Monday 15 February 2010

M'Athhew D'Anconna - '1 Inch' Attacks !

In a torrent of cliches as bitter as salt and as sour as a lemon, the New Statesman editor, Matthew '1 Inch' D'anconna ( so named in a 'street' homage to the American Gansta Rapper 50 Cent and also because of his diminutive, almost freakish, stature) has attacked the BNP.

Cue turkey analogy.


Lets start with the first trite statement ; the BNP is responsible for 'the cultivation of intolerance and racial tension'.



Now here we see a classic journalistic idiot technique. Conflate causation with correlation. For example a BNP member may decide to go hiking in wales but that does not mean he is responsible for the rainfall in Wales on that day.

First one cannot ' cultivate intolerance'.

I wonder what a 'cultivating intolerance' looks like.

Is it like an aubergine of hatred, a potato of racism or a cauliflower of contempt ?

I suppose it needs bullshit go grow, so Mr. D'Anconna will be quite the grower we expect, seeing as he is so profligate in his ability to disseminate bullshit.

The BNP cannot cultivate intolerance.

Its like comparing the shout of an ant to the scream of the engines of a commercial 747 jet liner.

The media are the primary cultivators in our society, so if intolerance exists it is a product of both the the media and the government who are the two primary cultivators in our society capable of disseminating information capable of changing or directing the social consensus.

If intolerance exists in society it is because the media peddle it and the government cause it.

Intolerance is also a term so wide in its meaning, it means nothing unless specifically linked to an specific type of 'intolerance' - does he mean Lactose Intolerance, Latex Intolerance, Wheat Intolerance or Idiot Intolerance which is what I get when I read Mr. D'Anconnas old bollocks.

Therefore the BNP do not disseminate or cultivate intolerance.

Moving on.

" Like Sinn Fein-IRA with its “Armalite and ballot box” strategy, the BNP runs on twin tracks ".

Well, no. Not really.

Thats a lie isnt it Matthew.

The IRA had a political strategy based on terrorism and democracy.

We have one based simply on democracy.

So neither factually nor numerically is Matthew correct on that one either.

Moving on.

As for the phrasing of 'Skinhead brutes', you can almost the homo-erotic sigh at the end cant you.

If you would like us to leave the room and leave you alone with your laptop Matthew, just let us know.

Heres a tip - an interesting story, and one that Matthew might to look into as a future exclusive for the New Statesman, is the new about the wheelchair bound, blind, one legged, transexual, female professional bodyguard from Guadeloupe just put in charge of protecting the Pope.

Havent heard of it.

Thats because it wont ever happen will it you dick.

So until then expect to see heavy set, white, working class males, big built and wearing scary sunglasses do security work in this country.

Cue 'bunker' gag.


' A minor strain of hostility' he calls racial strife between various immigrant groups in London.

Oh right.

I suppose Mr.A'nconna would describe the Iraq War as a 'bit of a tiff - with bombs'.

In fact I think he did, seeing as he is a Zionist tool in their Zionist media toolbox.

He is a spanner I think.

Melanie Phillips is the insidious rusty, stanley knife at the bottom of the box with the blade exposed that seeks to cut any hand that dares enter the Zionist toolbox.

Edmund Standing is that fluff encrusted Blu-tack that never sticks again to anything, even including the stickiest substance in the entire universe if it could ever be found.

I suppose in D'Anconna Land the American Civil War was a family spat, WW2 was a bloody good row and

Vietnam just a harsh stare.

An exchange of gunfire in the streets, murder, stabbings, shootings, gang warfare = minor hostility.

" fan the flames and exploit the simmering anger. "


" historical product of nations and races coming together ".


Uh oh - whats this.

" a black American musical form — the blues " - funny that.

Wasnt it a white man who invented the guitar and who invented the electric guitar ?

Try playing blues on the spoons (also invented by a white man).

It just aint the same.

Adolph Rickenbacker, George Beauchamp and Les Paul developed the electric guitar and they were all white.

The earliest extant six string guitar was built in 1779 by Gaetano Vinaccia (1759 - after 1831) in Naples, Italy. Also white.

Therefore the blues was just singing, before the white man invented the guitar.

As for Blues music that came from the spiritual songs of the Southern Scots-Irish Churches of the time that christianised their Black African slaves.

Studies by Willie Ruff and others have situated the origin of "black" spiritual music inside enslaved peoples' exposure to their masters' Hebridean-originated gospels.[6] African-American economist and historian Thomas Sowell also notes that the southern, black, ex-slave population was acculturated to a considerable degree by and among their Scots-Irish "redneck" neighbours.

So using the Blues musical genre as a way to talk about white musicians absorbing black influences, when in fact the guitar was invented by whites, the electric guitar invented by whites and the Blues musical genre began as a form of spiritual singing in the Scots-Irish Churches of the South that was taught to Christianised African slaves and which they copied is a bit silly isnt it.

Clapton going to America was returning the Blues to it White roots, not Whitey seeking blues credibility by mimicking Black Blues musicians.

Jeff Beck and Clapton are true Blues singers of a White tradition, not scions of an exclusively black musical genre.

But hey, why should D'Anconna know this - he is just a journalist aint he, and most of them talk out of their arses dont they.

Bored now of talking about D'Anconna.

Got something more important to do. Like watch Friends or something.

If turkeys had the vote, it is theoretically possible that they would join a party that was strongly pro-Christmas. Possible, but unlikely.

Yesterday, the BNP voted at an “extraordinary general meeting” in Essex to amend its constitution so black and Asian Britons can join its ranks. As Nick Griffin, the BNP's leader, told Sky News, this is likely to result in a “trickle, rather than a flood” of membership applications: and even a “trickle” may be pushing it.

The whole idea is, of course, innately hilarious: a party founded on the cultivation of intolerance and racial tension declaring that it has an open-door policy. In its 2005 manifesto, the BNP called for “voluntary resettlement” of immigrants and their descendants. So it wants you to leave the country but, before you do, invites you to join up and pay the membership fees (a standard rate of £30 pa, or £60 for the party's “gold” category, which presumably will entitle its new black and Asian members to a better class of dinghy when they are urged “to return to their lands of ethnic origin”).

Yet, even as we mock, we should be vigilant. The BNP is exploiting this constitutional change for all it is worth, both as evidence that it is being victimised and (the opposite claim) that it is voluntarily “modernising”. In truth, the new membership policy has been forced upon the party by the threat of legal action by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. On the BNP's website, there is currently a webcast by Griffin, complaining about the quango's attack on “this little party of ours”.

At the same time, the new membership policy fits neatly with his more general pursuit of incremental legitimacy. Like Sinn Fein-IRA with its “Armalite and ballot box” strategy, the BNP runs on twin tracks. Look at the so-called “security” at BNP gatherings if you doubt that the party still depends on a hardcore of skinhead brutes. At the same time, Griffin himself — a suit-wearing Cambridge graduate — has fought for years to bring the movement out of the Bierkeller and into mainstream political life.

This is why the election of two BNP candidates (Griffin and Andrew Brons) to the European Parliament last June was so depressing: it gave the party a claim to more serious media coverage, including Griffin's hugely contentious appearance on Question Time last November. The opening of the party's membership to non-whites is also part of this spurious process of “modernisation”: Clause Fourth Reich, so to speak.

Tony Blair had his Big Tent. Now Griffin will pretend that he has a Big Bunker, a rainbow coalition of prejudice. And it is certainly true that a plural society inevitably generates new tensions: where I live in east London, there is now a minor strain of hostility between second and third generation Afro-Caribbean Britons and newer arrivals from the enlarged EU: the working-class black community objects that it is being driven out of the service economy — cleaning, childcare — by Eastern European economic migrants who have undercut their wage-rates. In an age of globalisation and unprecedented population mobility, any complex urban society will generate such abrasions. And deplorable political movements such as the BNP will always be on hand to fan the flames and exploit the simmering anger.

As I wrote in November, Griffin and his gang are themselves refugees from reality, asylum seekers from the modern world. They choose to ignore the significant role that economic migration played (and will play again) in the years of non-inflationary growth. Worse, they seek to preserve something that never really existed: Britain is the historical product of nations and races coming together and commingling. Historically, this country has been a port rather than a fortress, a place of trade, exchange and racial interaction. Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Jews, Afro-Caribbeans, Asians, Eastern Europeans: pluralism is the very essence of our island story. Some of my best friends are Jutes.

At the wonderful Eric Clapton and Jeff Beck concert at the O2 Centre last night, it occurred to me that Britain is the only country on earth that could take a black American musical form — the blues — adapt it to a new setting and, eventually, revive it in its very country of origin (as Clapton and many others did in the Sixties). The BNP has no grasp of the porousness and heterogeneity of true Britishness.

Yet, more than ever in its 28-year history, the party represents a clear and present danger. A matter of weeks from now, it will field a number of parliamentary candidates in the general election: most dangerously, Griffin himself in Barking. The seat is held by Labour's Margaret Hodge, defending a majority of almost 9,000.

Safe? By no means. Labour's own polling shows that the category of voter most easily described as “white van man” is warming alarmingly to the BNP: in seven out of 11 wards, more than 50 per cent of this tranche of voters — more than 70 per cent in some areas — think they might vote for Griffin. Ever willing to nurture the voters' anxieties and resentments, the BNP has prospered during the recession and exploited the collapse of trust in the political class. In Barking, it sees a real chance to pull off an extraordinary victory.

It is bad enough that the party is represented in town halls and at Strasbourg. But the election of Griffin as an MP would be much, much worse. For the Commons is not just another representative assembly. Never forget: in our unwritten constitution, the Queen-in-Parliament is sovereign. I don't know about you, but the thought of the BNP having a share in that sovereignty, however small, makes me sick to the stomach, and more determined than ever that the battle of Barking should not be lost. In the end, in spite of all its absurdities, the BNP's advance is no laughing matter.

Add to Technorati Favorites


Anonymous said...

Lee will the goverment now have to lift the illegal ban on BNP members in the police etc with the new party rules?

Is it not now the time to test the water with one of our members and sue THEM for discrimination?

How they got away with it i'll never know, why had the BNP not chalenged this sooner or at least when Nick became an MEP, rather than fretting over animal rights!

Anonymous said...

Lee I would like to see the BNP raise the membership fee, to £50 and a seconded system where each new member has to be seconded by a party member, while making more of the online contributions and fundraisers.

There should be a general election target on the main site NOW. a donation system that hopes to stand every seat depending on donations.

We need to stand as many seats as possible even if it is just a paper candidate, people I know are already starting to become dispondent as they feel they will not see a BNP candidate.

Just standing a candidate should see good publicity and funds through donations driven by this publicity should reach the party to more than make up for the cost of the seat.

In past years the funds would not be recouperated, but now with it being so easy to donate and the BNP having a higher profile it is the right way to go.

If you don't stand then for the people in that area you may as well not exist.

Nick said he would contest every seat - let us hope Nick is a man of his word and starts to concentrait on the general election, anyone who says standing a small number of seats and gaining less total votes than the Euros is insane.

This is the springboard we need - question time, the Euros - let us not drift into oblivion.

Anonymous said...

"it occurred to me that Britain is the only country on earth that could take a black American musical form — the blues — adapt it to a new setting and, eventually, revive it in its very country of origin (as Clapton and many others did in the Sixties)"

she also forgot to mention that clapton live on stage urged the audience to vote for enoch powell. funny how she missed that part of.

"On 5 August 1976 Clapton provoked an uproar and lingering controversy when he spoke out against increasing immigration during a concert in Birmingham. Clapton voiced his support of controversial political candidate Enoch Powell and announced on stage that Britain was in danger of becoming a "black colony". Clapton was quoted telling the audience: "I think Enoch's right ... we should send them all back. Throw the wogs out! Keep Britain white!"[

Ade said...

So basically he's saying these muslim radicals and clerics are all pink and fluffy in their own countries, as soon as they get over here, the BNP make them violent.

Trouble is, if they spout that nonsense on the BBC, 5 million people will just accept it as true.

Muslim Riots in France

Muslim Riots in Denmark

Muslim Riots in Swrden

I can't be bothered doing any more links, just go to you tube or google and search muslim riots and any european country you like.

Ade said...

2.5 million dead Iraqis Gulf War 1, 2 and Sanctions and this guy is demonising Nick Griffin and the BNP.

They have been brainwashed, if the Russians had invaded Iraq and were setting up military bases there and installing puppet Govt's this guy would be snarling how evil the Russions were, 2.5 million dead Iraq's.
But because it' us and the US and they never actually say 2.5 million, the BBC usually just says thousands.
Then it hasn't happened.
They are brainwashed.

The Establishment machine has said don't criticise us, attack the BNP, and they do.

They are just trained ( brainwashed ) attack dogs.

Millions of people in this country have been trained by the media and political establishment to turn violent at the mention or sight of the BNP.
Question time was a prime example, attack dogs outside, in the audience and on the panel.

2.5 million dead Iraq's.

Anonymous said...

D'ancona used to be editor of the Spectator , I dont think he was anything to do with the Statesman but I might be wrong. Anyway he reduced the spectator to a politically correct rag which bored its readers and he lost many readers whilst he was at the helm . He is wet , rather akin to Dave himself, he is also rather fat and looks very unhealthy. Too many corporate meals! He will write anything the organ grinder requests , a true believer in the neo con corporate new world order.

Anonymous said...

off topic but this guy is spot on:

Andraste said...

This guy is a complete nut-job. Yet another woefully pathetic so-called journalist - this article is utter garbage and can be demolished so easily. He relies on all the normal lies of the extreme left with all it's historical revisionism.

"Worse, they seek to preserve something that never really existed: Britain is the historical product of nations and races coming together and commingling. Historically, this country has been a port rather than a fortress, a place of trade, exchange and racial interaction. Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Jews, Afro-Caribbeans, Asians, Eastern Europeans: pluralism is the very essence of our island story. Some of my best friends are Jutes."

This is such a typical and stupid statement. He is taking a vast tract of time, 1500 years, and squeezing it all together as though peoples were here at the same time. Fact is for best part of this time Britain was solely the home of Germanic peoples. It was only in recent times that the Huguenots and Jews arrived as refugees in relatively small numbers. As for the comment about Asians and Afro-Caribbeans, that's a joke. HMS Windrush only arrived in 1948 and that was the beginning of immigration from the West Indies. Certainly prior to that date there was no history of Asian or Afro-Caribbean immigration into Britain. This guy is a history mutilator, but alas such people get far in the sick media because it's not about truth, rather perverted reality for their globalist agenda.

This guy is well and truly a mess.

But what I find amusing is how only other day that fat hack Andrew Gilligan was saying how the BNP are not a serious party, and now you have another one of his ilk saying the BNP are a threat. Come on you idiots at least get a consistent story sorted between you.

The BNP cannot be stopped. It's simply impossible.

Anonymous said...

Matthew D'ancona, another mentally ill white liberal who will just have to learn about nature the hard way.

gatesofvienna said...


The relevant documents that exist in Common Law & in Statute Law include:-

1. The Magna Carta/s of both 1215 & 1225;

2. The Treason Act of 1351

3. The Act of Supremacy given effect by Henry VIII in 1534,

and restored by Elizabeth I, in 15-- :

4. The Declaration of Rights, created in the period 1688/89,

& formally accepted by the Crown in February, 1689;

5. The Bill of Rights published as a Statute in December, 1689;

6. The Treason and Felony Act of 1848.

All of these documents form part of our great constitution, which is still the envy of the world,


The people are Sovereign!- This is London- isn't it RUSSIAN OWNED?