Oz and Russia to Welcome Besieged South Africans

Good news! The white population in South Africa has been under the gun (and the machete) for far too long; a murderous heritage from Nelson Mandela to his people. But that legacy is about to turn.

That Russia is smart enough to offer experienced white farmers land to put into production shows how shrewd is the Bear. Heaven knows it needs people who are willing to be fruitful and multiply.

Meanwhile, Australia will have some balance for its leftist leanings, and some ballast for its ship of state that will eventually have to turn toward China.

Social Justice: An Analysis (Part 1)

Below is the first part of a four-part guest essay by Richard Cocks about Social Justice (and also, of course, Social Justice Warriors).

Social Justice: An Analysis

by Richard Cocks

Part 1

Cosmic justice: infantile and nihilistic

Social class, home environment, genetics and other factors all contribute to differences between individuals. People differ in looks, height, income, social status, morality, various kinds of intelligence and athleticism, musical ability, industriousness, discipline, and every other human characteristic. Differences in culture, history, and geography generate differences between groups. Being born into a culture that emphasizes hard work, education, conscientiousness, and thrift is a tremendous advantage.

“Social justice” advocates describe the resulting disparate achievements as “inequalities” with the suggestion that these represent some kind of injustice. Unequal achievement is treated as though it must be the result of discrimination, “privilege” or some other unfairness, while it is in fact the inevitable consequence of differences between individuals and groups. These differences will exist no matter how a society is organized, barring a race to the bottom where the laziest, least talented individual set the bar and every achievement that surpasses that pitiful measure gets confiscated and distributed — removing any incentive to do anything much at all.

Very young children and even some animals[1] have a sense of justice or fairness. In humans this starts out with an intuitive perception, later gets modified by reflection and culture, which in turn influences what gets perceived as just or unjust. Iain McGilchrist describes this as right hemisphere perception, left hemisphere mid-level processing, returning once more to the right hemisphere.[2]

An egocentric child, without prompting, can perceive that receiving a small ice cream while his brother gets a large one is unfair and unjust.[3] However, he is also likely to think that the fact that his older brother has fewer restrictions on what he can do than he does is unfair. Both cases generate resentment. However, only one is justified.

In the second case, being older and thus a little wiser, the older brother does not need as much supervision. He is more capable, self-sufficient and responsible, and therefore has more privileges. These privileges might seem unfair and unjust in some “cosmic” sense, but they are in fact perfectly reasonable.[4] His parents are not being unjust at all. It is merely that age and experience are on the side of the older brother. To harbor resentment at the parents is unreasonable, unfair and unjust. They are blameless. To resent the brother is also ridiculous. There will always be an older sibling as long as siblings exist. The protest is misguided.

Part of the maturation process is learning to distinguish between events that are due to favoritism, attempts to solicit elicit sexual favors, or some other inequity and occurrences that are the result of relevant differences between people. To feel resentful towards someone merely because he is better in some way, such as in looks, status, wealth, or popularity, is in some sense natural. It is also puerile and undeserved. It is a sin in the literal sense of missing the mark. Certainly the envied person is not at fault simply for being superior. The defect is in the heart of the malicious resentful one.

It is true that even a relatively happy, mature person will almost inevitably suffer occasionally from this kind of inappropriate resentment, but he recognizes that the fault lies in his own breast, not in the other person.

By failing to distinguish between deserved resentment and inappropriate hatred towards someone or some group simply for being superior in some way, “social justice” returns people to an infantile inability to differentiate between resentment based on actual unjust treatment, and resentment that is generated simply by the desire to have or be what someone else has or is.

If the universe itself can be considered unjust in some way, due to the unequal distribution of admirable characteristics, it is not the fault or responsibility of man and it is not in man’s power to fix. It is certainly not the fault of “society,” which the phrase “social justice” implies. Justice and fairness appropriately considered enter the picture only with regard to human institutions and rules.

To reject inequalities is to rebel against reality itself. All people bar two are superior to some and inferior to others in any conceivable characteristic. To reject that fact is to renounce the character of existing at all.

One response to existence and Being is to reject it; to decide that it is better never to have lived and then, having lived, to end it as soon as possible. Mass shooters act out the intention not just to end their own lives, but to kill as many as they can in a rejection of Life itself.[5] Social justice warriors are engaged in a similar kind of nihilism. Scapegoating and killing the “kulaks”[6] in the manner of Stalin has no logical end. Since differences of achievement are unavoidable, the logic of social justice is the complete destruction of the human race. By encouraging undeserved resentment against individuals and whole sectors of society, “social justice” activists ramp up intergroup hatreds that promote internecine conflict and, if unchecked, will lead to more horrible violence than simply one individual picking up a gun. Once the scapegoated group is murdered, differing levels of success within the persecuting group remain, and the process will continue.

To reward merit or productivity?

In thinking about economic success, Thomas Sowell recommends simply jettisoning the notion of merit. He argues that “the concept of merit brings an insult to misfortune and arrogance to achievement.”[7] It is impossible to separate how much achievement is the result of talent, for which a person can take no credit, and how much is the result of industriousness. On the face of it, hard work seems meritorious. However, even industriousness tends to be highly affected by familial and cultural influences; an unearned advantage. This means that it is not possible to assess merit. What can be rewarded — what is known how to reward — is productivity.

Rewarding productivity creates an incentive to be productive, and all tend to benefit. They benefit because rewarding productivity encourages using the latest technology and most effective methods, raising the quality of products while reducing their cost. Simply rewarding effort would not be optimal for that reason.

Continue reading

The End Times of Albion: Tyranny and Ineptitude in High Places

The essay below by Seneca III is the latest in the “End Times of Albion” series. Previously: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6A, Part 6B, Part 7A, and Part 7B.

Tyranny and Ineptitude in High Places

The End Times of Albion, Part 8

by Seneca III

May the Good Lord save us all

Preamble

At 1300 hrs BST on Saturday 14th July 2018 I sent this to GoV:

Baron,

It looks as if the Met may be setting up a confrontation between ‘Stand up to Racism’ and the ‘Welcome Trump’ marchers combined with the ‘Free Tommy Robinson’ rally. The last will already be established in Whitehall coming in from the North whilst the ‘Welcome Trumpers’ have been directed to join up with them via a roundabout route and also approach from the North; the ‘Stand up to Racism’ lot have been given free rein to approach however they wish from the South along Whitehall from their assembly point in Palace Yard.

Quote: Chief Superintendent Elaine Van-Orden said: “Our message is simple: if you wish to protest peacefully, that is your right and we want to work with you. If you commit criminal acts or breach the conditions of the event, you are liable to be arrested.”

I suspect the plan may be to let ‘Stand up to Racism’ kick off against the other two groups at the junction of Whitehall with Horse Guards and who will, naturally, defend themselves and thus give Plod the chance to wade into them and set them up as the fall guys.

I do hope not, but if that is the case I hope that at least some of the good guys read and digested Part 6B.

Seneca III

As it happened

It has long been understood in certain quarters that the collective IQ of the senior ranks in the Met is nothing to write home about. Apart from a significant percentile of them being career-box-ticking graduates of the Common Purpose Collective with degrees in politics, sociology, underwater basket-weaving, or with an affirmative-actioned Master of Philosophy degree in criminology from Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, there aren’t too many creative free-range neurons bouncing around.

Essentially, impartial planning is not their forte, although they do pretty well at buggering about those people whom they have been conditioned to regard as ‘Deplorables’. Hence on Saturday out came the threatening flyers concerning Section 12 of the Public order Act 1986, together with the route to be taken by the Welcome Trump crowd when they joined up with the Free Tommy Robinson rally.

This is the Met’s original plan:


(Note the last line)

The planned route for the Welcome Trump march. It is not the shortest 0.8 blue dotted one but the longest grey one possible bringing them in from the North via St. Martin-in-the-Fields — the one and only route the Welcome Trump Rally could take to join up with the Free Tommy Robinson protest.

[N.B. I recall from years ago that there was once a requirement for a senior officer to take over command of the (traffic?) planning unit. This required some ability in mathematics. The guy who was eventually promoted was the only officer who, in those pre-calculator days, could handle simple arithmetic using a pencil and paper — he held the highest mathematics qualification of all the candidates at the required (high) rank…it was a GCE in Maths (Junior High School Diploma in the US) and he got the job. London traffic has never been the same since.]


The planned route for the ‘Stand up to Racism’ rabble

However, to add insult to injury, the delegation of authority to localised commanders contained in the last line in the flyer shown above is probably what was utilized when the Welcome Trump gathering were told that they were now forbidden to march as planned and authorised, but that they must make their way individually in groups no larger then two, displaying neither banners nor flags, or they would be arrested, prosecuted and heavily fined.

Yet, the Met had already promulgated that the Section 12 provisions DID NOT APPLY TO ‘STAND UP TO RACISM’ AND THEY WERE FREE TO PROCEED HOWEVER THEY WISHED, the inevitable result of this favoured status was to make it possible for these masked Antifa to attack the peaceful Free Tommy/Welcome Trump combined group sometime later in the proceedings…

…when at least a few of the Plod must have realised that the whole mess they had organised had gone pear-shaped, thanks to the incubus and succubus of Londonistan…

…Caliph Khan and the Epithet Redacted.

Continue reading

The #FreeTommy Rally

I found this on Twitter. Short but clear. And the chant has mercifully replaced the cadences of “Who Killed Cock Robin” – which heretofore had looped in me noggin every time I wrote or spoke about the man.

I don’t usually upload videos to my channel. I save that task for our friends. But since this Bastille Day is also another #FreeTommy occasion, I couldn’t resist.

A longer essay, concerning the new #FreeTommy news will eventually be posted [After I get the quiche in the oven].

Welcome to the Islamic People’s Republic of Amsterdam

Our Dutch correspondent H. Numan sends this report on the latest political news from The Netherlands: the appointment of a commie chick as the mayor of Amsterdam.

Welcome to the islamic people’s republic of Amsterdam

by H. Numan

Amsterdam lost its mayor Eberhard van der Laan; he died last year. Eberhard was temporarily replaced by Jozias van Aartsen. This gentleman was the mayor of The Hague. Under his capable administration that city acquired its first banlieues. He continued the good work in Amsterdam. Until a new mayor was appointed, which is now. Habemus papam, we got one! It will be Femke Halsema. She was leader of Green Left, and that party won the elections.

Now, that looks clear enough, and democratic on first sight. But in Holland most things are somewhat different on second sight, especially in politics. Not everything is what it seems. We have municipal elections, and you vote for persons, not for parties. So far, so good. Here comes the snake in the grass: you can’t vote for a mayor. Or even which alderman actually represents you in the city council.

That is decided beyond firmly closed doors by the parties. Yes, it’s possible for a popular politician to be elected with preferential votes, but that’s not the norm. Everybody in The Netherlands knows “had-je-me-maar”. Roughly translated as ‘you wished you got me’. His real name was Cornelis de Gelder, and he was a tramp with a severe alcohol problem. He ran in 1921 for office, more or less as a joke. He was elected nevertheless. Back then the people were just as fed up with back-room politics as we are today. (He never took his seat in the council, as he was sentenced for drunkenness to a rehabilitation clinic prior to his election.)

So it does happen, just not often. The normal procedure is that the most the likely parties get together and negotiate a deal. As long as it pleases the lords regent, that is. In Rotterdam the party Leefbaar won by a landslide and was boycotted out of office. That’s how the council is formed. Electing a mayor is a very different story. Mayors in The Netherlands aren’t elected, but appointed by the king. The king himself doesn’t decide who becomes mayor; he merely appoints the preferred candidate. Not even the national parties do that. Though they, of course, are in the know. It’s the local parties who decide. Again, behind firmly closed doors. Who, what and how that is decided is none of your business! In fact, when a journalist got hold of information about the new mayor of ’s Hertogenbosch, the city filed criminal charges with the Rijksrecherche (our FBI).

Amsterdam has always been a bit different. It was the last city to join the revolt against Spain, for example. It always had strong communist and socialist parties. Since WW2 the mayor has always been a socialist. That’s a bit difficult now that party is in severe decline. The new kid on the block is GreenLeft (former communist party), which won the municipal elections.

The results: GreenLeft 10 seats, D66: 8 seats, PvdA: 5 seats, Socialist Party: 3 seats, Conservatives (VVD): 6 seats, Forum for Democracy (FvD): 3 seats, Denk (a branch of the Turkish AK party): 3 seats, the other parties combined (including the CDA): 7 seats.

GreenLeft calls the shots. They immediately boycotted a council with FvD and the VVD in it. They wanted, and got, a near-communist council. Of course they invited everybody who cared to apply for the position of mayor. In real life, Rutger Groot-Wassink, the leader of GL Amsterdam, is the kingmaker. He decided the next mayor must be a socialist or better, and a woman. No one else needed to apply. With hope of succeeding, that is. Who is Groot-Wassink? If you search online, you won’t find much. He prefers to operate in the shadow behind the scenes. He represents the extreme left wing of GL. If you’re looking for a possible/likely link between Antifa, anarchism, vegan terrorism and jihad, look no further. I can’t accuse the man of anything, but he’s a very likely candidate to begin your research with.

Continue reading

Trump and Brexit

Seems as though once-Great Britain has just experienced a series of Trump stinkbombs, the biggest of which is his public callout of PM May.

She must be seething and Boris Johnson must be showing all his teeth.

My favorite of Trump’s stinkers was his denouncement of Sadiq Khan. But you’ll look long and hard on Google to find it. Same with Duck Duck Go. I don’t have the patience to look for the quote I saw regarding London’s soaring crime rate but it’s out there if you parse your search just right.

Wait till Scotland gets to tell him what they think of his golf course. Watch hiim do battle with the nay-sayers. Must be his heritage on his mother’s side.

A Westerner Reads the Koran

A Westerner Reads the Koran

by Thomas F. Bertonneau

Introduction

The Western layman approaching the Koran for the first time must experience something like befuddlement. Supposing that the layman possesses a good education, including knowledge of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible and the core classics of the Greek and Roman worlds, the Koran will strike him as something like the opposite of that with which he enjoys familiarity. Take the Bible’s Genesis: It deals in straightforward narrative, as do its Near Eastern precursor texts such as the Babylonian Creation or Enuma Elish. The very opening words of Genesis invoke the concept of a beginning, which implies in advance both a middle-part and an end. The same is true of the Greek poet Hesiod’s account of the generations of the gods — Elemental, Titanic, and Olympian — in his Theogony. After Hesiod explains his own function as an interpreter of the lore concerning these things, he launches into his genealogical story whose episodes follow one another in comprehensible sequence: Once again, a beginning, a middle-part, and an end. In much the same way, the New Testament follows the Old Testament so that, taken together, they constitute a unified tale. The events in Homer’s Odyssey similarly follow in a comprehensible way the events in Homer’s Iliad. The essential seriality, as it might be called, of Western narrative and exposition contributes mightily to their seriousness and comprehensibility. Both the Old Testament and the New also sort out their chapters so as to keep non-narrative prose separate from narrative prose. This consideration helps the reader. To whomsoever compiled the Koran these principles meant nothing. The Koran lards non-narrative exposition into its narratives — promiscuously and confusingly from a readerly point of view. A properly chronological narrative can, by a difficult labor, be reconstructed from the Koran’s chapters or surahs, borrowing the history of prophecy from the Old Testament, but the naïve Western reader who proceeds from one surah to another will encounter no orderly arrangement of episodes such as he might expect in the Bible or Homer.

The Koran bears some resemblance to a little-known category of quasi-Western literature that appeared in the Greek-speaking parts of the divided Roman Empire in the centuries that historians label as Late Antiquity. The literature of the Third through the Fifth Centuries was largely religious and it was also competitively religious as sects and heresies of various kinds metastasized and proliferated. The Bible familiar to modern Westerners had already been codified and enjoyed wide dissemination. The Greek classics were still known to educated people. Classical High Culture still existed, and by the Fifth Century Nicene Christianity had established itself as the majoritarian religion of the Empire. The sectarian pamphlets of the time, which constitute the little-known category referred to above, urge the causes of the multitudinous competing faiths, many of which belong to Gnostic religiosity. (Definition to come)

A great cache of such documents came to light in the late 1940s and goes by the name of the Nag Hammadi Library, after the Egyptian town where archeologists discovered it. One characteristic of the pamphlets in this collection is their parasitic relation to established texts, especially to the canonical Testaments; another is their implacable hostility to the established Scripture and its interpretation. The word Gnostic describes the common attitude of the sectarian writers, which is one of absolute conviction and certainty, first, that the faith of the established Church is corrupt and false, and second that the writer has been vouchsafed by the Supreme Deity with a type of knowledge concerning these matters that is self-guaranteeing. Gnosis refers to a type of secret revelation unavailable directly to the mass of people, who must trust the claims of the illuminatus if they want to participate in or benefit by it.

Being parasitic and competitive in the extreme, the radical religious pamphleteers of Late Antiquity made use of literary reversal. In almost any item from the Nag Hammadi collection, the pamphleteer will retell an episode from the Old or the New Testament, but in a way that inverts its salient symbols so as to appropriate that story in a new overarching narrative with a meaning opposite to that of what it appropriates. A recurrent trope of the Gnostic pamphlets is to retell Genesis in such a way that the Creator-God becomes a malicious secondary deity who, jealous of the super-deity who created him, creates the physical universe in order that he might appear as the One True God to its inhabitants. In some of the Gnostic literary reversals, Jesus appears not as the son of the Genesis deity, but of the super-deity, and he comes to abolish the false creation conjured to salve his own pride by the lower-order, jealous deity. The pamphleteers never retell their borrowed stories straightforwardly, but their writers break them up and reorder the episodes seemingly at random. They also mix narrative with homiletics and commentary, making neither the story nor the non-narrative component easy to follow. Scholars remark that being difficult to understand and using a plethora of quasi-philosophical and quasi-theological terms — into the use of which one requires initiation — belonged to the appeal of the Gnostic sects. Acquiring the neologisms reinforced, as it does today in cultic recruitment, a peculiar us-versus-them, a radical inside-outside, mentality. The language of the radical sects might be Greek, Coptic, or Syriac, and the pamphlets reflect this, but even the Coptic and Syriac texts borrow Greek terms.

In the paragraphs that follow, I want to undertake a reading of the Koran’s first surah, known as “The Cow,” according to the disciplines of literary exegesis and comparative literature that I studied during my graduate-student tenure in the Program for Comparative Literature at UCLA — from which I earned a doctoral degree in 1990 for a dissertation on the anthropology of the modern epic poem. Thanks to the luck of my having attended school and college in the decades before the dumbing-down of American education had established its trend, I am familiar with a broad range of literature and philosophy from Antiquity through the Medieval Period right down to the Twentieth Century. I regularly teach a course in Greek and Latin literature in translation. I am the author of more than a hundred scholarly articles and of an equal number at least of essays on cultural topics for a lay audience, several of which have appeared at Gates of Vienna. Normally, I avoid the grammatical first person, but in the present context I want to make known my background because it will be relevant in assessing the plausibility of my comments and the legitimacy of my point of view. My criteria are, precisely, Western; criticism is a Western practice. A long tradition exists in the West of scrutinizing sacred texts to see whether they can survive the investigation of their coherency and consistency. Plato criticized Hesiod and Homer; beginning in the Eighteenth Century, writers of the Enlightenment brought the critical apparatus to bear on the Bible. There is no equivalent in Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament of the Bible, to the first sentence of the Koran: “This book is not to be doubted.”

I.

That the Koran consists of a patchwork of borrowings and allusions has long been known. Chronologically, it is a post-Classical or early medieval text originating in the Arabian milieu of the Saudi Peninsula. The Arabian lands remained largely outside the influence of Hellenism, although the neighboring Syriac lands did participate in Hellenism. The Syriac people of the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Centuries were Christians, but of the Monophysite rather than of the Greek Orthodox persuasion. Monophysite Christianity established itself in the Saudi Peninsula alongside Arab paganism and Judaism. It comes as no surprise then that fragments and motifs from the Old and New Testaments, and even from paganism, appear in “The Cow,” the very title of which is an allusion although a somewhat ambivalent one to the Old Testament, specifically to Numbers. Some way into “The Cow,” the Koran records a conversation between Allah, Moses, and the Hebrews. Allah, speaking through the angel Gabriel to Mohammed, and using the first person plural or “We,” reminds Mohammed that he once reminded Moses of the Abrahamian covenant and demanded that the people make to him the sacrifice of a cow. Moses passes along the news of this demand to the people. They mock him and behave with recalcitrance, quibbling about the details: “Make known to us what kind of cow it should be.” Once they have wheedled all the details out of Moses, and having rounded up a qualifying specimen, “they slaughtered the cow.”

The Penguin edition of the Koran, which is my source, declares in a footnote that, “Numbers 19 refers merely to a sacrificial ‘cow’; it contains none of the verbal exchange in this surah.” The passage, in other words, is a kind of riff on an obscure reference in one of the rather more obscure books of the Old Testament.

Continue reading

Geert Wilders Is Refused UK Police Protection for #FreeTommy Demo

There isn’t much direct news on this, but here’s a brief piece found on Twitter:

Geert Wilders’ speech for Tommy Robinson rally sabotaged by May’s Government

The United Kingdom is not free. The British people are a bound and seemingly gagged people.

In yet further efforts by the United Kingdom’s government, now seemingly to pander to the Muslim agenda, Geert Wilders’ speech, scheduled for the 14th at the #FreeTommy march, has to be cancelled.

The Party for Freedom leader tweeted this just now.

“UK Ambassador in The Hague just informed the Dutch authorities that they will not provide for my security in London this Saturday and will not give the Dutch diplomatic police weapon permits either, so, unfortunately, I cannot attend nor speak at the #FreeTommy rally in London.”

Is this another piece of timber in the gallows of which Theresa May’s government will hang? Will this attempt to silence the people, yet again, be the final nail and the impetus for the British people to roar yet louder?

Will Geert’s message be live streamed? Screens at the event? Periscope?

The British government may think they have kept Mr. Wilders’ speech out of London on Saturday. They can only prevent his physical appearance, however. His message will not be silenced.

By now, even the most skeptical of Brits are realising that ‘Tommy’ is the collective of all conservative Brits, here in the UK and beyond, that they are trying to censor and lock away.

What will you do? Join the #FreeTommy march 14 July on Whitehall.

It is to be fervently hoped that Geert Wilders will avail himself of technology to be heard at the demonstration. No doubt he’s working with the Middle East Forum to make that happen. Or with Ezra Levant, perhaps.

Don’t you wonder who else will be silenced?

By the way, there seems to be a balloon of Sadiq Khan flying over London. Or perhaps it was a photoshop job. At any rate, as a Muslim he can’t be portrayed as a pig, as has been done to Donald Trump (ask Trump if he cares), so he’ll have to be a bovine steer. You know, the kine missing their manly appurtenances.

An “America First” Judge Nominated to Supreme Court

Or so says Dr. Turley:

The Federalist essay recommending Kavanaugh as the strongest conservative candidate was written by one of his former clerks (who also clerked for Kennedy):

…Kavanaugh is by far the strongest choice for the job. His courageous and influential opinions on countless different issues—presidential power, regulatory overreach, religious liberty, the Second Amendment, and the list goes on—leave no doubt that he would be a forceful conservative justice for decades to come. Conservatives should not be misled by misinformation. Judge Brett Kavanaugh has the principles, the record, and the backbone that we need on the Supreme Court.

But what does that matter? You can expect the “IMPEACH TRUMP!” screaming on the left to begin soon if it hasn’t already. Just one reason for hating him: Kavanaugh’s predilection for calling illegal aliens by their correct designation. This is not an Open Borders jurist.

The End Times of Albion: To Hirsch or Not to Hirsch

The essay below by Seneca III is the latest in the “End Times of Albion” series. Previously: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6A, Part 6B, Part 7A.

Hirsch + Hirsch and others — BAME Racism Echoing Through Feminist Megaphones

The End Times of Albion, Part 7B

by Seneca III

To Hirsch or Not to Hirsch

In the closing paragraph of Part 7A I used the phrase ‘into the heart of darkness’; this was not a casual throw-away line. Heart of Darkness is a short novel written in 1899 by the Polish-British novelist Joseph Conrad. It describes a voyage up the Congo River into the Congo Free State in the heart of Africa, a place with which Conrad was well familiar.

The story’s narrator, Charles Marlow, tells his story to friends aboard a boat anchored on the River Thames. This location provides the setting for Marlow’s account of his obsession with the ivory trader Kurtz, and enables Conrad to create a comparison between London and Africa, both as places of darkness. That fictional concept eventually ascended to the status of a reality with the onset of the five days of London riots in August 2011.

The riots were a consequence of the death of Mark Duggan…

…a mixed-race thug and petty criminal known to carry firearms (a pistol inside a sock, gangster style, was recovered, unfired, from the scene) who was shot and killed by police on August 4th. Between 6th and 11th August thousands of people rioted in several London boroughs and in cities and towns across England. The resulting chaos generated looting, arson and mass violence that resulted in the deaths of five people.

Protests started in Tottenham, London. Overnight, looting took place in Tottenham Hale retail park and nearby Wood Green. The following days saw similar scenes in other parts of London, with the most rioting taking place in Hackney, Brixton, Walthamstow, Peckham, Enfield, Battersea, Croydon, Ealing, Barking, Woolwich, Lewisham and East Ham.

From 8 to 10 August, other towns and cities in England — including Birmingham, Coventry, Leicester, Derby, Wolverhampton, Northampton, Nottingham, West Bromwich, Bristol, Liverpool, Manchester, and Salford — saw copycat riots.

A total of 3,443 crimes were committed in London during this period and an estimated £200 million worth of property damage was incurred.

Even pragmatic analysts of the riots attempted to prioritise social factors such as racial tension and unemployment as the cause of the problem but in the end there could be little doubt, despite desperate attempts to cover it up, that criminality and ethnic gang culture were the real root causes…

…and thus ‘Marxist-Socialist Central’, the London School of Economics and Political Science (known in my day as the ‘London School of Marxist Dialectic and Revolution’), via a team lead by a certain Professor Tim Newburn of the Department of Social Policy, but commissioned by and its ‘report’ disseminated by The Guardian as it stuck its oar in and yet again and managed to steer the dialogue away from reality and into the ‘Mea Culpa!’-peddling arms of the vote-whoring collective in Westminster.

Two days after the police shooting of a local black man, Mark Duggan, in north London on 6 August 2011, protestors gathered outside the local police station.

Mishandling of this protest led to the outbreak of violence and looting. Disorder spread rapidly, initially across London, and subsequently to Birmingham, Liverpool, Nottingham, Manchester and Salford.

In the face of considerable speculation about the causes of the riots, and the absence of an official inquiry, the Guardian and the LSE established a unique collaborative study, titled ‘Reading the Riots’…

…The most significant direct policy response to ‘Reading the Riots’ came at the LSE’s conference on 14th December 2011. In her speech, the Home Secretary[1] announced a formal review of best practice in relation to police stop and search powers. A major element of this was a review undertaken by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, a primary prompt for which was the LSE and Guardian report. HMIC published their review in July 2013, and in a statement in the House of Commons on 2nd July 2013 the Home Secretary* said she anticipated significant reform of the use of these powers.

Know your enemy. They do not change.

To continue…

You may note in the photograph immediately above that there are a couple of white faces in the middle of the mob, products of our own benefit-sucking criminal underclass.

Continue reading

I Am Germany

Oz-Rita found the following video at Politically Incorrect. It’s a collage created by a member of the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, Alternative for Germany) celebrating German history and culture, but without forgetting the stain of 1933-1945.

Rita has translated the video and subtitled it:

Rita notes that the creator of “I am Germany,” Martin Renner MP of the AfD faction in the German parliament, writes:

…We made a collage about us: About Germany.

This collage wants to show you what is being destroyed more and more. Destroyed by the internationalist, socialist and globalist policies of all established parties — here in our home country, but also in the EU.

This collage “Ich bin Deutschland” wants to make clear to you what needs to be preserved. What must not be destroyed — by the pseudo-elites of politics and their predatory community comrades in business, culture, the media, churches, trade unions and NGOs…

Middle East Forum Plans Protest Rally for Tommy

The Middle East Forum has been at the forefront of the pushback for Western values. One of their most memorable investigations was a dangerous undertaking which involved going undercover in a number of American mosques to ascertain the percentage of radical mosques. They made their ethno-anthropological assessment using the same observation of objective behaviors in each case. I was pleasantly surprised to find that twenty percent of our mosques are not radicalized. Wish I knew where they are.

This investigation is still germane, even though it was done in 2011.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Now they are organizing for Tommy Robinson. I hope their rallies are hugely successful.

NOTE: the links in this announcement may be found on MEF’s site.

MEF Organizes 25,000 Strong Protest in Support of Tommy Robinson; Plans Additional Rallies

Tommy Robinson, the imprisoned English counter-Islamist activist, journalist, and book author, justifiably titled his autobiography Enemy of the State, for he has long been a target of the U.K. authorities impatient with his criticism of Islamism.

The Middle East Forum (MEF) is helping Robinson in his moment of danger. It does so in the context of its Legal Project which since 2007 has defended activists, journalists, politicians, et al. who face harassment, fines, or imprisonment because of their views concerning Islamism and related topics.

MEF is sponsoring and organizing the second “Free Tommy Robinson” gathering in London on July 14. MEF previously provided all the funding and helped organized the first “Free Tommy Robinson” event held June 9 in London.

MEF, along with a coalition of UK advocacy groups and international figures will assemble to advocate for Mr. Robinson’s release and demand greater protections for freedom of speech and freedom of the press in the United Kingdom. MEF is arranging for U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar (Republican of Arizona) to travel to London to speak alongside the Dutch political leader Geert Wilders, and others.

The latest incident began on May 25 with Mr. Robinson reporting on a rape-grooming trial involving Muslim defendants in Leeds, England, for which he was arrested, tried, convicted, sentenced to 13 months prison, and jailed — all in the course of a few hours. To make matters worse, he was tricked out of the right to confer with counsel. Now, he has been moved to historically violent Olney prison, where he is a potential target of Islamist gangs.

“The police allow rape gangs to operate for decades but swoop down within minutes on Tommy Robinson for a peccadillo,” notes Forum president Daniel Pipes. “We worry that his life is now in immediate peril.”

Continue reading

Welfare Chauvinism in Europe?

Another descriptive lecture from Dr. Turley:

He mentions “welfare chauvinism” coming of age in the paradigmatic shift occurring among center-left parties in Europe. Whoo-whee, Bubba, I thought only us knuckle-dragging EverTrumpers believed in that concept.

Sometimes I feel like a motherless child…other times, I feel like the world is in a barrel, twisting and twirling over Niagra Falls.

Leftists Untie!