| Lord Justice Neuberger: The Judiciary and the Ethnic Oppression of White Males |  |  |  |
| Written by Tim Heydon |
| November 2011 |
| ‘(Herrnstein and Murray’s) ‘The Bell Curve’ is a fact of life. The blacks on average score 85% per cent on IQ and it is accurate, nothing to do with culture. The whites score an average 100. (East) Asians score more…the ‘Bell Curve’ authors put it at least 10 points higher. These are realities that, if you do not accept, will lead to frustration because you will be spending money on wrong assumptions and the results cannot follow.’ - Lee Kuan Yew,. Prime Minister /Minister Mentor Of Singapore (Quoted in the Official Biography). Should we be surprised that the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Neuberger has demanded that more women and ethnic minorities should be appointed to the judiciary, at the expense of white males? Should we heck. Does Neuberger at some Level think he is protecting his Ethnic Interests as a Jew? As a Jew, Neuberger is of course himself a member of an ethnic minority. It is perhaps not surprising that as such he should want the majority population to be elbowed out of such positions. Stripping the majority population of its majority rights is generally seen by ethnic minorities as an excellent thing in itself since it confers power on themselves and so (they think) makes their own position in the country more secure. That is why they tend to be leftists and liberals like Neuberger. This attitude is selfish, unfair and ultimately likely to be dangerous. What Democracy is For The Greatest Happiness of the greatest Number Politically Correct Liberals like Neuberger tend to forget or try to ignore what democracy - rule by the majority - is for. It exists in societies such as ours because in them the guiding principle is fundamentally the utilitarian one of the greatest happiness of the greatest number (or some variation thereof). Majorities have superior rights to enforce their interests or ought to have them simply by virtue of being majorities. The Replacement of Force in the Exercise of Power Even more important perhaps is the fact that the democratic process is a device for replacing force in the getting and wielding of power. While they insult and work to destroy the democratic rights of the ethnic majority at every turn with Marxoid ideologies and devices such as ‘Human Rights’, liberals simultaneously rely on that majority’s aquiescence and good will without which their liberalism would not survive for a week. When these are not readily forthcoming, as increasingly in this country, they rely on Political Oppression including the championing of the existing sham of a democratic system which works to their advantage and the systematic , calculated demoralisation of the majority. When Democracy Disappears, Force will Reappear But when majorities see that their interests are consistently and as an act of policy being deliberately overridden in favour of those of minorities, the result in the end might very well be explosive. That is, in the right conditions including the manifest absence of true democracy as orchestrated by an unrepresentative political class, which is increasingly widely being recognised as the case in Britain now, the majority might revert to violence including political extremism to enforce its interests. Harsh Economic Conditions and Oppression of the Majority are the Seed Bed of Violence That is especially the case in the harsh economic climate that stretches ahead into the indefinite future. This is the danger, or one of them, that those like Neuberger who advocate ‘affirmative action’ ie anti-native British discrimination and oppression, run in advocating this course. There are already rumblings along these lines in this country. At the present rate it won’t be so very long before they burst out into serious civil disturbances The Farthest a Fair-Minded Majority will go Equality in terms of appointments on merit alone is as much as the majority ethnic group is likely to want to put up with in the long run. Affirmative Action means Loss of Prestige Another danger for the Neubergers is that, as in other areas of our national life where the policy of ‘affirmative action’ is practiced, ethnic and female members of the Judiciary will lose prestige because there will always exist the suspicion that they came by their appointments ahead of white males who have better claims themselves, even if they are said to be ‘equally qualified’. Institutionalised Anti-White Male Bias And that suspicion of bias will not be without foundation because contrary to what Neuberger asserts, no two candidates are ever going to be identically qualified academically, by experience or by character . Further, the structural bias which demands that when there are two ‘equal’ candidates, the ethnic or female candidate will be chosen, will in practice undoubtedly be compounded by an enhanced fear of accusations that ethnic / sex bias is being shown if white males are selected. This will result in a double bias against non-ethnic males. (Incidentally, when both candidates are female presumably the ethnic female will be chosen ahead of a white female as scoring more points on the PC scale of ‘oppression’). The False Premise of Equality of Ability and other Characteristics If Neuberger’s proposal and the Legislation he refers to has any claim to fairness it must be that it is based on the actual equality of ability and inclination of all. But the idea that minorities and women are equal in every relevant respect to white males and should be more fully represented in the judiciary, ideally in proportion to their numbers is as in other areas of life is without foundation. And because it is, it is the basis of oppression of the more able white males who are then excluded from their just rewards. Neuberger’ s own family history ought tell him that while family culture undoubtedly plays a part, ability is largely hereditary. Neuberger’s own Family History is an Indication of Inherited ability Wikipedia tells us that he was ‘born on 10 January 1948, the son of Professor Albert Neuberger,[2] Professor of Chemical Pathology at St Mary's Hospital, University of London, and his wife, Lilian. His uncle was the noted rabbi, Herman N. Neuberger. All three of his brothers are now professors: James is Professor of Medicine at the University of Birmingham, Michael is Professor of Molecular Immunology at the University of Cambridge, while Anthony is Professor in Finance at Warwick Business School, University of Warwick.[3]’ It’s not just Individuals who inherit Ability, it is Ethnicities. Further, the make –up of the Supreme Court ought to tell Neuberger that it is not just himself and his siblings who are the beneficiaries of inherited ability. It is the Jews as an ethnic group, as with other ethnic groups. The high proportion of Jews in the upper reaches of the British Judiciary matches their presence in the other professions and is entirely in line with what we would expect from what we know of their high level of average intelligence, which is in the range 107.7- 113 (native British 100). (Richard Lynn, The Global Bell Curve pp 94, 95. Washington Summit 2008). The Average Woman is not as Intelligent as the average Man. Further, Wikinews tells us. ‘In a study accepted for publication by the British Journal of Psychology, Dr. Paul Irwing (Manchester Business School, Senior Lecturer in Organizational Psychology) and Prof. Richard Lynn (University of Ulster, Professor Emeritus) conclude that men are on average five points ahead on IQ tests. The study also found that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rise. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, a level typical for people with first-class degrees. When scores rose to 155, a level associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman. Since women are not as intelligent as men, especially at the higher levels, have a natural role in bearing and raising babies and because of this natural function have emotional abilities and needs and therefore attitudes to work etc that differ from those of men, the assumption that they should be present in the same proportion as men at the higher reaches of the professions is ludicrous and the product of mere ideology rather than the plainly observable facts of life which that ideology tries to-dismiss. The Ethnic Origins of the Judges of the Supreme Court Lord Phillips President of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, KG Lord Hope Deputy President of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Hope of Craighead, KT Scottish . Hope seems solidly Scottish Lord Walker Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe English. Walker went to Downside School, a Catholic Indpendent School Lady Hale Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Baroness Hale of Richmond Hale’s provenance is not certain because there are few readily available clues on this point. She went to a Christian school, but her name, Hale, appears on a list of possibly Jewish surnames. She looks like a typical Jewish mother. Her second husband Julian Farrand has a name which can be thoroughly Jewish and has very Jewish looks. Further, the Farrands have strong Jewish associations. For example, we learn that they attended ‘a reception in honour of Dorit Beinisch, president of the Supreme Court of Israel, and the other Israeli judges and academics who were in London as guests of their British counterparts. The reception, hosted by the Jewish Lord and Lady Pannick, was held at the House of Lords. In his address Lord Pannick joked that with six Israeli judges in the room there would be at least seven opinions. Baroness Hale said: “We learn so much from these exchanges.” Lord Brown Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood Jewish. Brown is the son of Denis Baer Brown and Edna Elizabeth Abrahams. Lord Mance Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Mance English . But 'Mance' can be Jewish. His first name is Jonathan, favoured by Jews. He was introduced to the House of Lords between two Jews, Lord Hoffman and Lord Brown (See above). His wife’s father was a partner in a firm of solicitors founded by the Jewish Abel Morrall. Lord Kerr Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore Ulsterman. Kerr is an Ulsterman. Most likely Catholic (He went to a Catholic school in Northern Ireland). Lord Clarke Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon the Lord Clarke of Stone-cum-Ebony English . There is not much information on Clarke, but there is no reason to think otherwise. He has a very English name and face. Lord Dyson Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Honourable Lord Dyson Jewish . Dyson stepped into the vacancy left by Neuberger, himself a Jew of course, when the latter became Master of the Rolls. Dyson was a chairman of the British Friends of the Hebrew University's legal group. Lord Wilson Justice of The Supreme Court, The Right Hon. Lord Wilson of Culworth English – apparently. Not much information on ethnicity available. Again, he has an English / Scottish name and a very British face. Jonathan Sumption Newly appointed Justice of The Supreme Court English (probably). Sumption is an old English name but can be Jewish. It has been suggested that it is a variant of the given name "Samson," from the Hebrew "Shimson", a diminutive of "shemesh". The first name Jonathan is obviously favoured by Jews. However as a Historian Sumption wrote extensively on Christianity in the Middle Ages although this does have relevance to Jewry. So at least three of the 11 present members of the highest court in the land ie 27% (more or less) and possibly others are Jewish. Given that the present population of Jews in the UK is about 290,000 ie 0.5% of the whole , this disproportion is quite extraordinary. If Neuberger is after proper ethnic proportionate representation in the Judiciary, there should be no Jews in the Supreme Court , or in other high positions – ever. For surely ‘equal treatment’ as claimed by Neuberger means that, not just ‘under representation’ but ‘ over representation’ should be rectified Or does Neuberger have a strictly one-way process in mind? The fact that Jews, a tiny minority in the country, are in such numbers in the upper reaches of the Judiciary as in other areas of life in Britain is a proof that that there is no barrier to ethnics of ability. The artificial attempt to increase their representation and that of females by what amounts to affirmative action is a gross oppression of white males. It will not be tolerated in the long run. (Note: This article assumes that the Judiciary including Neuberger subscribes to the formula in Locabail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd and another [2000] QB 451 There, a specially convened Court of Appeal bench stated that: “We cannot … conceive of circumstances in which an objection [of apparent judicial bias] could be soundly based on the religion, ethnic or national origin, gender, age, class, means or sexual orientation of the judge.” The bench was emphatic that a judge’s particular religious convictions or cultural background or associations would not and should not be thought to influence his or her decisions on matters of law’ Your writer regards this statement as a pious fiction. But that is a subject for another article).
       |
