POLITICALLY CORRECT BRITISH CONSERVATIVES TOO MUCH FOR ONE FORMER SUPPORTER

The Conservative Party leadership may have seen a temporary respite from their declining electoral support in last week's council election results, but some things remain rotten in the State of Tory HQ and today's revelation that, for the first time in that party's history, quotas based on gender and ethnicity are to be imposed on local constituency associations in preparation for the next general elections appear to have initiated talk of widespread rebellion amongst once loyal and hard working grass roots members.

Dozens of perfectly able bodied white males with decades of political experience and demonstrable loyalty have been sidelined as prospective parliamentary candidates in target wards, to make way for female and ethnic minority candidates. In many cases the names chosen are totally inappropriate for the constituency and totally lacking in experience. The introduction of quotas by Tony Blair-lite, David Cameron has shocked the party faithful.

Any organisation, whether it happens to be a global corporation, national political party, family business or community association can only survive by employing the best people for the job. Awarding appointments and providing placements based on arbitrary notions such as "to be representative of the population" mean absolutely nothing if quality of officeholder/employee is sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. The Conservative Party will have to learn this lesson the hard way -it means falling numbers of members, declining donations and more tangibly, experienced office holders; the men and women who devote many hours of their own time and who are the very fabric of the party, quitting in disgust.

First defection

David Cameron's first high profile rebellion over this issue of imposition of PC quotas was announced this evening (14th) as a Lincolnshire Councillor told the Press he was quitting the Conservative Party and switching to the BNP.

The Reverend Robert West, a founding member of the Christian Council of Britain was recently suspended by the London based Tory leadership after he attended a meeting of the local BNP.

This evening in a press release Rev. West, the elected councillor for Holbeach Town Ward on South Holland District Council stated why he was now the BNP's 55th councillor.

Refugee

"I have decided to seek refuge from political correctness by applying for asylum with the British National Party - Britain's finest and most decent party - in our country's hour of need. The Conservative Party's list of candidates which deliberately exclude white male candidates in favour of women, non-white and homosexual or lesbian candidates, is discrimination of the worst kind."

Rev. West said he had been a lecturer in political philosophy and equal opportunities law and taught under franchise at the universities of Nottingham and East Anglia. He is now a supply teacher but understandably for fear of losing his job he would not reveal at which schools.

Suspended

Conservative deputy chairman Eric Pickle said: "Robert West was suspended about a month ago. He made inquiries into appealing that decision. His behaviour was a matter of concern for some time and following his latest indiscretion of speaking at a BNP meeting, his appeal is unlikely to succeed."

BNP organisers in the West Midlands, Yorkshire, London and Lancashire have, for some time, been conducting discreet talks with at least a score of elected representatives currently holding a Conservative Party membership card, plus it should be noted a few from other parties. Last week's election results changed the colour of the political map in over a dozen local authorities and many Conservative Councillors who are looking very isolated, have conveyed and reinforced their sense of vulnerability to BNP organisers in their area. In many cases the slickly presented yet metropolitan and isolated Tory HQ have laid the blame of failure at the doors of those local associations; accusing some associations of "ineptitude" and criticising some Chairmen for "dragging their heels" in implementing the new changes recommended by David Cameron's new leadership team.

Source



FRED REED ON THE GROWTH OF "MINORITIES"

It should perhaps be noted that Fred himself lives in Mexico!

From the Washington Post: "Nearly half of the nation's children under 5 are racial or ethnic minorities, and the percentage is increasing mainly because the Hispanic population is growing so rapidly, according to a census report released today." Now in newspaper parlance, "minorities" means "permanently underperforming and inassimilable minorities," which is to say blacks, Latinos and, when anybody remembers, American Indians. It very seldom means successful minorities, such as Chinese, Greeks, white men, Jews, or Anglo-Saxons.

As we look forward to a massive slewing away from the dominance of European whites in America, what may we expect? What will these huge minority populations do? It is instructive to look at what they have done so far.

Some thirteen percent of the country is now black, and thirteen percent Latino: over a quarter in all. Blacks remain intractably far below the white population academically. An astounding proportion can't read, and of those who can, few do. The gap hasn't closed, despite Head Start, integrated schools, segregated schools, more funding, welfare, black teachers, black school boards, black mayors, remedial instruction, or anything else. The gap appears on every known test of mental capacity or scholarly achievement-SATs, GREs, ACT, LSATs, MedCats, Stanford-Binet, Wechsler, Raven's matrices. Nothing makes a difference. Everything has been tried. Because of this, we got affirmative action or, as kids once said, make believe.

Further, blacks are not assimilating. Despite pushing, shoving, laws, legislation, regulation, and relentless indoctrination, the races are not melding at a rate that will produce results any time soon. The huge black necrotic regions of the cities, that whites never see, are so big and isolated as to be impervious to outside influence. If you have not spent time in police cars in such places, you cannot imagine the hopelessness and hatred that brood there. If you think that "hatred" is too hard a word, go look. I have. Whether the hatred is justified doesn't matter. It exists.

Yes, I will be called a racist for saying these things. I hope so. Today, "racist" means "one who says what everybody else knows." It is a badge of intellectual honor. Nonetheless, it remains that if I could change any of these conditions, I would. I don't enjoy seeing people in lousy circumstance. I just don't know what to do about it. Neither does anyone else.

Now, Latinos. Americans seem to think that the word denotes one kind of people, namely Mexicans, conceived as sitting torpidly under cactuses while wearing sombreros. Actually the variety of Latinos is great, from Argentines who amount to Europeans to Bolivians who are Indians. The Latinos coming into America are heavily Indian and uneducated. Mexican ophthalmologists do not swim the river. Mexicans who can make a decent living do not want to live in the United States. Thus the US gets the losers, the second-grade educations, people who on average have neither the intellect nor the urge to study. Yes, there are exceptions. But they are exceptions.

Everyone says, "But the Hispanics work hard." They do indeed, in the first generation. Many people in fields such as construction have told me that the Latinos are the backbone of their operations, that blacks don't want to work, have attitudes, show up if they feel like it and quit without warning. The Latinos work, now. Their children do terribly in school, however, drop out, and lose the desire to work. Then they join gangs.

Nice white people don't know about gangs. Maybe they think of West Side Story. I used to ride in Chicago, with the PD and with the South Side Gang Initiative, a federally funded program in the rotting satellite cities, Markham, Robbins, and Fort Ord. I saw the gangs. There were the Black Gangster Disciples, the Vice Lords, the Latin Kings, the Latin Cobras, the P Stones, the El Ruykins who came out of the old Blackstone Rangers and, earlier, Blackstone Raiders. They aren't the Jets, people. They're killers. And they loathe white America.

I once interviewed a ranking Vice Lord in the Cook Country Jail. Why, I asked, did blacks kill each other so much? "They'd rather kill whites," he answered, "but they know they'd lose." There's a lot of that. When I left Washington four years ago, Mara Salvatrucha (look on the web) was appearing in Arlington, Virginia, and now their graffiti are show up in Springfield, Virginia.

Law enforcement in America relies on having a white population that is mostly law-abiding. It has no good way of responding to large numbers of violent criminals, especially when they are backed by politically potent voting blocs. The crucial question, or a crucial question, is what proportion of the new minorities will fall into the permanent underclass? How much permanent underclass can the nation stand?

Another crucial question is this: If half the children today are of minorities, then in no more than eighteen years half the kids of college age will be. Unless they show a sudden scholarly afflatus which has not heretofore been in evidence, this means that soon the US will have to compete with China with the brains of only half the nation. This is not to mention secondary effects, such as enstupidating all schools to hide the failures of the minorities. Do you suppose that the Chinese are doing that?

Now, from the same story in the Washington Post, this: "William H. Frey, a demographer with the Brookings Institution, predicted that the United States will have 'a multicultural population that will probably be more tolerant, accommodating to other races and more able to succeed in a global economy.'" How heart-warming. I suggest that William H. Frey is a thoroughgoing fool, but this is common among academics.The whole touchy-feely multy-culty idea that forcing people together will make them love one another, kum bah yah, is simply wrong. Right now, there is a tremendous repressed hostility between blacks and whites, the lid being held on by federal power, tight control of the press, and rigorous political correctness. Whites, huge numbers of them, detest Latino immigrants and would love to expel them from the country. Serious friction grows between blacks and Latinos as Latinos push blacks out of regions they once controlled. We're not moving toward accommodation. We're moving toward trouble.

What will happen as the economy declines and the minorities continue growing in number? As they continue demanding through political power what they cannot obtain on their merits? As standards of living drop, and the pie isn't creamy enough to give everyone juicy freebies?

Source



GOOD IF IT HAPPENS

The Attorney-General is leading a drive for tougher jail terms to be imposed by judges in some of the most serious sexual and violent crimes. Lord Goldsmith, QC, the Government's senior law officer, is concerned about low levels of sentencing for manslaughter and child abuse, and has asked the Sentencing Guidelines Council to review both offences.

He favours heavier sentences for manslaughter, arguing that the gap between jail terms and sentences for murder is too big. He backs draft proposals from the Law Commission for new "categories" of murder that would enable a better match between jail terms and the severity of an offence. The sentencing drive is backed by wider powers being brought into force. From tomorrow, Lord Goldsmith's power to challenge sentences will expand to include middleranking sexual offences as well as the most serious offences that he can already tackle. He is challenging in the Court of Appeal the "double-jeopardy" principle that gives criminals discounts on their rightful sentences on the ground that they have been through the sentencing process twice.

The move, which chimes with Tony Blair's attack on the failings of the criminal justice system, comes as The Times has learnt that most challenges over lenient sentences are being brought over sexual and violent offences. Figures released under the Freedom of Information Act show that last year, of 106 cases considered by the Court of Appeal on a referral by the Attorney-General, the largest categories were for violence (23), then sexual offences (19), robbery (18) and drugs (17). Senior judges increased sentences in 63 per cent of sexual offences being challenged and in 69 per cent of violent offences, figures show.

In 2005, 389 sentences thought to be too lenient were sent in to Lord Goldsmith (by prosecutors and the public), compared with 277 in 2001. Fewer than one in three is then sent to the Court of Appeal. Of the 106 reviewed by the court, sentences were found to be "unduly lenient" in 75 per cent of cases. Jail terms were increased, however, in only 61 per cent of cases, often because of the double-jeopardy principle.

"The average length of sentence has gone up in the last eight to nine years from about 23 to 27 months. But there are pockets of concern and one of these problems is with manslaughter," Lord Goldsmith said. "One of the reasons I support the big review of homicide is that the difference between the sentence for murder and manslaughter is so great. "If you are convicted of murdering a partner or wife, the starting point is a minimum of 15 years, which is the equivalent of a 30-year sentence. "If you get convicted of manslaughter because of provocation, the sentence may be no more than seven to eight years. We really have to look at this."

The other main category about which the Attorney- General is concerned is child sex abuse. He recently lodged an appeal before a rare five-judge Court of Appeal over the jail terms imposed on two babysitters, Alan Webster and Tanya French, who repeatedly raped a 12-week baby girl. A decision is awaited.

Lord Goldsmith lodged an appeal in 2002 on the level of sentences in the case of abuse of young children. "I was concerned that some judges were not taking seriously enough the impact of abuse on young children," he said. Sentencing levels had improved but not enough. He said that he would prefer to see "higher sentences in this field".

Lord Goldsmith has brought challenges that have led to higher sentencing levels in such areas as human trafficking, street robbery and death by dangerous driving. He said that there was still a problem in cases of causing death by careless driving. "I believed there is a case for giving the courts powers to imprison in such cases," he said.

Source