Monday, 31 October 2011

Nukes Found In Libya

Image - The flag of Al Qaeda flying over the courthouse in Benghazi.

Why no announcement on the news that nukes have been found in Libya ?

The outgoing premier of Libya's NTC, Mahmoud Jibril said Sunday that nuclear weapons were found in the country, according to the Al Arabiya TV network, Israel Radio reported.

Jibril also said that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will provide further details on the weapons found in the next few days, according to the report.

A myriad questions arise ;

1) who gave them to Gaddafi

2) was it Israel, South Africa ( the Thathcer / David Cameron nukes) or North Korea ?

3) why didnt Gaddafi use them if he was such an evil monster ?

4) what will Al Qaeda do with them now they control Libya ?

5) why arent the media in the West mentioning this incredible announcement ?

6) Have the Islamists who run Libya got hold of a nuke and thereby creating a pretext for a massive attack on America / UK / Europe to act as the pretext for imposing martial law as the global economy crashes ?

7) will we soon see a massive nuke attack / false flag attack ?

As for the Libyan rebels - here is the proof they are Al Qaeda ;

It was here at the courthouse in Benghazi where the first spark of the Libyan revolution ignited. It’s the symbolic seat of the revolution; post-Gaddafi Libya’s equivalent of Egypt’s Tahrir Square. And it was here, in the tumultuous months of civil war, that the ragtag rebel forces established their provisional government and primitive, yet effective, media center from which to tell foreign journalists about their “fight for freedom.”

But according to multiple eyewitnesses—myself included—one can now see both the Libyan rebel flag and the flag of al Qaeda fluttering atop Benghazi’s courthouse.

According to one Benghazi resident, Islamists driving brand-new SUVs and waving the black al Qaeda flag drive the city’s streets at night shouting, "Islamiya, Islamiya! No East, nor West," a reference to previous worries that the country would be bifurcated between Gaddafi opponents in the east and the pro-Gaddafi elements in the west.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Machine Gun Preacher, Libya and Africom

Image - I am the West and only I can save Africans from other Africans.

In relation to the Hollywood and American foreign policy, it is no coincidence that movies released by Hollywood seek to support or reflect American foreign policy.

When the US were mired in Iraq film after film was released about Islamists in Iraq to bolster the publics support for the war.

During WW2 hundreds of films featuring the Nazis were released as pro-war propaganda.

Korea, Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan all have had their own war propaganda movies / documentaries released to bolster the support for US military foreign policy.

Now in the wake of the Libyan war comes Machine Gun Preacher.

The film is ostensibly about the story of Sam Childers, a former drug-dealing biker tough guy who found God and became a crusader for hundreds of Sudanese children who've been forced to become soldiers.

Thats the blurb.

Here is the real meaning of the film.

The Libyan invasion by NATO was the first move of the US army into Africa to checkmate the rise of China's influence in the region.

At the same time the US managed to smash Gaddafis plan to set up an African oil bourse backed by Libyan gold Dinars which would have challenged the global economic supremacy of the US dollar, the US managed to seize the vast oil and water reserves of Libya and at the same time the US sent out a message to the world that anyone who dares defy the power of the US global fascist corporations that control the US government via political funding and via the US military industrial block, they will be removed from power, sodomised with a knife and shot dead like a dog in the streets.

This is not international politics, this is psychopathic gangsterism.

The NATO attack on Libya was nothing to do with humanitarianism, it was the start of a New Great Game of Empire in Africa.

The aim is the re-colonisation of the continent by the West.

This begun with the use of foreign aid to impoverish and drag into debt the governments of Africa.

Now the physical removal of governments hostile to the West has begun.

This is why Obama has just sent US special forces into Uganda.

This is also why UK special forces went into Somalia this week to kidnap a Somali militia leader.

Africom is now waging war against China in Africa.

This is via waging war against governments that support China in Africa.

This is why films like Machine Gun Preacher are being released.

Look at the poster of the film above.

See the heroic white man with a gun protecting the black child.

Yet the truth is that the poverty and weapons that have damaged Africa are products of the West.

Russian made weapons flood the continent and are used in wars.

Foreign debt drives poverty and causes wars.

African dictators are supported, put into power, funded and armed by the West.

African doctors, nurses, academics etc are then forced to leave their own nations and come to the West, therefore accelerating the collapse of civil society in their own countries.

This then causes the collapse of those nations.

The wars / tribal revolts that then start in Africa act as the pretext for UN or US intervention.

The aim is to allow the West to recolonise the West.

This is why Hollywood is now releasing films like Machine Gun Preacher.

The sub text of the film is that only the white man who represents the West can save Africa.

The Africans cannot save themselves, so the West must recolonise Africa economically and militarily via Africom to protect Africans from themselves.

The films are not meant for African audiences, they are primarily to indoctrinate Western audiences with the idea that only the West via its bombing missions and armed interventions can save Africans from other Africans.

The films are acting as an antidote to the Hollywood messages of the last few decades which were based on a 'white man is evil and robbed/ murdered/ oppressed Africans' which were peddled to the masses under the previous US government regimes who had an isolationist position on Africa as they were dealing with mainly the Russian / Soviet threat - hence the endless films like Red Dawn, Rambo 2, Red Scorpion etc etc in the 1980's.

The same thing happened in the Balkans when movies

The expansion of Africom into Africa began about the same time the Bruce Willis film Tears of the Sun was released ;

After the US military were driven out of Somalia the Hollywood movie Black Hawk Down depicted Somalians as brutish Islamist monsters so that the US public did not demand they return to that region.

Now the US need to checkmate China, hence the Hollywood movies are required to condition the masses into accpeting military interventions in Africa.

The fact that the West merely wants to suck Africa dry of its resources is never mentioned in these type of war propaganda films, for the West is always depicted as the heroic saviour of the people of whatever nation / continent it is robbing.

Expect more films like Machine Gun Preacher as Africom seeks to expand out into the continent and recolonise it for the US corporations that need new resources to save the US global economic imperium.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Friday, 28 October 2011

The Green Arrow Goes All Gushy Again

Image - Heil Jim 'The Milkman' Dowson - Woof, Woof. Good dog. Have a biscuit.

I have just been having a good laugh at the total bollocks article just posted up by Green Arrow on his site about the laughable announcement by Britain First that they are going to be a 'political party'.

It appears that Green Arrow, who seemed to have settled down from his endless sycophancy over Griffin, now seems to have reinvigorated his homo-erotic fetish for Paul 'Sniff, Sniff' Golding and Jim 'The Milkman' Dowson.

You know that when Green Arrow goes all gushy and moon eyed over a nationalist, its more a reflection of his own delusions than anything approximating reality.

According to Green Arrow the man who most attacked the racial nationalists during his time as con man in chief of the BNP, Jim Dowson, has now become the heir to Heinrich Himmler and will unleash his NS shock troops ( Nettoes Supermen ) and start a racial revolution in the UK.

What makes this joke even funnier is the fact that about ten of the idiots who post on his site have decided to forego booze and fags for the night and donate it to Jim Dowson so as to save the White Race.

Apparently this is the statement of Britain Firsts political principles that will ensure the survival of the White Race ;

no.3 Britain First is committed to preserving our ancestral ethnic and cultural heritage, traditions, customs and values. We oppose the colonisation of our homeland through immigration and support the maintenance of the indigenous British people as the demographic majority within our own homeland. Britain First is committed to maintaining and strengthening Christianity as the foundation of our society and culture

So lets analyse this statement to see what it says about the survival of the White Race and how Britain First will save the White British people ;

1) It does not define the British people as having to be white

2) It does not state anywhere that non-whites are not British due to their race or that they cannot become British eg via Cultural Osmosis

3) It does not state that non-whites are not British in relation to their citizenship status

4) It does not state that compulsory repatriation of immigrants is required to save the White British folk

5) It does not state that they will stop any further immigration

6) It doesnt say anything about the problem of multi-culturalism and integration

7) It doesnt say anything about the problems of White immigration into Britain - eg White Eastern Europeans who have swamped parts of the UK

8) It doesnt even support voluntary repatriation.

In fact it says, or offers nothing, of any interest to a Racial Nationalist.

The fact that the window lickers on his site think it does, proves only that they are thick enough to believe any old bollocks they are told by Dowson, Golding and their propaganda master Green Arrow.

I wonder how much money Dowson has given Green Arrow to ensure his support for his latest rip off scam disguised as a political party ?

As for the issue of what we need to do to ensure the demographic threat from unintegrated immigrants with high birth rates in the UK, it doesnt say a thing.

For those nationalists that are too thick to know the answer to the issue of what we must do to cut the numbers of unintegrated immigrants in the UK whose birth rates are higher than ours = the answer is simple.

Demand they adopt British culture and integrate into British society or deport them if they refuse to do so.

The reason why the birth rates of unintegrated immigrants are so high is because under the system of multi-culturalism they have not been forced to abandon their ancestral cultures and integrate into British culture when they were allowed to settle in the UK.

It is the ancestral cultures of these colonists who have been allowed to settle in the UK to have high birth rates.

If they were forced to adopt our indigenous British culture and abandon their ancestral cultures then they would have exactly the same birth rates as we do.

Instead they are allowed to retain their ancestral cultures, to not adopt British culture, to not integrate into society and at the same time allowed to stay on welfare benefits and simply have more and more kids that we pay for.

But do most nationalists understand this issue, that the failure to demand immigrants integrate and adopt our culture to ensure their birth rates become the same as ours - no, of course not.

Only integration and deportation can solve the demographic problem of immigrants with high birth rates.

They just wag their tails and lift their paws in a Hitler salute whenever some idiot starts spouting a vapid load of bollocks about 'Racial Nationalism'.

To be frank British Nationalism has become a pathetic joke.

The BNP Zombie cultists shuffle along in the grip of a collective Griffinite psychosis, the Brons contingent think doing nothing = taking action and the mug punters are lining up to fund Dowsons latest scam and buy him another villa in Spain.

British Nationalists, as I said, have become truly pathetic.

There is no free thinking, no insights, no innovation, no new strategic and tactical thinking - in fact the whole movement has become a farce.

P.S I have no problem with Green Arrow as a person, as I know he is a sincere Nationalist - the only issue I have is his peddling bogus propaganda to his followers that Dowsons latest scam has anything to offer either Nationalism or attaining the ideological goals of Racial Nationalism.

Add to Technorati Favorites

How To Beat The System

Existentialists, of course, automatically jump to the conclusion that “Before The Law” is a message of the absurd nature of man’s search for reason and structure in a universe of random coincidence. That “the law”, as it were, is a superficial concept that humanity uses to make life more bearable. That we seek to create artificial social constructs in order to keep ourselves afloat in a sea of chaos. This is partly true. The law is, indeed, an abstraction conjured by men. However, the source of the most fundamental laws, being inherent conscience, is far from abstract. In fact, it is one of the few aspects of our existence that is undeniably tangible and universal. It is proof that all is NOT random, and that there is a meaning and a purpose to what we do here and now.

I see “The Trial” and “Before The Law” not as treatise on the futility of man’s search for justice, but as a warning on the foolishness of man’s dependency on systems not rooted in conscience. That is to say, we have a tendency to linger about idly while others make our decisions for us. We expect the system we live in to provide answers, to provide nurturance, to provide fairness, and to provide change where necessary. This expectation is a dangerous one.

Most social and political systems today are designed around collectivist methodologies. Their primary tool is centralization of power, and the removal of choice from the public consciousness. We are made to believe that the establishment is necessary for our survival, and that to abandon it would mean certain destruction. We are taught that the individual is subservient and inconsequential in the face of the state. This is simply not so. Like the traveler in “Before The Law”, we have been defeated by our own expectations of how the law (or justice) works. We sit and wait for permission, when we should be charging through the gates and taking what is rightfully ours.

Even amidst recent and increasingly prevalent protest actions on the part of Occupy Wall Street groups, there are still some within these movements who believe the answer to fighting back against the corruption of banking cartels and puppet politicians is to hand even MORE power over to the state, and to collectivize our culture still further. The ignorance of this mentality is no less than astonishing.

The only practical strategy for combating the tyranny of centralized systems has been and always will be decentralization. Individuals must stop relying on the rules of a rigged game to see them through to the truth. This means that while mass protests are certainly a powerful tactic for voicing concerns on an international stage, they accomplish little to nothing in the way of meaningful change in the long run unless they are backed by individual actions to break away from dependency upon a poisoned political and economic framework.

The common assumption amongst Americans is that nothing can be done without mass action resulting in “compromise” from leadership. That the healing of our cultural dynamic is a “top down” process. That one person alone has little at his disposal for bettering the world. In fact, it is always self aware and self sustaining individuals who build better societies, not angry mobs without understanding or direction. Individuals blaze the path that the rest of the world eventually follows, and they do this through one very simple and effective act; walking away.

By walking away from the corrupt system, and building our own, we make the establishment obsolete. This philosophy could be summed up as follows:

Provide for yourself and others those necessities which the corrupt system cannot or will not, and the masses (even if they are unaware) will naturally gravitate towards this new and better way. Offer freedom where there was once restriction, and you put the controlling establishment on guard. Eventually, they will either have to conform to you, attack you, or fade away completely. In each case, you win. Even in the event of attack, the system is forced to expose its tyranny and its true colors openly, making your cause stronger.

The obvious question now is; how can each one of us use this strategy in our daily lives? Here are just a few easy applications:

1) Focus On The Federal Reserve

If you as an activist or the movement you support are not fully aware of the private Federal Reserve Bank and its primary role in the destruction of our economy, our currency, and our political dynamic, then your protests are a waste of time, and your movement will end in failure. Uneducated mass actions are easily manipulated, and can even end up serving the purposes of those oligarchs they seek to dethrone. G. Edward Griffin’s full analysis on the history of the Federal Reserve “The Creature From Jekyll Island” and similar materials should be handed to every OWS protester before it is too late.

2) Take Back Your Savings

Do you have a bank account with one of the so called “too big to fails”? Is the culmination of your savings currently in the hands of financial monstrosities like Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, etc? Well, take your money back! This has been done by a few protestors and the response from banks has been outlandishly oppressive, including new guidelines attempting to obstruct customer access to savings, and even calling the police! This tells me that they are afraid. Afraid of Americans catching wind of the idea that the money they place in the accounts of bad banks is still theirs to do with as they will. If you don’t like how these institutions operate, don’t let them have your money. It’s as simple as that. Not only is this an act of defiance that truly hurts the banking system, it also protects your hard earned wealth (at least initially) from the inevitable collapse of these fiscally insolvent blood leaching leviathans (watch Bank of America closely, folks!).

3) Use Alternative Currencies

After you take your savings away from the banks, you still aren’t quite free of their influence. You are now holding fiat dollars, which the Federal Reserve, the foundation of all banking fraud, is currently devaluing. The idea of walking away from the dollar sounds ridiculous or even frightening to those trapped in the centralization mindset, but it is a highly effective method for combating the system itself. The dollar is a sham, and has been since its future was handed over to the Fed in 1913. Alternatives exist, and they must be utilized. Communities across the country use various scripts as a means to diminish reliance on the dollar, but ultimately, the best currencies are those that cannot be created out of thin air unhindered. This means gold and silver.

Central banking proponents have been railing against even the concept of a return to gold and silver currencies for years, and the Department Of Justice has labeled the use of such alternatives in place of dollars as a form of “domestic terrorism”. This should tell you, quite clearly, that they are deathly afraid of activists organizing to drop the dollar to pursue metals. If the system is willing to use the law as a weapon to keep us from having sound money, then we should be rubbing their nose in it daily by trading without dollars. They should be forced to react, and in the process, forced to expose their true intentions for our economic futures.

4) Build Barter Networks

If a bunch of people can band together to huddle in parks with signs for weeks in cities across the nation, then they can band together to trade goods and services outside the establishment system as well. Barter networks grow spontaneously out of economic collapse regardless of what any group decides to do, but generally, they appear AFTER the worst has happened. Wouldn’t it be wiser to organize such markets now, before a full collapse takes place? By preempting disaster with a backup or failsafe free market barter economy in each town and city, we insulate ourselves from the effects of the crisis, and, we cut loose from our dependency on the controlled mainstream economy. Localized trade makes it possible to walk away from corporate chains and maintain the circulation of wealth within a community, while countering the increasingly higher taxes caused by austerity and inflation that we are likely to see in this country very soon. It really is a no-brainer.

5) Grow A Garden

I don’t know how to say this nicely; don’t be a jackass, learn to grow your own food. Don’t expect that our economy will continue to sustain you. Actually, you should have every expectation that it won’t! If every Wall Street or Fed protester had their own garden patch and some stored goods, we would all be much safer. Food dependence is the worst kind. It has been used by governments and despots for centuries to cull the masses and dissuade dissent.

Sharecropping should be common in every community. Neighborhood gardens should be standard. Every household should have a year’s worth of food. Period.

Imagine that you lose your job and every cent you have tomorrow. Imagine that mom and dad are broke and have no money to lend you. Imagine that food stamps are a thing of the past because the national debt has become so exponential that entitlement programs have been erased. Now, how do you live from day to day? Where do you get the nutrition required for you to continue holding up that sign or shouting that slogan? Think about it...

6) Start A Micro-Industry

If the U.S. economy is ever going to get on its feet again, it will be because average Americans bring it back through local industry. This means ending our community addictions to corporately produced goods and returning to specialized trade skills. It means coalitions of local farmers, craftsmen, and micro-industries providing goods and services with a city or county based market focus. Large manufacturers and business chains relying on the model of globalization will have absolutely no ability to rebuild mainstreet commerce, even if they wanted to, because their methods depend upon constant outsourcing and downsizing for survival. Private tradesmen will be the only people capable of filling the dark void these corporations leave behind.

7) Start An Activist Group

The establishment HATES when you do this. The spontaneous organizing of groups outside government or corporate purview has generated notoriously absurd responses from authorities, including accusations of “extremism”, infiltration, and wrongful arrest. If this sounds frightening, then I suggest you get over it quickly, because this is going to be the norm for many years to come. The evils of the world are not undone by apathetic naysayers anymore than they are undone by mindless mobs. Without the coordinated actions of aware individuals with a common focus, nothing is going to change.

This group could be something a simple as a local barter network or a political discussion forum, or, a complex national organization geared towards tangible political action. It doesn’t matter as long as it’s based on the promotion of Constitutional freedoms, and its leadership is decentralized. Just make it happen…

At bottom, if we want to fight back against a system we cannot take back through traditional means, then we must learn to walk away. If the system feeds us, clothes us, and shelters us at will, then ordinary protest is pointless. Our tender parts are in a rusty vice on the autocratic workbench and until we pull them out, no amount of screaming and pounding will improve our situation. Independence is won through the constant striving for self responsibility. Freedom is won through a position of personal strength, not weakness and self-enslavement.

Numbers alone do not make a movement, and the elites we currently work to supplant are not going to flinch at a few random protests. In all likelihood they will welcome these actions as a useful distraction. Tyrants don’t fear the torches and pitchforks anymore. What they do fear is balanced insight, self reliance, and exceptional force of will. A handful of men with these attributes are far more dangerous to a corrupt system than thousands of citizens driven only by insatiable anger. To overcome oppression, we must first overcome ourselves. The ability to step outside the paradigm, the ability to act without permission, and charge the gates without apprehension, is the key to toppling totalitarian systems and exposing the great lie of our age; that we cannot exist without the cage we were born into.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Thursday, 27 October 2011

Brons Has A Plan

Image - Nick Griffin being abducted by aliens. In order to facilitate this event that will save the BNP, a contingent of Andrew Brons supporters have joined the Raelians and are now chanting for the aliens to come and take Griffin away.

News coming in that the 'Big Idea' agreed at the BNP Ideas Conference was to continue sitting on the fence, regardless of how sore their arses get or how many splinters it gives them.

The big idea is, apparently, to wait until Griffin spontaneously combusts or he is kidnapped by aliens or the police arrest him.

Seeing as many people reckon Griffin is working for the State then spontaneous human combustion or alien abduction are more likely.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Vatican Calls For World Bank

The Vatican called on Monday for the establishment of a "global public authority" and a "central world bank" to rule over financial institutions that have become outdated and often ineffective in dealing fairly with crises.

Jan Stromme | Riser | Getty Images

A major document from the Vatican's Justice and Peace department should be music to the ears of the "Occupy Wall Street" demonstrators and similar movements around the world who have protested against the economic downturn.

The 18-page document, "Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority," was at times very specific, calling, for example, for taxation measures on financial transactions.

"The economic and financial crisis which the world is going through calls everyone, individuals and peoples, to examine in depth the principles and the cultural and moral values at the basis of social coexistence," it said.

It condemned what it called "the idolatry of the market" as well as a "neo-liberal thinking" that it said looked exclusively at technical solutions to economic problems.

"In fact, the crisis has revealed behaviors like selfishness, collective greed and hoarding of goods on a great scale," it said, adding that world economics needed an "ethic of solidarity" among rich and poor nations.

"If no solutions are found to the various forms of injustice, the negative effects that will follow on the social, political and economic level will be destined to create a climate of growing hostility and even violence, and ultimately undermine the very foundations of democratic institutions, even the ones considered most solid," it said.

It called for the establishment of "a supranational authority" with worldwide scope and "universal jurisdiction" to guide economic policies and decisions.

Such an authority should start with the United Nations as its reference point but later become independent and be endowed with the power to see to it that developed countries were not allowed to wield "excessive power over the weaker countries."

Effective Structures

In a section explaining why the Vatican felt the reform of the global economy was necessary, the document said:

"In economic and financial matters, the most significant difficulties come from the lack of an effective set of structures that can guarantee, in addition to a system of governance, a system of government for the economy and international finance."

It said the International Monetary Fund (IMF) no longer had the power or ability to stabilize world finance by regulating overall money supply and it was no longer able to watch "over the amount of credit risk taken on by the system."

The world needed a "minimum shared body of rules to manage the global financial market" and "some form of global monetary management."

Current DateTime: 12:54:02 27 Oct 2011
LinksList Documentid: 45013642
Euro Zone Business Activity Shrinks Further In OctoberEuro Zone Fund May Draw on China, Brazil: OfficialsCan We Handle a Turnaround?
"In fact, one can see an emerging requirement for a body that will carry out the functions of a kind of 'central world bank' that regulates the flow and system of monetary exchanges similar to the national central banks," it said.

The document, which was being presented at a news conference later on Monday, acknowledged that such change would take years to put into place and was bound to encounter resistance.

"Of course, this transformation will be made at the cost of a gradual, balanced transfer of a part of each nation's powers to a world authority and to regional authorities, but this is necessary at a time when the dynamism of human society and the economy and the progress of technology are transcending borders, which are in fact already very eroded in a globalizes world."

Add to Technorati Favorites

The Great Crash Is Almost Here

The Coming Derivatives Crisis That Could Destroy The Entire Global Financial System
Most people have no idea that Wall Street has become a gigantic financial casino. The big Wall Street banks are making tens of billions of dollars a year in the derivatives market, and nobody in the financial community wants the party to end. The word "derivatives" sounds complicated and technical, but understanding them is really not that hard. A derivative is essentially a fancy way of saying that a bet has been made. Originally, these bets were designed to hedge risk, but today the derivatives market has mushroomed into a mountain of speculation unlike anything the world has ever seen before. Estimates of the notional value of the worldwide derivatives market go from $600 trillion all the way up to $1.5 quadrillion. Keep in mind that the GDP of the entire world is only somewhere in the neighborhood of $65 trillion. The danger to the global financial system posed by derivatives is so great that Warren Buffet once called them "financial weapons of mass destruction". For now, the financial powers that be are trying to keep the casino rolling, but it is inevitable that at some point this entire mess is going to come crashing down. When it does, we are going to be facing a derivatives crisis that really could destroy the entire global financial system.

Most people don't talk much about derivatives because they simply do not understand them.

Perhaps a couple of definitions would be helpful.

The following is how a recent Bloomberg article defined derivatives....

Derivatives are financial instruments used to hedge risks or for speculation. They’re derived from stocks, bonds, loans, currencies and commodities, or linked to specific events such as changes in the weather or interest rates.
The key word there is "speculation". Today the folks down on Wall Street are speculating on just about anything that you can imagine.

The following is how Investopedia defines derivatives....

A security whose price is dependent upon or derived from one or more underlying assets. The derivative itself is merely a contract between two or more parties. Its value is determined by fluctuations in the underlying asset. The most common underlying assets include stocks, bonds, commodities, currencies, interest rates and market indexes. Most derivatives are characterized by high leverage.
A derivative has no underlying value of its own. A derivative is essentially a side bet. Usually these side bets are highly leveraged.

At this point, making side bets has totally gotten out of control in the financial world. Side bets are being made on just about anything you can possibly imagine, and the major Wall Street banks are making a ton of money from it. This system is almost entirely unregulated and it is totally dominated by the big international banks.

Over the past couple of decades, the derivatives market has multiplied in size. Everything is going to be fine as long as the system stays in balance. But once it gets out of balance we could witness a string of financial crashes that no government on earth will be able to fix.

The amount of money that we are talking about is absolutely staggering. Graham Summers of Phoenix Capital Research estimates that the notional value of the global derivatives market is $1.4 quadrillion, and in an article for Seeking Alpha he tried to put that number into perspective....

If you add up the value of every stock on the planet, the entire market capitalization would be about $36 trillion. If you do the same process for bonds, you’d get a market capitalization of roughly $72 trillion.

The notional value of the derivative market is roughly $1.4 QUADRILLION.

I realize that number sounds like something out of Looney tunes, so I’ll try to put it into perspective.

$1.4 Quadrillion is roughly:



It is hard to fathom how much money a quadrillion is.

If you started counting right now at one dollar per second, it would take 32 million years to count to one quadrillion dollars.

Yes, the boys and girls down on Wall Street have gotten completely and totally out of control.

In an excellent article that he did on derivatives, Webster Tarpley described the pivotal role that derivatives now play in the global financial system....

Far from being some arcane or marginal activity, financial derivatives have come to represent the principal business of the financier oligarchy in Wall Street, the City of London, Frankfurt, and other money centers. A concerted effort has been made by politicians and the news media to hide and camouflage the central role played by derivative speculation in the economic disasters of recent years. Journalists and public relations types have done everything possible to avoid even mentioning derivatives, coining phrases like “toxic assets,” “exotic instruments,” and – most notably – “troubled assets,” as in Troubled Assets Relief Program or TARP, aka the monstrous $800 billion bailout of Wall Street speculators which was enacted in October 2008 with the support of Bush, Henry Paulson, John McCain, Sarah Palin, and the Obama Democrats.
Most people do not realize this, but derivatives were at the center of the financial crisis of 2008.

They will almost certainly be at the center of the next financial crisis as well.

For many, alarm bells went off the other day when it was revealed that Bank of America has moved a big chunk of derivatives from its failing Merrill Lynch investment banking unit to its depository arm.

So what does that mean?

An article posted on The Daily Bail the other day explained that it means that U.S. taxpayers could end up holding the bag....

This means that the investment bank's European derivatives exposure is now backstopped by U.S. taxpayers. Bank of America didn't get regulatory approval to do this, they just did it at the request of frightened counterparties. Now the Fed and the FDIC are fighting as to whether this was sound. The Fed wants to "give relief" to the bank holding company, which is under heavy pressure.

This is a direct transfer of risk to the taxpayer done by the bank without approval by regulators and without public input.
So did you hear about this on the news?

Probably not.

Today, the notional value of all the derivatives held by Bank of America comes to approximately $75 trillion.

JPMorgan Chase is holding derivatives with a notional value of about $79 trillion.

It is hard to even conceive of such figures.

Right now, the banks with the most exposure to derivatives are JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and HSBC Bank USA.

Morgan Stanley also has tremendous exposure to derivatives.

You may have noticed that these are some of the "too big to fail" banks.

The biggest U.S. banks continue to grow and they continue to get even more power.

Back in 2002, the top 10 U.S. banks controlled 55 percent of all U.S. banking assets. Today, the top 10 U.S. banks control 77 percent of all U.S. banking assets.

These banks have gotten so big and so powerful that if they collapsed our entire financial system would implode.

You would have thought that we would have learned our lesson back in 2008 and would have done something about this, but instead we have allowed the "too big to bail" banks to become bigger than ever.

And they pretty much do whatever they want.

A while back, the New York Times published an article entitled "A Secretive Banking Elite Rules Trading in Derivatives". That article exposed the steel-fisted control that the "too big to fail" banks exert over the trading of derivatives. Just consider the following excerpt from the article....

On the third Wednesday of every month, the nine members of an elite Wall Street society gather in Midtown Manhattan.

The men share a common goal: to protect the interests of big banks in the vast market for derivatives, one of the most profitable — and controversial — fields in finance. They also share a common secret: The details of their meetings, even their identities, have been strictly confidential.
So what institutions are represented at these meetings?

Well, according to the New York Times, the following banks are involved: JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and Citigroup.

Why do those same five names seem to keep popping up time after time?

Sadly, these five banks keep pouring money into the campaigns of politicians that supported the bailouts in 2008 and that they know will bail them out again when the next financial crisis strikes.

Those that defend the wild derivatives trading that is going on today claim that Wall Street has accounted for all of the risks and they assume that the issuing banks will always be able to cover all of the derivative contracts that they write.

But that is a faulty assumption. Just look at AIG back in 2008. When the housing market collapsed AIG was on the wrong end of a massive number of derivative contracts and it would have gone "bust" without gigantic bailouts from the federal government. If the bailouts of AIG had not happened, Goldman Sachs and a whole lot of other people would have been left standing there with a whole bunch of worthless paper.

It is inevitable that the same thing is going to happen again. Except next time it may be on a much grander scale.

When "the house" goes "bust", everybody loses. The governments of the world could step in and try to bail everyone out, but the reality is that when the derivatives market comes totally crashing down there won't be any government on earth with enough money to put it back together again.

A horrible derivatives crisis is coming.

It is only a matter of time.

Stay alert for any mention of the word "derivatives" or the term "derivatives crisis" in the news. When the derivatives crisis arrives, things will start falling apart very rapidly.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Saturday, 22 October 2011

The Spawning of the EU

The EU is the spawn of the Globalist Banksters ;

This ambivalent relationship between the IMF/World Bank vis-a-vis the BIS/commercial banks in the 70's is epitomised by Anthony Sampson in his book "The Money Lenders": "The commercial banks in the meantime had created a very different perspective, for the IMF now controlled much less of the world's money. In 1966, the quotas which made up its capital amounted to 10% of the total world imports; but by '76 they made up only 4%"..."by '76 world annual deficits had reached $75 billion : of this, 7% financed by the IMF; 18% by other official international bodies (governments and World Bank) - remaining three-quarters financed by banks (commercial)". (Today, some two-and-a-half decades later, the board members of BIS, between them, control 95% of the money in circulation). The reason for this apparent taking over of such responsibility by the BIS from the IMF/World Bank is twofold: (1) the collapse of the Bretton Woods system of exchange convertibility in the early seventies exposed the irrelevance of the latter as agents for European reconstruction; and (2) the latter being statutorily-appointed agents of the UN, were therefore - ostensibly - accountable to a much wider constituency than the BIS, and therefore politically less manageable by the corporate establishment, whose primary aim in the aftermath of World War 2 was to ensure the unrestricted flow of American capital into Europe. A flow considerably eased by subsequent European integration, in which both NATO and the Bilderberg played a crucial role. This aim was furthered by means of the US Congressionally-authorised European Cooperation Act (ECA) of 1948, and implemented by its subsidiary, the European Payments Union (EPU) of 1950 - both under the aegis of the Marshall Plan of 1947. Predictably, the BIS was the institution chosen by the EPU to oversee this movement of capital (a point worthy of note here is that the head of the EPU at that time was one Richard Bissell, an economist who, years later, was to be the CIA Deputy Director of Planning overseeing the Bay of Pigs fiasco in April '61!).The BIS was now firmly ensconced in the heart of European integration, and was subsequently to play a critical role in the events leading to its (Europe's) eventual evolvement into the European Union, a bureaucratic politico-economic body occupying a position of crucial importance within the wider global hierarchy envisaged by the corporate establishment.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Thursday, 20 October 2011

British Thirst - The Party Website

I have been passed a link to the new British Thirst website and very well done it is too.

MOO MOO to the Moo Nationalists ;

Add to Technorati Favorites

2041 - The end of White America

.....Your Friends' Activity1-0 of 0back next ..Let your friends be your guide to great content on Yahoo! News by connecting to Facebook. By connecting you'll be able to see friends' Activity and add your own. Learn more »
........A.D. 2041 -- End of White America?
Pat Buchanan's column is released twice a week.
By Pat Buchanan | Pat Buchanan – Tue, Oct 18, 2011....tweet24Share1EmailPrint......John Hope Franklin, the famed black historian at Duke University, once told the incoming freshmen, "The new America in the 21st century will be primarily non-white, a place George Washington would not recognize."

In his June 1998 commencement address at Portland State, President Clinton affirmed it: "In a little more than 50 years, there will be no majority race in the United States." The graduates cheered.

The Census Bureau has now fixed at 2041 the year when whites become a minority in a country where the Founding Fathers had restricted citizenship to "free white persons" of "good moral character."

With publication today of "Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?" this writer takes up what this portends. And while many on the left are enthusiastic about relegating the America of Eisenhower and JFK to a reactionary past, I concur with the late Clare Boothe Luce.

In this world, she said, there are optimists and pessimists.

"The pessimists are better informed."

What are the seemingly inevitable consequences of an America where whites are a shrinking minority?

First, the end of a national Republican Party that routinely gets 90 percent of its presidential votes from white America.

California is the harbinger of what is to come.

Carried by Richard Nixon in all five presidential elections when he was on the ticket and by Ronald Reagan all four times he ran, California, where whites are now a shrinking minority, is a state where the GOP faces extinction. John McCain's share of the California vote was down to the Barry Goldwater level of 1964.

When Texas, where two-thirds of the newborns and half the schoolchildren are Hispanic, goes the way of California, it is the end for the GOP. Arizona, Colorado and Nevada, also critical to any victorious GOP coalition, are Hispanicizing as rapidly as Texas.

In every presidential election since Bush I in 1992, Hispanics have given 60-70 percent of their votes to the Democratic ticket.

For Hispanics, largely poor and working class, are beneficiaries of a cornucopia of government goods — from free education to food stamps to free health care. Few pay federal income taxes.

Why would they not vote for the Party of Government?

Second, the economic crisis of California, brought on by an outflow of taxpayers and a huge influx of tax consumers — i.e., millions of immigrants, legal and illegal — will be mirrored nationally.

For though the majority of immigrants and illegals comes to work, and work hard, most now come from Third World countries and do not bring the academic or professional skills of European-Americans.

Third, the decline in academic test scores here at home and in international competition is likely to continue, as more and more of the children taking those tests will be African-American and Hispanic. For though we have spent trillions over four decades, we have failed to close the racial gap in education. White and Asian children continue to outscore black and Hispanic children.

Can the test-score gap be closed? With the Hispanic illegitimacy rate at 51 percent and the black rate having risen to 71 percent, how can their children conceivably arrive at school ready to compete?

Should this continue for three decades, what will it mean for America if Asians and whites occupy the knowledge-industry jobs, while scores of millions of black and Hispanic workers are relegated to low-paying service-sector jobs? Will that make for social tranquility?

Affirmative action is one answer. But this is already causing a severe backlash, and the reason is obvious.

When affirmative action was first imposed, whites outnumbered blacks nine to one. The burden of reverse discrimination on the white community was thus relatively light. Today, however, not only blacks, but Hispanics and women — two-thirds of the entire population — qualify for affirmative action in hiring and school admissions.

And the burden falls almost entirely on white males, who are one-third of the country but three-fourths of the dead and wounded coming back from Afghanistan.

Sociologist Robert Putnam, author of "Bowling Alone," has also found that the greater the racial and ethnic diversity in a community, the less social capital there is — i.e., people in diverse settings are far less disposed to cooperate for social goals. They retreat into enclaves of their own kind.

Putnam found social capital at the lowest level he ever measured in Los Angeles, the most diverse community on earth. Yet, by 2042, the demography of every American city will approximate that of L.A.

What is happening to America is happening across the West.

Can Western civilization survive the passing of the European peoples whose ancestors created it and their replacement by Third World immigrants? Probably not, for the new arrivals seem uninterested in preserving the old culture they have found.

Those who hold the white race responsible for the mortal sins of mankind — slavery, racism, imperialism, genocide — may welcome its departure from history. Those who believe that the civilization that came out of Jerusalem, Athens, Rome and London to be the crowning achievement of mankind will mourn its passing.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Failed State Colonisation

Let's compare two countries side by side. Country A has a sizable middle class and economy, social welfare benefits and a low birth rate. Country B is a failed state where thugs run amok in the street, a few families control the economy and the birth rate is off the charts.

Country A's citizens are taught that nationalism is evil and that everyone should get along. Country B's citizens are taught that they are the greatest people that ever lived and would be running the world if not for Country A. But despite all this, Country B's citizens all want to move to Country A. And Country A wants to let them. Because Country A needs new workers to subsidize its welfare state and voters who will vote for pro-social welfare parties.

Since Country B's workers want the social welfare benefits, they move to Country A. Country A ends up with a huge failed state population and dramatically increases its social welfare spending for them. Bankruptcy threatens, but change is almost impossible because the pro-social welfare benefits party has become very hard to beat. The pro-reform parties no longer tackle immigration, but try to get the immigrant vote. Their reforms turn into band aids. Country A slides toward the abyss. Country B continues shipping more immigrants every year who remain loyal to its culture and religion.

Country B is a failed state. But Country A is also turning into a failed state as it imports Country B's surplus population, along with its criminality, its political culture and its ignorance across the border.

Look at a map of the world, and what you see are successful states and failed states. This is a map that transcends ethnicity and race. It is not dependent on resources or the starting level of technology. It's not even dependent on wealth, or its level of distribution, Gulf petro-states with small populations can have rich subsidized per capita incomes, but they are still failed states dependent on a single resource and a vast army of foreign workers.

It was thought once that success would spread from the successful states to the failed states. That it was only a matter of passing along certain techniques, educating their leaders in modern universities and starting them off with some World Bank loans. But instead the reverse has happened. Rather than failed states becoming successful under the influence of successful states, successful states are failing under the influence of failed states.

Migration from failed states to successful states is leading the way to utter ruin. The Pakistanization of Europe and the Mexicanization of America are two examples of the phenomenon. But there are others. Cote d'Ivorie, one of the more prosperous African countries, has been taken over by Muslim migrant workers, with the armed backing of the UN. What happened resembled events in South Africa, but this time both sides were black. The difference was not racial, but religious. It is another example of an ongoing phenomenon. Failed State Colonization.

Failed State Colonization is the greatest threat of our time. It marks a major shift from the old era of colonization where successful states colonized unsuccessful ones. Now failed states are colonizing successful ones. Failed states have become a global plague through their population migrations, which spread terrorism, crime and bankrupt the social systems of successful states. And as the migration wave continues FSC is turning formerly successful states into failed states.

Failed states have higher birth rates and stronger group loyalties. That combination weaponizes their migrations into successful states with lower birth rates and weak group loyalties into a takeover. Failed State Colonization uses the disunity, tolerance and democracy of successful states to destroy them from the inside. It's not always a conscious act, but that doesn't make it any less destructive.

The grey squirrels didn't intend to wipe out the red squirrels in the forests of England. But the populations are incompatible and though the red squirrels may be a nobler breed, those very qualities that make them admirable, also make them less able to resist an incursion by a rougher breed. The high ground moralizing of successful states may also be admirable, but it is equally doomed in the face of an incursion by cultures whose only morality is the success of their own group.

Liberal immigration advocates cheer the destruction of our worthless culture as they look forward to a world state without borders. But there will be no world state without borders because the only people who believe in such a thing are wiping themselves out by importing migratory populations that don't think nationalism and patriotism are evils. Muslim and Mexican immigrants are not ashamed of their history. They don't think borders are a bad idea, so long as they're the ones who control where those borders are set. The left is destroying the West, but it is only the West that ever believed in a world without borders.

Conservative immigration advocates insist on a cultural exceptionalism that will absorb immigrants because of our innate superiority. And that can work in the proper ratios. Done correctly the host society ends up with some new ethnic foods, a few immigrant communities and some more loanwords. Done incorrectly, entire cities become no go zones and go bankrupt providing social welfare for all.

The difference isn't just in the numbers, though those are important, but selectivity. Immigration will almost always spike crime rates, but those go down as absorption takes hold. (So long as productive absorption is possible.) What you never do is import mass populations who think of your country as their own and want to take it over. In such a scenario the absorption will go the other way and then you end up with the likes of Taliban Terry, a former altar boy who goes around Dublin, with son Osama in tow.

The Western left has committed itself to multiculturalism, the Western right has committed itself to free enterprise-- and both positions make it hard to choke off the flow of migrants. The social welfare left and the anything for a buck right need more immigrants because there are jobs that the natives just won't do, like work without under the table without benefits while putting eight kids and two wives on the welfare rolls. The irresponsibility of corporations and social welfare lobbies inflates budgets and increases crime, while the blame gets passed around. And then you end up with cities that are No Go Zones, Imams preaching Jihad and Mexican flags waving at protests-- all because companies wanted cheap labor and left wing politicians wanted to build a constituency.

Failed State Colonization isn't an invasion by armed force. But then colonization by successful states often wasn't either. The natives lacked the will and unity to mount an active resistance, they didn't see the scale of what was happening until it was too late, the invaders took advantage of native hospitality and many of the natives collaborated with the colonists to gain some personal advantage. All three of these factors exist in Failed State Colonization. The West has failed to learn the lessons of its own conquests. And now it is falling victim to many of those same tactics.

The West is divided, the migrants are united. The scale of what is happening can only be seen on the ground or in a few mostly hidden statistics, but neither show the full scope of the phenomenon, and even if they did, most natives are conditioned to think of their countries as nearly invulnerable. When they learn otherwise, the shock is too much and they default to appeasement and collaboration. That's something the Incas could tell you about. Hospitality is lavishly extended to the migrants, but it's repaid with treachery and violence. Again something the Incas could tell us about. If their civilization was still around.

The difference between the successful state and the failed state is cultural. Successful states are successful to to the extent that they are democratic in that the agenda of the government mirrors that of the people. Failed states are successful only to the extent that their tyrants are competent, and even such competence has to be filtered through the culture of a failed state.

The successful state is dynamic, the failed state is static. The successful state is always getting things done, the failed state is just struggling not to fall apart. Where the successful state uses its resources and wealth to advance, the failed state locks them up or uses them to bribe its people. And when that fails it guns them down in the street. The successful state believes that hard work will give it a better future. The failed state believes that a turn of the wheel will put it on top of the world. The successful state blames itself for its failures. The failed state blames wicked conspirators who undermine it at every turn.

The greatest error of immigration advocates is the failure to understand that immigration does not just import a population raw for the mixing, but entire cultures with their own political culture. The migrating population of a dominant state imports its culture. The very element that made it into a failed state.

The people of a failed state may work hard, but they don't believe that hard work will move them forward because the system is corrupt and rigged against them. Instead they either work mechanically or look for ways to beat the system. The black market is ubiquitous. Everyone cheats everyone else. Political leaders are not representatives, but patrons, linking the people at the bottom to the top, who can provide favors and make things happen. You don't vote for a politican to reform a system, but to get in on the good side of his party and his family, who may then help out when you have to deal with the tangle of bureaucracy. Nothing works without a bribe. Not even the simplest things.

The people love and hate their country at the same time. They go from wanting to tear their leaders to pieces with their bare hands, to proclaiming them as gods in the space of a day. They distrust all leaders and yet they worship them. They fear the secret police and are its eagerest informants. The only injustice they protest against is personal injustice. They don't mind when the regime puts a thousand people to the wall, so long as one of them isn't their relative. They talk amongst themselves of whom the regime should really be shooting instead. "Ah, if only I were in charge. I would line them all up against the wall." That is the flavor of their democracy.

As successful states take on the political culture of failed states, their ability to reform their way out of the situation declines. Their welfare states might function if they could hold a steady native birth rate in a population that was steadily employed. But the companies of a post-modern country in a global economy feel no loyalty to remain and give up the profits they could make by outsourcing production. And a population for whom life begins after getting their second degree and where two family incomes are the norm is not going to have the birth rate necessary to sustain the next generation of the whole setup. Pouring a migrant population into the mix is like trying to fix a structural defect by setting the building on fire.

The more the ruling party responsible for the mess alienates the working class population it depended on, the more it needs immigrants to replace them as a voting base. The liberal parties become foreign parties. The conservative parties abandon their constituencies and chase after the immigrant vote. After all who are the natives going to vote for, the feckless leftist atheists or the good traditional conservatives who are busy observing Ramadan and learning to deliver speeches in Spanish.

As the system breaks down, the leftist parties pretend that nothing is wrong and the rightist parties go for slash and burn reforms that ignore the root of the problem. Scrap the military, nuke Medicare, cut funding to this office and that office. As if the root of the problem is the amount of money being spent, rather than the way it's being spent. Failing companies often try to cut expenses, but ignore that the underlying problem is not in the budget, but in its culture. The company isn't going under because it's spending too much money, that is a symptom of its fecklessness. It's going under because it has lost all sense of mission, it has lost touch with its old program and its new program is a dead end, and no one at the top can think of a reason for it to exist, except to keep them employed.

Take an honest look at Western governments and that's what you come away with. Massive bureaucracies that exist to provide compulsory services run by people who can't honestly provide a reason for the continuing existence of these countries except as an interim phase until the EU or the UN comes to take over for them. They mouth the rhetoric of exceptionalism, but they don't really believe it. They have more in common with their counterparts in other countries, than they do with the people whose lives they mismanage. Like most collapsing companies, the executives are obsessed with the minutiae of bureaucracy, enforcing rigid control in between attending lavish cocktail parties. They fiddle, Rome burns.

Failed State Colonization would not be a threat, if the successful states had not locked themselves into this mess. As the successful states fail, they lack the two elements that would repel the invaders. A high birth rate and a nationalist leadership. Those are elements the failed states do have. And so the showdown is an uneven one. The disparity is not of force, but of a willingness to use it.

Successful states attempt to avert the catastrophe by trying to police failed states, sending planes to bomb Libya to keep the migrants out, trying to shore up the Mexican government with aid and advisers. But those are all dead ends that lead to further entanglement and migration. American efforts in Somalia, Iraq and Yugoslavia have accomplished one indisputable thing. They have increased the numbers of Muslim immigrants coming from those countries. Practicing Nation Building on failed states won't stop them from colonizing us. It only accelerates the process.

Failed State Colonization is the greatest threat of our time, but it too is a symptom of the intellectual failures of the successful states. As failed states continue their prolonged collapse, they send out migrant populations which accelerate the collapse of the formerly successful states. This colonization means there will be no gradual decline. That we will not sink into the sunset like Japan, instead we will be brutally overrun. There will be no decline, but a fall.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Wednesday, 19 October 2011

The Zionist Takeover of The Tory Party

The motto of the Zionists 'If we cannot destroy you, we will buy you off'.

A millionaire hedge fund baron who bankrolled former Defence Secretary Liam Fox made a series of personal donations and gifts to a string of senior Cabinet Ministers, including the Prime Minister and Chancellor, it emerged last night.

Soldier turned banker Michael Hintze has given at least £1.2million to the Conservative Party and provided a further £2.5million in loans since 2005.

Mr Hintze, 58, also gave more than £100,000 to the Atlantic Bridge charity set up by Dr Fox and run by his self-styled adviser Adam Werritty.

Now the Daily Mail can reveal how other senior Tories have received individual gifts and donations from the banker.
Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne are among the top Tories who have benefited personally from the former Goldman Sachs banker.

Home Secretary Theresa May, Foreign Secretary William Hague and new Defence Secretary Philip Hammond also received gifts or donations from Mr Hintze or his company, CQS Management. Even London Mayor Boris Johnson and former Tory leadership candidate David Davis have been backed by the banker.

His generosity makes him one of the biggest Conservative Party donors behind Lord Ashcroft and has raised concerns about his influence.

Labour MP John Mann has asked the Electoral Commission to investigate. He said: ‘Michael Hintze is the new Godfather of Tory donations.

‘He is putting his money behind the key people in the party very deliberately. People never give money for nothing. They want something in return, they want influence.

More...Women voters turn their backs on the Tories amid fears over the economy
Fox should say no to a £17,000 pay-off. He'd set an example
Move over Swampy, it's us who should be protesting

‘Michael Hintze is a hedge fund boss and where he wants influence is over financial regulation. He does not have to ask Tory Ministers for anything, the act of giving simply changes their behaviour.
When they come to consider the issue of financial regulation they are much less likely to do something if it upsets someone who makes such generous donations.’

Mr Hintze made a personal donation of £10,000 to Dr Fox when the Conservative Party was in Opposition.
Money matters: David Cameron has benefited hugely from Mr Hintze
Other payments to senior Tories when in Opposition include £37,500 to Mr Osborne, £25,000 to Higher Education Secretary David Willetts and £1,200 to Mrs May.

Former Tory leadership candidate David Davis received £7,000, backbencher Adam Holloway £1,500 and Boris Johnson £5,000.
In addition, CQS made ‘non-cash donations’ to Mr Osborne of £1,254, while Foreign Secretary William Hague received £25,763 and Dr Fox a further £10,439.

Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne travelled from Newcastle to Biggin Hill in a plane paid for by Mr Hintze after the Conservative Party conference in March 2008.

In May that year Mr Cameron declared a donation from Mr Hintze to the Conservative Party that was used to pay for drinks receptions for Tory MPs and their partners.

Mr Mann has also raised concerns over potential donations Mr Hintze may have made to figures around the Conservatives, such as Mr Werritty.

His hedge fund has investments in companies that have contracts with the Ministry of Defence. Also, in the autumn of 2008, at the height of the global financial crisis, a CQS funds short-sold Bradford and Bingley shares.

Mr Mann said: ‘This raises the question over whether Adam Werritty was the only person with potential influence on the government who was being funded by Mr Hintze.’
Refugee from Communism who made a £700m fortune

One of Michael Hintze’s favourite and oft-quoted maxims is taken from Luke 12:48: ‘Unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required.’

At the Belgravia headquarters of his $10billion CQS hedge fund, one employee is tasked solely with opening the flood of letters which arrive daily, asking the celebrated philanthropist for money.

‘Somebody has to read them, and treat those people with respect,’ Mr Hintze, a devout Roman Catholic, once explained. ‘They are not asking just because they want something for nothing.’

Quite. In the light of ongoing revelations one wonders how many of these pleas bore the Conservative Party crest. That Mr Hintze has given much to the Tories in recent years is beyond dispute. His loans and donations total around £4million.What he requires in return for such bankrolling is a question that the electorate can, today, quite fairly wonder.

His name was thrust into the spotlight when it emerged Mr Hintze’s hedge fund had sunk £21.5million into a defence company which benefited from an announcement made by the Defence Secretary Liam Fox in July to replace the ageing fleet of Nimrod spy planes.

So was it for commercial gain or purely philanthropic reasons?

'My success has happened in the UK because of the context that the Conservative Party provided'‘He is an ideologue, albeit one who is politically naive,’ argued an acquaintance. ‘When someone like-minded asks him to sign a cheque or give office space, he won’t hesitate.’

Whatever the motive or, indeed, the power he wields as a result of such largesse, Mr Hintze is a remarkable man from an extraordinary background.

He was born in the Chinese city of Harbin, to which his family had fled from Russia during the Bolshevik revolution.

Following the then recent seizure of power by the Chinese Communists the family moved again, this time to Australia.

Mr Hintze grew up in Sydney, raised by a single, secretary mother and educated by the austere Christian Brothers, whose examples, he says, has informed his later life. He studied physics and engineering at university, before joining the Australian Army, as a junior officer, for three years.

When he left he gained an MBA at Harvard Business School, where he met his wife Dorothy, and afterwards embarked on a blitzkrieg through the world’s great finance houses, working for Salomon Brothers in New York, then Goldman Sachs and CSFB in London, before setting up Convertible & Quantitative Strategies in 1999.

The £200million with which the fund was launched has since multiplied many times over, as has his wealth. In 2005 alone he was reported to have earned for himself as much as £60million; the latest Forbes List estimates his personal worth at around £700million. Not that you would guess by his lifestyle.

Unlike most other hedge-funders, who favour the gold-paved streets of Mayfair, he lives south of the Thames, in the relatively unglamorous borough of Wandsworth. His four children were all state-educated.

But while bling is not his thing, Mr Hintze has made an indelible mark in public life through his £25million patronage of the arts, education and good causes through the Hintze Family Charitable Foundation.

All very laudible. But Mr Hintze’s political donations invites more rigorous analysis.

Last year Mr Hintze, who holds dual British and Australian citizenship, said: ‘It is pretty clear to me that my success has happened in the UK because of the context that the Conservative Party provided.’

And he was grateful enough to repay that provision, very handsomely indeed.

We know this because the Adam Werritty affair is not the first time he has reluctantly revealed the extent to which he is the money man behind David Cameron’s Conservatives.

In 2006, during the New Labour government’s ‘cash for honours’ scandal, a loophole in political funding was exposed relating to loans serviced at commercial rates, which could remain secret.

Mr Hintze admitted it was he who had made such a ‘stealth loan’ of £2.5million to the Tories.

Read more:

Add to Technorati Favorites

The Jim Dowson & Andrew Brons Parties

Image - Jim Dowson hard at work building his new nationalist party, The Britain First Party.

News coming in that the Paul Golding / Jim Dowson money making scam continues to increase in size as its income drops, with the accouncement that they are to form a new political party.

This will be led by Paul Golding with Jim Dowson in the background busy milking the cash cow members that they hope will join their new party.

I hope Jim remembers to warm up his cold, clammy hands before he grabs hold of the teats of the party members that join.

Cash cows dont like cold, clammy hands - nor topless models apparently.

Unless the new Dowson / Golding party seeks to occupy a civic nationalist position, then it will have to compete with the BNP, National Front and the British Democratic Party of Andrew Brons / Arthur Kemp.

This week also brings the BNP Ideas Party Conference where it is expected that they will announce their formation of a new party as well.

Two in a fortnight.

They seem like buses - you wait for ages then two come at once.

One would have thought that logic would dictate that Brons & co would join the Dowson Cash Cow Party, or the Moo Nationalists as I like to call them, but it appears that personality conflicts within both groups means two new groups will form.

It may be that they have a cunning plan, where at the conference Brons will announce he plans to join Britain First.

That means that into a rather small and airless sack, a collection of egotistical, angry cats will be forced to occupy a very small space.

We all know that the only thing that would unite such a party would be their hate for Griffin, not any personal, ideological or political cohesion, hence within a few months it would crash and burn.

After Brons recent letter to the Tyndallite group celebrating JT's birthday, it appears that the Brons / Kemp party will seek to position itself on the old Far Right ground that the BNP used to be on before Griffin decided the BNP was a personality cult based around the Fuhrer Principle.

This will though put it in direct competiton with the National Front - and also in direct breach with the Equality Commission the moment that it announced as Brons is an elected member of the EU - and unless the new party constitution is not 'unlawful' as per the dictates of the Race Relations Gestapo led by Trevor 'Heinrich' Phillips, then it will be forced to change its constitution rather like the BNP.

This issue is academic for the NF though, as even though its constitution is unlawful it does not have any elected members and hence the Equality Commission have no interest in forcing it to obey the law.

This new Brons / Kemp party means that around 25 % of the BNP will leave the BNP and go to join up with it.

That means the BNP will be massively weakened as a result.

Not that Griffin cares of course, as the remaining 75 % of the BNP will still ensure he has enough of an income to keep him happy.

So these are the possible permutations ;

1) Dowson /Golding for a new party

2) Brons / Kemp form a new party

3) Brons / Golding / Kemp/ Dowson for a new party.

4) The BNP splits and a rump of activists leave to join Brons new party / Brons, Golding, Kemp, Dowson Party.

So in one week we will have gone from one Far Right party, the NF, to potentially three with the BNP split in two and left as the only ethno-nationalist party or the BNP faces two new ethno-nationalist parties on its turf.

What with the EDP under Butler ripping itself apart as the influence of his BNP clique begins to exert itself in the paty and alienate the civic nationalist liberal cringers in the English pseudo-Nationalist movement - then it appears that the EDP itself may be already starting to fall apart into factionalism with resignations almost every day.

Interesting times indeed.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Tuesday, 18 October 2011

Fox and Nigeria

WMR's British intelligence sources report that the sudden early retirement of Britain's most powerful civil servant, Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell, who will receive a £2.3 million pension package, at the height of the investigation by the Cabinet Secretary into allegations that British Tory Defense Minister Dr. Liam Fox shared highly-classified information with Adam Werrity, a close friend. Werrity may have parlayed the information into personal financial gain.

O'Donnell had been investigating the affair but his departure will now open the door for the powerful post of Cabinet Secretary to be split up into three weaker positions by Prime Minister David Cameron. Cameron's press secretary, Gabby Bertin, has now been implicated in the Fox-Werrity scandal.

Werrity holds no official government job and he lacks a security clearance for the classified information he was allegedly given access to by Fox. It is believed that Werrity may have passed classified information on to his multi-billionaire lobbying clients, former Goldman Sachs official Michael Hintze and now manager of the CQS hedge fund; hedge fund mogul Lord Stanley Fink; and real estate tycoons Simon and David Reuben.

The departure of O'Donnell, who has served four Prime Ministers — John Major, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, and David Cameron — during a major inquiry into scandal surrounding the Prime Minister and Defense Minister, has many in the intelligence community wondering if there is something more that is being covered up.

O'Donnell may have been able to link the Werrity scandal to past defense ministry scandals involving the illegal exports of certain restricted defense items, including nuclear material, to embargoed nations or the international black market. O'Donnell has now left the civil service with a generous retirement. One of O'Donnell's predecessors as Cabinet Secretary, Lord Butler, later chaired an inquiry board that looked into the intelligence Britain used to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Not surprisingly, Butler concluded that some of the intelligence on Iraq's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction was inconclusive but that the intelligence that Iraq was pursuing yellow cake uranium in Africa was "well-founded." The document on Iraq trying to obtain yellow cake from Niger turned out to be a crude forgery. Butler later was named a director of the banking giant HSBC.

From the Matrix Churchill scandal involving banned British military technology to Saddam Hussein to serious allegations surrounding the disposition of apartheid South Africa's nuclear weapons, successive British governments have been mired in military technology and weapons smuggling scandals. O'Donnell's hasty departure during a major inquiry indicates that the successive cover-ups of British weapons smuggling and other illegal defense deals with certain problematic regimes, including Israel and India, continue to the present.

VN:F [1.9.10_1130]
please wait...
Rating: 8.7/10 (7 votes cast)
British Cabinet Crimes, 8.7 out of 10 based on 7 ratings

Add to Technorati Favorites

The New Danegeld

Handing £138,000 of taxpayers’ cash to community groups will stop Cambridge’s young Muslims turning to extremism, according to a Guildhall chief.

Among the beneficiaries of the fund will be a scheme to encourage residents who follow Islam to try sports, which gets £31,900, and recruitment of a co-ordinator for the Bangladeshi population at a cost of £23,600.

As the News previously reported, the money was handed to the city council by the Government to encourage social cohesion and challenge radical ideologies, and the distribution of it has now been approved by members.

Cllr Tim Bick, the authority’s community development chief, said a wide range of projects had been selected.

He told the community services scrutiny committee: “This programme is not because we have a problem with armed extremism in Cambridge. In fact, on the contrary, I think we can be reasonably content that’s not the case.

“The programme before us is to decrease the chance of that happening by improving inclusion and cohesion across the whole of Cambridge.”

Cllr Bick allocated £15,000 to explore the possibility of setting up an advice service for Muslims in Cambridge, and £6,000 to the YMCA to set up a youth group which will aim to attract both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Workshops and discussions will be held on multiculturalism and Britishness, as well as activities such as sport, arts and crafts.

A report considered by the committee said £20,000 had already been spent on running the Asian Mela held on Parker’s Piece on July 10.

Small grants totalling £41,200 have already been paid out, with recipients including dance competitions, coffee mornings and film-making sessions.

Cash was also handed to English conversation classes, a monthly Muslim youth magazine, and seminars entitled “Away from Extremism”.

Labour spokeswoman Cllr Carina O’Reilly said she supported the projects.

She told the meeting: “The nature of this grant means it’s effectively a one-time only offer, so it’s important to get it right.”

Add to Technorati Favorites

The Last Legal Racism

A pair of studies released recently by the Center for Equal Opportunity, a libertarian think tank, reveal severe discrimination based on race and ethnicity in undergraduate and law school admissions at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, with African Americans and Latinos given preference over whites and Asians. The studies are based on data collected by the University itself, which they refused to release until a state supreme court ruling on a lawsuit filed by the Center for Equal Opportunity.

The odds ratio favoring African Americans and Hispanics over whites was 576-to-1 and 504-to-1, respectively, using the SAT and class rank while controlling for other factors. Thus, the median composite SAT score for black admittees was 150 points lower than for whites and Asians, and the Latino median SAT score was 100 points lower. Using the ACT, the odds ratios climbed to 1330-to-1 and 1494-to-1, respectively, for African Americans and Hispanics over whites.

For law school admissions, the racial discrimination found was also severe, with the weight given to ethnicity much greater than given to, for example, Wisconsin residency. Thus, an out-of-state black applicant with grades and LSAT scores at the median for that group would have had a 7 out 10 chance of admission and an out-of-state Hispanic a 1 out of 3 chance—but an in-state Asian with those grades and scores had a 1 out of 6 chance and an in-state white only a 1 out of 10 chance.

CEO chairman Linda Chavez noted: “This is the most severe undergraduate admissions discrimination that CEO has ever found in the dozens of studies it has published over the last 15 years.” Chavez also noted: “The studies show that literally hundreds of students applying as undergrads or to the law school are rejected in favor of students with lower test scores and grades, and the reason is that they have the wrong skin color or their parents came from the wrong countries.”

Roger Clegg added: “The latest census figures have dramatically underscored that America is increasingly multiethnic and multiracial. In such country, is simply untenable for our institutions—including public universities—to engage in politically correct but divisive and unfair discrimination.”

When Clegg tried to hold a press conference to address the concerns, a mob of leftist students and other assorted sheeple stormed the venue, forcibly took over the microphone, and forced Clegg to leave.

Clegg also said that the University of Wisconsin was one of the most racist and least cooperative schools they encountered. He described the school as “certainly toward the less-cooperative end of the spectrum” since “maybe they knew they had something to hide.” He also said that “the odds ratios were the highest (that is, the worst) for undergrad admissions of any we’ve ever seen.”

Clegg denounced racial discrimination, including ‘affirmative action’, and said that it does not make sense in modern America. “The use of racial and ethnic preferences will end, sooner or later” he says, adding “they cannot be justified, they are legally vulnerable, and most Americans dislike them. They become harder and harder to justify with every tick of the clock, as the Jim Crow era becomes more and more distant, and as America becomes increasing a multiethnic and multiracial society. The fact is that it is simply untenable for our government institutions, including public universities, to have policies in 2011 that discriminate on the basis of skin color and what country someone’s ancestors came from.”

Clegg points out that “America is more and more a multiracial and multiethnic country,” adding the details that “since the last census, the Latino population has grown by 43.0 percent, and the Asian population has grown even faster: by 43.3 percent. The black population has grown by only 12.3 percent, and the white population by only 5.7 percent.”

Clegg sums up his argument as “In such a country, as I said, it is simply untenable for the government to classify and sort people on the basis of skin color and national origin, and to treat its citizens differently—some better, some worse—depending on which silly little box is checked. In a country like ours, the only system that will work is one where the government plays no favorites. Anything else is a recipe for disaster—for division, strife, and balkanization.”

Polls of Hispanics have shown majority or supermajority support for affirmative action programs. White voters, the slowest growing demographic group, are the most likely to oppose affirmative action. Unfortunately, unless we see a cultural shift in opinion, changing demographics combined with the liberal bent of the court system could very well lead to the “division, strife, and balkanization” that Clegg fears.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Monday, 17 October 2011

Musings of a Durotrigan - My Response

This is my response to the article below ;

In February, I suggested that the best ideological fit with the EDL seemed to be the recently formed British Freedom Party (BFP), but after making such a suggestion on the Gates of Vienna blog, it was made clear to me that the Counterjihad movement could not take the BFP seriously because of the oft-recorded rants of leading founder BFP member Lee Barnes. Although Barnes sometimes forwards some excellent ideas, he is unfortunately prone to posting some frankly bizarre material on his 21st Century British Nationalism blog pertaining to conspiracy theories (Zionist NWO being the most-frequently commented upon) and syncretistic ‘spirituality’ encompassing a wide range of pagan and New Age elements, including the Mayan Calendar 2012 Doomsday ‘prophecy’. This latter-day champion of an anti-Zionist Blakeian mysticism, it was suggested, should continue to commune with the angels in the trees at the bottom of his garden rather than become a leading figure in a viable nationalist party.

I have tried to post these comments below on the Durotrigan site but for some reason appear unable to do so due to the comments software.

I have been reading your blog for a while, thought the time had come to comment as this article mentions me.

I shall answer each point one at a time.

1) Can you tell me why the 'counter-jihad movement' thinks that support of Zionism is any way relevant to the struggle against Islamism ?

No, nor can I.

The struggle against Islamism is not predicated on us counter-jihadists being subservient to Zionism - in fact the primary reason why the counter jihad movement and nationalist movements of European nations have been so damaged as per their political / social development over recent years is primarily due to attacks on the counter-jihad movement by organised Jewish and Zionist groups whose interests in the counter-jihad movement appear focused primarily in relation to their own, and Israels interests, not the interests of our peoples or our nations.

The endless throwing of the word and phrases 'Racism, racist and anti-semitic' against any nationalist organisation that does not abase itself before the self appointed Lords of Zionism , has led to the undermining of the counter-jihad struggle itself.

If the Zionists think the only counter-jihad struggle they will tolerate is one that primarily serves them, then they are either mad or power crazed. Either way they are living in cloud cuckoo land.

The irony that these Zionists support Israel being a 'Jewish state' is lost on them.

It appears that whilst a 'Jewish' state is acceptable to them, anyone who dares demand Britain is a British state that serves the British people, not the demands of the Zionists, is unacceptable.

Such chutzpah is not just hypocritical, it is sickening.

The idea that we as a nation must resist Islamism but surrender to the demands of a tiny number of arrogant Zionists with their own political agenda before we can be 'acceptable' to the Zionists or the counter-jihad movement is the very antithesis of British Nationalism.

If Zionists want to run Israel then good for them, but dont ever think they will be allowed to run Britain.

We dont intend to remove the Islamists and thereby allow the Zionists to run Britain.

2) It appears that support for Zionist terrorism, Zionist terrorist groups, Zionist terrorists or Zionist supporting terrorists like Anders Brievik is no bar to being accepted into the club of the Zionists counter jihadists, but a British Nationalist who supports the right of Israel to exist as a nation, but who doesnt genuflect before the dictates of Zionism or Zionists, apparently is.

With that sort of logic we can see we are dealing with a bunch of cranks who seem to think that their loyalty to Zionism means more than defeating Islamist terrorism.

That sort of effete, precious, country club mentality is the curse of the counter Jihad movement - the movement itself seems to think that loyalty to Zionism is more important than having activists and a movement that can actually DEAL with the Islamists.

As I said, such self serving hobbyists are the curse of the counter-jihad movement.

3) The fact that the counter-jihad movement does not seem to realise that we have at most ten years to establish and build a real and effective counter jihad movement in Britain before the demographics issue alone make this almost impossible means that they think they have the time to obsess on forming a club of zionist friendly lackeys.

They dont.

Though the Zionist cliques in America and Europe may be safe, our people in Britain arent.

Therefore I suggest that rather than thinking they can define OUR MOVEMENT for us, they butt out and concentrate on building their own.

4) My support for Marijuana reform is based on supporting the same medical marijuana licensed outlets as in America in order to help those people with chronic illnesses. I suggest those that are unaware of the licensed medical marijuana dispensaries in America do the research on them. When you have worked with people who have MS and whose lives have been transformed by medical marijuana like I have, then lecture me on the issue of Marijuana.

If you havent, butt out.

5) As for my study of new age religions, I study all religions - if being an ignorant, materialist and atheist are requirements for being in the counter-jihad country club - then show me where it is written on the application form.

I suspect that this is another example of the 'precious' nature of the hobbyists who think they can dictate what the counter-jihad movement should be doing and where it needs to be going.

When these self appointed 'experts' get off the internet and do some work for the movement in the real world, then I will be impressed.

But they never do, do they.

The fact that I study religions makes me similar to all those in the Jewish / Christian faith who study their own religions.

If I cant study religions as that makes me a bit of a 'crank' I wonder what that makes the Pope, Priests or Rabbi's ?

Are all religious people cranks, or just me ?

As for me studying William Blake, if studying one of the greatest British poets makes me 'crank', then so be it.

So lets be honest shall we - parts of the counter-jihad movement seem to think that what matters is not intelligence, talent, political or legal skills, dedication to the anti-Islamist movement or even the ability to organise a movement that matters.

Oh no, what matters it appears is that one must abase oneself before Zionists and the ideology of Zionism before one is acceptable to the Zionist counter-jihadist country club clique.

This is hobbyism at its worst.

How dare a tiny clique of Zionist extremists seek to hijack the counter-jihad movement in the UK for their own purposes and benefit.

The UK counter-jihad movement needs to adress one issue - ISLAMISM.

If anyone thinks Nationalists will support, work with or vote for a party that abases itself before Zionism, then you are delusional.

Nationalists do not want any political party / movement they support to be run / controlled / influenced by a tiny shadowy clique of self serving extremists who put their own interests before our nation and people.

Our people are dying in the streets from Islamist bombs and terrorism.

Sooner or later the small self serving cliques that think they can control the nationalist movement for their own benefit will invite their own nemesis as a result of such hubris.

The fact the EDL has already split down the middle due to the issue of the EDL's unconditional support for Zionism, and allowing Zionist extremists to take leading roles in the EDL, shows us that nationalists are already sick of this Zionist clique seeking to control the anti-Islamist movement.

The fact that the EDL and NWI are now effectively at each others throats is as a direct result of Zionism.

I suggest that from now on the anti-jihad movement concentrate on one issue - resisting Islamism.

That way such schisms wont occur again and damage the development of the counter-jihad movement itself.

Its time for the counter-jihad movement to focus one one issue and one issue only - RESISTING ISLAMISM - and that way we can get on with the job at hand, which is saving our country and people from the existential threat that Islamism poses to our nation and Western Civilisation.


L. J. Barnes LLB (Hons)

Add to Technorati Favorites