As things stand I say to hell with Britain

Sycophancy is the demeaning art of degrading one's self for the benefit of others who don't really care about you; for if they did they wouldn't let you act as you do.

By Stanley Collymore

 

Pardon my asking, but isn’t the legal responsibility for apprehending and or physically detaining those who are known to be personally implicated in criminal activities, of whatever nature, or are reasonably suspected of being so involved on UK soil the sole responsibility of our lawfully constituted, supervised and publicly accountable domestic police forces?

 

That said, it’s absolutely true that in the only country in the world, namely the United Kingdom, that rather condescendingly, patronizingly, disdainfully and feudalistically designates its lawful residents to be subjects, never deeming it fit, proper or just to elevate them to the dignified status of citizen since to do so would be at variance and even clash with the supercilious notion as well as the deeply entrenched classism mindset itself concomitant with the instinctive subservience sycophantically and even avidly displayed, nurtured and cherished by numerous Britons and others in our midst to their alleged and so-called hereditary betters.

 

A phenomenon, it must be said, that is ludicrously widespread and endemic still, even with our advent into the 21^st Century, throughout Britain, but nevertheless still allows members of the general public in extraordinary circumstances to properly carry out the misnomer action of a citizen’s arrest of someone or persons engaged in the criminal act of breaking the law of the land.

 

But proscriptions do apply all the same. Since persons involved in this ostensibly public-spirited enterprise are at risk themselves of falling foul of the law if they act under a vigilante’s prescript. Furthermore they must adhere, even with the best of intentions in mind, to the established principle of exercising in the process of what they’re doing the very minimum of restrictive force to achieve their aim, and which under no circumstance can or should be lethal.

 

Crucially, too, they must contact the nearest police force immediately afterwards, apprise them fully of what they’ve done, and on the arrival of the local constabulary summarily hand over the alleged but apprehended suspect to them and thereafter unhindered allow the police to lawfully deal with the matter in hand.

 

Therefore, taking established precedent and all that has been earlier said into consideration how the hell then could MI5, not known to be a part of the BBC’s staff, evidently not naturally at the scene there to prevent a crime, and clearly as well not an element of any British police force presumptuously, premeditatedly and selectively turn up without being summoned, as far as we know, to the premises of the BBC wile a Newsnight programme was being aired with Abu Nusaybah as an interviewee and invited contributor to that specific programme, and on its completion and with him still in the studio summarily arrest him?

 

For what? I’d like to know! Giving an honest interview on our state broadcaster that contradicts the lying narrative of our political leaders and their warped equivalent of the vicious dogs in the novel Animal Farm �" i.e. MI5 that evidently doesn’t want the criminal roles that it and they all callously and intentionally played in the deadly Woolwich scenario properly coming to light, and that consequently make them unambiguously culpable for the events that took place there in May 2013.

 

Abu Nusaybah didn’t bulldoze his way into the BBC or the Newsnight studio for that matter wielding a meat cleaver or machete to gain access; he was there expressly at the BBC’s invitation to give the interview he was asked to. So if he’s culpable of a crime for acceding to the BBC’s request then so is the BBC, and specifically those who invited him to the BBC, equally guilty under the criminal tag of joint enterprise. But no one in their right mind would suggest that’s a valid criminal road to go down and the BBC isn’t be charged with anything. Moreover, nothing in Abu Nusaybah’s interview can in the remotest sense be construed as criminal or lend any credence to the notion that it was an incitement to criminality far less murder.

 

Besides, I’ve constantly seen and heard far worst on British TV of all shades by white Caucasian interviewees and so-called pundits that manifestly fall foul not only of the legally designated Ofcom standards but also British law, but I don’t know of a single instance where either the police far less MI5 have gone charging into the respective broadcasting entity, whether it was the BBC, Sky or the other independent broadcasters, to arrest those concerned.

 

In the direct aftermath of the Woolwich killing Nazi moron Kelvin Mackenzie formerly of the Sun and Hillsborough infamy openly declared on Sky’s Press Preview that the police should have summarily gunned down and kill Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale instead of just incapacitating them. Thankfully he was sternly slapped down not by Sky’s presenter of that programme but by his fellow guest on Press Preview. This conscionable and intelligent white female �" evidently in possession of human characteristics that morons like Kelvin MacKenzie markedly lack -  tersely pointed out to him that the role of the British police is to thwart crimes and prevent others that have already occurred  wherever possible from escalating, not act as sadistic assassins or executioners.

 

Such niceties however and the instinctive respect for law and order which is the undoubted bedrock of any society, however much it is provoked, that wants to realistically claim an be seriously recognized as a civilized one is evidently lost on mindless cretins like Kelvin MacKenzie as we saw in his venomous tirade about the Hillsborough tragedy and his exceedingly pernicious and asinine scapegoating of the very people who were the victims and not the perpetrators as he bullishly and stupidly claimed of that catastrophe and in tandem with that spurious assumption vented his venom and acerbic diatribe against them, making him a very wanted man in Liverpool, which to this day according to impeccable sources this craven coward eschews like the plague. But were anyone to actively call for or even suggest his physical demise this useless piece of human detritus would be doing his utmost to seek legal recourse.

 

Another one in similar mould is Anne Diamond who also on another Sky Press Preview �" Sky sure as hell knows how to pick them �" aired on Saturday 4 May 2013 with Stephen Dixon as the presenter avidly defended Jimmy Savile, suggesting and then outrightly saying that this serial paedophile monster shouldn’t be posthumously stripped of his knighthood. Her rationale, if one can so dignify it, for this perverted and even debauched analysis of hers is that during his lifetime Jimmy Savile raised large sums of money for several charities and good causes. The obvious awareness, even with hindsight, that this was a calculated front on his part to mask his vile paedophilia and other predatory sexual abuses of vulnerable children, youths and adults apparently either didn’t dawn on this vacuous blonde bimbo or possibly might even have fitted in excellently with her own sick mindset.

 

Which makes one wonder what lurid skeletons Anne Diamond has hidden away in her personal cupboard, bearing in mind that contrary to popular myth paedophilia as well as the predatory sexual abuse of minors or the highly vulnerable aren’t or were they ever the sole preserve of the male gender, since women, although it isn’t fashionable to say so, do offend in this regard as well!

 

Going back to Kelvin MacKenzie’s scenario that the police should have executed Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, for that is what it amounts to, this is my take on the matter. These two men both of whom are black had allegedly killed a white off-duty soldier who like them was born in Britain and shared a common British nationality. However, instead of running away from the scene of their alleged crime and with ample opportunity and time to do so both Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale deliberately stood their ground.

 

Naïveté or stupidity on their part? I don’t think that either is a valid assessment of the situation. For what they did was unprecedented by any standards where the law is consciously broken and certainly where public murder is concerned. Remaining in the direct vicinity of their alleged actions they consciously and keenly involved witnesses present in a rational discourse of why they acted as they did; asked to be photographed and even willingly posed for photos of themselves to be taken. They also made it clear that the several members of the public who were around when this broad daylight incident occurred and were still present after it happened had nothing to fear from them.

 

And, crucially, they were going nowhere; had no intention at all of changing their minds and escaping capture but would instead wait stoically where they were until the police came and they would surrender themselves. Which they surely and philosophically must have known was steeped with loads of risks for them, not least that at best their premeditatedly embarking on what they consciously intended could lead to their peaceful apprehension or at worst, and as happened in the case of Mark Duggan and other black British men before them, result in their summary execution that would publicly be masqueraded as is the customary practice by the Metropolitan Police in particular as a defensive measure, and the powers that be wouldn’t have given a s**t. But whatever the outcome was that their intentional decision presaged Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale weren’t in the least fazed by it any more than they were by the prospect of being summarily executed by the police.

 

And perhaps the commander of the police’s rapid response team that took some 14 minutes or more to get there and seeing these guys still standing around waiting for them recognized this defiance and its attendant stoicism and decided not to grant them their wish, possibly to die as political or even Islamic martyrs. Besides, it’s bloody futile the state killing someone who wants to die and is committed to that specific goal. That’s why we changed the law in Britain where a suicide aspirant could be physically prevented from taking their own life, then charged with what was then a capital offence, prosecuted in court and sentenced to death if found guilty on behalf of the state for trying to killing themselves. You couldn’t make stuff like that up!

 

So all the gratuitous crap we see, hear and read in the British media about these courageous and fearless Caucasian witnesses of this gruesome killing in Woolwich, generally females by the way, altruistically confronting these two black murderers is just that. For how can one realistically confront somebody who isn’t in a confrontational mode but very much the opposite, and furthermore poses no imminent or direct physical harm to them? But by employing this clichéd red herring those who run the British media know perfectly well that it fits excellently into the white stereotypical narrative of brute Blacks and dauntless whites. What surely ought to be more troubling I feel is the consistent dumbing down of our educational system and most particularly the English Language, in which the media play a prominent part, by those who arrogate it exclusively as their own yet haven’t the foggiest comprehension of salient words within it far less have any grasp of their proper utilization. But whoever heard of any sensible person attributing logic or commonsense, for that matter, to bigots of any kind?

 

Interestingly enough while the Woolwich murder allegedly committed by Michael Adebolajo and his accomplice Michael Adebowale has instinctively been slammed and vigorously promulgated by the UK government, British media and every other conceivable redneck white supremacist acerbically fortified with his or her warped racist, selective xenophobic or Islamophobic agenda as an act of terrorism, other at best brutal and at their worst much more horrifying killings with a greater loss of life and that had also catapulted themselves into the media spotlight and the national consciousness have unsurprisingly not been so labelled by these very same people copiously foaming at the mouth like vicious rabid dogs at what happened in Woolwich. And I’ll refer in this article, and for the purpose of balance, to just a tiny fraction of them where the defendants were actually found guilty in a court of law for what they did.

 

There were, of course, the murders committed by David Copeland, otherwise known as the London nail bomber, an engineer by trade, 22 years old and whose meticulously planned terror subsequently carried out at the Admiral Duncan Pub but for the grace of God managed to kill only three people. Three people too many in my opinion, but that said thankfully far fewer than what he evidently intended to be the case and were he not stopped when he was could quite conceivably have been more catastrophic with a serial dimension attached to it.

 

Meanwhile in Manchester in the north of England Dale Cregan callously utilizing the tactic of a call to the emergency services lured police constables Nicola Hughes aged 23 and her colleague Fiona Bone 32 who jointly answered that emergency call to the police in response to their planned deaths by ambushing them both with a savage gun and grenade attack that brutally cost them their lives. But incredibly these weren’t Dale Cregan’s only killings on his rampaging murder spree across northern England and where the same modus operandi were callously employed by him. But even more notorious than either of these two examples was the frenetic killing spree of the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik.

 

These subsequently convicted and wilful murderers it must be pointed out share the same ethnicity; they are all white Caucasian males with Anders Behring Breivik and David Copeland very well known by the authorities in their respective countries to hold rather extremist racist and xenophobic views against non-whites; so their murders weren’t by any means spontaneous, committed out of the blue or fashioned for that matter in some sterile vacuum of isolation.

 

However, other than an evanescent flirtation with the tag terrorist but only applied in the case of Anders Behring Breivik and that was carried in their initial broadcast bulletins immediately after the news broke of the tragic events in Norway and at a time too when the British and other western media, noteworthily institutionally racist themselves and which therefore collectively and automatically had thought that the carnage created in Norway was the work of non-whites, the correspondingly conclusive outcome of the twisted minds of the producers, editors, presenters, anchors and the pack of mindless stenographers that risibly masquerade as informed or objective journalists which they patently aren’t and who either run or else work for these corporate media organizations or as in the case of the BBC a statutorily established, licence fee funded and supposedly public corporation, and were therefore absolutely convinced in their minds, but without a shred of evidence to support their ludicrous assumptions, that the culprits involved were most likely the usual globally south descended suspects living in that Scandinavian country, were the terms terrorist or terrorism freely bandied about.

 

But thereafter when the real identity of the actual perpetrator of these gruesome acts was acknowledged and publicly disclosed by the Norwegian authorities and the shocking for many, including these media corporations themselves, but nevertheless inescapable truth finally emerged that it was the handiwork of a solitary mass murderer who was white, a Norwegian citizen and that no non-white persons: Norwegian or otherwise, were directly or indirectly implicated in these premeditatedly executed mass killings, there was an instantaneous and seismic shift in the attitude of the British and other western media not only in how they reported the events in Norway but also in their stance towards the white perpetrator that had savagely occasioned them.

 

In a 180 degree about face the BBC and the rest of them without even bothering to give an explanation for this change of heart injudiciously but summarily dropped in their news bulletins, documentaries and all other reporting on this human catastrophe which had been visited on the Norwegian public by Anders Behring Breivik all references, however remotely so, to the word terrorism or the concept that this white man was a terrorist. And watching these very people and broadcasters that only a short while previously had had no compunction whatsoever or any moral integrity at all in liberally banding about the terrorist epithet to the same crime when they all wishfully thought and noticeably mischievously and erroneously conveyed to the general public the distinct impression that its perpetrators were non-European was most revealing to say the least.

 

For here they were now quite studiously and calculatedly not only having unconscionably dropped all references to terrorism in the light of who they were forced to by facts to acknowledge was the genuine terrorist, if that term was to be correctly used at all, since to carry on as before would f**k up their racist narrative, but were additionally too earnestly seeking to mitigate the crime itself as well as exculpate the criminal from any wrongdoing on the entirely asinine basis that Anders Behring Breivik was justifiably provoked into doing what he did because of the threatening and encroaching march of multiculturalism across Europe; which is a most sickening conclusion by any rational perspective that I can think of.

 

Yet the same media organizations in tandem with the UK government, fascist groups like the EDL and the BNP, populist and self-serving MPs, unelected legislators in the misnomer-named House of Lords and the multiplicity of rent-a-mouth so-called expert pundits and social commentators that harangue the airwaves with their facile outpourings have from the very outset and still continue to waste no time at all in labelling the Woolwich killing a terrorist act; this despite emerging and compelling evidence to the contrary that it wasn’t!

 

Terrifying it most certainly was I must confess but by no stretch of the imagination, any logical strand or a comprehensive interpretation of that much misrepresented term was it a terrorist act; and its only right and proper to unequivocally state this fact and essay to put matters in their true perspective. For if every random lone wolf killing engineered by and subsequently executed on the basis of whatever personal or political grievance the killer may have justifiably harboured or otherwise nurtured and consequently felt compelled to act because of it were to be either cavalierly or else wilfully and mischievously categorized by those with their personal hidden agendas and a great deal to gain either financially or politically from being able to quite calculatedly establish a perennial climate of deep-seated but irrational fear among the general population to achieve their hope for objectives.

 

Might themselves have been unashamedly and directly responsible through their premeditated, brutally instituted, engagingly fostered, actively supported and rather cynically effected actions that undeniably provided the catalyst that triggered the lone wolf responses they secretly but earnestly hoped for, then when these actually come about publicly, most vehemently but all so dishonestly condemn them, thus maximizing the capital gains they derive from them with regard to themselves and their contrived goals ably assisted in that regard by the effusive efforts of those useful idiots in our communities whom they know they can easily con and therefore reliably count on to actively facilitate the means whereby they can activate their odious and destructive agendas and fulfil their goals.

 

Agendas and objectives that are the complete antithesis to the prospects of a truly vibrant and genuinely cohesive society by lending a much greater public acquiescence to their steadfast cause; their simplistic but effective mantra being one of we’re the good guys and the guardians of a democratic and civilized society, while the other guys that don’t look like us, share our views and who aren’t us must be roundly demonized as the enemy within and their retaliation to our deeds, the reasons for which are always never stated of course, branded as acts of terrorism.

 

For if these are truthfully the terrorists what etymological term I wonder do we then apply to successive British Prime Ministers, their cabinet ministers, MPs, House of Lords members, senior civil servants, the intelligence services, principal police officers, government advisers and others who devise and shape our foreign policies; or come to it our military chiefs that either conveniently forget or callously overlook the Nuremburg protocols which specifically state that the proposition of claiming to be following orders  doesn’t wash and is no valid defence in a court of law.

 

Protocols that were introduced by the way principally at the behest of the British government, were then freely and even indiscriminately employed as crude implements of revenge by its judges allocated to the Nuremburg Trials to summarily in kangaroo-style instituted tribunals readily dispose of Nazi politicians, German military officers, members of the SS, and anyone else that the British government along with its wartime collaborators, and wantonly utilizing the concept of victor’s justice, wanted to humiliate, punish and ultimately get rid of; and which as expected worked a treat for the Brits.

 

Meanwhile, the Nuremburg protocols, post World War II, have consensually been wholly incorporated into international law; have themselves turned into the revered mechanisms for other international laws, treaties and charters, like for example the UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions, that are universally recognized and well respected, and parallel to that have been ratified into domestic law by virtually all the member countries of the United Nations.

 

Therefore with that firmly in mind and Britain moreover an avid co-instigator of all the aforementioned and to boot a founding and permanent member still of the United Nations, one could easily be forgiven for thinking that its various instruments of government, the judiciary and all the other resplendent and overt paraphernalia that jointly constitute its much vaunted democratic processes of governance would have been fully cognisant not only of what the country in contemporary terms and over many decades had been instrumental in actively though self-servingly and dishonestly prosecuting in many countries, particularly so in the Global South, but equally as well and most especially so had similarly done in the case of Magna Charta over the centuries.

 

And consequently having conscionably so, if indeed those who subsequent to the ending of World War II and at all levels of government since have been running the United Kingdom are or were ever capable of such probity that is must surely have recognized, even if reluctant to accept this reality, the overriding moral responsibility and crucially too the acknowledgement of and significantly so the long overdue and the indisputable requirement for a genuine commitment to common justice, the universal and a markedly divergent from the customary, sterile, feudalistically class-driven or financially determined human rights that themselves in conjunction with the overarching, indivisible and inalienable respect that Britain does indisputably owe both to its own people and in the light of its dark and far from exemplary colonial and imperialistic history most of the rest of the world as well. What a truly pathetic commentary on the state of our nation, which has obligingly become a lapdog for the rich and the powerful! And I couldn’t agree more with that sentiment.

 

Sinisterly in partnership with that seismic shift in governmental behaviour and the stark realization of it by those who observe these things is the accepted trend that it’s not illegal anymore in the United States for instance to falsify the news we receive about events in or directly concerning our countries with the corporate media bosses quite shameless stating that “the news is what we tell you it is” rather than what it actually is, and with the British media slavishly and unreservedly following suit. Sky News after all is owned by the nationality carpetbagging, American-cum-Australian Rupert Murdoch who also owns the misnomer-named Fox News in the United States; while in the UK the BBC, our compulsory licence-fee funded and state broadcaster, has been doing the same for yonks. And returning to the US lets not forget that just six giant corporations own every facet of the electronic and press media in that country.

 

But it’s not only a similar phenomenon which affects us here in the United Kingdom where our media is concerned and moreover has evidently lost its independence; our governments that increasingly over the years have voluntarily surrendered their independence to the US with the current Con-Dem coalition one and the official Labour Party opposition currently, pusillanimously and rather elatedly embedded up that country’s a*s are similarly culpable. Sensible and prescient-minded individuals are fully knowledgeable regarding what stems from hubris; it’s nemesis, or colloquially blow-back, which ultimately comes back to bite as well as haunt its sponsors and perpetrators.

 

Personally I see the Woolwich killing as a murder with distinct and quite overt political overtones, not at all dissimilar from those multiple ones with their unmistakable inbuilt components of self-righteousness, calculation, savage violence and sheer revenge that Britain routinely in the past carried out in the Global South and nowadays in the 21^st Century still unconscionably, rather dishonestly and criminally does, and would you credit it still expects, as automatically happened in the past, to get away with its criminality.

 

After all what do you, for example, call the rather gratuitous and premeditated murders on a pretty grand scale of quite innocent black civilians in their own country, these murders themselves following on from the precursor of the savage torture, male castration without aesthetic let alone any semblance of concern for the unfortunate victims let alone the chillingly unsophisticated, absolutely rudimentary as well as the excruciatingly painful and utterly distressing for them barbarous way in which their scrota were literally hacked open and their testes bloodily and heartlessly severed from their bodies?

 

I play cricket and know all too well what it feels like, as I’m equally sure many other avid cricketers at all levels of the game do, to have ones testicles painfully struck by a delivery from a fast bowler, and it’s why protection guards specifically for the groin area were introduced in the club and similarly the higher professional versions of this especially remarkable game that we all love so as to preclude exceptionally painful experiences like the aforesaid from being occasioned by batsmen at the crease during play.

 

Now try if you will to imagine the terror that understandably and horrifyingly would be caused in you or alternatively how you would feel if your son, dad, brother, other close relatives, your partner, spouse or even close friends were to have their balls criminally, barbarically and uncaringly removed in this most monstrous of ways by those who innately considered you or those quite close and dear to you as much less than pieces of s**t.

 

But I’m getting way ahead of myself on this one, aren’t I? Because as whites this presumption on my part is a vivid imagination and a bridge too far in that respect for the likes of you to seriously consider far less ever realistically expect to happen to you, so why should you care? And furthermore would be flippantly regarded as a scenario which in your rather apathetic or even warped minds ought only to be contemplated in the case of Blacks or other purported inferior races.

 

So having physically emasculated these black men who were thus involuntarily turned into eunuchs but not created as such persons habitually were in Arab societies to be subsequently employed as guards in harems or as chamberlains in any palace, which in itself would have been bad enough, the government of the United Kingdom sitting in Westminster London racially gave carte blanche to its agents in Kenya, principally its colonial representative there, to do whatever they liked with these unfortunate black men, women and children, a number of the adults among them constituting the elderly, that were held under their control; and they did just that!

 

Routinely they were shackled, herded into fortified stockades to further restrict their movement, doused with petrol or paraffin, set alight and then allowed to burn alive while their taunting, inhumanly sadistic and tormenting persecutors eagerly stood by and gleefully watched their deliberate incineration. Others on the other hand were maimed, often having their limbs severed by machete cuts or else were executed in whatever manner that their sick torturers whimsically decided upon. While additionally over a million Kenyans of both sex were summarily detained, forcibly confined to squalid concentration camps �" yes you read that correctly, and this just after World War II had ended �" that were fenced off with barbed wire and where the inmates there were routinely subjected to sexual assaults, systematic beatings and horrific acts of torture that included several of them being roasted alive. While the “lucky” ones among their number but with the constant threat of death still hanging over them were brutally forced to build with their bare hands the Embakasi Airport that was paid for by purported US foreign aid.

 

All of this ironically occurring just seven years after the Second World War ended. A war in which the British and comprehensive contingents of nonwhites, British Empire and unmistakably colonial troops and allies that included hundreds of thousands of Kenyans who now found themselves the intentional victims of identical and in many cases even worse ghastly atrocities systematically carried out against them by of all people a smug British lot that after World War II had arrogated to themselves the moral high ground; had altruistically, courageously and very successfully on their part, these colonial troops, ably assisted a beleaguered Britain to importantly save itself and also to permanently put an end to the mass killings and other heinous acts of brazen criminality, as well as the completely inhuman activities that were being committed throughout Nazi Germany and similarly in the territories of its continental-wide European satrapies, Axis allies and fascist collaborators.

 

In the meantime, in a similar barbaric fashion to that which the British colonial authorities that had been autocratically in charge then and along with their white accomplices and several other willing Caucasian surrogates and collaborators who with the fullest knowledge, complicity and the barbarous authorization of consecutive British governments in London that quite evidently racially-motivated had habitually and unreservedly effected against multitudes of other unfortunate black women, juvenile females and clearly even non-pubescent black girls that unquestionably were manifestly sexual innocents at the times, on the slave plantations of the Caribbean and the Americas.

 

And otherwise comprehensively as well had with absolute and untroubled impunity carried on with their mass rapes and the indiscriminate sexual abuses of black females throughout these contiguous territories and regions; their 21^st Century successors: the equally exclusively white expatriate but this time African located British colonial authorities, selectively put in charge by the UK regime with overall and ultimate responsibility for that unwilling Kenyan colony and solidly having the former’s complete and unstinting authority, along with their white accomplices there to freely impose whatever bestial acts of inhumanity that their warped minds conjured up and their intrinsically cultivated and pernicious racism gave vent to against innocent Kenyan civilians regardless of their age, gender or physical infirmity, didn’t need to be told twice by their bosses in London, or reminded afterwards for that matter what their perceived duties to the British crown, white supremacist notions or the Master Race ideology �" one and the same thing as it happens �" indubitably were.

 

Unsurprisingly in the circumstances scores of thousands of Kenyan women and young girls were serially raped by white British soldiers, run of the mill civilians, public service officials and all manner of other Caucasian scum including butch lesbians. And they all committed these crimes arrogantly knowing that they could, would get away with it and moreover in a month of Sundays would never be charged by the so-called legal authorities with any of these crimes much less be ever be prosecuted for them.

 

Not least because these paragons of the law were of a similar mindset themselves and sure as hell either personally and deeply implicated in what was going on or else casually or indifferently condoned these reprehensible acts. Furthermore they were uniformly fully cognisant of the fact that no white judge, the only ones around, would ever contemplate far less actually act on sending one of their kind to prison for raping a black female. A black female who rather than being sympathetically treated as the rape victim that she was would instead by these racist scumbags be instinctively regarded as either lying, which is perceived by most Caucasians to be an intrinsic characteristic of all black people, or else would have assumed that she got what she asked for and rightly deserved.

 

Which wasn’t coincidental by any means, since pseudo white science had centuries earlier conveniently, subjectively and quite advantageously for these self-confessed eugenicists and self-proclaimed Aryans, but oh so fraudulently  as well for these duplicitous jerks that thought it up in the first place, concluded that black females unlike their white counterparts could never be raped. And this deliberately contrived scientific its proponents sallied forth was due chiefly to the fact that the vaginas of black females, they passionately argued, were distinctly and structurally different from those of white females.

 

A concerted act of nature they rationalized which places all black females, regardless of their age, into a recurring state of oestrus that emphatically forces them either consciously or subliminally to enduringly solicit the sexual assistance of others to satisfy their sexual cravings. A situation that they also bizarrely concurred which rationally, ethically and legally negates any assertion of rape or sexual abuse that black females might therefore seek to cunningly profit from by unlawfully crying rape or have others do so on their behalf.

 

Conversely they argued, and their successors still do, that no such state of affairs applies or could ever do to white females who both in legal and social terms can actually be raped. Thus it accounted for the prevalent rape of black females throughout slavery and colonialism and the involuntary infusion of the white male Y chromosome in all Blacks of Caribbean origin and some 95% of their number across the United States, Canada and Latin America.

 

Guilt feelings run deep, generally subconsciously and most glaringly so, it must be pointed out, among white Caucasians of all social classes and backgrounds who apart from not only going into a contrived state of denial when confronted with them consistently also take to arrogating to themselves the moral high ground and from there arrogantly and asininely proceed to lecture others. The European holocaust is one such example of literally thousands if not millions of this kind of behaviour. Attributing blanket rectitude or pervasive probity to white women on the basis of what white men have done and still do to black women and the crude assumption therefore on their part that all black men are dangerous threats to white women, obsessively want to do the same to them and prudently these Caucasian women must be protected at all costs is another.

 

Don’t these nincompoops ever bother to take note of what their womenfolk do when they go abroad on holiday? Anyhow, moving on from my intentional swipe at these evidently and pathetic, intellectually challenged morons the accepted white narrative is that non-white men who sleep with precocious and minimally underage but “consenting” white girls, which legally and morally in my opinion is a crime that should be punished, must vociferously be condemned from the rafters by everyone.

 

And when I say everyone I quite literally mean everyone from the Prime Minister, Home Secretary, the media, pundits, the police and even the closet paedophiles themselves that these hypocritical buggers all know about but covertly protect because they’re from the perceived proper social set, related educational or financial backgrounds and in our present day world of Reality TV with entirely worthless numbskulls living out their pathetic existence through face, Facebook friends they don’t know and are unlikely ever to meet compounded by rationally insignificant so-called celebrity imitations passing themselves off as the genuine article, right down to ordinary members of the public.

 

But there’s a noticeable disconnect here in relation to all of this as there’s no similar outcry or any action taken when the observable and innocent victims of Caucasian paedophiles or sexual abusers are black or otherwise non-white. And especially so when these abhorrent crimes are avidly engaged in as part of the sex tourism industry profitably organized by known British and other EU tour operators and companies without a moment’s hesitation or concern it would seem from within Britain and the other EU countries to those where these innocent or vulnerable children are predatorily, routinely and pitilessly mercilessly abused, while at the same time unceremoniously stripped forever of the innocence of childhood which they never get to experience in the first place.

 

But what the heck, there’s no need to fuss as they’re not white; and so it doesn’t matter is the universal and quite uncaring Caucasian rationale. And it’s this overall and explicitly pernicious mindset not only towards vulnerable and systematically abused non-white children in their own countries for God’s sake �" out of sight and therefore out of mind �" but also those living their lives in the Global South generally by our contemporary white rulers and lawmakers in the west, their Caucasian kith and kin in solidarity with them, establishment figures, the media, our military chiefs, their counterparts in the police forces, and the tax-evading, utterly self-serving, shady and financially obsessed oligarchs whose corporations dominate the military industrial complex in whose pockets all of the aforementioned are committedly embedded, which is largely responsible for exacerbating the already serious problems that we’re faced with. Which specifically in the case of Blacks s have been ongoing now for in excess of 500 years; and that to anyone with even the most rudimentary knowledge of basis arithmetic is half of a millennium!

 

A half of a millennium in which the same race of people and now their equally arrogant, irascible and 21^st Century successors have been systematically and gratuitously kicking in the assess of those in the Global South and most particularly those of black people, and furthermore conceitedly expecting them not only to uncomplainingly put up with this unwarrantable, agonizingly painful, mentally debilitating and the intentional and entirely humiliating kicks administered to them but also, and most crucially as well, spinelessly respond to how their sadistic and unquestionably savage abusers derisively dictate to them that they must; but should they refuse to do so, to summarily and violently have the wrath of hell unleashed against them.

 

In other words the instinctive peevish and brutal response of those who either see themselves as God’s chosen people or their Caucasian kith and kin, religiously different, but who nevertheless with the same ludicrous white supremacist mindset haughtily regard themselves as humanity’s Master Race. And from my personal perspective I must honestly say after a profound and calculated consideration of the matter that if this arrogant collective of markedly asinine morons either can’t see or more likely aren’t prepared to re-evaluate their intensely perverse thinking that’s often translated into pernicious action that in itself is highly detrimental to others, it must be sincerely hoped that as happened in the misnomer named 2^nd World War their conceit and innate savagery will cause them again to be pitted against each other; this time in what expectantly, from my perspective at any rate, will be an Armageddon holocaust that will in effect permanently eradicate both sets of these moronic species of humanity from the face of the earth to the resultant and inclusive benefit of a rather hard done by and long-suffering rest of mankind.

 

For it’s an absolute given that those who choose to live by the sword are ultimately doomed to perish by it, and this observable inevitability is as markedly applicable to Britain and the rest of the west as it is to everyone else. So no measure of bewildering obfuscation, ludicrous hype of its indisputable, God-given superiority and even a purported national invincibility relative to those of other nations it patronizingly looks down upon or disparagingly dismisses as irrelevant; nor any amount of unwarrantable sanctimony superciliously directed at others by Britain concerning how they should conduct their personal or strictly domestic affairs, advice that consecutive British regimes and Britons collectively don’t heed themselves, will ever dissipate the unavoidable consequences as regards the actions of these white supremacist and Master Race proponents and practitioners.

 

Not unless a determinedly serious and discerning stock is vigorously taken of their pertinacious attitudes and pernicious conduct towards other people who persistently and intentionally as it happens always end up as their inexcusable victims. For as every intellectual mind knows those who the gods wish to destroy they first make mad; and conspicuously insanity, compounded by an inherent death wish that appears to have generated a life of its own, seems currently to have permeated every fibre and sinew of the British body politic, that of its western Caucasian counterparts and close allies and, of course, their obsequious and ever obliging global satrapies.