Sunday, 20 January 2019

Why They Hate Farrakhan, And How They Lie About Him

The article below appeared on the front page of the London Jewish Chronicle, August 3, 1984. Nearly thirty-five years later, the same powerful vested interests are making the same noises about Minister Farrakhan and smearing him in the same way. To take just one recent example, when Farrakhan was branded an anti-Semite for the N thousandth time, he retorted that he was not anti-Semite but anti-termite. Shock, horror, that wicked man branded “Jewish people” termites. No, he did not. Like Donald Trump, Farrakhan has never been shy about repaying his detractors in their own coin. He branded Jewish leaders termites, the likes of the ADL who supported two Gaza massacres and the Flotilla massacre. If these people are not termites, they aren’t much higher up the food chain.

Farrakhan has also been branded anti-white. As whites are constantly being told by other whites how racist they are, surely we can forgive him this. In fact, Farrakhan’s most stringent criticism has always been reserved for his fellow blacks; he has for example attacked what he called the glorification of the gun.

So why has Farrakhan become such a hate figure for the lib-tards, one of the very few black men it is possible to attack without being branded racist?

There are two reasons, one is that like the late great Muhammad Ali he is a black separatist. In short he believes bluebirds should fly with bluebirds; that may go down well with the likes of wicked Harold Covington, but its corollary - white survival - goes down very badly with the likes of the ADL, Tim Wise, and other self-styled anti-racists for whom white survival is akin to hate. Talk about projection.

The second reason, which is just as important, is that Farrakhan is a student of the financial conspiracy; he knows how and why the Federal Reserve was founded, and how usury robs everyone from the poor to the point one percent in order to enrich the banksters. Is this man our enemy? Is he Hell!

Monday, 31 December 2018

Cyntoia Brown  —  the murderess in pigtails

A murder case from 2004 has been back in the news recently. Cyntoia Brown was convicted of the first degree murder of Johnny Allen in the American state of Tennessee. Don’t believe anything you read or hear about her innocence on social media.

In fact, don’t believe anything you read or hear about any murder case on social media until you have read the official findings of an appellate court, because there have been and are numerous such cases of convicted killers pleading their innocence and people lobbying on their behalf when the most cursory examination of the documented facts of the case reveals a trove of damning evidence.

This was the case with Troy Davis - executed in 2011; Linda Carty - currently on death row in Texas; and many others.

The appeal of Cyntoia Brown for most of the gullibles is her age. She was just sixteen years old in August 2004 when she shot and killed Johnny Allen. She was arrested shortly, and when she appeared in court, her legal team dressed her up like a thirteen year old, in pigtails. The story she gave the court was that she was a victim of sex trafficking and that she had been forced or virtually forced to shoot Allen because she was in fear of her life.

These claims were rejected by the jury in her 2006 trial and by the Tennessee Court Of Criminal Appeals in a lengthy judgment. Because of the gravity of her crime, she was tried as an adult; murder is seldom suitable for trying in juvenile court. That notwithstanding, the singer Rihanna and others have reignited this non-controversy by ill-informed posts on social media. They have been joined by CNN, National Public Radio, and many others who should know better but don’t. Many of them are not simply bending over backwards to excuse Brown but are literally making stuff up.

Cyntoia Brown: The Murderous Psychopath In Pigtails

According to Brown, she was forced into prostitution by a man known as Kut-Throat - spell that however you want. His real name was Garion McGlothen. She describes him as her pimp, claims he raped her multiple times, and forced her to have sex with other men. The reality is that although she had a terrible start in life, Brown was placed with a woman no reasonable person could fault as either a foster or adoptive mother. Even so, she chose to run away from home and seek out McGlothen or a man like him.

In Tennessee, the age of consent is eighteen; in most of the rest of the Western world it is sixteen, in a few places it is lower. Thus, although a man having sex with a sixteen year old in Tennessee is considered statutory rape, most people would regard it as no big deal. Brown’s victim, Johnny Allen, was forty three, ie old enough to be her father and then some, but plenty of women have had relationships including sex with much older men with no ill effect. The night he met Brown, Allen was in search of female company as much as sex. She says when he propositioned her she told him the price was $200; he offered half that, and they split the difference. We have only her word for this, but as the prosecutor pointed out, she felt comfortable enough in his company to go home with him, to eat with him, and to watch TV with him. Do “johns” normally take street whores home with them and treat them like this?

Johnny Allen was shot in the back of the head as he slept; the forensic evidence including the horrific crime scene photographs which in typical American fashion were released to the public, leave that in no doubt. Brown’s story that she was in fear of her life from Allen was and remains a lie.

In view of these lies, it is pertinent to ask what if any of what she says about her relationship with her alleged pimp is true? She murdered Allen with the pistol she carried in her purse. Sex trafficking victims - and they do exist - do not typically carry weapons of any kind, but prostitutes do. As for McGlothen, he died a violent death in March 2005 aged only 24, so is not talking, but the police had no interest in him at the time of Brown’s arrest either as an accessory after the fact or as a rapist in his own right. In short, Brown was with McGlothen of her own free will, so however odious he might have been, she cannot put the blame for her murderous actions on him.

Another point made by her supporters, including one psychiatric professional who should know better but doesn’t, is a 16 year old should not be judged by adult standards. This argument has merit when lesser crimes are considered. A 16 year old might not realise it is unlawful to attempt to bribe a government official, and may not understand the concept of joint enterprise, but surely every 16 year old, every 12 year old, knows and understands that murder is wrong.

All that being said, she and her supporters have looked around for another scapegoat. Brown’s white trash mother is said to have indulged in heavy alcohol use during her pregnancy, and Brown is said to have been born with foetal alcohol syndrome. The only problem with that argument is that if she was driven to commit a murder at sixteen by this condition, how much more dangerous will she be if paroled now?

Although Brown has learned to shed crocodile tears for the murder of Johnny Allen, this manipulative female psychopath is still happy to portray herself as a victim. Does this mean she should never be paroled? No, but it might not be a bad idea to keep her behind bars at least until the menopause, that way we can ensure she does not pass on her murderous genes to her offspring.

Saturday, 15 September 2018

Apostates And Idiots

If you don’t recognise the man in the first grab below, he calls himself the Apostate Prophet. He claims to have been born in Germany, to have returned to his ancestral Turkish homeland, then to have emigrated to the United States. I have no reason to take issue with any claim about his personal life. Obviously he speaks German and Turkish, he speaks English like a native, an Englishman rather than an American, and clearly a bit of Arabic too, so academically at least, this is one highly intelligent individual.

The woman in the second grab is older than she looks; born and raised in Canada, she is of Saudi stock, an authentic Arab.

They are both ex-Moslems.

Okay, you don’t believe in the Qur’an, I get that. You don’t believe in God either, nor do I, never have. There is injustice in Saudi Arabia; there is injustice in the Islamic world. But there is injustice everywhere, something Islam’s critics always seem to forget.

Both are rightly scornful of so-called Moslem feminist Linda Sarsour, a woman whose surname means cockroach in Arabic, but Sarsour is a media creation; if you want to understand her true significance, perhaps even her true purpose, refer to my blog YouTube Censorship And The 1% Rule.

Our Apostate friend doesn’t like Minister Farrakhan, neither does Yasmine Mohammed. She calls Farrakhan an anti-Semite and a homophobe; he adds anti-white and anti-woman. The charge of anti-Semitism is easily made, but Farrakhan is no Jew-hater, rather he is extremely well read, including the conspiracy literature, so knows something about the reality of Jewish power and the perfidy of Zionism. He has in the past made what have been perceived as anti-white statements, but mostly his ire has been directed at blacks. Does that make him anti-black as well? We will deal with homophobia in due course

Yasmine was married to an Islamist terrorist, a very important one, so it is understable that she is revolted by what she sees as some aspects of Islam, but are all Moslems really enemies of America, and does Islam really need to be reformed, even though it cannot be?

Yasmine wore the hijab and later the niqab; she really does hate the hijab and has a big hang up about it. Ever heard of #NoHijabDay? The antagonism towards the hijab is a wonder to behold in certain quarters. As this word has now passed into English, I will stop italicising it, but when will these idiots stop demonising it? It’s a dress code, nothing more. Don’t we have dress codes here in the West, and aren’t they at times far more severe? If you are a man, try walking down a city street with no trousers. If you are a woman, walk down the same street topless, and see how long you last before you are stopped by an officer of the law, if not arrested.

If you are a police officer, a nurse, an airline pilot, a building site manager, or even a cakeshop assistant, try turning up for work wearing a straw hat and a boiler suit. If your boss or line manager takes objection to your mode of dress, you can always reply you feel oppressed by having to wear a uniform, a hard hat or an apron day in, day out, and it’s time you threw off your chains. Will your next employer be more accommodating?

What the Hell is it about the hijab? It’s a ribbon, a piece of silk or whatever, nothing more.

Yasmine believes in sexism and regards herself as a feminist. Well, she would, wouldn’t she?

A hadith says women are less intelligent than men - At least Allah got that right.

Women get less inheritance.

Sigh. Ever heard of a dowry? As in the West until the Married Women’s Property Act, women were not only the property of their husbands but their charges. A man was responsible for his wife’s well-being, including her debts. Ever heard of the firstborn son inheriting? Her stupidity goes on and on.

Now they get really silly. In Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the media makes up lies. “It’s not like the Western media” he says, and she agrees!! Ask Donald Trump about how honest is the Western media. On the basis of a fake dossier paid for by his political opponent, and other black propaganda, he has been accused of sexual assault, rape, of lusting after his own daughter, being a money launderer for the Russian Mafia, and an agent of the Kremlin. If the media can make up gratuitous lies like that about the most powerful man in the world, what can they do to us little people?

Canada is so wonderful, she says.

He says similar things about America in other videos.

There are groups that are trying to spread Islam and the values of Islam - shock, horror she in particular has swallowed the LGBT propaganda. Or is it now LGBTQI....?

As you surely know, the G in the above stands for gay, only there is nothing gay about male homosexuality. If you doubt this, ask yourself if you have ever met a homosexual doctor. Doctors understand what this perversion can and does do to the human body. Even today when most people are tolerant of homosexuality they do not accept it. Ask any father if he would rather his son bent over for another man in the bath-house than bow down to Allah in the mosque. It’s a no-brainer.

It is not only Yasmine who finds the hijab oppressive, but our friend with the beard. He has made other videos about it. Like Yasmine, he is scornful of the way Islam segregates the sexes. Perhaps he wouldn’t be so contemptuous of this common sense social custom if knew what happened to Kato Harris, the geography teacher who was charged with raping a thirteen year old schoolgirl. He was acquitted by a jury in just twenty-six minutes because it was clearly demonstrated that the protocols in place at the school when he was teaching there made it impossible for him to have been alone with the non-victim at the times she claimed.

We are currently experiencing #MeToo hysteria which sees women coming forward accusing men of everything from sexual harassment, however loosely defined, to aggravated rape. These alleged offences can be years or decades in the past. What does Islam say about such allegations? No Sharia court would ever entertain them, yet there are almost certainly hundreds of innocent men if not thousands serving at times lengthy prison sentences throughout the Western world and even the non-Western world for sex crimes that occurred only in the tiny minds of their accusers.

Would Yasmine heap praise so freely on Canada if her new husband were to be so accused in view of its having long abolished statutes of limitations for sex crimes, having imposed restrictive rape shield laws and begun “re-educating” judges to believe the “victim” no matter how absurd her evidence?

Would our friend with the beard speak so highly of America if he were the victim of the police brutality for which it is renowned, and which contrary to the propaganda of social justice warriors is also meted out to whites, including women, and on occasion children?

Doesn’t he realise that in the land of the free and the home of the brave, he, or virtually anyone else, can literally be murdered by a trigger happy police officer who will face no consequences for the crime, even if by some miracle he is indicted for it?

Doesn’t he realise that if he is found to be in possession of a large quantity of cash - large being whatever the police call large - it can be seized and retained until he goes through the expensive process of proving it is his? In the UK, at least one billionaire has been so treated.

In the United States, the Apostate Prophet has free speech; in Canada, Yasmine does not. She can attack Islam all she likes, but she had better not question the religion of Holocaustianity. In Germany, unlike in Iran, to do so would cost her her freedom. Indeed, in modern, democratic Germany, if she were to perform a Nazi salute or be found in possession of a swastika, she would find herself in court.

Much more could be written in the same vein, but if you haven’t got the point by now, you never will, even if I tell you that like Tommy Robinson our Apostate friend is a hasbara, who boasts openly that he writes for Pamella Geller’s website. Only a fool would worry about the implementation of Sharia when his every telephone conversation and e-mail is monitored and stored by the NSA, and where government CCTV cameras track his every move in big cities and at times quite small towns. Why worry about becoming a slave to Allah when are already a slave to Mammon?

Wednesday, 22 August 2018

Rape Culture In The Greasy Spoon Café

I was eating my gammon breakfast, minding my own business, while a group of workmen on the other side of the room, apparently builders, were talking about mostly soccer. I think they were Chelsea supporters; they certainly didn’t appear to think much of either Arsenal or Tottenham.

At one point their conversation switched to Harvey Weinstein, and the consensus was that he deserved castration or something similar. It doesn’t matter how much money he’s got, there’s only one way to deal with someone like that. Truly amazing, these are the sort of blokes who are normally considered sexist louts whose wolf whistling is a form of street harassment. I finished my breakfast and left, heading first to the Internet caff then shortly back to the launderette to collect my service wash.

Saturday, 16 June 2018

YouTube Censorship And The 1% Rule

If you haven’t heard of the 1% rule, it has absolutely nothing to do with the top 1% of which we hear so much nowadays, rather it is about the way the mainstream media consistently clowns the “far right” and has done for decades.

The bottom line is that in an organisation or movement of any size you will find 1% who are batshit crazy, who spout all manner of garbage. These are the people who are sought out by the media, elevated by them, and even given a leg up to positions of power. It isn’t only the far right who are so targeted, on occasion the far left, and more frequently religious movements have come in for this treatment. Anjem Choudary, currently serving at Her Majesty’s Pleasure, is an example of how Moslems can be and are misrepresented. Choudary’s attacks on British “Imperialism” were given prominent publicity, but when he spoke about Islamic economics, only his own cameraman was present.

So what happens to unspeakables who are not batshit crazy, who don’t foam at the mouth, and whose arguments cannot be refuted? They get the silent treatment. This has spread to Amazon and even to IMDb. Recently, CODOH point out that while scholarly books on the so-called Holocaust from the Revisionist perspective have now been banned from sale on Amazon, the Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion and similar works are still being offered for sale there. The reason is not hard to seek: the Protocols has long been refuted; The Hoax Of The Twentieth Century has not, cannot, and never will be.

On June 10, I uploaded a two minute audio clip to YouTube entitled Notorious Holocaust Liar Kicks The Bucket, in which I pointed out that the recently deceased Gena Turgel, often portrayed as a saintly figure, was in reality a wicked liar. The video was removed the same day, and my account earned a strike. I appealed, and as you can see, the appeal makes the simple point that whatever I said about Gena Turgel pales by comparison with some of the allegations levelled against countless celebrities worldwide. It is clear my appeal was dismissed summarily and was probably not even read in a meaningful sense.

Four days later, a review I posted to IMDb of a CODOH documentary was rejected, but you can read it here.

It is clear that the people who run especially YouTube are allowing themselves to be pushed around by or even worse have been indoctrinated by both the misnamed social justice crowd and Organised Jewry. The latter includes the ADL, whose previous head honcho the odious Abraham Foxman condoned the mass murder of Palestinian civilians in two terrible assaults on Gaza by the IDF. How sad is that?

Thursday, 3 May 2018

The Voter ID Controversy — What Controversy?

Today I voted in the local election. The card that came through my door said

You will not be able to vote unless
you show ID to polling station staff

I thought this provision was a new national requirement but apparently it is a pilot scheme being tried out in a few areas. It is said to have caused chaos. I showed my NUJ card which was accepted, presumably some forms of identification were not.

I can’t say there is a big problem in the UK of duplicity at the ballot box, almost invariably that comes after the votes have been cast and the politicians have taken power. I recall two cases - one involving Orthodox Jews, and another Moslems. Unlike their secular brethren the JINOs, the ultra-Orthodox never cause any trouble in this country, and this was purely a matter of local politics. The Moslem voter fraud was somewhat bigger but was still local, and then there was of course that business in Tower Hamlets involving Lutfur Rahman. In the United States though it is all about racism. How could it be anything else?

The reality is that the Democrats are opposed to voter ID laws because there is massive fraud in the system including in particular illegal immigrants voting, and all this fraud benefits the Democrats. The claim that blacks and other legitimate minorities are less likely than whites to carry ID is utterly pathetic. It is virtually impossible to conduct any transaction in any Western nation without some sort of ID, and most of us carry ID routinely, if only a bank card.

Of course, we should all oppose the ever encroaching Orwellian state, including mandatory ID and checks on everything we do, but proving you are who say you are when you vote is far from Orwellian, and only unreasonable people would not consider it reasonable.

Tuesday, 20 March 2018

Muhammad & Aisha - And Mr Robinson

Tommy Robinson is an idiot, let’s be absolutely clear about that. Yes, the persecution he has suffered at the hands of Britain’s increasingly politically correct police has been disgraceful, but the British police have always been arseholes, and even idiots can suffer unwarranted persecution.

Like countless millions of other white Britons, Robinson is appalled by what he sees as the colonisation of his country and the attack on white, British, and especially English, culture. The vast majority of whites agree with him, and that in spite of decades of left wing brainwashing and at times naked tyranny. The big difference is, unlike him, they are afraid to put their heads about the parapet, and with good reason.

Before proceeding any further, it should be noted this sentiment is unique to neither the English nor to whites in general. The first white colonisers of the American continent faced the same resentment from the natives; the verdict of history is that this resentment was justified, certainly for Native Americans . There are those who would gladly see the White Man go the same way as the Red Man, and they make no secret of it, but these conspirators - for want of a better word - are not followers of Islam. Which brings us to Muhammad and Aisha. All over the Internet, the reader will find claims that the founder of Islam was a paedophile who had sex with a 9 year old girl. Today, that equates with rape in anyone’s language, the girl being far too young to consent. Dedicated enemies of Islam, not all of them with white skins, parrot this mantra incessantly, and on occasion, so has Robinson. But he goes much further than that, equating this alleged condoning of child rape with the grooming gang scandal, which like so many others he insists are the result of Islamic grooming gangs.

Here is the great man spouting off to Al Jazeera about how Muhammad married a 6 year old girl and raped her when she was 9. This clip was uploaded to YouTube on February 8, 2016, the day after it was recorded. So what are the facts, and the context?

To begin with, although unlike Jesus of Nazareth there is no doubt Muhammad existed, there are no contemporaneous biographies or other writings about his life, as historian Tom Holland points out. This means that even if one accepts the integrity of the Qur’an (not necessarily its validity), there must be serious questions about the Hadith, and about The Prophet himself. Recognising that the age of Aisha could be a problem in the modern world, some Islamic scholars have claimed she was much older, perhaps nineteen, when her marriage to Muhammad was consumated. The thought of a man in his fifties having sex with a much younger woman, much less a teenager of legal age, still causes revulsion for many people, although older men can dream! Others, like white convert Jonathan Brown, see no problem. Let us though look at the context of these claims of paedophilia.

What was the age of consent for cavemen, when our barely human ancestors first came down from the trees? That is an absurd question; throughout most of history there was no age of consent as such. Although the Bible tells us the years of Man are three score and ten, most people didn’t live anything like that long. It is so easy for decadent Westerners sitting in their centrally heated or air-conditioned living rooms to forget this. Not only was life indescribably hard for most people, even the very wealthy were not free from medical misery. Today, a person who develops appendicitis will be treated and make a full recovery provided it is diagnosed in time. The first recorded appendectomy was performed in 1735, but even two hundred years ago, appendicitis was a death sentence. So was birth for many women. Queen Victoria, who died in 1901, gave birth to nine children, all of whom survived, but earlier queens were not so lucky. Catherine of Aragon, the consort of Henry VIII, became pregnant seven times. Her daughter Mary became Queen of England but died aged 42. All her other babies were either stillborn or died in infancy.

In ancient times, social norms developed to protect fertile women and the young, without whom the tribe would not survive. This meant that as soon as girls achieved puberty, they had come of age. To put it crudely: When they’re old enough to bleed, they’re old enough to breed.

Puberty is an individual thing, but generally girls go through it two years before boys. The youngest recorded birth in history was of a Peruvian girl at the age of five years, seven months, twenty-one days, which seems barely credible. This was in 1933, and at the time of writing she is believed to still be alive. There have been nine year olds who gave birth, including one in Britain (1881), but leaving aside the depravity of men who would even consider perpetrating such monstrous acts as the rape of such a young child, these are truly exceptional cases, so we can almost certainly rule out the claim that Muhammad had sex with Aisha when she was nine, especially as this would have required the complicity of both her parents.

Whenever the idea of an age of consent came about, it did not become law in England until 1275 with the Statute of Westminster, which set it at 12. By the 1870s, it had risen to 13, but in 1885, the campaigning journalist W.T. Stead started what has been called a moral panic about the sexual abuse of underage girls in London, and this led to the age of consent being raised to 16, which it remains to this day, in spite of attempts to lower it, including by the pernicious homosexual lobby.

Returning to England, young marriages were not only permitted but were encouraged. At the higher levels of society, they were also arranged. Before Henry VIII, Catherine of Aragon was married to his brother, Arthur, who at 15 was slightly younger than her. He died a few months later, and seven years later she married the even younger Henry, but the first marriage had been planned since Arthur was three. The father of Arthur and Henry was Henry VII; his mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort, was married as an infant to John de la Pole. This marriage was dissolved, and at the age of 12 she married Henry’s father, Edmund Tudor, who was twice her age. Later that year she was a heavily pregnant, 13 year old widow. It is in this context that the marriage of Muhammad and Aisha must be viewed. As far as the historical record can be relied upon, the marriage was successful, regardless of his first wife and of the other nine he is said to have taken.

Tommy Robinson cannot be unaware of any of this. Although at times he has the demeanour of a street thug, he is a highly intelligent individual who claims not only to have read the Qur’an but to have studied Islam, yet still he pushes this absurd Gates of Vienna narrative about the threat to Western civilisation. This is too easy to punch full of holes, but we will all the same. As the aforementioned Tom Holland has pointed out in his speeches, the traditional view of the jihadi is of converting the infidels with a Qur’an in one hand and a sword in the other, adding that any fanatic who tried to do this would fall off his camel. Nevertheless, the image is one that is used by Islamists as much as by Islamophobes, and for the same reason: to portray Islam as an ineluctable force striking terror into the heart of all before it. But again as Holland points out, the evidence is that rather than falling to the Mohammedans, the Roman Empire in the East evolved in much the same way as it did in the West, where instead it embraced Christianity.

Relations between the Islamic world and the Western world were actually rather good throughout most of history, even after the betrayal of the Arabs with the 1917 Balfour Declaration. A stellar example of this was the great Irish famine of 1847-52. Following the Islamic pillar of zakat, the idealistic young Sultan Khaleefah Abdul-Majid I offered a donation of £10,000 to assist Irish farmers.

According to the Times of Febuary 27, 1845, page 5, in 1844, the average price of wheat was 7s 7d (about 38p) per bushel. As a bushel of wheat will produce around 42 loaves of bread, that sum would have paid for a shade over 1.1 million loaves, a token donation to combat a massive problem, but a very generous token neverthless. The reaction of the Great White Queen was amazing. At that time, Victoria was very likely the richest woman in the world. She had donated £2,000 of her personal fortune to ease the famine, but could not (in her mind) be seen to donate less than a foreigner and a mere Turk at that, but rather than increase her donation, she insisted he reduce his. The Sultan also sent five ships of food, which the British Government attempted to block. This is the Islamic menace?

It is well documented that the first UK mosques were established by white converts in 1889, and that the first true English translation of the Qur’an was published by another white convert, in 1930. In fact, Islam has been in these islands longer than the Mormon “religion” has been in existence, and in spite of the shabby treatment of the Arabs from the Balfour Declaration down to the nakhbah and the Intifadas, Islamist terror did not raise its ugly head in the UK until the 7/7 outrages of 2005. The 1988 Lockerbie bombing and the handful of other Middle East linked terror attacks cannot be described as Islamist in any meaningful sense of the word. So why has England in particular become a magnet for Islamist terror in recent years?

As all but the wilfully blind must acknoweldge, Islam is no more responsible for the current wave of terror than was Catholicism for the Provisional IRA, or the Gunpowder Plot for that matter. The roots of modern Islamist terror lie not with religion but with political and economic grievances, real and imagined, that are tacked onto it. The country with the world’s largest Islamic population is Indonesia; only a handful of terror attacks there have been directed against whites (Australians). So why does Robinson and why do so many people like him direct their anger at Islam?

It is partly due to the aforementioned grooming gangs, but these are not Islamic gangs. As former Home Secretary Jack Straw pointed out many years ago, the problem is there are some men “of Pakistani heritage” who regard young white girls as “easy meat”. Straw’s comments were branded racist at the time - bore, bore - but was he wrong?

Robinson and others have also campaigned against what they see as creeping shariah, but how does shariah deal with rape, real rape? In June 2012, Iran publicly hanged four men convicted of aggravated rape. In 2014, Saudi Arabia executed a man who kidnapped and sexually violated a young boy. How many “Islamic” grooming gangs would there be in Britain under a shariah government?

If Robinson’s crusade against Islam started with a genuine but misguided grievance, it has now expanded into something far more sinister. Predictably, when he started the so-called English Defence League back in 2009, he was condemned as a Nazi. Not realising how futile was attempting to dodge this ludicrous charge, he went out of his way to recruit Jewish, black, and even homosexual members. Homosexuality is a far greater threat to Western indeed all civilisations than a few jihadis. As if that still wasn’t enough, Robinson decided to go all the way in attempting to purge the media smear of anti-Semitism by accepting an invitation from a Zionist to visit Israel, even posing with the IDF, on a tank holding a machine gun. He has also made common cause with American Zionist Pamela Geller, a woman who is so far off the planet she has even been condemned by the ADL, an organisation that smears all critics of Israel and Organised Jewry as anti-Semites.
Robinson with Pamela Geller - spot the goy

So what is really going on here? The short answer is that Robinson has become a hasbara, not only that, he has fallen for the garbage about gallant little Israel being the guardian of Western civilisation, the new Gates of Vienna. He and others on the so-called far right have made common cause with the Zionists simply because they are white. This wouldn’t be half so tragic if Zionist Jews had not been in the forefront of the destruction of free speech on race issues and enthusiastic promoters of both non-white immigration into the West and forced race-mixing. Earlier this month, Jayda Fransen and Paul Golding of Britain First were sentenced to 36 weeks and 18 weeks respectively for “harassing” Moslems by the same Government that is complicit in the murderous American drone programme that has killed hundreds and maimed thousands of innocent Moslems in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen.

So the British Government, more specifically the globalists, are not friends of Moslems anymore than they are of blacks, or Jews for that matter. Rather they want everyone to conform so they can rule over us. Way back in the 1990s, David Icke suggested what they want is “a microchipped population connected to a global computer.”

Icke became a laughing stock on account of such pronouncements, when he wasn’t being denounced as an anti-Semite, but he sounds saner with each passing year. In fact, Icke was far from the first person to postulate the machinations of the global elite. Leaving aside so-called conspiracy theories about the Order of the Illuminati (which did exist), and other, far more way out stuff, Professor Quigley wrote about it en passant in his magnum opus, see in particular page 980 of the Second Edition.

Technology aside, Moslems are being brainwashed the same way as the rest of the goyim. And the non-goyim. Is it conspiracy, coincidence or simply degeneracy that every major soap opera must now have its own dysfunctional non-white family, and that Moslems in particular are shown drinking alcohol and even engaging in perverted sex as in the sickening EastEnders storyline of a few years ago? This sickness has jumped from the boob tube to reality in the persona of London’s first so-called Moslem mayor. Here is Sadiq Khan’s voting record on so-called gay rights. He has also endorsed feminist claptrap about the mythical gender pay gap. According to Robinson, Khan is not to be trusted, he is some kind of Trojan horse for the great Islamic conspiracy. Mushallah!