UKIP has won a landslide victory in the south of England. It also came within just over 600 votes of winning a formerly safe Labour seat in the north. Both the Tories and Labour are running scared. They’re paying the price for ignoring public anger about immigration. The old accusation of “Racism!” isn’t working any more. And both parties may see MPs defecting to UKIP, frightened that they’ll lose their seats if they stay where they are.
After all, UKIP’s election victor, Douglas Carswell, is a defector from the Tories. But that’s what worries me. Carswell is a plague-bearer from a diseased party. He’s said this: “I have no difficulty with Britain as Britain is today.” Rape-gangs, riots, FGM, electoral fraud — Carswell is fine with all that.
He’s also declined to endorse what the UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, said about banning people with HIV from entry to Britain. This is an eminently sensible proposal with majority support, which is why it has been greeted with outrage by the liberal elite. Don’t White tax-payers realize how privileged they are to fund vibrant enrichers with hugely expensive diseases?
Apparently not. But Carswell won’t side with the White majority against the liberal elite.
Nor is he opposed to further immigration:
On the subject of immigration, let me make it absolutely clear; I’m not against immigration … We should welcome those that want to come here to contribute. We need those with skills and drive. There’s hardly a hospital, GP surgery or supermarket in the country that could run without that skill and drive.
Apparently the native British are incompetent to run a modern society. The UK simply must have ever more immigrants or the whole society will fall apart.
If more Tories defect, he’ll have allies and liberalism will be strengthened in UKIP. If Labour MPs defect, it will be even worse. As I pointed out in “Crock of Shock,” Labour is best described as a criminal conspiracy, not as a political organization. UKIP should want to put Labour MPs on trial for treason, not persuade them to defect.
CFI and LFI play the same role in Britain as AIPAC plays in the United States. Although the general public is ignorant of these organizations, British politicians are well aware of how important they are. Without their support, a political career will go nowhere. With a UKIP Friends of Israel, we can be certain that UKIP is being influenced by the same organization that stands behind CFI and LFI: the Board of Deputies, which works on behalf of Britain’s tiny Jewish community. And works very effectively. British Whites have never wanted mass immigration or laws against “hate speech.” But the Board of Deputies (B.O.D.) wanted both. It got what it wanted.
B.O.D. wants more laws against free speech, and Theresa May, the British Home Secretary, is happy to oblige:
Radical Islamist extremists and neo-Nazis could be banned from making public appearances including on television under a gagging order proposed by the Conservatives with echoes of the broadcast ban that once applied to the voice of Gerry Adams. Theresa May will announce the measure as part of a widely drawn counter-extremism strategy that is intended to catch so-called hate preachers such as [Muslim activist] Anjem Choudary, who was released on bail last week after being arrested on suspicion of encouraging terrorism.
The home secretary’s new orders would be aimed at those who undertake activities “for the purpose of overthrowing democracy”, a wide-ranging definition that could also catch a far wider range of political activists. The “extremist asbos” [i.e., anti-social behaviour banning orders] are reminiscent of the 1980s broadcasting ban under which Sinn Féin spokesmen such as Adams were banned from the airwaves. Actors were used to voice the words of republicans and others with links to paramilitary groups in news reports.
May will also set out proposals to ban non-violent extremist groups that fall short of the current threshold for being banned as terrorist-related organisations. (Theresa May plans new powers to ban extremists from TV appearances, The Guardian, 30th September 2014)
What does she mean by “non-violent extremism”? Would a someone who says that Jews have disproportionate power and influence in the UK be a “non-violent extremist”? What does it matter that the Tory chairmen, Lord Feldman and Grant Shapps, are both Jewish? That’s reality. If you point it out, Theresa May may well want you silenced.
Theresa May also said it was “outrageously irresponsible” of the Liberal Democrats to oppose more surveillance powers for the police and security services. She pointed out that “innocent people are in danger right now” from Islamic terrorism.
But why are they in danger? Because of mass immigration which her party does nothing about. It was “outrageously irresponsible” to let Muslims flood into Britain from violent and corrupt Third World nations like Pakistan and Somalia. But May hasn’t admitted this or called for a ban on further Muslim immigration. Instead, she blew smoke and told lies about Islam:
The extremists believe in a clash of civilisations — a fundamental incompatibility between Islamic and Western values, an inevitable divide between “them and us”. They demand a caliphate, or a new Islamic state, governed by a harsh interpretation of Shari’ah law. They utterly reject British and Western values, including democracy, the rule of law, and equality between citizens, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, religion or sexuality. They believe that it is impossible to be a good Muslim and a good British citizen. And they dismiss anybody who disagrees with them — including other Muslims — as non-believers. This hateful ideology has nothing to do with Islam itself. And it is rejected by the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Britain and around the world. (Theresa May’s speech on terrorism and extremism, The Spectator, 30th September 2014)
The reality, of course, is that mainstream Islam scornfully rejects “British values”: it hates both democracy and equality. Under shariah law, Muslims are superior to non-Muslims, men are superior to women and homosexuals are executed. Shariah courts are already operating in the UK and denying women equal rights. These courts aren’t “extremist”: they’re standard, mainstream Islam. And if the brutality of Islamic State has “nothing to do with Islam itself,” why is it attracting so many Muslims not just in Britain but right across the West?
Theresa May is a prime example of the tyranny of mediocrities that currently rules Britain. Another member of the “mediocrityranny” is the narcissistic buffoon Boris Johnson, the part-Jewish, part-Turkish mayor of London. Before UKIP’s election victory, he was accusing Tory defectors to UKIP of a propensity for sex with vacuum cleaners. Now he’s saying that the Tories and UKIP are “doppelgangers.”
He’s also saying that his great hero Winston Churchill would have fully supported Tory policies on Islamic extremism:
The security services are monitoring “thousands” of terrorist suspects in London, Boris Johnson has disclosed, suggesting the threat from Islamist extremists may be far greater than has previously been admitted. Until now, it was thought that the main danger came from around 500 jihadis who have travelled to Syria and Iraq from the UK to join Isil or al-Qaeda fighters, around half of whom have returned to Britain. But the Mayor of London suggested the threat from home-grown terrorist plots was far more widespread than the relatively small numbers of extremists who have gone abroad to fight.
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, he said: “In London we’re very very vigilant and very very concerned. Every day — as you saw recently, we had to raise the threat level — every day the security services are involved in thousands of operations. There are probably in the low thousands of people that we are monitoring in London.”
Mr Johnson gave the interview to promote his new biography of Sir Winston Churchill, The Churchill Factor, and suggested the wartime leader would have approved of Parliament’s decision to back air strikes on Iraq. He said: “Let’s ask ourselves this question: would Churchill now be authorizing air strikes on Isil? I think he would be. He was a great believer in air power.” …
He suggests Churchill would have been “very tough” on home-grown terrorism, and would have taken “personal charge” of the situation. Citing the example of the Sidney Street siege in 1911, when police became involved in a gunfight with a group of anarchists, he said: “If you look at his handling of the Sidney Street siege …Churchill goes down there personally. He would have taken personal charge of counter-terror in London, no question. Had he been Home Secretary now, he would be absolutely appalled to think that these people could be carrying British passports and yet be loyal to another state.” (Boris Johnson says ‘thousands’ of terrorism suspects are being monitored in London, The Daily Telegraph, 10th Oct 2014)
Johnson is ignoring the 800-lb gorilla in the electric pink tutu: the fact that Churchill would have been “absolutely appalled” that so many Muslims had been given British passports in the first place. Unlike modern Tories, Churchill spoke the truth about Islam. In April this year, Paul Weston, the leader of LibertyGB, tried the experiment of quoting Churchill’s views in public:
How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property — either as a child, a wife, or a concubine — must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. (Paul Weston Busted for Quoting Churchill, Gates of Vienna, 26th April 2014)
Weston’s experiment ended as he expected it would: he was arrested by the police. Remember that the new UKIP MP Douglas Carswell said this: “I have no difficulty with Britain as Britain is today.” In Britain today, people are arrested for quoting Winston Churchill. More Tory defections to UKIP will mean more influence for Carswell and his suicidal liberalism. UKIP is not the solution to that liberalism. It’s already collaborating with it.
But UKIP is a sign that ordinary Whites have had enough with the old politics. Lying, spinning and celebrating national suicide aren’t going to work any more.
UKIP isn’t the cure, but we can hope that it is a step on the road to a cure. The disease that afflicts Britain is becoming more and more obvious. The same disease afflicts America: rule by a rich minority, not by the White majority:
Despite the seemingly strong empirical support in previous studies for theories of majoritarian democracy, our analyses suggest that majorities of the American public actually have little influence over the policies our government adopts. Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association, and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened. (New Report from Princeton and Northwestern Proves It: The U.S. is an Oligarchy, Liberty Blitzkrieg, 16th April 2014)