The Search for Change 254

The linked long term phenomena of falling electoral turnout and a decreasing percentage of those who do vote, voting for the two main parties, leaves politicians in power with the active support of an increasingly small minority of the population. To date this has not seriously impacted on consent – the Majority are apathetic, and devoid both of interesting sources of useful political information, and of social cohesion. Membership of organisations of horizontal solidarity is also in long term decline.

I would love to see an attempt at long term quantification of the difference between the parties in terms of the manifesto policies they offer. I have no doubt that there will be a very sharp reduction in difference, or rather policy convergence between the parties. If you look at 1911 – social insurance, pensions, power of the hereditary aristocracy, 1945 – nationalisation of major industries, initiation of the NHS and full welfare state, and 1983 – privatisation, nuclear weapons – there were very real and sharp political differences that offered voters a distinct ideological choice. The country – and your own future – could be recognisably different dependent on for whom you voted.

The last two times our government changed parties, the new party came in to pledge to continue the fiscal measures already projected by the treasury under its predecessors. Anyone who believes the Treasury would be fundamentally different under Balls or Osborne is delusional, and responding to tribalism not real difference. Who introduced tuition fees? New Labour. Who accelerated the “marketization” of the NHS? New Labour. Who vastly expanded PFI? New Labour. Who bailed out the banks? New Labour.

In effect, the parties offer exactly the same neo-con policies. NATO, Trident, Occupation of Afghanistan, Privatisation, Tuition Fees – the only apparent alternative at the last election came from the Lib Dems, and the electorate grasped at it in larger numbers than a third party had ever received before, something we have quickly forgotten. The reason that we have forgotten it is that Clegg, who was never any kind of Liberal, dumped the entire radical heritage of his party as soon as he came to power.

There is a much wider point to what happened to the Lib Dems. Two other changes – the introduction of PR for the European Parliament, and the large increase in expenses for MP’s staff – had made a radical change to that party. Lib Dem conferences were suddenly places of power dressing, not woolly jumpers. A great many young professional politicos – MPs research assistants, and staffers from Brussels – were all over the place. Bright, presentable, highly paid, most of them had no connection with liberalism, had never read John Stuart Mill or Hazlitt, had no idea who Lloyd George was and cared less. They had latched on to a rung of paid political work, had become part of the political class – that was the entire purpose of their activity. The woolly jumpered chap who had campaigned about paving stones in Salisbury and passionately wanted to abolish Trident and adopt green energy became sidelined, an amusing anachronism, the subject of the jokes of the sophisticates.

Of course, their focus groups showed that the people want policies which the ever shrinking ownership of the mass media promotes, because they are the only policies they have ever heard of. But the people no longer trust the ownership of the media, and the expenses scandal caused a much-needed scepticism of the appalling political class. People are desperate for leaders who look honest and say something different.

So do not despise UKIP supporters. They are not vicious racists. They are in fact brighter than those stupid enough to continue voting for the three neo-con parties, despite having their lives crippled for the next three decades to pay unconceivable sums to the bankers. The UKIP voters at least wish to punish the political class and wish to hear of some different policies.

The problem is that the only alternative of which the mainstream media is prepared to inform them is Mr Farage and his simple anti-foreigner maxims. Many of the bankers are keen to leave the EU, as Nigel Lawson told us. So if people want an alternative, that is the one they will be offered. Only in Scotland have people been offered a more radical alternative – and while I do not wish to exaggerate the economic radicalism of the SNP, they are markedly to the left of Westminster on issues like tuition fees, healthcare and PFI.

The great question of the day is, how to put before the population, in a way that they will notice, a radical alternative other than simple right wing populism. I have a strong belief that there remains a real desire in society for a more social policy, for a major and real check on the huge divergence between rich and poor, for good public services, for a pacific foreign policy, and for leaders not just in it for the money or to promote wealthy interests. But how do you get that message to people?


From comments made, there must be an ambiguity about this article which I don’t see myself. I made this clarification in a comment and I add it here for certainty:

Of course UKIP are not a real alternative. I said “do not despise UKIP supporters”, not “do not despise UKIP”. UKIP are a false “alternative” dangled by the mainstream media and the bankers. But the support for them is evidence that the public do very much want some alternative. I shall append this to the article as it must be more ambiguous than I thought.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

254 thoughts on “The Search for Change

1 6 7 8 9
  • Mark Golding - Children of Conflict

    There is no such thing as ‘caring’ in British politics according to Mr Anthony Charles Lynton Blair – Labour conference September 2006

    Dead children are collateral damage in war : Destroying nature is collateral damage in play:

    Government licensed secret buzzard egg destruction, documents reveal
    Eggs and nests of protected raptors destroyed to protect pheasant shoot, according to FoI documents.

  • fedup

    who could explain so cogently how all the major abuses of the glorious Saddam years can in effect be attributed to the actions of the evil West

    Who are you kidding? Do you ever fucking read?

    “……. Saddam’s CIA handler was an Iraqi dentist working for CIA and Egyptian intelligence. U.S. officials separately confirmed Darwish’s account.”

    former senior State Department official, Saddam, while only in his early 20s, became a part of a U.S. plot to get rid of Qasim. According to this source, Saddam was installed in an apartment in Baghdad on al-Rashid Street directly opposite Qasim’s office in Iraq’s Ministry of Defense, to observe Qasim’s movements.

    Further the bumbling thug that Saddam was, despite the “History” revised, in his attempt to assassinate Qasim the 22-year-old Saddam lost his nerve and began firing too soon, killing Qasim’s driver and only wounding Qasim in the shoulder and arm. Another of the assassins had bullets that did not fit his gun and that yet another got a hand grenade stuck in the lining of his coat, not able to use it. Keystone Kops Assassins !

    As the case is with most of the current “Arab Leadership” who are mere vassals/charge hands set in charge of the “Man Fridays” to keep the oil pumping and keep on taking the toilet paper (dollars) paid in return for the oil too. That is save Assad, who is currently under attack to be over thrown, and a more friendly sort of a chap to be put in his place.

    Recollecting that Assad was in No 10 a Guest of B liars, and was getting groomed for his services in yet another blatant fruit of democracy: the CIA renditions (ie farming out the kidnapped Muslim prisoners to various Arab countries to be tortured and interrogated).

    Your holier than thou fucking attitude is based on a firm belief that you find; ignorance to be a fucking bliss, and rigidly stick to the Ostrich Principles (head in the sand and arse up) to carry on dissent against the dissidents here.

    In the other news:

    Now the police state finds the need for even more intrusive methods of surveillance, U.S. Special Forces getting constellation of mini surveillance satellites to hunt down ‘people considered to be dangerous’. Chief of Reichssicherheitshauptamt could have only but dreamt about such a capabilities.

    Meanwhile back at the ranch, after the initial outbursts about the events of yesterday; the hatemongers have realised that they may have fanned the flames of hatred just a tad too much, and are busy pushing the Stay Calm, remain collected, and stick together message. Syria and the Arab Spring ought to be foremost in their lessons learned docket.

  • resident dissident

    “Bernanke and Paulson presided over the 2008 crash and went off for Rosh Hashanah in the middle of it.”

    Oh well time for another name change after that gratuitous bit of anti-semitism. Paulson is a Christian Scientist btw.

  • resident dissident


    Whem you were chastised as a child by your parents/teachers were you able to avoid responsibility for your actions by blaming the evil US empire? Just asking.

  • Komodo

    I’m sorry but I know SNP supporters personally and by experience know them to be some of the least Socialist and most bigoted people in Scotland. Not just about the English either, should Scotland become independent and these people take power I would fear for large sections of the Scottish population too, especially those who they refer to openly as “Tinks” and who already suffer a great deal of prejudice and discrimination.

    Not my experience at all, Fred. Though I have met extremists too. The extremes do not define the centre. As to calling travelling people “tinks” that’s pretty traditional. Within living memory, that’s what they were: tinkers – Irish travellers who mended pots and pans, among other borderline legal activities. We had a guy in our RAF unit nicknamed Tink. (he was) He had no objection, and he wasn’t the acquiescent sort.

    Still, it’s incomparably worse than comparing someone to a beached whale, I know. Contempt is one thing……..contempt is another.

  • resident dissident


    “There is no such thing as ‘caring’ in British politics according to Mr Anthony Charles Lynton Blair – Labour conference September 2006”

    Another day another attempt at rewriting history. Whatever Tony Blair’s faults he never said this at the 2006 conference.

  • fedup

    Whem you were chastised as a child by your parents/teachers were you able to avoid responsibility for your actions by blaming the evil US empire? Just asking.

    What a comprehensive answer? Did you fucking think of it all by yourself, or did you have someone else write it for you?

    All you have to say about the forwarded points, is this poxy, bollocksy sentence in a sort of Freudian banana custard analysis?

    Head in the sand ostrich ought to be flashing its arse and not get engaged in any debates with dissidents.

  • N_

    As a non-voter who believes that the parties essentially stand for the same thing, and that in any case, parliamentary politics is nothing but sheepfeed, I’ve also been interested in finding out what substantive differences between them have been evident over the decades.

    I’m not someone who decides what I think and then ignores facts that don’t fit. You can’t improve your understanding that way!

    Clearly there was a big difference between Labour and the Tories in 1945: never forget that the Tories opposed the creation of the NHS.

    As for the 1960s and 1970s, I have found that the main points on which Labour differed from the Tories were

    1) land law, and

    2) private schools.

    You can trace these through royal commissions, policies, and a few legislative efforts which were left dead in the water. Labour attempts to bring about change in these two areas were scuppered, including by your former mates in the civil service, Craig! 🙂

    (As for the unilateralism in 1983, that was just pretence, I think.)

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    “A law enforcement source told The Pilot the incident happened about 12 nautical miles off the coast of Virginia Beach. The official blamed bad weather for the incident and said the agents – members of the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team, based in Quantico – fell into the water…..

    The official said he believed the agents died as a result of the impact rather than drowning.”

    Terminal velocity is about 120 mph and for a human body to reach that speed it takes 8 seconds.

    When a body strikes water it has resistance comparable to concrete. How high up were these agents before rappelling?

    This is a very unusual accident.

  • fedup

    How high up were these agents before rappelling?

    They were Augusto Pinochet feet off the ground silly! This is the new standard operating height for rappelling without any ropes (ropes are for wimps not G Men) and shit.

    Mind you are growing very charitable these days: This is a very unusual accident.

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    ” Irish travellers who mended pots and pans, among other borderline legal activities. We had a guy in our RAF unit nicknamed Tink. (he was) He had no objection, and he wasn’t the acquiescent sort.”

    That’s why I hear my family made the journey here, Komodo. We were Tinkers and horse-traders (or was it horse-thieves) and when we arrived were met with cries of ‘Irish trash’.

  • Komodo

    Horse experts, Ben. Back in the day, a Highlander with a duff horse would get an opinion from a traveller rather than a vet. Often, I guess…that animal is on its last legs, but I’ll give ye a half-crown for it to save ye the trouble o buryin it…one account I heard is that they’d come across, walk to the West Highlands, and dig holes in the peat to live in. Think it’s true. The USA is a much better option, I’d say.

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    Yeah, Ko’. Once we lost the ‘brogue’ we were assimilated and all was forgiven, now that we are no longer a good judge of horseflesh.

  • Fred

    “Not my experience at all, Fred. Though I have met extremists too. The extremes do not define the centre. As to calling travelling people “tinks” that’s pretty traditional. Within living memory, that’s what they were: tinkers – Irish travellers who mended pots and pans, among other borderline legal activities. We had a guy in our RAF unit nicknamed Tink. (he was) He had no objection, and he wasn’t the acquiescent sort.”

    Calling Asians “Paki” is pretty traditional too, as is calling West Indians “Niggers”.

    I don’t care how traditional it is it is derogatory, a term of derision, it would be derogatory even if the people referred to were Irish travellers but as it happens they are Scottish and some of the oldest inhabitants of the county.

    I remember the days of rampant bigotry in Britain, when we had TV programs like Till Death Do Us Part, you are showing they live on in Scotland and in the SNP.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    Bright and early (07h23, no less!), the Obsessive Poster writes :

    “St Theresa of May was wearing black last night and was giving her statement (off an autocue?) with deep gravitas. She had been rehearsed. Her white make up gave her a witchlike appearance.”

    Not quite sure what the point of that comment was, except perhaps to reassure her fans that the OP’s eyesight is still fine despite her advancing years….or to demonstrate that despite a certain (and very welcome) abstinence lately the old girl hasn’t lost her ability to post ad hominem and irrelevant insults.

    BTW, with reference to the “She had been rehearsed” : the OP should know from her all-day reading of the BBC website and msm (or even from any common sense she might possess) that statements made by ministers on important matters are not usually ad-libbed and off the cuff.

  • Komodo

    RD – I am at a loss to see how an obvious savant such as yourself can read this: “hoping for the party system to disappear” into this: “My position (check it out) is that the party system sucks.”

    It would be nice if we could get rid of the party system, but I don’t see a realistic and relatively bloodless way of doing it right now. Any thought of its disappearance by itself is of course wishful thinking. So I don’t hope.

    Fred: And disparaging people of whom you disapprove by calling them “beached whales”? How does that fit with your PC these days? You take the piss out of fatties rather than, er, brown people? I see you do. Well done you.

    I remember the days of rampant bigotry in Britain, when we had TV programs like Till Death Do Us Part, you are showing they live on in Scotland and in the SNP.

    You are becoming incomprehensible. I think you need a nice lie down. I remember cheap digs in E. London with notices saying;” No Blacks. No Irish. No dogs”. I tell you, it was tough being a dog in those days.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Resident Dissident :

    As the several people to whose existence on this blog my presence lends meaning and focus might have noticed, I’ve been away for a couple of days. If I dare say it – in a better place 🙂

    But I did want to congratulate you on the relevance, quality and invariably courteous tone of your many comments. I have of course noticed the various insults directed against you by way of ‘reply’, but on the other hand I have yet to read. a constructive reply, never mind a convincing rebuttal or counter-argument. I do in fact note a grave lack of any proper replies at all, despite your repeated invitations to supply such.

    Your persistence and the exhaustiveness of your comments is also most welcome. I assume, however, that you are mostly writing ‘for the record’ – and for the silent 99% pf the readers of this blog – and not for the Eminences and their hangers-on, whom you will of course never convince. As you yourself wrote, “Let closed loop speak unto closed loop”.

    More power to your arm, Sir!

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    Fedup @ 4:28

    I tried to google some corroboration for the book’s premise, and it makes some sense, but I wonder about that for a reasons

    The Irish commonly married outside their race. Native Americans often became Irish spouses. I personally have two great-great grandmothers who were Blackfoot and Cherokee. It’s possible the competition for the same labor created some off relations between blacks and Irish.

    This is the typical article arising from the subject……

    “Like many immigrant groups in the United States, the Irish were characterized as racial Others when they first arrived in the first half of the 19th century. The Irish had suffered profound injustice in the U.K. at the hands of the British, widely seen as “white negroes.” The potato famine that created starvation conditions that cost the lives of millions of Irish and forced the out-migration of millions of surviving ones, was less a natural disaster and more a complex set of social conditions created by British landowners (much like Hurricane Katrina). Forced to flee from their native Ireland and the oppressive British landowners, many Irish came to the U.S.

    Once in the U.S., the Irish were to negative stereotyping that was very similar to that of enslaved Africans and African Americans. The comic Irishman – happy, lazy, stupid, with a gift for music and dance – was a stock character in American theater. Drunkenness and criminality were major themes of Irish stereotypes, and the term “paddy wagon” has its etymological roots in the racist term “paddy,” a shortening of the name “Patrick,” which was used to refer to the Irish. However, this is also a gendered image and refers to Irish men, specifically. The masculine imagery of “paddy” hides the existence of Irish women, but did not protect Irish women from racism as they were often more exposed to such racism through domestic jobs. Women typically played a key role in maintaining Catholic adherence, which resonates closely with Irishness and difference. The “model minority” (if you will) stereotype of Irish-American women is of a “Bridget,” recognized for her hard work and contribution to Irish upward class mobility.

    Simian, or ape-like caricature of the Irish immigrant was also a common one among the mainstream news publications of the day (much like the recent New York Post cartoon). For example, in 1867 American cartoonist Thomas Nast drew “The Day We Celebrate” a cartoon depicting the Irish on St. Patrick’s Day as violent, drunken apes. And, in 1899, Harper’s Weekly featrued a drawing of three men’s heads in profile: Irish, Anglo-Teutonic and Negro, in order to illustrate the similarity between the Irish and the Negro (and, the supposed superiority of the Anglo-Teutonic). In northern states, blacks and Irish immigrants were forced into overlapping – often integrated – slum neighborhoods. Although leaders of the Irish liberation struggle (in Ireland) saw slavery as an evil, their Irish-American cousins largely aligned with the slaveholders.

    And, following the end of slavery, the Irish and African Americans were forced to compete for the same low-wage, low-status jobs. So, the “white negroes” of the U.K. came to the United States and, though not enslaved, faced a status almost as low as that of recently-freed blacks. While there were moments of solidarity between Irish and African Americans, this was short lived.”

  • April Showers

    PM to Hague: Face battle against terrorism together

    05/23/2013 15:19
    Netanyahu extends condolences over murder of solider in London; two leaders plan to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat, Syria.
    Netanyahu and Hague meet in Jerusalem, May 23, 2013

    Israel and the United Kingdom both face the battle against savagery and terrorism at home and around the world, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said Thursday in a press conference with British Foreign Secretary William Hague in Jerusalem.

    The prime minister extended Israel’s solidarity with the people of Britain, following the terror attack against a British soldier in London on Wednesday.

    PM to Kerry: Peace talks top Israel’s agenda

    Peres writes to the Queen after UK soldier’s murder

    “We wish to send condolences to the family and to the people of Britain,” Netanyahu stated. “We’ve experienced such horrors here, and we sympathize deeply.”

    Hague thanked Netanyahu for condolences expressed by himself and many other Israelis, and reiterated British Prime Minister David Cameron’s words earlier in the day: “We will never give in to terror in the United Kingdom, and we know the importance of defeating terrorism.”

    “That is well understood here in Israel as well,” Hague added.

    The two were speaking ahead of a meeting, in which they planned to discuss the Iranian nuclear threat , the crisis in Syria and US Secretary of State’ John Kerry’s bid to renew Palestinian-Israel peace talks.

    Will the gruesome twosome be planning some Woolwich style killings in Syria by the rabble rebels? That after all is what we have been supporting militarily and financially.

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    Was it random? Was he in uniform? They hit him with the car they were in, then finished him off. I continue to be overwhelmed with skepticism. I want to know more about the hackers and Rigby.

  • April Showers

    Woolwich attack: Statement from convenor of Stop the War Coalition
    By Lindsey German

    The attack in Woolwich yesterday was horrific. There can be no justification for a murderous attack on an individual soldier in the streets of London. It must have been awful too for the local people who witnessed it.

    Unlike with most terrorist attacks or indeed other crimes, we have been able to see film footage of the perpetrators, hear testimony from the witnesses who saw or talked to them. So we know what these men say motivated them. They claimed that the killing of the soldier was in response to the killing of Muslims by British soldiers in other countries. One said that the government did not care for people and should get the troops out.

    The Boston bombers last month were supposedly similarly motivated. The Woolwich attack, carried out by two men now shot and wounded and under arrest in hospital, appears to represent a phenomenon that was pointed out nearly a decade ago by the security services in Britain: that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would lead to a growing threat of terrorism in Britain. Those of us in Stop the War have long predicted that these sorts of attacks would happen because of the war on terror.

    Unfortunately there is little sign that the government, media and military will draw any of the conclusions that they should from the attack. The instant response was to brand it as a serious terrorist attack, although already many commentators are saying they believe it more likely that this was a one off and isolated incident, and unlikely to be part of a wider conspiracy. David Cameron cut short a visit to Paris in order to fly home.

    This reaction is one which manifestly fails to deal with the political causes underlying such attacks. The simple truth is that there were no such cases in Britain before the start of the ‘war on terror’ in 2001, which led to the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. The consequences of those wars have been devastating for the people of those countries and further afield. Up to a million died in Iraq and 4 million were made refugees. Tens of thousands have died in Afghanistan. Fighting still continues and in Iraq looks like descending into civil war in some parts of the country.

    The US and its allies have been involved in bombing attacks on these countries which have been responsible for many thousands of deaths.


  • April Showers

    The trouble with Prince Harry: naughty boy peddling war propaganda.

    15 May 2013

    Interviewer: “Have you killed from the cockpit yet Harry?”
    Prince Harry: “Yeah, so, lots of people have.”

    The Trouble with Harry
    Written by Heathcote Williams
    Edited by Margaret and Alan Cox
    Narrated by Alan Cox
    Handsome Dog Productions

    In May 2013, Prince Harry went on a seven day tour of the United States. The official aim was to “promote Britain”.

    The underlying purpose was to rehabilitate the much tarnished image of a royal soldier-boy whose value as a peddler of propaganda for the British military — and in particular the disastrous war in Afghanistan — had been somewhat derailed by an earlier ‘tour’ of the USA.

    When Prince Harry was deployed to serve in the British army in Afghanistan, the tabloid media heralded him the “warrior prince” and “one of our boys”. It was, as Lindsey German said at the time, “a naked attempt to rehabilitate a war in which the British army is killing and being killed for no other purpose than to save the face of the politicians and generals who are waging it.”

    In January 2013, the media was full of interviews in which Harry boasted of killing ‘insurgents’ in the ‘game’ of being the pilot of a £40 million attack helicopter. “Take a life to save a life,” he said. “If there’s people trying to do bad stuff to our guys, then we’ll take them out of the game.”

    This was a very different ‘game’ to the one Harry was caught playing in Las Vegas in August 2012, which overnight destroyed his value as a salesman for war and militarism. The latest US tour is an attempt to wipe away the misdemeanours of the royal soldier’s previous visit, so he can once again be the useful fool promoting the British army waging war in other people’s countries.

    But poet Heathcote Williams doesn’t think we should forget the contrast between Harry’s sordid romp in Las Vegas and his arrogant boast of killing Afghans. Warning: some people may be offended by the content of this video.

    The Trouble With Harry:naughty boy peddling war propaganda!

  • nevermind

    Why did these ‘Muslim madmen’ choose a soldier over a civilian? and, if they are of African decent, far more likely to be of Christian persuasions, what has persuaded these youngsters to the their chosen faith?

    That it happens on the streets of London is what makes politicians twitch. Another convenient detraction from the Governments failures, dare I say they’ve seen this coming.

    Lets face it, just because a soldier is walking round London and in your civic cloth does not mean he is not at war. The chaotic circumstances we created and our foreign policy involvement in issues which are none of our business, is increasingly making this country a target for people who have legitimate concerns and reasons to revenge their lost relatives or else relieve their grief. lets hope its not becoming a craze.

    But people should be told to live with it, its reality.

  • April Showers

    The Chief of the General Staff –

    1747: The Chief of the Defence Staff, General Sir David Richards, says the killing has only reinforced the determination within the armed forces. “We are absolutely determined not to be intimidated into not doing the right thing, whether it is here in this country or in Afghanistan or wherever we seek to serve the nation.”Bold

    1748: Sir David says he and the Prime Minister have agreed that personnel should resume wearing their military uniforms when they are off base. “I think this is a completely isolated incident – we wait to hear more but that is our view. There is no reason at all why we should not wear our uniforms with pride, but on a common sense basis.”

    Woolwich Live Reaction

  • resident dissident

    @Lindsey German

    “There can be no justification for a murderous attack on an individual soldier in the streets of London.”

    So why spend the rest of the statement providing one and in effect parrot the likely justification of the murderers? The EDL/UKIP version will naturally use the reverse of the same perverted logic when it comes to explaining any likely counterreaction. The Stop the War Coalition could of course have made exactly the same arguments about what the US and its Allies have done in Iraq and Afghanistan before yesterday – but they couldn’t resist the opportunity to use a bit of blood on British streets to push its arguments a little bit further. What they are too stupid to realise is that among the 99% the impact of such opportunistic behaviour will be to weaken rather than strengthen their cause – and the message will only confirm the views of those who already believe in what they say.

  • Ben Franklin -Machine Gun Preacher (unleaded version)

    ” the impact of such opportunistic behaviour will be to weaken rather than strengthen their cause” – Indeed. If creating a sympathetic public was the intent. Rage is a form of insanity and the anger becomes chief enabler.

    They strengthen the security noose hanging around all our necks, but to that I say “cui bono?”

  • Fred

    “You are becoming incomprehensible. I think you need a nice lie down. I remember cheap digs in E. London with notices saying;” No Blacks. No Irish. No dogs”. I tell you, it was tough being a dog in those days.”

    I expect people in the EDL and BNP don’t understand why others consider them bigoted either. “Nothing racist about calling a nigger a nigger” they say, “I mean they are niggers aren’t they so how can that be racist? Some of them even call themselves niggers”

    That’s the sad part, that you don’t understand why what you do is wrong.

1 6 7 8 9

Comments are closed.