Friday, 12 August 2011

For a moment there at the weekend it looked as though the game might be up; that the Berlin Wall of lies that has concealed the truth about mass third-world immigration from the people of Europe might have been about to tumble. On newspaper comment threads, in television interviews, even on the BBC - people were dispensing with the usual deceits and prevarications and speaking bluntly about what was happening to their cities. It looked as though a new era of truth-telling was about to dawn.

But to think that was to foolishly underestimate the hideous strength of the multicult apparat. Almost immediately it went into action. The truth tellers were bundled off the air. The static images used to iconify the riots in the print press were carefully selected to diminish the ethnically alien element. There was a striking difference between the raw video footage of the looting, showing that those involved were predominantly negroes, and the photographs of looters that were later circulated widely in the media. There were many video shots in which literally every looter was a negro; it is virtually impossible to find a crowd photograph used by a newspaper that shows only negroes, however. Even the newspapers that might have been thought most sympathetic to realism on the topic of immigration, the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph, ruthlessly screened them out.

Using the Dalston Turks and the Sikhs guarding their temple as examples, artful propagandists were even finding new ways to spin pro-multicult lines from the smoking ruins of London and other cities. "The Immigrants Love Britain More than We Do", proclaimed immigrant Cristina Odone, ridiculously misusing the word "We". She even absurdly declared that in Turkish (unemployment rate 59%) and Somali culture (unemployment rate 81%), "Dependence on the state is largely seen as unacceptable."

Comparable efforts to defend their towns by ethnically English people were stigmatised as fascism on the march, vilified in the media and crushed by the police. They were racist, it was said, based on one man throwing a plastic bottle at a bus on which four negroes were making "provocative gestures" to the white people on the street. Andrew Gilligan tries to do a hatchet job on them in the Telegraph today:
But the problem is that this particular version of David Cameron's Big Society has become contaminated by racism. Bill, a dustman and another participant in the defence of Eltham, says: "Last night they were all in the churchyard, the ––––––– blacks. We chased them down that way."

Why exactly is it racist to say 'we chased the ****** blacks'? If they were blacks, is it racist to describe them as such? Gilligan himself was mugged by a black during the riots. How how I know it was a black that mugged him? Because Gilligan told us so himself in the article he wrote about it.
The big black boy rode his bike straight at me, crashing me off my own and leaving us both tangled up on the ground. Then four more of them were racing towards me, clawing at my legs to get them off my bike, kicking me in the head as I tried to hold on.

So Gilligan describes his attackers as "black" and "them" and he, presumably, is not a racist. But for a bunch of working-class blokes in Eltham to describe the people they chased as "black" is racist?

The double standards become even more apparent when we consider the treatment of the dead Muslims in Birmingham. Ed Miliband declared that the father of one of the dead Muslims was "the true face of Britain". Conservative Friend of Turkey Daniel Hannan proclaimed that he made him proud to be British. We now know that those Muslims attacked the car with the four blacks in it with bricks and bottles before it turned round and drove over them. Is it possible that those Asian Muslims were a teensy bit racist in their reaction to a car with four blacks in it driving down the street? But the mass media has covered up the crucial detail that the Muslims initiated the confrontation.

There has, however, been a relentless media focus on the fact that the Eltham whites threw a plastic bottle at a bus window with some blacks (making "provocative gestures") in it, and claims they threw bottles at the police. The police kettled these white people in Eltham for no reason, meaning them they held them in a confined space for a prolonged period. It's hardly surprising if that gives rise to frustration. The real question is why did they do it in the first place when they didn't do it to the Dalston Turks or the Sikhs?

The media is now seizing on the whites who are being convicted of involvement in the riots to downplay the ethnic element. In his article today, Gilligan said:
I had spent the whole of the previous day in court, finding that most defendants, on that day at least, were white.

First of all, there is the question of selection bias in those presented for prosecution. It is quite possible that the police and prosecution service are deliberately pushing the whites up first to downplay the ethnic element. Most importantly, however, is the question of how these people came to be known to the police. In most cases, we can assume that they were turned in by friends, neighbours or family members. Quite obviously, ethnic minorities, who have an Us vs. Them attitude to Britain, and who come from cultures where ethics are rooted in tribal loyalty, are going to be less likely to turn in their own friends, family members or neighbours. There is also the question of members of ethnic minorities being less readily distinguishable to the average European ("they all look the same" effect). So, for various reasons, the proportion of whites among the initial group of rioters charged cannot be taken as a representative sample. But the MSM will no doubt use it to good propagandistic effect while continuing to push their multiculturalist lies.

So the mainstream establishment, like some Arab despot initially shaken by a popular revolt, has now deployed its tanks to crush the resistance. You have to marvel at its strength and resilience. It wasn't a Berlin wall coming down moment; it was a Prague Spring. We can only hope that something has kindled in the minds of people in the country that will eventually make change happen for real.


Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews