Saturday, 10 December 2016

Luciana Berger — Kosher Stupidity At Its Classic Best

Joshua Bonehill-Paine is a legend. To the man in the mirror, at any rate. Luciana Berger is hot, like smoking; women like her can have the pick of the alpha males, and that does not include Joshua, who must be blind if he calls her a filthy Jew bitch or a filthy anything. As Bonehill-Paine begins a two year sentence for harassing - not sexually but simply harassing - the Liverpool MP, one has to ask if she or anyone else believes this will shake his belief that Jews control Britain, or if it will simply affirm it.

Curiously, the lovely Luciana has enemies on the left too, including veteran Kosher crazy Tony Greenstein who four years ago wrote of her “...Lucian is not only a Zionist scumbag but a coward to boot. In order to protect her career and knowing which way the wind blows, she hasn’t even raised Israel on her own blog or in the House of Commons!”

Not quite such poisonous rhetoric, but coming from someone who is not regarded as a total fruitcake as well as a member of The Tribe, far more hurtful. In the first place, many Jews have supported Zionism because like the gullible goyim they have been blinded by its propaganda campaign in the Western media. With the rise of social media, the alternative media, and Islamic voices, most of them have seen through it. Probably Berger is ashamed to speak up for Israel after the two massacres of Operation Cast Lead and the 2012 attack which saw such terrible loss of life. But in comparison with the implosion of Syria, the crimes of the Zionist entity from 1948 to date don’t look so terrible at all.

Leaving aside the Middle East though, Luciana does have some right daffy ideas; she believes in the gender pay gap for one. And she seems to believe the way to deal with idiots is to throw them in gaol. After Bonehill-Paine’s conviction she relished in playing the victim to the BBC. Or perhaps that should be the survivor. Just kidding. But did it have to end like this? One thing she could have done was refrain from feeding the troll. Another and far more alluring thing would have been to invite him to meet her. In spite of her whining about sexism and other chimeras, she has done some excellent work in both her constituency and Parliament as is evinced by her short film Breadline Britain and constantly raising the issue of food banks.

Men like Bonehill-Paine may be ignorant, but they are not ignorant in a vacuum. They’ve been reading the wrong books, watching the wrong videos, and listening to the wrong people. If no one educates them, they will remain ignorant, and when this particular idiot comes out of gaol in a year or so, he will be not simply ignorant but embittered. In short, if he doesn’t hate Jews already and his writings really are only satire, he will certainly hate them then. Congratulations Luciana, Eric Sevareid would be proud of you.

Tuesday, 27 September 2016

Never Shag A Woman At Work

Sometimes I look back with regret on the way my personal life has turned out - alone at sixty. Then I think of my friend Chris Tame and his two failed marriages, or the guy downstairs and his two crazy girlfriends - one on whom I called the police on Valentine’s Day thinking he was being murdered. Then I don’t feel so bad. For the past thirty years when I have worked I have done so for the most part alone; when I was younger I did not work exclusively in all male environments, but I had little opportunity to fraternise with women by and large, that is women to whom I was attracted. I don’t regret that either.

Working with women gives a man the opportunity to mix business with pleasure. That sounds nice, but it can be disastrous. Look at Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Now that was really sordid, and frankly the cunt brought it on himself, but others have landed in trouble with a capital T, like Staff Sergeant Eddy Soto of the United States Army. Fortunately, his absurd rape conviction was overturned on appeal, but a woman doesn’t have to accuse you of rape to trash your job, your career, your life...

Last month, the Guardian ran a story headlined: Half of women in UK have been sexually harassed at work, study finds

Sure: “Polling of 1,553 women found 52% experienced unwanted behaviour at work including groping, sexual advances and inappropriate jokes” - what does that even mean, inappropriate jokes?

As we’ve seen in some high profile cases, including that of Ellen Pao, sexual harassment and discrimination can mean almost anything. Even though Pao lost her lawsuit against her former employer Kleiner Perkins and was as good as kicked out of Reddit, she is still being lauded by media braindeads as some kind of heroine instead of a toxic bitch.

Any man who has any sort of romantic entanglement with a woman at work is risking everything for what - a shag? Okay, there are exceptions, Robin Cook met his second wife at work, and married her. He had no regrets about that, although his first wife may well have, but when the shine wears off, what are we left with? Charges of sexual harassment or worse. Okay, so the girl is cultured, sweet natured and stunningly attractive, so was Karla Homolka. Don’t go there guys, don’t even think of going there, find your love interests in the club, on the dance floor, even on a dating site, but never shag a woman at work.

Friday, 2 September 2016

The Last Time I Saw Tony

The screengrab below is from an e-mail that arrived on the 22nd of last month. It is clearly incomplete, but what is not so clear is that it was long overdue because the author had been dead four years by that time.

Anthony Hancock - Tony to his friends but AH to me - died June 11, 2012. I can only guess at what happened, but presumably the e-mail account from which this message was sent has now been long closed. His phone number no longer works, and although his domain - Historical Review Press - has been taken over by Simon Sheppard - the company he founded with his late father is also long gone.

If you read about AH in the mainstream or anywhere slightly to the left of the Monday Club, you will find nothing flattering about him, and much that is deeply unflattering. For some time after our initial acquaintance, I wasn’t that impressed with him either. The sentiment was mutual, but I realised shortly, as did he, that this mutual contempt had been engineered gratuitously by someone we’d both been kind to in our own different ways, and who had repaid us by trying to set us at each other’s throats.

After this individual overstepped the mark, we both realised we’d been played, and although we were never friends with a capital F, we did reach the point where we enjoyed each other’s company. I owe AH a lot; he did some printing for me including one ill-fated project (that he actually contracted out) which left him seriously out of pocket, and one of my pamphlets he printed totally for free. I can’t remember at this distance if this was Holocaust Revisionism After Irving v Lipstadt or The Man Who Invented Racism, but he certainly printed one for free, and the other for a fairly nominal fee.

It was because of AH that I went to Tehran where I delivered a paper on the forbidden subject; I also assisted him albeit belatedly as McKenzie friend in the ludicrous Tosspot Trial which saw him stitched up by a deranged lawyer, a barrister who looked and talked like a pig, and a judge who was out of the Ark.

The photo below is rather sad looking; the last time I saw him - at a political meeting - he looked even sadder. I feel a bit guilty over that because I tapped him for twenty quid, I remember not what for. I realised later that by that point he was a broken man, his horrible common law wife having kicked him out of the house, and he was I am reliably informed sleeping on the floor of his printworks. Even so, he would not have died prematurely at 65 had be followed his doctor’s orders.

It was a sad end for a man who had been demonised by people who on the one hand painted him as a bigoted and quite mad conspiracy theorist while at the same time conspiring against him and everything he stood for, even dragging him into court over the printing of a boring satirical pamphlet while turning a blind eye to or even attempting to justify the crushing of a nation and the mass murder of its people, including its children.

In the grand scheme of things, AH was an important person, and if our race still exists two hundred years from now, history will be a lot kinder to him than his contemporaries.

Tuesday, 23 August 2016

Sing Along With The Chabloz Goy

What is a self-styled singer-songwriter? Alison Chabloz is one, according to her detractors. As she both composes and performs, and her work can be viewed on YouTube, one is entitled to ask in what sense is she self-styled? This petty dig is probably the slightest slight she has suffered since she came out, not as a lesbian, but as a Holocaust Revisionist.

Miss Chabloz has lived or at least spent some time in the Middle East, and in spite of her beliefs is clearly a left winger who identifies strongly with the struggle for Palestinian statehood. At one time this would have been a death sentence for her musical career; certainly as late as the 1980s Zionist spokesmen were able to insist there was no Jewish Lobby, no Israel/Zionist Lobby, and that any suggestion to the contrary was misguided if not the ravings of anti-Semites.

All that has changed in the past twenty years, a change that has not been down solely to the Internet. It is difficult to portray yourself as a victim when you are standing on your oppressor’s neck. While at one time the Jewish Lobby and the Israel Lobby were synonymous, this is no longer the case, especially in the United States. But the hidden hand is still very much alive, and Miss Chabloz has been feeling its effects because not only does she support the Palestinian cause and openly espouse Holocaust Revisionism, she has set her views to music.

Understandably this has caused considerable mock outrage including at the Edinburgh Fringe where last year the event’s organisers came under considerable pressure to ban her, a pressure which they admirably resisted.

Since then she has recorded a number of songs that are sure to cause the ADL to foam at the mouth, including Kosher Brother and the hilarious (((Survivors))). When you have heard the latter, Hava Nagila will never sound the same again.

Thursday, 4 August 2016

Don’t Destroy Your Face, Lady — Or Anything Else

On March 3, 2016, I was sitting on a seat in a roadside garden under the bright winter sunshine, with time on my hands, when a young woman - younger than me - sat on the bench opposite. She was not unattractive, and as she spoke to me I fancied my chances of at least taking her to the nearby cafĂ©, but I noticed that she had faint tattoos on both her hands, and thought better of it. The wording was the same on both: ACAB. If you are not familiar with that acronym, don’t ask.

I have no doubt that in spite of this she was not a horrible person, although she may have been when she was young and rebellious, which was presumably when she had those marks engraved on her hands. Most of us mellow with time, but a tattoo makes a statement about you, one that may not be true 30, 20, 10, even 5 years on from when you commissioned it. Heck, it may not even be true at the time, but a tattoo does make a statement for all the world to see and interpret, or misinterpret.

If there is one thing worse than a woman with tattooed hands it is, well, take a look at this woman, Elizabeth (Forever) Young.

Difficult though it is to believe, this was taken on her fiftieth birthday. Now compare with this one.
At the time this photograph was taken, Joanna Dennehy was around 31 years old. Even without the tattoo, she looks older than Elizabeth. She has a tongue stud too - yuk. Like Elizabeth she is also an unusual woman, though for entirely different reasons: she is that rarest of rare birds, a female serial killer.

Okay, so perhaps the comparison is a tad unfair, but take the point, if you had to choose, which of these women would you say had blood on her hands?

Tattoos are not always inappropriate, no one bats an eyelid at a sailor with tattooed arms, but tattoos on the neck, legs, really on any other part of the body, are to be avoided for men, and don’t let’s mention women. Then there are body piercings.

A woman who has pierced ears or even double pierced ears is one thing (as is a single pierced ear for a dude), but look at the way some women today are going way over the top. Then there are other piercings, it’s difficult to believe that any woman would pierce her navel or nipples, but there is far worse than that, including for men.

Finally, nasal piercings are a no-no. Okay, an Indian woman who has a single traditional stud, maybe, and at times this can be forgiven in a Western woman, but a woman who has studs in both sides of her nose or a pierced septum...why not go the whole hog and stick a bone through it like a stereotypical cannibal?

I have many, many regrets in my now sixty years, both of things done and of things not done, but one thing I have never regretted is not getting that tattoo. And if you get to my age unblemished by this indelible pigment, you will feel the same way.

Wednesday, 18 May 2016

The Ken & Barbie Killers

This is a 45 minute documentary about Canada’s most hated woman and the serial rapist who married her. If there was ever a case of not judging a book by its cover it must surely be that of Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo. All the major elements of the killer couple are covered, from their first meeting at which sparks flew to Bernardo’s physical abuse of her, their joint rape of Karla’s younger sister Tammy, and the deal with the Devil which understandably outraged the Canadian public. The one thing that is not mentioned is that this was sanctioned by Marion Boyd, the feminist who became Attorney General of Ontario.

Although this was early days in the history of DNA profiling, it is difficult to credit the police felt obliged to offer Karla any kind of deal in order to secure a conviction; the case against Bernardo was surely compelling enough without her testimony. In the UK, the two would most certainly have been charged together, and if Karla ever saw the light of day again it would have been as an old woman rather than as a relatively young one who some miserable wretch not only impregnated but married and whisked off to an island paradise.

Did Karla rather than Bernardo kill the two girls? Bernardo’s lawyer seems to think so; the man himself said so, and as he has since confessed to numerous other crimes that will ensure he is never released, there is no good reason not to believe him.

Thursday, 14 April 2016

Milo v Muhammad - Seriously?

One of the most controversial pundits to be given space in the controlled media in recent years is self-styled dangerous faggot Milo Yiannopoulos. While he is spot on with his critiques of the insane totalitarian ideology of third wave feminism, his attacks on Islam and his endorsement of the phony gates of Vienna narrative are sorely misguided, and it is difficult to argue that this ignorance of the world’s third great religion is anything but wilful.

One of the things Yiannopoulos says he worries about is the attitude of Moslems to homosexuals, and he stresses here that he means ordinary Moslems rather than the Saudi brand or the fanatical Islamists of ISIS. What are the facts? Before answering that question, perhaps we should ask a different question, namely, if you were/are the father of a young boy, which of these two scenarios would you rather see for your son: bowing down in the mosque, or bending over in the bathhouse? Women tend to be more sympathetic to the faults of their offspring than men, but no mother worthy of the name would rather her son grow up homosexual anymore than she would rather see him grow up confined to a wheelchair or suffering from cystic fibrosis.

Male homosexuality gave the world AIDS; Islam gave it algebra. This really is a no-brainer. Male homosexuality is a far greater threat to the West than this supposedly anti-Western jihad. Now back to the question, what do ordinary Moslems think about homosexuals? Here is white convert Hamza Yusuf explaining how Islam really deals with homosexuality; Milo can drop his trousers for his black friends all he likes in the privacy of his own bedroom, where there will not be the four witnesses required to grab him by the scruff of his neck and drag him into a Sharia court, but the moment he attempts to bring his perversion into the public space, that is when the mullahs will come for him, that’s if the mothers of his sexual conquests don’t get him first; most blacks are just as revolted by homosexuality as Moslems.

When he discusses the chimera of sexism in the Islamic world, Yiannopoulos wants to have his cake and eat it. On the one hand he says women are oppressed by Islam, yet on the other hand when he tackles the sisterhood about their nonsense on gender roles and the education of girls, he points out rightly that while in the West, very few women take STEM subjects, in Bangladesh and indeed in other Islamic nations, there is no shortage of women engineering graduates and the like. Clearly he is confusing the innate modesty of Moslem women, and the high esteem in which motherhood is held, with Islamic dress codes and the segregation of the sexes. If the West had not removed barriers to sexual segregation, we would not now be plagued with spurious allegations of sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and in particular false allegations of historical sexual offences, including rape.

Finally, while like the rest of us he deplores the grotesque scenes of women being violated en masse on the streets of Cologne as happened during the 2016 New Year celebrations, is it right to equate this with Islam? Let’s put this another way, why do brazen sexual assaults of this nature not happen under Sharia? Because in Malaysia, rapists are caned, and in Iran, the sexual violation of a woman can be capital.

So what is the problem if not Islam? Does anyone believe the recent and ongoing mass invasion of Europe would provoke such controversy if the invaders were white? Of course not. This isn’t about religion, it’s about race, in particular white guilt and the hysteria generated by decades of left wing brainwashing.

All mainstream politicians and pundits are terrified of speaking about it for fear of being branded racist, so instead they use facile arguments about foreign workers claiming benefits in the UK and other European countries, or similar issues. Now there is certainly a security issue here, but the simple fact is that no white European in his right mind wants millions more non-white immigrants the same way the Thais don’t want immigrants from different racial backgrounds and neither do the Japanese; the big difference is they don’t suffer from the same kind of guilt and Marxist agitators as Europe. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t help these people, but the idea that millions of them should be granted asylum in Europe is a step too far. Incidentally, Moslems are also helping these refugees, as Yiannopolous surely he knows.

In conclusion, which would you rather live in, a society in which homosexuals are kept in the closet, or one in which they are free to spew their poison over not only the adult population but especially the young? A society in which the social scene revolves around alcohol with all the associated evils: drunkenness, violence, sexual violence, ladette culture, cirrhosis of the liver...or one in which alcohol has no place or is at least very restricted? These are just two of the alternatives offered by Islam, and for many people, including non-believers, they are better alternatives to the madness we have at present.

Friday, 8 April 2016

Don’t You Grow Up To Be A Pig

When you were a kid, what did you want to be when you grew up? Perhaps an actor or an astronaut, perhaps a rock star or a famous author. Of the attainable goals, you might have wanted to become a police officer, probably a detective. There are reasons for this, the profession has been glamourised in literature and on film, and there is a certain attraction about carrying a gun. For girls, well, you get to boss guys around for a change, and that can’t be bad, can it? Actually, it can.

We hear a lot in the modern world about privilege: the vacuous white privilege; the ludicrous male privilege...even so, most people realise that when it exists, privilege derives mostly from money. Celebrity brings privilege too, but this can be a double-edged benefit. Likewise in countries like Britain where there is an hereditary ruling class, there can be a certain privilege in social status or birth. The police have a unique privilege, the privilege money can’t buy.

Unless you have experienced this, you can’t really understand it. There is a big difference between the American police and the British police. The Americans are psychopaths; the British are cunts. There are reasons for this. In the States, the Constitution places severe restrictions on such things as searching property and people. The American police can’t even take a suspect’s DNA without good reason. On the other hand, the American police are armed routinely, and are prone to shoot first and ask questions later. They are also prone to use violence, especially against people lower down the food chain including blacks, the homeless, and even on occasion women.

Although police violence is not unknown in the UK, it is usually confined to public order situations, and is generally much less intense than in the US. This hasn’t always been the case, as for example the murder of Liddle Towers back in the 1970s illustrates, but today you are very unlikely to get beaten to a pulp by the British police. On the other hand, there are few people who are so dishonest. Although they will plant evidence only very occasionally, they will suppress exculpatory evidence, verbal up witnesses to give correct evidence, and place absurd interpretations on even the most prosaic of actions.

This is what is known as noble cause corruption, a behaviour that is of course anything but noble. It is known more accurately as bent for the job; the other type - bent for self - is entirely different, and in general is not tolerated, but acting as judge and jury to fit up some individual who has been judged undesirable is a different matter.

All this is done with the collusion of prosecuting lawyers, magistrates, and even judges. In this age of near total surveillance we have many examples of this, and there are few better or more outrageous examples than the scandalous case of the treatment of Monica Contreras, in an American courtroom. Check out this short video, and in particular the behaviour of the judge who literally looked the other way. Patricia Doninger was fired over her complicity in this incident, and the gutsy victim was eventually awarded a $200,000 settlement. Now ask yourself what would have happened if this had not been recorded; most likely Monica Contreras would have been written off as a head case or would have found herself in a criminal court, perhaps even losing the custody of her daughter. This is the privilege money can’t buy.

Here is another, arguably more shocking example, this time Ronald Jones, a 62 year old man, is set upon by a group of uniformed thugs for no good reason, beaten up, charged with imaginary crimes, and thrown into gaol for 15 months.

An excellent or rather an appalling example of this sort of behaviour from the UK was the death of Ian Tomlinson, who was assaulted by a police officer in broad daylight, from behind, and in full view of numerous witnesses, including unfortunately for PC Harwood, someone who filmed the incident. Ian Tomlinson was an alcoholic, a man down on his luck who had been reduced to living in a hostel, one of the great unwashed, a person of no consequence, indeed the sort of person society is better off without. He was also a very sick man, and an assault which would have left most men of his age bruised and angry led to his death within minutes. Harwood could not of course have foreseen that, but because of the victim’s low social status, this wanton assault was bracketed as bent for the job, and a cover up was instituted. This involved bringing in a tame (or bent) pathologist to fudge the post mortem examination, but thanks to that mobile phone video, the genie was out of the bottle. Again, as with the Monica Contreras and Ronald Jones incidents, consider what would have happened but for the film.

Now ask yourself this question, do you want to engage in that sort of behaviour against strangers - people who have done you no harm - or even have the power to do so? If you answer yes, you should seek psychiatric help. If you don’t, welcome to the human race. Nobody has to grow up to be a pig.