Monday, June 29, 2009


A fine article detailing Labour’s issuing work permits galore to third-worldies and then citizenship rights to their illiterate wives was published (at long last – thanks, BNP!) by former Torygraph editor Max Hastings: Daily Mail, 15 vi.


As brave Iranian modernizers took to the streets of Teheran in their scores of thousands, suffering tear gas, beatings and killings by mad ayatollahs and their motor-cycling ‘basiji’ thugs, Britain and America – consumed by White guilt, idealistic multiculturalism and incompetence -- failed to release their 2½ million prisoners to help the rebels. Instead of using its shock troops, the West preferred to keep its testosterone-fuelled criminals – many of them Black – in broadband- porn- and cocaine-served jails at individual costs of £100Kp.a. when they could instead have been parachuted into Iran. As the rotted corpses of British hostages were delivered to the UK Foreign Office from Iraq, the pathetic ‘Foreign Secretary’ schoolboy Milliband announced not a policy of destroying one mosque per captive week (and five mosques per death) but only his social-worky sympathy for the pain of the grieving relatives.


High-g and jocular anti-Semites Stephen Whittle and Simon Sheppard (see earlier) re-emerged in orange jumpsuits in Leeds after a year of confinement in the USA as they unavailingly sought asylum from British Labour-arranged persecution of ‘hate speech’ (Daily Mail, 17 vi; Yorkshire Evening Post, 18 vi). Apparatchik ‘Judge’ Rodney Grant told them ‘prison is at the forefront of my mind’; but he would wait for a month for condemnatory ‘pre-sentence reports’ from British ‘liberal’-left social workers.

Adrian Davies, for Whittle, said he had "substantial mitigation" because he came back to the UK voluntarily after the US authorities gave him the option of travelling to New Zealand instead. Pony-tailed Whittle, who nonchalantly read a book in the dock, had contributed to Sheppard's website, which featured ‘offensive’ Holohoax’ material.


While Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi busied himself defending his babe-bagging, he was joined in his populist anti-illegal immigrant policies by a newly elected mayoress of a northern town on the Swiss border. Sandy Cane, 47, had stood for the right-wing Northern League (which doubled its vote in the elections to the European Parliament) though herself the daughter of a Black American soldier from Massachusetts (Daily Telegraph, 11 vi).


Salford University lecturer Gary Duke, 24, found himself suspended and facing disciplinary charges after he put out leaflets excoriating the management style of one particular bossperson, apparently a Black female and, like himself, a student. Duke had been leading protests by the University and Collegue Union against 150 proposed job losses at the university and found himself unprotected by being a sociologist writing a thesis on the Labour Movement (Manchester Evening News, 19 vi).


Unusually, the left-leaning Independent newspaper admitted the special interest of Blacks in gang-raping young girls, with non-Whites accounting for 85% of such beastliness even in still-White-majority London (Sorious Samoura [apparently a Black, from Sierra Leone], 21 vi):

One of the few police forces to have begun recording the figures of reported gang rape is the Metropolitan Police. In 2008 alone, they received reports of 85 gang rapes. Using the Met's definition of gang rape – those involving three or more perpetrators – we began to look at the number of convictions. We tracked down 29 cases, from January 2006 to March 2009, in which a total of 92 young people were convicted of involvement in gang rape.

One fact stood out. Of those convicted, 66 were black or mixed race, 13 were white and the remainder were from other countries including Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

Clearly this is not a crime exclusive to black communities, but I found it impossible to ignore the fact that such a high proportion were committed by black and mixed-race young men.


As three arrests were made in Belfast in connection with attacks on Roma gypsies (mendaciously called ‘Romanians’ by the BBC), and as a few more attacks occurred in an outlying village, the Guardian – while not mentioning Roma illiteracy rates of 60% -- said that Roma unemployment was 70% and that Roma had the Grauniadista-shocking habit of forcing their girls into marriage as young as 12 (Robert Fox, 22 vi).

Spurning the hundreds of multicultiloons who had lined up to support them, most of the gypsies themselves decided to go home – doubtless helped to this decision by the church which had given them sanctuary having its windows smashed, and certainly assisted by free flights provided by UK taxpayers (Times, 23 vi – where correspondents were largely realistic about the special problems of thievery and welfare-dependency posed by Roma; BBC 24 vi – which reckoned the widely feared and despised Roma, ‘Romania’s curse,’ might be 5% of Romania’s population).


Faced with an irate Britain, Labour MPs decided to put up the two fingers to the electorate and replace shamed semi-literate Labourite Speaker Martin with fast-moving opportunist Finchley-Jewish homosexualist, ex-Monday Clubber John Bercow who had a six-inches-taller Labour-backing wife, the de rigeur autistic son and a penchant for amateur dramatics.

Pathetic ‘Conservatives’ sat on their hands rather than welcome the new Speaker – historically supposed to be supported by the whole House of Commons, but in this case elected by a mere 320 votes, as against his main opponent’s 270, Conservatives having failed to arrange a decent voting system for this flagship office.

Diminutive homosexual ‘Conservative’ MP, the ex-Oxford[St John’s College] and -Harvard Alan Duncan, the Conservatives’ version of prancing ‘Lord’ Mandy Mandelson, was subsequently wheeled out to appeal for more ‘respect’ for the new Speaker from Conservative MPs – only three of whom were thought [esp. by the Conservatives’ only looker, just remotely, Nadine Dorries], to have voted for the unlikely-named Jercov.

A London supporter wrote:

"By electing Bercow, the Commons has chosen a Speaker who is badly tainted by the expenses scandal, a strong supporter of secrecy over MPs expenses, a fawning supporter of the outgoing Speaker Gorbals Mick and someone who wishes to keep the exterminated Speaker's pension. . In addition he commands no support from his own Party, a quite extraordinary thing, and is widely disliked across the House on a personal level if one can believe the media accounts. Just the Speaker to reform the Commons!"

There is also his extraordinary ideological shift from Monday Club stalwart to cringing Blairite wet, a shift which began when he was almost 40. It is one thing to believe one thing in your teens and then reverse your position, quite another to do so in middle age. A ‘man without principle’ is a reasonable judgement.

Altogether it was clear that Jercov should resign and call a fresh election in which the winner would need to draw at least 25% of his votes from parties other than his own. Ideally, the Conservatives would cease to talk in the Commons until Jercov was shamed into doing this.

Top Telegraph columnist Simon Heffer joined Nadine Dorries in deploring Labour’s frivolity and contempt for the British people – comparing Bercow’s election to that of Caligula’s horse (23 vi). For the usually establishment-backing Times, Rachel Sylvester said Bercow’s election “showed the Commons at its worst” and her 51 first correspondents overwhelmingly agreed (some calling for mass demonstrations, revolution and for the Speaker to be directly elected by the people (23 vi). Unusually, Tory frontbencher, Shadow Defence Spokesman Liam Fox said Burqo was “not the right man for the job.” And even the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland declared the result a “discouraging” sign of the Commons ignoring national anger and returning to ‘political games as usual’ (23 vi).

See various comments HERE, here and here and here.


Fresh from its electoral success (winning two MEP seats), the British National Party, which had for several years decided to deny ‘racism,’ found itself queried by the ‘liberal’-left enforcer, the top-funded Equality and Human Rights Commission, about its policy of not allowing non-White members (Daily Mail, 23 vi). An answer was due by July 21 – and would presumably be {as I had long advised} that the party would in future be open to all Britons of passable integration {having English, degrees, cricket, rugby, jobs, bank accounts or marriages….}; but, initially, Leader Nick Griffin was inclined to hope the BNP, as a democratic, electorate-chosen party might be to some extent immune from Labour’s tyrannous race relations ‘laws’ – for the Race Relations Act apparently had clauses [25, 26] exempting from prosecution ‘exclusively ethnic organizations’ with memberships of 50 or more (23 vi). The Party also faced legal challenges that it might be discriminating in employment and in the service offered to constituents (Sun, 24 vi).

Meantime, things got as good as they ever did for the BNP in Britain’s ‘right-wing’ press, with ‘high life’ columnist ‘Taki’ giving Speccie readers a little race realism (23 vi):

Politicians keep lying about crime in Britain, as they lie about everything else. The fatal stabbing of an innocent 16-year-old by three subhuman thugs who postured threateningly in court is a perfect example. The three killers are all sons of African immigrants, their sink-estate patois and arrogance indicative of this government’s total failure in rooting out the causes of crime. What is ironic is that in a best-selling tabloid decrying the murder of the innocent 16-year-old, the following story was about the evils of the BNP.

Perhaps because I’ve been away [from London] for a year, I have missed something. Has the BNP been killing innocent 16-year-olds? Is that why moronic columnists are pushing the alarm bells against the party? I have not as yet met one person who is poor and struggling who has not expressed contempt for open borders and unlimited immigration. Things the BNP stands for, along with some other not so nice things. I’ve said it before and will say it until this column is terminated. Politicians will treat the electorate with contempt until we throw them out of office the moment they go back on their word. Cameron is wet and an absolute w***** who speaks with a forked tongue.


Tiny Jewish French President Nicholas Sarkozy took a step towards reining in France’s five million Mueslis as he put his weight behind proposals for a six-month parliamentary commission to consider banning what he called the “debasing” burka (burqa) by which Muesli husbands asserted their dominance over their wives and shielded them from the sexual attentions of other males (Daily Mirror, 23 vi).

In Britain, Liberal Democrat MP Chris Davies urged the burka be discouraged (Blackburn Citizen, 24 vi). The Speccie’s Rod Liddle found this authoritarian (25 vi) – rather forgetting the authoritarian suppression of free speech about Mueslis that successive Labour governments had already arranged (with precious little opposition from ‘Conservatives’) and to which banning the burka was an obvious and understandable if low-IQ response.


Paedophilic downloaders may largely be the victims of credit card fraud: their card numbers are stolen as they visit ordinary porn sites, then subsequently they dare not complain when their numbers are used to download kiddieporn. Such was the brave claim of Sunday Torygraph columnist Alasdair Palmer (21 vi) – brave since police routinely accuse those who interfere with their paedohysterical sleuthing as being paedophiles themselves.

A London correspondent writes: It is very difficult indeed to prove identity theft or that material has been placed on your computer without your knowledge, either directly or remotely.


It took five years for it to emerge that a 32-year-old teacherette (race and name unknown ‘for legal reasons’) had been raped at Westminster City School, within hours of taking up her position, by a half-Black, 15-year-old, Dwayne Best, who had previously sexually assaulted a school cleaner and who was subsequently jailed for life (Sun, 24 vi). The woman, who never returned to teaching, eventually achieved out-of-court compensation from the school, which had failed to warn her not to be alone with the hefty dreadlock-haired half-Black.


Top American fashion house Abercrombie & Fitch, of Savile Row, which had let itself be bullied into taking on Blacks in adverts and front-of-house jobs, found itself hauled before an Employment Tribunal where (pretty) law student Riam Dean sought £20K because it had asked her to work in its stock room (instead of front-of-house) until its supply of winter uniforms arrived which would enable covering of her prosthetic left forearm – needed because of a birth defect, so the ‘distressed’ Miss Dean threw in a charge of “practising eugenics” for good measure (Daily Express, 24 vi).


Hope flickered into life for British politics as punch-drunk PM Papa Broon, in a last stand as King Cong, was outclassed in the Commons by Daft Dave Shameron, raising hopes of an early General Election and the laying to rest of the Labour Party. The Indie’s Simon Carr recorded the mesmerizing scene (25 vi):

Cameron slaughtered the old bruiser. Speaker Bercow had called (to some laughter) for a quiet, rational debate. That mended some fences with the Tories because quiet debate ruins the Prime Minister.

Quietly, Cameron kept coming back to the question of a central deception: how come Gordon's capital spending keeps going up, but the Government's Budget has capital spending going sharply down?

The Prime Minister roared. He babbled figures. He denounced Tory cuts to capital spending. He denied Labour cuts, then confirmed them, then denied his confirmation then post-denied his pre-confirmation. At least we understood what was happening to capital spending. It's going up. And down.

Labour rank and file looked on astounded. Their man had collapsed in front of their eyes. It was one long "Obama Beach" (as he'd called Omaha Beach, in front of the US President during the recent D-Day celebrations). He tried to say Ombudsman, he said Osborneman. He tried to say "the Polish Law and Order party" but he said "department". He tried to say Labour didn't believe in cuts, but he said Tories didn't believe in cuts. His figures came out backwards – in one data stream, spending rose between "1998 and 1992".


As top pop star Saint Michael Jackson went decrepitudinously to an early grave at 50, after years of facial surgery, pain killer abuse (drugs administered by a Black, ‘Dr Conrad Murray’) and non-admitted paedophilia (usually with White kids, freely admitted by Jackson to share his bed for ‘beautiful’ times – World Net Daily, 4 ii 2003), the world’s media put all other news on hold for a day because he had been a Black man – largely forgetting that his increasingly grisly surgery had been intended to make him look like a White woman and that he had pretended to have fathered three children, all of whom were actually White and had to be kept perpetually under blankets so their skin colour would not upset Michael’s fans. Rather than criticize his criminal offences and perversities, President Saint Obama described Michael’s (un-named) problematic pursuits -- which would have seen any comparable White jailed for life -- as just “tragic.” A charmed – if bankrupted (one boy alone was paid £12M to settle an accusation of Michael’s kiddiefumbling) – life and media-assisted death!


It turned out that former Temple University psychologist Bruce Rind had been trying for four years, along with several academic colleagues (mainly classicists), to publish an article sympathetic to paedophilic relationships in Ancient Greece – only to find themselves frustrated at every turn by ‘publishers,’ most lately Taylor & Francis (Inside HigherEd, 12 vi;Times Higher, 24 vi).


Britain’s Labour Government announced it would call off its demands for state primary schools to reach universal standards in literacy and arithmetic – these ludicrous undifferentiating targets had been among the first announcements by Rev. Bliar when he became Prime Minister in 1997 with his slogan of “Education! Education! Education!” so this was a unique reverse for neosocialist lunacy. {Educational targets are inevitably meaningless unless IQ is used as a baseline.}


Comments? Email Chris Brand.
Some history.


Sunday, June 21, 2009


Good-humoured, putatively race-realistic and high-g anti-Semites Simon Sheppard and Stephen Whittle, having sought asylum in the USA from their persecution in Britain for Labour-invented ‘hate speech crimes’ (see earlier), found themselves deported from California on the basis of legal technicalities and facing ludicrous seven-year prison sentences in England (The Press [Yorkshire], 14 vi).

But they had heroically demonstrated to anyone who did not know it already that both countries had allowed ‘liberal’-lefties to destroy the historic freedom of speech that had once tolerated the left-revered works of Paine, Marx and Engels; and at least they slipped for a moment through MSM silent treatment and got into the Los Angeles Times (4 vi) and Torygraph (4 vi) so Americans could read of how their country (which for years protected IRA murderers from deportation to Britain and accepted millions of Muslim and Mexican immigrants) had (under its new Black president who had accomplished nothing but such neosocialism in his first 120 days in office) terminally shamed itself.

{Yes, the doom for both countries which I predicted in 1996 when neither stood by The g Factor had come to pass – symbolized by a Black Muslim president in the USA and the rise of First Lady Mandy in the UK (triggering notable electoral victories for the BNP).}


Although the one-million-vote-winning British National Party officially declared itself ‘non-racist,’ as did countless sympathetic callers to the BBC’s ‘Any Answers?’ programme (hosted, i.e. ‘liberal’-left-censored, by national treasure J. Dimblebore), the original mainly-healthy race realistic views of the party’s new MEP, Andrew Brons, were detailed in the Observer (14 vi). Unlike former Marxists Alistair Darling (UK Chancellor) and Peter Mandelson (First Lady ooops Lord of Everything-in-Sight, including Britain’s wretched ‘universities’) Harrogate politics lecturer Brons did not entirely disclaim or denounce his earlier views as a ‘youthful excess.’


A fine visual aid of a hooded Muesli denouncing Western freedom, accompanied by claims from the independent Royal Unitied Services Institute that Britain – after a generation of loony Labour-led Pakistani immigration – had a problem with ‘home-grown terror’ was provided by the BNP (14 vi).


The limits of multiculturalism went on display in south Belfast as 20 “Romanian” (i.e. Roma [= gypsy]) families were driven from their homes close to the university district by brick- and bottle-throwing “racist” youths who gave Nazi salutes to demonstrators who had tried to show solidarity with the immigrants – who themselves, some 115 in number, were finally given shelter in a Protestant church hall (Daily Mail, 17 vi) and a Belfast leisure centre.

Four days of serious troubles were the culmination of three months of simmering tensions after a Poland vs Northern Ireland football match (which NI won 3-2). Just what the ‘sanctuary-seeking’ “Romanians” (most of them without a word of English) had done to antagonize their new neighbours and just what slogans (some apparently from Combat 18) the ‘racist’ youths had chanted seemed quite unlikely to be revealed by MSM, in line with its policy that no truth-telling should ever be allowed to disturb the whacky policy of global equality, brotherhood-of-man-ooops-wymmin and mass-third-world-immigration to the West on which (along with mainstream parties [MSPs] and mainstream businessmen [MSBs] it had long ago decided.

Hilariously, Sandwell Council, in the West Midlands, chose this moment to announce it would compel its schools to teach all children that gypsies and travellers (aka Irish tinkers) (the bane of many country-dwellers’ lives) were in fact a Jolly Good Thing…. (Daily Telegraph, 17 vi).

Telegraph blogger James Delingpole and commentators became the next (after this diary) to discuss MSM suppressing the fact that the immigrants were gypsies and the troubles (rape, pillage, rubbish, noise) that gypsies so often cause (17 vi).

‘Socialist Workers’ committed themselves to the ‘long-suffering’ ‘Romani’ (17 vi) (and cajoled the trade unions to do likewise) – declining even to mention the problems the gypsies were usually deemed to cause.

Next, the troubles spread to east Belfast, adding 15 to the number of Roma on the run from vigilantes. A BNP spokesman told the Belfast-based Irish News: “The people of Belfast were always going to get the blame but the source of the problem is these people. They cause trouble wherever they go.”

A London correspondent of this diary wrote: “On the Radio 5 morning phone-in, they were huffing and puffing in best liberal-bigot fashion about how outrageous was the treatment of the Romanians. They came to the last caller who was Romanian and proudly put her on air in the expectation that she would say how wonderful Romanians are and how they were all wonderful assets to Britain. To the BBC's horror the woman proceeded to say [the immigrants in Belfast] were not Romanians but gypsies. She then happily embellished this with graphic descriptions of how gypsies behaved wherever they were: robbing, beating, burgling and raping. She ended splendidly by saying that the behaviour of the people in Ulster was quite understandable. Effing hilarious.”

Asked about the Belfast attacks on ‘Romanians,’ BBC ‘Question Time’ panelists did not utter the words ‘Roma’ or ‘gypsy,’ let alone ask why Belfast natives had got so fed up with these immigrants. Ditto the piety-intent BNP (20 vi) – though a correspondent claimed to have seen a press report that there had been a huge increase in crime in Belfast. Claims of huge increases in ‘petty crime’ (old ladies being mobbed at cashpoints and having their bags slashed from them, thefts of clothes from washing lines, aggressive begging) since 1,000 illiterate and workshy Roma appeared in Belfast in 2007 were reported by the Daily Mail (20 vi).


There was more hilarity as Britain’s ‘terror watchdog,’ Lord Carlisle said it had come to his attention that cowardly multiculti cops were stopping-and-searching White youths quite randomly and with no terror-related reason whatsoever just so as to ‘maintain a racial balance’ in records of how their attention was distributed (Times, 17 vi).


Reflecting on the BNP’s oft-vaunted non-racism, failure to be offered liberal/libertarian pacts or alliances which could have yielded my preferred National Liberal Party, and less-mentioned need to drum up funds to pay for repatriation of impoverished foreigners, it occurred to me that a simple commitment to ‘English-speaking married couples with children’ (EMCs) could do the trick. Income tax could then be raised to 40P in the pound for all but EMCs. If, after slashing welfare and molly-coddling for all but EMCs, closing all social science faculties in the country’s universities, meeting repatriation targets and impressing the IMF and Standard & Poor by beginning to pay off Labour’s debts, there was spare cash in the kitty, it could go to setting up a Humanitarian TaskForce for Africa which would conscript Britain’s long-term criminals and welfare-dependents and one-by-one transform willing African countries into passably peaceful and prosperous democratically-elitist countries (who would help pay for the exercise with their mineral wealth).

Would this proposal scare the City away? Surely not, for most City financiers are EMCs or could easily become so – especially by marrying the many adolescent girls (and boys) who would no longer be subsidized by the state to attend universities. One could just hear the crowds chant ‘BNP – EMC!’ as the party’s electoral base rapidly expanded. Ah well, dream on!...


After fifty years of Western behaviourist egalitarian utopians fooling around with monkeys (e.g. trying to give them language), an Indian psychologiste at Harvard, Konika Banerjee, at last identified a general intelligence factor distinguishing among 22 charmingly-coated cotton-top tamarins, based on 11 cognitive tests (such as whether the animals could reach around a transparent plastic screen to pick up a raisin) (ScienceBlog, 16 vi; New Scientist, 17 vi; Softpedia, 17 vi; The Hindu, 17 vi)). Banerjee's team (including g-backing Christopher Chabris, a rarity while he was at Harvard) ranked the 22 monkeys across all 11 tasks of working memory, executive control, inhibitory abilities, information-processing speed, attention (tracking), reversal learning, habituation to auditory stimuli, novelty seeking etc. and found that the same animals tended to perform similarly well across all the tests.

When her team calculated an ‘IQ’ score for each monkey, animals' ‘g’ scores could be used to accurately predict 65% of the time which of two animals would outperform the other on any given task in the cognitive task battery. However, the monkey ‘g’ factor accounted for only 20% of the variance on the 11 tests used – whereas human g typically accounts for some 60% of reliable variance on mental tests. (The reliability of Banerjee et al.’s tests was often low, giving hope of stronger ‘g’ factors in the future if testing procedures could be lengthened or otherwise improved.)

The authors speculated that human g might be evolutionarily based on extending upwards the ‘g’ differences occurring in other primate species. "This is a difficult study to undertake, and this team should be commended for doing it so well," said Robert Deaner of Grand Valley State University in Michigan.

The breakthrough was likely to send any remaining behaviourists (and their hangers-on in cognitive [i.e. non-cognitive] psychology) to an early grave lamenting they had not long ago conducted such testing – as I had advised E.LU.’s late behaviourist/primatologist/psychologist Brendan McGonigle as far back as 1975. Follow-up work was likely to involve giving the same tests to children and seeing whether there was still a ‘g’ factor and whether it correlated with conventional human g, IQ and Mental Age measures. Subsequently, inter-specific comparisons could be made – at last getting round the problems outlined in the Introduction to The g Factor. One reasonable guess would be that g differences would be found within animals of species having social hierarchies [other than those based conspicuously on physical size and strength].

The research, which was published in the internet open-access journal PLoS One, was led by Konika Banerjee, a research assistant in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University. Banerjee's co-authors were Marc Hauser, professor of psychology, and James J. Lee all of Harvard, along with Christopher Chabris of Union College, Fritz Tsao of Hillsdale College, and Valen Johnson of the University of Texas Medical School at Houston. The research was funded by the Harvard College Research Program and the Goelet Fund to Banerjee, and from grants to Hauser from the McDonnell Foundation and NSF.

N.B.: Sir Cyril Burt was premature, if not over-optimistic, in calling the g factor “innate general cognitive ability,” for ‘innate’ must strictly refer to characters that all members of a species have in common (bar perhaps uncommon accidents). I outlined the problem to a supporter as follows.

The g factor as known and measured principally distinguishes individuals (and occasionally -- though 'controversially' -- races). It does not confer much breeding advantage -- quite the opposite in the modern West. Differences in it are evidently biologically tolerated. So why do we differ so much in g? Arguably because g differences allow clear and stable hierarchies to be formed -- hierarchies being the basis of most co-operative, high-speed male activity (hunting, armies, hospitals, newspapers, government). More crudely, g differences allow the systems of slavery (or semi-slavery) to which humans naturally aspire -- and in which obedient and successful slaves can do well biologically -- unless their Muslim masters have castrated them.

Recall the general giftedness and artistic and scholarly ways of Henry VIII, Elizabeth I, James I, Charles I. It was only once we got the dull (but safely non-Papist) Hanoverians that 'prime ministers' were able to emerge -- the Pitts, Disraeli, Gladstone and Churchill being of towering g. (Today, we have to rely on the media to throw up our nationally venerated figures like Starkey, Ferguson, Lord Winston, Lumley, Dench....)

Whether g will ever be measured in such a way as to allow inter-species comparisons is considered in Chapter1 of ‘The g Factor’ (1996/2000). Konika Banerjee's work has promise -- though currently her ‘g’ factor within monkeys is pretty weak, so there will be some way to go before measures emerge which allow g measurement among monkeys, among people and then, if successful, between monkeys and people or even between cats and dogs.


One in four men in South Africa were found to admit to rape and many confessed to attacking more than one victim, according to a study that exposed the country's endemic culture of sexual violence (Guardian, 18 vi). Three out of four rapists first attacked while still in their teens, the study found. One in 20 men said they had raped a woman or girl in the last year. One man in ten reported he had been homosexually raped at some time; and one South African child was raped every three minutes, with 88% of such rapes going unreported. {If the figures had been broken down by race, the rape rates for Black men would have certainly been even higher.}

Sunday, June 14, 2009


Though Labour MPs banged their desks at Westminster, confirming Crash Gordon in office pro tem., star left columnist (the mega-rich, Florence-dwelling) Polly Toynbee announced the long continuation of Labour’s civil war, calling the Brown-backers ‘delusional’ and predicting the ‘destruction’ of the wretched party (Guardian, 9 vi). Fellow Grauniadista John Kampfner joined Polly in predicting ‘the dismantlement of the British left’ (9 vi). (At the same time, the far-left announced it would create yet more confusion by challenging the legality of the BNP, which had just pulled in a million votes and brought in nearly £1M p.a. from Brussels (Guardian, 9 vi).)


Radio host Michael Savage, real name Michael Weiner, announced he would definitely be taking legal action after he was ‘named and shamed’ on a U.K. Home Office list of undesirables in May. Mr Savage's name had figured on a Home Office list of alleged troublemakers which also included former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard Stephen Donald Black, Hamas M.P. Unis Al-Astal, Jewish extremist Mike Guzovsky and American anti-gay Baptist pastor Fred Waldron Phelps.

Miss Jacqui ‘Jackboots’ Smith (though no longer in office after her husband was found charging pornographic videos to the taxpayer via Smith’s House of Commons’ expense account) would fight the action, the Home Office said. Robustly right-wing and surely race-realist Savage declared: "Maybe Jacqui Smith just plucked my name out of the hat because I'm controversial and White -- to counter-balance all the Arabs named on her list. It is totally preposterous but it's deadly serious because she has made me a target. Now I want the ban lifted and my name removed from that list, I want a public apology from your Home Secretary and I want substantial damages. My lawyers have told me I have a very strong case for defamation."


Some 100 members of ‘Unite against Fascism’ responded to the B.N.P.’s electoral success by shouting down leader Nick Griffin as he tried to speak outside Parliament, charging into him and hitting him with a placard, and throwing eggs (one broke on Griffin’s shoulder and one hit a cameraman full in the face) until Griffin, fellow M.E.P. Andrew Brons and minders made an escape by car (The Right Perspective, 9 vi). Griffin said later the protesters were a "mob for hire" that included supporters of the ruling Labour Party. "This is a mob of students, lecturers, probably a few civil service parasites ... and hardcore activists and supporters primarily of the Labour Party," he told the BBC.


Comments? Email Chris Brand.
Some history.


Tuesday, June 09, 2009


As if the expense scandals of the Commons and the enfeeblement of the Cabinet at a time of national economic anxiety and rising knife crime were insufficient to show the uselessness of Britain’s political class, Supreme Leader Brown spoke before hundreds of war veterans assembled in France of the bravery shown on D-Day 1945 at “Obama Beach” – repeating his error before correcting to ‘Omaha’ on a third attempt.

Nor was America’s Saint Obama gaffe-free, reading out from his autocue that America had “joined” the Second World War when it had rather, after staying out for two years [cf. three years in WWI], had war declared on it by Japan and Germany. Obama also fell out with France’s President, pseudo-right dwarf Sarkozy – declining to dine with him at the Eiffel Tower. Altogether, it seemed better to leave grand formal occasions to professional heads of state like the Queen – who had most discourteously not been invited to attend the Omaha Beach commemoration.


As Britain slipped towards constitutional meltdown (with countless new schemes proposed for everything from MPs’ expenses to withdrawal from the European Union, but with no-one any longer having clear authority to resolve any of the arguments) – presided over by a nailbiting Stalinoid (described by his main political ally [pro tem.] Lord Mandy of Rumba as “angry, self-conscious and insecure”), a timid nerdish schoolboy Foreign Secretary and an orphaned unlettered postman Home Secretary, and deserted by its only good-looking woman (Twickenham-born tap dancer Caroline Flint) – it looked increasingly likely that only the principal of proportionality could provide a widely acceptable rallying ground for reform. In particular, paying all of MPs’ merry costs directly to constituencies, which would divide them proportionally between local parties according to votes cast at the last election, looked like a way of galvanizing that local political effort which the House of Commons was supposed to reflect -- whereas the House of Lords* had historically reflected and could easily continue to reflect the country’s main interest groups.

With a pot of some £500K p.a. to be fought over in each constituency, local political activists would have something to work for and would hopefully realize, in most cases, that only affluent, married graduates from the country’s best universities would be likely to help them hang on to a decent slice of Westminster’s handout for democratic politics. Proportionality looked the only way of restoring a true democratic elite and preventing every election being a beauty contest about the Prime Minister. Proportional funding would also provide an easy method of ‘recall’ – allowing an MP’s constituency party to turn off the tap of funding if a majority of its members became dissatisfied with the MP’s indifference to them or slavish subservience to Westminster party whips.

* My proposal for reform of the House of Lords was emailed to the Spectator:

My proposal is that the House of Lords should represent Britain's major *interest groups,* while the House of Commons continues to represent, as currently, *localities.* Once, ordinary people were very much defined by their locality; and to represent local feeling as against the state (monarchy) and vested interests (aristocracy) was important. Today, ordinary people are not well defined by their locality. They define themselves at least as much by their education, jobs, sports, hobbies, philosophical affiliations etc.

The dynamism of Britain -- like any other Western country -- consists in such active involvements of its people. Their interests are the main source of both their pride in themselves and their admiration for others -- for all that their ultimate obedience in Britain is to the monarch (guided by Parliament). Thus, I propose that the House of Lords should represent those voluntarily-joined organizations which provide themselves with elements of democratic control by the voting of members or owners. Thus, workers, shareholders or members of churches and clubs would find their organization (if it was sufficiently large) with a representative of their organization's interests.

Some call this fascism? No, it is a balance of powers (For the role of the monarch, see below.)

Would this provide a sufficient difference between the jobs of the Lords and Commons? Yes. Most legislation would be introduced in the energetic House of Lords, then ultimately sanctioned (or not) by the House of Commons, reflecting the prosaic concerns of indiviuals and localities.

So who would do the final checking which is currently the main role of the experts of the House of Lords? Answer: it would be done by the Supreme Court that the past government has already set up. Or, better, by long-term-appointed deputies from both Houses.

And the role of the monarch? Probably to expand freedom and defence for all, particularly campaigning to let the press free of the libel laws (and peecee regulations) that stifle criticism (e.g. of the banks' and Government's gross overlending -- following the American 'subprime' boom which caused the present economic crisis) and obliging any Government to wage war successfully (if at all).

Still, the main thing is to get the House of Lords going once again as representing the true dynamic forces of the United Kingdom -- unlike the Commons which allowed itself to be by-passed by lying neosocialists Messrs Blair and Brown.


After forty-three years of Labour’s ‘race relations’ multiculti religiosity, suppressing even free speech in universities, the British electoral worm turned and gave the socialistic but at least unofficially race-realistic and certainly brave BNP two Brussels seats (out of 650) and 6% of the U.K. poll. The Labour Party which, with the help of its multiculti extremists and far-left hysterical shock troops of ‘Unite Against Fascism’ (i.e. the Anti-Nazi League which had intimidated E.LU. to fire me) had bullied cowardly Conservatives into silence, found itself up against the Thatcherite Lord Tebbit* who told Brits not to vote for the major (Lib-Lab-Con) parties and got his way – with a mere 30% turnout and a slump in the Labour vote to a “dismal” (said chief-witch Chairwyman Harriet Harperson) 15%. More Brits, 23%, voted for UKIP with its more specifically anti-E.U. (though equally – officially -- anti-racist) agenda,** making it Britain’s second-biggest party, behind the pathetic Conservatives, on 28%.

With all Britain’s main political parties gaining only around 20% of votes, electoral pacts would have to be on the cards in future – probably forging the National Liberal alliance long advocated here and in the William McDougall NewsLetters but not having found acceptance with the sadly blinkered minds of the BNP and Libertarian Alliance, let alone with the traitors of Britain’s main parties.

* Normotebbs had famously compared Muesli-loved Sharia law to rule by London’s infamous gangster Kray twins of the 1960s (Daily Mail, 5 vi).

** Here is UKIP’s splendid Head of Communications, Clive Page, as reported in the Guardian (5 vi) : "So you're from the Guardian?" he says, full of bonhomie. "My brother used to work for the Guardian. That's the good news. The bad news is I hate him. He's a f*cking twat. We said to him, the way you're going you'll end up at the Guardian, and he f*cking well did. Twat."

Sunday, June 07, 2009


Top England cricketer ‘Freddie’ Flintoff rejoiced the hearts of fans by complaining (with his four daughters in mind) of Britain’s level of knife crime and kindred thuggery which he attributed especially to Black gangsta rappa music and to immigrants’ failure to integrate – as witness their inability to speak or understand English (Sun, 1 vi). See here

{Meantime, Supreme Leader non-anger-managed Phone-Tosser Brown who had masterminded Britain’s twelve-year decline into peecee bankruptcy took relief from biting his nails to say he would shop till he dropped because he was still working ultra-hard – in accordance with his ludicrous Scotch-Presbyterian-behaviourist-egalitarian “vaaaaaaaaaaaaaalues” (supposedly installed by his dominie Dunfermline father – Brown’s attempt to mimic Rev. Blair’s religiosity) -- on a plan to fund Labour traitors-to-Britain to milk committees that would graaaaaaaaaaaadually plan a PR response to the patiently awaited work from Sir Christopher Kelly’s trillion-pound quango on MPs’ expenses, due to report in 2066….}


The hypocrisy of ‘free speech’ America was terminally exposed as asylum-seeking jokey Jew-baiters Simon Sheppard and Stephen Whittle (q.v.) clocked up a year of being jailed in California where they had sought sanctuary from British Labour’s race-hate-speech ‘laws’ – though at last U.S. journalists managed to get a picture of them (Los Angeles Times, 3 vi). See here

{Whereas America’s PeeCee-corroded ‘legal system’ had utterly failed the American people’s long-proclaimed aspiration to ‘free speech’ – already betrayed in the U.S.A.’s ‘universities’ where there was not a single known straightforward race realist – Britain’s (admittedly weird, unwritten) constitution delivered, thanks to the country’s newspapers (esp. D. Torygraph), success against socialist cheats and tyrants as fat-frump ‘Jackboots’ Smith’s resignation as Home Secretary (after she claimed parliamentary expenses for her husband’s porn-movie viewing) was rapidly followed by the resignation of triple-home-loving and ‘expense’-claiming diminutive ginger-nut motor-cycliste ‘Lickle’ Hazel Blears, the Labour Party’s forever-beaming ultra-loyal (to Rev. Blair) Chairwoman ooops Chairman. Several other Labour luminaries ‘stepped down’ as June began – i.e. jumped before they were pushed.}


Twelve years after winning power by promising ‘Education,’ NuLabour (via its ‘Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills’) advised hundreds of thousands of its mediocre new ‘graduates’ of 2009, owing an average £16K (to pay the salaries of Marxoid ‘professors’), to take whatever menial jobs were going in shops, restaurants and call centres. – Many ‘graduates’ were well prepared for this, having worked part-time in Tescos throughout their periods of peecee ‘university’ study.


As Grumpy Gordon ran into awesome problems over the British economy in general and the expenses of his Labour serfs in particular (on Kit-Kat bars, tampons and loo seats [2 for illiterate pie-scoffing office-sex toad John Prescott]), he needed to tell the dramatic truth about how the house-price bubble and subsequent recession had indeed originated in America (as he had often said and as had been explained in this blog – FIND Sailer) with state-compelled lending to ‘subprime’ Blacks and Hispanics. But, after years of Labour multiculchalunacy, Brown could not even take an email from his one-time Edinburgh playmate Chris – or even manage, as Cartman had apparently done (see Visual Aid), to read The g Factor….


Much-travelled U.C.L. lawyer Professor Eric M. Barendt, probably Britain’s top expert on ‘academic freedom,’ appeared in Edinburgh for a few days (after nine months of prior enquiry) to investigate key players in Brand vs E.LU., 1996-8. However, he found Profs Grieve, Morris and McCormick and mega-earning P.R. Head Ms Wallace were all already dead from their exertions; other academics were barred from talking to him; others would talk only under promise of anonymity; and the LUniversity had anyhow disposed of all records of the £100K case (just as the Vatican had ridden itself of all records of its eight-year persecution of Bruno, whom it burned to death in 1600).

So EMB reckoned his week of enquiry (possibly to be followed by a graciously granted interview with Lady Stewart Sutherland of Houndstooth, c/o House of Lords), would eventually yield a perfectly adequate five-page summary of the affair, to emerge leisurely from the academic mills c. April 2010, reckoning the Brand Affair was a possibly “borderline” case of a teensy-weensy bit of unfairness to a previously unwarned, uncharged and untried but oh-so-so-naughty-naughty (if much-provoked) long-serving academic.

Just what this summary of the blindingly obvious -- totally neglecting the vilification and suppression of The g Factor from which all else had followed (e.g. the synthetic ‘outrage’ about my urging clemency for paedophile Nobelist Gajdusek, the accusations of anti-feminist jokes at my own parties of ten years previously) -- would contribute to the cause of academic (or any other kind of) free speech remained to be seen.

EMB freely declared his own hopelessness in a Summer 2009 article about ‘freedom of expression’ for the Indiana Law Journal, which concluded miserably, “….we know that legislation rarely brings about the consequences it intends to achieve.” Yes! The efforts of Mrs Thatcher and Sir Keith Joseph to ensure free speech on campus had proved worthless once the ‘liberal’-left got to work. And EMB could have strengthened his point by explaining particularly that, under law of the 1990s, E.LU. – as it argued successfully before a Scottish High Court judge -- had no more duty to support its employees’ free speech than did a biscuit factory! (A case involving United Biscuits sacking an outed BNP member was successfully prayed in aid by E.LU. before Mr Justice T. Gordon Coutts Q.C.)


Top Sun columnist John Gaunt (‘Gaunty’) drew attention to the by-2009 widespread phenomenon that complaints about inability to speak reasonable English on the part of shop assistants, airline desk staff, call centre workers and kindred graduate professions attracted counter-accusations of ‘racism’ – hardly surprising since the 25-year-old rise of PeeCee had been allowed to destroy free speech even in universities. Likewise, complaints to local councils of ‘travellers’ (cf. gypsies) leaving rubbish at campsites were increasingly commonly rejected as ‘racist.’ See here


As if the expense scandals of the Commons and the enfeeblement of the Cabinet at a time of national economic anxiety and rising knife crime were insufficient to show the uselessness of Britain’s political class, Supreme Leader Brown spoke before hundreds of war veterans assembled in France of the bravery shown on D-Day 1945 at “Obama Beach” – repeating his error before correcting to ‘Omaha’ on a third attempt. Nor was America’s Saint Obama gaffe-free, reading out from his autocue that America had “joined” the Second World War when it had rather, after staying out for two years, had war declared on it by Japan and Germany. Obama also fell out with France’s President, pseudo-right dwarf Sarkozy – declining to dine with him at the Eiffel Tower. Altogether, it seemed better to leave grand formal occasions to professional heads of state like the Queen – who had most discourteously not been invited to attend the Omaha Beach commemoration.


As U.S. President Obarmy took control of the commanding heights of the economy, sacking the boss of General Motors and printing dollars like confetti (though unable to command North Korea or Iran to do diddly-squat*), Pravda foresaw the decline of the West, deploring in particular the “scandalous liberalization” of Holy Orthodox churches in ‘circus religion’ America (27 iv).

* In fairness to Barry, he had managed to get a bit of action (incl. killing – seldom allowed to British or American latrine-builders ooops troops) out of the Pakistani Army against grimly gun-toting Muesli fanatics of the Taliban – though by the unimaginative expedient of showering Pakistan with yet more billions of dollars.


A woman in Nottingham who had produced a premature baby needing intensive care was deemed by social workers ‘too stupid’ to manage the necessary routines and thus had her baby removed and farmed out for adoption (Sunday Times, 31 v). The case was being contested on the woman’s behalf by the Official Solicitor – brought in because lawyers deemed the woman ‘too stupid’ to be able to instruct counsel in her own defence. A psychiatrist, whose qualifications in intelligence testing were equally unknown, considered the woman’s intelligence to be ‘in the normal range’ (which for shrinks of the past meant ‘not actually cretinous, moronic or idiotic’). See here


Comments? Email Chris Brand.
Some history.