An Open letter to the Times Higher Education by Dr Frank Ellis : ref Dr Satoshi Kanazawa research

A interesting and informative letter written to Times Higher Education in order question the so called intelligentsia over their faux  outrage at the factual and scientific findings of his research that proved that of all the women of the earth those of the negroid race are the least attractive to men including negroid men themselves! Look folks I don't make this up I just report it ! Horwich Nationalist

Written by Frank Ellis
From: Dr Frank Ellis To: Times Higher Education Date: 4th June 2011, A.D. Re: My Response to the Open Letter Published in the Times Higher Education 2ndJune 2011 signed by Alvergne et al in which Dr Satoshi Kanazawa is attacked for allegedly Sub-standard Research. The signatories to this circular-letter to the Times Higher Education make much of the fact that Dr Kanazawa refuses to address criticism of his work and that he will not engage with his critics. There are two problems here. First, why is Dr Kanazawa expected to become involved in lengthy and time-consuming correspondence with people who object to his published work? If he wishes to do so that is a matter for him. If, however, he decides that his time can be more profitably spent by doing his research, rather than talking about it that is also a matter for him. I should also point out that when I challenged Bhikhu Parekh to provide sources for his claim, made in The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain: Report of the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain (2000) that ‘Race, as is now widely acknowledged, is a social and political construct, not a biological or genetic fact. It cannot be used scientifically to account for the wide range of differences among peoples’ (Parekh, para 5.10, p.63), he just ignored me. Second, the signatories begin their letter by referring to hostile comments made about Dr Kanazawa’s article (‘Why are Black Women Less Physically Attractive than other Women?’) in various fora. At no stage do they address the assertions and arguments of the article. Even if Dr Kanazawa’s question reflects some racial bias against blacks that itself does not automatically disqualify the search for an answer to a question that arises from bias against blacks. All research begins with a bias: the bias of interest. In any case, I thought that the pursuit of knowledge and ideas for its own sake was one of the founding principles of a university and other institutions of higher learning. Or am I to understand that this principle must be jettisoned when dealing with race? Moreover, how can it be the case that Dr Kanazawa ‘rarely engages with his scientific critics’ if he submits articles for publication in journals? In the politically correct world of what purports to be higher education any researcher who submits an article in which he uses low mean black IQ to explain black failure is most emphatically engaging with his scientific critics: he serves notice that he rejects the current explanations for black failure (white racism, the legacy of colonialism and so on). Nor does Dr Kanazawa sin against academic convention, as asserted, when he has not published ‘corrections to the papers for which doubt has been cast on his conclusions’. In the academic world today, one which is dominated by various multiracial/multicultural orthodoxies, any researcher who concludes that low mean IQ can explain a great of black failure will have his conclusions subjected to ‘doubt’. Doubt does not constitute evidence of hard error. In fact ‘doubt’ is too polite a word. Any academic who rejects the cosy, sentimental assumptions of the left regarding race and racism can expect to be subjected to vicious ad hominem attacks. I experienced such attacks at Leeds University in 2006. Members of the faculty who agreed with me in private nevertheless maintained a cowardly public silence. An answer to the question posed by Dr Kanazawa on the lack of black female attractiveness may have implications for understanding the weak family structures of blacks, their greater sexual promiscuity (the implications for the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases are obvious) and the high levels of black on white rape. Far more threateningly, the premise of Dr Kanazawa’s question implicitly posits the view that skin colour or any other visible racial characteristic is or may be a primary criterion in any hierarchy of racial beauty. In other words, Dr Kanazawa’s article is a direct challenge to the fallacious view that race is a social and political construct and that desirable qualities, such as sexual attractiveness and high IQ are uniformly and equally distributed among and between populations or that these evolutionary valuable assets should be so distributed. Is it this that provokes the hatred of what the signatories call ‘the evolutionary behavioural science community’ instead of a reasoned response? By ignoring the challenge thrown down by Dr Kanazawa the signatories to this letter are guilty of the very thing of which they accuse Dr Kanazawa: silence in the face of his trenchant criticism. They remain silent because they are frightened of race (as a genetic and biological reality) and they know that if they argue for or against Dr Kanazawa’s assertions they enter into the forbidden realm that race is in fact a genetic and biological reality. The signatories then warn: ‘we feel compelled to state publicly that Kanazawa’s research should not be taken as representative of the evolutionary behavioural science community’. Well, I am compelled to state publicly that many scientific discoveries, inventions, technological advances and intellectual shifts in the status quo were not representative of any established community or group when they were first made. Innovation, discovery and invention are by their very nature outside the known and the expected and typically the work of individuals who are, happily for them, not part of any collective or ‘community’. Discoveries great and small, shock, offend or inspire awe, precisely because they are unknown, unexpected and often challenge reputations and powerful vested interests: they dislocate our expectations of the world about us. Socrates, Plato, Pythagoras, Heraclitus Kepler, Galileo, Darwin, Mendel, Leibnitz, Heisenberg, Einstein, Nietzsche, Rand, Solzhenitsyn, and the greatest mind of them all - Sir Isaac Newton – exemplify the historical trend, the path away from obscurantism towards knowledge and this elusive thing called Truth. The signatories make much of the fact that the London School of Economics (LSE) will host a debate under the heading of ‘Is Evolutionary Psychology Racist?’ In the West, anything that challenges or undermines multiculturalism is deemed to be racist. For example, the following assertions are deemed to be racist in British universities: (i). race is a genetic and biological reality; (ii). all races and cultures are not equal; and (iii). mean black IQ is lower that mean white IQ (in the case of Sub-Saharan blacks, significantly lower), and this discrepancy has major consequences for real-existing multiculturalism in First-World states with large non-white populations. The signatories to this letter betray their politically-correct credentials and their agenda when they write that a great deal of the research in the field of evolutionary psychology is ‘nuanced’ and ‘culturally-sensitive’. In plain English, if one regards low mean black IQ as a powerful and consistent explanation of black failure worldwide one is not demonstrating a ‘nuanced’ or ‘culturally-sensitive’ interpretation of the data if one makes those points. Ad hoc, ‘culturally- sensitive’ explanations have to be provided – colonialism, white racism, capitalism, multinationals, or in the case of Macpherson, institutional racism – anything will suffice, provided that it is not directly attributable to blacks and the way they behave. When it comes to peer-reviewed articles in journals the critics of Dr Kanazawa want it both ways. Articles by Dr Kanazawa in peer-reviewed journals are deemed to be suspect yet articles in peer-reviewed journals which attack Dr Kanazawa are somehow above reproach. In fact the signatories admit as much when they write: ‘The peer review process is not perfect and appears to have failed when dealing with Kanazawa’s poor quality work’. Did anyone review the letter to the Times Higher Education attacking Dr Kanazawa? The attacks on Dr Kanazawa reveal something of a war between journals. So: ‘Those of us who have reviewed his papers have had experiences where we have rejected papers of his for certain journals on scientific grounds, only to see the papers appear virtually unaltered in print in other journals, despite the detailed critiques of the papers given to Kanazawa by the reviewers and editors of the journals that rejected his papers’. Could it be that the scientific grounds alone, on which the signatories claim the reviewers rejected Dr Kanazawa’s articles, were not accepted by the editors of the journals in which the original unaltered articles were eventually published? One editor of a journal rejects an article for publication; another accepts the article. That an article is rejected by one journal (with reasons for rejection) does not mean that the author of the rejected article has to make changes before he submits the article to another journal. I thought diversity of scientific opinion was supposed to be a good thing. I hope that the editors of the journals in which Dr Kanazawa’s work has been published, editors who are now being criticised, will respond robustly to these accusations of academic incompetence. It is a rule that the author of an article should not know the names of those who review his article; yet here we have signatories to an open letter to the Times Higher Education who claim to have reviewed Dr Kanazawa’s articles and found them to be inadequate on scientific grounds alone (of course) and are now openly violating the ethical code which requires that their assessment of an academic’s work be kept private. They publicly violate the ethical code required in the peer-review process by informing the world that they had earlier found Dr Kanazawa’s articles to be inadequate on scientific grounds (of course), and now, having violated that ethical code to attack Dr Kanazawa, they exploit the anonymity of the code so as to hide among a list of names. Who are these people that claimed to have reviewed Dr Kanazawa’s work? Why do they hide among others, protected by ‘we’? This blatant violation of the ethical code that governs peer review and which now serves as the basis for mounting these scurrilous attacks on Dr Kanazawa may well be actionable. Highlighted here is that the whole process of peer review is wide open to abuse, and will be abused in areas such as global warming, race and IQ and sex differences. Another massive potential for abuse arises from the fact that nepotism and cliques are rife. If there is money, status and media adulation to be derived from telling the world that black failure is not due to low mean IQ but is caused by white racism then those who dissent from these evasions can expect to be ostracised and denied publication in the relevant journals. They also run the risk of losing their posts. The signatories to this letter know these outcomes full well. In the USA and in the UK there are countless examples of academics’ being harassed and threatened with loss of employment for attacking the cult of multiculturalism. That the signatories to the letter attacking Kanazawa signal their support for academic freedom is, in this instance, cynical and tactically opportunistic on two counts. First, they write: ‘Academics who publish work that may be unpopular with some sections of the media or general public should not be condemned on those grounds’. The trouble with this is that it rather conveniently arrogates a special status to academic opinion, the much-vaunted peer-review process, as being decisive in rejecting Dr Kanazawa’s work. This process is massively flawed and wide open to abuse. Second, in writing this letter to the Times Higher Education the authors are manifestly reacting to the attention of the electronic and broadcast media, ignorant student activists, black special-interest groups and some members of the general public. The masses, as it were, having created an atmosphere of outrage against Dr Kanazawa, have prepared the way for the authors who now judge that the time is right for them to inflict the coup de grâce on the hapless and isolated Dr Kanazawa. The timing of the letter to the Times Higher Education in which Dr Kanazawa is attacked in this way is also rather convenient. Dr Kanazawa is, we are informed, currently the subject of an internal LSE investigation. The letter to the Times Higher Education, alongside the provisional findings of the investigation, could be used by some in the LSE as justification for suspending Dr Kanazawa pending an internal inquiry. Suspension at this stage would create the impression among the gullible that Dr Kanazawa is not being suspended for challenging the anti-intellectual orthodoxies mandated by political correctness in British universities - and so there can be no question that academic freedom and the institution of free speech are being violated – but because he has transgressed the conventions and codes of rigorous scientific method, as defined by the signatories to the letter to the Times Higher Education. According to this view he would be an impostor who should be expelled from ‘the evolutionary behavioural science community’ and lose his post at LSE. The LSE must not permit itself to be influenced by external rivalries and feuds. I have no doubt that should Dr Kanazawa be suspended the delay between his suspension and any internal hearing will be used to examine all his published work with a view to citing any errors against him in the hearing. His work will be subjected to a level of scrutiny and criticism beyond that used in peer-review and will also be expected to meet higher standards of evidence than that used in the original peer-review process. Were this to happen it would amount to an academic version of double jeopardy and would represent a clear violation of due process. The signatories to this letter and other critics should ask themselves whether their own published work would survive full, open, heightened and post-publication scrutiny. None of these attacks would have been made on Dr Kanazawa were he black or brown. Black or brown academics are able to make nonsensical, bizarre and often virulently anti-white racist statements without any sanction at all yet whites (and now Japanese) can expect to be chastised for anything that violates multicultural orthodoxy and especially for dissenting from the view that all races and cultures are the same. The evidence for a double standard here, a clear and obvious violation of scientific method, never mind the hypocrisy, is overwhelming and well documented. As I have indicated in an earlier email to Professor Rees, the director of LSE, if Dr Kanazawa is suspended pending an internal hearing, others and I will offer our services and expertise as witnesses for the defence.

Abortion: Our Own Modern Inflicted Holocaust

Below is an article from Christian voice, showing the true Horror of the Genocide of the unborn that we have witnessed since David Steel the former leader of the Liberal democrats introduced the abortion act as a private members bill in 1967, perhaps David should consider the numbers murdered if he ever wishes to falsely accuse any one in the British National Party or EDL of ever being Nazi's as we see it all true Nazi's should join the Lib Dems and for ethnic cleansing of adults perhaps the Labour party.

Christian Voice - Abortion: Our Own Holocaust: "

Our own Holocaust

That was the headline in the Sunday Telegraph on the subject of Thursday's 60th anniversary of the Russian army's entry into Auschwitz. They made a telling point - we congratulate ourselves on how much better we are than were the Nazis, but we have an extermination programme every bit as ruthless as their's was. The Nazis started off by forcibly sterilising the mentally handicapped as 'unfit to reproduce', a policy supported by British socialist intellectuals like George Bernard Shaw. They moved to exterminating those they termed 'useless eaters', using gas to kill them, and then extended the policy to other sections of society they disliked, mainly Jews. As for the disabled, 70,000 handicapped people were put to death by the summer of 1941.

In Britain today, to kill an unborn baby after 24 weeks is illegal, unless the baby is diagnosed with a handicap, which as we have recently seen, can be as trivial as a cleft palate. We compel the owners of the smallest public building to construct ramps for the disabled, whilst trying to eliminate disabled people before they are actually born. Disabled people cost money to look after, and the Nazis would have appreciated the logic of our position.

At 550 unborn babies a day, we may not be killing as fast as the Nazis managed, but we have been at it for longer. Just like they did with their extermination programme, we started by killing the hard cases, but moved quickly to extend it to those who were just inconvenient to have around. Our total death toll is now well over 6 million from abortion in the thirty-six years since it was legalised in 1968. The Sunday Telegraph concluded:

"We have successfully disguised the enormity of what we are doing from ourselves, just as the Nazis did. Thursday should not be an occasion for congratulating ourselves on how far we have come from the moral abyss of National Socialism. It should rather prompt an honest recognition of how disturbingly close our abortion laws have taken us to it."

English Defence League, Tower Hamlets Video they need all the Support We Can Muster

Below is an excellent video that has been released by the English Defence League, which is used to support an article on their site, about their intentions to remind the colonisers of Tower Hamlets London, that it is still a part of the United Kingdom. we recommend that all true Englishmen and also our Scottish, Welsh and Ulstermen brothers and sisters arrange some kind of support for this rally by either going or fund raising ! the time for trying to talk to the liberal political elites is now coming to a close in our view at the Horwich Nationalists and that we must take action ourselves to protect ourselves and our women and children not only in the future but now from the groomers and sex and rat pack attackers along with their corruption!

Join us in Bolton and Horwich and spread the word with our new national leaflet

Join us and spread the word with our new national leaflet

  News Team @  http://www.bnp.org.uk/

The British National Party is going to print with a nationwide run of our new recruitment leaflet – and we need you to help spread the word.
Our We Want Our Country Back leaflet has already returned an excellent response during its trial run of 100,000, and now it is vital we spread its message of hope as far and wide as possible.
With this recruitment campaign, we can capitalize on the ‘soft’ support we received up and down the UK in this year’s elections.
We need to let everyone know there is a real alternative to the anti-British LibLabCon monopoly – and we need to do it now.
The hard-hitting leaflet explains where we stand on pensions, British Jobs for British Workers, family values, immigration and defence, among other issues.
It also calls for an English parliament, withdrawal from the EU, and a ban on ritually slaughtered meat.
All British National Party groups and branches are invited to contact dispatch manager Alwyn Deacon at dispatch@bnp.org.uk or on 0844 809 4582 to place their orders so we can adjust our print run accordingly.
The price of the full-colour A4 leaflet is £30 per 1,000, including postage and packing.
Individual supporters are also encouraged to order leaflets for distribution.

Prices are:
50 leaflets: £2 (including P&P)
100 leaflets: £3.50 (including P&P)
250 leaflets: £8 (including P&P)
500 leaflets: £16 (including P&P)
1,000 leaflets: £30 (including P&P)
2,000 leaflets: £48 (including P&P)

Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish versions of the leaflet are also available, but due to the economy of scale in printing, the price will be on application depending on the amount ordered.
This simple, attractive leaflet is a fantastic recruiting tool for our party – but only if enough patriotic Britons like you help us get it to as many of our countrymen as possible.
Please help do your bit for Britain, while we still have a country left to save.
You can also download the leaflet by clicking here. Print them off on your own printer at home or at work, and give them to friends and family. Also email the leaflet to everyone in your address book.
Those British National Party activists with a RISO printer, please print a master copy from the PDF and use that to print your own black-and-white versions of this leaflet.

P.S.  Another great way to help the British National Party is to set up a standing order mandate and give the price of a pint regularly. Please download the standing order mandate here: http://www.bnp.org.uk/PDF/StandingOrder_Mandate2.pdf print it of, fill it in and post it to British Heritage, PO Box 213, Wigton, Cumbria CA7 7AL.




If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

A warning to those who support the Labour Party

A warning to those who support the Labour Party
by Horwich nationalists
Below is a video and transcript of a speech given by author and scholar Robert Spencer addressed and condemning the European allies of the Marxist UK labour party , who like their UK counterparts are now are link to the forces of darkness and evil, and regularly use violence and intimidation against their opponents. Be warned the labour party is an ally of the Islamists and the enemy of Christian Western Civilisation, so consider do you wish to vote for your own enslavement by voting Labour, in a deluded wish to teach the government a lesson. You MUST! realise that all three of the major Parties are interlinked, and offer support to groups such as the UAF!

        
A demonstration for democracy, human rights and equal rights for women needs heavy police protection, as activists from the extreme left use horns, shouting and drums to silence the voices they do not agree with. Here are the words that the extremists do not want the public to hear, as author and scholar Robert Spencer addresses the unruly crowd in Stuttgart, June 2nd 2011.
The noisy crowd were wearing flags and banners from Antifa, Die Linke, SPD (German Social Democrats) and several other organisations, whose attitude to freedom of expressions apparently is quite questionable. Watch the video, see the banners and feel the noise.
Here are the words that the Antifa, Die Linke and the Social Democrats in Stuttgart do not want you to hear:

TRANSCRIPT
And now another guest:
Robert Spencer from the USA.
Robert, it is up to you to talk to the people.
I came from the United States of America to stand for freedom, with all free people, against the forces of oppression and darkness which you are representing.
I came here in order to stand with the people who are fighting for the freedoms that makes it possible for you to do what you are doing today.
Not the violence and hatred, but to stand and dissent, but you can't stand to have an (inaudible), you can't stand having dissent, you have to try to throw bottles, and to crowd us up, because you are cowards, because|you know that you stand for nothing except passion and darkness and hatred, and that is why you are there.
And that is why I am here.
You are fighting for the most radically intolerant and hateful ideology on the planet. Everywhere in the world, everywhere in the world, where there are Muslims and non-Muslims, there is conflict because the Muslims attack the non-Muslims. because unceasing they wage war against the non-believers, and they subjugate them.
You are already subjugated! You are already their useful idiots. You are already their tools. You are out here in their service. And you think your fight is for freedom. You are fighting for your own slavery! You are fighting for your own enslavement. And it will come. It will come to you.
You are fighting for an ideology that denies the freedom of speech, and one day you will wish you had the freedom of speech that you are trying to fight against today.
You are fighting for an ideology that denies the freedom of conscience
and will kill you if you disagree, which is exactly what you want to do already. You are fighting on behalf of an ideology which denies the equality of rights for women, and all the women among you will one day be enslaved, if you get what you want.
You are fighting for the destruction of all the freedoms that you enjoy. You are fighting for the (inaudible) defeat of your own selves, of your own lives. You are slaves seeking slavery. You are the oppressed loving your oppression.
And thinking that you are standing for freedom, you are the most foolish, you are the most evil, foolish, people on Earth.
We are standing for the human rights of all people. Of the oppressed Christians in Indonesia,|in Pakistan, in Egypt, in Sudan you just heard about, We are standing for the oppressed people|who are fighting the Islamic Jihad. Everywhere around the world,|in Israel, everywhere around the world.
And so, in closing, I have to say:
Shame on you!

Geert Wilders : Though I stand here alone, my voice is the voice of many

By the Horwich Nationalist 


Geert Wilders gives his final address to the court in Holland defending the right of free speech and the right to criticise the Islamifaction of Holland and Europe, I hope those not involved in the struggle to regain our rights of the freedom of speech from the Marxist labour and Con/Dem parties watch this video, of the passionate and insightful address to the Dutch court, for if Geert Wilders would be found guilty at this trial the Proud nation of the Netherlands would be gone for ever with ours soon behind it!
full transcript of speech below video

Mister President, members of the Court,

I am here because of what I have said. I am here for having spoken. I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak. Many have kept silent, but not Pim Fortuyn, not Theo Van Gogh, and not I.

I am obliged to speak. For the Netherlands is under threat of Islam. As I have argued many times, Islam is chiefly an ideology. An ideology of hatred, of destruction, of conquest. It is my strong conviction that Islam is a threat to Western values, to freedom of speech, to the equality of men and women, of heterosexuals and homosexuals, of believers and unbelievers.

All over the world we can see how freedom is fleeing from Islam. Day by day we see our freedoms dwindle.

Islam is opposed to freedom. Renowned scholars of Islam from all parts of the world agree on this. My witness experts subscribe to my view. There are more Islam scholars whom the court did not allow me to call upon to testify. All agree with my statements, they show that I speak the truth. That truth is on trial today.

We must live in the truth, said the dissidents under Communist rule, because the truth will set us free. Truth and freedom are inextricably connected. We must speak the truth because otherwise we shall lose our freedom.

That is why I have spoken, why I speak and why I shall continue to speak.

The statements for which I am being tried are statements which I made in my function as a politician participating in the public debate in our society. My statements were not aimed at individuals, but at Islam and the process of islamization. That is why the Public Prosecutor has concluded that I should be acquitted.

Mister President, members of the Court,

I am acting within a long tradition which I wish to honour. I am risking my life in defence of freedom in the Netherlands. Of all our achievements freedom is the most precious and the most vulnerable. Many have given their lives for freedom. We have been reminded of that in the commemorations of the month of May. But the struggle for freedom is much older.

Every day the armoured cars drive me past the statue of Johan de Witt at the Hofvijver in The Hague. De Witt wrote the “Manifesto of True Freedom” and he paid for freedom with his life. Every day I go to my office through the Binnenhof where Johan van Oldenbarneveldt was beheaded after a political trial. Leaning on his stick the elderly Oldenbarneveldt addressed his last words to his people. He said: “I have acted honourably and piously as a good patriot.” Those words are also mine.

I do not wish to betray the trust of the 1.5 million voters of my party. I do not wish to betray my country. Inspired by Johan van Oldenbarneveldt and Johan de Witt I wish to be a politician who serves the truth end hence defends the freedom of the Dutch provinces and of the Dutch people. I wish to be honest, I wish to act with honesty and that is why I wish to protect my native land against Islam. Silence is treason.

That is why I have spoken, why I speak and why I shall continue to speak.

Freedom and truth. I pay the price every day. Day and night I have to be protected against people who want to kill me. I am not complaining about it; it has been my own decision to speak. However, those who threaten me and other critics of Islam are not being tried here today. I am being tried. And about that I do complain.

I consider this trial to be a political trial. The values of D66 [a Dutch leftist liberal party] and NRC Handelsblad [a Dutch leftist newspaper] will never be brought before a judge in this country. One of the complainants clearly indicated that his intentions are political. Even questions I have asked in parliament and cooperation with the SGP are being brought as allegations against me by Mr Rabbae of GroenLinks [the leftist Dutch Green Party]. Those on the Left like to tamper with the separation of powers. When they cannot win politically because the Dutch people have discerned their sinister agenda, they try to win through the courts.

Whatever your verdict may be, that is the bitter conclusion of this trial.

This trial is also surrealistic. I am being compared with the Hutu murderers in Rwanda and with Mladic. Only a few minutes ago some here have doubted my mental health. I have been called a new Hitler. I wonder whether those who call me such names will also be sued, and if not, whether the Court will also order prosecution. Probably not. And that is just as well. Because freedom of speech applies also to my opponents.

My right to a fair trial has been violated. The order of the Amsterdam Court to prosecute me was not just a decision but a condemning verdict by judges who condemned me even before the actual trial had begun.

Mister President, members of the Court, you must now decide whether freedom still has a home in the Netherlands

Franz Kafka said: “one sees the sun slowly set, yet one is surprised when it suddenly becomes dark.”

Mister President, members of the Court, do not let the lights go out in the Netherlands.

Acquit me: Put an end to this Kafkaesque situation.

Acquit me. Political freedom requires that citizens and their elected representatives are allowed to voice opinions that are held in society.

Acquit me, for if I am convicted, you convict the freedom of opinion and expression of millions of Dutchmen.

Acquit me. I do not incite to hatred. I do not incite to discrimination. But I defend the character, the identity, the culture and the freedom of the Netherlands. That is the truth. That is why I am here. That is why I speak. That is why, like Luther before the Imperial Diet at Worms, I say: “Here I stand, I can do no other.”

That is why I have spoken, why I speak and why I shall continue to speak.

Mister President, members of the Court, though I stand here alone, my voice is the voice of many. This trial is not about me. It is about something much greater. Freedom of expression is the life source of our Western civilisation.

Do not let that source go dry just to cosy up to a totalitarian ideology. “Freedom,” said the American President Dwight Eisenhower, “has its life in the hearts, the actions, the spirit of men and so it must be daily earned and refreshed – else like a flower cut from its life-giving roots, it will wither and die.”

Mister President, members of the Court, you have a great responsibility. Do not cut freedom in the Netherlands from its roots, our freedom of expression. Acquit me. Choose freedom.

I have spoken, I speak, and it is my duty – I cannot do otherwise – to continue to speak.

Thank you. 
Geert Wilders

Education: A Radical Rethink

Education: A Radical Rethink

By Richard Barnbrook.  at http://bnpideas.com/

Just imagine for a moment, what it would be like if you could neither read nor write. The letters on this page that you are now subconsciously deciphering, would be incomprehensible!

You would also have difficulty in understanding sign posts, instructions leaflets, warning notices, correspondence, advertisements, newspapers, not to mention novels, articles, events programmes and the internet. A whole area of modern life would be to you literally, a closed book.

And yet this is the terrible impediment experienced to a greater or lesser extent by some 30,000 (about one in 20) children leaving school in Britain today. And as many as one in ten of 16 year olds (some 60,000) left school in 2005 did not pass GCSE English or Maths.

‘Education, education, education’ was a central slogan in the mantra of Tony Blair’s Nu-Labour. And yet despite throwing millions into the schools and education budget, the fact that so many children habitually under-achieve, has to be one of the most scandalous travesties of modern times.

And simply chucking good money after bad into propping up an inefficient system that is fundamentally flawed, is not the answer.

Indeed, like most of the problems which British society now has to reckon with, the rot set in largely in the 1960s.

The levelling down ‘one size fits all’ emphasis was on Comprehensive education, with large unwieldy and unruly schools in which, because of their size, individuals are just faces in the crowd. Corporal punishment in schools was abolished in Britain in 1967, and so discipline became and continues to be nothing more than a joke to bored and disruptive pupils intent on causing trouble.

But to add to this, the syllabus itself has become so prescriptive, over-burdened and progressive, that those whose learning rate is slower and who take longer to grasp the basics of a subject in the early years have virtually no hope of ever catching up.

Think what it must be like to have to sit through lessons in geometry when you haven’t grasped the concept of simple addition. Or, to broaden the analogy, classes in how to make a wedding cake when you can’t follow how to make a victoria sandwich?

I’m sure you can think of similar analogies from any field of expertise. The whole experience becomes meaningless, boring and humiliating, when one is being taught a subject at a level beyond ones comprehension. And yet this is the regular, monotonous and pointless routine for thousands of our school children, day after day and year on year.

The current school leaving age is 16, and I think that it should remain as such. Each and every child is therefore entitled to receive full time education from the age of 5- eleven years in all.

But my innovative proposition would alter the automatic progression from year to year up the school; promotion to the next class would depend wholly on whether an adequate standard is attained at the end of year assessment.

So until the child is thoroughly familiar with the standard of that year, there would be no promotion to the higher year group. For some, this would inevitably mean that their eleven years in the state education system never takes them much beyond primary school. But at least then, every child would have had every possible opportunity to enable him/her to be able to read and write fluently!

Although this proposal could be considered radical, it would as I see it, completely alter and improve the level of achievement and motivation of our children. The major milestone for all children, other than the end of year tests, would be the ‘primary examination,’ which would be at the end of what is now Key Stage 2, at age 11.

At this level, the child/young person would be able to demonstrate a comprehensive all round ability in literacy and the spoken word, numeracy, and elementary science. But in keeping with the rules of this suggested model, pupils who were not up to standard would have to resit the assessment the following year and thereafter until they attain the satisfactory standard.

Although in this day and age when so much emphasis is placed on the need to have a degree, a child that has been thoroughly taught emerges from primary school equipped with sufficient skills to make his or her way in the world.

Those who have achieved a good level at Key Stage 2 SATS can read and write fluently and are already basically numerate. In addition, they have should also covered some history (albeit there is insufficient emphasis on English History on the current syllabus) and some geography and grasped basic concepts in science.

Fluency in literacy is of course the key to education as a whole and once this has been achieved, the sky is the limit- a young person then has the option of developing his or her own skills and following his/ her own leanings in career choice, or indeed of going back into education at a later date. But a child who has not mastered the basic three Rs is in no way suited to yet more education at a higher level. No wonder there are so many disaffected truants in secondary school! For them, the experience of learning has become an agonising pain, rather than the fulfilling pleasure that it ought to be.

The implementation of such a change would cost relatively little in terms of extra money, although with mixed age ranges, more supervision would be required. But this would amount next to nothing in the grand scheme of the education budget. And it would make such a positive difference to the lives of thousands.

There are other alterations which I would advocate that would make a huge improvement to our educational achievements. Modern syllabi have become grossly unwieldy; far less ground should be covered, but it should covered more thoroughly. The vast amount of paperwork that teachers have to produce simply to prove that they are doing the job of teaching, ought to be abolished.

More emphasis should be given to learning by rote to reinforce basic principles and inculcate ‘gems of learning.’ English history should be taught as a core subject in order to instil a sense of pride and national identity. Corporal punishment should be re-introduced immediately, in order to reinstate discipline and respect for authority.

Of course, this is a universal blue-print, designed to ensure that all our children have the best chance of achieving full literacy and numeracy. However, those more able, who passed the new end of year tests, would proceed steadily up the year progression ladders as at present. The other improvements suggested above, -would apply across the board in order to improve the system as a whole.

In my view, teachers are highly undervalued. The teaching profession could be said to be perhaps the most responsible and valuable profession, second only to that of medicine. It is teachers who have the task of instructing and civilising the next generation and thereby of safeguarding this country’s future. We are happy as a society to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds in salaries to lawyers, and, as we have seen recently, to bankers and financial speculators, with little or no overall gain to the common good. But the teaching profession has been blighted because of low pay, coupled with the inability to impose discipline, both of which has resulted in a lack of respect. Consequently, it is not always easy to attract recruits of the very highest calibre.

So I would advocate raising teachers’ salaries to a basic of say £50,000 for a primary school class teacher, rising to double this for a head of department in at secondary level. We need to attract teachers of the very best ability, moral fibre and dedication and make entry into the profession as competitive and as selective as it is for law and medicine.

This strategy could be partially funded with money currently wasted on ‘nothing courses’ in colleges of further education and universities. But a country that has money to burn on pointless foreign wars surely can find the resources to properly educate its young.

We need to get back to basics and common sense in education, before another generation of non-attainers is condemned to the scrap-heap of illiteracy, disillusion and recidivism. A good thorough, basic and enabling education is a ‘pearl of great price’ and it needs to be seen and valued as such. But for many, learning is not something that one just picks up- it needs to be inculcated.

And in my view, these proposals would enable the highest standards of literacy and attainment to become the norm.

Protect Our English Churches – Email Your MP

Protect Our Churches – Email Your MP

Email your MP now telling them that it is time to Protect Our Churches and preserve Britain’s Christian heritage.
Here is an example of what you could write: IT IS QUITE SIMPLE JUST USE THE LINK AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE AND FOLLOW THE COUPLE OF  SIMPLE STEPS.

Dear [INSERT YOUR MP'S NAME],
Britain’s churches were built with the love, dedication and money of the local people.
Many sacrificed greatly to build, maintain and support their local church. There are a growing number of local Christian churches that are being converted to Islamic mosques. This is unacceptable for a number of reasons.
Many local churches contain graveyards, and in most cases the integrity of the graves where generations of our people have been laid to rest is not respected. In fact, some are even bulldozed in the most disgraceful manner.
Please could you tell me where you stand on this issue? Could you tell if you would be willing to take some sort of action to highlight this growing problem?
Yours,
[INSERT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS]

USE THIS LINK TO EMAIL AND FILL OUT YOUR PETITION 

£400 Million of British Foreign Aid Given to India Had No Effect

£400 Million Foreign Aid Given to India Had No Effect

  News Team at http://bnp.org.uk/

Hundreds of millions of pounds of British money sent to improve India’s schools has been wasted, as a governmental report reveals the country’s education standards are in fact falling.
Over the last eight years, LibLabCon governments have pumped £388 million into India’s education system and plan to spend another £117 million by 2013.
However, the Annual Status of Education Report into Indian schools revealed that much of the money has been wasted and that levels of reading, writing and arithmetic have dropped.
Standards in some regions have fallen to such an extent that national figures show up to a quarter of primary school teachers are routinely absent, half of ten-year-olds cannot read a sentence and only a third can do a simple sum.
The report, announced by Indian vice president Shri Hamid Ansari, found that the money sent by Britain has made no impact. It concluded: ‘Close scrutiny of India’s education system reveals a sobering truth – that this large investment has been spent poorly.
The highly regarded independent report found that, while there had been an increase in the number of children attending school, results are now considerably worse than those three years earlier: ‘The changes that can be discerned in the system as a whole are minor and often imperceptible,’ it read.
The news comes amid Coalition plans to enshrine in law an increase in British aid spending of over £12 billion and rising a year at a time when public services are facing sweeping cuts.
The Department for International Development (DfID) has already received criticism of its funding for India’s Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan education programme after investigations exposed corruption within the scheme, with up to £70 million going astray.
Britain is the only major country in the world set to meet an international target to spend 0.7 per cent of its annual income on foreign aid by 2014. We already contribute twice the G8 average of 0.28 per cent.
Incredibly, International Development Minister Alan Duncan defended Britain’s exorbitant foreign aid packages by saying they make Britain ‘popular’ aboard.
The Conservative minister also denounced criticism of foreign aid as ‘aid bashing’ and ‘illogical’ and employed the David Cameron trick of baseless claiming it stops immigration and terrorism.
He ridiculously tried to defend Britain’s foreign aid wastage by saying, ‘If you had a pound, would you give a halfpenny to stop someone dying in the street? The answer is you probably would, actually,’ seemingly unaware that it is not his ‘halfpenny’ that he is giving away.
India is the chief beneficiary of British aid, despite having its own space, nuclear and foreign aid programmes. It gets £295 million a year from British taxpayers.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

LYBIA : UK GOVERNMENT HYPOCRISY A PICTURE TELLS A 1000 WORDS

THEY SAY A PICTURE TELLS A 1000 WORDS, THEN WHY SAY MORE OVER THE UK GOVERNMENT SELL OUT TO THE MULTINATIONALS AND THEIR ARMS TRADE ALLIES!

A Great New British National Party Newsroom Website

Horwich Nationalists are proud to announce the launch of a superb brand new website from Andrew Brons MEP of the British National Party, Named Ideas-Thoughts-Action.  

Which is a platform for British Nationalists ideas and policies, WITH MANY TRUTHFUL ARTICLES FREE FROM POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND LEFT WING BIAS!  Also their is plenty of opportunity for members of the public to leave comments and ideas for policy. A full range policies are covered from education to foreign aid and banking plus many more ! please visit the site to see what is REALLY HAPPENING IN BRITISH POLITICS! http://bnpideas.com/

Dr Satoshi Kanazawa, his Research and the Call for his Dismissal. fron the LSE

Dr Satoshi Kanazawa, his Research and the Call for his Dismissal.

Written by Frank Ellis

From: Dr Frank Ellis To: Professor Rees, London School of Economics (LSE) v.mizgailo@lse.ac.uk Date: 27th May 2011 AD Re: Dr Satoshi Kanazawa, his Research and the Call for his Dismissal. The quality of arguments deployed against Dr Satoshi Kanazawa for his article on the theme of black female attractiveness does not inspire confidence in the intellectual calibre of the authors. I suppose this is just one consequence of applying a policy of affirmative action for students and faculty who do not have to meet the same standards as whites. Too many black students and faculty do not seem to grasp the abstract concept of free speech and the role of academic freedom in the pursuit of truth and the eradication of error. Black hostility to free speech and academic freedom is not surprising, since blacks have shown themselves to be quite incapable of creating advanced societies or sustaining any kind of intellectual milieu in which the right to dissent is enshrined in law and custom. At times we whites find it a strain in dealing with white dissenters: for blacks with their generally less developed capacity for abstract thinking it is an impossible burden. Unable to grasp the abstract nature of free speech and its essential role in scientific and technological progress blacks perceive the exercise of free speech by non-blacks, especially as it concerns the discussion of low mean black IQ, black educational failure, appalling levels of black crime in First and Third World states, incompetence, unbelievable savagery and the pitiful state of sub-Saharan Africa and, of course, Islamic terrorism, as racism. This is always at all times, in all places, the default position for blacks and their white manipulators when confronted with evidence of black failure. This is the reason that blacks, encouraged by whites who should know better, are attacking Dr Satoshi Kanazawa and demanding he be sacked. I have read articles by Dr Satoshi Kanazawa and I have found them to be well researched, clearly written and very interesting. Despite all the accusations of “scientific racism” and the associations of Kanazawa’s research with Jim Crow, Apartheid, the Holocaust and the slave trade, the genetic, psychometric and historical data demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that the mean intellectual and cultural achievements of blacks are way below those of whites. The only conclusion – and it is not a happy one for blacks and their white, xenophiliac manipulators – is that intellectually and culturally blacks are, as judged by the objective, unforgiving measure of achievements, not by sentimental, emotional, ad hoc evasions and multicultural propaganda, inferior to whites, Jews and north-east Asians. Denouncing Kanazawa as some version of a racist does nothing to change this state of affairs. It merely encourages blacks and their white manipulators always to scream racism when unpleasant truths emerge or are posited. Behind the public debate of this matter I have no doubt that the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has already demanded that LSE take some form of action against Dr Satoshi Kanazawa. In the first instance this will mean that Dr Kanazawa is expected to withdraw his research and issue a suitably grovelling apology. I can only hope that Dr Kanazawa will resist any such demand. He has said or written nothing for which he should apologise. In the event that Dr Kanazawa refuses to grovel the EHRC will threaten LSE with a diversity audit, arguing that by failing to take action against Dr Kanazawa, the LSE is violating its obligations under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. At this stage, in order to propitiate blacks, their white manipulators and to remove the threat of a diversity audit, the LSE will move to suspend Dr Kanazawa and seek to secure his dismissal through an internal hearing. As far as LSE is concerned, this has the advantage of immediately reducing the negative publicity for LSE and creates the impression that LSE has responded in a politically correct manner to the clamour of so-called anti-racists. The threat by EHRC to carry out a diversity audit will be made behind the scenes so as to avoid the impression that LSE is being placed under any pressure to act from outside the institution. I urge LSE to stand up to the bullies, the ignorant, the plain gullible and above all the viciously anti-white racist EHRC. In 2006, when teaching at Leeds University, I was subjected to the same sort of treatment when I highlighted the complete failure of multiculturalism. I was profoundly shocked by the despicable cowardice of administrators and faculty members. I argued then, and I argue now, that for all the words in their charters on academic freedom and free speech, universities on the themes of multiculturalism, feminism, non-white immigration, race and IQ are craven and corrupt. I hope that LSE proves me wrong. For all the unpleasantness, I nevertheless learned a great deal. Be advised that should LSE succumb to the temptation to suspend Dr Kanazawa and initiate an internal hearing with the aim of securing his dismissal, I and others shall contact Dr Kanazawa and offer our experience and services as witnesses for the defence. Please, do the decent thing and reject the mob and the hideous EHRC and all its works. Yours sincerely Frank Ellis

Broke Britain Leads the World (in Giving Away Money)

Britain Leads the World (in Giving Away Money)

News team @ British National Party Newsroom

The ConDems gave away a record £8.5 billion in foreign aid in 2010, making Britain the most proportionally generous country in the world, and the total is set to rise year on year.
Britain gave the highest percentage of any country’s GDP to foreign lands, sticking rigorously to a misguided six-year-old G8 pledge to throw 0.7 per cent of taxpayers’ money away by 2013, a promise other countries seem to have long since forgotten.
The British foreign aid bill is set to rise year after year, reaching an estimated £12 billion by 2014.
In fact, Britain is donating double the G8 average foreign aid contribution, spending 0.56 per cent of GDP compared to the 0.28 per cent norm.
Compared with the other G8 countries, Britain spends £600 million more than France, £700 million more than Germany, £1.7 billion more than Japan and £4.4 billion more than Canada, Italy and Russia combined. Only the United States gives away more, £18.5 billion; however, that accounts for just 0.21 per cent of its GDP.
Part of Britain’s contribution will involve a gift of £110 million to North African countries such as Egypt and Tunisia over the next four years in support of the Arab Spring riots.
Up to £40 million of that will come from the Foreign Office for “political reform”, and £70 million from the Department of International Development to boost the countries’ struggling economies.
When announcing the aid to North Africa, Cameron repeated the same platitudinous excuses that he gave when he handed over £650 million of taxpayers’ money to Pakistan in April.
Then, he said the money to Pakistan would help avoid “the problems of migration [and] of extremism” and that “it’s in our interest that Pakistan succeeds”.
Clearly employing the same speechwriter, Mr Cameron yesterday announced, “If we can secure greater democracy and freedom in countries like Egypt and Tunisia, that is good for us back at home.
“That will mean less extremism, it will mean more peace and prosperity, and it will mean there won’t be the pressures of immigration that we might otherwise face to our own country.”
In 2005, the richest eight nations pledged to hike aid spending to 0.7 per cent of their gross national products by 2013.
Since 2004, Britain has raised spending on overseas aid by a whopping 74 per cent, three times the level of increase in Japan and Italy. Other countries have failed to find £12 billion of the cash they pledged in 2005.
The chief beneficiary of British aid is India, a country that has its own space, nuclear and foreign aid programmes. It gets £295 million a year.
Other top yearly recipients include Ethiopia (£214m and set to rise), Bangladesh (£149m and set to rise), Sudan (£146m), Tanzania (£144m), Afghanistan (£133m), Nigeria (114m and set to rise), the Democratic Republic of Congo (£109m and set to rise), Ghana (£90m) and, of course, Pakistan, which is set to receive a staggering £446 million a year from British taxpayers.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British national Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

British National Party Activists Pay Tribute to Blackpools Charlene Downes Despite Police Threats

British National Party Activists Pay Tribute to Charlene Downes Despite Police Threats

News Team at http://www.bnp.org.uk/

British National Party activists paid tribute to missing teenager Charlene Downes in Blackpool today despite strong opposition from police who threatened to arrest party members and throw away the wreath laid for Charlene as “rubbish”.
Activists attempted to lay a wreath and a bunch of flowers in Charlene’s memory outside Mr Beanz, the takeaway shop in Dickson Road where she was believed to have been groomed, murdered and had her body turned into kebabs by the shop’s owners.
The activists, led by National Organiser Adam Walker and Cllr Mike Whitby, were told by police that they were in breach of the Public Order Act for being near the takeaway shop and that they would be arrested if they did not move immediately. The police attempted to issue Mr Walker and the activists with written warnings, but they did not accept them.
When the activists tried to lay the wreath for Charlene outside the shop, police told them that it would be thrown away as it was “rubbish” and would be seen as “incitement”.
Activists said a prayer for Charlene then went to Blackpool town centre and distributed to the public over 2,000 “Our Children Are Not Halal Meat” leaflets, which warn about the Muslim paedophile grooming epidemic in Britain.
Afterwards, activists laid the wreath at Charlene Downes’s memorial bench in Blackpool’s Stanley Park and held a minute’s silence for her.
Mr Walker said he wanted to hold a dignified ceremony to raise awareness about the victims of Muslim paedophile grooming and murder, not just in Blackpool, but all over the country.
He said it was disturbing that there are people holidaying in Blackpool now who are blissfully unaware of the horrors that have taken place there and will continue to take place.
“What we have got here is certain members of our community who are grooming and drugging our children for sex. It’s completely unacceptable, and it makes my blood boil,” Mr Walker told British National Party TV.
“It’s only the British National Party at the moment that has the guts to speak about this sort of thing. We’re here for our people, and we’re fighting back. We’re going to start bullying these bullies.”
Blackpool schoolgirl Charlene Downes disappeared in 2003 aged fourteen.
The owners of what is now Mr Beanz takeaway, Jordinian Iyad Albattikhi and Iranian Mohammed Reveshi, were tried for her murder in 2007 and 2008 but were acquitted after police failings and awarded with nearly half a million pounds in compensation.
The verdict was met with disbelief as police had captured more than 50 tape recordings of the two men in which it was reported that they joked about chopping up Charlene’s body, putting her through a mincing machine “bones and all” and putting her remains into their kebabs.
Mr Beanz has also been linked to teenage Paige Chivers, a fifteen-year-old girl who went missing in 2007.
Charlene’s mother Karen has said that she hopes that there is now enough public pressure for the police to re-open the investigation.
You can see British National Party Television’s video report by clicking the first image below.

Activists outside the Mr Beanz takeaway in Dickson Road

At the Stanley Park memorial bench

Mike Whitby with the memorial wreath
Also video of Police threats to Activists

If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4
581. If operators are busy, please try again.

Why is intelligence frowned upon?’ – Great Article on the Dumbing Down of Children

‘Why is cleverness frowned upon?’ – Great Article on the Dumbing Down of Children and the Education System

I’ve came across this article from The Independent describing the “non-learning”
happening in UK schools. Funny,

Why is cleverness frowned upon?
Tom Hodgkinson
Having three children in the state primary system, I’ve seen the results of New Labour’s Brave New World anti-intellectualism up close. Academic work has been largely dropped. Times tables, spelling, grammar and good handwriting are not taught. One teacher told us that correcting spelling might interrupt “the creative flow”. In the playground, age-old games such as conkers and It are banned, as they might upset someone. The local authority, we are told, has also banned the ancient game of football, because it encourages competitive behaviour. Instead, pupils are treated to lavish praise, sex education and colouring in, plus a big dose of television via the whiteboards. The place is awash with laptops. There is a therapeutic ethos, and in “circle time”, pupils are encouraged to talk about their problems at home. Cleverness is frowned upon: yesterday my daughter said she didn’t like being clever and was considering doing bad work so she would be moved down a set.
As it gradually dawned on my wife and me that there was very little of what we would call teaching going on, we decided to step in and fill the gaps ourselves. (Mr Gove has promised a return to a more traditional agenda, but how long will it take?) So now at home we drill the children in times tables, teach them the rudiments of grammar, and we all learn Latin together with a tutor via Skype. We play competitive games and do wrestling. We tell them off. We praise them for good work, but tick them off for bad work. And in a sense this is all the wrong way round: schools are doing the parenting and the parents are doing the schooling.
The upside, it’s true, is that children enjoy school. Our kids react with horror when we threaten them with home education. The downside is that parents are forced to take on the burden of educating their children properly, as the state has shrugged it off.
I hear similar anecdotes about the secondary system: one English teacher told a parent we know that they didn’t teach spelling because pupils could use the spellcheck on their computers. Instead of books, “texts” are taught. A dumbed-down relativism has led to the idea that a web page or an advertisement is as worthy of study as William Blake. I blame Roland Barthes: I myself was briefly infatuated by the French post-structuralist writer, whose book Mythologies was a big hit with trendy undergraduates. We liked the way he used his considerable intellect to write about the Citroë* DS. But really Mythologies was just a cerebral game, and shouldn’t have been taken as the basis for a whole education system.
Another culprit would be the journalist Toby Young. His magazine Modern Review, which flourished briefly in the early 1990s, celebrated the idea that you could write about Terminator 2 as if it was high art. All things were equal. There was nothing better or worse, and beauty was in the eye of the beholder. Mr Young has thankfully rejected this creed and is now attempting to set up a school which will concentrate on Latin and grammar rather than empathy and self-esteem.
Oh yes, self-esteem. If everyone has lots of self-esteem, the theory goes, no one will commit crime and everybody will be nice to each other. But the theory is clearly nonsense. When combined with an anti-academic education system, the result is children who are stupid, but who have a lot of self-esteem. And that is a worrying combination. My local landlord tells me that the graduates from the local comp who he employs in the pub not only cannot spell “gravy”, but get upset when you point this out. We should remember that self-esteem under its old name, pride, was considered sinful.
The combination of stupidity and self-esteem, though, makes for very good consumers. Every child is taught shopping and spending skills to a high level. It is all summed up in advertising slogans such as “Because you’re worth it”. The commercial world continues to promote the self-bigging-up agenda through products. If you’re feeling down, you go shopping, and because you have not been taught how to think, you don’t realise that you are being conned.
I would dearly love to start an anti-materialist advertising campaign that featured a monk with his head bowed and the slogan, “Because I’m not worth it.”
Self-esteem, or self-confidence, in any case, comes not from self-esteem classes, but from ability. “Competence is the foundation of happiness,” wrote William Cobbett. Teachers, simply, should teach knowledge, or scientia, and skills, or arti. That sort of teaching, and not happiness lessons, will lead to a fulfilled life.

You might also like:from http://vigilantcitizen.com/
 

 

Dumbing Down Society Part I: Foods, Beverages and Meds

Dumbing Down Society Pt 2: Mercury in Foods and Vaccines

Transhumanism, Psychological Warfare an

Asylum Seeker Costs Soar at Home and Abroad

  News Team at http://www.bnp.org.uk/

British taxpayers have had to pay out £1.2 billion in the last three years to house and support “asylum seekers”, a figure that accounts for just part of the yearly asylum swindle.
The released figures show that, in the past three years, the UK Border Agency has wasted nearly £400 million of taxpayers’ money on housing for those claiming asylum.
The Agency also provided a further £192 million in cash support for asylum seekers in that time period. Another £407 million was spent providing care for unaccompanied refugee children.
The figures do not include the cost of how much is spent on deporting – or failing to deport – those judged to be bogus asylum seekers.
The total cost of the asylum system has been calculated by Migration Watch at £2 billion a year.
The spending was criticized by the TaxPayers’ Alliance. A spokesman said: “It’s staggering that over a few years there’s a billion pound price tag for housing and supporting asylum seekers. There will be costs but this is a very big bill for taxpayers.”
The bulk of the money is spent on building council and social housing for so-called asylum seekers, most of whom have crossed several internationally recognized safe countries to reach the benefits paradise of Britain.
The soaring cost of asylum is not just restricted to Britain, of course, but is mirrored across the Western world.
It was announced earlier in May that Australia’s predicted asylum bill for illegal immigrants arriving by boats has quadrupled this year to over one billion Australian dollars (£691 million). The biggest expense for the country this coming year will be an estimated £462 million on detention and related costs.
Incredibly, part of the Australian government’s “solution” to its worsening immigration problem is to pay £191 million to import yet more refugees.
The so-called Malaysia Solution, championed by prime minister and Labor Party leader Julia Gillard, will see Australia send “up to” 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia in return for receiving a further 4,000 people judged to be “genuine refugees”.
Australia has gullibly gifted Malaysia with £50 million over the next four years to accept the handful of immigrants, which will run Australian taxpayers £62,000 per deportee if all 800 are sent, which is believed to be extremely unlikely.
Only the British National Party will bring an end to the invasion of our country. The British National Party argues that asylum seekers have the right of refuge in the first safe country bordering the one they flee, and do not have the right to cross any safe countries to reach Britain.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

Britain The Benefits Riviera of the World

The Benefits Riviera of the World

   News Team at  http://www.bnp.org.uk/

By John Salvage –
 
Credit Crunch... what Credit Crunch? The world's top spot for the good life, where homes, and everything in them, including ash trays, as highlighted by the British National Party almost a decade ago, is getting even more comfortable. It sounds like a great place to visit, and millions have decided to stay. So where is it? Here, of course.
Many of these visitors cannot speak the native language, one of over fifty spoken here, thus the ever-so-kind taxpayers have decided, at least by their voting patterns, to pay for them to have their wishes translated into English. The cost? Nothing really, well, not to them anyway. The taxpayers, easily herded into ‘political gas chambers with broken promises and wild ideas of equality, pay around £116,000 per week collectively for this 'service.'
Happy to vote for illegal and horrific wars, the people living in The Benefits Riviera of the world, formerly known as Great Britain, also enjoy helping in excess of 180,000 immigrants, sorry, visitors, some of them 'health tourists,' to the tune of £78,000,000 per year. Money going to support visitors' children still in their homeland, while one or both parents are enjoying life here, is estimated to cost more than £20,000,000. every year.
The number of these types of claims has risen by 20 per cent in the past year alone, and is in reference to Eastern Europe only. Of course, this does not even include visitors from Africa, Asia, the Far East, South America, China, or the West Indies.
Our system is rigged to promote 'equality,' and that now includes literally anyone with enough Chutzpah to 'enjoy our hospitality' from anywhere in the world. Why wouldn't anyone take this opportunity? Many people have been driven from here, and other Western countries for decades, with dreams of making a better life. Some, of course, have returned. They do not want to admit that the grass is not greener on the other side. Having said that, people taking their families to shores of gold, and seas of fun and prosperity, means that something is wrong here, or from whence they came. Except for those not of indigenous European descent, there are not that many options left open to them, and this also goes for those who made Africa a civilised, crime-free and prosperous continent in the last century and before that.
And now, the Benefits Riviera of planet earth, so loved and hated in equal terms by millions, has a gaping hole in its institutions. That hole, which includes what was once a world-renowned health service, armed forces, and police force, sits alone, begging for help from someone, somewhere. It sits alone, in the northern part of Europe, broken, crime ridden, and helpless.
Still, we have some heart-warming things to fill our evenings with, as millions starve, freeze to death, and find nothing relevant in terms of jobs or careers, self-employment and future prospects. Yes, we have a coalition government, made up of 'opposing ideologies.' They are different; some call themselves Liberals, others Socialist, and some Conservative, with the odd few apparently very worried about being integrated into the EU.
Yes, they are different, they are different to us, their lives are 'gold plated' against poverty. They are also different in many other things also. They differ from the millions who come here looking for a better life, but want so much to bring equality and fairness in society to them. After all, it won't be long before an immigrant, or one from immigrant ancestry, takes the 'top job' and becomes Prime Minister, just like America.
Not of Britain, of course, but of England. Scotland and Wales will, of course, be able to enjoy this idea, as they are now preparing to depart from the ancient Britanicus that at one time was one single entity. Soon, we will have our very own Barack Obama. Equality would then be total. The Marxists, so wonderfully financed by the foreign bankers of old, would then be a happy bunch.
Marxism is, of course, along with its later creation, the 'Frankfurt School,' the bedrock of the whole sham now playing at a city, town or village near you. This bedrock was not particularly stable, though, as the whole house of cards was financed by those who will soon show how ruthless they are. How so? It's like this: Super capitalists, mainly immigrants themselves, embedded in Europe and New York, desperately needed a vehicle to drive their plan of world fiscal and resource domination into being. Once this was achieved, so-called Socialist revolutions could then explode all over the world. Now they have completed this, many who voted Labour, joined unions, and basically threw the baby out with the bath water by despising their traditions and culture, will suffer severely. Nothing is safe, and no amount of students demonstrating, or people moaning in the decreasing number of pubs etc., will stop what is coming if solid action is not forthcoming. Our little island may be the benefits Riviera of the world, but it is simply unsustainable.
With so-called 'main-stream' ideology comes propaganda, and now it is all coming home to roost. Marxism and basic Social and Capital dogma has been proven to be one and the same. It's all now becoming clearer, and our little nation, once the breadbasket of the world in sheer engineering and export terms, is being broken, smashed into pieces, and everyone will become a victim.
Now we have only one choice, and that is to take a lead from all the opposing groups, and polarise our efforts no matter what. Somehow, and somewhere and sometime soon, very soon, there will have to be a single entity on the worldwide stage, one that will reach every individual, group, and political party wherever they are on earth of Anglo-Celtic origin. We have little time, so watch this space, as it is becoming apparent that a legal representative with a recognised diplomatic status, to push for the rights and renaissance of our kind, will become a reality.
If you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.

Arrested and Tortured by Police for Telling the Truth About Labour Party Perverts

Arrested for Telling the Truth
News Team

Two British National Party activists were arrested in Liverpool last month for distributing leaflets that disclose information of 25 Labour party paedophiles. The treatment of the activists by police while in custody is now subject to an investigation.

Peter Tierney and Andrew Tierney were arrested on 30 April for distributing Labour 25 leaflets, which detail the names of 25 convicted councillors, activists and mayors of the Labour party for paedophilic offences such as child rape.

While in custody, Peter Tierney said that he was subjected to violent abuse by police officers, who bruised his ribs and stamped on his jaw after he refused to have his fingerprints taken.

Speaking about the contents of the leaflet, Mr Tierney said: “This is all fact. When we were taken into the police station, we actually begged them to get us into court so we could bring all this evidence to court.”

Nick Griffin, who met with Mr Tierney regarding the incident before the North-West Way Forward meeting on Thursday, said of details on the Labour 25 leaflet:

“They’re all genuine. They’re all proven. They’re all convicted. There’s a serious degree of sympathy for paedophilia within not just the Labour party but within the entire political establishment, hence, for instance, in which they lowered the age of consent to sixteen. One day it’s paedophilia – they change the law – it’s no longer paedophilia.”

When asked about Mr Tierney’s treatment by police, Mr Griffin commented: “It’s a symptom of how out of control the police force and judiciary is. The police are making it up as they go along, and this is something that has to be opposed and exposed.”

The below videos feature the interview with Mr Tierney and the activism on 30 April for which he and his brother were arrested.

More information about the Labour 25 campaign can be found on its blog, www.labour25.wordpress.com

f you liked this news article, please donate to help with running costs and improvements of the British National Party website.
Alternatively ring our donations hotline on 0844 809 4581. If operators are busy, please try again.