Hate righteous LibDems -yes-> Anarchy UK

|

no

|

Craig Murray and the triple-breasted-unibollock party.
)

But I thought the BNP liked white Aryans. Well, perhaps not liberal-minded ones.

Surely UKIP liked Maurice Chevalier, so long as he sang in English.

And don’t bankers who vote Tory go for fox furs in a big way? Not to mention minks, Rolexes, Rolls Royces ..

Surely New Labour loves Iraqi government ministers. Think of those statements in favour of the Iraq war.

For the Green party to hate Jeremy Clarkson when he put ‘Al Gore is right’ stickers on his car would be downright ungrateful.

The Lib Dems, apparently, don’t hate anybody – but wait, Craig Murray is a Lib Dem, and some people might suspect him of having an aversion towards Jack Straw, George Bush, and a few other potentates.

Not an easy one.

Here’s a serious question for Lib Dem party members. If we get a hung parliament, which looks possible, will the Lib Dems do a deal with Nulab, or with the Tories?

Abe Rene

I suspect we might see a Blairite/Tory alliance. They have much more in common.

LOL.

Simplicity acknowledged, it’s a pretty good summation of what ones vote will actually mean.

Craig

If I read you correctly, will the Blairites in the parliamentary Labour party defect to the Tories en masse, or form their own party and do a deal with them?

The next one should be, “Do you hate Afghans” with a yes leading to liberal democrates and a no leading to “vote spoil”

You missed a box:

Do you secretly only value democracy

where the vote is likely to support

your own position (for example you ——- YES—-> Lib Dem

would not support a referendum

on Scottish independence)?

|

|

NO

|

SNP

Abe Rene

The BNP hate whites too. They sant to use them to gain power then subjegate them.

And they also hate each all other members of the BNP, each and everyone of them are waiting for a chance become the leader by deposing the one above them.

Yes, I’ve been speculating about a Labour / Tory alliance, too. No mention in the mainstream, and it’s often what the mainstream leaves out that proves the most significant.

But maybe the fox hunting issue will keep them forever divided. And of course that’s far more important than war, economy, etc…

Good question, Abe. Personally, I do not think there will be a hung parliament, though I agree, it would be a good thing.

Meanwhile, look at this, from today’s Herald:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/airport-police-accused-of-spy-trap-on-muslims-1.1024620.

Arsalan,

your 12:39 PM comment isn’t fair, there are plenty of LibDems opposed to the war in Afghanistan, Craig included. And hasn’t Clegg suggested an early end to that war?

DO YOU HATE REFUGEE CHILDREN IN DETENTION CENTRES?

|

DO YOU HATE FEES FOR FINAL YEAR STUDENTS?

|

DO YOU HATE CONTROVERSY OVER FAITH SCHOOLS?

|

DO YOU HATE GOVERNMENT LEANING ON SCIENTIFIC ADVISORS?

|

THINK ABOUT VOTING LIBDEM

merely proof that the ineptness of the public when it comes to politics has reached all parties and their supporters.

Viva Independents.

Reading the Herald, Suhayl? Naughty. Did you smuggle it out of the shop hidden inside a copy of Playboy?

Perish the thought! And on a Sunday, too.

I think the Jeremy Clarkson question is the logical slip-up. It should be more along the lines of, “Do you hate car owners”

Here, too (from the very naughty Herald on Friday, to boot!) is a good piece, an interview with Alex Salmond, on why minority governments and de facto operational coalitions can actually work to some extent – I know it’s constrained in this case by the Scotland Act. I think he’s also right about the Brown gaffe.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/election/salmond-holyrood-is-proof-a-minority-can-lead-1.1024154

And although one may not agree with everything in this piece, it’s worth a squint, largely because of the excellent points about immigrants. Oh, how I wish once, just once, in the history of humanity, a major politician in a major party somewhere in the world would stand up at election time and say:

“I love immigrants!”

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/guest-commentary/i-warmed-to-gordon-brown-i-think-he-acted-with-restraint-1.1024104

“DO YOU HATE FEES FOR FINAL YEAR STUDENTS?”

In Scotland the LibDims, in power with Labour, had the opportunity to remove university fees. Instead they moved them from the start of the course to the end and gave them a different name. The fees were eventually abolished by the SNP. Since then, the Herald ‘newspaper’ has run a daily headline about the ‘crisis in higher education funding’ but the policy has stayed in place. If the Lib Dems are again co-opted by Labour to form a government in Edinburgh, you can be quite sure that fees will be re-introduced.

Yes, I know, Vronsky. I was really referring to the UK parliament. Some people in England seem to think that minority govt/ coalition govt spells the end of the world as we know it. I’m merely attempting to illustrate that across Europe, it has been the norm rather than the exception.

Btw, it occurred to me, re. the ‘Special Branch (allegedly) attempt to recruit Muslim spies at Scottish Airports story, that instead of introducing themselves as,

“Hello. My name is Bond, James Bond,”

it perhaps would be more like:

“Salaam alaikum. My name is Plod, PC Plod.”

“And although one may not agree with everything in this piece”

Sure, but Kenneth Roy has been writing with great gusto for people like Newsnet Scotland, Caledonian Mercury, Scottish Review, Scottish Left Review – the internet MacSamizdat that is springing up as a reaction against the Herald/Scotsman (= Pravda/Isvestia) block. He sounds like a man who has just had both hands untied from behind his back. Not for nothing are they worried about the CyberNats.

“In Scotland the LibDims, in power with Labour, had the opportunity to remove university fees.”

The lib dems also voted to keep prescription charges in Scotland.

Suhayl – I gotta say, I felt a flicker of sympathy for El Gordo in his open-mic plight. But I also feel that the honesty he displayed inside the car should have been expressed to Mrs Duffy with the cams rolling. I think it would have been entirely possible for him to politely but firmly disagree with her position and to explain why, without it getting ugly. Brown was too accustomed to the ‘dont-ruffle-voter-feathers’ dictum, which is basically dishonest.

Yes, I know, as I’ve written on other threads, actually I agree entirely, Mike. In many ways, Brown made his own bed and dug his own hole. I posted the link to the Roy article not so much as an apologist piece for Brown but largely because of Roy’s powerfully-penned ‘alternate take’ on immigrants.

What made me vote to murder Iraq children?

http://www.coia.org.uk/Cameron_Iraq.jpg

Suhayl

(a) Singling out Muslims at airports to give them a hard time, and then ask them to become informers, sounds like a very stupid idea, unless of course a sufficiently large cheque is involved. But I would insist on a five-figure sum. What do they I am, cheap? Not being a Muslim might be a slight problem for me, of course.

(b) Jack Straw loves immigrants. Look how he helps them in Blackburn, dines them at elections and how they vote for him in turn. Of course the food has to be provided by non-party members, or someone might accuse him of Treating, and it would never do for the Minister of Justice to be a party to such works unless they were totally deniable.

Abe

a) Ha! Absolutely! Five figures at the very least!

b) I know what you mean. I really meant that it’d be really powerful if someone (and I don’t mean via the sort of transnational corporatist argument deployed by corporatist Republicans in the USA when faced with their own backlash against the importation of mass cheap labour to enhance their profits, the answer to which is that workers need to stick together and force up wages and conditions for all) actually came out and stated loudly and clearly that (whichever cohort of immigrants is current at a particular time; right now it’s East Europeans):

Immigration into Britain is a good thing and immigrants deserve our respect (and we, theirs) and that actually they/we come to WORK not to scrounge and that they/we actually CREATE jobs not take ‘em off us and that they/we make life on this sceptred isle more exciting in every way and that it’s been happening for hundreds and hundreds of years (fellow-blogger, Anno, the Huguenot descendant; Michael Howard’s Jewish Romanian parents; my pal who owns a florist’s shop down the road, my barber, my optician, Boris Johnson’s Ottoman great-grandfather; the very French-named Nigel Farage’s ancestors; me; our gracious host’s wife, etc.).

It’s got zilch to do with Sir Jack of Blackburn.

It’s got everything to do with pointing-out the emperor’s clothes, distraction from the real sources and machinery of power and wealth and the currying of visceral hate.

Here’s a possible scenario that could occur after 6th May:

1. Hung parliament; the Lib Dems get about 100 seats and the Tories and Nulab are nearly equal.

2. Immediately after the result, the Blairite section of the parliament labour party do a deal with the Tories. They don’t defect wholesale since that would antagonise their constituents, but they form a ‘special section’ which exempts itself from the Nulab whip. Jack Straw joins this Blairite-Tory axis.

3. The Blairites are expelled from the Labour party, but most of them are not particularly worried about it and spin their decision to their own constituents as a ‘principled decision’ along the lines of the SDP in the 80s.

4. Tony Blair returns to the UK, to cement the special relationship with the USA. He and family eventually emigrate to the USA to become US citizens, and he is photographed singing ‘The star-spangled banner’ with tears streaming down his face.

5. The Brownite Labour party is driven into the wilderness with the LibDems, their analysts predict for 100 years. Some of them can’t stand the thought and cry ‘An eternity, an eternity! How can we endure such endless punishment?’ The LibDems reply ‘No sweat, we’ve done it and are getting stronger all the time (smirk)’.

Tee-hee! I like the vignette of Number 4 especially!

Oh, the other thing I’d really like to hear a major politico say at election-time is:

Why, in the name of Lady Godiva, Ilkley Moor and the Highland Fling, does every election this side of the Napoleonic Wars one way or another have to end-up being about ‘immigration’ and the Bogey-Man?

Do you hate the current political classes ?

yes – wipe your arse on the ballot paper

no – try and use your vote to create some sebalance of future positivity … i.e. vote lib-dem

If the Tories get the largest number of seats and then do a deal with the Blairites, the LibDems will be excluded from power. Therefore the LibDems are better off if Nulab get a larger number of seats, because then it will have to share power with the LibDems in some measure.

This election could end up as a terrible mess, with weak government at a time when one needs the opposite, because of the dire economic situation the UK finds itself in.

Even the idea of rapidly introducing a “fairer” voting system, some kind of proportional representation, at a time like this is problematic, and perhaps even dangerous.

Proportional representation isn’t all pluses; there are minuses too. For example proportional representation actually gives “disproportional” representation to small parties that hold the balance of power between larger blocks. Small parties can become far more powerful and important than their actual electoral support justifies, as is the case in many countries with PR.

At a time like this, is the potential fragmentation of the old party political system, really a wise course to embark opon?

Obviously the old system is grossly unfair; but for decades it provided for stability and strong government. Obviously one can argue that we’ve had far too much of both, for too long, but now, to enter uncharted waters in the middle of an economic depression, with the UK close to the edge of a cliff, radical change in these circumstances strikes me as being somewhat risky.

Do you like homosexuals adopting children? Vote Edinburgh Lib Dems

Have a look at MPAC’s site Craig, they are running with your story about jack Straws breach of electoral law.

How much longer can the powers to be stall his interview and questioning?

Brillinat debate live on Ummah channel today, Jack unfortunately had to leave early, he threw in the towel.

But what you fantasists ignore is that the three main parties, including the morally superior, above-the-political-fray Lib-Dems, are for globalization, empire and war.

That means bombing the shit out Muslim countries until such time as Muslim believers are led by men (and women of course) who are the moral and spiritual equivalent of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

It also means unrestricted wage arbitrage that will bring the great majority of British workers into direct competition with Asians working in many cased for no more than pennies per hour (so much for Suhayl’s wacky idea of compelling British employers to pay everyone a decent wage — including the eight million unemployed or only partially employed). And by the time that process plays out, Britain and the other Western nations will be largely de-industrialized.

Then, the West will be the third World and the Asian giants will constitute the new First World. It will be the Asians who have the leading edge industrial and military technology, the top research universities, the great corporations. What’s more, the great Western corporations will be doing most of their business in Asia and employing mainly Asian workers. IBM’s workforce is already more than 70% non-American. (And in passing it may be noted that many Asians who migrated to Europe will by then realize that the real action and opportunity was in Asia.)

Instead of smirking and jeering at the BNP whose immigration and industrial policies appear to be a rational attempt to deal with real economic problems, why don’t Liberals think about reality once in a while, especially one might hope during an election campaign, and try to find some basis (a) for ensuring a decent life for the twenty percent of the workforce and their families who are unemployed or underemployed; and (b) ending the war for global governance, (c) preserving British sovereignty, (d), etc.

“Do you like gosht curry & sweet rice?” YES ==> Vote for Straw

sounds a bit weak and implausible, doesn’t it?

Commenters marvel how voters can be bought so cheaply, are missing the point. The crime is not “bribery”, it is “treating” – i.e. preferential treatment for a special group; they just have to vote to keep the provider in power. This crime is a manifest attempt to manipulate free voting by appealing directly to self-interest of a chosen group. It’s not exclusive – just come along and you can be admitted to the gang (you will vote for Jack, won’t you).

So it should be: “Do you want to be represented by someone who promises you special treatment (look at what we’ve done for you tonight!)” YES ==> Vote for that nice Mr Straw.

Ah, the BNP, here it is again. Glory, glory hallelujah. Amen and Omega. Of course Asia is rising. That’s history. It doesn’t mean we had. have to jack-in our manufacturing. Germany didn’t. They were clever. Thatcher and her successors were/ are stupid – or acting on behalf of international finance not the UK. What’s wacky about paying a decent wage? You get better productivity if you do. We are constantly told we need to pay the rich even more to keep ‘em here. What about the rest of us? Chinese workers’ wages have risen so much, they now outsource to Vietnam. It all evens out eventually.

But the BNP – Jesus McGinty! Or, as Billy Connelly said (quoting his old-time relatives), “Jesus Sufferin Fuck!”

Up in Aberdeenshire, in that wee toon, someone is printin BNP leaflets…

“Britain’s Election: Welcome to No Choice Democracy”

“In an advertently shocking admission of the stranglehold on Britain’s politics, a Financial Times (26 April) front page headline read: “Brutal choices over British deficit”. Its report went on to say: “The next government will have to cut public sector pay, freeze benefits, slash jobs, abolish a range of welfare entitlements and take the axe to programmes such as school building and road maintenance.” In other words: you can vote, but it won’t make a difference ?” this is how the economy is going to be run as dictated by capital.”

“Ruled out from the outset, it seems, are imminently sensible and workable options, such as taxing the super-rich whose combined wealth is more than twice than of Britain’s budget deficit, or immediately ending budget-draining criminal wars of foreign occupation.”…

http://tinyurl.com/3yadabg

Que Sera, Sera (Whatever Will Be, Will Be)

One thing though, Brown is fatally damaged, very unlikely he will get three or more years as PM. This seems to be the way with British Politics, they have a “honeymoon period” then do the really dirty and bad stuff and then try to look all coy sweet and innocent, promise the earth, kiss their arses and hope to get back in again. Trouble is Labour has done so much wrong that the hundred or so key marginal seats will not give them the chance again. So the other lot get in for a while. Really will it make much difference who gets the levers of power, the country is effectively bankrupt and the real pain has yet to be felt.

So, logos, what really is so new about that? The rich gang together and cultivate one another and one anothers’ corporations in exclusive clubs and use codes only they know. Trade Unions gang together – that’s the whole point! What’s potentially objectionable is if actual bribery/ illegality is occurring. It’s got nothing to do with whether it’s beer and skittles, champagne and caviar, golf and pizza or keema naan and chicken-bleedin-tandoori. The extended family system (baratherie system; from the Indo-European root word common also to ‘brother’) prevalent among certain South Asian cohorts, the demographic of migration to the UK (from rural areas in Punjab and points north) and the way politics runs in South Asia facilitates such tribalistic manipulation – but it’s far from being unique to South Asian communities.

Suhayl

I should tell you that I find the juxtaposition of Jesus and swear words objectionable, even though I make no claim to any great religious experience. To me using bad language too easily in general is bad manners, disrespectful to the listener. Swearing under stress or frustration is not what I’m talking about.

Just letting you know, in case I’m not unique that way.

Oh, right, Abe, I’m very sorry. I was quoting from a very funny act by Billy Connolly from the 1980s.

The other thing is, expletives have a real place when used in humour – as was the case here – or strategically used for various purposes, not as a substitute for literacy.

The BNP and other assorted Nazi bodies are inflammatory in the extreme.

But I’m sorry if I caused you hurt.

“Parliamentary Democracy: A Triumph of Victorian Engineering”

“The degree to which the state is hanging on to its suit of Emperor’s clothes by a thread is evident in the rise of the Liberal Democrats, vacuous as they are, looking almost like ‘old’ Labour minus the cloth caps. But I seriously doubt that the propaganda onslaught will have the desired effect, Nick Clegg notwithstanding.”

“In fact it’s a sign that the electorate are grasping at straws, anything to get rid of what is obviously a corrupt and sclerotic political class. The problem is that the Lib-Dems are just as much a part of ‘club’ as the rest of them. Becoming an MP is just like joining the Masons, minus the secret handshake.”…

http://tinyurl.com/362ufkk

Suyahl, what are you trying to imply about Aberdeenshire? There is no significant BNP support up here. I joined ‘Unite Against Fascism’ here last year and we did some leafleting, but there was nothing to react against. In fact, we decided at a committee meeting it was better to send people to the demonstrations in Glasgow. The BNP’s share of the vote in the last election was a paltry 0.7%.

I see you’ve become provocative in general over the last few weeks. The “on the bus” taunts at St. Larry et al hardly amount to a rational argument. Those pigs dragged you into the tactical muck, and you’re still rolling around in it even when they’ve cleared off.

Suhayl

That’s OK, I’m glad you understood. The BNP are certainly trouble-makers. But extreme parties usually feed on grievances. The Nazis got elected to power in a democracy which was in grave economic trouble. I sincerely hope that people like that never appeal to the masses here. That’s one reason for not wanting Labour’s traditional base of support to collapse too suddenly – I wouldn’t want something much worse to take its place. That’s why I’m so wary about PR. I recommend the TV film “So proudly we hail” starring David Soul, a story about a neo-Nazi movement in America, if you ever get a chance to see it.

“but for decades it provided for stability and strong government.”

You would need to justify your concealed assumption that strong government is a good thing, in the face of oodles of evidence to the contrary (or we wouldn’t be talking here). ‘Strong government’ is a bit too ‘thousand-year-reich’ for my palate.

It’s strange that you are usually an opponent of what you style ‘nationalism’ (actually meaning fascism) but merrily advocate strength and stability. My ideal is a system which never quite works and can’t reliably deliver power to anyone. I like that feeling of safety.

I’ll certainly check it out. Thanks again, Abe. You’ve made a very good point, too about Labour’s support-base.

Nextus, the ‘leader’ of the BNP in Scotland is based in Turriff, a small town in Aberdeenshire, and their election material (in Scotland) comes from there. I know there’s zero support in that county for that party, thank goodness. That why it seems so incongruous.

My ‘on the bus’, ‘have a cuppa’ invitations to Larry were humorous, not vicious, to do with Ken Kesey and his Acid Pranksters and the Tea Party, respectively. It was really a tactic I used because there seemed no point entering into discourse with him/ them on political matters. So I thought I’d try and chat with him/ them, and then, when it was obvious they weren’t interested, just to toss out the occasional Mad Hatter’s teapot. But you’re quite right, I ought not to indulge them.

I’m sorry I used Billy Connolly’s quote, it was OTT and inappropriate. Jings, now I feel like Gordon Brown!

Hey Craig

Interesting thing over at wikipedia. You’re credibility as a source for wikipedia is up for discussion.

The article? Rory Stewart.

Added an interesting point I saw from your blog. It keeps being deleted. Primarily by two users who’ve only ever edited this one page.

Any thoughts?

I’m in the Richmond Park marginal between Lib Dem and Tories. The Tories had a chance of taking the seat from Lib Dems, because they’ve got quite a good local well liked candidate until he blotted his copy book in being revealed as a non dom.

Anyway we’re bombarded with election material from the Lib Dems and Tories, lots of letters from St Vincent of Twickenham etc.

Today I get this letter from Dave himself. It’s a contract between me and the Conservative party with my name on it and all sorts of Tory pledges, done up in this kinda faux legal paper. I get all excited that maybe Dave’s pushing the boat out and really going for it with some new and novel way of holding politicians to account; you know like all that change stuff he goes on about.

At the end it says, and I quote:

“So this is our contract with you. I want you to read it and – if we win the election – use it to hold us to account. If we don’t deliver our side of the bargain, vote us out in five years’ time.”

LOL. Same old, same old shit…

“just to toss out the occasional Mad Hatter’s teapot. But you’re quite right, I ought not to indulge them. ”

I dunno, I think it’s constructive. Conversation’s more interesting between people who act like human beings instead of automata (though, how much to indulge people who won’t, may be another matter).

Suhayl,

The reason they have to pay the top execs millions, or is it billions now, is because they are doing such a brilliant job of outsourcing everyone else’s job. It’s very profitable hollowing out the Western economies — for the capitalists who do it, not for society at large.

Abe Rene,

“The BNP are certainly trouble-makers. But extreme parties usually feed on grievances.”

What exactly are these grievances that the BNP feed on?

The war in Afghanistan. They say they want to bring the troops home.

Outsourcing and off-shoring, which wipes out jobs in Britain. They want to discourage it with tariffs, investment tax incentives, etc.

Mass immgration. They want to end it. Not because they hate anyone, but because it drives up the cost of housing, drives down wages and increases the need for infrastructure investment and hence the need for higher taxes.

And they have other policies that most people agree on: for example not spending $18 billion in subsidies to the third world, supposedly to limit climate change, but in fact, to increase the competitiveness of Asians in the competition for jobs and income.

As I said you’re all fantasists. You don’t know what the real issues are or where the main parties stand. Well I’ll tell you where the main parties stand. Unless your a Clegg or a Cameron or some other kind of toff, they out to screw you.

Basically, Alfred, they’ve adopted the clothes of the Left because of the vacuum left (!) by the collapse of the Left in the UK and the removal of the Labour Party ever further to the Right and it’s deal (via Blair, Brown, Smith et al) with big business.

So, as with extremists the world over, they concur with, and exploit, the analysis of what the problems are – untrammeled corporate capitalism, run completely amok with the active participation of the Business Parties, the capitalist war machine… but their solutions – and this is what the BNP won’t talk about openly anymore – are extreme nationalist, racist, etc. The dynamic, and this applies to the Front national in France and all the others of similar ilk, is that of the NSDAP. How can an affable, clever, astute guy like you, Alfred, not see that? Perhaps your wife burnt the cakes (!)

And so, in Hungary, the accession of a Far Right Party because the ‘other side’ is corporate capitalist and sells the national silver to the Davros Murdochs of the world.

We are b/w several rocks and a number of very hard places. There are no ‘goodies’, just different kinds of ‘baddies’. And in the UK context, the BNP are worse than most. They are really not the answer.

“and this is what the BNP won’t talk about openly anymore – are extreme nationalist, racist, etc.”

Suhayl, This is what everyone from the BBC to the Daily Mail says about them. But they do not say it themselves. The only justification for such claims is that they once may have said such things and Griffin makes a point of saying such things privately, but while being secretly filmed ?” things he then says he did not say.

“Hard state rent boys, is what you called them”. By which, I take it, you mean they are a security services operation to smear radical opposition to the mainstream party policies, i.e., to perpetuate the long war, globalization and the transformation of western civilization into a new feudalism under which heretics, i.e., people who question the new orthodoxy, are burnt at the stake, or subject to some latter day equivalent.

But that is why I keep referring to their platform. It is the populist platform. So why does no one support it? Because the BNP are doing a brilliant job of alienating the public from their real interest. Nigel Copsey’s book on British Fascism cites clear evidence that when a policy is associated with the BNP, support for it collapses.

So this is what I am saying, if you think any of the mainstream parties work for anyone but the global elite and Israel, you’re crazy. And if I am correct about that, the policies that you should be considering are those espoused by the BNP. As I proposed before, Britain need a new party: DNTN ?” Definitely Not The Nationalists, but it will have the same policies and it will be run by radical reformers not Masonic scum.

Forget the election, it has already been decided.

Our new government…

http://tinyurl.com/22un2do

Nextus,

“I joined ‘Unite Against Fascism’ here last year and we did some leafleting, but there was nothing to react against.”

Why, then, may I ask did you join?

Also, did you know the United Against Fascism was infiltrated by the police to protect the BNP?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/libertycentral/2010/mar/21/police-demonstrations-fascism-racism

Why do you think they infiltrate the antifascists to protect the BNP? Could it be that the BNP is a state asset?

George,

Interesting link, which confirms my case. As that damp rag, unelected President of the EU said, 2010 “is the year of global governance.”

“Because the BNP are doing a brilliant job of alienating the public from their real interest.”

That is a very lucid analysis, Alfred. Yeah, I think that’s largely their role.

Ned

Fascinating! The notes in the discussion seem entirely sensible.

“India’s EVMs are Vulnerable to Fraud”…

http://indiaevm.org/

Abe Rene,

The BNP are not saying what you are say they are saying or expressing the fantasy that you say they are expressing. What you are doing is playing their game. Making the policies they espouse contemptible by identifying them with Nazism, racism, etc.

The racial policy of the BNP, is based on the following premise. Britain, like all European states has a negative birthrate, i.e., less than 2.1 per female (very much less in some states). Some immigrant groups, however, have a very much above replacement fertility rate. Hence there is a process of replacement that will see the indigenous British a minority in their own land within 50 years. While I do not have the exact figures at my finger tips, I believe that a little research will confirm this to be essentially a non-controversial statement.

In view of this reality, and in order to preserve the indigenous British as the great majority in Britain, the BNP propose to end mass immigration and to provide financial aid (under existing law) to those immigrants who may wish to return whence they came.

There is no resemblance between this policy and the Nazi ideology of racial superiorityor racial extermination. One can support this policy at the same time that one may think the Brits are in some ways a truly pathetic lot. I mean look at them. The have a goddam police state which is justified in terms of fighting fascism, a justification that is swallowed by most of the population even though it means the eventual extinction of their own race. Is that pathetic, or what?

“The Corruption of New Labour: Britain’s Watergate?”…

http://tinyurl.com/66bvjz

Brilliant description of the party leaders here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/opinion/02gill.html?ref=todayspaper

“Mr. Cameron, the Tory, is personable ?” your mother would like him. A fresh-faced character who tries, and fails, with emotionally winning oratory. He always sounds like the coxswain urging the rowing team to pull together and straighten their straw boaters.

We look at Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat, and try in vain to imagine him going toe-to-toe with leaders like Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel or even the Queen of Tonga. In any other decade, the best he could have hoped for would have been a post as a junior minister in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, an ambassador’s bag-carrier. He speaks five languages but can’t say boo in any of them. His children all have Spanish names.

Gordon Brown is a character from a tragic opera, twisted by ambition and a Presbyterian sense of fateful destiny. He has waited 13 years, mostly in Tony Blair’s shadow, for this poisoned chalice and has a pessimist’s luck. He wrestles with an Old Testament temper, and it’s said that he has no friends. Certainly, none of them have come out to contradict this. Last week he was recorded by an open microphone petulantly calling a respectable working-class woman he had just spoken to in the street a “bigot.” Off the record, his advisers say they are quite relieved ?” it’s usually so much worse. …”

A very interesting post by Simkin George – thank-you.

From insiders blogging on the now defunct Webcameron we know Cameron has spent many hours inside the MI5 building. Dave Davies warned of a police state and how ‘fear’ would continue to be used to destroy civil liberties in preparation for ‘global governance’ – All parties are committed to this path I agree George – but I believe Nick Clegg to be less corruptible in moves to ‘convert’ to the right.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/feb/28/civil-liberties-government-law-courts

Mark

The above link has 24 pages, bottom left to find page 2. You may have missed it?.

“but I believe Nick Clegg to be less corruptible in moves to ‘convert’ to the right.”

I thought that about a few in New Labour…I was sadly disappointed.

Consultant on Iraq contracts employed president’s brother

Neil Bush, a younger brother of US President George W. Bush, has had a $60,000-a-year employment contract with a top adviser to a Washington-based consulting firm set up this year to help companies secure contracts in Iraq.

Mr Bush said he was co-chairman of Crest Investment Corporation, a company based in Houston, Texas, that invests in energy and other ventures. For this he received $15,000 every three months for working an average three or four hours a week.

The other co-chairman and principal of Crest is Jamal Daniel, a Syrian-American who is an advisory board member of New Bridge Strategies, a company set up this year by a group of businessmen with close links to the Bush family or administrations. Its chairman is Joe Allbaugh, George W. Bush’s campaign director in the 2000 presidential elections.

Other figures at New Bridge include Ed Rogers, its vice-chairman and a senior official in the Reagan and first Bush administrations, and Lanny Griffith, with whom he works in the lobby firm Barbour Griffith & Rogers.

Lord Charles Powell (Jonathan Powell’s father), adviser to former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, is listed as an advisory board member.

Suhayl,

“Ah, the BNP, here it is again. Glory, glory hallelujah. Amen and Omega. Of course Asia is rising. That’s history. It doesn’t mean we had. have to jack-in our manufacturing. Germany didn’t. They were clever. Thatcher and her successors were/ are stupid – or acting on behalf of international finance not the UK. What’s wacky about paying a decent wage? You get better productivity if you do. We are constantly told we need to pay the rich even more to keep ‘em here. What about the rest of us? Chinese workers’ wages have risen so much, they now outsource to Vietnam. It all evens out eventually. ”

There seem to be a few points here:-

1. The rise and fall of the economic top-dog is a cyclical process.

2. The type of economic process that depends on oil for production, and the levels of consumption that the US presently enjoys – China is chasing, as is India, Brazil etc. simply does not square with the resources that the world has relaive to the population bases that exist across the globe.

3. In light of 2 above, we are streching the world’s resources to unsustainable limits.

Point three is where the real long-term issue is.

Do you hate politicians cabbing for Israel?

Then vote BNP!

http://www.ldfi.org.uk/

Sorry, ignore my last comment. Here are the BNP Friends of Israel:

http://bnp.org.uk/groups/british-people-that-support-israel

“But that is why I keep referring to their platform. It is the populist platform. So why does no one support it?”

What does “populist” mean, in this paragraph ? How is a platform “populist” if no-one supports it ? Is it one of these “in-group” technical terms that’s about “who belongs to our club”, rather than meaning what any ordinary person would expect it to ?

Alfred – that second link of yours returned a ’404 – Not Found’ page.

Fascinating that you tell us about Clegg, “His children all have Spanish names.”

I did ask you in a previous thread, but you ducked it – are you a racist, Alfred? Do you regard non-white Europeans as lessor human beings?

glenn

Something strange about Alfred and his true politics?.

Hey Richard

You up in the middle of the night again. Do you work night shifts and do some blogging during your breaks, or do you just have to get up in the night for a pee?

Concerning populism, it should be in your dictionary. But here you go, here’s one definition:

“In general, ideology or political movement that mobilizes the population (often, but not always, the lower classes) against an institution or government, usually in the defense of the underdog or the wronged. Whether of left, right, or middle political persuasion, it seeks to unite the uncorrupt and the unsophisticated (the ‘little man’) against the corrupt dominant elites (usually the orthodox politicians) and their camp followers (usually the rich and the intellectuals).”

If you’d read my earlier comments you would see why I say that, despite the populism of the BNP platform, no one supports it. They do not support it precisely because it is the BNP’s platform — that’s the function of the BNP, to alienate the mass of the people from their own true interest.

How do they do that, do you ask? If so, see conversation above with Suhayl.

Glenn,

Sorry about the bum link:

This should work

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/opinion/02gill.html?ref=todayspaper

Am I a racist? Glenn, let me as you, have you stopped beating your wife?

George:

“something strange about Alfred and his true politics?”

What’s that George? I mean what’s strange?

And what you mean by my “true politics.”

Did I say anything about my politics. I didn’t think so. I was trying to point out some things, that’s all. But if I can clarify anything, I will.

Alfred

Maybe nothing, but something just doesn’t gel about you. I like Glenn pick up some undertone in some of your posts?.

As the old saying goes…Time will tell.

Alfred’s back with his neo-Nazi fantasies again.

It’s blatantly obvious that the BNP are still the same old squalid bunch of fascists that they always were.

Nick Griffin likes to talk about the way he has transformed the party from a racist, anti-semitic homophobic party into what it is now. But what attracted him to the racist, anti-semitic party it was? The fact that he was a racist, anti-semitic homophobe which he still is and which his party still is. The fact is that Nick Griffin has merely attempted to change it cosmetically. This is what he himself has said when he was talking in front of David Duke of the KKK. If you ever listen to their “legal adviser” Lee John Barnes then you’ll find he often forgets he’s no longer a fascist and will leap to the defence of neo-Nazi thugs and criminals that carry out racist violence and vandalism.

The BNP are exactly the same as they’ve always been and you’d either have to be an idiotic Pat Buchanan-reading moron not to think otherwise or a Pat Buchanan-reading fascist to pretend otherwise.

Does it really matter which one Alfred is?

Oh, and nice try with that “Oppose Israel? Vote BNP!” Of course, the BNP hate Israel, the BNP hate Jews. And you’d have to be a moron not to realize or a fascist to pretend otherwise.

Ha, that could be it George: I lack gel! If I had it, I could put it on my hair, or mix it with salt and make a bomb.

But here’s where I find a lack of gel. Polls consistently show that about three quarters of the British population, i.e., nearly all those of long British descent, want a cap on immigration, yet large numbers of people are still enthusiastic for the Lib-Dems, who want to legalize illegal immigration, and New Labor who want to see the immigrant population explosion continue.

Similarly, I find a lack of gel concerning the war. The great majority are against it, yet the parties commanding between them something like 90% of voter support are intent on continuing it.

And I could go on.

What’s going on here, perhaps, is that the contest is more exciting than the policy issues which are not seriously discussed. So folks are for the Greens or the Reds of the Yellows (but not those stinking racist red, white and bluers) and get caught up in the excitement of the contest. In “Count Belisarius” Robert Graves brilliantly describes how, in Byzantium, this spirit of faction was engendered and exploited for corrupt political ends.

Angrysoba, Who apparently cannot read, or cannot be bothered to read, joins some others in helping fulfill the BNP role: namely, to associate populist ideas with Nazism, etc., although no such connection can be established except by insinuation — insinuation that is facilitated, deliberately one has to assume, by the bizarre conduct of members of the BNP.

As for the rest of Angry SOB’s rant, it is just that, an ill-mannered driveling rant not worthy of response.

Alfred

What is pathetic is your view that the British are “A race” or that what you would doubtleas view as “miscegenation” would in some way make Britons any worse. Ethnic purity does not exist, and if it did there is no reason to consider it desirable.

Have Eddie/Larry morphed into Alfred?

Woke up this morning, Bank Holiday Sunday, to hear the phoney Gove on Radio 4 Today extolling the virtues of Cameroon’s Big Society and trying to explain why it doesn’t seem to have had much of a reception in this ‘election’.

Interesting Conservative policy in Blackburn election.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100037654/tories-attack-israel-accuse-labour-of-atrocities-and-promise-to-end-expensive-wars/

Dear Vronsky,

You choose to omit the following sentence from my comment about “strong and stabil” government; that one can argue that we’ve had too much “strong and stabil” government under our twin party system for decades. This is an odd omission. By all means criticize me for what I’ve written, but tailoring my comments like this is a bit primative, no?

Of course much of this debate, like the election, is highly academic. It hardly matters who wins the election, because ordinary people, with limited resources, not me though, are going to be royally screwed over, like the Greeks.

The differences between the leading three parties are minimal, more a matter of style and emphasis, rather than substance. Three conservative factions fighting over who gets to sit at the head of the table of greed and power in our post democratic society.

I’m kinda surprised by the panic over PR that is being expressed here. Born and raised in Australia, I cannot understand what the fuss is about. Australia is neither radical or unstable, in fact its much too conservative for my taste. The same is true for the European states that use PR.

Regarding minor parties holding too much power, voters for the minor parties expect the smaller parties to be responsible with the power they are given. If the smaller parties are seen to be misusing the power entrusted to them, voters generally withdraw their support very quickly. A good example of this can seen with the Australian Democrats, once the most significant minor party, it now barely exists after betraying the voters and making deals for their own political gain. The Greens instantly filled the vacuum left by the Democrats and the political system is as stable as ever.

BTW it is now controversial to quote Billy Connelly on this blog? Are our ears (eyes) so sensitive? I’m actually offended that people are offended. Swearing is a beautiful thing, and can be quite profound when used in the correct manner. I highly recommend Bill Hicks Rant in E-Minor as an example of this. Personally I have never understood the hype over George Carlin, he is just like Bill Hicks minus the insight, spirituality and humour.

I don’t buy Alfred’s argument quite as he puts it, but I suspect that the existence of the BNP is indeed convenient for the other parties, in a ‘look – there’s someone worse than us!’ sort of way. The above-mentioned Anti-Nazi League and kindred groups frizzle away their energy throwing eggs at Griffin, while the nazis running the country, and its foreign wars, escape similar attention.

It reminds me of that faintly disgusting photo of Brown and his wife posing outside Auschwitz. ‘Look’ it says ‘we are not them.’

“By all means criticize me for what I’ve written, but tailoring my comments like this is a bit primative, no?”

My apologies, writerman – skimming through the posts too quickly.

Gordon Duff on Opinion Maker.

http://opinion-maker.org/2010/05/times-square-bomb-hoax/

Was there a false flag on the car roof?

Yes, I agree, Vronsky. I think that although I disagree with one of his central theses – the ‘race’/ birth-rate one to which Craig and others already have allude – I think Alfred does make some excellent points. I sense he’s also being rhetorical/ Devil’s Advocate at times in relation to the BNP in order to stimulate lateral thinking.

Also, over many years there have been quite serious concerns reportedly expressed in relation to some anti-fascist organisations, Searchlight in particular. The UAF, too; it’s not just Alred, I’ve read other material on this subject. It’s not that these bodies are not full of entirely sincere grassroots members who hate racism, fascism, etc. – they are – but some of the organisations are alkso being used by the mainstream political parties and/ or the hard state. So, we have the hardstate manipulating/ instrumentalising both fascists and anti-fascists. But what’s new? It’s not that ‘they’ are omnipotent – not yet! – but this is how such organisations work to best maintain power in the hands of those for whom they work. They’ll set up front organisations to draw people away from genuine ones and they’ll infiltrate genuine ones to manipulate them. Look at what happened to the anti-arms trade organisation – CAAT – allegedly they were infiltrated by a sophisticated UK state spy-ring.

So, whether the leadership of the BNP are deliberately posing as a hard state outfit (i.e. whether it’s an organised strategy) or are just doing what politicians do and trying to gain maximal populist power, in some ways it has the same end result. It serves the interests of the main political parties, esp. Labour and Conservatives and the interests of those whom now they serve.

I wonder where the bnp are getting their money from to field so many candidates in this election?. Not that long ago I heard they were broke?.

We in the The Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition… http://www.tusc.org.uk/ …can only manage to field 42 candidates in the UK.

Tonight jack is attempting to treat some more people, its an open event and the police is ‘stretched’ with a Blackburn home game at Ewood park.

The campaigns manager of jack got a ticking off for feeding the masses and told in no uncertain terms to not do it again, tonight he will.

So we all know what will happen, nowt!

enjoy your squabblin, you ahebv been so very active during this election, without moving from your chairs, bar Craig that is, who’s valuable work once again has set examples to us all.

“What I say to people on the doorstep is we will only cut your throat slowly, the others will cut your head off” was a comment of New Labour MP for Blyth Valley in the North East, Ronnie Campbell, in a local paper. This message has been mirrored by New Labour chancellor Alistair Darling, when he admitted that public sector cuts will be ‘deeper and tougher’ than under the hated Tory regime of Margaret Thatcher.”

“Elaine Brunskill, Tyneside Socialist Party”

http://tinyurl.com/2v8g69o

Craig,

(1) “What is pathetic is your view that the British are “A race”

(2) or that what you would doubtleas (sic)view as “miscegenation” would in some way make Britons any worse.

(3) Ethnic purity does not exist,

(4) and if it did there is no reason to consider it desirable.”

I split your comment that way because it asserts four different propositions.

Re: (1) Did I say that the British are a race? Possibly, although having a training in biology I do not like the term because it has no precise operational definition. However, here’s an operational definition: An interbreeding group within a species largely separated from other groups. The nations of Europe, were, until the modern age, races in that sense.

What is pathetic about that?

Nothing, obviously. So Me 1, Craig zero.

Re: (2) It is probably a mistake to make assumptions about what someone with some expert knowledge in a field in which you are evidently largely ignorant “doubtless view(s)”. But if you had read every comment on your own blog ?” not that I consider that obligatory ?” you would remember that I had said a week or two ago that immigration no doubt raises the IQ and energy of the British population.

So, Me 2, Craig zero.

Re: (3) Bollocks Craig. Go tell the Yanomamo that their just the same as the Scotch (although I’ll admit they’re both primitive, the Scots particularly).

http://indian-cultures.com/Cultures/yanomamo.html

So, Me 3, Craig zero.

Re: (4) This is based on a false premise (see response to (2) above) and is therefore irrelevant.

So, Me 4, Craig zero.

Proportional representation is a better system than first past the post, which is a kind of race, but under present circumstances I’m not sure about the wisdom of a radical change to the electoral process at this jucture.

What system would one use? Would one have a 5% barrier for small parties? Would one count votes over the entire country or in individual constituencies? Do we really need 650 MPs anymore? What about the House of Lords?

Alfred – “You up in the middle of the night again”

I don’t regard 2 o’clock as particularly late, especially when I don’t have to get up early next morning. I was out with my ceilidh band, playing a gig in honour of a nice lady’s birthday, got home just in time for last orders at the local pub, back home about 1.30, type a few irrelevant things under the influence of Beer, and go to bed, no problem. Musicians’ hours.

populism – “In general, ideology or political movement that mobilizes the population (often, but not always, the lower classes) against an institution or government,”

So it would be populist if people went along with it, but as you say, they don’t ?

But logic-chopping aside, I can see some of that, yes. I’d say the BNP were the party of defining groups of “others” as a target for negative feeling among those it defines as its audience. (With a strong potential for claiming victimhood when the deluded populace fails to recognise its own best interest – but I suppose they’re all prone to that).

If you think I’m displaying bias, I’d agree with you. I don’t like them. I’m pretty damn sure that if they ever get their way, I’ll end up listed among the “problems” they’re offering to “solve”. And I go further, identifying my own self-interest with that of the country at large – it seems an unhealthy and undesirable direction for us to move in.

Their decision to go anti-war is “interesting”, I’ll grant, not to say seriously wild-eyed; my experience is that the anti-war people round here have been more worried about being attacked by them than seeing them offering any support or help.

What’s your bias ? From time to time you seem to say you’re merely offering points for our consideration without necessarily supporting them, but I don’t see you putting any other party’s positions in the same way. It seems to have some connection with your idea of putting people into rigid categories and wanting to see them competing to outbreed each other ? which I won’t try to take any further, given your response to previous attempts.

Richard,

I’m glad you had a pleasant evening. Late nights ?” music. The possibility should have occurred to me as many of my family are musicians.

“I’d say the BNP were the party of defining groups of “others” as a target for negative feeling among those it defines as its audience.”

I think you express the common impression. However, I have studied the BNP quite closely, and I see nothing of this targeting of negative feelings. If you watch Griffin’s public pronouncements on U-Tube you will notice that he repeatedly states that he blames the problem of mass immigration on the politicians not the immigrants and he repeatedly asserts that immigrants who have “paid their taxes and bought into our society” have nothing to fear from the BNP. He has even spoken slightly bizarrely of immigrants as seasoning in the soup, or some such expression, which is surely not negative.

The origin of the general view of the BNP is not altogether clear to me. The fact that the leadership is made up of ex-Nazis or fascists is obviously a factor. But people can and do change their minds and people forget. Few, for example, condemn Jack Straw (and non the Labour Party) because Jack Straw was, and probably still is, a Commie bastard. So I think there is more to the negative view of the BNP than the past associations of some members.

What seems significant to me are the repeated and bizarre missteps. For example, being secretly filmed talking about people who “walk like monkeys.” When this went public it was immediately denied by Griffin as “an outrageous lie.” But here’s an interesting fact. According to an article in the Guardian by Ben Goldacre, denials may enhance belief in what is denied if the denial comes from someone people don’t trust.

http://www.badscience.net/2010/05/evidence-based-smear-campaigns/

So here’s a great mechanism for the BNP to ensure that it is held in such contempt that anything it supports will be the subject of dark suspicion. With such a mechanism in place, what to do?

The money and the Zionist interest that control the country want:

(a) War to destroy Islam and to crush Russian and Chinese nationalism (this is a long term project to culminate in the Great Siberian War in which China and Russia mutually annihilate as was supposed to happen to Germany and Russia during WWII, although the Russians, unfortunately, came out it with a huge standing army that necessitated the early re-armament of Germany),

(b) Free movement of capital, goods and people, i.e., globalization and mass migration,

(c) Destruction of local democracy and sovereign states,

(d) The institution of global governance,

(e) The destruction of Christianity as a culture-forming influence,

(f) Homogenization of culture world-wide, i.e., KFC, MacDonalds Starbucks at every corner of every city in the world, etc.,

(g) The establishment of a new feudalism under which the masses, suitably culled, genetically improved and indoctrinated are ruled by a handful of global monopolies.

The BNP are against all these things. The BNP are feared and hated. Hence, everything comprising their program is automatically suspect. Which means that the major parties can carry on doing what no one wants without fear of anyone seriously considering the alternatives.

I recall an undercover film on TV about the BNP’s ‘red, blue and white’ festival in which Nazi songs were sung and one person made a joke about Auschwitz which I will not repeat.

Jack Straw and Richard Reid abandoned Communism and joined the Labour party. I call that a step in the right direction. The corresponding action for BNP members would be to forsake the organisation and turn to the Tories, and perhaps some of them have done so.

PS. That should be John Reid, not Richard Reid.

Abe,

You miss the point. Actually, you miss two points. First, the BNP have a different platform to the Tories. They say they want to bring the troops home, end outsourcing and off-shoring of jobs, mass immigration, and other things the Tories do not believe in.

Second, the whole point of the BNP, I am suggesting is to have no supporters other than a few knuckle-draggers who, though allowed to say nothing, create the right atmosphere, thereby helping to discredit the platform that the BNP allegedly espouses.

There’s an interesting U-Tube video of the BNP’s Martin Wingfield telling members to expect essentially zero result for the BNP during the forthcoming election. In other words, we gotta keep the knuckle draggers on board even though we will alienate everyone else.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ia7-XPo5Cko&feature=PlayList&p=5400187434C8F6D9&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=24

A bit subtle for folks like you and Craig, perhaps. But please try not to misunderstand what I am saying.

I’ve never raised a finger to my wife in anger, since you ask. Now I’ve answered your question, perhaps you’ll have the courage to answer mine. Are you a racist, Alfred?

Glenn,

Tell me what a racist is and I’ll tell you if I am one.

You may think my question is unnecessary, but since racist is perhaps the most common term of abuse in the liberal lexicon, its meaning has become relatively obscure.

Alfred

My point is that you shouldn’t be a BNP member (or supporter) at all. This is a racist organisation which would maintain a ‘whites only’ policy if the law did not compel them to do otherwise. It is not a coincidence that racist terrorist groups such as Combat 18 are associated with it.

Being a Tory is a move in the right direction, because they are not harmful in the way that BNP are.

But people can repent of racism. I met such a person once, who was both an ex-racist and ex-psychiatric patient. A more famous example would be the late South African editor Donald Woods, friend of Steve Biko. He described himself as ‘highly racist’ in his youth. I would recommend his books ‘Asking for trouble’ and ‘Biko’ on which the very good film “Cry Freedom” was based.

Alfred – for my definition, being a racist simply means regarding those of other races as inferior in terms of character or ability. It can also mean one who negatively discriminates on account of race.

Ah the wonderful cuddly face of the BNP -clean living, hard-working pillars of the community. But no – remember the expose on what they really look like?

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/05/now_thats_real.html

There is some variation amongst this bunch of Simian thugs, though. The BNP candidate for Banff & Buchan, Richard Payne, is hardly the most threatening specimen of the Aryan race. And he’s actually nextusCanadian.

http://scotland.bnp.org.uk/2010/01/richard-payne-to-stand-in-banff-buchan/

Actually Glenn, I have to go, so without waiting for your definition, I’ll define racism for you and show how it is that you and just about everyone else is more or less of a racist.

Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary gives three definitions of racism, which I quote from memory:

(1) Belief that a person’s character or abilities are determined by race;

(2) Belief that the races of mankind can be ranked in a hierarchy;

(3) Discrimination on the basis of race.

Re: (3) I am crazy about Vietnamese girls’ beautiful china dolls’ noses, and had I not first met an incredibly beautiful English girl who agreed to my proposal of marriage I would undoubtedly have sought out with ruthless discrimination any Vietnamese girl who would have married me.

Re: (2) I have no doubt that the races of mankind (they don’t exist according to Craig, which means I suppose that racism is an imaginary evil) can be ranked in various ways. Tutsis are taller than Hutus, for example, and Americans are fatter than Armenians. But perhaps what is meant is that the races can be ranked from good to bad, or ugly to handsome, or smart to stupid, or just superior to inferior.

To a biologist the idea of superiority is simply silly. Humans are products of evolution like every other one of God’s creatures. As such, natural selection will have tended to adapt them to their environment, including the social environment, which varies greatly between communities.

So tall or short, fat or thin, smart or dumb, we can assume that variation among relatively self-contained human populations are adaptive. Period.

Re: (1) Do you know, I always thought the English tend to a certain stodginess, you know, the sort of people who take to accountancy, pig farming and running a grocery store in Grantham, whereas my highland Scots ancestors seem to have a little more life, poetry and music in their veins. And it would seem logical to attribute such differences in temperament to adaptation to different social environments.

The Scottish highlanders lived rather like many Africans, in smallish clans or tribes, fighting small wars with neighbouring clans, stealing cattle, engaging in a bit of rape and pillage when the opportunity arose, but otherwise, mostly bumming around telling tales, singing songs: hence the musical and poetic inspiration. I mean, don’t you notice a difference in temperament between, say, Desmond Tutu and the Archbishop of Canterbury? Heck if they made Desmond Tutu Archbishop of Canterbury, I’d at least think about becoming an Anglican.

Of course, in most respects, differences among populations are quantifiable only by comparison of means and there will be many exceptions to any generalization based on population means.

For example, that old cannibal Idi Amin was likely a dour bastard, and there are no doubt a few highlanders with a grievance whom it would not be hard to distinguish from a ray of sunshine. But on balance, yes, I think Africans and highlanders are temperamentally a little different from your average English shopkeeper.

Abe,

I think I have studied the current face of the BNP more carefully than you have. They are not explicitly racist. In fact they explicitly state that they are not racist. They have also stated years ago that they are not totalitarian. You may not believe a word they say, in which case you are like most other people, but that is another matter.

The BNP’s opposition to mass immigration is no proof of racism. There are many reason for opposing mass immigration, economic, social and cultural, none of which have to do with racism.

As for the Tories not being harmful, they’ll certainly be harmful to the Afghans as will New Labor and the Lib-Dems. Whereas the BNP say they would not be. So who are the racists and the anti-Islamic bigots?

H

Alfred

The current face of the BNP is defined by the need to appear respectable. I’m not just talking about immigration which all major parties intend to restrict in various ways. That’s why I referred to the result of an undercover operation on their red,blue and white festival.

I am indeed like most people in disbelieving their claim not to be racist. Their roots are in the National Front, one of whose members, Robert Relf, became notorious in the 70s. I remember a near-unprintable hate letter of his being printed in the papers as a specimen. They’re bad company.

So far as Afghanistan are concerned, the only justification for being involved there is to prevent attacks here that originate there. If the BNP were convinced through secret intelligence of such a link, I wouldn’t see them pulling out.

Glenn,

Thanks for the definition, which you must have posted as I was making a response to your question. As you see, by your definition, I’m in the clear. To a biologist, ideas of racial supremacy are simply stupid. Like saying a human is superior to a tapeworm, or a smallpox virus, whereas we all know that the latter are both superior to an academic dean or anyone running for political office.

Abe,

You think the more Afghans we kill (I say we, meaning Canadians and Brits) the less likely it is we will all die in an ‘orrible way due to a Taliban terror cell, cutting throats and blowing up the Parliament Buildings?

Well, who knows, you might be right. But it doesn’t seem logical to me. It’s not as if they had anything to do with 9/11. Even Osama is in the clear on that: the FBI saying they have no hard evidence that he was involved in 9/11 — see here:

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

Alfred – your argument above, re: Desmond Tutu and the Highlanders, seems to suggest that “temperament” is a matter of genetics. Is that right ?

Alfred

I believe Osama was indeed responsible for 9/11, and that it is naive to think otherwise. The idea that Bush organised the murder of 3000 of his own citizens is a crackpot conspiracy theory as far as I am concerned.

As for Al Qaeda doing a Guy Fawkes, my point is that senior politicians have access to secret intelligence which lead them to believe that terrorist plots originate in Al-Qaeda from the Afghan-Pakistan border, making it necessary to root out the Taleban. Craig has given us good reason for thinking that Uzbekistan is not a reliable source, but I don’t believe that all secret intelligence comes from there.

Richard,

There is abundant evidence of genetic factors controlling temperament, e.g., genes related to bipolar disorder, depression, anxiety, etc.

More subtle genetic influences on temperament would be more difficult to establish. But since the mind is an organic machine created through the interaction of genes and environment, its features must reflect underlying genetic variables.

Abe,

Why is it naive to think that bin Laden may not have been responsible for 9/11 when the FBI say they have “no hard evidence” that he was?

I don’t see any point in arguing the point in detail here, since it’s been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere. You might, though, take a look at http://patriotsquestion911.com/. There you will find comment by politicians, scientists, engineers and military and intelligence officers that provide a starting points for anyone wishing to inquire for themselves into a series of rather mysterious and ill-investigated events that provided the United States Government with the much-to-be-desired catalytic event that justified a massive military build-up and an attack on Afghanistan to secure access to Central Asian oil and gas resources.

As for a new terror attack, real or false, you surely don’t believe everything that “senior politicians” say. Remember, Saddam’s WMD, which proved not to exist, his drones of death that were liable to spread death and destruction throughout the west at 45 minutes notice. All bogus as it turned out. I won’t call you naive. But I do suggest that you might examine alternative points of view before dismissing them out of hand.

Alfred, thank you for your reply above, but it appears we are in danger of expanding the term ‘racist’ beyond any useful meaning. To observe that we can indeed select some physical traits and then rank candidate races along a measure of those traits, is so obvious as to be not worth mentioning.

What I was getting to was whether you believe there’s an eminent superiority of one race over another. A sufficiently large and general superiority, that one race could be classed as overall “better” than another. That race would be a sufficiently large enough factor by itself, so that other considerations become vastly less significant.

For instance, would actual intelligence, moral standing and physical well being be less important to you than the simple matter of race?

This is why I said negative discrimination as part of the definition used for our discussion, since you were kind enough to offer me the privilege, rather than simply noting the ability to distinguish various characteristics.

Negative discrimination would disqualify candidates based on race, while overlooking other qualities that might be clearly superior to those of the favoured candidate. Would you tolerate such negative discrimination based on race?

Gentlemen, please… if you want to discuss “Operation stand-down day” and so on, this is the thread in which to do so:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post.html

I’ll be happy to chip in myself. The owner of this blog has made it clear that’s the only thread in which we can discuss the subject, which is fair enough, because enough threads ended up getting hijacked (forgive the pun) by the topic.

As you will find, I am in no small way in agreement with Alfred on this one. As with a surprising amount besides.

One major advantage the BNP has is that it voices positions on some subjects that most of the country will agree with, while none of the major parties has the courage to say anything about it at all. Of course, they hold a set of pretty awful ideas too.

The fact that none of NL, Con or LD even wants to talk about our policy concerning the Global War On Terror, makes a mockery of any concept of democracy in this country. Most people don’t want to be involved with it. Most people put that pretty high up on their concerns, far more than whether some change to NI takes place. But no party dares to offer a change or review in policy, let alone abandon it.

“here is abundant evidence of genetic factors controlling temperament, e.g., genes related to bipolar disorder, depression, anxiety, etc.”

Well, yeah, possibly. But before, you were talking about “musical and poetic inspiration” and a tendency to farm pigs. Don’t you think that’s a different kind of a beast ?

Glenn,

You say, “What I was getting to was whether you believe there’s an eminent superiority of one race over another. A sufficiently large and general superiority, that one race could be classed as overall “better” than another. That race would be a sufficiently large enough factor by itself, so that other considerations become vastly less significant.”

I am atheist brought up in the Christian tradition and I believe that the Bible is mostly a collection of myths, some of them making little sense, most of them cribbed from other stories and traditions. Yet I believe that Christianity embodies ideas that have contributed to what is best in Western civilization. The idea, for example, that we are children of God, born in his image and equal in his sight. That is, I think, the right basis on which to approach others, whatever their race, religion or creed. We should, that is to say, regards others as our moral equals, at least until there is evidence to prove otherwise.

That there are physical and intellectual differences among populations seems an inevitable consequence of the fact that there are always genetic differences between essentially isolated populations. The physical differences are potentially measurable, although because phenotype is the product of genotype and environment, a proper comparison is impossible unless one standardizes the environment, a near impossibility unless one raises children of different origins under rigorously controlled, uniform conditions.

Nevertheless, some differences seem pretty obvious: the superior lung capacity and red blood cell count of the Sherpas, the superior tolerance of low core body temperatures in the Innuit, more fast muscle mass in certain African groups, etc. But when it comes to the intellect, the complications are vastly greater because the intellectual environment is vastly more complex than the physical environment. So while theoretically, there must be intellectual differences among the races of mankind, what they are and how significant they are is obscure indeed.

But in any case, to a biologist, physical differences imply a scale of superiority only insofar as they affect survival. If it survives and multiplies, it’s better. But in the evolutionary race, you’re only as good as you were on the day. The future is unknown, therefore, we cannot know what will be superior, in an evolutionary sense, tomorrow.

There is one other way in which one can, and most people usually do, regard and value groups. It is according to personal attachment and loyalty. I don’t consider the British a superior race. Britain has produced some wonderful personalities, great artists and many of those who in recent centuries have contributed most to the advancement of human understanding of the world in which we live. Yet visiting from abroad one cannot help noticing the uncouthness, the materialism, the moral laxity of many of the mass of British people, or the loathsome greed and arrogance of some members of the ruling elite and business executive class.

So I have no illusions about the British. Yet the British nation gave me life and shaped my mind. It is out of gratitude and loyalty that I want to see the British, for better or worse, stay in business for another nine thousand years.

Of course people come and go. They always have. But the impact of immigration is a matter of numbers. On present trends, the outlook for the continuation of the British race in an essentially unmodified form is grim.

That is why I oppose further mass immigration. This has nothing to do with my feeling about immigrants. I am an immigrant. If they are in Britain legally, if they are loyal and if they pay their taxes and otherwise contribute to society, immigrants should have the same rights as any citizen of long British descent. If there are to many immigrants, it is due to a political failure, a failure that must be addressed politically.

Richard,

You quote me:

“There is abundant evidence of genetic factors controlling temperament, e.g., genes related to bipolar disorder, depression, anxiety, etc.”

and say:

“Well, yeah, possibly. But before, you were talking about “musical and poetic inspiration” and a tendency to farm pigs. Don’t you think that’s a different kind of a beast ?”

Not really. The Welcome Trust and other research groups have put their fingers on many genes associated with specific diseases including various mood disorders through well-funded medical research programs. That no one has yet has put a finger on the J.S. Bach gene is mainly, I suspect, because there’s no money in it.

But there is likely a genetic basis to such genius: at least three of J.S.’s sons were notable composers.

And the Darwin family showed unusual interest in speculative biology over a number of generations, beginning with Erasmus.

Perhaps less conclusive, a slightly dotty relative of mine, in search of our family’s aristocratic roots, found that our English ancestors farmed pigs for generations, which suggests a hereditary aptitude.

Alfred

I believe that the evidence of Osama’s responsibility for 9/11 is not all public. The idea of the American government killing its own citizens is indeed worthy to be dismissed as far as I am concerned, as the product of lunatics. I don’t believe everything that senior politicians say, but I don’t disbelieve them on principle either. They are worthy to be regarded as democratic representatives, dismissable at elections.

I recall reading an article by a man who felt that 9/11 was a domestic conspiracy. This particular individual is a enthusiast (to put it charitably) about another equally unsubstantiated conspiracy about a certain British hobby club. But this discussion reminded me of David Aaronovitch’s Voodoo Histories, which I am pleased to notice has just come out in paperback (ISBN 009947896X), which I have now ordered. So one good thing about this discussion is that otherwise I might not have bothered to look for it!

“The Welcome Trust and other research groups have put their fingers on many genes associated with specific diseases including various mood disorders through well-funded medical research programs. That no one has yet has put a finger on the J.S. Bach gene is mainly, I suspect, because there’s no money in it.”

I suspect it’s because the ability to conceive of such music is a much bigger and more nebulous thing than a “specific disease”, and an ability to explain it well would involve understanding of many more issues, alongside the features that can be coded for in DNA. Bach’s was a musical family, yes. Do you not think “family” counts for anything, in the sense of what you’re taught, what the people you look up to tell you is important, the things you learn from the people you’re around when you’re a little learning machine ? To suggest that all of that counts for nothing, with “a gene” to supply everything necessary, seems to me daft and I’ll believe it only when it’s shown. As you say, no-one’s been willing to put up the money to test it. Nor would I, for the next few decades.

Likewise, if you have several generations of pig-farming in your ancestry, I’d ask, were these people connected, at all ? Is there any possibility that they learnt from previous generaions that it was a viable way to make a living ? And learnt the tricks of it from them, in a society that would pay for pigs ? If someone carrying these hypothetical pigfarming genes had been somehow whisked away from that environment at birth, founded a thriving dynasty of Antarctic penguin-trainers and had never seen or heard of pigs, and their great-great-grandchildren suddenly developed a helpless craving to farm a specific animal they’d never even heard of, than it might be proof of such a thing. As it is, I’m more inclined to suspect it was as much a result of what they’d learnt.

Which last – the ability to learn would have strong genetic components, yes – again, along with other factors – but let’s not go overboard with the pre-destination.

What I meant by my “not for the next few decades” is, the DNA people have been going great guns since the ’80s, they seem to be learning loads about what can be carried, and explaining all kinds of things (“specific diseases”, as you say), and I think that’s leading to exaggerated claims of being able to explain Everything that way; explanation by genetics is becoming overvalued. And there’s probably no help for it except to plug on until we have a much clearer idea of what can and can’t. But the possibility of looking for a “Bach gene” isn’t (IMO) worth it until we can get beyond that to a grip on the same old question as always, the way that our individual experiences affect, build on, that raw material.

It’s a question of logical typing, basically. To identify chemical malfunctions leading to a disease is one thing, to assert that such music as Bach’s is an outcome of nothing-but-chemistry in the same way, by the same mechanisms, looks like a rather more tenuous hypothesis that hasn’t been demonstrated.

Richard,

” Do you not think “family” counts for anything, in the sense of what you’re taught, what the people you look up to tell you is important, the things you learn from the people you’re around when you’re a little learning machine? ”

Absolutely. As I indicated in talking with Glenn about racial differences, the difficulty of disentangling genetic and environmental factors determining intellectual variation is enormous because of the vast complexity of the intellectual environment.

However, there are some indications that particular intellectual traits could have a rather simple genetic underpinning. For example, many of the most extraordinary analytical geniuses have been severely handicapped socially. Grigory Perelman, the Russian mathematician, for example, who has turned down two prizes of a million dollars (the Fields Medal, and the Millennium Prize), lives a life of almost total seclusion. Socially, Isaac Newton was somewhat more functional, but severely abnormal. Likewise George Cavendish, perhaps the greatest physicist of his age, who would run in panic if approached by a stranger. Cavendish discovered the gas laws and many other things but never told anyone. The extent and importance of his work was known only when his papers were examined after his death. Then there was Kurt Goedel, Einstein’s friend at Princeton, whose incompleteness theorem revolutionized mathematical thought. Goedel died of starvation because he feared he was being poisoned. Einstein, himself, was a little odd. For one thing, he never wore socks!

Such characteristics might be explained by a simple frontal lobe abnormality, that allows privileged access to the unconscious mind, while disrupting various functions necessary for normal social behavior. Newton talked about keeping a problem constantly before his mind until little by little it opened up to his understanding. Einstein talked of thinking deeply about what it would be like to travel on a sunbeam. These remarks suggest a kind abnormal concentration that characterizes many of those who, today, would be considered psychiatric cases. Had Goedel, for example, been suitably medicated, he might have had a well-adjusted social life and accomplished nothing, mathematically, of the slightest importance.

The notion that rather specific genetic factors or combinations of factors can result in unusual intellectual achievement is also suggested by the case of families in which members achieve unusual success in widely separated fields: an interesting topic for research.

“The notion that rather specific genetic factors or combinations of factors can result in unusual intellectual achievement is also suggested by the case of families in which members achieve unusual success in widely separated fields:”

Well, but that could also suggest that it might have something to do with what your upbringing values, also what opportunities are open to the resources available to that family, etc etc. The trick is to find ways of testing these suggestions …

“an interesting topic for research.”

Oh, I agree. And there’s much to be done, before we’ll understand these things.

Abe,

Quit pontificating and find out what you are talking about.

Here’s a start:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25365.htm

Alfred

I have perfectly good sources of information, such as the Times, the BBC, and I can apply my own judgment. The website you refer to appears to be anti-American propaganda and therefore biased. Therefore I am not inclined to look at it.

I look forward to reading David Aaronovitch’s Voodoo Histories, and would recommend that you do likewise, as well as Donald Wood’s books.

I tell you seriously that associating with the BNP will do you no good. If that’s pontificating, I’m glad to plead guilty – it’s for your own good.

Abe,

I should think in your mind anything anti-American would be biased whether it were propaganda or not.

But, yes, Rupert Murdoch’s Timesy is a very reliable source. Have you tried Murdoch’s British pornography channels too?

http://www.newshounds.us/2006/02/12/rupert_murdochs_pornography_profiteering.php

You might find them eye-opening (they used to boast, and perhaps still do, that they offered the “dirtiest” films allowed under British law).

And truly, the BBC, is a totally trustworthy source of the unvarnished truth.

Incidentally, did you know that David Ray Griffin is an American and an Emeritus professor of theology and that his book “The new Pearl Harbor revisited” was chosen as “pick of the week” by “Publisher’s Weekly,” the trade journal of the American publishing industry?

But, yeah, don’t confuse yourself with the facts, such as discussed in this special issue of the American scholarly journal “American Behavioral Scientist”:

http://911.lege.net/ABS53N62010/

The topic is SCADS (state crimes against democracy) — anti-American propaganda, obiously. The authors of the articles, all scholars at American universities, should certainly be fired.

Alfred: Indeed, anything anti-American is biased. Indeed, the Times is a very reliable source. And truly, the BBC, is a totally trustworthy source of the unvarnished truth – your own words there, I couldn’t do better. SCAD is a conspiracy theory, and your time is better spent on Aaronovitch’s book, whose details I have already provided.

On a different subject – fiction, but a special kind, that reveals truth through it – you might enjoy the series West Wing; all seven seasons are available on DVD, and such is its quality that several past presidents agreed to be interviewed in its special features. Aaron Sorkin, the author is clearly a very gifted playwright (he wrote the script for the film The American President and the A Few Good Men).

In fact I might watch some of it myself now, so I turn to my mug of tea, and wish you good night – and take care of yourself!

Abe,

You’re kidding me, right?

Or not? You comments disturb me. They remind of a kid I knew in school who rose to become Minister of Defense in Gordon Brown’s government. We all thought he was nuts, and now we know it.

“Incidentally, did you know that David Ray Griffin is an American and an Emeritus professor of theology and that his book “The new Pearl Harbor revisited” was chosen as “pick of the week” by “Publisher’s Weekly,” the trade journal of the American publishing industry?”

He’s also a crackpot who doesn’t understand the problem of induction.

His empirical analysis of things is “X has never happened before therefor X cannot possibly happen”.

He dresses it up differently but that is the gist and it is cracked.

Abe, InformationClearingHouse is not “anti-Americans”, no more than Mr. Murray is “Anti-British” because he criticises the establishment. If you’re declaring that any criticism of America makes you “anti-American”, you have certainly drank the Kool-Aid, as the saying goes.

Furthermore, ICH does not just make stuff up. It is, rather, a compendium of the relevant bits of news for the day from a large variety of reputable sources. Some of which might even reference articles from The Times, if they appear to be true examples of journalism, rather than puff-pieces for whichever politician is doing the most favours for Murdoch.

The slant from the BBC is such that you must be leaning into a very stiff wind indeed if it looks straight up and down to you.

Angry,

You say,

He’s also a crackpot who doesn’t understand the problem of induction.

His empirical analysis of things is “X has never happened before therefor X cannot possibly happen”.

Well it is a bit unlikely, isn’t it. If no steel frame building has ever collapsed due to fire, then three supposedly do so all on the same day in the same city — one of them not even hit by a plane.

Craig thinks the reason they fell was because the steel girders weren’t properly bolted together. Do you buy that?

Take a look at the thread devoted to the subject, and see how conclusively Angry/Larry got bashed on the issue:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2010/01/the_911_post.html

It’s a bit rich to come out swaggering now, AngrySoba, as if you had that whole argument down. You had your chance on that thread. Your appeals to authority and incredulity wasn’t winning it for you, and so you went your rather tiresome Mr. Angry routine.

The link to the thread is above, if you feel you have further business with it.

Yes, I have just been reminded that our host does not wish discussion of 9/11 to intrude on the discussion of other topics.

But I suppose we can address the problem of induction and, in particular, Professor Griffin’s method of argument.

Griffin’s argument is not that “”X has never happened before therefor X cannot possibly happen”, it is:

Y has never been observed to happen unless proceed by X (detonation of explosives), therefore, when Y happened three times in one day one should consider the possibility that it was caused by X. Weak induction, I believe that is called — a method of reasoning without which life would be impossible.

Hello Alfred,

I too am an atheist brought up in pretty strong Christian teachings. You’d have to get up pretty early to out-Bible me. There are all manner of religions who give the same pretty basic principles to live by, which seem to me to be fairly decent life philosophies, such as:

—start

Brahmanism: This is the sum of duty: Do naught unto others which would cause you pain if done to you.: Mahabharata 5:1517

Christianity: All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.: Matthew 7:12

Islam: No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother what which he desires for himself. Sunnah

Buddhism: Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.: Udana Varga 5:18

Judaism: What is hateful to you, do not to your fellowmen. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.: Talmud, Shabbat 31:a

Confucianism: Surely it is the maxim of loving-kindness: Do not unto others that you would not have them do unto you.: Analects 15:23

Taoism: Regard your neighbor’s gain as your own gain, and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss.: T’ai Shag Kan Ying P’ien

Zoroastrianism: That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good: for itself. : Dadistan-i-dinik 94:5

—end

And so forth.

*

I’m with you until your assertion that there are intellectual differences between populations. Physical differences go without saying, but are you suggesting some races are more stupid that others, or are you merely observing (again) that one group of people might be more predisposed to intellectual pursuits than another?

If it’s the latter, I’m pushed to see why you keep making references to something so obvious as to be considered a truism.

“Personal attachment and loyalty” might not go so far as you imagine, even among those considered thoroughbred British. Have you seen the atmosphere at a football match anytime in the last 20 years? Or witnessed how police and strikers or protesters, every bit as British as each other, become opposed?

How about how our very British executive classes outsourced our entire manufacturing base to China, destroying the beating heart of our economy and communities for short term gain.

Our continuation as a British “race” in any form is grim while the ruling class treat us as disposable assets in a race to the bottom for labour costs. Instead of immigration, consider the emigration of our jobs for a while, and realise that is the most corrosive element in our decline.

*

You say that if “they” are British legally, “if they are loyal and if they pay their taxes and otherwise contribute to society, immigrants should have the same rights as any citizen of long British descent”.

Should this principle not be applied by the BNP, when they consider membership applications? Last I heard, they wouldn’t accept a black member. Are you at odds with the BNP on this issue, Alfred?

“Well it is a bit unlikely, isn’t it.”

THIS is an appeal to incredulity.

“If no steel frame building has ever collapsed due to fire”

But it has:

“The 1960 exposition hall was destroyed in a spectacular 1967 fire, despite being thought fireproof by virtue of its steel and concrete construction. At the time of the fire, the building contained highly flammable exhibits, several hydrants were shut off, and the sprinklers proved inadequate suppression. Thus the fire spread quickly and destructively, taking the life of a security guard.[4] ”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCormick_Place#History

So, no doubt, Griffin will change the goalposts to “no steel-framed skyscraper” on the presumption that being taller makes it less susceptible to collapse. A clearly absurd stipulation as anyone can agree.

Also, if you are familiar with Bertrand Russell’s “chicken paradox” you will already know that chickens are not wise to think that everyday they will go out be fed grain just because it has always been like that in the past. One day the axe will come out and they’ll all have their heads lopped off and sent to market even though none of them may have seen this happen before.

Glenn,

I am tired. Can’t write straight.

The BNP exist, I have concluded, to make repugnant populist policies, thus leaving the field clear for the main parties to continue pushing wars, outsourcing, submission to EU rule, etc. The BNP don’t want votes. They want to be hated (not the mugs and knuckle-draggers who make up the rank and file, obviously) but the intelligence behind the operation. That may be paranoia. In which case one has to assume that Griffin is the stupidest Cambridge-trained lawyer that ever lived, since anything the party espouses actually becomes less popular when people know it is BNP policy. (The BNP, incidentally, does now accept members of any ethnicity.)

As to intellectual differences among populations, I assert that as a logical necessity following from the fact that populations differ genetically, and therefore, they must differ at least marginally in all aspects of phenotype including the mind. But I have no preconceptions about what those racial differences are, or whether they are what anyone would consider significant.

I regard IQ testing as fairly stupid, since it seems silly to assume that intelligence can be measured on a linear scale by a single number. However, I’m willing to believe that IQ tests measure some mental processing capability. Further, I’m prepared to believe it possible that if you raised a bunch of Chinese and a bunch of Scottish highlanders under identical conditions and tested their IQ’s the Chinese might come out slightly ahead. This is wild speculation, but the Chinese are adapted to a complex society with a high population density, whereas the highlanders are adapted to a much simper social system. Dealing with people requires mental processing power, so the Chinese may have needed more of it than people living in simple tribal communities, i.e., selection would have endowed them with more brains despite the high metabolic and nutritional cost. The Scots, on the other hand, could dispense with some brains, which would give them an advantage over the Chinese in fleetness of foot.

But look, don’t take this too seriously, although you should know that this is more or less how evolutionary biologists think. They never think in terms of racial superiority/inferiority. They think in terms of adaptation. All they are interested in is what pays off in reproductive success. In humans, the brain is the most critical organ when it comes to environmental adaptation. Therefore, one should expect the brain and its properties to vary with the social environment and history. Whether it varies much or only in inconsequentially tiny degrees, I have no real conviction.

If one considers the intellectual history of mankind, I am inclined to accept Jared Diamond’s view that the reason the Trobriand Islanders and other peoples on the periphery of civilization failed to discover the infinitesimal calculus, was that they were in the wrong place, which is to say they simply lacked the experience that would have allowed them to pose the question to which the calculus was the answer.

But one day it might become evident that Finns or some obscure ethnic group in Asia really are, on the whole, better at math, or composing polyphonic music than most other people, just as those Kenyan long-distance runners can out-run everyone, except possibly a highland Scot.

“This is wild speculation, but the Chinese are adapted to a complex society with a high population density, whereas the highlanders are adapted to a much simper social system”

What kind of time period do such evolutionary adaptations take place over ? How many generations before we start seeing them ?

Ach, it just makes no sense. Stick a Chinese baby in a Highland family or vice versa and they’ll grow up adapting to their environment. I know ‘The Jerk’ was Steve Martin when he was funny, but it’s not meant to be a blueprint for racial theories.

Alfred

I kid you not. The Times, the BBC and the West Wing are just fine by me. But I won’t be voting Nulab, unlike that kid at school you mentioned. And I hope you in your turn don’t touch the BNP with a ten-foot pole.h

Anon,

You quote me:

“This is wild speculation, but the Chinese are adapted to a complex society with a high population density, whereas the highlanders are adapted to a much simper social system”

and ask:

“What kind of time period do such evolutionary adaptations take place over ? How many generations before we start seeing them ?”

Genetic variation within human populations can occur in various ways at various rates. Rapid change occurs through changes in the frequency of genes already present in the gene pool. For example, during a plague only those with specific immunity genes survive. The Black Death, for example, caused an abrupt change in the composition of the gene pool of the British population during the fourteenth century.

Such adaptation may be reflected not only in the acquisition of resistance to a particular disease, but in visible morphological traits also. The plague appears to have changed the common skull form in England from round to long (http://forum.stirpes.net/studies/13735-unexplained-changes-skull-type-british-men.html).

Such a correlated change in traits may reflect the action of a pleiotropic gene (i.e., with multiple effects) or to linkage between different genes, perhaps due to the presence within the population of several incompletely miscegenated strains, e.g., Viking versus Celt, differing both in plague resistance and skull form.

Radical changes in many traits, for example body size or coloration (e.g., in fishes) can be achieved in experimental populations within just a few generations through the application of strong selective pressure. Such changes result not from the addition of genes to the gene pool, but through alteration in the frequency of multiple genes pre-existing in the gene pool. Because large human populations such as those of modern nation states possess a great diversity of genes, much of the potential genetic variation of the species exists within each racial or national gene pools.

Rapid genetic change within a population can result from differential breeding rates among genetically distinct population groups, e.g., Islamic immigrants to Britain versus indigenous Brits who may for practical purposes be defined as those with four British born grandparents. As mentioned elsewhere, such differences in reproductive rate can result in the virtual total replacement of one gene pool by another within only a couple of generations. In Europe, the magnitude of such effects is masked in the overall population statistics because of the long post-reproductive life of modern Britons, i.e., there are plenty of indigenous old people, but fewer, proportionately, of reproductive indigenous Britons.

The impact of immigration on the local gene pool depends on whether the immigrants are mainly single and mate with members of the indigenous population, or bring mates from their own homeland. In the first case, the result will be a merging of gene pools. In the second case, the result will be tendency is for replacement of one gene pool with another. The impact of immigration also depends on whether the second and subsequent generations of immigrants “marry out” or breed only within their own community. Thus, cultural traits associated with specific gene pools affect the dispersal and genes within those gene pools.

An additional cause of genetic change within a population such as a nation state, is the merging of local gene pools. For example, until recent times, few people in Britain traveled more than ten miles from their place of birth, so gene flow between, say, Manchester and Birmingham was minimal compared with gene flow within those communities.

Such genetic isolation resulted in multiple unique local gene pools, which are easily recognized in facial types, the preponderance of particular hair and eye colors, etc. The composition of each local gene pool will have been the result of a different history of migration and selection, resulting in a population with unique attributes. How much local adaptation has contributed to the unique achievements of particular local communities, e.g., ancient Athens and Rome, eighteenth century Edinbugh and London, is unknown.

Other processes of genetic change include conquest and genocide, as ongoing in Israel, or conquest and rape, as within the Mongol empire. What role, if any, mutation ?” the emergence of entirely new genes ?” plays, I have no idea.

Abe,

Thanks for your assurance of soundness on NuLab. No I won’t be voting BNP: I don’t have a vote, though if I did, I’d probably shred it.

Re: the BNP designed to fail

This seems to confirm my hypothesis that the BNP are not intended to get any votes:

“BNP in turmoil after online chief Simon Bennett walks out”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7116654.ece

First Griffin is “secretly” filmed saying Africans “walk like monkeys,” then a BNP candidate threatens to kill the Griffin, then the party gets in a stupid argument about Marmite, now everyone’s walking out. Could their message be any clearer, for God’s sake don’t vote for us.

The only question of interest now is who is behind these scumbags. NuLab?, the security services? The NWO folks that Angrysoba shills for?

Angysoba,

Good try about McCormick Place. It’s wasn’t a steel tower, it was a single story building. As for it being destroyed by fire, many steel towers have been “destroyed” by fire, if you mean gutted. But none have collapsed in their own footprint — except of course on 9/11 when it happened three times.

As for Russell’s argument, it proves only that weak induction is weak. So what? Weak induction is all you’ve got in many circumstances, whether you’re a chicken or a man.

That Russell illustrates weak inference with a story about a chicken confirms that weak inference is based on sound evolutionary epistemology — I think thats what Konrad Lorenz calls it.

Incidentally, what does this mean on your Web page:

“AN NWO SHILL AND FOOTSOLDIER FOR THE 9/11 LIES MOVEMENT”

I like the way you correctly use the indefinite article “an” before the letter “N,” as so few people do. But what does it mean? Do you get paid for shilling and lying? If so, what’s the rate and who pays it?

Alfred, there’s a 9/11 thread, specifically dedicated to the subject of 9/11 – just so you know.

Technicolour, methinks you are turning Scottish (“Ach”), if not in genotype or phenotype then at least in meme. How could this be possible? Verily, ’tis a revolt ‘gainst the harmony of the spheres!

Suhayl,

You say, “Alfred, there’s a 9/11 thread”

Yeah, that’s why we’re talking the “problem of induction.” Falling steel frame buildings are being mentioned simply for the sake of illustration. In future we will illustrate the argument with talk of chickens and falling skies.

PS. I give you the Daily Mail, you don’t like it. I give you the same info. from the BBC and you tell me to stand on my head. What do you consider a reliable source? The Gruniard? Oh, yes, everyone forgot to mention the old geezers of over “working age.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/apr/10/foreigners-immigration-jobs-ons

Sure old Brits don’t compete with immigrants because there are very few immigrants in that age group.

Anyhow, your contempt for 20% of the British workforce seems palpable. If they’re all too incompetent to clean hospital floors, it’s time to train them, not replace them with foreigners who only buy things because they have incomes that are not going to British citizens who could be trained to do the work that immigrants do.

Think about it: 20% unemployed or working part time when they need a job. Twenty percent of the population in effect humiliated, marginalized, living in dire poverty and you want to have an uncontrolled influx of people from dollar-a-day economies who consider welfare in Britain, let alone a minimum wage job is a hell of a good deal.

What you are advocating is a program to destroy the British. It is a policy of genocide by marginalization, demoralization, and reproductive failure, associated with replacement by an alien population.

DEST-ROY THE BRITISH. DEST-ROY THE BRITISH.

Whoops! Caught me there too, Alfred!

Suhayl, thanks for your patience. I always find it a bit sad when people end up ranting about ‘uncontrolled influxes’ and talk about people from ‘dollar-a-day’ economies; as though we didn’t have some of the stiffest regulations in Europe and as though the people who come here don’t have to pay the same prices as everyone else.

I guess if they can send back a quid or so to their families some people might object. Why, I’m not sure. They’d do better to focus on corporate tax evasion (hello News International): now that really hurts the economy.

Alfred, you’re directing your ire and fear at the victims of the system; not the perpetrators. Why?

Technicolor,

What you call the victims of the system could avoid being victims of the system if they stayed in their country of origin.

Saying that I am directing ire and fear at the 20% of the British workforce that is unemployed or only partially employed is daft. But what you are unable to see is that there most of what you call the victims of the system are not immigrants.

Alfred, I don’t despise anyone. I’m trying to argue that the reason there are so many long-term unemployed people in the UK is a direct consequence of the global economic system and the chaos and war on which it thrives and is dependent. The reason people migrate here also is to a large extent related to the global economic system and the same dynamics. The problems and solutions reside in the global econonic system and those who run it for their own benefit to the ultimate systemic detriment of the 20% of Britons, immigrants and most other folk on the planet.

We ought to be directing our ire at those who run the global economic system and not at one another (by which I mean at immigrants/ at the 20% of the UK people to whom you refer). Otherwise, we are in danger of being duped by the Lords of Big Capital.

Media organs like The Daily Mail and many others are propaganda leaflets for the Lords of Big Capital. The BBC is a state broadcaster which does many good things but which ultimately is not the arbiter of truth on everything. Think about it’s shameful coverage of the Iraq invasion, and much else.

I do think that the world will need to stand on its head if things are ever to change.

Furthermore, I really do think that it is necessary that we come to see the movements of populations and individuals not as a ‘problem’ per se, but as a ‘situation’, a reality that has always existed in this world and which will continue to exist for as long as the human species continues to exist.

Alfred, you do not seem to have engaged with the points which I made in earlier posts on the ‘Immigration’ thread, which alluded to other countries being by far the main recipients of refugees/ asylum-seekers, many of whom are in suhc situations because of wars in which the UK is a dirct or indirect protagonist.

In Britain, we are encouraged by many organs of the corporate media to become paranoid about ‘incomers’. We need to stand on our heads and take a look at the rest of the world, at history and at ourselves.

Ex-Liberal Party leader, David Steel’s daughter, an example of immigration and syncretism in action, long-term. This is what Britain is, and it’s something good:

http://catrionabhatia.org.uk/

She has four children (and good on her, too!). I guess Alfred might choose to pontificate in some way on that fact.

I hope she wins.

Alfred (whose language gets distinctly less Edwardian under pressure) patently lives on Daily Mail Island, not in Canada. Oh well. It’s hard not to feel sorry for people who feel forced to wear a narrow, hateful set of blinkers, whichever tribe they think they come from. Alfred, I’m sorry.

“Good try about McCormick Place. It’s wasn’t a steel tower, it was a single story building.”

I see. So empirical reasoning only works for steel towers?

Some might consider that a rather arbitrary use of induction. But maybe you can account for how it was possible to turn over the conventional view that a single story building couldn’t be destroyed by fire with an instance of one doing just that but the conventional thinking on steel towers works differently.

Let me guess, it’s something to do with gravity, right?

Perhaps you could also point out why, if a steel building was unsusceptible to fire, then all buildings of such size and even height, are coated with fireproofing? Is fireproofing just an extortion racket or do you suppose it has prevented other buildings from collapsing from fire damage in the past? Just a thought that…

Now, if you’d like to answer that, then you’ll have to do it on the 9/11 thread as the good folk round here have had enough of that talk.

Alfred [05:08] – that’s pretty late, and your writing is just fine for such a time.

Your surmising of the BNP came as something of a surprise – that the BNP is basically a shell organisation to peel off racist morons to delegitimise popular positions. In much the same way, the Teabagging Party in the US has been formed out of the same demographic. This was a view I had not expected from you – particularly, when you go on to say they do not really want or expect general popularity.

But by contrast, the teabaggers have become the tail which is wagging the Republican dogs in the US, even though every last one of their supposedly populist arguments are utterly vacuous. As logical as their often misspelled signs, warning “Government keep your hands off my medicare” and suchlike.

The teabaggers are actually troubling ordinary (albeit rabid) right-wing Republicans for nomination as candidates for many Congressional and even Senatorial seats – “Insane” McCain among the most prominently threatened . And since the media treats each side (republicans/teabaggers) with that good old, independent equivalence notion, whacked out views verses _really_ insane views is considered a valid debate. Most particularly with Fox “News” and the Murdoch media empire pounding out its breathless faux-popularity for the teabaggers wall to wall.

The teabaggers were originally dreamed up by the Republique party to raise money and attempt to generate fake grass-roots popularism against Obama. If they had any real leaders, rather than morons like Palin who are just along for the ride and to make money, they could be much more dangerous.

It’s worth noting recent attempts to associate 911 Truthers with the teabaggers, to undermine the former in much the same way as a lot of BNP views are reasonable, but tainted by the lunatic positions they hold elsewhere.

Your comments on intelligence are fully noted, but there is also a huge variance within any given population. There may be slight tendencies in one direction or another due to environment, but assumptions based on generalising is so hit and miss as to be quite worthless. The Greeks may well have achieved so much intellectually because they had the culture that gave them time to sit around pondering abstract notions. Of course, a lot of that time was granted due to the fact they had slavery. So it goes.

Interesting analysis, glenn. Slightly surprised by the fact that you say Palin is a “moron who is just along for the ride and to make money” – and therefore is not a real leader? Not a good, leader, I agree.

Otherwise, the BNP’s vicious and divisive agenda – blame everything on immigration – has already been taken up, in varying degrees, by the main parties, the media, and other people who wouldn’t know a multi-cultural community from their elbows. So it appears to be working here, too.

Yeah, as I wrote some days ago, it seems to distill down to this sad lowest common denominator, immi-bloomimg-gration, every bloomimg general election since before I can remember.

I think back to 1968… same (largely ahistorical, somewhat decorticate) discussions in the media. But British society itself has moved on light-years since then, light-years – for the better in this specific regard. You wouldn’t know that if you had just arrived from Mars, though, and were plugging-in to our media.

Bring back Orson Welles, I say!

!The Martians are coming!

1970, I ought to have said.

I wonder how much people will whinge when the Belgians finally get it together to invade us. Do you think they’ll still be bleating on about ‘peaceful immigration equals genocide’ when they’re being forced to eat sprouts at gunpoint?

It’s tragic, really. Genocide looks like Iraq, not effing Stoke on Trent. I think the Martians have landed already.

Alfred: sorry if my previous posts seemed rude, it feels a bit like talking behind your back (although you can, of course, read it). I just don’t understand where your passion for this comes from. If you were in favour of making sure that a place’s original inhabitants were not dispossessed by incomers, either from the UK or abroad, by concentrating & improving shops, transport and other services and by building more houses, for example, I would understand. It would be sensible fiscal as well as social policy. But instead you want to cut & deport; as if you see some kind of pre-lapserian pink Britain emerging from the ashes.

But I can picture your policies everywhere; from bustling London markets, to the communities in Blackburn, and they would result in desolation; in echoing spaces where people and families once shopped and played. We would be left with the ashes.

Hey Angry,

I’m still puzzled by your masthead!

Glenn,

I have long thought it likely that the BNP is a scam. Last September I wrote this:

“Given that MI6 ran Germany’s post-war Nazi party, that the Jew, Joseph Cohen, alias Frank Collins, ran the US Nazi party and that the Canadian Jewish Congress funded Canada’s one-man Nazi party, does it not seem probably that the BNP is also run by MI6 or some other hidden entity with the object of discrediting citizens who quite reasonably oppose mass immigration to Britain, one of the World’s smallest and most densely populated countries?

Why else would the BNP, headed by a lawyer, and a person, therefore, of presumed intelligence and discrimination, discredit itself by running ex-Nazis and others of questionable repute for election to Parliament?”

The original statement is on this page:

http://canadianspectator.ca/zarchive.034.html

where there are links to various sources.

Events seem to bear me out. Through a series of unbelievably stupid antics, e.g., pulling people’s noses, being secretly filmed insulting African immigrants, appearing on a party political broadcast with a jar of Marmite, Nick Griffin has managed to throw more than three hundred BNP candidates under the bus. Remember, after the Question Time appearance of Nick Griffin, 22% of viewers agreed that “the BNP have a point” and eight percent said they would consider voting BNP. Today, I bet not zero point eight will actually vote BNP.

Re: human variation.

I try to view it scientifically. Biologists are interested in mechanisms and what they imply. But what is known of the mechanisms of human variation and what they imply is not a whole lot. So biology rarely supports the kind of sweeping statements that some people make.

However, populations really do differ in appearance, physique and physical and physiological attributes. I find that wonderful to behold. That’s one reason I hate globalization. I really do hope that all this fascinating diversity will still be here in hundreds of years.

Further, I think that the capacity of the human race to survive a changing world will be greatly reduced if we throw all the diverse forms of our species into a global melting pot. This is why, although I enjoy living in a society (Canada) that is a racial melting pot, I don’t want to see every society a melting pot. I want there to go on being Chinese and Vietnamese and Zulus and Pakistanis and the thousand other ethnicities, including the British. And for that, each ethnicity needs a homeland.

The British are a rather small race and they have a small homeland. I hope they can keep it.

Suhayl,

Re: “Furthermore, I really do think that it is necessary that we come to see the movements of populations and individuals not as a ‘problem’ per se, but as a ‘situation’, a reality that has always existed in this world and which will continue to exist for as long as the human species continues to exist.”

A common difficulty for you literary folks, is to grasp the significance of quantity. Yes people have always come and gone from Britain’s shores. But today’s mass and largely illegal immigration is not only the largest invasion that Britain has ever experienced but a real and present threat to the continued existence of the British people, a unique population with roots in Britain going back 9000 years.

“A common difficulty for you literary folks”

Ooh, bitchy bitchy.

This increasingly reminds me of discussions around “the war on drugs”. What I mean is, making things illegal doesn’t stop necessarily them happening. When there is a demand for them it can also set up a “survival of the fittest” economic environment that selects for Mafia, as it has wrt immigrants & drugs. It would be much healthier for us to find ways of restructuring these issues so that it wouldn’t be profitable for criminals to invest in becoming organised.

“Today’s mass and largely illegal immigration”.

To whom are you referring, Alfred?

“a real and present threat to the continued existence of the British people, a unique population with roots in Britain going back 9000 years.”

How?

Alfred, I’m sure Duke William of Normandy, the Conqueror, would disagree with you. That was the last real mass invasion of the island of Great Britain.

Immigration is not an invasion.

We are absolutely not even facing a massive level of immigration, not compared to some other countries (eg. Syria, Pakistan, Iran and many others) which I mentioned in a previous post on the Immigration thread.

This kind of panic-mongering is really irresponsible and is a fiction.

Our governments and the economic system they service generate disclocation, war, economic hell for millions – billions – of inhabitants of the planet. That is one of the main reasons there are people who want to migrate.

The British are not “a race”.

The biological model on its own has long been discredited as a means of explaining the socialised animal species that is humanity.

Are David Steel’s grandchildren – the Bhatias – part of “the British race”? You see how silly this gets. The concept itself holds no water and never did.

Btw, I may be an effete librettist/ novelist/ whatever, but you know, I’m also a scientist. And I deal with humanity of all colours, creeds and social classes. And you know what? I feel humbled and privileged.

Britian is far better because of immigration over hundreds of years and since WW2. Britian is Britian because of constant immigration over 3,000+ years.

Britain, I mean.

“- a real and present threat to the continued existence of the British people, a unique population with roots in Britain going back 9000 years.

- How? ”

Theme Park UK. Come and view this protected enviroment populated exclusively by quaint ethnics that believe themselves flatly unable to deal with the world beyond their shores.

And Richard speaks as a man who jolly well knows his old British ‘folk’ tunes!

Alfred, you are either an immigrant or a descendant of immigrants. You have exported British culture outward and I have imported aspects of other cultures inwards, while Richard, I sense, has explored it in geopoetic terms. All are valid. All are British. And yet you speak without irony. But before you begin to talk of ‘invasions’, there is no parallel b/w the situation of the American Indians and that of the majority white communities in the UK.

Attempting to rationalise for and inflame a movement whose boot boys are currently marching (albeit with varying degrees of success) through our towns is nothing to be proud of, Alfred.

Richard,

Re: “A common difficulty for you literary folks”

That was not an intended slight. It is a generalization and though, like all generalizations, false, it has some validity as illustrated, for example, by Winston Churchill’s self-confessed difficulty with the “damned dot” when he served, incompetently, as Chancellor of the Exchequer.

That literary people do have difficulty in dealing with concepts of quantity is not surprising since, with some exceptions, they have little training or experience in handling matters quantitatively. Suhayl demonstrates my point with his comments about the Norman conquest. The Normans left very little trace in Britain’s gene pool, according to DNA studies by Oxford University population geneticist, Bryan Sykes, whose book I have cited here before. The Normans replaced the ruling elite, while leaving the population largely undisturbed, as did the British in India. If it only took ten thousand Brits to administer the Indian Empire, how many Normans do you think it required to rule Britain?

Technicolor,

Re: “a real and present threat to the continued existence of the British people, a unique population with roots in Britain going back 9000 years.”

You ask “How?”

I already explained how in a dozen paragraphs in response to a question from Anon. If you haven’t read what said there, I don’t expect you would read it with any attention if I repeated it here.

Suhayl,

“Immigration is not an invasion.”

Come on, man! You’re a wordsmith. Don’t play games about the meaning of words.

Of course mass immigration is an invasion. And, to those who seek to avoid the destruction of the British race it is a disaster.

As for Britain not facing the same scale of immigration as some other countries, so what? It’s like saying Britain’s casualties during the World Wars were of no account because Russia’s were so much greater.

‘The British are not “a race”‘ This is what you and Craig and what some might call traitors within the ranks keep saying, but it does not alter the dictionary definition of race or the biologists definition of race, in accordance with which the British are undoubtedly a race, just as are the Chinese, the Luo, the Yanomamo and the Innu.

But, then, you’re pushing the settler line, aren’t you, and that really leaves no room for worthwhile discussion.

Ach, Suhayl. (it’s an irish ‘ach’, by the way). How long has this been going on? Forever, probably. Alfred? Do you remember the ‘discussion’ about American Indians with dreoilin? Do you remember that you couldn’t substantiate either your facts or your statements back then? Could you therefore answer my questions this time?

Richard, well, I confess to having recent visions of a small island where all the violent power-hungry grey-pink people can go, myself. But there aren’t really enough of them to sustain a community, and nor would their nature incline them to, I suspect. I guess we have to look after them

Oh Lord, I need to listen to some Shelagh MacDonald or Sandy Denny, or Richard Thompson or Ian Whiteman or Danny Thompson or Yusuf Islam or…

How is Craig a “traitor”, for goodness sake? This man almost gave his life – he represents what is best about British people.

Alfred, do you consider yourself more ‘British’ than Craig Murray’s youngest son?

… or Lord David Steel’s grandchildren? Or ‘Irish’ Technicolour, or me? And if so, on what basis, exactly.

“what some might call traitors”, hey? In danger of lapsing into BNP speak, Alfred.

Yes, I read all your stuff about ‘miscegenation’ and ‘mating’. I watched Drag Me to Hell last night, too. Your point? That too many British people are voluntarily shagging people with more melatoninin and that this amounts to the destruction of the British race?

Come again?

Thanks for the incredulity generated by the comparison of British immigration to British deaths in World War 2, though. I don’t think my jaw’s dropped for ages.

And this is brilliant!

“Come on, man! You’re a wordsmith. Don’t play games about the meaning of words. Of course mass immigration is an invasion.”

Yes, Suhayl, don’t you try and pretend that one word is completely different to another word, you wordsmith. Look, apple, potato. Apple potato. An apple is a potato. Immigration is invasion.

Duh.

“And, to those who seek to avoid the destruction of the British race it is a disaster.”

Bless you, Alfred. I presume that while you’re not trying to make extreme right wing propaganda sound reasonable (a useful exercise, I’m sure) you’re volunteering to help poor old people, or undernourished kids or something. No?

Alfred – “Suhayl demonstrates my point with his comments about the Norman conquest. The Normans left very little trace in Britain’s gene pool”

I took his point to be, that *that* was an invasion.

“I already explained how in a dozen paragraphs in response to a question from Anon.”

That anon. was me, sorry. Your reply cited various good solid physical characteristics that I wouldn’t dispute as ‘genetic’, My doubts were concerning the rather more abstract claims.

- “Of course mass immigration is an invasion. And, to those who seek to avoid the destruction of the British race it is a disaster. … But, then, you’re pushing the settler line, aren’t you, and that really leaves no room for worthwhile discussion”

You seem to state your beliefs and refuse to talk with those that don’t share them.

Hello Richard,

Thanks for not jumping down my throat!

My refusal to discuss is with those who refuse to discuss the issue that I originally raised: the plight of twenty percent of the British workforce that is reduced to poverty, humiliating social irrelevance (except as a problem), and deracination.

As to those who raise silly race-baiting questions, they can go and piss up a rope.

“Thanks for not jumping down my throat!”

It must be the way I tell them.

‘miscegentation’; ‘mating’: ‘silly race-baiting questions’…

‘miscegentation’; ‘mating’: ‘silly race-baiting questions’…

Not to mention “deracination” and, I believe, “indigenous race”, “The British race”.

I get the impression that Alfred is a fascist in fascist clothing.

He’s got some weird ideas about how the BNP are some kind of New World Order plot to discredit perfectly good fascist ideas by making them seem, well…fascist.

Alfred doesn’t seem to consider a more obvious possibility. That Nick Griffin and his holocaust-denying cohorts are actually genuine fascists. Griffin, for example, was in the National Front – which actually make the BNP (as disgusting as they are) look comparatively mild, and had been a fan of Hitler since his adolesence. I know the New World Order are supposed to be smart and secretive but do you really think they’ve been training Nick Griffin since his teens for this election?

Ah! But Alfred has a precedent. Remember them Jews who became fascists. The American Nazi Party guy. Nevermind the fact that they already had a leader in George Lincoln Rockwell and his bunch of fascists.

There is a distinct innuendo going on here with Alfred who seems to be suggesting that Jews are making fascist parties and fascist policies disreputable.

“Hey Angry,

I’m still puzzled by your masthead!”

It means I work for the New World Order, the Bilderbergers, the Council of Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Jews.

Our mission is to destroy the “white race” with mass immigration and deracination initiatives and you’ll no doubt be glad to know that I am doing my but with a young lady from the Trilateral Commission.

So there!

Lucky you! Is she a mezzo-soprano, btw?

Yes, it’s interesting that once induced to delineate his core political beliefs, this core turns out to be very dark indeed.

The theory that the BNP are associating themselves with ‘anti-imperialist’, ant-corporatist policies globally simply in order to discredit those policies among the electorate doesn’t really hold water. When someone, says, “I’m against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan”, very few people would automatically think, “Ah, so you must be BNP then, so that means I ought to support the wars because I’m not a racist and anyone who is against the wars must be a racist”. The logic is not sound. It just doesn’t work. The majority of people in the UK associate people on the Far Right with Nazism and Fascism – and justly so – regardless of whether or not they support a particular war or economic policy or masquerade as Anti-Isarael/ Pro-Isareal/ anti-Military/ Pro-Military.

The BNP are associating with these policies simply as ‘populist’ opportunists.

They capitalise on the ground vacated by (esp. the discredited ‘New’) Labour Government – the NF, BNP et al all tend to rise more during Labour Government tenures and this is for various reasons.

The real effect of the BNP et al on the ground is to stymie the development of a grassroots party which represents the interests of those ’20%’ to whom Alfred refers, though of course the various Socialist parties tend to make a very good job of scuppering their own chances all by themselves!

That’s not to say that Special Branch, the SS et al don’t try to manipulate both Nazis and Anti-Nazis to serve the agenda of the ‘corporate security state’. They do infiltrate and manipulate, and have always done so. I like the idea of the BNP as “hard state rent-boys”, it appeals to my sense of the absurd and also degrades the Wagnerian masculinity which they like to project. But that’s different from saying the whole thing is a single coherent organised plot. It’s not as simple as that. It’s very complex. ‘It’s complex because it’s the system, man’ and industrialised societies are not simple entites. Power has many centres, not just one; often these centres compete, sometimes they cooperate. They all act in their own, narrow interests.

And even if one did think that the BNP exists as a ‘damning-by-association’ water closet for anti-imperialists, it does not follow that one then would espouse wholheartdely the core racialist agenda of the BNP and other Far Right groups, the long discredited entire panoply of ‘race’ as a C19th construct.

There’s no point saying someone saying they don’t agree with the BNP when they then go on to espouse a core agenda which accords perfectly with their own twisted beliefs.

The whole thing has no logic. And – this is very important – no sense of irony.

I heard Griffin on the radio, somewhere in the dark hours. He’s away with the fairies.

Lovely comments. Yes, I think Griffin’s for the chop. Too much dirt on him, for one thing. I wonder what happens to an ex-leader of an extremist far-right party who’s mired in violence? Blair became the public face of Louis Vuitton, of course. Perhaps Griffin will become the public face of Primark?

Still can’t get over the description of Cameron, which someone posted earlier, as ‘C3P0 made out of ham’.

DES-TROY THE PALESTIN… I mean THE BRITISH

DES-TROY THE PALESTIN… I mean THE BRITISH

The Palestin… I mean British people, do not exist.

The Palestin… I mean British people, do not exist.

Oh, how ironic.

Alfred, you poor person. Do you not know? The Palestinians are being walled in. They are being starved. They are being shot at. Gaza has been bombed. White phosphorous has been used.

Sounds just like Stoke On Trent, doesn’t it?

Of course British people exist. I am a British person. So is Suhayl. What are you on about?

Sorry if I preempted you, there, Suhayl. You could be Scottish, of course, or Afghan? (me, I’d rather be Afghan).

“Sorry if I preempted you, there, Suhayl.”

Teamwork, I see. Good show. Along with Angry, that doughty “NWO SHILL AND FOOTSOLDIER FOR THE 9/11 LIES MOVEMENT” as he so describes himself.

Alfred, I think angrysoba is being funny. You know, like comedy?

I am worrying about you a bit. Do you have friends? Do they agree with you? I wish I could buy you a pint & let you know everything is OK, and no-one is being exterminated in the UK, and in fact we are lucky to be here, in this mostly peaceful place of many shades, cuisines & colours.

“I am worrying about you a bit. Do you have friends? Do they agree with you? I wish I could buy you a pint & let you know everything is OK, and no-one is being exterminated in the UK, and in fact we are lucky to be here, in this mostly peaceful place of many shades, cuisines & colours.”

It’s only a game. He doesn’t actually propose to live under what he’s recommending for us, it’s a game of fantasy cricket. SF/fantasy/RPG “invented world” stuff. That’s why the complexities are never followed up, just redesign the board slightly so they won’t arise and everything’s nice and simple.

Yeah, be mellow, Alfred. Mellow yellow… they call me. We’re just talking, it’s a web-versation, even though you’ve got some heavy views, man, you’re a good egg, man, take it easy and roll. Technicolour, thanks for your robust sanity. You were right both times. I am all of those things, and more. English, too, in a kind of King Alfred way. Wessex is green. Sussex is holy (esp. as I see that ‘Hercule’ Baker kept his seat!). But yeah, basically, at biopsychosocial level, at root, I am indeed a Brit, through-and-through-and-through. Whatever that might mean – its power and truth resides in its indefinability. The truth is not out there, it is in here, and it’s numinous.

Actually, you know, originally, I am a Yorkshireman – hence my spirited defence of the much-maligned Richard III! Hah! Those bleedin Lancastrians! My kingdom, my kingdom for a horse!

Suhayl,

You say, “I am all of those things, and more. English, too, in a kind of King Alfred way.”

You realize that Alfred is the only English monarch know as “the Great” because he secured England’s borders from an uncontrolled settler invasion.

So I am glad we agree on that.

“Actually, you know, originally, I am a Yorkshireman – hence my spirited defence of the much-maligned Richard III! Hah! Those bleedin Lancastrians!”

Huh. A plague on both yer houses.

Hah! Quite! And his wife burned the cakes. He was learned, they say, or had a love of leraning. An interesting monarch.

Now I remember, the point in the story was that King Alfred burned the cakes when asked to watch over them. And his wofe scolded him for it and he was mellow. A mellow monarch.

angrysoba… “the BNP are some kind of New World Order plot to discredit perfectly good fascist ideas by making them seem, well…fascist”.

suhayl: ‘robust sanity’. Yeay! And from a doctor, too. Can I quote you?

Notes: The BNP lost all 12 council seats in Barking. With all the violence surrounding them, it’s hard to see how they’d avoid being caught assaulting someone, or making Nazi salutes, or just falling out with each other (the Marmite thing was obviously a set-up). But I think the information campaign against them was astonishing, and takes the credit.

Otherwise I enjoyed Alfred’s paean to the beauties of the Zulus etc. It’s hard not to feel a sense of loss at the idea that such people might disappear. But the threats to countries and cultures have nothing to do with sex. The West Papuans are not noticeably being plagued by horny Brits, but they are being threatened by corporate landgrabs, slow starvation and government backed murder. The Iraqis’ genes are not being diluted by inter-racial bonking, but mutated by depleted uranium. I could go on. But to everyone’s relief I won’t.

Sorry, meant to say ‘the marmite thing was obviously not a set up’.

Techicolour, you can indeed quote me.

I hereby certify for posterity and the Earl of Nod that Technicolour is completely, robustly and indeed, indefatiguably, sane.

“And his wofe scolded him”

It was not his wofe.

He was hiding in the marshes and took shelter in a basket weaver’s cottage.

It was the basket weefer’s wove who scolded him.

The reason he was mellow about it was because he was incognito. Otherwise he’d probably have slewed her on the spot for telling him to mind her bluidy cakes.

Incidentally, as I predicted, Nick Griffin (is he a mason like his Dad) got over 16% of the vote in Barking, quite enough to get him into the Commons with a PR system.

Me’s glod wove goat thoat stoarie wright, thanksth, Alfred.

“slewed her on the spot”

*slain*, please.

er hem, I think it’s *slayed*? slaid? slade?

Poor woman.

Also the Vikings & Danes were invading with armies & killing people, not just ‘settling’. And the peasant woman realised who Alfred was. But folk myths are like that, hey.

wofe!

“the Vikings & Danes were invading with armies & killing people”

Well of course. That was how itg was done in those days. Aelfred had no Minister for Immigration or CCTV cams, so naturally the Vikings just went on like a bunch of West Bank settlers.

As with NuLabor and Cameroon, today, there were barons scheming with the settlers to rob Aelfred of the throne. That was why he was hid in the swamp. Maybe Cameroon should do the same.

Interesting, by the way how violently the A. SOBa objects to the idea that the BNP could be a front for one of the intelligence services, or that Jewish interests might set up such a front in Canada (affirmed by the high profile lawyer, Ezra Levant — I’d put in a link except that this software chokes on more than one link).

Glenn stated that Angy was receiving 50 cents a time for his shilling, a decent rate of exchange. Angry ridiculed the claim — angrily of course — but did not actually deny it. Is his masthead SHILLING FOR THE NWO, a piece of irony or a clever cover for a shill?

As for Nick Griffin being a fraud, I came across this.

http://griffinwatch-nwn.blogspot.com/

The masthead reads:

“Is Griffin Premeditatively Sabotaging the British National Party.”

I have not read much further, although I did check out the illustrated Masonic hand grip in case I ever meet a BNPer.

“That was why he was hid in the swamp. Maybe Cameroon should do the same”

Ah, but the Dutch have taught us how to drain them. We grow food in them now.

“Glenn stated that Angy was receiving 50 cents a time for his shilling, a decent rate of exchange.Angry ridiculed the claim — angrily of course — but did not actually deny it.”

Ah! I didn’t deny it, ergo, it must be true.

“Is his masthead SHILLING FOR THE NWO, a piece of irony or a clever cover for a shill?”

Ah! I might be ridiculing it, ergo, it must be true as it’s a double bluff.

“Interesting, by the way how violently the A. SOBa objects to the idea that the BNP could be a front for one of the intelligence services, or that Jewish interests might set up such a front in Canada.”

Ah! It must be true because I object to it.

Actually, I certainly didn’t say that intelligence services haven’t infiltrated fascist organizations or that they don’t do that in organized crime or other political movements. They surely do. There is plenty of evidence that they do and often the purpose is to act as a kind of beacon to detect those with such political or ciminal affiliations. And part of the cover will be for them to engage in similar behaviour to those they are investigating.

Of course, this can all go horribly wrong if they end up “going native” or making the organization more popular and more violent than it ever would have been.

I have no idea about the situation in Canada, so I did some Googling. I take it you are referring to Grant Bristow. I don’t know why you make out that the fascists in Canada were part of a Jewish plot, though. Ernst Zundel, for example, was already a well-established neo-Nazi and Holocaust denier who ran his Nazi publishing company Samiszdat. He published writings by the leader of Britain’s National Front. I am pretty sure, as some people can confirm here, that anti-immigrant racist violence from the National Front was very nasty and very real (not organized by some Jewish-run NWO to discredit opposition to immigration which is really just silly pretzel logic).

http://tinyurl.com/6ghxpq

“As for Nick Griffin being a fraud, I came across this.”

Well, you’ve sent me to that BNP site and my reaction is, if the BNP tear themselves apart in a frenzy of paranoid finger-pointing and playing spot the crypto-Masonic-Jewish-Zionist-New-World-Order-shill then GOOD. The less influence that fascist parties and fascist policies have on Britain the better.

good Lord, angrysoba, I suddenly feel inclined to be distrustful if not downright suspicious of you. Could Alfred’s clever and oh so subtle ‘divide & rule’ exercise really be working?

Oh, no. No, it’s OK, it isn’t. But you (and/or Alfred) might want to read this for a laugh anyway:

Belgium Doesn’t Exist!

http://zapatopi.net/belgium/

Belgium was the locus of that child abuse scandal that enveloped so many powerful people – we haven’t heard all of that one, I’m certain. Apostasy and the stench of Woden Bone await us all!

I have a ring with a diamond shaped like a… diamond, so perhaps, in the right Luciferine light, it may come to resemble a Grand Master’s ring. I had a Masonic handshake once. How odd and ticklish to have a portly fifty-five year-old tradesman man hanging on to my hand, like some kind of ‘toon, not letting go, until I shook him and shook him and then he turned into a giant, roving eye: “Hello, I’m Horus,” he said, “and I’m here to take you to meet Noel Edmonds.”

Angy quotes me quoting Glenn

‘”Glenn stated that Angy was receiving 50 cents a time for his shilling, a decent rate of exchange.Angry ridiculed the claim — angrily of course — but did not actually deny it.”‘

And says

“Ah! I didn’t deny it, ergo, it must be true.”

Ha, more irony, I presume, which leaves me slightly baffled.

Is it that our man from the land of the lone nut is an honest shill, who will not tell a lie direct?

Re: the Canadian Jewish Congress and their support for Canada’s Nazi party

Ezra Levant’s comments on the subject are here:

http://ezralevant.com/2009/05/the-canadian-nazi-party-a-part.html

He does not mention anyone named Bristow. In fact, he says the Canadian Nazi Party had only one member, named Blaikie. The CJC then spent thousands of dollars hiring an ex policeman to join Blaikie ans work as his bodyguard.

Zundel seems to have been more or less of a nut, interested in UFO’s among other things. Why anyone took any notice of his nonsense, I don’t understand.

There are no doubt many people who believe in UFO’s, deny that the world is round and proclaim that Joe Stalin was a great man, not a mass murdering monster. But the jails are not large enough for all of them. And anyhow, we conspiracy theorists are always inclined to believe what is officially denied.

“Zundel seems to have been more or less of a nut, interested in UFO’s among other things. ”

Zundel has always been a favourite with Holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis. He was the one who commissioned the Leuchter Report and had people such as Faurisson and David Irving testify in his favour.

For what it is worth, and you can check this many times over on this blog and others, I don’t believe in incarcerating people for stupid or even hateful beliefs.

I do believe that such people can and should be denied work in higher learning institutions but that is because people such as Zundel and Irving have only reached their conclusions by distorting or falsifying their work.

Personally, I like some of Niall Ferguson’s history books but I cannot agree with him on his ideas about the benificence of the British Empire. One of the reasons why I disagree with him is because he says, himself, that the British were (at least partly) to blame for the deaths of five million Indians in the nineteenth century.

This is an absolutely horrific number and the behaviour of the British was supremely callous. How Ferguson can stand aside and say, “Well in the long-run it worked out okay!” is mind-boggling. But Ferguson is at least someone who acknowledges these horrific things whereas apologists for the Holocaust largely pretend that these atrocities never happened.

And they’re almost all Nazi sympathizers or otherwise haters of Jews or Gypsies.

technicolor: “good Lord, angrysoba, I suddenly feel inclined to be distrustful if not downright suspicious of you.”

Eh? What did I say that was so bad?

“Personally, I like some of Niall Ferguson’s history books but I cannot agree with him on his ideas about the benificence of the British Empire.”

Angrysoba

Absolutely. Ferguson is talented, clever, magnetic and currently he is the Milton Friedman of History. Well-rewarded, then. Unlike historians like the late Angus Calder, for example. Ferguson’s main claim to fame (I’m not saying this is the sum total of his work, simply that his fame is a consequence of this) is this:

‘Imperialism is good’.

That road is paved with gold and wreathed in laurel.

But in the long-run, Angus Calder was right.

Soba I meant that I was *not* suddenly distrustful or suspicious of you, despite Alfred’s suggestions that you work for an organisation which doesn’t exist…

it was (obviously badly typed)irony…

“he (ferguson) says, himself, that the British were (at least partly) to blame for the deaths of five million Indians in the nineteenth century.

This is an absolutely horrific number…”

Absolutely true, but let’s keep things in perspective. The U.S. has undoubtedly been responsible for many more deaths than that in its pursuit of world hegemony since 1945. For example:

‘An article in Z magazine asks: “When 10 million children die yearly for lack of basic medical aid that the U.S could provide at almost no cost in countries whose economies Exxon and the Bank of America have looted, what can you call it other than mass murder?”‘

http://richa.dod.net/warandpeace/howmanydeaths.htm

What Britain needs, obviously, is an anti-imperialist ruling party now. The BNP, claim to be just that. However, whenever I mention it I am shouted down as a fascist, which seems to confirm my contention, (a) that supporters of the big three parties are all fascists with a guilty conscience, and (b) that the BNP is designed to nauseate anyone who might thing of supporting an anti-imperialist party.

Alfred, you get “shouted down” hereabouts not because you suggest the BNP as a hard state front, but because of your oft-expressed race theories which seem to accord too neatly with the Far Right’s own race ideology. Therefore, there seems to be an inconsistency in your logic.

“Hold your nose and accept some self-proclaimed neo-Nazi racists as your ‘rulers’ because they claim to be anti-imperialist” doesn’t really sound like a contention I’d bother shouting about.

Suhayl,

I take strong exception to your allegation about my “oft-expressed race theories.”

That is a total and offensive lie.

I have no race theories. I have tried to explain to one or two people who might actually be interested something about the genetic basis of human variation.

I have some qualification for that. I graduate in biology with the faculty prize and I obtained a PhD in molecular biology.

I have also state both the dictionary definition of “race” and how a scientist might define the term operationally, which means how it might be defined in a way that allows objective determination of what constitutes a race and what does not.

The fact that cretins hold stupid ideas about race does not alter the reality of human genetic variation. To insult people who talk responsibly on the subject is to show your own bias.

If you think there is no difference between a Chinese and Pakistani, you an idiot. But as you are not an idiot, I conclude that you are disingenuous: in fact talking up the settler interest by accusing those who believe that a country’s immigration policy should be determined on grounds of national interest and democratic intent of racism, race theories, fascism, etc., etc.

There is no apparent basis for further discussion. A futile discussion as it has proved to be thus far.

Alfred, “the national interest” is served by the peaceful arrival of people from other countries and cultures. Not by a barrier mentality which coldly speculates on the ‘mating’ habits of other people and ‘miscegenation’. And you certainly have theories about race (for example your theory that the British race is threatened by genocide); that you attempt to deny this I find almost as peculiar as the theories themselves.

Oh well.

“There is no apparent basis for further discussion. A futile discussion as it has proved to be thus far”

Well, yeah. It’s bound to be if you dismiss people for disagreeing with you. What’s your problem with “the settler interest”, anyway ? It seems an incongruous objection, coming from someone who lives in Canada.

I heard the leader of the BNP on the radio, somewhere in the depths of election night. He stated that because his constituency is full of Africans. it’s not part of England. He’s demented. Why not settle for the simple explanation, people don’t like it because it’s not likeable ?

I haven’t forgotten their Polish Spitfire, either. Such incompetence mitigates my worry over them slightly, and provides a certain amusement, but that’s not the same as credibility.

Alfred, your argumentation makes you resemble Canute, rather than Alfred (The Great). Or rather, Canute’s advisors (Canute himself knew their hubris). Unless one is the Man in the Moon, one cannot hold up one’s hand and halt the tides. And so the world turns…

Alfred, perhaps it would be beneficial to emerge from the mechanistic level and draw the focus outward to the modular.

In other words, arise, Man of Molecules, arise from the electron microscope and gaze upon the face of the world!

The world is smiling.

But as I said, only if one stands on one’s head.

“The world is smiling.

But as I said, only if one stands on one’s head. ”

Or someone else’s, as per Isaac Newton.

If I have seen further than others, it is only because I stand on the head of … what’s that you say, Knud ? “Bloody quicksand” ? Aargh.

technicolor: “Soba I meant that I was *not* suddenly distrustful or suspicious of you, despite Alfred’s suggestions that you work for an organisation which doesn’t exist…”

Sorry, I get it now. My mistake.

Alfred: “He does not mention anyone named Bristow. In fact, he says the Canadian Nazi Party had only one member, named Blaikie. The CJC then spent thousands of dollars hiring an ex policeman to join Blaikie ans work as his bodyguard.”

Right, well I went searching for the Ezra Levant article you were talking about and ended up finding this:

“During the 1980s and 1990s, CSIS — that is, the taxpayers of Canada — helped organize and build Canada’s leading group of white supremacists. Funding, strategy, organization support — all of it came from the government.

Their point man was Grant Bristow. He was one of Canada’s neo-Nazi leaders, who worked as an agent for CSIS. Without Bristow, Canada’s neo-Nazis would have been less-organized, less prominent and more poorly led. Thanks, CSIS.”

http://ezralevant.com/2008/07/csis-canadas-leading-neonazi-o.html

Fascinating. D’you think Griffin is MI5? Cambridge… tap on the shoulder, cup of tea…

“D’you think Griffin is MI5? Cambridge… tap on the shoulder, cup of tea…”

It would be highly amusing if he was, but the BNP don’t need his help to make them look like complete buffoons.

Wouldn’t it be more likely that someone such as the guy who leaked their membership list be secret service or do they prefer to keep such information to themselves?

I don’t know how intelligence services work. Not at all. Honest, guv’nor. Hoping someone here at NWO HQ will tell me at some point.

“I have no race theories. I have tried to explain to one or two people who might actually be interested something about the genetic basis of human variation.”

I don’t think anyone has said that there are no differences in genetic variation among population groups, but I think it is you being disingenuous by saying that you have no theories about race.

As others have pointed out you do talk about “deracination” and “miscegenation” and “British race” which is curious when you also say you agree with Jared Diamond’s view on environment being the difference between those who built aircraft, for example, and those who still live in hunter-gatherer communities.

I think a good article by Diamond on the subject is this one called Race Without Colour in which he shows that “races” could easily enough be attributed to humans but they probably wouldn’t be of much use or they would be completely different from our intuitive concepts of race (you could, for example, make blood groups racial groups but that wouldn’t appeal to so-called “race realists” who obviously want it to be about colour).

http://discovermagazine.com/1994/nov/racewithoutcolor444

Diamond’s main point is that trying to find concordance between genetic variations across “races” is a mug’s game.

Even the example you gave of how only a fool couldn’t tell the difference between a person from China and a person from Pakistan is almost certainly wrong. A person from East Turkestan (or Xinjiang if you prefer) is a Chinese national but could well be mistaken for a citizen of Pakistan.

You might say, “Well I meant Han Chinese. The fact that you use the example of the Uighurs only proves my point that you can tell the difference!”

To which I would say, “Sure! But being able to recognize physical differences in people is quite trivial. Why would you want to base your immigration policies on the way people look?”

And that, I think, is why you are being dishonest because what you are trying to do is portray your views as very reasonable and uncontroversial. But aren’t you saying that you want to talk about immigration in a sensible way while also trying to smuggle race theories in through customs?

You’ve already alluded to ideas that there is a racial basis for a difference in intelligence and how Britain is becoming “deracinated”. So maybe you need to be a bit more clear about what you are saying because I can’t help thinking that what your real concern is is that you think Britain is being “swamped with foreigners” and needs a party just like the BNP minus the stigma of being fascist.

That was as superb a dissection as I could’ve wished for. Angrysoba, those were exactly the points I was about to make this morning (!) – thanks for saving me the trouble!

I’m rather surprised that Alfred (Doctor Alfred, PhD) espouses such ideas when science – including biologists, geneticists, etc. – has long discarded them.

Dogma is antithetical to the scientific method.

Good morning! Am thinking this is site is addictive (not for the first time). I even pulled my internet connection out yesterday, briefly, ouch. Hope they get this election business sorted soon, or I’ll never be able to work again (still, at least I’ll be able to blame it on the NWO)

angrysoba: “But being able to recognize physical differences in people is quite trivial. Why would you want to base your immigration policies on the way people look?”

That’s it!

Thank you very much Suhayl and technicolour.

We’ll have to wait and see what Alfred’s response is as we may have all misconstrued his ideas.

But if that is the case then it may be useful for Alfred to learn that we all read him in a way he doesn’t want to be read.

Yes, I keep hoping I may have misconstrued Alfred’s ideas too, and then you find this:

“What you are advocating is a program to destroy the British. It is a policy of genocide by marginalization, demoralization, and reproductive failure, associated with replacement by an alien population.”

Oh well, as I think I said earlier.

Angrysoba, this is good stuff. thanks.

“But if that is the case then it may be useful for Alfred to learn that we all read him in a way he doesn’t want to be read.”

Yes. For me, he seems very clear on his conclusions, while remaining oddly nebulous on his reasoning. He claims to be a highly trained scientist, but his argument is conducted in a way that I’m fairly sure would not be acceptable among that community – many of his statements seem highly questionable, and he doesn’t respond to any examination, just comes back giving different arguments for the same conclusion – a) the Mau Mau problems in Kenya could have been avoided if ‘the British’ had gone in with orders of magnitude greater numbers. How would that have avoided tension over land-use ? Oh, Canada is empty (the example that first struck me). b) The partial failure of the LoN/UN to solve everything has utterly discredited any idea of ‘co-operation’, therefore all that’s left is Hitler, who was “Darwinian”, in spite of his lack of success (more Galtonian, possibly ? but WTH) … and so on.

(I speak out of annoyance & frustration here – I’ve been trying to chase some of these, and getting nowhere with him. It leaves me feeling played, like the bull chasing the red rag while the significant stuff happens elsewhere. Trivially-falsifiable prediction – he won’t be back on this thread. I wonder if anything’ll change now the election’s finished ?).

But the point in the middle of the distractions isn’t nebulous and doesn’t shift about. He wants everybody sorted into nice neat categories called ‘races’ (questions as to the children of mixed partnerships have been asked several times and not answered), he sees these races as being in a zero-sum game, a beggar-your-neighbour competition; and from that, he’s simply cheering his team on; anything ‘the British race’ can get away with, good for them, and other ‘races’, all very nice so long as they don’t get in the way. Armed violent settlers in Kenya, good. Peaceful settlers in Yorkshire, so bad he can’t even talk with them.

### A REAL CONSPIRACY THEORY FROM ANGRYSOBA ###

Angrysoba ?” Could it be that you have finally realized that, amongst the many fictional myths, there are actually some genuine conspiracies? Your reference to Ezra Levant’s Conservative blog was very interesting. Anybody who clicked on the URL you gave would have seen Ezra’s article headlined

“CSIS, Canada’s Neo-Nazi Organization”.

Is that not just what I have been saying??? As many readers of Craig’s blog know, I also have a problem with CSIS.

In fact just a month ago I commented on Ezra’s blog on another topic critical of CSIS; pointing out that the same Grant Bristow (the CSIS agent provocateur you referred to) had subsequently falsely associated himself with Mr. Preston Manning, Leader of Canada’s opposition. CSIS in the middle of a general election then blew Bristow’s past associations with Neo-Nazis (which Manning did not know of) to the press; thus smearing Manning and perhaps costing him the election. Needless to say, CSIS did not mention that Bristow was actually their agent who they had planted on Manning. Now one might have thought that with his experience of CSIS, Mr. Manning would have been helpful to me. But, retired Canadian politicians do not seem to be noted for their courage. Indeed one of his assistants commented to my daughter that “I’d put him on the spot”. Mr. Manning is Canada’s Prime Minister’s Mentor, and a former leader of the opposition, which is why I contacted him. Here is my two-way correspondence with Mr. Manning:

http://tinyurl.com/PrestonManning

As for the holocaust ?” surely holocaust denial is another conspiracy and a very nasty one too. And then there were the Protocols of the Elders of Zion; another conspiracy (invented by the Tsar’s intelligence services ?” The Okrana). As for Zundel ?” His filth was well publicised in Canada. So Angrysoba there are real conspiracies as well as myths!!

The timing of your comments on CSIS is particularly relevant to me, because on Friday I filed with Police in Canada a serious complaint about CSIS. As you know this complaint is summarized on Chapter 7 of the document that comes up if one clicks on my signature. Of course this is just a summary and the actual complaint I have made is backed by mountains of verifiable evidence.

Roderick, I think the title of Ezra Levant’s article is hyperbolic. It’s accusatory towards the CSIS for its incompetence more than actually attributing neo-Nazi views to them. I don’t say that intelligence agencies never infiltrate extremist groups or that they don’t influence them – I’ve sometimes wondered about Anjem Choudary, for example, but he seems too ridiculous to be taken seriously – but I’d prefer to see each one looked at on their own merits.

Do you have a link to the Ezra Levant blogpost that you commented on, by the way?

As for the other things you mention, I wouldn’t call Holocaust denial a conspiracy. I think it is better described as agenda-driven psuedo-scholarship similar to so-called “intelligent design”. As with intelligent design, Holocaust denial doesn’t really seek to enlighten or clarify and it offers nothing to replace what it rejects. Advocates of Holocaust denial and intelligent design instead affirm a conspiracy, that their ideas are being systematically suppressed by historians, scientists and politicians who presumably have their own interests in not allowing the “Truth” to come out. Many conspiracy theories are of this form.

I’d say that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is not so much a conspiracy as a hoax, like the Piltdown Man only far more destructive. Certainly a group of people conspired to produce it and in this case, as you say, those people were members of the Tsar’s secret police.

Angrysoba, on a different note for a moment, when you get a moment, tell me, what’s Japan like? What are your impressions of the country and the city of Osaka? I’ve never been there!

Angrysoba ?”Most people would call the protocols of the elders of Zion a conspiracy. But let’s take the Zinoviev letter which possibly affected the outcome of the 1924 general election ?” was that not a conspiracy? And CSIS’s planting of their supposed neo-Nazi “Agent Provocateur” Bristow on Preston Manning ?” was that not also a conspiracy. And then of course the law recognizes the concept of conspiracy, both criminally and in civil tort.

Angrysoba, I suspect that you have set yourself an agenda of debunking all conspiracies, so that when you come across a real conspiracy you have to call it by another name. Using weasel words ?” very Orwellian of you, Angrysoba!!! With respect to the headline on CSIS, I am simply reporting the URL link that you gave us ?” It says “CSIS, Canada’s Neo-Nazi Organization”. I did not write that headline and call them neo-nazis as you know; My own preference is Stasi. Admit it Angrysoba ?” Many conspiracy theories are indeed myths; but some are not

Er, isn’t a theory by definition something which remains unproven?

That’s ‘hypothesis’, technicolour. ‘Theory’ is something that’s been widely tested, as in ‘The Theory of General Relativity’. Hypothesis precedes theory: you test the hypothesis.

“Angrysoba, on a different note for a moment, when you get a moment, tell me, what’s Japan like? What are your impressions of the country and the city of Osaka? I’ve never been there!”

Well, as I am sure you can appreciate, that’s a pretty big topic and it’s difficult to know where to begin. What aspects of the country or city do you want me to talk about?

Thanks, Angrysoba.

Umn, well, just what kind of internal and external zeigebers Osaka connotes – to you.

Some cities – NYC, for example – have a peculiar spirit which is an accumulation of architecture, situation, linguistics, sound, smells, etc. The music, the stories, of the city, if you like.

You’re in education, right, so the kinds of interactions b/w students and academia – are there particular aspects of this which strike you as being different from Britain? And in what ways? What are the singular things about Osaka, for you, that differentiate it from other Japanese cities and from British cities? What strikes you as ‘different’ when you return there after visiting Britain? What’s the first thing that comes into your head. Japan and Britain are both islands.

So…

“Angrysoba, I suspect that you have set yourself an agenda of debunking all conspiracies, so that when you come across a real conspiracy you have to call it by another name. Using weasel words ?” very Orwellian of you, Angrysoba!!!”

Roderick, I don’t think I have said that conspiracies don’t exist. Of course they do. The Gunpowder plot was a conspiracy. Watergate was a conspiracy. The Zionviev letter was a conspiracy.

I also agree that intelligence services plot and scheme and conspire too. There would be no point in having them if they made all their decisions out in the open as they would be too easy for other intelligence services to anticipate them. And, of course, the crimes of conspiracy to murder, and conspiracy to steal and to kidnap are also on the books because people do plan murders and robberies and kidnappings together.

If you want to we can use the term “conspiracy” for any action involving more than one person planning something with an element of covertness. In fact, that’s probably the actual meaning of the word.

So, yes, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a conspiracy to create a hoax, etc…

But a “conspiracy theory” is something different. Usually, this is an ad hoc theory in which the conclusion comes first and then all the other evidence is slotted around it. Only evidence for the theory is admitted with evidence against being either discarded or bent to fit the theory or it is considered to be fabricated and therefore is evidence in favour of the theory. I think, then, a conspiracy theory is more to do with methodology rather than what it concludes.

As an example, when LHO was arrested for shooting JFK he was shown a picture of himself holding the very rifle used to kill JFK as well as some magazines such as “The Militant” and with the pistol that was used to shoot officer Tippit. This is about as damning as you can get.

A conspiracy theorist, however, will conclude that the photograph is a fake – which is what LHO said also – because it doesn’t square with their preconceived conclusion. And if it is a fake, then it supports the conspiracy theory. (Or if it isn’t a fake then a conspiracy theorist will say that it doesn’t prove he acted alone, which is true).

So, I don’t think I am using weasel words, I am just trying to assess the reasoning process: How do we know there was a conspiracy? How do we know the nature of the conspiracy?

“That’s ‘hypothesis’, technicolour. ‘Theory’ is something that’s been widely tested, as in ‘The Theory of General Relativity’. Hypothesis precedes theory: you test the hypothesis.”

Yes, I think a theory has some kind of predictive and explanatory value. If theory X is correct we can expect Y to happen, for example. And we should be able to explain how we know this from our theory. But a theory usually has many lines of converging evidence. Not only does the fossil record support evolution but so too does pictoral evidence for human selection of animals as well as research into mutations of viruses etc…

A hypothesis is an initial “best guess” or assumption that might only rely on slender evidence and which is usually discarded if something contradicting that evidence is found. But both a hypothesis and a theory should be capable of falsification. (It’s POSSIBLE that evolution could be wrong and if a fossil of a human riding a dinosaur was ever found then it would cause evolution to be on shaky ground. But given the vast amount of evidence that would still remain evolution wouldn’t be discarded. It is, in principle, however, falsifiable.)

I like the approach of Lobster magazine, whose editor cooly – but humanely – tries to analyse the evidence for events, as far as he has access to such evidence and always seems open to doubt and multiple ‘sides’. It doesn’t tend to demonise. He also doesn’t deal in the plainly ridiculous (‘David Icke Riding Dinosaur’-type stories); it’s a serious magazine of ‘parapolitics’. It neither accepts nor discounts out of hand, but weighs the evidence and let’s the reader decide. In the end, that’s the best way.

Well, Osaka is a charmingly ugly city which has no pretensions of being otherwise. People speak much less formally here than they do in Tokyo and Kyoto or in nearby cosmopolitan Kobe in a distinctive dialect called Osaka-ben.

As with most of Japan it is pretty homogenous but it does have a large Korean population and there seems to be a rising interest here in things Korean such as the food, language and popular culture.

Thanks, Angrysoba. Much appreciated indeed. And how are the students, faculty, etc.? What are the people like? How do the interactions differ from those in Britain? I’m just trying to get a flavour, an essence, of the reality of it. A vignette…

Soba: I think you go further than this. If the official conspiracy theory is X and someone (myself, perhaps) says, “I don’t believe it”, you’ll then say, “Ah! So you’re a conspiracy theorist!” What usually follows is a demand to know what exactly happened instead, so you can set about rubbishing it, as if the default position is always to believe the official version, unless a watertight alternative position can be found – in which case it would become the Official Position.

Strange to call someone a Conspiracy Theorist and _then_ demand to know what their theory is.

There’s also the process attempt to portray anyone failing to believe an official story as a “loon”, with all manner of attempts to ridicule that individual. The practice of doing this appears to have become your modus operandi. I wonder why you devote so much energy to it. That fat Nazi David Aaronovitch will delight you in the way that he, establishment stooge that he is, does just this throughout his latest book. Not sure what it’s called, something like “I believe everything the establishment says”.

“If the official conspiracy theory is X and someone (myself, perhaps) says, “I don’t believe it”, you’ll then say, “Ah! So you’re a conspiracy theorist!”"

Well, no. I might say, why don’t you believe it? And you could choose to tell me or you could call me an “establishment stooge”. You usually choose the latter so it seems to be you who is guilty of what you accuse me of doing.

“What usually follows is a demand to know what exactly happened instead, so you can set about rubbishing it, as if the default position is always to believe the official version, unless a watertight alternative position can be found – in which case it would become the Official Position.”

No. I don’t think the whole story of 9/11 is known. I don’t believe, for example, that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition, I don’t think the failure of the US air force to intercept the hijacked airliners was sinister and I do believe that those the US authorities say were responsible were responsible. Every argument and piece of evidence that I’ve ever seen to the contrary is weak, non-existent or based on misunderstandings of the very term “evidence”. The reason I have spent so much energy on this is not because I am shilling for the authorities as your strawman has it but because I originally wondered if there was truth to the Truthers claims. Having looked at every argument I can find I have discovered some of the shoddiest, flimsiest and down-right deceitful arguments I have ever seen and I am gobsmacked that so many otherwise intelligent people have swallowed them.

Besides, it is you who demands for himself the luxury of not having to commit to a position while sitting back and rubbishing the position I have found to be the most tenable. So it seems like more projection on your part.

“Strange to call someone a Conspiracy Theorist and _then_ demand to know what their theory is.”

You called your theory the “Magic Arab” theory which is bizarre and seems to trade on offensive stereotypes. You have asked me for evidence that the hijackers could fly and I have always provided you with it. And when I do the work for you you don’t even acknowledge it but pout about how I am so mean.

“There’s also the process attempt to portray anyone failing to believe an official story as a “loon”, with all manner of attempts to ridicule that individual. The practice of doing this appears to have become your modus operandi.”

So you think it is not acceptable to call people names?

“That fat Nazi David Aaronovitch”

Oh, apparently it is okay sometimes.

Glenn you’ve just displayed a whole array of accusations in which you hold a complete double standard.

Criticising your position is wrong, but criticising mine is fine. You don’t need evidence but when I provide it it is unfair. You can call people names for their beliefs but I can’t.

Also, I am damned if I do and damned if I don’t. You don’t like the idea that I have looked into all these claims and expended too much energy doing so. But according to Vronsky who thinks I haven’t looked at them I am incurious.

What am I supposed to do? What is the only acceptable position for you?

Throw me a frikkin bone here!

Suhayl, the students are very good and eager to study which makes them a pleasure to teach. They receive plenty of English grammar/translation in their other classes so I try to concentrate on improving their fluency. Last year one of my students made it to Tokyo University which is Japan’s equivalent of Cambridge. I’d like to take the credit but he was the one who put in all the hard work and I only taught him once a week at most.

British schools can be very different according to the reports I hear from my sister who teaches French in a comprehensive in Nottingham. Having said that, I do teach in a private school and people I know who teach in state schools here do have their horror stories too – one story that sticks in my mind is the one about the school bunny rabbit being decapitated by some kids who had stolen the Home Ec. knives.

AS: Actually, _yours_ is the Magic Arab theory. I’m surprised that you have become so confused. I don’t believe in Magic Arabs at all, which is why I don’t believe in your establishment-approved conspiracy theory.

Just because I can’t explain – to your satisfaction, I’ll admit in advance – _what_ gravity is and why it behaves as it does, or electricity for that matter, it does not mean it doesn’t exist.

Just to clarify – there’s a whole lot that we respectively do/don’t believe in – but how does you position differ from that of the Official Version, exactly?

I called that fat Nazi Aaronovitch just that because (iirc) Mr. Murray had referred to the bastard in precisely those terms on this very blog, and I considered it a very fair description.

If you recall all our conversations, I’ve never called you a loon, an idiot, or anything else which calls your intelligence into question. I have pondered your motivation for shilling for the establishment, which is another question altogether. By contrast, you may recall some eagerness to pull me – personally – into very unattractive positions so that I might be dismissed as a “loon”, ably assisted by your friend Larry.

I wonder why you want anyone not sharing your establishment position to be considered completely insane, and try to associate them with positions you know are decidedly whacked out – such as the much discredited Protocols, Lizzard people and so on.

Have you ever disagreed with your side-kick Larry when he’s disparaged others on such matters? Answer – no.

You want an acceptable position? Let me offer one – be honest about these subjects, instead of sitting on the sidelines on one half of this “debate”, and viciously attacking on the other, then pretending to be impartial!

Well, I don’t see anything substantial enough to reply to there Glenn, except your claim that THERE ARE crazy ideas such as the Protocols and lizards etc…

Again, you feel that you know where you can draw the line and tell people who believe in those things that they are loons but tell me that I cannot call people loons for their beliefs.

It’s another double standard Glenn.

“I called that fat Nazi Aaronovitch just that because (iirc) Mr. Murray had referred to the bastard in precisely those terms on this very blog, and I considered it a very fair description.”

Oh yes, so he did:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/david_aaronovitch/article3227701.ece

Thanks, Angrysoba. That’s fascinating about the schools. My in-laws used to live in Nottingham. I once experinced the sort of ‘Clockwork Orange’ mentality from youths in a middle class suburban area of Nottingham – Wollaton – when I came across the victim of a road traffic crash on a dual carriageway there. Their behaviour was disgraceful. But of course, as you say, it’s something common to many cities nowadays, sadly.

My colleague, the writer, Michael Gardiner used to teach English Literature at the University of Tokyo – he’s now at Warwick University, I think. Some of the stories in his book, ‘Escalator’ were set in Japan. You might enjoy them!

http://www.birlinn.co.uk/author/details/Michael-Gardiner-710/

Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll look out for his book (the title somehow sounds familiar).

If you’re looking for Japanese novelists then I recommend the Kafka-esque Kobo Abe (“Woman in the Dunes”) or Shusaku Endo (“Silence”). If you want to read something very dark and bleak you could try Osamu Dazai (“No Longer Human”). Actually, all three authors are pretty dark.

For commentary on Japan, my favourite authors are Ian Buruma and the travel writer Alan Booth. Unfortunately most of their books are a bit dated now (especially Booth’s as he died more than twenty years ago) but they both cover a lot of ground in an entertaining way.

Glenn: “You want an acceptable position? Let me offer one – be honest about these subjects, instead of sitting on the sidelines on one half of this “debate”, and viciously attacking on the other, then pretending to be impartial!”

Glenn, I’m not sure I understand what that position is.

On the thread that shall not be named I think I made it clear what my position was rather than pretending to be impartial. I made one of the first posts on there explaining what I believed and why. I don’t know what I could say that was more reasonable than that.

AS: I thought your position was to be in total agreement with the establishment view? If not, my apologies, but you certainly give that impression.

My crazy, whacked-out “loon” conspiracy theory is that I don’t know what happened. I’ve heard plenty of theories, all of which sound rather implausible and lack the required proof, sounding rather too convenient and serving the agenda of those promoting the explanation. A proper inquiry, impartially and openly conducted would be the best way forward, rather than in secret by establishment stooges.

Why you get so ticked off at someone holding that position is not that clear.

Best to leave it at that (on this thread at least) with your permission… I fear we are drifting way off topic.

Thanks, Angrysoba, I’ll definitely check-out those books – they sound very interesting indeed!