Bad Medicine I: The Sickening Truth About Britain’s Foreign ‘Doctors’

/64 Comments/in /by

Manish Shah: Charged with 118 sexual crimes against his patients

An Essex-based family doctor of Indian origin, Manish Shah, has gone on trial in London charged with 118 sexual offences against 54 of his patients, one of whom was under 13 at the time of Shah’s alleged predations. Although the sordid details of the accusations against Shah are yet to fully emerge, we know that the former general practitioner has been charged by the police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) with 65 counts of assault by penetration, 52 counts of sexual assault and one of sexual assault of a child.

The case is headline news in the UK, where the number of charges is so staggering that the media has been forced to take notice. Quite predictably, however, the mainstream press has refused to contextualize this horrific case within an increasingly apparent ethnic context, and coverage thus far has been dominated by bland descriptions of Shah as a “London doctor” or “Romford doctor.”

In the following essay I want to break the taboo on critique of foreign physicians by analyzing the promotion of foreign doctors in multicultural propaganda, and then offering a counter-narrative of the reality behind the lies  – a disturbing record of mass sexual abuse, malpractice, and gross incompetence. Reaching beyond the merely anecdotal, my source material for the latter exploration will be the publicly available records and decisions of Britain’s Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS). As the public body most responsible for protecting the public from bad physicians (by stripping them of license to practice), the records of the MPTS should be considered more reliable and complete than police and CPS statistics concerning the disturbing, and growing, problem of foreign doctors in Britain.

In the third chapter of his recently published The Strange Death of Europe, Douglas Murray lists a number of excuses or lies that have duped European populations into believing that multiculturalism shouldn’t be resisted. These are grouped under the headings ‘Economic,’ ‘An Ageing Population,’ ‘Diversity,’ and ‘The Idea that Immigration is Unstoppable Because of Globalisation.’ Although perhaps implied under economic considerations, Murray failed to significantly explore the often absurd justifications for multiculturalism offered in the name of national infrastructure or public services. This is particularly important because the British people are frequently informed that immigrants are crucial to the smooth functioning of their health service. (Murray does tackle another aspect of this myth by pointing to the fact that Britain’s financially exhausted health service spends more than £20 million every year just on translation services for foreign-born patients.[1]) Read more

The Notion of Racial Diversity in German Academia and National-Socialist Legislation, Part 1

/16 Comments/in , /by

Introduction

What follows below are the translations of several excerpts from rare books and essays on race published by prominent German legal scholars, biologists, and medical doctors who were also high ranking members of the National Socialist Party in before and during World War II. The focus of the translated passages is on verbal, legal and sociological analyses of race. It is not TOO’s, or for that matter my intent, to whitewash National Socialism or glorify the works of its academic or military spokesman. The fact that after the NS seizure of power the number of NS  party members skyrocketed from the modest 800,000 to 8 million members by 1943, a number which also included a large number of world-known German scientists and academics, proves time and again that opportunism and intellectual duplicity among scholars is nothing new. Dominant ideas, however bizarre, or dangerous they may ultimately sound, as long as they are shielded by the ruling class and its police, will always attract cheerleaders among herds of glory-hungry academics, limelight searchers, and a host of circumstantial sycophants. Many of them will quickly disavow their beliefs when different cultural or ideological trends start lurking on the political horizon.

The great danger, however, lies in the fact that dominant political ideas invariably have an impact on the definition of natural science — and never the other way around. Hence it is a waste of time today trying to convince the political adversary on racial differences by inundating him/her with empirical data, especially if dominant ideas espoused by elites are hostile in advance to any discussion about race. Facts are seldom important—what counts is the interpretation of facts.

The sole intent of these essays is to point out significant semantic and conceptual errors arising today with the usage of former German political and legal concepts related to the issue of race which, while common in higher education and politics in NS Germany, often turned after World War II into demonic misnomers. Following Donald Trump’s election to US presidency, accompanied by the ongoing language distortions in the media and higher education, aka “fake news”, and in light of the mass arrival of non-White migrants to the US and EU, as well as the increased racialization of political discourse, some parallels in intellectual climate between Weimar and NS Germany and the EU and the US today can be drawn. Read more

Assault on Psychology: Research on Race Differences Anathematized

/63 Comments/in , /by

Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) has been called the Father of Modern Science. So it is fitting that he was, perhaps, the first scientist to be censured and silenced by political forces represented in his day by the Catholic Church. The issue then was evidence Galileo presented supporting the Copernican heliocentric model of the solar system that contradicted the Aristotelian geocentric theory espoused by the establishment.

Elites have often used science to support the dominate ideology while suppressing evidence incompatible with their beliefs. One notable case was the rise of Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union during the reign of Joseph Stalin. Trofim Lysenko (1898–1976), a Ukrainian biologist, rejected Mendelian genetics in favor of the inheritance of environmentally acquired characteristics. This theory won favor because it fit well with the creation of the New Soviet Man: human nature was not innate, but as malleable and adaptable as were the characteristics of spring wheat.

The ideological orthodoxy of today is egalitarian multiculturalism, sometimes described as social or cultural Marxism. According to this doctrine the perceived differences between racial groups are superficial physical traits or cultural characteristics determined externally by history and the social environment.  All ethnic groups have equal potential for social development. A multicultural society is the most desirable and progressive social arrangement. There are no legitimate group interests that would preclude social harmony in a diverse and inclusive society.

Over the past half century, as social Marxism has tightened its ideological grip on the main stream media (MSM), education, corporations and the government, very few public persons have challenged its canon. But a handful of social scientists, mainly psychologists, have, along with Galileo, gone where the evidence led them. Because psychology deals with intelligence and behavior, the field is especially important for egalitarians to control. This essay will take a brief look at five psychologists who have contested established dogmas, and paid a price for doing so. Read more

Gender Bender: Feminist Ideology Goes Off the Deep End

/39 Comments/in /by

Recurring in feminist ideology is the notion that gender expression and gender roles are almost entirely based upon expectations set by society, not biology. Feminists often take issue with the “gendering” of toys, characters, and expectations. On some fundamental level, I do not take issue with the idea that sex roles can change throughout history. Throughout cultures the world over, and through the ages, men and women have held many different roles in different societies. The idea of fluidity makes sense; it accounts for historical changes in masculine behavior (think Vikings vs. modern Swedes). Fluidity as a concept allows for variances in biology and traits between men and women.

People should be free to do, say, and be, whatever they want. The issue I have with modern feminist theory is the idea that culture, not biology, plays by far the most important role in shaping behavior. Not only do feminists assail the idea of “traditional” gender roles, they are working towards making it illegal to even notice fundamental biological realities. Further, they assert that society not only shapes the roles men and women occupy in society but also that there are no biologically based differences at all between men and women.

This anti-biologism leads to the idea that gender is anything a person wants it to be — that a person could decide to change gender identification as often as [insert pronoun] wants — even from day to day. The theory that gender is completely voluntary and has nothing to do with hormones or body parts is having effects in the real world. New York City passed a law that makes it illegal to address a person by the wrong title, pronouns, or gender. All businesses, professionals, and landlords are required to address a person by their preferred title or pronoun. If a man wants to be referred to as “her”, “ze”, “xir”, or any other randomly imagined name, employers, professionals, and landlords are required by law to abide, else they face a fine of $125,000 to $250,000. “Mis-gendering” a person, is now illegal in New York City. The law also includes provisions to inhibit enforcing a “gendered” dress code at work. Meaning, you cannot ask a male employee not to wear a dress and high heels to work anymore.

In California, State Senator, Scott Weiner, has introduced a bill that would require care facilities to accommodate a person’s preferred gender and pronoun. If they do not comply, they would face a fine and a prison sentence of up to one year. Weiner also introduced a bill that would make it no longer a felony to knowingly transmit HIV. The bill applies not only to failing to disclose your HIV status to sexual partners but to blood donations as well. Read more

The Moral Battle

/61 Comments/in , /by

From the beginning of Trump’s candidacy I expected and hoped that it would accelerate racial polarization and White radicalization as well as discredit the anti-White media and its false narratives. As that racial polarization — the Great Divide — occurs, our success or failure, and with it the life or death of our race, will depend on how many of the people of our race break to our side of the divide. If it is most of them, we will probably win and our race will be saved. If not, our chances will be greatly diminished, and for something of this importance, this seriousness, with this much — literally the life or death of our race — at stake, we must take the utmost care to maximize our chances.

In April 1989 I gave a talk at a gathering of Instaurationists entitled “Creating a Moral Image.” It was well received and Wilmot Robertson published it in the August, 1989 issue of Instauration. It turned out to be the most controversial essay yet to appear in its pages. According to Wilmot most of the criticism was of a very low quality, too low even for the “Safety Valve,” but he did publish one essay-length response which, like the other criticism, wrongly saw my paper as a pacifistic rejection of warrior values. The critics missed the main point of the essay — the decisive battle for the hearts and minds of our people is being fought on the battlefield of morality. Violence per se was rejected only if it was immoral (by public perception and/or traditional Western standards) or counter-productive, and the example I cited was clearly both. I maintained that those who practiced or preached such immoral violence, or in any other way projected an immoral public image, were hurting our cause and playing into our opponents hands.

Over twenty-eight years later, in the wake of the “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, we see how little has changed, how clearly our battle is still one of morality, and how the points I made in that essay are, if anything, even more true now than they were then (see also “Moral Capital and White Interests“). Our anti-White opponents know this well, but too many pro-White activists have yet to heed the lesson. The storm now shaking the country, and the whole of the Western world, including the Trump administration, is one of perverse anti-White values and policies presented as consensus traditional and universal morality. Our anti-White antagonists were given, or arranged, the opening or opportunity they were looking for and took full advantage of it at our expense. They seized the moral high ground and from those heights are showering us with a torrent of moral invective, denunciation, condemnation and epithets, creating false pretexts to justify suppression of our message, our platforms and our gatherings as our moral image seems to have been dragged to new lows. Read more

Silent Sisterhood Revisited: Another Vibrant Rape Gang, Another Liberal Lie-Fest

/85 Comments/in , , /by

When you’re studying the behaviour of animals, it’s pointless to look for motives like “truth-seeking” and “compassion.” Animals aren’t interested in discovering the truth and Making the World a Better Place. They’re interested in survival — in eating and not being eaten.

“All white women are only good for one thing…”

Something similar applies when you’re studying the behaviour of liberals. Whatever they might claim, they’re not interested in truth or world-improvement: they’re interested in power — in dominating and not being dominated. As I pointed out in “The Silent Sisterhood,” feminists prefer to ignore sex-crimes committed by non-White men, because such crimes contradict their insistence on the Omnipotent Evil of the Stale Pale Male. Now more proof of feminist double-standards has arrived, because another Muslim rape-gang has hit the headlines in Brave New Britain.

It’s vibrant up north: the Newcastle rape-gang

Newcastle, in north-east England, was the vibro-centre this time. Seventeen Muslim men from “backgrounds” of dazzling diversity — “Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Indian, Iraqi, Iranian and Turkish” — have been found guilty of the “rape and human trafficking” of more than 200 “vulnerable women and girls.” One of those men, Badrul Hussain, is reported to have espoused a shockingly toxic mixture of racism, misogyny and male supremacism. His alleged words, addressed to a White female ticket-inspector, should have set feminist keyboards rattling right around the world. They went like this: “All white women are only good for one thing. For men like me to fuck and use like trash. That’s all women like you are worth.” Read more

If Elected Party Leader, Zionist Anne Marie Waters Will Sound UKIP’s Death Knell, Part 1

/38 Comments/in , /by


Within the next few months, United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) members will be asked to elect a leader to replace Paul Nuttall, the Catholic conservative, mildly pro-Zionist Member of European Parliament for North West England, who resigned after leading the party off a cliff at the last General Election.

It’s fair to say that Nuttall was neither intellectually equipped, nor politically astute enough to lead a defanged UKIP into the Brexit negotiation period, as evidenced by his inability to achieve the slightest electoral success in 2017.

UKIP’s share of the vote, which reached a staggering 4 million when I stood as a prospective Member of Parliament for West Lancashire in 2015, collapsed at this year’s General Election — with both the Labour Party, from whom UKIP had previously siphoned off hundreds of thousands of voters from disenfranchised White working class communities in the north, and fiercely patriotic English Conservatives, whom UKIP had targeted down south, hacking large swathes of support back from Nuttall’s party.

In fact, Nuttall’s inability to put his personal stamp on the populist party resulted in UKIP losing over 80% of its vote (from 12.6% in 2015 to 2% in 2017), its membership rumored to have dropped by more than half, and the party Farage had built from scratch all but relegated to a footnote in the annals of British history and dustbin of British politics. Read more