent show test when I first heard about it," sand Zhang Jing from Beijing Union University, before eventually agreeing to recite a piece of poetry. Law graduate Zhang Wenbian added that "At first I thought the talent show was a little unnecessary. But after singing in front of nine judges I changed my mind, because it gave me a chance to display my other skills."

Wang Bosheng of the judging panel said that "it is amazing to see so many pretty girls with such great gifts. I personally believe that this talent show is essential. It was completely my idea and I believe that it will help us to selected the most eligible women for the army."

Private Eye No 1254 - 22 January - 4 February 2010
(China Daily, 30/11/09: Spotter: Andy Clayton)



I now know what the Chinese government is up to: world domination by means of feminine seduction.

Instead of invading foreign countries with their male army, they will send their women first.

A significant minority of men watching the video of the women in red marching and strutting their stuff will probably welcome a whole army of them entering their country and taking them prisoner.

Such a man will probably fantasise about the rough treatment that would be meted out to him while being forced to learn Mandarin while being tied naked to a bed.

Any mistakes in pronunciation will result in having his face slapped by a well-manicured female hand.

Mistakes in intonation will result in having his hair pulled hard by slender feminine fingers.

After enough mistakes have been made and punished there will be an inevitable tumescence.

Watched by the other female soldiers, the most senior, beautiful, intelligent and talented one will mount this helpless man, not even bothering to remove her tunic whose military stiffness will chafe his face while this unspeakable act is being performed on him. He will be ridden roughly and ruthlessly until he spills his seed in her.

Once impregnation is confirmed they are to be regarded as engaged.

Once the child is born his official position will be that of her sex slave and househusband for which the white European male is now trained properly in this country with schools that teach British boys mostly about sex ed and cookery but little else..

Thus will the new blended master race be created.

What should be done to the Doncaster Demon Boys and both their parents?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/sep/03/doncaster-torture-case-brothers

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7036546/Doncaster-attack-brothers-subjected-two-young-boys-to-vicious-prolonged-attack.html

Their necks should be broken, of course.

And then their parents'.

Publicly, if I had my way.

That would the most effective way for decent, right-minded members of society to show their disapproval of such behaviour and a way of distancing themselves from the idea that Britain is really a Nation of Paedophiles, Murderously Sadistic Children, NEETs, Slags, Sluts, Slappers and Single Mums breeding the next generation of all of the above at taxpayers' expense.

That should send a strong message to children who are thinking of following in their depraved footsteps, and to women who enjoy copulating with depraved men but are too stupid to use contraceptives.

Liberals will no doubt howl with horror at my commonsensical suggestion that is so quick, effective and cheap to send a message to such people and their depraved offspring, but be unable to furnish any intellectually coherent reasons for not doing so, apart from the predictable arguments about being "barbaric" and this sort of thing being against the Demon Brothers' human rights.

At the time of writing this, David Cameron has not yet made his speech about Broken Britain. Since he is too cowardly to unambiguously condemn single mummery or uncompromisingly support those who take the trouble to get married before they have children, then it will be the usual empty earnestness and plastic prating that he is so good at.


http://www.andybarefoot.com/politics/cameron.php?poster=41519

http://www.andybarefoot.com/politics/cameron.php?poster=41323

http://www.andybarefoot.com/politics/cameron.php?poster=30927

http://www.andybarefoot.com/politics/cameron.php?poster=30425

Thursday, 21 January 2010

7 Point Plan to Peace

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jan/21/counter-terrorism-funds-pakistan

The solution to the shortfall in terrorism funds is idiotically simple that even a child could tell you the answer.

1. Stop giving more terrorists more reasons to hate you.

2. Stop making Muslims all over the world hate you.

3. Stop putting British Muslims in an impossible position.

4. Stop associating ourselves with Israel and the US.

5. Stop the killing of white boys by the Taliban.

6. Stop white boys killing Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan.

7. Stop the war.

Jack Straw and the Chilcot Enquiry

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6996895.ece

Jack Straw paraphrased:

"I knew it was wrong but did it anyway."

Warning notices to burglars

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/8469850.stm

Imagine there are two kinds of signs for householders to put outside their homes:

(1) "This is a liberal household. Any action taken against burglars will be proportionate and reasonable. "

(2) "This household will take any action deemed necessary to discourage criminals in our society. Trespassers beware."

Which one would you rather have?

My solution to the Decline and Fall of British Civilisation

Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace or How We Came To Be So Hated by Gore Vidal explains how you have this thing called the American Constitution, the government flouts it and nobody notices or if they do, nobody cares.

Straying from the Koran - the Word of God that is meant to serve as a warning and a guide to all humanity, which is also much longer and more intimidating - must be a lot like that.

Britain needs a written constitution so if we do stray we will know how far, if anybody can still read by then.

But we are already mostly illegitimate, innumerate, illiterate, ignorant and arrogant. And we will just get worse.

Nobody listens to me, but my solution is to have all of us vote for a one-party state operating direct democracy under a narrower franchise.

I have even drafted a party constitution.

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

How to deal with the Deadly Sin of Gluttony, manifested in Obesity

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7035013/NHS-rations-obesity-surgery-to-save-money.html

Another reason to completely privatise the NHS.

We should let these morbidly people eat until they go pop (like that diner in Monty Python's Meaning of Life) or declare Open Season when it is legal to hunt and shoot obese people.

The comedic possibilities of the obese fleeing and hiding in cupboards that are too small for them, trying to get through doors that are too narrow for them, or trying to get under a bed to hide from their hunters are delicious and endless.

We could have a successful series of cookery programmes watching them being cooked on TV by celebrity chefs after they have been successfully hunted down.

My solutions would ensure that the problem would, er, thin out in due course, at no extra cost to the overburdened taxpayer.

Wednesday, 20 January 2010

Obama and the incorrect choice of promises he should have kept and broken

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8466995.stm

Obama should have broken his promise to give the Americans free health care and kept his promise to end the war.

It would have been fiscally more responsible.

Tuesday, 19 January 2010

Madame Marcati, Suzanne Moore, Rod Liddle and Claire Khaw - Orwell Prize blogger Aspirant

KEEP WATCHING THIS SPACE.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00pr4c0#synopsis

http://madamearcati.blogspot.com/2010/01/rod-liddle-and-suzanne-moore-fight-it.html

http://www.anorak.co.uk/236651/media/rod-liddle-and-suzanne-moore-row-over-independent-editors-job-on-facebook.html

Private Eye No 1253, 8-21 January 2010 - Street of Shame

While hacks on the Independent cannot fail to notice the fractious relationship between editor Roger Alton and is deputy Ian Birrell, who seem to have different editorial agendas, the truth is that neither will be decisive in shaping the future direction of the paper.

Instead, hacks keen to work out what they'll be doing this year should be looking to two other men: Alexander Lebedev and Matthew Freud.

Ailing Independent boss Simon Kelner has spent more than 18 months negotiating the sale of the Independent to Lebedev - who may or may not turn it into a freesheet like his other purchase, the London Evening Standard. They will find out soon enough, since the sale is scheduled for completion by mid-February.

Meanwhile, Kelner's long-standing buddy Matthew Freud, has handed over a room in his own offices for the clandestine redesign of the paper that will debut early this year. So close to the action is Freud's PR team that one member, Claire Curran, has ever been known to attend meetings of the paper's executive board. If all goes to plan, the redesign will be accompanied by a major advertising push; but given that the paper is being guided by a PR firm and is about to be purchased by a former KGB agent, it is safe to assume the new campaign is unlikely to reprise the paper's old shout line: "The Independent: It is, Are You?"

Private Eye No 1254, 22 January-4 February 2010 - Street of Shame

Frenzied ululations in the blogosphere and Twitterland at the news that Rod Liddle's buttocks may fill the editor's chair if Alexander Lebedev buys the Independent. By last Friday almost 4,000 people had signed up for the Facebook group "If Rod Liddle becomes editor of the Independent, I will not buy it again".

How many Tweets and Facebook groups are there expressing similar shock at the prospect of the venerable Indie being owned and controlled by a man from the KGB? Er, none.

Meanwhile, the Guardian reports that Lebedev may install Indie features executive Adam Leigh as Liddle's deputy. Leigh's most obvious qualification for the job is that his uncle is Indie supremo Simon Kelner, but the Guardian omits to mention this. It claims instead that "his appointment could mollify Independent journalists worried that the potential appointment of Liddle could overturn the paper's liberal values".

This surprises some hacks who have worked under Leigh. "Mollify?" one mutters. "Liberal values? The man's a craven philistine and an appalling bully. A worse bully than Max Hastings. At least with Max there was usually a reason why he was angry. With Adam it was just insecurity, always second-guessing what his uncle would want. "

What his uncle now wants is Rod Liddle. Could even Leigh have second-guessed that?

Suicide Pill Pack

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8466112.stm

I am so tired of hearing about silly cases like this one being prosecuted at huge expense to the taxpayer which end up not deciding anything anyway.

The daughter wanted to die.

The mother wanted the daughter to die.

The daughter was no good to man nor beast.

So, unless you want to look after her in your own home for the rest of her life, what is the problem?

Why can't we have a trial period of selling Suicide Pill Packs?

It would work like a pill-popping version of Russian Roulette.

Basically, the idea is take one pill a day for seven days from a pack. One of them contains a poison pill, but you don't know which one ....

Monday, 18 January 2010

Drake as Bin Laden, America as the Spanish Armada's attempt to "shock and awe"?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00q3l9k

A beautifully filmed, dramatically told history of the British Navy by the tall, dark and handsome Dan Snow. Mmmmmmm!

If there is any justice in the world it will win lots of awards.

Another suicide bombing in Afghanistan: the one on 18 January 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/world/asia/19afghan.html

What just happened in Kabul shows the utter futility of waging a "war" on terrorism. Such a "war" can only be a metaphor, and you cannot bomb a metaphor.

You can only deal with terrorists by dealing with their grievances, which you previously thought you could ignore with impunity.

Was there that much justice in British foreign policy in the invasion of "Afraq"?

80% of the Muslims in the world wish the US and UK harm.

Could it be time to acknowledge the error of our ways and resolve to do better in future?

No justice, no peace?

Kindness

"Kindness is the difference between the heaven and hell."

Rabbi Lionel Blue on nurses and nursing on Thought for the Day

http://www.platitudes.org.uk

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/programmes/thought/

Thursday, 14 January 2010

A properly-attired Muslim: "ornaments" = cleavage and thighs

Here is what I hope is an Islamic argument for the banning of the niqab for the protection of Muslims and the prevention of crime and Islamophobia.

24:31 contains the dress code for a properly-attired Muslim woman.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/024.qmt.html

Way I look at it, no cleavage should be on view. That's it.

A woman's "ornaments" are her breasts and thighs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleavage_%28breasts%29

Arguably, an ugly woman has no ornaments at all and everything about a beautiful woman is an ornament, including her eyes, which you cannot cover or you would be blinding her. I suppose you could argue that a beautiful woman must always wear sunglasses in a public place, but that would just be impractical and extreme.

Having dealt with a woman's upper torso, we now, er, "lower our gaze" to her lower torso.

Therefore, you have some sort of sensible rule. I would suggest that modest dress includes skirts.

Let us say then that anything above a woman's knee is an ornament, and skirts, to be modest, should cover a woman's thighs.

In one morning I have single-handedly resolved and pronounced upon the proper dress code for all decent, right-minded women, Muslim and non-Muslim, for all time.

In a perfect world, I would be called upon to be the Mufti of Britain.

What the Prophet Muhammad might have done if he were Anjem Choudary

I like to imagine that the Prophet Muhammad if he were alive and living in this country would turn up at Wootton Bassett and express sympathy and sorrow at the unnecessary deaths of the white working classes who are cannon fodder to the dishonourable and disastrous war that even the nitwit NeoCons now wish they hadn't started.

He might have made a speech suggesting that those who are still alive with the full number of limbs they were born with should consider going AWOL if they are about to be sent to Afghanistan and feeling uneasy about the war, and he might have suggested that those already there mutiny and down tools.

He might have suggested that the parents of soldiers still alive and not wishing to attend the funeral of their children persuade their children to do the same.

The penalty for going AWOL and mutiny is a court martial and 3 years' imprisonment, I think, but at least after that you would be alive, and still have the full number of limbs you were born with.

What would the Prophet Muhammad himself do is always a good question to ask oneself or suggest that the Muslims ask themselves, I would have thought.

Tuesday, 12 January 2010

My Fantasy Cabinet

Prime Minister - Peter Mandelson

Chancellor of the Exchequer - Vince Cable

Foreign Secretary - Daniel Hannan

Home Secretary - Nick Griffin

Education Secretary - David Cameron


I really think this has the potential for a sitcom set in a one-party state. What do people think?

Gloating about the banning of Al Muhajiroun?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/10/david-mitchell-free-speech

Next time you propose a march that enough people find "offensive", and agree that terrorists might be angry with us because of our foreign policy of invading people's countries on the pretence that they have WMDs and may harbour terrorists, you could find your organisation banned.

Did we invade Eire to kill the IRA? Why not?

I propose the BNP now take the initiative and hold a mock funeral with empty coffins:

Coffin 1 - Freedom of Speech (Can't say "gollywog" now can we?)

Coffin 2 - Freedom of Belief (that British foreign policy encourages terrorism, anything that offends PC ideology and those who are against an Islamic state)

Coffin 3 - Freedom of Contract (all anti-discrimination legislation)

Coffin 4 - Freedom of Association (BNP, Jewish Free School judgment that said Orthodox Jews racist and/or sexist)

Coffin 5 - the right to property (high taxes infringe this)

It would be nice if the BNP could summon up the courage to invite Anjem Choudary and hold it in Wootton Bassett for maximum publicity.

Perhaps they will end up being banned. And then what will we do?


Civil disorder would be an option, but this is unlikely in a cowed and a apathetic populace, the majority of whom are sheeple.

Sunday, 10 January 2010

Two simple reasons why invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan is Illegal

OFFICIAL:

Invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan ILLEGAL. Why? Because Article 5 of NATO Treaty implicitly refers to an "armed attack" by another sovereign state.

Al Qaeda is not another sovereign state.

Iraq was not responsible for 9/11.

Anyone who still supports the invasions are supporters of illegal wars.

As long as we are now clear about this.

BNP may win enough votes in Barking if they get the right racially-inclusive message on the death penalty

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8450052.stm

No doubt Nick Griffin will use this murder of a Sikh in Barking by two black youths to put the case for the return of the death penalty in his general election campaign in Barking. This is something that will unite all the races in this country on a matter which the liberal establishment has conspired to thwart majority opinion for far too long.

This - http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/law_final.pdf - is UKIP's 2008 policy on crime, which I find very disappointing, as I was under the impression that they wanted the death penalty. I searched the document for any references to "death penalty" and "capital punishment". Nada. If you want the death penalty you would have to vote BNP.

http://bnp.org.uk/manifestos/mini-manifesto-2007/ (page 6, Crime and Justice)




Vote: Should the death penalty be re-introduced in some form, eg for the worst cases of murder?

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=7

You could be sued for clearing snow from the pavement outside

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/topics/weather/6958131/Health-and-safety-experts-warn-dont-clear-icy-pavements-you-could-get-sued.html

I actually shovelled snow yesterday because I didn't want any old dears to be breaking their hips (including my own dear self) slipping on ice on the pavement outside. If anyone sues me for doing that I will join Al Qaeda.

Saturday, 9 January 2010

The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli

" ...one change always leaves the toothing for another."

" ... men ought either to be well-treated or crushed."

" ... the injury that is to be done to a man ought to be of such a kind that one does not stand in fear of revenge."

"There are three courses for those who wish to hold [states]: the first is to ruin them, the next is to reside there in person, the third is to permit them to live under their own laws, drawing a tribute, and establishing within it an oligarchy which will keep it friendly to you."

" .... he who would keep a city accustomed to freedom will hold it more easily by the means of its own citizens than in any other way."

" ... the Medes soft and effeminate through their long peace."

" ... there is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

" ... the incredulity of men, who do not believe in new things until they have had a long experience of them."

" ... all armed prophets have conquered and the unarmed ones have been destroyed."

" ... the nature of the people is variable, and whilst it is easy to persuade them, it is difficult to fix them in that persuasion. And thus it is necessary to take such measures that, when they believe no longer, if may be possible to make them believe by force."

" ... to secure himself in his new principality, to win friends, to overcome either by force or fraud, to make himself beloved and feared by the people, to be followed and revered by the soldiers, to exterminate those who have power or reason to hurt him, to change the old order of things for new, to be severe and gracious, magnanimous and liberal, to destroy a disloyal soldiery and to create new, to maintain friendships with kings and princes in such a way that they must help him with zeal and offend him with caution ... "

" ... in seizing a state, the usurper ought to examine closely into all those injuries which it is necessary for him to inflict, and to do them all at one stroke so as not to have to repeat them daily; and thus by not unsettling men he will be able to reassure them, and win them to himself by benefits."

" ... injuries ought to be done all at one time, so that, being tasted less, they offend less; benefits ought to be given little by little, so that the flavour of them may last longer."

"He who obtains sovereignty by the assistance of the nobles maintains himself with more difficulty than he who comes to it by the aid of the people, because the former finds himself with many around him who consider themselves his equal, and because of this he can neither rule nor manage them to his liking. But he who reaches sovereignty by popular favour finds himself alone, and has none around him, or few, who are not prepared to obey him."

" ... one cannot by fair dealing, and without injury to others, satisfy the nobles, but you can satisfy the people, for their object is more righteous than that of the nobles, the latter wishing to oppress, whilst the former only desire not to be oppressed."

" ... a wise prince ought to adopt such a course that his citizens will always in every sort and kind of circumstance have need of the state and of him, and then he will always find them faithful."

"The chief foundations of all states, new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms."

" ... if he who rules a principality cannot recognise evils until they are upon him, he is not truly wise; and this insight is given to few."

" ... nothing can be so uncertain or unstable as fame or power not founded on its own strength."

" ... because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live, that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation; for a man who wishes to act entirely up to his professions of virtue soon meets with what destroys him among so much that is evil."

"A prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, through too much mercy, allow disorders to arise, from which follow murders or robberies; for those are wont to injure the whole people ... "

"Men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails."

"It makes him contemptible to be considered fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute, from all of which a prince should guard himself as from a rock; and he should endeavour to show in his actions greatness, courage, gravity and fortitude; and in his private dealings with his subjects let him show that his judgments are irrevocable, and maintain himself in such reputation that no one can hope either to deceive him or get round him."

"He who conspires cannot act alone, nor can he take a companion except from those whom he believes to be malcontents, and as soon as you have opened your mind to a malcontent you have given him the material with which to content himself, for by denouncing you he can look for every advantage; so that, seeing the gain from this course to be assured, and seeing the other doubtful and full of dangers, he must be very rare friend, or a thoroughly obstinate enemy of the prince, to keep faith with you."

"Princes ought to leave affairs of reproach to the management of others, and keep those of grace in their own hands."

"As princes cannot help being hated by someone, they ought, in the first place, to avoid being hated by everyone, and when they cannot compass this, they ought to endeavour with the utmost diligence to avoid the hatred of the most powerful."

" ... a wise prince, when he has the opportunity, ought with craft to foster some animosity against himself, so that, having crushed it, his renown may rise higher."

"A prince is also respected when he is either a true friend or a downright enemy, that is to say, when, without any reservation, he declares himself in favour of one party against the other; which of course will always be more advantageous than standing neutral; because if two of your powerful neighbours come to blows, they are of such a character that, if one of them conquers, you have either to fear him or not."

"Never let any government imagine that it can choose perfectly safe courses; rather let it expect to have to take very doubtful ones, because it is found in ordinary affairs that one never seeks to avoid one trouble without running into another; but prudence consists in knowing how to distinguish the character of troubles, and for choice to take the lesser evil."

"The prince who relies entirely upon fortune is lost when it changes."

"He will be successful who directs his actions according to the spirit of the times, and that he whose actions do not accord with the times will not be successful."

"It is better to be adventurous than cautious, because Fortune is a woman, and if you wish to keep her under it is necessary to beat and ill use her; and it is seen that she allows herself to be mastered by the adventurous rather than by those who go to work more coldly."

" ... the old order of things was not good, and none of us have known how to find a new one. And nothing honours a man more than to establish new laws and new ordinances when he himself was newly risen."

Friday, 8 January 2010

Let us call the unique and supreme deity "YahHoLah"

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1952497,00.html

OFFICIAL: Christian God and Muslim God one and the same.

Omnipotent and unique deity a generic idea. What you call it indicative of whether you are Jew ("Yahweh") , Christian ("Jehovah") or Muslim ("Allah").

World peace might be better served if we mixed it all up.

I propose "YahHoLah".

Political Correctness gone mad, and we are all paying for it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1239765/Park-ranger-sacked-racist-joke-wins-40k-compensation-tribunal-tells-council-skin-colour-fact-life.html

Because a black man said it was racist of a white employee to jokingly ask if he put polish on his legs, Lambeth Council had to pay the white employee they sacked £40K for wrongfully dismissing him for "gross misconduct".

£40K of taxpayers' money, folks. More if you include the legal fees Lambeth must have paid to defend the case.

It would be a rather good story if it were to be discovered later that the white and black employee were in cahoots with each other in a conspiracy to divvy up the £40K between themselves ....

Why the BNP should support Choudary's proposed Wootton Bassett march

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6931768/Anjem-Choudary-admits-Wootton-Bassett-march-is-publicity-stunt.html

If we think things through logically, everyone of us who were against the war from the beginning - Muslim or not - must want to be proven right. More and more politicians are agreeing with us. Those who felt strongly enough about it at the time actually resigned, eg Clare Short, the late Robin Cook, and most recently Eric Joyce.

We cannot, if we are being logical, wish the war well or the agents of the state who prosecute it.

Choudary is at least following the logic of his conclusions.

What would be the point of "honouring" the war dead who prosecuted a war you disapprove of?

In my opinion, he is the only one with the courage of his convictions. Virtually all Muslims disapprove of the war too, but revile Choudary because they don't want the unwelcome and aggressive attention of Islamophobes that is so easily aroused in the West.

It is the hypocrisy of the BNP that I find particularly cowardly and disgusting. They are supposed to be looking after their own white working class boys, yet they too are saying "honour our dead" and allowing a superb opportunity of opposing the war to pass by. Of course the government wants to prevent the march, and they have variously called Choudary's proposed march "abhorrent", "unacceptable" and "offensive".

Have they not heard that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?

It would appear that they still have not worked out which is the enemy and which the friend.

While it is common knowledge that the BNP hate Muslims, it must ask itself who let them in in the first place.

It was of course their own white political establishment who let them in and then accused all who dared to complain about immigration of being "Nazi Fascist Racist Extremist" so they could suppress and then ignore the complaints of the white working classes who did not like having their neighbourhoods taken over by foreigners bringing in an alien faith.

It was after all the British government who started the stupid war in the first place and was responsible for successive decades of uncontrolled immigration.

It is time the BNP decided once and for all who their enemy and who is a potential ally and it appears that they are having difficulty sticking to a consistent line. The BNP Chairman Nick Griffin on Question Time spoke of "a truce with the Muslims" though on the same TV appearance he described Islam as "a wicked and vicious faith".

As recently as 10 December 2009, the Muslim Debate Initiative hosted a debate - an invitation the BNP accepted.

http://www.thedebateinitiative.com/#/islamification-debate/4536297387

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/12/historic-evening-of-debate-between.html

How is continuing to honour the dead soldiers fighting a war they disapprove of "supporting British troops"? If by "supporting" them we implicitly approve a policy of continuing to send them to their deaths, then British soldiers could do with less of this kind of "support", I would have thought. The BNP are just standing by while more are being sent to their deaths.

Painful though it is, the BNP must see the logic of not honouring those who died prosecuting the disastrous and dishonourable war of a discredited government.

They cannot have their cake and eat or have it both ways. It makes no sense to honour the fallen soldiers of a war you disapprove of.

To the bereaved, the message should be sympathy and the declared intention of preventing any more parents of members of the Armed Forces from suffering the same bereavement.

Were the BNP to support the Choudary's march they would actually be doing something constructive, rather than merely saying "British Muslims shall not criticise British troops even if they prosecute a war against Muslims we were also against from the beginning, just because they are Muslim".

It is inconsistent, idiotic, unconstructive, and frankly chauvinistic, but that should come as no surprise as it is the BNP we are talking about.

The sooner the war is stopped the better. Any opportunity to show disapproval of it is should be used to best advantage by all who oppose the war, Muslim and non-Muslim. If those who oppose the war are accused of being 5th Columnists, let us all, Muslim and non-Muslim, BNP and non-BNP be in it together.

That would send the strongest possible anti-war message to the government.

I would have thought this was pretty obvious, but sadly it is not. It appears that only Choudary and I see things this way.




Vote: Should Anjem Choudary's proposed march in Wootton Bassett be allowed to go ahead?
http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=145