Hand in Glove

I’ve tried tackling this issue already and the only successful effort I could manage was here.  My main feelings are still those of powerlessness and depression; and there is little to be said that hasn’t already been, but no amount of political platitudes, pink balloons, playlists, hashtag prayers or I ♥ MCR from people who have never set foot in the place, will make a sod of difference.  This weekend there will be a slebfest love-in which will do nothing to address the causes of the slaughter that it supposedly sets out to remember; an act of mass-murder by a Muslim misogynist at an event popular with young girls, a step further than the rape of thousands of girls by ‘grooming’ gangs in Rochdale and numerous other towns.  Britain’s Feminist Establishment has continued to deny the motivation for the murders as it has about the rapes.

Meanwhile, the government will clamp down not on the murderous Islamic ideology, but on ‘Islamophobic’ criticism of it.  But there is more to it of course, as John Pilger has highlighted.  Britain’s security services have a long track record of being hand in glove with Islamic terrorism, allowing these terrorists to be given free rein when useful.  The SAS helped to train the Islamic Mujahadeen in Afghanistan; Saudi Arabia has long been one of the main customers of the British weapons industry and earlier this year Theresa May agreed a ‘defence’ deal with Turkey’s Islamist president.  If you want more evidence of how Islam and its inherent intolerance to non-believers is permeating our society, you don’t need to see the idiots protesting about cartoons.  Follow the money and see how many businesses are owned or sponsored by the Islamic Absolute Monarchies of the United Arab Emirates, including the cricket ground where that slebfest will take place.


New Dawn Fades


Theresa may but she may not.  Her penchant for wearing heels is appropriate given how good she is at dragging them.  Since the referendum we have now had Six Months and Sweet FA.  Theresa desperately wants to be Maggie, but doesn’t have the electoral mandate; and she can’t be Maggie, because Maggie only stayed in power by convincing just enough people in the constituencies where it mattered, to vote Tory and share the spoils of purchasing the stolen goods that constituted our national infrastructure.  The family silver has been sold and now the cupboard is bare, our ‘sterling’ currency being anything but that, its market value based only on what investment return can be gained from it (next to bugger all with interest rates so pitifully low).  Under Tory then Labour then Tory we have had a ‘brick’ standard for our economy over the past few decades.  Little wonder then that for a large minority of voters in Britain, the EU is either better or no worse; and as the EU has ruled against Theresa’s Snoopers’ Charter, they have a valid point.

Many of these ‘Remainers’ believe that the EU needs to be reformed and that this is still achievable.  Their intentions may be sincere, but not a single one of them can elaborate how this reform can come about, given the EU’s track record of ignoring any attempts to do so and its contempt for any referendum result which goes against the deterministic European Project to create a continental superstate.  Theresa is, like Maggie was, a ‘Remainer’ at heart.  A true Tory, a whore to big business and its desires for anything that will reduce the costs of labour.  (It was Maggie after all who signed the Single European Act to encourage mass migration to drive down labour costs).  Theresa talks a lot of tough guff about immigration but without any sincerity.  Her track record as Home Secretary, by making cuts to the UK Border Agency, shows that she is anything but sincere on the matter.  Theresa realises that ‘Brexit’ is the only chance that she will ever have to make her mark on the world as a Leader.  With Hillary out of the way and Angela on the skids, Theresa could become the most powerful female Head of Government in the world; and a genuine ‘Brexit’, a clean break, would mean no more subordination to the EU.  But she won’t go that far, she is still trying for a fudge which will please no-one.

I made my departure, my ‘Leave’ vote, as I recognise that the EU has got beyond the point where it can be reformed, not something which I would have thought a decade and a half ago.  But to me, ‘Brexit’ is only worth having if it leads to greater reforms of the United Kingdom, such as it is, possibly away from being a Kingdom or Queendom.  An unelected Head of State, an unelected Upper Chamber (Lords rather than Commissioners) and the lack of a written constitution are issues which genuine progressives should be addressing, instead of clinging to the EU.  We Britons cannot change the EU, we are outsiders and always have been.  The EU will not adopt the common sense solution to its lack of moral authority, of a demerger into a Common Market for the trade in goods and services and nothing more than that.  So we must Leave the EU and build a better Britain, better than the Tories can ever offer us and take back the infrastructure which they plundered from us.  All this sounds very Old Labour, but that is what I am deep down.  The Tories’ procrastination over ‘Brexit’ is because only a minority of them genuinely support it, so the majority are hoping that the longer they can drag it out (with the backing of fraudulent ‘progressives’), the more fed up ‘Leave’ voters will become and say fuck it, why bother?

Finally, one should try to be optimistic and wish good tidings at this time of year; and in keeping with that, the journalist whom I mentioned in an earlier post on this blog must be expecting a single malt from Santa, so merry is he.  However, I cannot share his merriment.  The contrived ‘migrant crisis’ and the terrorist attacks that have come in its wake do not bode well for a peaceful New Year, as both will continue indefinitely.  The globalist enterprise known as the so-called British Broadcasting Corporation, the voice of the political establishment, will accuse those who voted ‘Leave’ of turning their backs on Europe, hence being on the same side as the so-called Islamic State.  Just wait.

Winter Warmer

As my last post showed a half-naked man, then in the interests of balance, I’ve decided to write a post about Brigitte Bardot, the woman who made the bikini fashionable.


Bardot is a ‘Marianne’, an icon of the French Republic, someone unafraid to speak her mind; a woman who abandoned her acting career to live with her menagerie of animals in Saint-Tropez, devoting her life to the causes of vegetarianism and animal rights, long before these became fashionable causes célèbres for the Hollywood Set.  It is easy to criticise Bardot and many may see her as just a wealthy elderly woman living near the Côte d’Azur, with its tan-to-cancer beaches and locals who look like they have been bred for their leather, speaking controversially in the safe knowledge that she can afford lawyers to fight any prosecutions against her for her views; also knowing that her iconic status affords her a certain degree of impunity.

Bardot’s objection to the barbarity of Halal and Kosher slaughter methods has drawn criticism from the Regressive Left to whom she is ‘racist’, when her views on this matter are in reality ‘culturalist’; and praise from the whiter-than-white snowflakes of the Alt-Right, a large proportion of whom are gun-toting, pro-hunting rednecks, hostile to her support for vegetarianism and animal rights.  If Bardot’s views on religious slaughter are ‘xenophobic’, then her opposition to the inherent cruelty of force-feeding ducks and geese for the production of foie gras; and her opposition to bullfighting, which is still practised in Languedoc, must be similarly ‘prejudiced’ against French culture, given that France is not exactly renowned for its adherence to animal welfare standards, let alone animal rights.  Bardot’s views on these matters are consistent (just like those of Morrissey, one of our most famous old curmudgeons, who has also in the past been accused of ‘racism’).

It is Bardot’s support for Marine Le Pen, whom she compared to Jeanne d’Arc, which is where she has drawn the most criticism.  If Bardot’s support is unconditional, then that criticism is deserved, as it is unlikely that Marine Le Pen would pay anything more than lip service to the causes to which Bardot has dedicated her life, as it would damage Le Pen’s electoral campaign among conservatives to do so.  That Bardot is willing to speak out, when feminists are unwilling to do so, against Islam, a religion which subordinates women, is itself a good thing, but that doesn’t mean that she should compromise her other views by allying herself with pro-hunting conservatives.  As an aside, a couple of years ago, French politician Nadine Morano used the above photograph on her Facebook page to campaign against women wearing burkas at the beach (this was slightly before the advent of the ‘burkini’ and the ‘controversy’ about that).  As Bardot is now an octogenarian, presumably Morano wouldn’t expect her to wear a bikini in order to prove her secular, patriotic credentials in the service of the republic.