Click here for LATEST Diary entries

Welcome to:
Chris Brand – Psychorealist

HISTORY OF C.B. versus P.C.

There are 4 main offshoots from the homepage of the controversial Edinburgh psychologist who has fought for liberalism and realism:
1. 
BRAND's BATTLES against political correctness as seen by others, incl. the media
2. 
ISSUES of scientific importance to differential psychology

3.  HISTORY OF C.B. versus P.C., by Chris Brand  (this page, see below)
4.  QUIZ TIME – find what twenty Gorgeous Girls have in common!

 

LATEST NEWS FROM CHRIS BRAND
– DIARY from 2000 till present

 


BRIEF BRAND BIO:
I am a differential psychologist of the hereditarian 'London School' (following the ideas of Sir Francis Galton). My book The g Factor: General Intelligence and Its Implications (1996) set out my work on how mental speed is the basis of IQ differences; and it explained my proposals for schoolchildren and their parents to have 'track choice.' The book provoked a media firestorm and outrage among 'liberal'/leftists after I agreed I am what 'anti-racists' [typically ignoracists] call a 'scientific racist' – believing that Blacks tend to have low IQs (and that Jews and Orientals have high IQs). The book was withdrawn by its 'publisher', Wiley; and when Oxford University Press planned to republish it I was suspended and sacked from my lectureship at Edinburgh University. Subsequently I worked as a waiter and ran the William McDougall NewsLetter on the Internet backing liberalism and race realism ('neolibeREALISM') and criticizing egalitarianism, anti-racism, multiculturalism, feminazism, paedohysteria and NATO's attack on Serbia. Today I am a research consultant for the Woodhill Foundation (USA) which helps arrange birth control for cocaine-addicted mothers.
    I was born in Preston, England in 1943, am a graduate of Oxford University (The Queen's College), and have worked a prison psychologist, as an Oxford junior don (Nuffield College) and as a scientific expert with the US Navy (San Diego). I am probably best known as a book reviewer for Nature,  Times Higher,  Behaviour Research & Therapy and Personality and Individual Differences; and as a Consulting Editor for European Journal of Personality (1987-2000). Recently I have written for American Renaissance and Occidental Quarterly. Since 1970 I have lived in central Edinburgh. I am married and have three children by previous marriages. For my Curriculum Vitae, battles with PeeCee, extraction of UKP12,000 from Edinburgh University and latest news (Diary 2000-present), see
http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/index.htm.

 

Click here for LATEST Diary entries

 


3.  Chris Brand versus P.C. -- HISTORY

SUMMARY:

Personality psychologist Chris Brand was fired by Edinburgh University in 1997 for one page of truth-telling in e-mail. He wrote the controversial 1996 book on IQ, The g Factor: General Intelligence and Its Implications, which was sold in UK bookshops for six weeks but was withdrawn by 'publisher' Wiley (New York and Chichester) for political incorrectness. Determined to be rid of him for his 'racism' and 'sexism', Edinburgh University pounced* on Brand's defence of a Nobel prizewinner who had himself fallen foul of modern mindlessness -- about non-violent paedophilic episodes with adolescents, for which the 73-year-old Nobelist faced a possible 30-year jail term. Psychologists like Chris Brand, Raymond Cattell, Linda Gottfredson, Phil Rushton and Glayde Whitney are the victims of a 'Fourth Inquisition' by defenders of egalitarianism who are now desperate about the overwhelming modern evidence of the importance of genes. Egalitarians insist that all human unhappiness and weaknesses can be blamed on a person's environment -- and thus corrected by political endeavour; so they have to play down genetic factors and support the convention that sexual advances to a minor are not only 'outrageous' but invariably harmful.**
      Brand scorns the shameful violations of academic freedom by Wiley and Edinburgh University. He maintains: that it is wrong to blame human ills on social disadvantage; that many children surmount such fashionably invoked hazards as 'labeling', 'low parental SES', 'child abuse', 'parental deprivation' and 'racial discrimination'; that the environment is a challenge, not a handicap -- except when made into an excuse by experts; and that psychologists should respect human individuality and the need of young people for choice in their development.
      In November, 1999, Edinburgh University infuriated 'anti-racists' by paying Brand £UK12,000 -- the maximum award obtainable for unfair dismissal from UK Employment Tribunals. But Brand does not intend to rest content with this moral victory and continues to publish his weekly McDougall NewsLetter opposing Political Correctness and hoping to rescue British academia from the intimidation to which it is subjected.    
   

       *  Just as the USA's Constitution allows a President to be off-loaded for "high crimes"
       or even "misdemeanours", i.e. largely according to Congressional taste (as President
       Gerald Ford once observed, and as the whole world observed in the trial of President
       Clinton in 1998), so British academics and their books can be off-loaded without warning
        for whatever university bosses or publishers happen to deem "good cause." There has
       been no serious security of tenure for British academics since the Education Reform Act
       of 1988.

        **    The modern panic about 'child sex abuse' reflects three developments. (1) Belief in the
        'recovered memories' [often false] of neurotic women has allowed prosecutions. A whole
        industry has grown up of hysterical 'therapists' who know little psychology and believe that
        virtually any psychological problems can be traced to early 'abuse.' (2) Feminists have insisted
        that the former police practice of not prosecuting crimes committed more than ten years ago
        (except in the case of murder) be abandoned. (3)The closure of many mental subnormality
        hospitals has put people back into 'the community' who have childish interests and little
        ability to form sexual relations with adults. Notoriously, low IQ people are susceptible to
        pornographic stimulation and wish to act out their fantasies. (By contrast, classical
        paedophilia -- like that of the creator of Alice in Wonderland, Lewis Carroll -- was focused on
        near-pubescent children and was conspicuously non-violent. Despite their peculiarity placing
        them at grave risk of censure, intelligent paedophiles have provided the backbone of much
        educational, religious and social work endeavour -- being prepared to work for modest
        salaries because of a genuine interest in children that was often of obsessional intensity and
        accompanied only rarely by sexual expression. )


"The path of a psychologist in England is indeed not made smooth or attractive in any way."
      William McDOUGALL, 1938, in a letter congratulating Raymond Cattell on his appointment at Clark University, USA.


CHRIS BRAND WRITES:

What does all this add up to? I am a rationalistic libertarian realist who has fallen foul of modern academia -- which I had thought protected free speech. (It is funny that, thirty years ago, I left the Prison Psychological Service in England so that I could confront the failure of prison authorities and psychologists alike to solve 'the crime problem.' I had hoped to enjoy the security -- when speaking one's mind -- that universities were presumed to allow. Today, the crime problem is 'solved' by jailing more people than ever before; and I cannot lecture or have my book published.)
      I did not take the trouble to belong to any political party, church or trade union. My dissatisfaction with the egalitarianism of modern educationalists, feminists and conservatives can be seen in my reviews over the years for Nature, Times Higher and Personality & Individual Differences and in my recent articles for Sweden's Financial Times [Finanstidningen]. Though today's neosocialism of Messrs Blair, Clinton and (perhaps) Schroeder allows people more choice than in 1950 as to how they spend their incomes, its uniformitarianism still casts a blight on education, marriage and health care -- three areas in which I believe the present dragooning of people must cease. I am not alone in viewing the modern welfare state as providing not true rights and entitlements but a new form of serfdom -- see Harvard's top historian, Emeritus Professor Richard Pipes, 1999, Property and Freedom.
      I regard a proper reinstatement of respect for intelligence and its biological basis as the way forward from a century of disillusion with traditional religion and illusion with the totalitarian ideologies of communism and fascism. Since 1945, the liberal West has won a great victory for the principles of the free market. Communism (or socialism, as it was called in the Soviet Union), for years thought feasible by intellectuals, has collapsed in ignominy. Yet while Western writers now acknowledge economic competition as necessary for civilization and progress, there has been insufficient recognition that people have different intellectual abilities, health needs and sexual preferences. More freedom is needed in these areas too -- always assuming that people will take personal responsibility for their own decisions.
     The arrival of the new eugenics (via artificial insemination, genetic engineering and cloning) will soon concentrate politicians' minds wonderfully on these issues. People themselves will demand the best possible progeny (just as, in various races, they currently seek blonde hair, straitened and luxuriant hair, skin lightening, breast enhancement, penile enlargement etc.); and it will equally plainly be wrong for them to burden the rest of society with the novel and sometimes risky procreational choices that they will make. Hopefully, a new commitment to liberty will arise along with the new realism about the human condition. The alternative -- that egalitarians will take control of breeding, effectively nationalizing it after a half-century of pushing back the enormous role in human affairs which states had assumed by 1945 -- is unthinkable. (Aldous Huxley once attempted to the feat of imagination, in Brave New World.)
      At present, people on the political left like to deny the importance of genetic and racial factors and call people like me 'racist.' (I am certainly a race realist and what the modern 'anti-Nazi' left likes to call a 'scientific racist' [as were Immanuel Kant, Voltaire, David Hume, Charles Darwin, Karl Marx, Emile Zola, Sir Francis Galton, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, William McDougall, and D. H. Lawrence -- see e.g. K. Malik, 1996, The Meaning of Race].) Yet the strange denial of genetic factors which were all the rage with left-wing people in the first half of twentieth century will probably change quickly once a baby's eye colour, skin colour, hair colour, hair crinkliness and future IQ can be chosen by parents and medical personnel. As the left sees the chance of creating, at last, its long-sought 'utopia' in which none have 'advantages' over others, the prospect of a new totalitarianism will be real. It will probably be supported by many feminists who will welcome the opportunity of lesbianism-loving designer babies while continuing their careers. Now is the time to insist that society should be based upon individuals and upon the choices and contracts which they themselves make (and which they support with suitable financial provision or insurance). In preference to the communitarianism that seems to provide the only coherent impetus behind the political 'Third Way' of Britain's 'New Labour', I advocate contractualism as the backbone of Fourth Way politics for the Millennium.
      Currently, I spell out the contractual idea in two essays, 'Sex and the Twenty-First Century'* and 'Liberating the Past from the Future, and the Future from the Past.'** But the hurly-burly of assertion of realism and the need for responsible personal choice continues in the William McDougall NewsLetter.


CB vs PC NEWS May 2000 – September 2003

FOR SOME TEN RECENT PUBLIC BOOK REVIEWS BY BRAND
DEALING WITH INTELLIGENCE, EDUCATION, EUGENICS AND RACE

GO TO Amazon Books (Brand) AND Heredity 2003.

 

FOR THREE RECENT ARTICLES, GO TO The Occidental Quarterly.


For updated coverage of 'Babe Baggers'

(men having female partners markedly younger than themselves),

see http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/index4.htm.

 

 

RECENT BIG DIARY STORIES

Harvard's top neoMarxist scoundrel, palaeontologist S. J. Gould, 60, pops his clogs

"Extreme multiculturalism is withering on the vine," says top Blairite

Men are God's gift to women, says seminal New York University research!

Hereditarian psychologist discovers What Women Want

Brand was hounded from E. LU. for "innuendo", Times Higher discovers
IQ correlates .74 with basic mental speed – corroborating 1980's views of eugenicists

New York Times backs use of IQ tests

Top Times columnist wants Geneva asylum seeker provisions scrapped

Ex-professor slams UK universities' grade inflation

Eugenic fertility assistance offered in London

Sydney, Australia, wants no more immigrants

London NHS surgeon demands English-speaking nurses

Spectator backs transportation realism (first advocated in TgF NewsLetter)

UK broadsheets doubt antiracism, multiculturalism, paedohysteria

Muslim fanatics attack Jews, Christians and Hindus

Starkey and Brand confront Scottisocialists

Harvard prof. plans "to abolish the white race"

MIT prof., top psychologist Steven Pinker, converts to hereditarianism
– but not to discussing race!

>50% of Scots want no more 'ethnic immigration'

Prince Charles deplores Political Correctness
Streaming (tracking) experiment to continue in Glasgow school

Japan and Hungary boost funding of responsible childbirths

Professor James Flynn dismisses secular intelligence rise (the 'Flynn/Lynn Effect')

Glasgow Uni rebuffs paedohysteria

No gains from private education -- Scottish research

'Lone' Washington ('White') sniper turns out to be Black Farrakhan backer

Forensic farce at Brit. Psycholotashitical Socy. as 'criminal profilers' fall out

Parliamentary committee deplores "overenthusiastic" paedohunting

New Labour backs "master classes" for gifted children

"Most muggers are Black," London police admit

"Paedophilia not the worst sin," say R.C.'s

America still a segregated country -- but no Republican may mention it

"The most important book of the 21st century" reviewed

NYTwits learn of C.R.A.C.K.

Bush to ban affirmative racism

Rise of asylum seeker realism after Birmingham policeman murdered

LUniversity of Edinburgh infested with mice

New scepticism about paedohysteria

Paedophile pop is top

NuLabour Blair wants 40% cut in asylum swindling

LUniversity of Edinburgh slammed by Sunday Times for affirmative classism

Houston learns about C.R.A.C.K.

Heredity reviewer Brand slams complex interactionism

Sexual harassment is initiated by females

Top Muslims say they back Britain’s enemies and will “never forget”

Madman Insane’s tortures exposed

Black, British and jailed – 25% of young Black men require custody

Brand shocks Harvard sociologists

Western political realignment begins

       left consigned to work the seam of national socialism!
Why Rich Men Bag Beautiful Women

‘Landowner calls for Scotland to be kept racially pure’

Brain-based sex differences admitted by Cambridge psychologist

Mary Magdalene: Christianity’s Hidden Goddess

New politics? – NeoLiberal Imperialism versus Socio-Nationalism?

Dutch race realist Pim Fortuyn was murdered by a leftist

Landowner calls for Scotland to be kept racially pure

Biology-based sex differences admitted by Cambridge psychologist

Sexcellent news at Easter: a girlfriend for Jesus!

Eugenics realism in Cyprus

‘Asian’ exposed as hopelessly confusing term

Politics confused as no-one finds the neolibereal answer to neoimperialism

RC’s devastated by paedohysteria and their own cowardice

PeeCee’s grip on schools and publishers revealed

Richard Dworkin’s ‘affirmativism’ denounced

Pursuit of affirmative action disgraces peecee New York Times

T.A.T.U. kiddie-lesboes sweep the West, even allowed on BBCI

Black loons turn on friendly lefties

Top leftie mag (London Review of Books) accepts eugenics

Chris Brand named “noted psychologist” in Spectator

Size does matter – especially if buggery is to be enjoyable and  risk-free

Prince William comes out, declaring his “love of Africa”

Paedophilia chic

‘WHAT WENT WRONG WITH CONSERVATISM?’

FLYNN-ISM CONFOUNDED

New York Times nosedives due to its affirmative racism

BLACK-ON-BLACK MAYHEM

THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF GENERAL INTELLIGENCE  published

‘WHY WHITE GUILT?’

AFFIRMATIVE RACISM SPLITS COURT (5-4 IN FAVOUR, 6-3 AGAINST)

POLICING LESBIANISM 

Censorious LUniversity of Edinburgh falls to 18th in ‘Table of Tables’

Skin colour linked to IQ

Germaine Greer talks up delights of ephebophilia

Testosterone boosts creativity

IQs of African troublespots only 65

British girls begin their sex lives with intercourse before age 16

Feminazies lose rape accusation case against TV celebrity John Leslie

 

  

In May, 2000, I suspended publication of the McDougall NewsLetter, having said there over the previous two-and-a-half years most of the things that need to be said in today's neosocialist times about race, sex, IQ, political correctness and of course paedohysteria. Back issues will stay on the Net for a while, but otherwise email cbrand@cycad.com.

In June, 2000, I began work as a consultant researcher for the Woodhill Foundation* (USA) – a registered charity that seeks to develop realistic policy options and provide practical help for adolescents on the left hand side of 'the bell curve.' The UK's best-known geneticist, pinko Steve Jones, called me a "buffoon" and attempted a refutation of my views in the Guardian (7 June -- http://www.guardianunlimited.co.uk/genes/article/0,2763,191890,00.html).

*  STATEMENT FROM THE WOODHILL FOUNDATION
The Woodhill Foundation was founded by a Houston software millionaire to "do good" in a wide variety of areas.  As a Life Member of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), one of his causes is naturally the defense of the freedom of thought, speech, and scientific inquiry wherever in the world these core Western principles are challenged.  The cause of Mr. Chris Brand of Edinburgh, Scotland is a particularly egregious example of today's neo-Nazism since it involved actual book-burning and the destruction of a researcher's career for nothing more than expressing currently-unfashionable opinions.
    It is the position of The Woodhill Foundation that government classification of people by race is an affront to the dignity and liberty of all citizens.  We believe that everyone should be judged on their individual characteristics and actions, not by the alleged characteristics of groups to which they are assigned by some bureaucrat.  Scientists, on the other hand, should be free to study group differences and report their results without fear of censure or retribution.
    The Woodhill Foundation has no opinion on the substance of Mr. Brand's academic work.  No one at The Woodhill Foundation has read his now-banned book THE
g FACTOR, nor do we have the background in psychology, statistics, and other disciplines to evaluate such a work in any case.  We note, however,  that the study of racial differences is proving fruitful in such areas as the design of custom drugs to better treat hypertension and understanding why the AIDS virus spreads differently in different populations.
    THE WOODHILL FOUNDATION DOES NOT NECESSARILY THE IDEAS OR INDIVIDUALS TO WHICH IT PROVIDES SUPPORT.  THE FOUNDATION BELIEVES THAT THE FREE EXCHANGE OF IDEAS, EVEN UNPOPULAR ONES, IS THE CORNERSTONE OF A FREE PEOPLE AND PROVIDES SUPPORT WITH THAT PRINCIPLE IN MIND.

 

In August, a big British Sunday tabloid egged on paedohysterics to attack my views. Out of sober statements that, according to research evidence, classical paedophilia does no harm on average -- assuming it involves a bright child over 12 and involves no force -- and thus that distinguished elderly paedophiles should not routinely be threatened with 30-year jail terms, the News  of the World (Scottish Edition, 20 viii '00, p. 7) managed to contrive a positive endorsement from me of the wide range of murders, tortures, rapes, kidnaps and buggeries which it likes to call paedophilia.

//////


Is this the sickest man in Britain?

Paedophile sex 'good for kids', says Scots author

BY Douglas Wight

{With a nice-enough picture of me in my Egypt suit holding The g Factor outside Edinburgh LUniversity Psychology Department. Caption: 'WHIPPING UP A STORM: Chris Brand has been blasted by campaigners.'}

FURY has erupted after an outrageous Scots author insisted that paedophiles can be GOOD for 12-year-old boys. . . .

\\\\\\

PS  The Noose of the World is now so committed to paedohysteria that it carries "FOR SARAH" beneath its front-page masthead. It may be that the paper will soon realize the merit of a distinction between paedophilia and paedosadism -- allowing it to continue to demand life imprisonment, castration, deportation and other ostracization of the latter while becoming a bit more reasonable about the paedophilic activities of Shakespeare, Lewis Carroll (1832-1898) and St Augustine. (Yes, the latter acquired a ten-year-old girlfriend when he was in his thirties (Confessions, Book III). Initially, the saint planned to wait to marry her at the then legal age of twelve; but in fact the girl (or possibly another girl) fell pregnant and left him with a son before Augustine had got around to tying the knot. Of course, Augustine wept buckets as well as swiftly taking another mistress. But twentieth-century paedophiles also avail themselves of the consolations of Christian repentance.)

PPS  Newly discovered letters of Lewis Carroll's reveal that correspondence with under-age girls figured prominently among the activities of his last days (Times 22 viii '00). One girl, the daughter of a colleague, was sent a plum cake. This is in line with Carroll's observation to his sister that – though Dean of Christ Church and a busy mathematician – he spent 50% of his time arranging or enjoying assignations with young children. England's literary giant, the art and social critic John Ruskin (1819-1900) has also been named as a paedophile in a new biography which makes him out as more sensible than some previously thought. According to a review in the New Yorker (10 viii '00), Ruskin was smitten by several under-age girls in his life, not just by the delicious Rose La Touche whom he first met when she was 9, proposed to at 14 (she rejected marriage but continued the relationship) and lost to a chest condition at 22.

Can't find enough paedophiles to attack? What about organizing a local focus group to condemn paediatricians (as attempted in Newport, Wales – see above), palaeographers, palaeontologists, palaeotypographers, palaeologists (who study antiquities), palilogists (who repeat words for emphasis), pedagogues, pedestrians, paedobaptists (who advocate infant baptism, filthy swine), pedicurists (surgeons obsessed with feet), pedologists (soiled scientists – ugh!), pedometrists (who measure distances travelled by foot, the slimy toe-suckers) or petrobrusians (who reject infant baptism, filthy swine).
      Whatever you do, don't get out of practice. After paedophiles, there will be plenty other minorities to hound into suicide or emigration!

To new readers:  Please remember that I only became involved in saying anything about the dreaded subject of paedophilia because, from May 1996 to August 1997, I ran The g Factor NewsLetter in order to keep alive the memory of my de-published book. The TgF NewsLetter -- like its successor, the McDougall NewsLetter -- backed a wide range of 'realisms' about race, sex, class and age; but it was when, in October 1996, I first attempted a little realism about paedohysteria that Edinburgh LUniversity's Chaplain decided to call in the tabloids to bully E.LU. to fire me. FIRE BRAND was the Daily Record's font-72 headline filling its front page. I do in fact know quite a bit more about paedophilia than most psychologists, but I am far from being an expert in a subject surrounding which there is much more heat than light. I have thus based myself on published researches, the most important being two from Germany and the USA which examined late-teenagers who had once been exposed to paedophile advances, molestations and relationships. In both studies, there was scant evidence of psychological harm, especially for boys. For details, see ISSUES of scientific importance to differential psychology.
      Looking on the bright side, an advantage of the present paedohysteria culminating logically in paid or unpaid transportation of the offenders is that the same policy -- once very successful, when America and Australia were used to receive convicts -- might then be extended to other British criminals, especially to those of low IQ and high recidivism. Currently there is a big labour shortage in Siberia; and other enterprising countries like Sri Lanka and Thailand might well find a place on a sun-kissed beach for educated paedophiles so long as they arrive handing over perhaps UKP30,000 in hard cash -- the cost of a year's imprisonment in Britain. It remains to be seen just what would be the charge for other criminal products of Britain's years of socialist housing schemes and for the traitorous educationalists who have dumbed down the UK's once formidable state education system.

In September, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair said children should be grouped and taught according to their ability (BBCTV1 News, 8 ix '00, 21:00). Britain's comprehensive schools were in poor shape, said the New Labour leader; and the answers would be:
1) specialization -- each school trying to find something it could do well, then attracting pupils from a wide area;
2) more special schools for gifted children;
3) grouping of all children by ability and teaching them accordingly.

Some hope!

In October, my beloved Pearl and I announced our engagement. We found our paths crossing in Edinburgh Central Reference Library earlier this year and first stopped to chat one sunny afternoon, 2 v '00, outside the Royal Scottish Museum. We plan to marry next year and to settle in Edinburgh.

In November, Channel 4 TV began three programmes on race (Sundays, 8p.m.). The first was very slow going and elementary – much of it only a contentless parade of graphics 'wizardry.' The programme admitted that concern with race was making something of a come-back after a virtual veto from 1945. But it insisted on talking only of "*apparent* differences between the races in ability."
      I was given a mention in despatches at the Independent [London], 28 xi. Columnist Yasmin Alibhai-Brown gave herself the headline 'Scientists should not be so scared of racism that they ignore facts' and went on to say "'This restraint has become a massive and unjustifiable taboo today that is both foolish and destructive." See http://www.independent.co.uk/story.jsp?story=43701.

In December, Edinburgh LUniversity, Principal Dame Stewart Sutherland awarded an M.Sc. degree in the History of Art to my East Asian fiancée and gave a sermon to a thousand assembled new graduates and their parents on the inspiring theme of "the four C's"– cash, cash, cash and cash. To Edinburgh University's Student Representative Council (SRC), Dame Stewart had earlier explained the LUniversity's values for the new millennium (reported in the student magazine Hype 2000/2001, Term 1, Week 9): "Our first priority will be to maximize our net income through attracting additional fee-paying students, commercializing, and a fund-raising campaign." Students would need to help the embattled LUniversity, the Dame maintained, urging the SRC to stop wasting its time complaining about pathetic library facilities and to go out and recruit new students.

Thanks to the kindness of a French supporter who works in Tunis, Philippe Gouillou, an online 2001 edition of THE g FACTOR: GENERAL INTELLIGENCE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS is now available FREE at http://www.douance.org/qi/brand/tgf.htm.

In January 2001, Phil Rushton's paper showing African students (University of Witwatersrand) have a mean IQ of only 84 [see McDougall NewsLetters 1998] was published: J. Philippe RUSHTON & Mervyn SKUY (2000). 'Performance on Raven's Matrices by African and White university students in South Africa.' Intelligence 28, 4, 251-265. The authors note: "Black South African students are a highly selected population. They have passed standardized school matriculation exams, entered university and been chosen for a first-year course in Psychology on the basis of academic performance. Assuming that these students are 1 standard deviation {15 IQ points} above the population mean, the results are in accord with earlier work finding that Africans, in general, average a tested IQ of 70."

The Edinburgh LUniversity newspaper Student re-discovered my existence (24 i 01). The article is a reasonable summary of the Brand affair by UK journalistic standards and especially has some fair-minded touches like exempting me from being a supporter of paedosadism; however, it fails to mention that Edinburgh LUniversity finally paid me the top amount I could have been awarded by a Scottish court for unfair dismissal.

Return of the Racist Lecturer

BY Brian Forrest

{Using the nice above engagement picture of Pearl and me, subtitling it
'RACIST LECTURER WITH 'INTELLIGENT' FIANCEE: Brand'}

NOTORIOUS PSYCHOLOGIST Christopher Brand, who claimed that some forms of paedophilia were acceptable, has finally had his "racist" book The g Factor published on the Internet.
  
Mr Brand, who describes himself as a "scientific racist", worked at the University of Edinburgh for 26 years before being sacked in 1997 for "disgraceful behaviour" and "gross misconduct."
    The Uni launched an inquiry after he claimed on his Internet newsletter to support Daniel Gajdusek, a Nobel prize-winning scientist who faced a possible 30-year jail term for non-violent paedophilic molestations in America.
    Brand also gained notoriety when he claimed black people were less intelligent than whites and single mothers should be encouraged to "breed" with higher IQ men to escape the poverty trap.
    He said: "
Academic studies and my own experience suggest that non-violent paedophilia with a consenting partner over age 12 does no harm so long as the paedophiles and their partners are of above-average IQ and educational level. As lead choirboy and soloist, I met lots of paedophiles who would press florins and half-crowns into my horrid little palm when I was 13. For better or worse, I never 'fancied' any of them nor did anything but allow a little fondling. . ."

Brian Forrest declines to add my own continuation:
". . .
on my part it was not a sexual experience. But I was never feminazistically inclined to condemn them: these men were well above average in intelligence, well educated (two were writers), amused me far more than the average geography teacher, gave me useful tips (where to find the G spot etc...) and never frightened me in the least. "

    Since his sacking, Mr Brand has been forced to accept menial work as a waiter. The g Factor has only been produced in photocopied form, but a supporter in France has now put the entire book on the Internet.
    Mr Brand said: "I am glad to tell you that The g Factor is now available on the Net. The book that political correctness doesn't want you to see is being posted in a slightly revised edition by the French evolutionary psychologist, Philippe Gouillou, to whom I am much indebted."
    Original publishers John Wiley & Sons Inc. withdrew the book after its New York head office said Brand's politically incorrect claims about race differences were "repellent."
    The former lecturer is now the UK consultant for the Woodhill Foundation, a right-wing American charity which offers drug addicts $200 as an incentive to be sterilised.

These offers are of course made -- via Mrs Barbara Harris's charity, C.R.A.C.K. -- to drug-addicted women who have already given birth to a drug-addicted child.

Brand recently announced his engagement by saying: "I have fallen in love with an oriental miss who combines practicality and charm in an astonishing fashion and, of course, fully testifies to an East Asian IQ of >110 as hypothesized in my book The g Factor."

----

Student's article was followed up by other  Scottish newspapers, e.g. Daily Record, 29 Jan. 01, p. 16:

RACE ROW LECTURER TO MARRY ASIAN GIRL
...and he doesn't like women much either

EXCLUSIVE by Marie Sharp

{Using a nice engagement picture of Pearl and me, subtitling it
'TOGETHER: Brand and Pearl announced their engagement on the internet}

A PSYCHOLOGIST whose book was withdrawn because of his racist views is to marry an oriental student.
   
Sacked Edinburgh University lecturer Chris Brand claimed black people are genetically less intelligent than whites and has even voiced support for paedophiles.
   
But he has announced plans to wed a young woman he calls Pearl, describing her as "my oriental princess."
    Announcing his wedding on the Internet, Brand said they met while researching at Edinburgh's Central Reference Library.
    The only details he gave about his fiancée is that she studies at a Scots university. He has refused to reveal her surname.
    Brand was sacked by Edinburgh University in 1997 over his book, The g Factor.
    In it, he claimed intelligence was genetic and white people were supreme.

No, I actually said what studies show, that Asians and Jews have the highest average IQs – well over IQ 110.

He said black Africans had the lowest IQ and black Americans had slightly higher intelligence due to the 25 per cent white DNA in them.
    The book was later withdrawn by publishers Wiley & Sons for being "repellent", but a French fan has published a revised version on the Internet.
    Among Brand's suggestions are giving black, Hispanic and female children less challenging lessons in schools.

Actually, The g Factor stoutly maintains that females have the same average IQ as males.

    He says the education system is dumbed down to suit less intelligent minorities.
    Brand said
{at my website} : "Black schoolchildren, whatever their gifts in rhythm, jumping, boxing and social skills, can't be expected to perform as well academically as white children."
    And he has also attacked women. In his book
{no: at my website} , he said they were inclined to deceitful promiscuity, suggesting one in seven fathers were not the biological dads of their kids.

Actually, I have always stuck with a 'one in ten' estimate – though the 'one in seven' estimate did appear in the Times.

Adopting

    But he was sacked

The article has made three references to my sacking but none to Edinburgh LUniversity's payment of £12,000. . .

when he called for clemency for a man who faced 30 years' jail in the US for indecent acts involving a teenage boy in his care. The man, who was an American Nobel prize winner, had been involved in adopting nearly 50 children.
    But Brand has repeatedly claimed there is a difference between "non-violent paedophilia" by introverted, intelligent men and a violent act by a low-IQ attacker.
    And he approves of sexual acts
{well, I say they do no demonstrable harm on average} with a child over 12 who is intelligent, saying: "The child can, in fact, psychologically benefit."

Why introduce specious double quotes when even a half-educated reader would know I must have said
". . .benefit psychologically"?

----

Preparing for a General Election in the U.K., Labour announced it would support separate 'academic' and 'vocational' tracks for pupils in state schools from age 14 (Times 31 Jan., p. 1). Pupils would also be allowed some picking and mixing from both tracks, thus re-instating something like the tripartite division of secondary education (grammar, technical, modern) that Sir Cyril Burt had helped develop – it lasted for a brief period around 1950. (Currently, the Bush administration in the USA is being persuaded to insist on academic education for all children, as urged by a left-liberal-egalitarian-environmentalist educational historian, Professor Diane Ravitch. But there are powerful arguments for allowing parents and children more choice, especially in response to children's IQ levels  -- see BRAND, C. R., 2001, Radical traditionalist.)

In February, the Daily Mail (Scotland, 3 Feb., pp. 16-17) carried a two-page spread designed to show how this traditionally Conservative newspaper was continuing its latter-day policies of antiracism, feminazism and paedohysteria. Titled ''Oriental Miss' and her racist lover', the article says that -- as well as being a racist and supposedly saying "abused children often benefit from the suffering inflicted on them by paedophiles" -- I came from a "privileged" background and am "balding" and notorious for laziness, taking lots of holidays and belittling women. Naturally, then, it asks, "How can this beautiful Asian girl stay with him?" Needless to say, no intelligible answer can be supplied; and "one friend" of Pearl is wheeled in (anonymously) to say the relationship "defies logic." The article thus concludes ominously: "When will Pearl's fascination with Chris Brand end?" To any who know the facts, the article will long provide a fascinating demonstration of how today's Conservatives have capitulated to PeeCe. Here is the article, with corrections.

'Oriental Miss' and her racist lover

His objectionable views on race, intelligence and child abuse led to his sacking as an academic, so how can this beautiful Asian girl stay with him? She never read his book. . .

BY Matthew Knowles

{With three nice pictures, one of Pearl , one of CRB and one of Pearl 's graduation lunch in Edinburgh University's Teviot Row Union.}

In a modern society where ethnic differences and huge age gaps are no barrier to relationships, the sight of a middle-aged man with a young lover is not uncommon. But to all those who know the man in question, the fact that his girlfriend is an Asian must come as a shock.
 
Disgraced former Edinburgh University psychology lecturer Chris Brand holds views on race, women and child abuse which even the most broad-minded of people would find offensive.
  He claims black people are less intelligent than whites, women are devious manipulators, and abused children often benefit from the suffering inflicted on them by paedophiles.

I claim only that, on average, no demonstrable long-term harm comes to adolescents from paedophiles. – Paedosadists are a different matter.

  His opinions, regularly posted on his Edinburgh University website, eventually led to his downfall. He was sacked from his £45,000-a-year job after he attacked an American court's decision to prosecute a paedophile, a 72-year-old Nobel Prize winner, who had abused more than 50 boys in his care.

1. I was paid £25,000p.a. by E.LU.
2. It is police and prosecutors who prosecute, not courts.
3. The prosecution brought outrageous charges that could have attracted a 30-year jail term for Daniel Gajdusek – even though no violence or harm was claimed.
4. Gajdusek was charged with molesting only one of his 50 adopted children.

  So what can the slightly built {not an accurate description – Pearl  is petite but firmly and generously built}  
attractive, 32-year-old Taiwanese university student Pearl, see in a balding man almost twice her age, who describes himself as a 'scientific racist'?
  Twice divorced father-of-three Brand, whose hero is the late Conservative politician Enoch Powell, admits he never dreamed he would be engaged to a young Asian student at the age of 57.
  But none are more surprised than his former colleagues and students he worked with and taught over 26 years.
  To them
{who, actually – Commissar Halla Ballsoff?} Chris Brand is an opinionated bigot, as condescending towards woman as he is to ethnic minorities.
  He refers to Pearl as his 'Oriental princess' or 'Oriental miss' and claims he is besotted with her, but the relationship seems impossible to reconcile with his offensive and bigoted views.
  The couple met while Pearl, studying a four-year course
{actually one-year} in history of art, was researching the painter Salvador Dali in Edinburgh's Central Reference Library.
  Brand said he only sat near to he so he could keep an eye on the library's clock face, but over the weeks he would regularly make a bee-line to her table
{I did no such thing} so he could see her 'nice, smiling face.'


But they did not speak {seriously} to each other until May last year, when their paths corsses as Pearl was heading towards an art exhibition at the Royal Scottish Museum in Chambers Street.
  They introduced
{themselves to} each other and agreed to meet up later that day. {No, we immediately went off to a nearby café called Négociants and spent the rest of the day together.} Their romance blossomed, and the pair spent more and more time together until eventually Pearl moved into Brand's two-bedroom {three-bedroom} spacious apartment in Edinburgh's southside.
  Their relationship is not without its critics. Fellow students, aware of Brand's reputation at the university, warned Pearl against getting involved with the lecturer.
  Her friends
{how many?}, many of them from her home country, were surprised that such an obviously intelligent young girl could have any attraction to a man who belittles women and looks down on other races.
  One friend said last night: 'Pearl is a clever girl – she has worked hard to get to this country and attain the qualifications she has. But her relationship with Brand defies logic. He readily condemns other races as having lower intelligence, his attitude towards women is deplorable and he is well past his prime.'
{Not what my doctor says.} She has fallen in love with Edinburgh and its way of life {Pearl  has never said any such thing.} and I think it would have been hard for her to leave. She still wants to continue her studies and I think that would have been hard for her in Taiwan. {Hard? In what way?} Brand showed interest in her – any man would – and I think she was flattered. She is quite shy {Pearl  has often lectured to classes of 100 in Taiwan. On Feb. 3, she led a two-and-a-half-hour of modern Western art for fellow students from Taiwan.} and maybe revelled in his attention.
  Despite the opposition, Brand announced his engagement to Pearl in October last year, declaring they planned to marry in Edinburgh in spring and settle in the city.
{We both announced our engagement – on some seventy cards signed by both of us and sent to friends and relatives.}
   
He said: 'I have fallen in love with an Oriental miss who combines practicality and charm in an astonishing fashion and, of course, fully testifies to an East Asian IQ of greater than 110 as hypothesized in my book The g Factor. I know it will surprise many of my critics who have a stereotyped view of what I am supposed to be.
  'Never in my wildest dreams did I expect to find myself involved with a pretty girl of 32. Then throw in the racial thing as well. . . I know more about Asia than I did before, but it still hasn't changed my views on IQ.'
  The controversial book written by Brand in 1996 claimed blacks were less intelligent than whites due to their genetic make-up. The book claimed that Asians, while having a superior intellect to whites, were inclined to waste time
{when being IQ-tested} because of their 'perfectionist' nature.
  Pearl, who was awarded her degree in December, applied to Taiwan to extend her visa and seems happy with her new life. The flat, now decorated with Chinese symbols as part of her Chinese New Year celebrations a fortnight ago, is littered with her art books.
{Actually, the flat was very tidy on the day the Mail's men called. The only art books they saw were in bookcases.} Pictures of her graduation day sit next to old photographs of Brand's children. {New photographs of my grandchildren, actually – in their birthday suits, of course.}
    
Perhaps, for her, ignorance is bliss. Brand admits Pearl has not read his book or even seen a summary of it. He said: 'She has heard a lot about it, of course, and has been much criticised by her compatriots which has made life difficult. These people get an idea in their head {well, some people got an idea in their heads} about what I have said and many {well, some}  claim I said Asians have a low IQ.

Of all the psychologists {who concern themselves with IQ}, I am the one who gives the highest estimate of Asian IQ. It is on a par with the Jews. Pearl is very representative of her race in terms of IQ.

What I told the Fail was that Pearl's views on race and IQ were probably pretty representative of those of her compatriots. Pearl's IQ would of course be falling off the right-hand side of the Bell Curve even by Asian standards.   

 
'Pearl would not be remarkable in her own views about the subject, but she has not had any personal familiarity with black students.

More to the point, Pearl has no experience of East London street crime. Black students at first-division universities in the UK probably have IQs entirely comparable to those of White students.   

 
'We have not had any great falling out over the IQ question but Asian people do generally tend to believe they have a superior intellect.'
  To Pearl, life in Edinburgh is a world away from her life in Taiwan. She had worked hard to get the qualifications she needed to study in Great Britain.

'Reporter' Matthew Knowles is running out of things to say and now resorts to deprecatory speculation about conditions in Taiwan. He could  instead have mentioned my vindication by scientific findings and by payout from E.LU.;  and my work over the past six months for the Woodhill Foundation.
  
 
The electronics engineer from Taiwan was bored with her humdrum life, working long hours building computer components in one of the many high-tech factories churning out cheap electronic goods for the Western market.
  Faced with a life of drudgery, she spent much of her meagre earnings working for a degree in English literature to achieve her dream of entering university in the UK. Her parents agreed to support her application to study first at Essex, where she gained an MA in modern art, and then on to Edinburgh University.
  There she studied hard for four years
{one year}, finally being rewarded with an MSc in history of art, a qualification she plans to use to get herself a more satisfying job.

By contrast, Brand has led a relatively charmed life, one that has relied on theory and opinion to further his career rather than hard work. The son of a telecoms engineer, he was born in 1944 {1943} and grew up in an affluent area of Barnet, Hertfordshire. {The affluence of telecommunications engineers is legendary?…}  
  A privileged and bright boy, he received a first-class education at Queen Elizabeth's Boys' Grammar School in Barnet, before heading to Oxford to study
{for} an MA in psychology and philosophy.
  Before he departed for the dreaming spires, he married his childhood sweetheart Joan Donaldson, just after he turned 18.
{I first met my 'childhood sweetheart' when I was 17.}
  His career, for the most part, was unremarkable: he worked as a prison psychologist for a time
{three years} at HMP Grendon, Buckinghamshire {Britain's major experimental prison of the post-1945 years}, before returning to academia with a post at Nuffield College, Oxford. By this time he had fathered a son, Tom, now 32, but his marriage was failing. A stint working with the U.S. Navy in San Diego put paid to the relationship and Brand headed towards Edinburgh in 1970. {I worked in San Diego in 1982, not 1969.}

He met his second wife, Carmel Dinan, while on one of his many holidays and sabbaticals to Dublin, Ireland, in 1977.

Inspection of E.LU. Psychology Department's records will show unequivocally that I took very few holidays and was short-changed of sabbaticals – admitted by Prof. Neil McCormick in 1996. I met my second wife-to-be in Edinburgh, not Dublin.

The couple married and and Brand had two more children, Emily, now 11 {actually, 20},and Catherine, 13 {actually Katharine, 22}.
 
Brand was already working on a number of theories based on the effects of race and economic background.
  His second marriage was crumbling as his opinions and theories became more radical and his wife divorced him in May, 1993, taking custody of their two children and moving back to Dublin.

1. My second wife and I had no great disagreement about the importance of IQ and heredity.
2. I divorced her, claiming successfully that the marriage had irretrievably broken down.
3. It is entirely usual in the UK for women to be given custody of children, and I had normal rights of access.

  In 1996, Brand claimed in The g Factor that poor single mothers lacked intelligence {as had been plainly set out in The Bell Curve, in 1994}.
  His findings about race were based on a sliding scale
{meaning?}, where whites were given an IQ value of 100 {as by psychometric convention since 1915}.
  He claimed that black Africans had a reading of around 70. His book, withdrawn by Chichester-based publishers John Wiley shortly after release, caused a furore.
  Given his opinions and two failed marriages, the question now must be: when will Pearl's fascination with Chris Brand end.

--

I am sure Pearl will be braver and more sensible in resisting the above mischief than was E. LU.'s Principal Dame Stewart Sutherland in 1996/7.  And it is hilarious to think how Britain's peecee academics must now feel at having the Daily Fail on their side.

PS  By February 26, the Daily Mail's moralism had met its come-uppance. After accusing the conservative tabloid Daily Express of having an owner who was a pornographer, the Mail found its own proprietor, Lord Rothermere, accused by the Express of having fathered an out-of-wedlock child. Following floods of tears from Lady Rothermere, the Mail's editorial staff buckled and agreed to stop the newspaper's pornohysteria (the new Express owner having on the takeover dropped his former tit'n'bum holdings).

In its February 7 issue, Student (E.LU.) carried unaccustomed support for me (p. 4) – reminiscent of the heady 1996 days when 'Pat Brisbane' used to explain how the entire young male population of Papua New Guinea happily besported itself with paedophilic 'big men' uncles . . . .

Dear Editors:
                 I was pleased to read (in Student dated 24 i 01) that Chris Brand has managed to publish his book The
g Factor on the internet. His views may or may not be repugnant, but far more unacceptable and insidious is censorship, a threat to the freedoms of everyone and one of the hallmarks of an uncivilised, undemocratic society.
      A university should be a sanctuary for free thought and informed debate, so it's to the University of Edinburgh's everlasting shame that it saw fit to sack Brand because he had the courage to express his unpopular views on sexual relationships.
      The way to combat anyone's opinions is to denounce them with vigorous argument. Censorship doesn't work because it makes martyrs of the censored and elevates them to a position of authority they might otherwise never reach. Unfortunately, perhaps, suppressing Chris Brand's ideas has put him in the same category as Socrates, Galileo, the Marquis de Sade and Salman Rushdie – visionaries who have dared to speak their truths, suffer the consequences and argubly be proved right in the end.
      Yours sincerely, B.A., Edinburgh.

Sadly, the author had asked the newspaper to withhold his/her name – testifying to the continuance of threats by E. LU. to make life difficult for outspeakers about the Brand affair.

Reminded of my possibly repugnant views, the editor of Student for February 14 compared the suppression of my book with a ban from Sheffield University's far-left Student Union on the 'homophobic' White rapper Eminem – said by Sheffield feminazies to use "misogynistic and hate-filled language" which nasties find "intimidating and extremely threatening." Student decided to call it "foolish to ban Eminem" but – doffing the cap to E.LU.'s Principal Dame Stewart Sutherland -- "socially expedient to suppress Brand's views." (Eminem's songs which Student would tolerate on campus encourage listeners to bludgeon women and "faggots" to death, and to "take drugs, rape sluts, make fun of gay clubs.") So what was the reasoning for Student's distinction? There wasn't any. But none was necessary. For, reaching dizzy new heights of confabulation, Student had spoken of "ex-Edinburgh Uni professor Christopher Brand's. . .book which claims to scientifically condone paedophilia." Some new readers of The g Factor are going to be disappointed to find only such outrages as race realism and libertarian élitism in my book's pages.
      Britain's Sir Elton John – who is performing with Eminem – also approved Eminem's latest album.  The Princess-Diana-celebrating homosexual volunteered: "We live in an age of political correctness where you can't say this or that. I honestly don't think people will go out and start beating and killing people because of this album." He was joined by Madonna and Stevie Wonder, the former comparing Eminem's language favourably with that of newly elected President George W. Bush. When will the luvvies provide a similar rescue operation for The g Factor?

On February 17, a dramatic exemplification of Britain's level of paedohysteria was provided in BBC Radio 4's 'Any Questions' programme. Invited to condemn lenient sentencing for half-a-dozen men who had downloaded Internet kiddy porn, the panel had duly obliged – with left-wing Ken Livingstone, the unmarried elected Mayor of London, demanding virtual life sentences.  Chairman David Dimbleby then asked the audience if any of them backed the sentences actually given by the English judiciary. Only one brave hand was raised, at which Dimbleby said he had never before received such a decisive outcome when polling 'Any Questions' audiences. On the same day, the Guardian's centre pages carried a swipe at paedohysterical mobs from some member of the liberal-left great-and-good; but such liberalism is evidently quite out of touch with the witch-hunting frenzy that tabloids and feminasties have created in Britain over the past decade.
      Paedohysteria also surfaced in the European 'Parliament' [of MEPs elected on derisory turnouts] where leader of the French Greens, Daniel Cohn-Bendit (revolutionary hero of Paris 1968, nicknamed 'Danny the Red'), found people castigating his indiscretions of the 1970's. Charged with the care of the tiny tots of fellow-revolutionaries, Bendit apparently took the opportunity to let it all hang out. He wrote (according to France's L'Express magazine): "Several times certain children opened the flies of my trousers and started to tickle me. I reacted differently each time according to the circumstances... But when they insisted on it, I then caressed them." Faced with discovery of his article today, however, he denies such events took place – saying he made up his story pour épater les bourgeois. "I said all that purely to provoke, to shock the bourgeoisie," he told Reuters. "Knowing what I know today about sexual abuse I regret having written all that." In days of paedohysteria, it is smarter for a politician to admit to outright fabrication and to destroy his own credibility forever than to admit a few incidents of harmless kiddiefumbling.

On February 21, Student reported a breakthtaking statement by E.LU. Principal Dame Stewart Sutherland. Struggling to control demonstrators protesting in Old College, Edinburgh, against a visit by NATO supremo Lord Robertson, Sutherland declared: "This is a university, and we are dedicated to the free expression of opinion." Sickened by this – from the Principal who had sacked the author of The g Factor – former E. LU. Psychology student Alex Roushias (a Greek Cypriot who had greatly appreciated the McDougall NewsLetter's 1999 support for Serbian autonomy) made his views felt throughout the ensuing meeting and was finally awarded a "stern rebuke from the platform party for his constant interjections."
     
Fast track learning was advocated in an article in the Daily Telegraph by a newly retired schoolmaster, Jonty Driver (though, like Dame Stewart, Driver had forgotten The g Factor). There was much UK press approval of Prime Minister Blair's plan to get away from "bog standard comprehensive schools", to encourage secondary schools to specialize, and to allow such schools to select 10% of their pupils by ability. The left agreed to keep quiet till after the General Election – when progress towards specialization will likely prove as non-existent as was progress towards fast track learning during the first Blair government, 1997-2001.

Visual aids of the disaster of multiculturalism appeared widely around February 25 (e.g. Independent 26 ii 01). In the south of mountainous and jungle-covered Borneo, the Indonesian government had been in the habit of introducing migrants from 300 miles away across the Java Sea. Coming from Madura (an island off the north coast of Java), the migrants were a commercial success – helping modernize the Borneo outback and bring its logs out to the West. But, unsurprisingly, their arrival infuriated the Dayak tribes who then started butchering the Madurese in their hundreds. Unsurprising? Just 100 years ago, William McDougall recorded the ferocity and engaging sexual habits of the Dayaks – a tribe which successive colonial governors, both Dutch and British, always liked to believe they had begun to civilize. It is terrifying to think that Western multiculturalism and unrealism may have infected third-world regimes which may now be embarked in the same crazy migration policies as those of the West. (For more on the head-hunting and penis-pin-sporting Dayaks and their orgasmic womenfolk, see The g Factor NewsLetter and McDougall NewsLetters 1996-8.)

In March, British police gratified their political masters by an orgy of concern with "hate crime" ('Police arrest 85 in London "hate crime" raids', Reuters 20 iii 01) and "paedophilia" ('Children at risk from Internet paedophiles', Reuters 20 iii 01). Both categories of offence are created by lumping together entirely different types of behaviour. 'Hate crime' covers a ridiculous range from assault, battery and grievous bodily harm through to verbal expression of opinion about the minorities who ceaselessly flaunt their sainthood and need for positive discrimination; 'paedophilia' covers an equally unhelpful range from buggery, rape and murder of infants through to frottage, photography and Internet downloadings of pictures of well-paid teenagers. What convenient words for justifying the arrival of 'thought crime' in British law! Reinforcing the impression that British police are overenthusiastic zealots for their new work, a top cop told Reuters that the 'racists' arrested – but not yet tried – were "scumbags." Heaven knows what British cops say about men often claimed to have been actually 'paedophilic' like Lord Kitchener, Benjamin Britten, Charlie Chaplin and Martin Luther King!
      NEWS FROM WILEY DEPUBLISHER: Asked to review a book for Wiley, a senior American anthropologist refused because of Wiley's de-publication of The g Factor. Imagine his surprise on learning that the Wiley editor who had approached him knew nothing of Wiley's history of peecee censoriousness. Evidently it is not just Edinburgh LUniversity that tries hard to prevent knowledge and discussion of the 1996 capitulation to PeeCee that took place when The g Factor was published.

In April, the Wall Street Journal (2 iv 01) took the trouble to query what had been the recent (see above) arrests of 'race hate' suspects in the U.K. -- http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB986163667703788446.htm. The 'review and outlook' editorial concluded: "Like all restrictions on free speech, bans on "racist" or "homophobic" expression rest on a slippery slope. Some Christian denominations believe that homosexuality is a sin. Are their clerics to be silenced by law because this view is unacceptable? Last September, after Britain's Conservative Party leader William Hague called for the internment of asylum seekers, a Tory defector deplored such a disgraceful position as tantamount to "the promotion of hate crimes." Some day, Mr. Hague could face internment. We aren't there yet. But when people can be given additional time in jail for what they were thinking while committing a crime we are approaching rule by a thought police. A good many people, even some supporters of hate-crime legislation, might find that a hateful outcome."
      This year's Journal of Psychology (135, 1, 17-36) carries a 'Meta-analysis of published research on the effects of child sexual abuse (CSA)' which reviews 37 good-quality studies. These covered 9,230 people who claimed that in childhood they had experienced unwanted sexual contact from an adult in a position of relative power. The review has serious limitations: welcome contacts from ordinary adults were plainly excluded; advances from family members were very much included; clinical and legal samples were included, rather than using only representative population samples -- as in the work Bruce Rind and colleagues (e.g. 1997, J. Sex Research 34); the work of Rind et al. is not even mentioned; the review takes no account of stress caused to children by the post-CSA  process of investigation and litigation; and published academic reports always over-represent studies finding 'significant' effects. Nevertheless, despite the Calgary authors Elizabeth Paolucci, Mark Genuis and Claudio Violato themselves being eager to claim substantial harm to come from CSA, only 14% of their victims showed more psychological distress (on objective tests) than is found in controls: 86% had no detectable long-term effects to show for their experience of CSA. More surprisingly (in view of previous research, e.g. Rind's), outcome was not affected by the victim's sex, class, age when abused, relationship to the perpetrator, the amount of contact experienced, or the type of contact (voyeuristic vs frottage vs penetration). The psychometric measures used were of 'post-traumatic stress disorder', depression, suicidal ideation, sexual promiscuity, victim-becoming-perpetrator, and academic failure. The authors show their size-of-effect to be about half the size-of-effect achieved on the mortality rate of representative American physicians who  experimentally took aspirin. Properly considered, Paolucci et al.'s results further attest that, contrary to the liberal-left view of  the world, children are not doomed, passive creatures of the environment and its stresses.
      Tricky British Foreign Secretary, Robin 'Nookie' Cook, played the left's race card in a major speech saying there was no such thing as Britishness, that chicken tikka masala was now the nation's favourite dish, and that some Conservatives had not distanced themselves sufficiently from racism. Conservative MP John Townend, on the verge of retirement, decided to threw down the gauntlet at once to Cook and to his own party leader, William 'Baldie' Hague (the most unpopular UK Opposition leader of since records began) by deploring multiculturalism. Though denying he was a racist, Townend said that people like Cook seemed to want to turn the British into "a mongrel race." Like Thatcher-backing Lord Norman Tebbitt before him, John Townend evidently expects immigrants to make a serious effort to acculturate. Although English is the world's language, it is now routine for British patients to find that communication with their National Health Service doctors and dentists is possible only with the mediation of a nurse; it is notorious that few naturalized immigrants ever support British sporting teams; and violence in Bradford and Oldham (including what police say was a racist assault on a pensioner by Pakistani  youths) led this month to the revelation in Britain's cowed media of  'no-go' areas in those cities clearly marked by signs on lamp-posts reading 'WHITES BEWARE!' Sadly, Hague -- already exposed as having sworn away Conservative MPs' rights to discuss race during the forthcoming General Election -- declined to seize the opportunity to back Townend and say clearly 'MULTIRACIAL – MAYBE!  MONOCULTURAL – CERTAINLY!' Thus he forfeited his last faint chance of  the Conservatives winning the General Election.
      Edinburgh LUniversity's Principal Dame Stewart Sutherland prepared to resign from the West's most nauseating one-time seat of learning (now a bastion of PeeCee). Sick with remorse over the Brand Affair, Dame Stewart had applied to become a 'people's peer' at Westminster -- one of the latest breed of 'Tony's Cronies' selected by committee to give neosocialist NuLabour more seats in the House of Lords. Dame Stewart's term of office at E.LU. had seen that institution be overtaken by the University of St Andrews, drop out of the UK's top ten universities and get itself a debt growing by one million pounds annually. Dame Stewart's plan to escape from E.LU. was greeted with derision by the Times newspaper (27 iv 01), which rated him precisely 0/10 for his qualification to be a 'people's peer.' Ribald comments about 'people's peers' were widespread elsewhere in subsequent press. The Dame had attracted approving Blairite attention last November by a speech at an E.LU. Graduation Ceremony saying the only point of a university was MONEY, MONEY, MONEY.

In May, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair had himself photographed singing Negro spirituals with weenaged Black girls of a South London comprehensive school so as to get his quite unnecessary General Election off to a 'multicultural' start. In a sickeningly tasteless propaganda stunt using the school chapel, Blair loved every minute as Black weenies sang of their love for their leader and tore their blouses off when Blair said he wanted their hearts as well as their minds. The headmistress told the press Blair was "the most wonderful Prime Minister of all time." The Spectator's political editor wrote of the exercise (12 v 01):
     
"No self-respecting editor would have accepted it as a script for a satire programme. ‘Come on,’ he would have said. ‘I know you despise him and think him unutterably shallow. But there are limits.’ Not where Tony Blair is concerned! In 1992, it took Neil Kinnock [Labour leader] three weeks of campaign intoxication to work up to the Sheffield rally enormity. On Tuesday, Mr Blair began where Sheffield left off. He clearly believes that Sheffield was a flat affair, that the Kinnock speech had too much intellectual content, and that there was not nearly enough crowd hysteria."
As to content, the leader who said the 1997 was about 'Education, Education, Education' but proceeded to rat on his promise of fast track learning now says the 2001 Election is about 'Education er Crime and er Welfare.'
      In response, the Conservative Opposition leader William Hague desperately offered to slash petrol prices; but he showed little sign of offering choice to British kids in how they are educated, what drugs they can take, how their future health care is to be insured, and whether they can experiment responsibly with trial marriage or a little paedophilia – let alone of encouraging higher-educated Brits to breed before the country fills up with desperate migrants and children of zero-parent families who are unlikely to be interested in the finer gradations of freedom. As for his policy on asylum seekers, it amounted to nothing more than keeping acceptances to a minimum – he showed no concern to select high-quality migrants using IQ tests and knowledge of English language and history. Hague effectively ended his political career at Westminster when he failed to support a fellow M.P., Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, an ex-boxer who, during a rowdy demonstration, had retaliated instinctively and politically incorrectly by immediately walloping a 'fuel protestor' who had hurled an egg into his face from close range. In a splendid editorial (19 v 01), the Times remarked that Mr Hague had no more of a policy for immigration than anyone else and that it was time to offer new arrivals only a second-class citizenship (e.g.  giving no long-term entitlements to welfare benefits) until they proved proficient in English
      Channel V TV (8 v 01) explained that love between HRH Prince Philip and Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II first blossomed paedophilically when the prince-to-be was 19 and Princess Elizabeth was 14. According to the programme, Elizabeth was entirely "smitten" with and "mad about" the handsome and dashing Philip after he served as her guide on a royal tour around Dartmouth Naval College, and a correspondence began which led eventually to marriage. This might not surprise Her Majesty's aboriginal subjects in Australia, most of whose daughters were revealed actually to have had some kind of sex with a relative before age 16 (
http://www.theage.com.au/news/2001/05/09/FFXKPUNJGMC.html).
     
In William McDougall's home town of Oldham (Lancashire) and later in Aylesbury (Buckinghamshire), White and Asian (i.e. Pakistani) youths provided a visual aid as to the impossibility of the kind of multiculturalism venerated by British politicians and media folk of the past generation. Oldham has for some time been known as a racial 'tinderbox' (McDNL Spring 2000; Darcust Howe, New Statesman 10 iv 2000) and two Whites were assaulted in May, including a 76-year-old man, so police had time to prepare for the inevitable; but two dozen police were injured and scores of arrests were made as hundreds of Asian youths took to the streets for three nights, throwing bricks and petrol bombs at police after windows had been broken at two Asian homes. Police said they were stunned by the "ferocity" of the Asian attacks on them, but blamed National Front agitators bussed in from London. Government ministers responded by admitting the violence had been serious and warning British people not to talk about race. Ministers presumably plan to tolerate the same de facto apartheid as exists between the much-bloodied religious 'communities' of Northern Ireland – wall building is the policy advocated by the newly moderate British National Party and it proved Britain's main answer to modern Protestant vs Catholic strife; but they want pious talk of multiculturalism to continue. Though local imams maintained their young had every right to 'protect Asian families', Pakistan's High Commissioner in the UK, Abdul Kader Jaffer, condemned the over-reaction by the rioters: asked whether Britain was a racist society, he put White politicians to shame by replying 'emphatically not.' It turned out that peecee Germany balances its piety with practicality: it has a 'Green Card' system for selecting immigrants -- being young is worth 25 points, having a university degree is worth 20, as is having a knowledge of German, and a Ph.D. is worth a further 10. Columnist Alice Miles wrote for the Times (29 May) that it was "impossible for politicians to keep quiet [about race] much longer."
      In Texas, child abusers were told they must display a prominent sign outside their homes saying 'DANGER – a registered sex offender lives here' and telling which authorities to phone at any sign of hanky panky (Daily Telegraph, 30 v 01). The measure increased the already high suicide rate amongst paedophiles, but the signs are to be protested via the courts as being a 'cruel and unusual punishment.'
      In a breakthrough for biological approaches to schizophrenia, NIMH scientists announced they had discovered a gene which produced a dopamine-degrading enzyme and thus impaired schizophrenics' abilities on a card-matching task known to involve brain circuits in the brain's frontal lobes (Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 29 v 01).

In June, on the eve of the UK's General Election, some 250 South Asian youth rioted for seven hours in Leeds ('the Capital of the North'), burning out two dozen cars in apparent response to the arrest two days previously of a Bangladeshi; but no mainstream politician felt moved to comment on multicultural Britain's worst few weeks of race rioting since 1985. Locals, some of whom were forced from their cars, expressed themselves horrified at the violence. Police said the attack on them – which slightly injured two officers in riot gear -- was premeditated, orchestrated and inexcusable: police had been called to an Asian area to investigate an alleged petrol bombing by Whites (of which no evidence was ever found).
      In the Election, which gave Prime Minister Tony Blair a licence to continue purveying Thatcherism with a smiling face, the largest single body of voters was the 42% who stayed away from the polling booths (cf. 28% in 1997, 22% in 1992 and 25% in 1987). The problem of British boredom with politicians was dramatically illustrated by a ban on political speeches in Oldham on Election day lest anyone – in particular the British National Party -- say anything insensitive about race. The only Conservative gain was in the Cockney area of Romford,  where the Conservative candidate had stressed his opposition to bogus asylum seekers and the euro: this produced a 9% swing to the Conservatives which, repeated nationally, would have been enough to put Mr William Hague into Downing Street.
     
The main changes at the polls were the sharp rises in support for the Liberal Democrats and for the BNP in Oldham, together suggesting the possibility of a future English National Liberal Party devoted to fighting PeeCee and to maintaining and extending the freedoms of the English. (Opposing neosocialism, an ENLP would presumably offer CHOICE to people [e.g. in state schooling, marital contracts, health insurance, recreational drugs, country pursuits, weenager sex, hiring and firing, the currency, property sales – why not to 'Whites Only'? -- and constituency membership] and keep from the polling stations and from public office those having little knowledge of England or English. Under the slogan ENGLISH CHOICE, an ENLP could expect to regain the votes of the many ordinary people who have lost enthusiasm for New Labour as it has become Westminster's new conservative party, functioning chiefly to preserve the gains of the Thatcher years. A chief ENLP focus would be on KIDS' LIB – for English children are currently dragooned, curfewed and criminalized as never before by the nanny state even though they will soon be expected to pay for ever-increasing numbers of old age pensioners. A central ENLP method would surely be to encourage self-help neofamilies – voluntary groupings that would be increasingly used as the major channel for state welfare endeavours [see 'NEOLIBERALISM NEEDS NEOFAMILIES' in McDougall NewsLetter, 27 vii '99].)
      At Birmingham Crown Court, a much-discussed 'racist attack' by Whites on White Olympic triple jumper Chris Cotter, who had two Black female athletes as lovers, turned out actually to have been a criminal conspiracy by Cotter to win sympathy from one of his women: Cotter had persuaded two male friends to assault him and he lost a litre of blood, but Judge Robert Orme jailed him for two years. In Essex, Wayne Rule, a mulatto, was sentenced to nine years imprisonment for wilfully accelerating into and killing a White policemen who was asking traffic to halt because of an accident.
      Reservations about multiculturalism began to surface on the British far left as it was noticed that Pakistanis in Oldham had begun to demand walled ghettos for themselves in the name of multiculturalism. The New Statesman's Black commentator, Darcus Howe, expressed sympathy for the Whites of  decaying Oldham, seriously neglected for many years by a peecee Labour council determined to assist the ghettoization of the various racial groups while parading its 'multiculturalism.' Grants of half a million pounds were made from the National Lottery to help coloured immigrants in Oldham (at whatever risk of resentment from Oldham's many poor Whites) and to homosexual propagandists in Scotland (though these hypocrites draw an artificial distinction between themselves and paedophiles and decline to do anything to relieve the extravagant public persecution of the latter). When Asian groups in Oldham demanded more of the 8-foot-high metal fences that the council had begun to put up so as to separate the races, they found themselves opposed by Britain's new Home Secretary, David Blunkett – unsurprisingly, since segregation in Oldham had been advocated for several months by the British National Party.  Britain's Communication Workers' Union decided to press via the Trade Union Congress for an outright Government ban on the BNP.
      On the British right, just one candidate for the captaincy of the doomed Titanic Party took the trouble to criticize multiculturalism: Ian Sunken Ship ooops Duncan-Smith, a Sandhurst graduate, said that Britain's multiracial condition needed to be handled by a liberal but firm monoculturalism (Daily Telegraph, 16 June). The Guardian (20 June) admitted that
housing in Bradford, one of Britain's most multicultural cities, "is moving relentlessly towards segregation on the American model." (Notoriously, minorities feel safer when clustered together. The reasonableness of this feeling was confirmed in Britain in February, when the Observer reported that higher rates of minority victimization occurs in rural areas where immigrants are thin on the ground.)
      After four years of failing to deliver his promised 'fast track learning' in state schools, the re-elected Prime Minister Tony Blair decided to appoint as Education Minister a woman who had by her own account been a poor student and failed all her A-Level examinations. The National Association of Schoolmasters and Union of Women Teachers (NASWUT) condemned the Government's proposed specialist secondary schools as elitist and irrelevant. (The policy envisages that one third of English state secondary schools will be allowed to select up to 10% of their pupils according to measured abilities. So far, 79 specialist schools have been set up – 33 in technology, 18 in languages, 16 in sports and 12 in art.)
      In ex-Yugoslavia, Nato's allies in the cause of a multicultural Kosovo, the ethnic Albanians, continued to terrorize villagers and kill the police and soldiers of multiethnic Macedonia in pursuit of the kind tribal homeland which no-one in the Balkans is allowed to have until they have killed half a million people. Bringing criminalization of racist downloadings a step nearer, President Chirac of France and Chancellor Schroeder of Germany announced their intention to censor 'hate speech' on the Internet (Wall Street Journal, 13 June).
     
Edinburgh LUniversity's Regius Professor Neil MacCormick who tried to persuade Oxford University Press to republish The g Factor in 1996 was knighted in Her Majesty the Queen's Birthday Honours List. As Social Science Provost at E.LU., Neil MacCormick had played a star role in the witch-hunting of me in 1996 – bringing his Inquiry to the agreeable conclusion that I should continue to be employed. (Unfortunately, E.LU.'s Chaplain was then so infuriated that he decided to create a media firestorm around what I had said in my TgF Newsletter about Nobelist Daniel Gajdusek and his paedophilia.) Neil MacCormick failed to make any public denunciation of the lack of respect for academic freedom at E.LU., but he did later express sympathy with hard-pressed academics in Serbia (McDougall NewsLetter, 3 xi '98).

ENGLAND'S 2001 RACE RIOTS -- A COMMENT
The two months of racial disturbances in Britain have involved towns on either side of the Pennines, north-east of Manchester. This is a low-IQ and high-unemployment area -- for both 'Asians' (chiefly Pakistanis in this case) and Whites. The problem is already being 'solved' by the Ulster expedient of voluntary segregation of housing and schooling, plus some high metal fencing supplied by local councils. The majority Whites will next be told that they will not be allowed to govern anything, however local, without 'power-sharing' with Asians. That is, as Multiculturalism Mk 1 fails, one moves to Multiculturalism Mk 2 including the abandonment of democracy.
      Britain has plenty of experience 'policing' this type of arrangement for the Catholics and Protestants of Ulster. But Britain's Muslims have no equivalent of the Dublin Government -- an accepted body to which a semi-dignified surrender can be made by Westminster. Whereas Ēire had a record of treating its post-independence Protestant minority with respect
(so long as Prods kept their heads down or subscribed to Ēirish nationalism), few UK Whites today could have much confidence that Islam would today supply the passably benign arrangements that it reputedly made historically for the Peoples of the Book.
      Britain's National Front and the British National Party (the latter lately 'modernized' and led by a Cambridge graduate) will do their best to maintain tensions in the next few weeks throughout the 500-square mile area (Nelson, Leeds, Barnsley, Oldham) where BNP voting at the General Election approached 5%. But mainstream British politicians will try to hold their noses, as about Ulster -- except perhaps seizing the opportunity to 'stamp out institutional racism' in the Lancashire and West Yorkshire police forces. It took a generation for the British people to realize that they had to stand up to the trade union barons whom politicians of 1945-1975 had
fruitlessly tried to placate (continuing a century of privileging the trade unions at law). Standing up to advocates of multiculturalism – whether Black, White or 'Asian' -- will probably take just as long. Race relations in Britain are largely excellent as minorities enliven the place and fill the many vacancies opened up by Whites' failure to breed. Unpleasantness and incompetence are only encountered in places where numbers of ethnic minorities are gathered together -- as with Black control of the tube stations of the London Underground, Arab control of the waitering staff of some London hotels and restaurants, and Asian control of the lower levels of the Home Office's Immigration Division. However, the ending of affirmative racism, quotas and political correctness in the USA would doubtless help inspire monoculturalism here; and young Pakistanis could make the key mistake of self-destructive hyper-militancy that enabled Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to move against the Gaddafi-backing trade union supremo, Arthur Scargill.

 

In July 2001, with the help of a billion-dollar bribe, the West's multicultural maniacs were able to arrest the Serbian ex-leader, Slobodan Milosevic, who, like the West itself, had failed to create ethnic harmony in Kosovo – though he had at least kept bi-racial Macedonia in one piece. If he is not sprung from his Dutch jail by experienced Serbian criminals, Milosevic will be tried at an 'international tribunal' at the Hague which uses no jury and does use hearsay evidence (unacceptable in UK trials). Last year, UK Foreign Secretary Robin Cook pointed out that the Hague kangaroo court 'does not exist to try UK or US leaders.' This is fortunate for Bomber Blair who is even now planning to make British troops spearhead the 'peacekeeping' that is hoped to keep Macedonia glued together. In the Times (3 vii), columnist Mick Hulme observed that the 'war crimes' tribunal "looks less like a neutral court of international law than a creature of global power politics." The court contravenes the UN's own principle that it does not intervene in the internal affairs of member states. Chicago columnist Steve Sailer writes of NATO's 1999-2001 operation "We not only turned the KLA into a triumphant force, but we urinated on the principle of the sanctity of borders that we had defended so triumphantly in the Gulf War." A headline in bomber-backing Newsweek tried to explain away how the Kosovo Liberation Army has plunged Macedonia into chaos: "Judgment Day: Milosevic is at The Hague, accused of war crimes. But his malevolent spirit lives on in places like Macedonia."
      In the USA, a jury voted to ban a father of nine from having more children until he paid his outstanding child support arrears of  $25K. David  Oakley, 34, will be jailed for eight years if  he  becomes a father again, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin ruled. The despicable dad had already been placed on probation with a condition he sired no more offspring; but a ninth child came along so he will now face prison if there is a tenth. Females on the jury had been opposed to the vote, believing instead in a 'right to breed.'
      In London, the use of cannabis was partially decriminalized  when police in south London said they would no longer charge suspects but merely seize their ganja and caution them. The move resulted less from growing neoliberalism (though NuLab bigwig 'Mo' Mowlam now backs legalization) than from 'antiracist' piety – wishing to avoid provoking London's Blacks.
      In Bradford, a mob of about a thousand Pakistani youths assembled under Anti-Nazi League (ANAL) leadership to protest against a (banned and thus non-existent) march by the National Front. Apparently ANAL fanatics had spotted a grand total of four National Front supporters having a drink in a pub in the centre of Bradford – police had turned back five others at the railway station. For several hours the Asian mob was out of control and sent burning cars rolling downhill into police lines. Two White youths were knifed, 23 Pakistanis and 13 Whites were arrested, 120 police in riot gear and three police horses where injured (one of the horses being deliberately knifed). The Sunday Times' headline was 'Asian youths stone police in new Bradford rioting' and a Times leader was titled 'Young Asians in Bradford cannot claim incitement.' The New York Times tried to blame the National Front (4 July, 'Shadowy Party Heats Up British Racial Tensions')  but their reporter noted that Asian youths gave her "a barrage of unprintable remarks about Jews." Further nights of  window smashing, petrol bombing and police injuries followed. Multicultural Britain now stands revealed in all its glory. Asian leaders appealed to their youth not to take the law into their own hands. The Bishop of Bradford praised the tolerance of the police and said they had "
bent over backwards to try and understand the Asian community." In the Daily Telegraph (9 July), a new Labour MP, the Spectator columnist Siôn Simon, blamed the violence chiefly on ANAL which can hardly wait to see Asians torching their own areas and calling for mass suppression of what Mr Blair already likes to call 'the forces of reaction.' More thoughtfully, ex-Marxist columnist Mick Hume, in the Times, blamed NuLabour's espousal of hysterical anti-racism, saying "Labour and its new political elite have hardly missed a chance to play their version of the race card [and] to redefine issues in the language of race." David Blunkett, Britain's blind Home Secretary – a politically correct appointment after he had failed to produce 'fast track learning' in education – said he could see no cause for the rioting which was thus "mindless" and would be dealt with by water canon, like the disturbances of multicultural Northern Ireland for the past generation. A new report by the Campaign for Racial Equality attacked racial "polarisation" in Bradford, saying that schools and neighbourhoods were virtually segregated since Labour had agreed to give Muslims their own state-funded schools. It found Bradford was riddled with drugs, fear and gangs whose members could not be arrested without damaging charges of 'racism' ensuing. More segregation got underway as White flight sped up. Left-wing Labour MP Ann Cryer showed unexpected good sense in demanding that immigrants be obliged to learn English and Pakistanis be encouraged to desist from pressuring their children to make marriages with uneducated girls in Pakistan. Mrs Cryer described the habit of British born Asians taking such marriage partners from the sub-continent as "importing poverty". She also proposed compulsory adult education for Asians in West Yorkshire. Mrs Cryer said "Intercontinental marriages mean that about 50% of the marriages that take place in the Asian community result in an intake of new residents who are unable to communicate in the English language." However, the New Statesman called for Pakistanis to be given quotas of jobs in White firms, Terry Rooney (the Labour MP for Bradford North) urged banning the BNP, and another Labour MP (for Oldham) demanded "coerced integration" to achieve multiculturalism for Bradford's communities. Meanwhile, in Ulster, where 'positive' discrimination has long been enforced, Catholic youths injured 100 police and Protestants refused to continue talking about Mr Blair's scheme for further surrender and left him to prawn cocktail croissants with the Dublin Government and the IRA. In Brixton, 100 Blacks fought with police (27 arrests, 3 police injuries) after a police marksman had shot dead a Black man wielding a replica gun and terrorizing passers-by. The Home Office prepared for more multiculturalism by granting a right of asylum in Britain to the millions of Muslim women whose governments fail to protect them from clitoridectomy. Indicating that ethnic hostilities are far worse than multiculturalists have admitted, sociologists at the University of Leeds' Centre for Ethnicity and Racism Studies announced their view that "institutional racism" is "rife" in British universities. Police officers involved in dealing with the Bradford race riots are launched a claim for millions of pounds in damages over the 'trauma' they suffered.
      Female Boy Baggers ('Mrs Robinsons') caused psychological harm not educational enrichment to the adolescent virgins they ensnared, the Royal College of Psychiatrists was told by Prof. Michael King of the Royal Free and University College Medical School (Daily Telegraph, 12 July). King claimed that, compared with other men in a sample of 2,500, adolescents who had enjoyed a fling with an older woman were later more emotional and had somewhat elevated rates of suicide and 'self abuse.' However, King did not take the trouble to investigate cause and effect. In particular, he does not seem to have asked whether the toy boy experience might actually have had a soothing influence on youths who already have troubled, attention-seeking and affection-demanding personalities. Thinking of which, Principal Dame Stewart Sutherland – about to be installed as a Baroness – announced she would resign in 2002 as Vice-Chancellor of E.LU. in order to undertake something really interesting like another book about the multicultural religion which the great and good are planning to introduce when and if multifaith-fancying Prince Charles becomes king.
       The French Supreme Court said doctors could be sued if they failed to advise abortions in pregnancies likely to result in the birth of seriously handicapped children. Four disabled French teenagers have so far filed such suits. However, the decision was denounced by religious groups, handicapped groups and France's Attorney-General (Times 14 July).
      Richard Lynn's new books, Eugenics: A Reappraisal [Praeger] and
The Science of Human Diversity: A History of the Pioneer Fund, [University Press of America] were published to acclaim from the Internet newsletter Politically Incorrect (PINC).
      Laura Spence, who failed to win a place at Oxford University in 2000 but soon after gained entry to Harvard, told the Daily Mail  (16 July) that she bore no grudge because she knew that, in her interview at Magdalene College, she had performed at well below her true ability level. Thus the attack on Oxford 's 'elitism' that followed -- with Chancellor Gordon Brown leading the mob -- turns out to have been based on  the failure of the press to search for the true story about Laura. That even the right-wing press in Britain should jump so eagerly on every passing anti-elitist, anti-racist and anti-sexist bandwaggon is a scandal and a terrifying danger. Equally horrific was the finding of an Employment Tribunal in London that the Law Society should pay one million pounds to compensate a Pakistani manageress who had herself been found by due process to have bullied staff (Daily Telegraph, 16 July): the Tribunal's judgment was that the Society had shown "unconscious" racism and sexism – though the Tribunal could not point to any actual evidence that the manageress had been treated with less fairness than would have been shown to a White male. Hysterical denunciations from the Association of University Teachers followed research showing that female academics in Britain earn only 75% of what is earned by their male counterparts: leading the field in sex realism was the prestigious London Business School where the corresponding figure was a mere 67% (Guardian 16 July).
      A Daily Telegraph editorial summed up Britain's Blairite plight rather well (17 July): "
What  is particularly worrying about the present Government is that  it seems  to  combine the social authoritarianism of the Right with  the class-based  illiberalism of the Left.  It wants the seizure of  assets from unconvicted  but  suspected  criminals, greater  powers of surveillance  and a reduction in jury trials.  And,  at the same  time, businesses are choked  by  rules  on  health   and hygiene    and "anti-discrimination".  And not only businesses: schools,  universities and the professions are all ordered around as the state imposes its own nostrums on what ought to be private institutions."
      The penchant of the Commission for Racial Equality for brainwashing Britain was revealed in its advertisment for staff in The Scotsman, July 20. The advert (for a legal affairs officer, a public policy officer, a campaigns officer etc.) was headed blankly CHANGING ATTITUDES and concluded by reminding readers: "We have new powers to eliminate racism. Help us to use them." BBC Programme Organizer Gerry Hines told Race Today "Newspapers have to sell in order to live, so does commercial T.V. That leaves the BBC as the only truly public service medium in this country disseminating information, entertainment, and, in the case of race relations, propaganda. We are unashamed to admit it is what we are doing." And BBC Political Editor Andrew Marr told the Observer he favoured "the vigorous use of state power to coerce and repress racism." Marr added,  "It may be my Presbyterian background, but I firmly believe that repression can be a great, civilising instrument for good. Stamp hard on certain 'natural' beliefs for long enough and you can almost kill them off. The police are first in line to be burdened further, but a new Race Relations Act will impose the will of the state on millions of other lives too."
These revelations of flagrant illiberalism coincided with the Crown Prosecution Service in London being denounced in a Government report as "institutionally racist" – a judgment to which the CPS boss promptly deferred. And from Phoenix, Arizona, it was learned that police now maintain 'information cards' listing racist and homophobic remarks that could be used against suspects as and when 'hate speech' is criminalized.
      UK Channel 4 TV attracted vilification from child abuse thought police (e.g. the fat'n'frumpy Michelle Elliott who had in 1996 wanted 73-year-old Nobelist Daniel Gajdusek to rot in prison) for carrying a spoof feature programme which lampooned paedohysteria in the British media. C4 had amusingly 'shown' real-life broadcasters encouraging mobs to beat up and set fire to paedophiles emerging from 40-year jail terms, and experts issuing warnings that paedophiles could have sex with children entirely by internet; but the company stood by its programme, one of its comical Brass Eye series, saying it had made a serious point. Government ministers (including the blind Home Secretary, David Blunkett) then weighed in to denounce the programme as "unspeakably sick", "an insult to victims of child abuse" and as "tearing down the barriers of TV decency"; and they promised to try to tighten UK censorship via the Independent Television Commission. (C4 had known the programme would be controversial, for it had taken the unusual step of not releasing an advance summary for listing in weekly TV schedules. C4 had been making inquiries for some while as to how it might cover the topics of paedophilia and paedohysteria.) Within hours of criticism beginning in the UK's Sun, Mail  and News of the World tabloids, C4 said it regretted any offence to any victim of child sex abuse or to anyone who had watched the programme (or its Saturday repeat) in full, but added: "As commentators have already noted, some of  the more outspoken reaction to the programme only underlines the validity of the point it was making." High profile figures such as ITN correspondent Nicholas Owen, Black comedian Richard Blackwood and rock star Phil Collins had all been duped into fronting bogus anti-paedophilia campaigns for the show: they lent themselves to wearing tee-shirts reading NONCE SENSE ('nonce' is UK prison slang for 'paedophile') and reading aloud from a cue-card saying: 'These HOECS {Hidden Online Entrapment Control System, pron. 'hoax'} computer games can make your child smell like hampsters.' Other celebs fooled into participating in anti-paedophile ranting included soccer commentator Gary Lineker, ex-Olympic athlete Sebastian Coe, Labour MP Barbara Follett, 'family values' campaigner Gerald Howarth MP and Michael Hames, the former head of Scotland Yard's Obscene Publications Branch. "Using an area of the Internet the size of Ireland, pedophiles can make your keyboard release toxic vapors that can make you more suggestible," said Syd Rapson, a Labour member of Parliament. Playing an anti-pedophile recording by the made-up rock group Smash My Brother's Face In, he looked at the camera and said, "If you listen to this at night, behavioral psychology tells us that in the morning you'll be 17.8 percent safer." He further commented on trousers that blew up at the front, supposedly to disguise erections: "It's an absolute disgrace that somebody should use the internet to market these "Trust Me" trousers. It makes it very difficult legally to try and pin them to an offence because it covers the fact that they are stimulated in the groin area." Rapson subsequently said the programme's organizers had told him he must speak gobbledegook so as to relate to today's young people. Broadcaster and journalist Kate Thornton solemnly announced: "We have footage, too alarming to show you, of a little boy being interfered with by a penis-shaped soundwave generated by an online paedophile."  What C4 had managed to do was precisely to display for cognoscenti the high level of paedohysteria to be found among top Brits who really should know better. In the Observer, Kathryn Flett commented: "…how about the former Blue Peter {kids' show} presenter, Philippa Forrester, who last week left her job on Tomorrow's World after six years. Dare one suggest that she resigned in the shameful knowledge that the following day she would be appearing on Brass Eye, explaining how a paedophile wearing a pair of motorcycle gloves can reach through the screen of his PC to grope young children, a claim that would surely undermine any credibility she may have gained by working alongside Peter Snow on a popular TV science programme for several years?" Capital Radio breakfast show DJ 'Dr' Fox allowed himself to be filmed comparing the genetic make-up of a crab to that of a paedophile and adding "That is scientific fact. There is no real evidence for it but it's scientific fact." An Observer leader complained of paedohysterical critics of C4: "They are fuelling exactly the obsessive bonfires of outrage -- some manufactured -- that Brass Eye sought to satirise." In the Times, Jasper Gerard's TV column pronounced the C4 effort "laudable"; and the Guardian’s readers were overwhelmingly supportive, as were editorials in the Independent* and the Daily Telegraph.** But C4 and ITC received an unprecedented 2,500 complaints in three days and C4 withdrew the programme from its E4 satellite outlet as it faced continuing complaints from female Labour ministers and wounded celebs whose self-righteousness had led them to mouth such things as 'What I want to teach you now is nonsense.'

* The Independent commended C4 boss Michael Jackson for re-broadcasting the programme despite protests from the National Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children. It said Brass Eye "made telling points about the hysteria concerning paedophilia" and that the only sufferers were celebrities and politicians "so eager to be seen denouncing an obvious evil that they temporarily lost their critical faculties." It added: "Once again, the Government's illiberal instincts have been exposed."

* * "Brass Eye was a parody not of paedophilia but of the low-grade investigative programmes that seem to dominate evening television: the kind where self-important presenters set out to "expose" some vice or other, while knowing all the time that their appeal rests on the audience's salacious interest in that vice. ….[It is not surprising to see Labour politicians lining up with the tabloids – especially after the lead given by Tony Blair when he condemned the England soccer coach Glenn Hoddle for insensitivity --] but it is distasteful to watch ministers of the Crown demeaning themselves in this way.

Subsequently the Observer noted the hypocrisy of the British tabloids:  "One Mail splurge on the programme (headed Unspeakably sick', the words of one of the Ministers who hadn't watched it) was preceded by close-ups of Princesses Beatrice (13) and Eugenie (11) in their bikinis; in the Star, beside a shock-horror-sicko Morris story, sat a picture of singer Charlotte Church in a tight top ('She's a big girl now ... chest swell!'). Church is 15." Programme director Chris Morris may well have a personal reason for his anti-paedohysteria: as a child, Morris attended a minor English public school which was the center of a child sex abuse scandal that saw the headmaster jailed and several senior staff fired.
      Writing in a special New Statesman issue on race, leftish journalist Marek Kohn (author of The Race Gallery) expressed annoyance at the Guardian's anti-racist staffer, Gary Younge.  Apparently Younge refuses to discuss whether Blacks might actually be dull, promiscuous or criminally inclined until the West first produces a non-racist society where fair research can be conducted.  Kohn was shocked by this irrationalism and found it no way of dealing with resurgent scientific racism – now known as 'race realism', Kohn advised Staggers readers.
      Black-on-Black violence (called genocide by Congo's President Joseph Kabila) has claimed the lives of some 2.5 million people in the eastern Congo over the past three years. Emerging from behind the lines of the rebel-held east following a truce is a picture of mass murder, rape, starvation and disease among a population persecuted by myriad armies and groups (Guardian, 31 vii).

In August, a Kurd was killed and an Iranian injured on a sink council estate in Glasgow. Fellow Muslims protested at what they called Glasgow's meanness to the 5,000 asylum-seekers housed, fed and watered in the city. Danir Qadir, who was 33 and had been accommodated (along with his wife) on the litter-strewn Sighthill estate for nine months, told the Daily Telegraph (7 viii 01): "The  people are very bad here. Ninety per cent at least. ….Either asylum seekers should live here or Scottish people should live here. There is no other solution. We cannot live together." The injured Iranian told the media that life in Iran was preferable to what he had experienced in Glasgow. Remarkably, televised asylum seekers were burly, aggressively dressed and haircutted Muslims who showed not the slightest signs of emaciation or torture. Rather, they seemed healthy and assertive recruits for Labour's shock troops, the 'Anti-Nazi' League. Meanwhile, 250 Kurds and Afghanis detained by French authorities in Calais staged a two-hour protest march to complain it was hard to get into Britain because of the numerous checks on asylum seekers. The murdered 'Kurd activist' turned out (under enquiries by Scotland's usually Labour-backing Daily Record) to have been merely a fruit-and-vegetable trader who had changed his identity in order to get into Britain.
      The Holy Republic of  Ēire showed signs of being the next country to rebel against multiculturalism: the new habit of admitting 11,000 'asylum seekers' annually to a virtually all-White country was resulting in strains that led the usually Irish-friendly Observer to run a condemnatory feature which said "Dublin, Cork and Limerick are infamous for racism." Ēire's government was so apprehensive of racist sentiment that it toyed with creating a floating 'Flotel' in which budding immigrants could stay without annoying the natives;
and Ēire offered £8.8 million Irish pounds ($10m) to Nigeria in return for co-operation in returning more than 1,000 asylum-seekers to the African country.
     
America's National Association of Scholars [NAS] made available online its 163-page study showing the absurdity of most claims that tangible benefits arise from the pursuit of racial 'diversity' in higher education. NAS's clear conclusion is stated in its title 'Race and Higher Education: Why Justice Powell's Diversity Rationale For Racial Preferences in Higher Education Must Be Rejected.'
      The Times published a remarkable article from a top Conservative, a Jew, saying that Britain's race problems are serious and require more than "
anti-racism campaigns and cultural friendship societies." Rather, wrote Daniel Finkelstein, former Conservative Policy Director, "the rate of  integration and assimilation of immigrants" must be faster than the rate of immigration. A Welsh businessman who had helped set up the Welsh Assembly complained in print of the destructive influence of English settlers on Welsh cultures, saying the English were, for Wales, "a second foot-and-mouth disease." The New Statesman's Darcust Howe said London's Brixton was a racial tinder box waiting to explode; and the Glasgow Herald, reporting another racial attack by White youths on a Syrian, said Tony Blair would {as recommended at this website} seek to oblige asylum seekers to learn English. (Subsequently Blair's office denied this and the idea was condemned as "linguistic colonialism" by Habib Rahman, the chief executive of the UK's Joint Council for  the Welfare of Immigrants; but it had been advocated by Immigration Minister Lord Rooker, welcomed by Labour MP Ann Cryer {see above} and defended by Home Secretary David Blunkett.)
      My princess Shiou-yun (aka Natalia) and I were well and truly hitched on August 11th, at Edinburgh's Registry Office (Renaissance Suite, with Novak's 'At the Church' playing). The bride wore a sensational, figure-hugging Chinese-style sleeveless silk dress with a high collar, green and gold embroidery on the dress's ivory background, classically high-slit thighs and golden shoes having four-inch stiletto heels. She carried a light emerald-green shawl together with her bouquet of miniature white roses and yellow fresias; and kept her long black hair up, showing her champagne-pink pearl earrings until – after photos in Edinburgh Central Reference Library (where we had first met) and a procession down the Royal Mile, passing amidst Festivallers around St Giles Cathedral -- the wedding party was received at Edinburgh's Carlton Hotel. The wedding was a small and minimally advertised affair so as to keep paedohysterical 'anti-racist' hacks off the scent. Subsequently, we enjoyed a token honeymoon on the romantic and thankfully sun-kissed Isle of Skye, including a visit to the 800-year-old castle at Dunvegan where Doctor Johnson and James Boswell had stayed for several days in 1773 – discussing with their Macleod hosts such topics as nature, nurture, the sex ratio in Formosa [today's Taiwan] and what Montesquieu had thought to be the occasional desirability of polygamy (though Johnson would have none of it).

      The Jerusalem correspondent of the Times, Sam Kiley, resigned in protest at censorship from the Times' Wapping HQ of his reporting of Israeli multiculturalism – reporting which had broken the golden rule of the hour by recording police attacks on unarmed civilians and referring to Jewish 'assassinations' of Palestinian leaders. An article in the Sunday Telegraph complained that anti-Semitism is now fashionable at the dinner parties of London's 'liberal'-lefties. {Just why Israeli assassinations are not a reasonable response to Palestinian suicide bombings remained to be explained. Equally mysterious was why the Arabs had not mortgaged their oil and thus paid for Israelis to relocate to the USA. Sadly, both sides remain bizarrely concerned to maintain multicultural pretences that some kind of 'peace process' may once more by possible – and are encouraged in this folly by lethal Western idealists.} In multicultural Zimbabwe, Black-on-White genocide continued unremarked by Western politicians even though dictator Mugabe's Vice President declared that "Whites are not human beings." The Observer admitted Zimbabwe was under a "reign of terror" – though the paper's chief complaint was of attacks by Mugabe's thugs on rival Black politicians.  The Observer called not for the Nato intervention to which putatively multicultural Macedonia was being treated but only for 'smart sanctions' like emptying racist Mugabe's bank accounts in the West.
      As the British Conservative Party descended into civil war, I sent the following letter to the Independent to outline a possible realignment in British politics.
 

                                                                                               Edinburgh, 22 viii 2001

Dear Sir,
                Your editorial envisaging a fundamental realignment in British politics was spot on ('The Conservative Party is not yet in terminal decline, yet it could be', 18 August). New Labour has plainly finished with socialism and liberalism; and its main distinctive ideas are those of Thatcherism, political correctness and tabloid-fuelled paedohysteria.
      Once, Emperor Constantine transformed the shambles of early Christianity into Rome's religion (allowing him to plunder the temples of the far richer pagan religions to build Constantinople). Likewise today, Tony Blair has given direction to feminism, riding roughshod over feminism's internal arguments as to whether women are should be treated as different from, equal to or superior to men and simply urging women forward to replace high-cost male labour in the workforce. Tacking on similar bribes to other 'minorities', New Labour now offers a religion of affirmative action just as Toryism put traditional Christianity in its shop window. Showing the wide appeal of  affirmativism, Conservatives themselves have repeatedly tried to imitate it: once William Hague donned an inverted baseball cap to impress Black people, and today both leadership contenders, Ken Clarke and Iain Duncan-Smith, say they will promote women in their Party by whatever artifice.
      At the same time, New Labour offers individuals their only serious hope of evading charges of sexism, racism, harassment, stalking, date rape and petty paedophilia. In New Labour Britain, hounding for the political incorrectness of being a White male is most conveniently avoided by maintaining leftish credentials. This was exemplified when Home Secretary Jack Straw got away in 1999 with denouncing 'Travellers' {cf. Tinkers} as
"winos, addicts and squeegee merchants" who terrorized local communities and "defecate in shop doorways." Alternatively, those seeking a quiet life can focus apolitically on doing business and regarding affirmative good works as a new form of taxation that must be cheerfully accepted. New Labour spans the dimension of opinionation that would normally contrast capitalist individualism with religiosity. Like twentieth-century Conservatism, it has a lot to offer at once to big business, to the great and good, and to small-time moralists who seek to tyrannize others around them into 'sensitivity.'
      With New Labour as a centre-right party, can enough beef be found in Liberalism to provide a centre-left alternative? Notoriously, liberalism lacks a clear identity – except perhaps in the issuing of numerous human rights requiring ongoing legal adjudication (e.g. from the US Supreme Court) as they conflict with each other. Nor, according to the polls, does British Liberalism's uncritical commitment to the European ideal offer a promising political start.
      Instead, British Liberalism should now re-articulate itself as favouring choice – whether in type of education, of medical insurance or of family arrangements (including gay and polygamous marriages). Stemming also from that central political value, a New Liberalism would also provide a real choice of citizenship: it would offer monocultural integration into an English-speaking world to those who wanted that, and generously assisted passage to any who felt they wished to live in a primarily Moslem, Catholic or other type of illiberal country. States need something to contrast themselves with, otherwise they offer nothing. Instead of foisting on British citizens a Blairite deal which they could find just about anywhere in the world of globalized capitalism and its affirmative pieties, New Liberalism would express its humanitarian concern in ways allowing local choice, initiative and responsibility – perhaps in a revival of extended families; and especially stress England's history as a relatively gentle, non-oppressive country where discussion, choice and free speech used to thrive till the arrival of political correctness.
      As the icing on this cake, New Liberalism would accept European monetary union on one simple condition: that the European Union become officially English-speaking and thus capable of the traditions of debate, humour and comradeship for which the Westminster Parliament long provided a model. It is probably only thus that British people could ever be reconciled to the European Union. By so reaching out to people of nationalist sentiment, New Liberalism could expect to pull in a sizeable fraction of Conservative voters as their party – lacking all imagination since its Thatcherite days -- moves into its death throes. Such National Liberalism might also appeal to those like Ann Cryer, the Labour MP who recently talked of the need for British citizens to be fluent in English.
      National Liberalism would not be without precedent.  A century ago, the popular politician, Joseph Chamberlain, attempted a similar dynamic compromise between liberal and nationalist/imperialist ideas. Chamberlain only failed because he lumbered himself with the burden of opposing free trade and cheap food. A new liberalism which accepted the Eurodollar but sought the lowering of trade barriers with North America would not repeat Chamberlain's mistake. Rather than seek the sameness of the Clinton/Blair/Bush New World Order, National Liberalism would encourage diversity and choice in other countries. At the same time it would value free trade and free discussion uninhibited either by the prosecution of 'hate speech' or by the kindred criminalization of acts that either do no objective harm or are plainly expected as part of love or war. By stressing that both people and peoples should have choices, National Liberalism would provide a welcome alternative to the authoritarian moralizing of New Labour.
       I am yours sincerely, Chris Brand.

However unlikely the above proposals may seem, the 'Third Way' seemed exhausted (except as a proposal for running the country via spin doctors rather than via discussion in Parliament).  One Blairite think-tank in London abandoned talk of the 'Third Way'; and a new book edited by Blair-backing Prof. Anthony Giddens of the LSE attracted a damning review in Times Higher (17 Aug.) from Robert Sugden, who wrote "Several contributors voice concern that we are seeing a decline in civil society and social engagement, but there are few convincing suggestions [here] about how these trends might be reversed."
      Differential psychology professor Ian Deary and Scottish colleagues reported in the journal Intelligence a strong correlation (of -.50) between IQ and Hick-type choice reaction time in a thoroughly normal sample of Glaswegians. (Work linking intelligence to mental speed has been bedevilled by failure to use the full IQ range in the population – many workers contenting themselves with using attenuated groups such as university psychology students.) Professor Deary also wrote a damning review for Times Higher of Harvard professor Howard Gardner's latest "pick'n'mix of recycled essays" about his 'multiple intelligences' (now numbering about nine – a 50% increase in ten years). Panic attacks were shown to have a largely genetic basis by scientists in Iowa and Barcelona: in a study of families having the devastating disorder (classically called agoraphobia), a small region of chromosome 15 (called DUP25) turned out to be duplicated in 90% of affected family members, and in 70% of unrelated sufferers (New Scientist, 25 viii 01). Skull measurements showed that the original native Americans (such as 'Kennewick man' whose own skull is kept under legal wraps for fear of annoying Amerindians) were most likely descended not from Asians but from Caucasians such as the 'hairy Ainu' who are still found in the north of modern Japan (Science, 10 viii 01, 'Random samples'). Traditional advice to students to avoid the first person singular in their prose was given a boost by research showing that poets who committed suicide (with Sylvia Plath as a star case) were more likely to use 'I' in their writing and less likely to use 'we' -- apparently because of self-preoccupation and (as envisaged by Durkheim) alienation (Science, 10 viii 01, 'Random samples').
      More 'racism' was exposed in the Conservative Party as prominent supporters of Iain Duncan Smith's leadership campaign came under media scrutiny (possibly after tip-offs from Kenneth Clarke's camp). But the promptly ejected Edgar Griffin (79, a Vice-President of  the Montgomeryshire Conservative Association [ in mid-Wales] and father of British National Party leader, Nick Griffin) told the media that many other Conservatives shared his view that the voluntary repatriation of New Commonwealth immigrants should be encouraged. Soon, the BBC discovered Conservative websites (e.g. the notorious Monday Club [set up c. 1969 to support Enoch Powell and having some forty MPs as members]) which spoke of Britain's 'problems' with the 'unpromising material' presented by 'coloured immigrants' and likewise urged generously assisted repatriation. The Daily Telegraph reported that many of Iain Duncan Smith's constituents in Chingford, north-east London, were extremely hostile to immigration, hated the European Union and regarded Kenneth Clarke as a socialist. A second Tory with links to the BNP was soon uncovered. Cresswell Rice, 72, from Somerset said he had been a paid-up Conservative member for 15 years but had also joined the BNP in 2000.  Five further Tories soon disappeared from lists of Smithy supporters – all having 'links' of some kind to 'far right' groups and publications (e.g. Right Now). The Conservatives, already bitterly divided over 'Europe', can expect a haemorrhage of  members known to have 'racist' views – all because the Party has increasingly failed to be realistic about race and IQ during its past generation of deference to PeeCee. Funnily enough,  assisting voluntary repatriation of New Commonwealth immigrants had been advocated by the late Black Labour MP, Bernie Grant, a few years ago, and was once official Tory policy and thus written into law in the 1971 Immigration Act. Is Mr Blair a 'racist' because he has made no move to repeal this legislation?
      As it turned out that 'asylum seekers' rarely leave Britain even when their cases have been rejected by the Home Office, the Times (28 viii 01) announced its considered view that immigration should now be discussed. "[British] policy on immigration is all but non-existent," it said, and urged Britain give consideration be given to following the USA, Canada and Holland in competing for global talent by demanding qualifications (e.g. in American history, English language and computer literacy). {My article, 'The legacy of Enoch Powell', dissusses the terror in Britain of discussing race and immigration. It was published in the new magazine, Occidental Quarterly. It considers the prospects for at last taking forward Powell's views – which were at once English-nationalist and classically liberal.} {It would certainly be interesting for race realists to know why thousands of  middle-eastern 'refugees' actually risk death and prison to reach Britain rather than stay in France
J.}
      A US federal appeals court panel ruled unanimously that the admissions policy of the University of Georgia, which gives a slight preference in bonus points to non-White applicants, was unconstitutional (New York Times, 28 viii 01).
      The USA decided to send only a low-level representative (and not its famous Black Secretary of State, Colin Powell) to the United Nations conference on racism being held in Durban. The conference had been persuaded not to condemn Zionism as racism and not to vote financial reparations for Whites making slaves of Blacks. But Israel was still condemned for organizing 'a new apartheid'; and  the USA still feared (1) that the conference would show an unhealthy and unrealistic interest in why Blacks in the USA are so often unhealthy, poor, unemployed, pregnant out-of-wedlock, imprisoned and executed; and (2) that the ongoing racism of Tutsi vs Hutu, Fijians vs Indians, Nigeria's Hausa vs Ibo, Cuba's Hispanics vs Blacks, Borneo Dayaks vs Madurans, Malays vs Indians, Chinese vs Tibetans and Black Zimbabweans vs Whites would be played down. The Independent's Black correspondent from Durban, Kaizer Nyatsumba, claimed 'America and its allies are frightened of a good argument' but it was not at all clear that the conference would allow any scientific discussion of racial differences – preferring to concentrate on unsubstantiated allegations of 'racism.'
      Ann Cryer's call for immigrants to learn English was supported by Labour stalwart Roy Hattersley MP (Guardian 27 viii 01). The former government minister said: "
When I was a Birmingham MP, I lost count of the occasions on which a family, in desperate need of a decent house, turned down the chance of a suburban council tenancy because they could not face life outside the Urdu or Hindi enclave. Usually the problem was said to be the women, who could not shop in English-speaking supermarkets. Sometimes the men actually discouraged their wives from speaking English as a not very subtle way to keep them tethered to the kitchen."
      A discussion between leftish London journalist, Marek Kohn, and myself was broadcast worldwide (BBC World Service, 'The World Today', 31 viii 01, e.g. for Europe at 05:10BST). MK adopted a very reasonable tone, even criticizing censorious antiracists and the AntiNazi League in particular, while claiming simply that most scientists disagreed with me. Faced with chairman Oliver Scott putting it to me that my views were simply beyond the pale, I replied it was hard to know what or where the pale was when so many psychologists were so intimidated by PeeCee. I pointed out that antiracism was a real menace to Black people and White alike -- resulting in de-policing in Cincinnati, Seattle and East London and in the dumbing down of education so that Black failures weren't so glaringly obvious. Thus I contrived to conclude that antiracism is now more of a problem than racism. This was my first BBC broadcast for five years.

In September 2001, America and Israel withdrew altogether from the UN's Durban conference – which was dominated by the international left including fruitcakes like the South African Prime Minister Thabo Mbeki who does not believe that AIDS is sexually transmitted. The Sunday Times headline (2 ix 01) was 'PC people turn race summit into a revolting spectacle.' Some 4,500 conference delegates turned out to greet Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, but only a single banner was seen in Durban deploring Red China's occupation of Tibet. Syria submitted a resolution denouncing the Holocaust as a "Jewish lie" and saying that anti-Semitism could not count as "a contemporary form of racism." The UN's conferences on racism in 1978 and 1983 were also hijacked by Arab anti-Semites and their final declarations never became credible documents.Top British columnist Barbara Amiel {beautiful, Jewish and married to top right-wing/eurosceptic publisher Conrad Black} put things well in the Daily Telegraph: "As for the UN, it should either be reconstituted along the lines of its former ideals or abandoned by us. The original UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, written in 1948, has had some 67 conventions added to it, most of which do nothing but eliminate rights. My favourite is the 1987 "UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice", amusingly, in the light of Tiananmen Square, named the "The Beijing Rules"." To  improve on that would require race realism – especially an acknowledgment that Israel is a racist state, can be proud of it and could usefully condemn the Jews in the USA who work tirelessly to promote the dangerous and passé cause of multiculturalism. Signs that Jewish leaders now see the danger of the antiracist tiger which they have unleashed appeared in the Jewish Telegraph.
      The cause of monoculturalism was joined by top columnist Melanie Phillips, till recently a regular columnist for the left-wing Observer newspaper. She wrote in the Sunday Times (2 ix): "A multicultural society is a contradiction in terms, dissolving society into competing fragments. It gives people nothing to identify with or hold in common with each other. It creates instead a grievance culture in which minorities present themselves as victims."
      A fine denunciation of  'anti-racism' was provided in the Daily Telegraph (Anthony Daniels, 3 ix 01). The article in this Conservative paper (which has been slow to stand up to antiracism over the past decade) noted the irony that antiracists like to have everyone classifed (currently, in the UK, as 'White British', 'White Irish', 'White Other', 'Black British' etc.) while denying that race has any reality; it pointed out that most London medical schools would need to close if racial proportionality were demanded – since 25% of the London's current trainee medics are Indian; and it mocked Conservatives like Clarke-ite Andrew Lansley who want to purge their Party of the sin of  'latent racism' and come to power in the process. The Telegraph also rallied to the defence of Australia which had resolved to keep out some 400 Afghanistani 'asylum seekers'. "The borders of Western countries are under siege," editorialized the Sunday Times (2 ix), "and the West needs to consider incentives for would-be migrants to stay at home." {The problem about asylum is that the
UN Convention on Refugees of 1951 grants refugee status to anyone who is simply afraid of persecution in their homeland. It is time to demand that those who flee their fellow-countrymen have an honourable five-year record of resistance to the conditions they criticize. Refugees should be randomly allocated to Convention signatories – and not all end up in America, Australia, Britain and Germany.}
      Glasgow University found itself shouldered with the solemn duty of anti-paedohysteria when one of its postgraduate students, in Sociology, was hoisted in the Mail on Sunday for allegedly inappropriate emails to top paedophiles who had convened for a conference in Berlin. The University did well initially: obliged to suspend Richard Yuill's Internet access and to set up a committee to investigate his research (into how paedophilia is seen by diverse groups), the University nevertheless took the trouble to point out that its sociologists could not be expected to refrain from studying deviant groups and that some degree of contact with and sympathy for research subjects had to be expected.
     
Then, on September 11, the world changed. The minicausts at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon showed that the world had not, in fact, reached Frances Fukuyama's 'the end of history.' Instead, liberal democracy was to be savagely and easily challenged in its heartland by suicidal terrorists. (They used the psychological principle which the West had long preferred to ignore, Freud's 'death wish.') Promptly, debate began as to whether (after some token retaliation), America should revert to the isolationism long favoured by some US Republicans; or whether American empire could continue, as preferred by Democrats and a majority of Europeans. Sadly, what was lost sight of amidst the dust from New York's famous and symbolic twin towers of the World Trade Center was the need to abandon multicultural pretences – the need to halt the reckless jumbling up of the world's racial ethnic groups that had led inevitably to the 11 ix 01 (in US parlance, '9/11') outrage being perpetrated by Arab fanatics who had for years made themselves perfectly at home in the USA Canada and Europe -- three of the thanatic hijackers had even received their pilot training in Florida. Astonishingly, aimless multiracialism had been accompanied by flagrant unrealism. For example, earlier this year the US Government had told America's airlines that they would be breaching passengers' 'civil rights' if they made extra checks on passengers of Arab origin (Times 2, 13 ix 01); and Arab youths have been allowed to receive weapons training via mosques in London. Of course, American empire must continue – for Israel, Taiwan, Australia and unarmed Japan cannot be abandoned. But the lethal multicultural farce of  liberal internationalism must be halted and replaced with a race realism that allows for diversity among countries and their regions and for choice -- including 'racist' choice -- as to the type of society in which people can live. Such nonsenses as multicultural Israel (necessary to obtain water supplies from Arab areas) and Northern Ireland (necessary to avoid saying that Britain has simply given in to terror) should be wound up forthwith – with the Arabs and Ēirish nationalists forced to pay (from their vast resources – not least those of their supporters in America) the full costs of resettling their enemies in the safety of the USA and Britain. Macedonia (kept multicultural to save Nato's face) should likewise be encouraged to bribe its Albanian minority into the safe haven created for them in Kosovo by Nato's regrettable international terrorism of  1999. It is time to realize Woodrow Wilson's national-liberal view of the world which achieved too little instantiation at Versailles in 1918 (see McDougall Newsletter, 28 iii 2000). It is over a 'new world order' of proper nation states that the USA and Nato should genially preside. In return for the USA and Arabs rehousing them, the Jews of Israel could be expected to regret and get suspended the demolition job on Western culture organized from Harvard and Hollywood over the past two decades and running under the far too innocuous name of Political Correctness. Doubtless America and its allies should move quasi-imperially to strike terror into terrorists; but national liberalism rather than global multiculturalism should now be the West's objective; and it is neofamilies including plenty of blood ties which should provide the key method. (The West's Arabian enemy, Osama bin Laden, recruits his agents largely along blood lines, apparently resulting in great solidarity and impenetrability for his organization. And, whatever the Islamic world's failures, single parenting by low-IQ females is not prominent among them. The American 'National Liberal' movement of the 19th century was specially concerned to promote the family as the chief social unit.)  Sadly, while the West continues its undiscriminating population policy (of breeding from its tower blocks) it is unlikely to make much progress against terrorism or anything else; and a self-declared state of 'war against Evil' will probably make matters worse – for the first casualty of war is usually truth, and this will be even more likely in a 'holy war.' Whatever the all-too-feeble revenge that can be exacted on Osama bin Laden and his supporters, the West should now turf out the politicians whose multiculturalism has enshrined nondiscrimination on its statute books and obliged Westerners even to employ – on fear of accusations of 'racism', 'sexism' etc. -- people whom they know to be incompetent or hostile. There is no point a country talking of making war if its citizens are not even trusted to practise a little discrimination. While the West's fighting men seize enough Arab oil to pay for resettling Israel's Jews, the West's politicians must undo the skein of Political Correctness into which the West has been knotted by its neosocialists.

 

Intellectuals responded….:
Harvard University greeted 9/11 by having prayers read in Arabic on its church steps by a Muslim. A telephone survey found only 49% of Harvard students favouring a military response – compared with 85% of the general US population. In the UK, Times Higher (14 ix 01) said the twin towers atrocity was 'A brutal invite to the harsh reality of globalisation' and insisted that 'Academics must provide balance in the face of terror.' In Oxford University, authorities moved swiftly to condemn as 'insensitive to foreign students' staff who displayed Union Jacks in their rooms (http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_404196.html). For Nature (20 ix), 9/11 presented a new opportunity for state funding: "Funding agencies should foster collaborations {sic} between Islamic and Western scientists and between those in the humanities studying science. Now may be a particularly good time to do so." The City University of New York staged seminars protesting at President Bush's war on terrorism: one anthropology professor, M.A. Samad-Matias, called the atrocity an understandable Islamic response to Western imperialism. For other campus peacenikkery, see 'Learning to love terrorists.'

 

A rousing monocultural message from http://www.vdare.com/pb/wtc.htm (Peter Brimelow):

"….unlike chasing alleged terrorist leaders around Afghanistan with airborne missiles, immigration policy actually offers
concrete ways in which America can be defended. The borders can be sealed. Illegals can be expelled. Alien enclaves can be assimilated. And the mounting destabilization of America´s political order can be stopped - even reversed. Only a few commentators, like the redoubtable Tom Sowell, have recognized this immigration dimension. It is our job to hammer home the simple message:
IT´S THE IMMIGRATION, STUPID!"

 

Talk about bad timing:
At 3 p.m. 11 September 2001, President Bush was scheduled to meet with the leaders of a half dozen Arab-American and Muslim organizations. They were headed to the White House to discuss their desire to end ethnic profiling, as well as the 'objectionable' policy of  "secret evidence" that allows American law enforcement officials to detain non-U.S. citizens based on evidence they are not compelled to share.

 

'Racist' vigilantism – a comment from the Human Biodiversity Email Group (18 ix 01):

"The response of the Muslim-American organizations has been contemptible, and is causing their people to be subject to vigilantism. They need to make a strong stand for military retribution and issue a call for patriotic Muslims in America to root out terrorists in their midst. They should offer a big reward to any Muslim whose tip leads to a conviction on terrorism conspiracy charges. Muslims are best situated to expose Muslim terror plots."

 

Celebrating 9/11 – Elisabetta BURBA (Italian journalist), Wall Street Journal 19 ix 01:

"[In Beirut, Lebanon, on September 11th, ] I realized that the offspring of this great civilization were celebrating a terrorist outrage. And I am not talking about destitute people. Those who were cheering belonged to the elite of the Paris of the Middle East: professionals wearing double-breasted suits, charming blonde ladies pretty teenagers in tailored jeans."

 

Times editorial urges racial vigilance re resident terrorists (20 ix 01):
"….Courtesy of the civil liberties that they hold in hatred and contempt, thousands [of] extremists continue to circulate in Britain and other Western countries, "sleepers" ready to strike when the commands come. ….The police fight shy of arresting people for incitement to violence, for fear of being accused of racism." {Yet instead of  arresting London-based 'Sheikh Omar Bakiri Muhammad' when he pronounced a fatwah death call against Pakistan's West-backing leader, General Musharraf, the UK has spent its time sentencing to 18 months imprisonment a 34-year-old babe-bagger who had happened to fall in love with his babe (and she with him) when she was 14 and his pupil. Paul Tramontini had resigned his maths teaching post in Portsmouth before eloping to Rome with Katherine Baillie when she was 15; but he is still deemed to need harsh punishment for his apparently victimless crime.}

 

The San Francisco Chronicle may have marked a turn in the tide when it carried an article urging closer control over immigration (19 ix 01):
"….
Improved border and visa control may not catch all malefactors, but it would help alert us to conspiracies such as last Tuesday's attacks. If only a few of the dozens of conspirators had been identified by consular officers during visa processing or by border inspectors, it is very possible that the entire conspiracy would have unraveled."

 

A rare voice of moderate Islam was that of the secretary-general of Kuwait's liberal National Democratic Movement, Ahmad Bishara (Arab Times, editorial; reported Times [London], 22 ix 01):

"Regardless of where the eventual blame [for 9/11] finally rests, our society has a problem on its hands already. For terrorist acts are nothing but a violent manifestation of a greater Arab-Islamic culture that is laden with intolerance and embraces violence as a means of change and deifies terrorists."

 

The Times (22 ix) counselled Prime Minister Blair not to rest content with backing President Bush abroad, but to crack down on suspicious immigrants and mad mullahs at home:

"To defend incitement to murder on civil liberties grounds is to weaken civil liberties."

 

Just in case President Bush needs encouragement to have his military geniuses wipe out Kabul or some such, the New York Times published an article by Thomas Friedman (21 ix 01):

"In February 1982 the secular Syrian government of President Hafez al-Assad faced a mortal threat from Islamic extremists, who sought to topple the Assad regime. How did it respond? President Assad identified the rebellion as emanating from Syria's fourth-largest city - Hama - and he literally leveled it, pounding the fundamentalist neighborhoods with artillery for days. Once the guns fell silent, he plowed up the rubble and bulldozed it flat, into vast parking lots. Amnesty International estimated that 10,000 to 25,000 Syrians, mostly civilians, were killed in the merciless crackdown. Syria has not had a Muslim extremist problem since."

 

Life under Islam – Mark STEYN Spectator 22 ix 01:

"In the Middle East, you can choose to live under a theocracy, an autocracy, a plutocracy or a nutocracy, but the only Arabs living in freedom are the two million who live in the West."

 

Making 'war' in Afghanistan will not be enough  -- American Renaissance stalwart Samuel Francis told it like it was (25 ix 01):
"The claim of the open-borders lobby -- that non-Americans and non-Westerners can immigrate to this country and overnight become part of our nation and our civilization simply by assenting to a "creed," an "idea" or a "proposition" -- has now been shattered. The nineteen suicide terrorists came here, went to school, mastered Western technical skills like flying a jetliner, spoke English, had families, got drunk in bars, ogled girls in the swimming pools and behaved in superficial ways exactly like the Americans they pretended to be. In fact, they hated every man, woman and child they laid eyes on; they hated them in some cases for years; and they were willing and eager to die to satisfy their hate. They were and remained enemies of the West. We can bomb Afghanistan and every Arab or Muslim country in the world all we want; we can suspend the Bill of Rights and turn the CIA into a reasonable facsimile of Murder Incorporated; we can wage war abroad until we drop from exhaustion. But until we control our own borders and know that a significant ethnic minority within our own population is not, at best, alien to and, at worst, a sworn enemy of our own people and civilization, we should have no illusions that we are going to win any war against terrorism."

 

Even in the left-wing Observer  (London, 23 ix 01), columnist Peter Oborne had pointed to the same problem:

"The great point about the last week's atrocities is that they were inside jobs. The same will be true in future. Many of the hijackers were educated in the West. ….We do not guard our borders effectively and it is inconceivable that fresh terrorists will not make use of this weakness. It is criminally negligent of the Government to allow such a situation to persist."

 

What to do? – Chronicle of Higher Education [USA], 24 ix 01:

"Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat worried about reports that at least one man involved in this month's terrorist attacks entered the United States on a student visa, may propose legislation that would prevent the federal government from issuing any student visas for the next six months." {Such a crazy proposal is apparently thought preferable by the homosexualist Ms Feinstein to discriminating against students from predominantly Muslim countries. PeeCee still lives on!}

 

Identity cards? – Nick Gibb MP in the Times, 25 ix 01:

"It is easy to argue that identity cards would be a panacea in the battle against terrorism. But successive British Governments have rejected ID cards as a useful weapon against the IRA. Last week all the hijackers of the four US planes had fully documented identities — and it is probable that at least some of these identities were stolen. If terrorist groups have the sophistication to mastermind the outrages in New York and Washington, it is hardly surprising that they are able to fabricate whole identities. If identities can be forged, so can identity cards. It is simple too to suggest that ID cards would solve the problem of illegal asylum-seekers. But they would help only if all of us were required by law to carry them. Such compulsion would be too a high price to pay for the Government's failure to police our borders and maintain an efficient immigration service."
{Ever since my time as a prison psychologist, I have (on balance) believed in Identity Cards. Their great merit is that they allow more flexibility in sentencing by courts, for the card can be marked to show whether the bearer is currently entitled to buy petrol, tobacco and alcohol -- the three staple ingredients of the criminal lifestyle. I think many criminals could be trusted to live safely outside jail so long as thus (temporarily) 'demasculinized.' However, I do *not* think ID cards should be introduced at *this* particular juncture. They have no special merit (over passports and driving licences) in countering terrorism; and their introduction would let Western governments slide away from what should now be the primary task of restoring all sensible forms of 'profiling.'}

 

What are the Arabs ooops Islamites angry about? – Daniel FINKELSTEIN, Times 26 ix 01:
"As the Egyptian daily newspaper Al-Akhbar put it: "The conflict that we call the Arab-Israeli conflict is, in truth, an Arab conflict with Western, and particularly American, colonialism." In school textbooks published by the Palestinian Authority's Ministry of Education young children are told that Islam "will defeat all other religions and it will be disseminated, by Allah's will, through the jihad fighters". In such a war American liberalism and Israeli Judaism are equal enemies."

Deport young male militant Muslims? – Times 27 ix 01:

Along with jihad, one Koranic teaching is that of hijrah which enjoins Muslims to move to areas where they are more able to practise their faith. London's Muslims pumped out bloodcurdling fatwaas (at http://www.almuhajiroun.com/), calling all able-bodied British Muslims to cut off the hands and feet of Pakistan's General Musharaff and other leaders of Islamic countries.

 

Bring back racial profiling! – Rosemary RIGHTER in Times 27 ix 01:

"Not only do you clamp down on incitement to violence, you make it clear to police that they will not be investigated for racism if they apply the law outside the Finsbury Park mosque where Sheikh Abu Hamza spits out his messages of hate." Those realizing the need to scrap PeeCee were much reinforced by the revelations that Arab terrorists had trained in the USA itself not only to fly aircraft but to qualify as drivers of lorries carrying dangerous chemicals.

 

Deport undesired aliens now! – US columnist Ann  Coulter (http://www.townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/ac20010927.shtml)
"…. How are we to distinguish the peaceful Muslims from the fanatical, homicidal Muslims about to murder thousands of our fellow citizens? Are the good Muslims the ones who live quiet lives, pray a lot and obey the law? So did the architects of Bloody Tuesday's mass murder. Are the peaceful Muslims the ones who loudly proclaim their hatred of Osama Bin Laden? Mohammed Atta did that, too. …. It is impossible to stop Islamic fundamentalists who believe that slaughtering thousands of innocent Americans will send them straight to Allah. All we can do is politely ask aliens from suspect nations to leave -- with the full expectation of readmittance -- while we sort the peace-loving immigrants from the murderous fanatics." 

 

Western superiority to Islam? -- Wall Street Journal 28 ix 01:

When Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi told his people "we should be confident in the superiority of our civilization" he was promptly denounced by European bien pensants who back PeeCee – the Belgium Prime Minister and UK Home Secretary David Blunkett were happy to urge an apology, as were most of the folks assembled for the BBC's (surely rigged) 'Question Time.' Fortunately, some conservative spirits emerged for once to take some risks, including UK Shadow Defence Secretary Bernard Jenkin and the WSJ which noted the overwhelming Western superiority in liberty, democracy, civil rights and affluence and declared 'Now is not the time to apologize for being a Westerner.' As the West faced agonizing choices as to wide a front to open against Islamic terror, it remained true that none of them would have much point if the West continued its disastrous domestic policy of self-denigrating  peecee multiculturalism. A turning point in the West's tolerance of militant Islam was reached on 9/11; for, as the WSJ observed: "…. [even] the laws of jihad categorically preclude wanton and indiscriminate slaughter. The warriors in the holy wars are urged [in the Koran] not to harm noncombatants, women or children, "unless they attack you first." {WSJ did not, however, urge restrictions on immigration – such is the greed of employers for cheap labour.}

 

The enemy within – Times 29 01:

The Times' front-page story was about the outrage felt in London that the Government had done nothing in the 20 days since 9/11 to expedite extradition to the USA – notably of an Algerian pilot wanted for questioning by the FBI but currently planning a three-year process of appeals costing UK taxpayers three million pounds. The newspaper's first editorial ('Tough on camera -- weak on what causes Britain to be the world's terrorist haven') said: "….[A]s lawyers argue and politicians bicker, Europe's solidarity with the US melts into nothing. Equally disgraceful is the pussyfooting of prosecutors over men who preach the hatred that inspires bitter young  Muslims to clamour for jihad. Those who use their mosques as centres for religious hatred should be prosecuted. ....last year's Terrorism Act provides ample scope. A person commits an offence "if he incites another person to commit an act of terrorism wholly or partly outside the United Kingdom."" {Evidently the requisite WWIII statute is in place, but Rev. Blair has not chosen to use it.} In the USA, a poll showed Black people to be especially keen that Arabs should be given ultra-thorough checks by airport staff (http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/273/nation/Polls_say_blacks_tend_to_favor_cheeks+.shtml) – though leading peecee goons like Angela Davis (a law professor at American University and a specialist on racism in the criminal justice system) said that if such attitudes exist, they are ''very troubling.''
    PS Once Sir David Frost added his voice to that of the Times, Prime Minister Blair agreed that rapid legislative action was necessary to detain terrorist suspects, to freeze possible terrorist assets, and to expedite extradition of suspected terrorists to friendly countries.

 

 

OTHER SEPTEMBER NEWS
Dictator Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe took the opportunity of the West's distraction by 9/11 to tighten his grip on White farmers and to forget the promises of moderation which he had made to Nigeria (Times 27 ix 01). Inter-faith murder – especially Muslim on Christian -- continued apace in Nigeria. Syria said that the Holocaust was a "Jewish lie" and that anti-Semitism was not 'a contemporary form of racism.'  Sir Francis Galton was given unusually favourable treatment in New Scientist (29 ix 01) – in a two-page article by Geoff Watts about Galton's interest in the high-frequency hearing of animals like cats and lions, only three mentions were made of his eugenicism.

 

 

HOW THE PROMISED 'WAR ON TERROR' TURNED INTO A WAR ON
FREE SPEECH, RACE REALISM AND NAIL CLIPPERS!

As October began, approval for President Bush remained at an astronomical 90% in the USA and there seemed a real possibility that racial profiling would be permitted in the search for terrorists – thus beginning the rolling back of PeeCee. The US Supreme Court turned down a complaint against a mass stop-and-search of hundreds of young Black men by police after a stabbing (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,35491,00.html).

 

Western superiority to Islam? – Mick HUME (formerly editor of Marxism Today), Times 1 x 01:

"….Whatever one thinks of a right-wing caricature such as Berlusconi, it is surely a worrying sign of the times when a politician ostensibly speaking in praise of free speech and tolerance is told that such offensive opinions will no longer be tolerated." {The Wall Street Journal made similar points (1 x 01, http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB1001884309282113640.htm).}

 

How to deal with Bin Liner?

The West's reluctance to play hardball over Islamism was apparently indicated by three remarkable concessions: (a) brothers, cousins and nephews of Bin Liner, after being arrested in the USA, were immediately handed over to the Saudi Arabian embassy and allowed to leave as soon as flights resumed; (b) America poured wheat into famished Afghanistan, even into the southern areas where the West had no military influence whatever – defying the usual logic that food and medical supplies will arrive only once a population has succumbed to the invading army; (c) the West made no use of powers to detain and/or deport dubious aliens – preferring to rehearse the mantra that 'Most Muslims are not terrorists' (on which Ann Coulter made trenchant observations at http://www2.uclick.com/client/cap/ac/).

     

Creative thinking….

Killing Bin Laden will only create a martyr. Holding him prisoner will inspire his comrades to take hostages to
demand his release. Therefore, let us do neither.  Let the SAS, Seals or whoever covertly capture him, fly him to an undisclosed hospital and have surgeons quickly perform a complete sex change operation. Then we return "her" to Afghanistan to live as a woman under the Taliban!

 

Hate crimes?

Following a crusading speech by Rev. Blair -- even committing Britain to intervene militarily to sort out Rwanda and the Congo {but Zimbabwe and its thieving terrorist President Mugabe was not mentioned} – it transpired that nine European countries condemned Labour politicians and London's police for sustained unwillingness to detain and question Islamite terrorists (Times 3 x 01). Unabashed, Home Secretary Blunkett said his contribution to the war effort would be to defend Muslims from hate speech and to admit more immigrants on work permits. In the USA, an Arizona State university student, Ahmad Saad Nasim, admitted to faking injuries which he had attributed to a race hate attack (http://www.arizonarepublic.com/arizona/articles/1002student02.html). In Leith, the port for Edinburgh, a mosque was slightly damaged by a firebomb. Muslim leaders declined to denounce the idea that suicide bombers proceed directly to Paradise, expected there by seventy doe-eyed houris with lime juice at the ready. The failure of Muslim leadership drew adverse comment from Baroness Thatcher – comment for which top Tory wet Michael Heseltine promptly demanded she apologize.

 

Finish for the far left?
As seen in the London Review of Books, the committed intellectual left backed itself into a corner over Bin Liner. Leftist stalwarts like Paul Foot, John Pilger, Richard Rorty and Edward Said queued up to blame America for 9/11. But they convinced no-one – especially not Stanford academic Marjorie Perloff who wrote (18 x 01) to compare the lefties to appeasers and Nazi sympathizers of the 1930's. (This comparison was found "unforgivable" by the lefties (1 xi 01) who are more used to calling others 'fascist' than to being themselves called fascists in LRB.) Andrew Sullivan exposed the left's central problem in Wall Street Journal (4 x 01, http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB100214965491540440.htm):
"One of the most telling things I have seen since the Sept. 11 massacre was an early "peace movement" e-mail. It listed three major demands: stop the war; stop racism; stop ethnic scapegoating. A liberal friend had appended a sardonic comment to the bottom. "Any chance we could come out against terrorism as well?" One of the overlooked aspects of the war we are now fighting is the awakening it has spawned on the left. In one atrocity, Osama bin Laden may have accomplished what a generation of conservative writers have failed to do: convince mainstream liberals of the illogic and nihilism of the powerful postmodern left. For the first time in a very long while, many liberals are reassessing -- quietly for the most part -- their alliance with the anti-American, anti-capitalist forces they have long appeased, ignored or supported." It is all very well for the left to urge that 'we must listen to BinLiner', but (as Guy Deutscher pointed out to LRB from St John's College, Cambridge) all BinLiner has to say is "Allahu Akbar."

 

Holland queried multiculturalism after 9/11 -- Agence France Presse 3 x 01:
"A [Dutch] survey published last week showed that more than two thirds of people questioned thought any Muslim who approved of the terror attacks should be thrown out of the country. …. Former European Comissioner Frits Bolkestein joined the anti-Muslim chorus an article….in De Volkskrant in which he criticised the "hatred against the West" which he claimed a large section of the Islamic world felt."

 

Even PeeCee-parading Canada rejected Islamalunacy –  Vancouver Sun 2 x 01:

"OTTAWA -- A British Columbia feminist told a cheering audience here that the United States government is more threatening to the world than international terrorism. Sunera Thobani received several standing ovations from about 500 delegates attending the Women's Resistance Conference [1 x 01]. "Today in the world, the United States is the most dangerous and the most powerful global force unleashing horrific levels of violence," said Thobani, a women's studies professor at the University of British Columbia and former head of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women. Her comments caused a political uproar, with opposition MPs condemning Secretary of State [for Multiculturalism and the Status of Women] Hedy Fry for sitting silently as Thobani spoke. MPs called on the government to fire Fry {a leading self-styled anti-racist}, charging that she should have immediately condemned Thobani's statements."

 

Democratic racial profiling began –  US National Review, 5 x 01, columnist John Derbyshire: (http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire100501.shtml):

"Whether you think the present emergency rises to the level of a war or not, one thing that is fast becoming clear is that Americans at large are much more tolerant of racial profiling than they were before the terrorists struck. This fact was illustrated on September 20, when four men “of Middle Eastern appearance” were removed from a Northwest Airlines flight because
other passengers refused to fly with them. A Northwest spokesman explained that under FAA rules, “the airline has no choice but to re-accommodate a passenger or passengers if their actions or presence make a majority of passengers uncomfortable and threaten to disrupt normal operations of flight.”"

 

Outlaw 'religious hatred'?  Independent,  5 x 01, letter from A. J. Myers, St Albans, Herts:

"….To see what a dangerous road [Home Secretary] Blunkett would have us travel down, one has only to look at the experience in Pakistan, where a law aimed at prohibiting "derogatory remarks against the Prophet Mohamed" has resulted in maliciou claims being brought against Christians who simply express their faith."

 

Outlaw 'religious hatred'?  Sunday Telegraph, 7 x 01, Jenny McCartney:

"…."Incitement to religious hatred" is an amorphous charge, and the path to a legal swamp. The true misery lies in the actual abuse of individuals on the basis of their religion: the persistent insult or the paint-bomb splattered on the front door. That is already against the law [in Britain]: it is classed as an intimidation or harassment. Incitement to acts of violence is also already a crime. Instead of placing fresh restrictions on what peopoe can say, [Home Secretary] Blunkett should concentrate his energies on stamping out the vicious things that they do."

 

Britain's leisurely war on terror

A  Pakistani cleric accused of recruiting and fund-raising in Britain for a Kashmiri  terrorist group lost the final stage of his legal battle to avoid deportation (Daily Telegraph, 12 x 01). The UK Home Office had been trying to get rid of him for three years "because your continued presence represents  a danger to national security." The mad mullah – who had sired two children in London while banned from Britain -- had been collecting cash and recruits for a Islamic guerilla group  known as Lashka Taybyaba. To French intelligence authorities, London is known as 'Londonistan' because of its infestation with wanted terrorist suspects. At the same time it turned out that several of the 9/11 Arab terrorists had actually received their pilot training from the US Air Force. While authorities did nothing to detain towelhead crazies in London or New York, the left had time to organize, producing 20,000 assorted peaceniks in London's Hyde Park to protest the two weeks of American and British bombing of such few significant buildings as Afghanistan possesses. {Action to restrict the civil liberties of all Brits was less leisurely as the Home Office moved to 'outlaw religious hatred.' But the likelihood of new legislation being used against Muslim fanatics was thought to be zero since these enthusiasts specialized not in denouncing Christianity but in issuing death warrants for Messrs Bush, Blair and sundry others.}

 

Islam's intrinsic violence exposed  -- in the Koran:

A Call to the Muslims of the World from a Group of Freethinkers and Humanists of Muslim Origins

(http://www.secularislam.org/call.htm):

"The Qur'an takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and relegates those who disbelieve in Islam to hell (5:10), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (9:28), and orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (2:193). It says that the "non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water" (14:17). It asks the Muslims to "slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter" (5:34). And tells us that "for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods" (22:19-22) and that they not only will have "disgrace in this life, but on the Day of Judgment He shall make them taste the Penalty of burning (Fire)" (22:9). ….The Prophet himself set the example of unleashing violence by invading the Jewish settlements, breaking treaties he had signed with them and banishing some of them after confiscating their belongings, massacring others and taking their wives and children as slaves. He inspected the youngsters and massacred all those who had pubic hair along with the men. Those who were younger he kept as slaves. He distributed the women captured in his raids among his soldiers keeping the prettiest for himself (33:50). He made sexual advances on Safiyah, a Jewish girl on the same day he captured her town Kheibar and killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives. Reyhana was another Jewish girl of Bani Quriza whom he used as a sex slave after killing all her male relatives. In the last ten years of his life he accumulated two scores of wives, concubines and sex slaves including the 9 year old Ayesha. ….Dear friends, there is no time to waste. Let us put an end to this lie. Let us not fool ourselves. Islam is not a religion of peace, of tolerance, of equality or of unity of humankind. Let us read the Qur'an. Let us face the truth even if it is painful. As long as we keep this lie alive, as long as we hide our head in the sands of Arabia we are feeding terrorism. As long as you and I keep calling Qur'an the unchangeable book of God, we cannot blame those who follow the teachings therein."

 

The psychology of BinLiner

After photographs came to light of the 14-year-old BinLiner posed with two older brothers and two dolly birds in Oxford of 1971, columnist Ben MACINTYRE wrrote in the Times (13 x):

"What the….photographs demonstrate….is just how modern and Westernised bin Laden was and is. Like most revolutionaries, from Marx to Hitler to Gandhi, he is rebelling not against a foreign, alien culture, but against a world that he knows very well indeed – the wealthy, materialist, Americanised, secular nature of his upbringing. He is in revolt against part of himself. The man who is waging war on the West has seen the architectural glories of Oxford and punted the Cherwell, worn flares, leant on Cadillacs and flirted with pretty Western girls. ….part of his own personality and past is colonised by the West. It is this part he has renounced, this part he is fighting, but it is part of him still."

{Doubtless it did not help that BinLiner was the 17th child of  his father by a woman he sadly insisted to the dolly birds was merely a "concubine."}

 

Outlaw 'religious hatred'?  -- Columnist Matthew PARRIS, Times, 13 x:

"….if any Home Office lawyers can tell [Home Secretary] Mr Blunkett how a law framed to prohibit incitement to religious hatred can avoid criminalizing a famous author {the Caribbean-born but genetically Hindu Nobelist Sir V. S. Naipaul} who calls Islam a hateful religion on television, the Home Secretary is in urgent need of their advice."

 

"Nothing is made in Trinidad."

"Africa has no future."

Sir Vidia NAIPAUL, quoted in Sunday Times, 14 x 01.

 

What to do about 9/11? – columnist Melanie PHILLIPS, Sunday Times, 14 x 01:

"The West should end its "liberal" imperialism and stop telling other cultures how to behave. Instead, it must vigorously defend and reassert liberal values on its home ground. ….[That] means schools should abandon multiculturalism and start teaching English culture and history. ….It means arresting those who preach violence."

 

Why 9/11? – from David Duke Report, 16 x 01:

"The media did not bother to tell the American people that the attack occurred on the anniversary of the League of Nations Proclamation of the British Mandate, which was made public in Palestine on September 11, 1922. The British Mandate was the first major step toward implementation of the Balfour Declaration; a Jewish State in what is now Israel. September 11 is a
day of infamy for the Palestinians, and they sought the same for America. The media bosses had to know of the significance of that date. But, no major news source even mentioned it. The date can be found in many historical dating indexes, including Important Dates in History."

 

Racial anti-profiling
The war on terrorism took a new and ludicrous turn as airline officials at O'Hare International Airport refused to let a 73-year-old grandmother board her plane. She had in her possession two six-inch knitting needles.

 

Occidental obsession

The government of mainland China was denounced as "racist" in an editorial published by the Wall Street Journal (18 x 01). What could have produced this astonishing outburst against a country that had been passably supportive of America's 'war on terror' and moved troops to its Afghan border to prevent Islamic fanatics linking up with their coreligionists in Sinkiang province? Why, the Chinese authorities had warned their airlines to be "careful" about flying passengers from the Middle East; and the government had said it would set a good example by restricting the number of visas issued to people of ArabiStanic origins or citizenship. According to the WSJ, such discrimination was "shocking."
{By contrast, those who remained appalled at the continuing grip of PeeCee on the West's politicians found it shocking that employed White male graduates without criminal records had not been invited to bring their guns on to planes so as to deter suicijackers. Attempts to infantilize passengers by taking away anything that can kill -- starting with strangulation-enabling ties and bootlaces -- must lead eventually to nude flying. Meanwhile, until all air transportation is suspended in the multiculti-obsessed West, any terrorist who wants a gun on a plane has only to be capable of disarming a female 'soldier.'}

 

TV bosses agree to censorship -- Daily Telegraph 17 x 01

In a joint statement,  UK broadcasters declined to accept Government advice not to re-broadcast messages from Mr BinLiner. But they said "We will  continue to  exercise care in our handling of all  material. As  responsible broadcasters, we are mindful of national  and international  security issues  and the impact of reports can have in   different communities and  cultures." Translation: "We will not censor at the request of the Government  but  we  shall continue with our  normal  peecee censorship."

 

Leading Muslim urges Muslims to leave the West -- http://orlingrabbe.com/lfctimes/afghan_media.htm
"Writing in [Pakistan's] respected Dawn newspaper, Muhammad Siddiqi warned readers that in the United States, "Moslems do not belong in there." Referring to the rhetoric and behavior of Americans after the Sept. 11 attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, he added, "For Moslems in general, America will never be the same again. As years pass, there may be a lessening of hate, but the rancor will never go away." Advising all Pakistanis who emigrated to the U.S. that they should immediately evacuate, Mr. Siddiqi said, "America was never ours. It could not be, for America is Western and Christian. Period.""

 

PeeCee War

Western military action against Afghanistan appeared to grind to a halt as Messrs Bush and Blair tried to work out how to achieve their primary objective of a multicultural government for the country. Central to this remarkable mission was the belief that there existed 'moderates' in the Taleban regime with whom the West could do business. Meanwhile Russia more comprehensibly began to give unequivocal support to the Northern Alliance, the Taleban's bitter enemy. Back home in Londonistan, murderous Islamic fanatics remained unarrested while blind Home Secretary Blunkett concentrated on making criticism of Islam a criminal offence – the only chance of a reprieve for free speech being that some Muslims told the press that Blunkett's legislation might unduly cramp their style when criticising Christianity. Not to be outdone in peecee level, Conservative leader Iain Sunken Ship banned his members from belonging to the anti-immigration Monday Club (set up in the 1960's to support Enoch Powell). In peecee Canada, the Government moved to ban anything deemed by a judge to be 'race hate' – and thus to suppress criticism of its policy of encouraging immigration from the third world. Anticipating the new restrictions on religious discussion which are HMG's main response to 9/11, a Christian  radio  station in London  was  given  an  official  warning  by   the UK's broadcasting regulator after seven complaints were upheld: Premier Christian  Radio had said the  Koran and the holy books of Hindus  and  Buddhists  were "full of superstition  and absurdities." The only relief as PeeCee expanded was a Government promise to consider making classes in English and British Citizenship compulsory for new immigrants – though not for the hundreds of thousands of existing 'British citizens' of colour who effectively have no literacy in any language. {The abusive conditions in which Muslim women in Britain are not uncommonly kept by their menfolk were described in the Spectator by Theodore Dalrymple, who concludes of British tolerance: "Every multiculturalist believes — whether he knows it or not — that it is right to force young girls into marriages they don’t want, to deprive them of
the schooling and careers that they do want, to regard them as prostitutes if they leave their abusive husbands, and to punish, even to kill, those who cross cultural and religious boundaries."}

 

Londonistan explained: deportations of ArabiStanis are effectively forbidden by European laws to which Britain has madly subscribed – Daily Telegraph editorial 22 x 01:
"
With every week that passes since September 11,  new stories emerge  of terrorists  who  live  or have lived in Britain,  often  on   benefits. Terrorists have planned their operations here,  and no doubt are  doing so  today.  Most of these people are not British  citizens.  We do  not need a new panoply of "emergency" law to deal with such people: we need the  power  of  government  to  enforce  existing  laws  without  being overruled by the political activism that the Human Rights Act et al now
sanction."

 

Folly of ignoracism –  Jason L. RILEY (Senior Editorial Writer), Wall Street Journal, 25 x:

"To ignore the fact that America's enemies in this war share a faith and ethnicity – and that their actions, by their own reckoning, are ethnically and religiously inspired – would be self-deluding and foolish." {Certainly the more remarkable examples of hate speech after 9/11 came from the Islamic side, e.g. from Crown Prince Abdullah (the effective ruler of  Saudi Arabia) who railed against "the vicious Western media" which he said were "inspired by religious prejudice. In Lutonistan (north of London), fanatical young Arab men – apparently without fear of prosecution for treason – said they were not 'British Muslims' but only 'Muslims in Britain', prepared to fight for BinLiner, and displayed a placard for TV cameras saying 'Muslims will dominate the world.}

 

 

War? What war?

By the end of October, the main efforts of Rev. Tony Blair were focused on reassuring Muslims that the War was not against them, pleading with Pakistan and Syria to stay with the Alliance, trying to solve the Palestinian problem, restricting free speech in Britain, and urging the British public and media not to forget 9/11. Whether all this busy inactivity was a smokescreen for a forthcoming seizure of Saudi Arabia's oilfields remained to be seen. (Both the Wall Street Journal (31 x 01) and Senator John McCain (Rep.) began to say what had long been obvious – that Saudi Arabia could hardly be more of an enemy of the West if its current Prince Fart were overthrown by Islamic fundamentalists, so the West might as well seize the oil and use the proceeds to buy Israeli relocation {see August, above}.) What was clear was that the left welcomed HMG's plan to suppress criticism of religion: at the Guardian, senior editorialist Alan Travis said protecting religious sensitivities was just a natural extension of  protecting racial sensitivities – and welcomed HMG's taking the opportunity of 9/11 to raise the maximum prison sentence for 'race hate speech' from two to seven years. For its part, HMG had not even embarked on prosecuting the young Islamic fanatics who openly planned – though British citizens – to fight for BinLiner. {HMG already has plenty of authoritarian tools in its kit, e.g. to prosecute for sedition, which is "to bring into  hatred or contempt or excite disaffection against the sovereign or the government and  constitution of the United Kingdom ...  or to  incite persons to commit any crime in disturbance of the peace" (Daily Telegraph 30 x 01).} In America, the Federal Aviation Authority was still not allowing aircraft pilots to carry stun-guns, let alone real guns.

 

'Bush declares war on tourism' – Private Eye, 2 xi 01:

         BY OUR WASHINGTON STAFF, Ann Thrax and Spore Vidal

President Bush last night announced an all-out war on international tourism.

   "We are well on the way," he said, "to wiping tourism off the face of the globe."

   "These people can run but they can't fly," he explained.

   "We will not only put an end to tourists. We will end those organizations which support them – the international network of airlines, travel agents, hotel chains and so on."

 

 
OTHER OCTOBER NEWS
    Some UK university degrees were denounced as valueless by the Vice-Chancellor of London University, Professor Graham Zellick. He did not mention the existence of IQ differences, but condemned as meaningless Britain's Labour Government's plan to send as many as 50% of youngsters to university (Times 3 x 01). He said too many university students lack the academic ability to profit from their course and  leave with degrees which will not get them jobs. 
    Oxford scientists identified a gene for language on Chromosome 7 (Nature 4 x 01): its mutated form, FOXP2, prevents the brain's language circuitry from functioning and causes aphasia unconnected with autism or mental subnormality.
     Euan Blair, the Prime Minister's son, learned the facts of London life when he and a friend were mugged in north London for what small change they possessed by a gang of some ten Black youths. 
    The Swaziland government announced a five-year sex ban for young women in a bid to combat the spread of HIV and AIDS in the tiny mountain kingdom. Any man who failed to observe the rules would be fined 1,300 Emalangeni or one cow.
    A senior London policeman said that gun crime was "threatening the  fabric of London"  with armed officers called to around an alarming 256 incidents  in one week – most involving Black males.
    A half-Chinese man working for Birmingham Council's 'Partnership Against Racial Harassment' was awarded UKP116,000 for racial discrimination against him by senior staff. More than 100,000 census officials due to descend on South African households were issued with condoms in case anyone was "led into temptation" during their work.
    A poll released by Reuters Israel, but not reported in America, showed that 46% of Americans wanted to "rethink" the US relationship with Israel -- ending military and economic aid.
    In an unexpected latter-day triumph for PeeCee, UK 'Tory' leader Iain Duncan Smith – though elected on a right-wing ticket -- banned his Conservative MPs from having anything to do with either the Monday Club or the similarly race-realistic Right Now! magazine. 'Tory' shadow education  secretary Damian Green followed this up by supporting state-funded faith-based Islamic schools – the uninspiring multicultural model for which is the Northern Irish system of separate Catholic and Protestant state schools.
    In an excess of political correctness, and to fury in France, Edinburgh police jailed a French tourist for two nights after he had been reported to have spanked his eight-year-old son outside a Tandoori restaurant. The boy had been throwing a temper tantrum and was soon released from hospital when medics found he had not a mark on him.
   
A report, published by the French Institute for Demographic Studies, reported the number of French births rose by 5% in 2000. Researchers said the mini-"baby boom" in France was probably linked to "family-friendly" government policies.
   
Sudan's President Omar Hassan al-Bashir urged Sudanese men to take more than one wife in order to double the country's population of 30 million.
    American car-making giant Toyota bowed to the affirmative protection racket of Rev. Jesse Jackson (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/10/23/180654.shtml). It agreed to spend $8 billion to increase Black participation in its workforce, and paid $300 million directly to two of Jackson's supporters; "coincidentally", Toyota claimed, Jackson withdrew his threat that US Blacks would boycott Toyota products.
    UK Higher Education Minister Estelle Morris declared she would increase the differential funding of universities that accept more students from lower social class backgrounds.  She told the BBC that it was indefensible that a greater proportion of middle class students attend university, since "there are no ability differences between the groups." {Normally the left-wing line is that observable ability differences between children can be rectified by Head Start programmes and positive discrimination. It is a novelty for the left to be seen claiming literally no class differences in IQ, even in late adolescence.}
    Top biology professor Garland E. Allen was given two pages in Science to deplore eugenics and what he said was "the requirement of antifertilization medication for continued welfare benefits in the US" (Science 294, 5 x, pp. 596-7). {If his claim had been true, it would have been the best news of 2001.}
    In South Africa, 'Mother of the Nation' Winnie Mandela was arrested (subsequently bailed) on 60 counts of fraud.
    The American 'liberal'-left magazine Mother Jones ran an article deploring the work of C.R.A.C.K., the organization (supported by the Woodhill Foundation) which gives $200 to drug-addicted mothers (many of them Black) if they adopt serious contraception or are sterilized. Although a majority of C.R.A.C.K.'s board of directors are Black and the organizer, Mrs Barbara Harris, has a family of Black children and a Black husband, author Barry Yeoman felt free to wheel on Dorothy Roberts, a law professor at Northwestern University and author of 'Killing the Black Body' to liken C.R.A.C.K.'s efforts to those of Nazi eugenicists.

 

In November, Salman Rushdie, who fell foul of Islamic fundamentalism over his book The Satanic Verses, identified "paranoid Islam" as one of the prime factors in the war being waged against Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden (Guardian 3 xi 01). Rushdie said the US president, George Bush, and the prime minister, Tony Blair, had been wrong to insist the war in Afghanistan was not a war against Muslims but against terrorism.  "Let's start calling a spade a spade. Of course, this is 'about Islam'," he said.

Looneyversities: Graduates working as waiters and clerks -- Daily Telegraph [London] 2 xi 01, John CLARE, Education Editor:
"
NEARLY 95 per cent of new graduates who want a job find one within  six months but a third of the jobs they take do not require a  degree, says a report published yesterday. Five   years   later,  a   fifth   of   graduates   are   still    in "non-professional-level employment"  -working as clerks, secretaries, retail  assistants, or catering, waiting and bar staff."

New Britons – National Review [USA] (2 xi '01, Jonah GOLDBERG, http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg.shtml ):

"According to the London Telegraph, a radio station conducted a poll of 500 Muslims, mostly Pakistani, between the ages of 20 and 45 living in the greater London area. Ninety-one percent said this is a war between the Christian West and Islam, and 98 percent said they wouldn't fight for Britain. Forty-eight percent said they would fight for bin Laden or for Islam. Let us be clear. These are not the objections of pacifists. These are people who not only would take up arms, but would take up arms in this cause --  just not for their country. In other words, even if this poll is a huge exaggeration of the reality, a significant fraction of British Muslims are simply disloyal. Period."

 

PeeCee is first casualty of War on Tourism ooops Terrorism – Daily Telegraph, 2 xi 01:

"The former  president  Bill  Clinton's  policies  of  allowing   women soldiers  into combat zones are being halted as part of a   fundamental rethink  by the Bush administration about the culture and purposes of the armed forces."

 

New Britons – Sunday Times (4 xi 01, ex0Observer columnist Melanie PHILLIPS):
"A Sunday Times survey has found that four of ten British Muslims believe Osama bin Laden is justified in mounting his war against the USA. ….liberal Britain has got to get real and ditch the multiculturalism that is now a menace to life and liberty." The newspaper's report of seriously divided loyalties among Muslims found outside London's Regent Park mosque began: "ONE in 10 British Muslims questioned by The Sunday Times believes Osama Bin Laden was justified in launching terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11." {By 14 xi, even BBC Radio 4 UK was admitting that the Government had failed in its attempt to persuade Muslims that the War on Terror was not a war against Islam.}


Multiculturalism 'in denial' – Times (6 xi 01, Jonathan CLARK, Hall Professor of History at the University of Kansas, 'Despite denials, this war is rooted in religion'):

"Osama bin Laden reminds post-modern Britons that theirs is an undeniably Christian country rather than an ahistorical "community of communities." Yet liberal orthodoxy is still 'in denial.' Secular pluralism is consistently imposed from Northern Ireland to the Balkans."

 

Jewish re-think on multiculturalism -- http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/back1301.html.

Stephen Steinlight, former Director of National Affairs and Senior Fellow at the American Jewish Committee, examined the evolution and legacy of the high-immigration advocacy of America's Jewish organizations and concluded it might be time for a change. He wrote: "American Jewry needs to toss reticence and evasion to the winds, and bluntly and publicly pose the same questions we anxiously ponder in private." He said he had had a "conversion experience" from his previous support for policies of high immigration. {However, Stephen Steinlight's conversion did nothing to stop planned legislation outlawing 'race hate speech' and 'racist' websites proceeding on its course in both Europe and the USA.}

 

Multicultural Michigan –  http://www.vdare.com/roberts/downside.htm, 7 xi 01:

"According to the FBI and to a report compiled by the Michigan police for the state legislature, most of the Muslim terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Al Gamat are present in Michigan, which, thanks to former Republican Senator Spencer Abraham, is home to the largest Arab population outside the Middle East. The police report says, “Southeast Michigan is known as a lucrative recruiting area and potential support base for terrorist groups.” Chasing after the Taliban halfway around the world will have no effect on the “sleepers” who represent the real threat to Americans."

 

Black racism reaps its predictable reward -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_1645000/1645842.stm:

"The United Nations World Food Programme (WFP) has said it is planning a large emergency food aid operation for Zimbabwe - a country that traditionally produces a food surplus. The organisation said one of its teams had just visited the country and
found that more than half a million people were facing acute hunger."
{At the same time, Black Dictator Robert Mugabe made further assaults on the freedom of the press, detaining newspaper editors for police questioning  -- Times 9 xi 01.}

 

PeeCee crumble – Hugo YOUNG (top 'liberal '-left columnist), Guardian 6 xi 01, 'British Muslims must answer some uncomfortable questions':

"[A serious problem] arises out of pervasive statements of support for the Taliban, backed up by a lot of airy declarations by Islamic
leaders here that their religion comes before their country, together with a reluctance by British progressives to attempt a rigorous definition of the limits of multiculturalism. ….Hypocrisy is the only word to describe people who live in British freedom, yet support systems of thought which deny that freedom, or Britain, must be defended. Liberalism is betrayed by other people who put the comfort of immigrant minorities before the insistence on an irreducible list of British civic values: democracy, mutual tolerance, equality of liberty, the rule of law. Let's hear it from the mullahs, right and left." 
{Fancy a Grauniad writer moving to distinguish himself from "progressives"!}

 

The multicultural question – Michael WHARTON, 'Peter Simple' columnist, Daily Telegraph, 9 xi 01:

"….Islam, says Tony Blair with almost frantic insistence, is a religion of tolerance and peace.  All we have to do is to be peaceful  and tolerant towards Muslims ourselves. Does he protest too much?  Is this excessive fondness for Islam  liable to turn us the other way,  and so present the first real check  to  the hitherto irresistible progress of the race relations industry?  Is  the "multicultural  society "  going  to be shown up as the  sham  it   has always been? Are  50 years of systematic evasion and pretence about the  results  of mass immigration,  50 years of silence enforced by moralistic  bullying and even by law,  about to end?  Must we now face the possibility  of a million-strong fifth column - or rather army in  our midst?" {Perhaps one day the Torygraph will get round to giving the answer?}

 

The g factor still has the power to infuriate intellectuals.

After a pro-g article by fundraiser Robert Plomin, an irate reader of Times Higher was moved to write: "Who but competition judges or bookmakers preoccupy themselves with measuring this composite {i.e. the g factor}? ….the g-spotters have been at it for a century with nothing to show but test scores." (Robin WHITTY, School of Computing, South Bank University [London], 9 xi 01

Islamophile setback – Times, 9 xi 01.

When the Islamic Society of Britain (ISB) set out to name and shame top bigwigs who would not sign its 'pledge of tolerance for Islam', it could have reckoned that Rev. Blair, 'Liberal' leader Charles Kennedy and the neosocialist Daily Mirror editor would sign. But the Society must have been dismayed to have refusals from not only 'Conservative' Iain Sunken Ship but also from the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Chief Rabbi, and all four of London's main broadsheet newspapers, including the Guardian. The abstainers will have been well pleased, for it turned out that the ISB had the last year hosted meetings addressed by the Muslim Brotherhood (which provided the chief inspiration for Osama bin Laden's top sidekick, Ayman Zawuhiri).

 

Feminazie setback – Sunday Telegraph, 11 xi 01, 'Defence Secretary rejects women in frontline combat':

"Women will not be allowed to fight alongside male soldiers in front line infantry and armoured combat units. Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, is understood to have made the decision after receiving overwhelming evidence from the Chiefs of Staff that allowing women to serve in frontline fighting units would undermine the military's "operational capability." ….The evidence supplied to Mr Hoon came from the results of the Combat Effectiveness and Gender Study, which involved a series of mixed-gender trials. The tests revealed that only one per cent of female soldiers were as fit as the average male. ….[the most difficult the tasks is] the ability to carry a soldier 50 yards and simulates retrieving an injured comrade from the battlefield. None of the female soldiers was capable of passing this part of the test."

 

Multicultural madness – Times 12 xi 01.

Even as the Northern Alliance swept through Mazar-I-Sharif and Heart and reached the gates of Kabul, UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told journalists he was putting "considerable pressure" on it to adopt PeeCee. "What we want to see across Afghanistan is a broad-based government in Kabul reflecting Afghanistan's rich ethnic diversity," he mouthed.

 

Peecee Cambridge -- Times 12 xi 01.

A top Cambridge University committee is urging the adoption of "positive action" to appoint more minority staff – such as women, who currently make up 15% of its academics. Opposition to this academic cop-out may come from Lord St John of Fawsley (Emmanuel College) and John Casey (Gonville & Caius College).

 

Islamic Awareness Week in Britain passed off without the slightest sign of Muslims wishing to celebrate an Indigenous Britons Week.

 

Taliban collapse horrifies Western media

The deliriously comical collapse of the much-talked-up Taliban, who lost control of 70% of Afghanistan within a week, provoked only hand-wringing among mainstream Western journalists (e.g. New York Times, BBC). What if the Northern Alliance killed some prisoners {shock, SHOCK!}? How would the U.S. handle the oh-so-very-much-more-difficult Pashtun areas in the south?  (Just a few days before, the media didn't even think the U.S. be able to break through in the north!)  Would there be a "diplomatic nightmare" as a result of taking Kabul? What would the Pakistanis say?  (Gosh -- diplomatic problems! Things really WERE going badly, weren't they?…) Perhaps the Taliban were – as they said – "regrouping"?  Sadly, even President Bush felt obliged to tell the Northern Alliance it would be very naughty if – after waves of pounding of Taliban lines by B52s – the Alliance actually went into Kabul and did not set up the multi-ethnic government for Afghanistan of which Rev. Blair had been talking for the previous two weeks. {Hopefully, Bush and Blair were taking their instructions from the Pentagon in a breathtaking bamboozlement of  the Anglo-Saxon world's liberal-left media. Thankfully, the Taliban's Mad Mullah Omar and OK BinLiner said they would rather die than take part in the multicultural government of Afghanistan being dreamed up by Bush and Blair.}

 

New Britons back BNP -- Daily Telegraph 8 xi 01, 'Hindus turn to BNP over Muslim threat'

The British National Party found a new and unexpected source of support as Sikhs and Hindus in England met with it to discuss what to do about what they identify to be the menace from Islamic fundamentalists and fanatics. A coalition of community groups met with BNP chairman Nick  Griffin and later told the press that he understood their problems. Such new support may help the BNP to shake off its reputation for anti-Semitism, though perhaps not suspicions that the organization is actually run by MI5/Special Branch so as to provide a well-monitored outlet for national-socialist extremism.  {Against the background of modern peecee piety and stifling of free speech, Hindus and Sikhs had some reason for concern. A letter circulating among Muslims denounced other religions as "animalistic." Even Christians came specifically under attack in Bradford, where 60 Asian youths vandalized and tried to set fire to St Philip's Church and threw a rock through the window of the vicar's car. Brown Owl Lucy-Jane Marshall, 22, a member of the church,  had stones thrown at her and was called a "Christian  bitch" while parents' cars were attacked with stones and eggs (Daily Telegraph, 14 xi 01).}      

 

PeeCee beneficiary turns on "racist" Labour     

It is likely that persecution of 'witches' ended when accusations of 'witchcraft' began to be made against the top church brass – even by each other. Anyway, multicultural 'anti-racism' passed another milestone on the way to its own extinction as top British Muslim Shahid Malik, the only Muslim member of Labour's National Executive, accused Britain's Labour Government of racism (Daily Star, 16 xi 01, p. 9).  What had provoked this attack on the high priests of PeeCee who even then were bleating daily for a 'multi-ethnic' Afghanistan? Why, a British Muslim fighting for the Taliban and Bin-and-GoneLiner had been captured by the Northern Alliance and Her Majesty's Government had not lifted a finger to help him. How shocking! "It seems the Government has one rule for White people imprisoned abroad and another for Black people," whined Malik like a man determined to register a complaint with railway authorities even if the result is to stop the very gravy train on which he is riding.

 

Cognininnies celebrated

Two computibabblers at Imperial College London at last proved that intelligence is all a matter of environment. Whoopee! Such, at least, was the verdict of New Scientist (17 xi 01) on a finding by Per Bak and Joe Wakeling that computers having less memory do better at laboratory games requiring computers to select what computers have lately rejected as 'answers' to problems. That computers giving random answers are bound to do well at such a ridiculous set of tasks caused jubilation to all who wish there were no such one thing as intelligence. In reply, g-backing Professor Linda Gottfredson (U. Delaware) was allowed to point out that, in real life, higher-intelligence people do well across a wide range of tasks and that Bak and Wakeling could not have done much reading. But Gottfredson's remarks were brushed aside by the 'scientific' magazine which was chiefly worried at the time that future American use of 'bunker buster' bombs against Bin-and-GoneLiner might possibly muddy the Afghani water supply in areas of natural beauty for which the country has become so well known….

 

Multicultural Afghanistan

As the Taliban fled, losing 75% of Afghanistan in a week to the rampant Northern Alliance, British troops were sent in to hold Kabul's biggest airport and to ensure good peecee behaviour by the victors. Complaints about this policing were immediately forthcoming, so the possibility opened up that the Northern Alliance might turn on British troops and teach multicultural Mr Blair a hard lesson – supported by the Russians who had done so much to arm the Alliance with T52 tanks in previous weeks.

 

Peecee Scotland – Stephen ROBINSON, Daily Telegraph, 16 xi 01:

"….on a wide range  of issues - from banning hunting, to criminalising the  smacking of children,  to forcing childminders to  take   needless tests,  to plans to outlaw smoking in pubs - the Scottish Parliament is blazing  an authoritarian trail which makes David  Blunkett  seem  like Hayek.  Political correctness has replaced Scottish nationalism as  the dominant  impulse in Edinburgh political  circles as MSPs  meddle  ever more confidently in the lives of Scots."

 

Peecee 'journalism' – Daniel SELIGMAN, Wall Street Journal, 19 xi 01:

"The New York Times runs a long, admiring article identifying Patrick Chavis, a black doctor in Los Angeles, as evidence that affirmative action in medical schools is working the way it was meant to, by bringing good doctors into minority neighborhoods. Later, after many botched operations and a patient's death, Chavis loses his license. The Times never reports it.

    Matthew Shepard, a homosexual in Wyoming, is brutally attacked by two thugs and left to die, tied to a fence in sub-freezing temperature. The story is, quite properly, a nationwide media sensation. Not long after, a 13-year-old Arkansas boy named Jesse Dirkhising is sadistically raped for hours, then left to die, by two next-door homosexuals. The New York Times, Los Angeles
Times, CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC ignore the story entirely….."

 

Sex realism  -- Bangkok Post

Thailand's Deputy Health Minister Surapong Suebwonglee said that he would propose an amendment to the government's
Criminal Code that would impose legal and financial penalties -- including helping with the cost of an abortion -- on men who are
involved in unplanned pregnancies.

 

Paedopersecution UK -- Daily Telegraph London 22 xi 01, Letter to the editor:
{Jonathan King, the multi-talented British music impresario imprisoned for seven years for ancient episodes of harmless frottage and oral sex with co-operative 14-year old boys, made sound points about the general unfairness of English legal procedures, defects which are amplified where PeeCee comes into play. The fact that complainants can also expect a large payout from the Criminal Injuries
Board (CIB) made this trial smell even more. Actually, the CIB should be abolished because it generally introduces a potentially corrupting  element into the law, especially when large compensation can be awarded on no objective basis.}
 "I  have been  found guilty on some  charges and acquitted   on  others,
and  I cannot complain that the trials have been unfair.  But I   would
like  to  point out strands in the legal system  that  produce  serious
potential injustices.
    The  removal of the need for corroboration of witnesses means that  the
accused is effectively presumed guilty unless innocence can  be proved.
Unlike virtually, every other Western nation, Britain has no statute of
limitations  for sex offences.  One of the allegations  against me  went
back 1969.  It  virtually impossible to prove you didn't  do something,
and even  harder when so much time has elapsed.
    There  is the lack of protection from publicity for the  accused  while
the accuser is guaranteed anonymity.  This means a life and  career can
be injured, no matter what the verdict.
    In  combination,  these elements of our legal structure  are  dangerous
anomalies.
    I  wanted to bring this situation to public attention If I can  prevent
one more person suffering the ordeal that I have gone  through, it will
have been worthwhile.
    Jonathan KING, Belmarsh Prison, London SE28

 

Religious hatred and harassment – Mr Neil ANDERSON, Letter published in Times [London], 24 xi 01:

Sir,

    In the parliamentary debate on the proposed new offences of incitement to religious hatred, the Home Secretary stated that any such prosecutions would require the consent of the Attorney-General (report, November 20; see also letter, November 19).
    But his proposals also include the creation of offences of religiously aggrravated harassment which can be brought by means of private prosection. Harassment is a subjective and unpredictable allegation and the creation of religiously aggravated harassment offences will provide a mechanism for the bringing of prosecutions by evrery religious extremist or cult which feels it has somehow been "harassed."

    These potentially dangerous proposals could affect anyone in the country with a religious or anti-religious poin to view.They should certainly not be rushed through Parliament simply "tagged on" to an anti-terrorism Act."

    Yours faithfully, Neil ADDISON (Author, Harassment Law and Practice, Blackstone Press, 1998), New Bailey Chambers, Liverpool.

 

Ban on criticizing religion denounced – columnist Michael GOVE, Times, 27 xi 01:

"There is no doubt that [UK Home Secretary David Blunkett] errs in his proposals to make incitement to religious hatred a new criminal offence {carrying a maximum penalty of seven years imprisonment}. ….The bizarre doctrines of L. Ron Hubbard's creation, Scientology, would be protected while the artistic efforts of a genius such as Salman Rushdie would be open to prosecution. How can such a law be defended? ….This Bill is a monstrosity. ….The Lordsshould tell Mr Blunkett that [it] is only fit for the fire." {To which a Times leader added: "The proposal to expand the crime of incitement to race hatred so that it covers religious belief should not become law."}

 

E.U. PeeCee – Letter in Times 27 xi 01:

Britain and Europe
FROM LORD PEARSON OF RANNOCH
Sir, The results of our subservience to Brussels and Strasbourg become clearer by the day. On the one hand, Strasbourg dictates that the British Government could not extradite Osama bin Laden to stand trial in the United States unless the Americans promised not to execute him. On the other hand, thanks to the European Union's new directive on arrest warrants, British subjects face the prospect of being extradited from this country, on the say-so of a Belgian magistrate, to be tried in Brussels without the benefit of habeas corpus or a jury, for the crime of "xenophobia". The Government is unable to define this, but no doubt the European Court of Justice will soon do that for us.
Yours faithfully,
PEARSON of RANNOCH
(Co-founder, Global Britain),
House of Lords, November 22.

 

End nigh for affirmative racism? – Tallahassee Democrat, 29 xi 01:
'For affirmative action, the end is drawing near'
, by Bill Cotterell.
"….The tide is running strongly against affirmative action. It loses at the polls - California and Washington state, for instance - and the courts have been, at best, highly skeptical of minority-preference programs. The University of Florida decided last summer to stop awarding race-based scholarships, despite a decline in black freshman enrollment…."

 

E.U. PeeCee – 'EU considers plans to outlaw racism', by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard (in Brussels), Daily Telegraph 29 xi 01:
RACISM and xenophobia would become serious crimes in Britain for the first time, carrying a prison sentence of two years or more, under new
proposals put forward by Brussels yesterday.
    Holocaust denial or "trivialisation" of Nazi atrocities would be banned, along with and participation in any group that promotes race hate.
    The plans, drafted by the European Commission, define racism and xenophobia as aversion to individuals based on "race, colour, descent,
religion or belief, national or ethnic origin".
    Ordinary crimes would carry heavier penalities if they are motivated in any way by racism or xenophobia, or if the culprit is carrying out
"professional activity", such as a police officer. Some of the crimes listed are, broadly speaking, offences under British law already, such
as public incitement to violence.
    But the list also a covers a wide range of activities that sometimes fall into the sphere of protected political speech, such as "public
insults" of minority groups, "public condoning of war crimes", and "public dissemination of tracts, pictures, or other material containing
expressions of racism of xenophobia" - including material posted on far-Right internet websites.
    It was not clear yesterday how the law would affect radical Islamic groups that openly promote anti-Semitic and anti-Christian views.
    Nor was it clear how it would apply to political parties opposed to mass immigration, such as Austria's Freedom Party, Belgium's Vlaams Blok, and
the Danish People's Party, all of which have become serious political forces.
    The law could potentially cover many stand-up comedians, and even Anne Robinson, who, during an appearance on BBC television this year,
described the Welsh as "irritating".
    The proposals, which will require the unanimous backing of all 15 states, are aimed at ending the patchwork of different laws across the
European Union and establishing a common definition that can be used by all judges. The commission appears to have adopted the most restrictive
code - Germany's - as the basis for the rest of the EU.
    Leonello Gabrici, the Commission's judicial spokesman, denied that there was any intention of curbing political expression. "This totally
respects free speech. It will be up to judges to decide where the balance lies" he said.
    The United Kingdom Independence Party said yesterday that it could be targeted by the new rules, noting that the Oxford English Dictionary
definition of xenophobia is "a morbid fear of foreigners or foreign countries".
    Nigel Farage MEP, the party's chairman, said: "I'm morbidly xenophobic about this new country called the European Union, so if that is covered
by this law then I'm most certainly xenophobic and I could be extradited anywhere. So I'm going to make sure my overnight bag is packed and
ready."

 

 

It is fitting that this website's recent extended coverage of national and international news since 9/11 should finish with warnings about new UK Government plans to penalize though and speech. Although the Western military effort in Arabistan  apparently made reasonable progress, Britain prepared to allow criticism of religions and races to be met with seven-year prison sentences – and even fast track deportation of UK citizens to face trials in Euroland where many countries already interpret race realism as incitement to race hatred. Abroad, Britain planned to foist a multicultural government on Afghanistan, backed by 6,000 British troops, even though Afghan tribesmen of the 'Northern Alliance' gave Rev. Blair a bloody nose by rubbishing the scheme.

 

On a happier note, I was able to email supporters as follows:

This is just to let you know that, thanks to the support of the Woodhill Foundation, I will be attending the forthcoming conference in Cleveland, Ohio, of the International Society for Intelligence Research. I will be delivering the Brand, Constales and Kane paper, 'Why ignore 'g'?'* (on why psychologists and philosophers -- with the exception of Plato -- have neglected the 'general intelligence' factor). Other speakers at the three-day conference will be Nathan Brody, Douglas Detterman, Linda Gottfredson, Earl Hunt, Arthur Jensen, John Loehlin, David Lubinski, Phil Rushton and Robert Sternberg. 

    Thanks to 'anti-racist', 'liberal'-left intimidation of British bodies that have wanted me to address them, and the cowardice of bodies liked the International Society for the Study of Individual Differences, it is now almost five years since I spoke in public (at the University of Cambridge, in January 1997). I am most grateful to all those** who have made my academic survival and rehabilitation possible -- and especially to psychologist Harrison Kane  whose exciting new data on the 'g' factor and race realist Henry Garrett's 'differentiation hypothesis' will be the special focus of my talk in Cleveland.

*  Abstract attached {see ' Why ignore the g factor? -- Historical considerations' above at this website}

** For lists of outstanding supporters from the beginning of Edinburgh LUniversity's attack on me, see the New Year and Birthday Honours Lists in 'The g Factor NewsLetter' for January and June, 1997 (http://www.webcom.com/zurcher/thegfactor/archive.html).

 

On a more personal note, my wife Pearl and I wrote to Chelsea Clinton at University College, Oxford, to congratulate her on standing up to peaceniks in academia of whom she had complained to the British press. We enclosed a contribution towards buying Newcastle Brown Ale for her supporters at The Queen's College – just across the High Street from her and known for its robust 'northern' loyalties, its love of wild boar hunting and for holding out against feminism longer than all other Oxford colleges. (Chelsea wrote a nice reply, though very properly saying passed the donation on to the Red Cross.)

For a fine review of the long-term damage 9/11 has hopefully done to multiculturalism and kindred causes of the chattering classes, see John LEO, 'Our shattered chatterers', Jewish World Review, 27 xi 01.

 

In December, evidence emerged of increasing race realism in New Labour as blind UK Home Secretary David Blunkett announced that immigrants to Yukay really should make some effort to learn English (e.g. Daily Telegraph, 10 xii, p. 1). Admittedly, it remained to be seen whether this announcement would be worth any more than Mr Blair's 1996 announcement that he favoured 'fast track learning' in schools. In fact, Britain's young Muslim rioters of 2000 were second- or third-generation migrants for whom knowledge of English could not have been a great problem and Britain's Nationality Act of 1981 already requires new immigrants to have a "sufficient" knowledge of English, Welsh or Gaelic; but Mr Blunkett's remarks looked useful enough for antagonizing the Race Relations industry. Certainly they upset the tubby London-based Pakistani columnist, Yasmin Alibhai Brown*: she had published an appropriately titled pamphlet, After MultiCulturalism, but was shocked to infer (gratuitously) from Mr Blunkett that quiet Asian youths might have to learn to drink beer like British football hooligans. Downing Street came to Mr Blunkett's defence, with the official spokesman for Rev. Blair saying (Times 11 xii, p. 1): "I don't think it's right to have some sort of self-imposed censorship on the grounds of political correctness because we are talking about race." TopTimes columnist Libby Purves added: "[Mr Blunkett's] outburst is quite useful. The pussyfooting fake reverence for immigrant "cultures" has done damage to British life." Blunkett also earned well-deserved brownie points by abandoning his attempt to legislate against 'incitement to religious hatred' – though 'incitement to race hatred' remains unnecessarily and dangerously criminalized. But he will be in for trouble if he attempts to introduce race integration by the compulsory bussing that proved so unacceptable in the USA; and any idea that mixing children in determinedly 'multicultural' schools  will  produce greater  "interracial  understanding"  is  quite  laughable. On 8 December, the Daily Telegraph reported from a multicultural London school where a Somali boy, aged 15 was knifed to death by a Black youth in a school row over UKP10.
    Encouragingly, it emerged that New Labour's School Standards Minister, Stephen Timms, had been given half a million pounds to bring back the grammar schools – or at least to support those that would develop "partnerships" with nearby comprehensive schools. This was not a lot of money and the project may just be an obfuscatory Blairism. But perhaps NuLabour, in its backside-covering way, is moving towards a little of the once-promised fast track learning.

    I attended and addressed the 2nd Annual Conference of the International Society for Intelligence Research – in Cleveland, Ohio. The more striking claims made to the Conference were that Black African IQ is 70 (Phil Rushton – see above) and that the g factor is twice as important in the bottom half of the IQ range and thus largely 'invisible' to intellectuals who decline to work with people below IQ 100 (Brand, Constales & Kane – see above).  These claims were well received by conferencers (who included Arthur Jensen and Linda Gottfredson), though further clarification was sought by such critics of hereditary and unitary g as Earl Hunt, Nathan Brody and Joseph Fagan. A full report was to be published in the magazine American Renaissance (print edition, 10 i 02; Director's Cut follows).


THE IQ WARS

 

 

Hairy Horrors to beat Balded Behemoths in extra time

 

Pro-IQ warriors may just be about to win their battle
with environmentalists and kindred 'ignoracists.'

 

 

BY Chris Brand[1]

 

 

 

Is the study of general intelligence (g) now on its last legs? Has Political Correctness (PeeCee) finally suppressed all study, nay, all mention of IQ and the g factor and of the deep-seated connections of these variables with race?

 

It would be easy to think so.

 

In December 2001, Cleveland (Ohio) hosted many of the stars of modern intelligence research – including such horrors, oops, martyrs to the IQ cause as Emeritus Professor Art Jensen, Canada's Phil Rushton (University of Western Ontario), Linda Gottfredson (University of Delaware) and myself (sacked by Edinburgh University in 1997 for saying too much about the g factor, race, sex, feminism, unwed mothers and paedohysteria [see American Renaissance, July 1996]). Somewhat to the martyrs' surprise, all of us still had our own hair; and our romantic partners averaged out so young and/or rich as to qualify us as babe baggers (see McDougall Newsletters, passim). Our opponents came too: balded behemoths like Profs Earl 'Buz' Hunt (University of Washington), Nathan Brody (Wesleyan University) and Joseph Fagan (Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland) lumbered into action to face hard pitching at the 2nd Annual Conference of the International Society for Intelligence Research (ISIR). Adding novelty to the confrontation, a pair of 'ethically' inspired psychologists, one vertically and one sartorially challenged (in white trousers), turned up from nearby Indiana University to lament the 'insensitivity' of IQ testers and to deplore the absence from the conference of "people of colour." -- In fact, three Asian Americans and a Hispanic were among the forty authors whose papers were read to ISIR in the now customary non-elitist 20-minute digests which allow almost everyone at a conference to be a speaker; but no Blacks had applied.

 

Soon the sparks began to fly. Claims for new 'multiple intelligence' tests were said to be essentially fraudulent. (Such tests and indeed the 'intelligences' themselves are invented at colossal expense in Harvard and Yale in the hope of dispensing with the political embarrassment of unitary g and its persistent Black-White difference.) A splendid one-eyed lawyer from Akron (Ohio) explained how he had several times had 'evidence' from those tests thrown out of US courtrooms. From IQ testing in one of Africa's two best universities, Witwatersrand, with an anti-apartheid activist as his co-author, Phil Rushton shocked the behemoths with his finding that the top-flight Black African students had a mean IQ of only 84 – yielding an estimate of only 70 as the mean for the full range of Black Africans. Myself, I explained that population differences in g were apparent to Plato, who may have derived his understanding of the range of human nature from observations made as a slave and from what seems -- in the Symposium -- to have been his experience of late-night paedophilic drinking parties. Unfortunately, few Western philosophers followed Plato's lead of mixing widely – their lack of sexual interest actually leaving 50% of them unmarried. Thus, after Plato, it was more than two thousand years before g and eugenics were discussed articulately and systematically.

 

 Conference organizer Douglas Detterman (Case Western Reserve) and I both talked of how and why variations in g are what matter among ordinary people, for all that high-IQ people are typically found to have extra cognitive specialisms (such as in verbal, mathematical, spatial and memory abilities). Such relatively infrequent cognitive discrepancies impress left-wing theorists who don't get out much. The exotic specialisms of high-IQ folk as they use their IQ-surpluses are ludicrously taken to mean that intelligence is seriously 'multiple' and that people are all wondrously equalized by each being good at something. Another paper summarized at the conference claimed that – as my Edinburgh colleagues and  I have said since 1977 (following Hans Eysenck, but also from our own 'inspection time' data) – "rapid information processing is the basic mechanism underlying g" (Tim Bates, Macquarie University). Another result concerned "the importance of the role of processing speed and IQ in predicting reading comprehension" (Rolando Tiu et al., Case Western Reserve). Altogether, the g factor was having a field day.

 

Aghast, the behemoths resorted to every trick in the book, putting up a smokescreen of methodological and ad hoc objections. Naturally, they demanded recounts and replays down to the last dimpled chad. In desperation, they reanalyzed data from Allied-occupied Germany of 1950 to applaud the near-normal IQs of the out-of-wedlock children of Black US military personnel by local girls around US Army bases – forgetting both that US soldiery of that time were all selected to have IQs above 80 and that girls brought up in Hitler's Germany wanted as partners men with stripes on their shoulders and cigarette cartons in their jeeps, not Black grunts of uncertain means and worrisome penile girth.

 

Trying again, the critics of g told travellers' tales (brought from another conference in Sydney, Workers' Paradise) of the 'Abecedarian' Head Start project in Carolina producing IQ gains by age 21 – albeit only of 4 IQ points after a twenty-year expenditure of $11,000 annually on each 'disadvantaged' participant, and achieving no reduction in crime rate or welfare dependency (as compared to control subjects). One behemoth even promised to abolish the Black-White difference by teaching Black testees the right answers on vocabulary tests: similar 'opportunities for exposure' provided to White testees produce no gains (because Whites know the answers already), so such 'opportunity-giving' would plainly rectify the elemental inequalities delivered by traditional testing methods…. (The same officially equality-loving baldy introduced a novelty to the conference: a splendid blonde who did nothing but wiggle and change his overhead transparencies for him – a model to all chauvinist conferencers of the future!)

 

Yet though there were sparks, no fire ever caught hold among the "grey and tepid dons, smelling of water biscuits" (as the Welsh poet, Dylan Thomas, once described the academic breed). Despite the liveliness of occasional exchanges, this parade of stars of the IQ firmament was a dimmed-down affair. No university could be found to host the scholars who had jetted in from places as far away as Australia, Austria, Germany and California. Thus the venue was a Holiday Inn where the too-thin room dividers meant that the dismal number of twenty ISIR conferencers attending the typical session sometimes had to listen to three lectures simultaneously -- while the room temperature swung from Arctic to Tropical despite the steady stream of Black heating engineers sent to fix the problem. Worse, the psychology experts were disinclined to acknowledge each other's brilliance. Applause for the speakers (whether they were race realist or peecee) was perfunctory; and most conferencers avoided expression of any commitment which might have startled a fly. Asked to comment on Rushton's South African breakthrough, one of the brightest students at the conference said first that Rushton 'should have set aside his obsession with head size' – when in fact that subject had not come up in Rushton's talk; and secondly that he, the student, 'had always thought African IQ to be pretty low, so Rushton need not have gone to the rather boring trouble of proving the point.' Trying to find praise for Rushton's empirical commitment and application was like trying to get some taste from a Budweiser.[2] Even though the unctuous Indiana 'ethicists' claimed to "come as friends to the IQ community," they absented themselves when Professor Rushton described the ultra-sensitive psychometric testing procedures at Witwatersrand—so much did they prefer their own stereotypes to reality. The press also stayed away, for denial is the only way the New York Times can handle the entirely robust and demonstrable phenomenon of IQ.

 

The ignoracism (to use the term of the late psychometric guru, Raymond Cattell) that generally characterizes the critics of IQ extended even into the hallowed conference-and-coffee room where debate was meant to happen. Asked their opinions on the simplest questions about race and IQ, conferencers would stare resolutely into the middle distance, hoping for a call that would end the coffee break and let them scamper back to their seats. Nor could conferencers discuss the rise of PeeCee in the universities and the reduction of political conservatives to being 5% of faculty members in America. Thus PeeCee has arguably triumphed, for obtaining such silence is that movement's chief objective.

 

Fortunately, the greybeards who slugged out what the fainthearted audience declared a stalemate were not the whole of the story. In Cleveland, there were merciful signs of a younger generation bringing reinforcement to the hereditarians of the London School. From Holland, a young researcher arrived with news of a South Asian IQ of less than 90 – for which finding this former liberal had endured press denunciations comparing him to 'the fascist Brand in Scotland.' In Delaware, a young engineer had converted to psychology so as to study the possibility that the 'Flynn Effect' (of rising IQ scores in the 20th century) had been due not to teachers, social workers or other do-gooders but simply to increased geographical mobility with resultant outbreeding and hybrid vigour as recessive genes were smothered. From Nevada, my own young colleague, Harrison Kane, sent in new data attesting the overwhelming importance of the g factor in accounting for mental ability variations in 6,000 Americans – a finding also made by Dasen Luo, an Indiana colleague of Douglas Detterman's sizeable Cleveland team. A convert from a Sydney MA course in Commerce proposed a biological theory of intelligence as "neural plasticity in competitive networks," which is apparently "a general mechanism that adapts the connections in response to the environment." The full paper by the blond-haired, blue-eyed and designer-stubbled Dennis Garlick was scheduled to appear at any moment in psychology's most prestigious journal, Psychological Review, so the baldies could not sniff openly at this.

 

Remarkably, all these young workers had been driven forwards by unique experiences. In two cases, they had been impressed by the hounding they had received once their names had been linked to my own. In one case, the young man had identical twin sisters and also a third, non-twin sister enabling the twins' extensive psychological similarities to stand out. A fourth young researcher had grown up as the only child of a bright, successful and self-made engineer and found himself seriously shocked when, at age five, he had hit the state schools of Australia's Deep North. The current generation of young IQ scholars do not enter the field through ordinary academic channels. One might have thought that psychology would by now be a science or at least an academic subject in which argument and non-anecdotal evidence would be central. Alas, because the New Left's thought police are everywhere – as the present conferencers plainly believed – there is little space, let alone any state funding, for realistic psychology. Individual initiative now counts for a lot.

 

Perhaps it was ever thus. I, myself, arrived at hereditarian views around 1965 following my special childhood experience of having been adopted (very happily, in fact). Thus I found myself amazed at the environmentalism which, in the English  maximum security prison (for personality-disordered criminals) where I first worked as a psychologist, invariably blamed the problems of any adoptive prisoners quite uncritically on their adoption. Arthur Jensen, likewise, made a unusual career move to work with Hans Eysenck, the arch-critic of the very projective (e.g. inkblot) tests in which Jensen himself was expert; and the Cleveland conferencers were reminded of the continuing scholarly inquisitiveness of this sprightly 77-year-old as a discussant – an alertness likely to continue to give service to psychology thanks to a record of longevity in the Jensen family. Long live individual experience and the powerful curiosity, questioning and rebellion which it encourages! Personal curiosity, uppitiness and oddity now provide the last hope that academic psychology will survive the battering it has had from the tidal waves of the West's insurgent religion of PeeCee.[3]

 

FINIS

 

An edited version of this report was published in the print version of American Renaissance (ed. Jared Taylor) in January 2002, together with a photo of Chris Brand.


 

    Without any protest from Western liberal-leftists, Malaysia announced it would flog with a rattan cane all illegal immigrants it discovered. (Malaysia, one of the richest countries in the region, is a  popular destination  for  illegal  immigrants from poorer nations such as Indonesia, the  Philippines and  Bangladesh.  Many  take low-paid construction jobs or work in plantations.)
    Researching child sex killers, Southampton University researchers found that 80% were family affairs, with 55% of the murderers being mentally disturbed (http://education.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4322142,00.html). Of the other 20% of cases, half involved intropunitive men who had themselves
been abused themselves as children and showed deep remorse and high suicide rates afterwards; the other half involved men who were markedly more generally criminal and extrapunitive, having no tendency to suicide. It was remarkable that research was continuing in an area of such high risk for researchers – a great tribute to the courage of Professor Christopher Bagley who was one of the six UK academics to support me openly at the time of my Tribunal and Appeal in Edinburgh University.

    A hole remained knocked in paedohysteria as the Britain's Broadcasting Standards Commission declined to condemn Channel  4s ' 'Brass Eye' programme for lampooning politicians who had eagerly agreed to make anti-paedophilic propaganda (July, 2001). (The Labour MPs Syd Rapson and Barbara Follett had gone on the programme issuing warnings to children about a "toxic paedophile gas that can be emitted from your computer" and about a magic tee-shirt which enabled paedophiles to describe themselves as children.) Another anti-paedohysterical contribution came from a Times editorial and a follow-up article by ex-Marxist columnist Mick Hulme: these articles both insisted on distinguishing between normal paedophilia and the "predatory paedophilia" which is so much rarer but is used by the tabloids and feminazies to maintain widespread fear and despondency about men.  However, less happily, PeeCee continued to reign supreme in St Petersburg, Florida, where the police chief was dismissed after an 'insensitive' and inappropriate remark. Explaining how a Black arrestee had been dragged out of a car, the top cop said "It may take more than one officer to get a subject under control, especially if that person is acting like an orangutan" and was promptly fired by the mayor (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/011219/80/cm504.html).

    A feminazie social psychologist was found to have faked her data at Harvard in an effort to show how women misguidedly adapted themselves to the wishes their patriarchal superiors (http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2001/1219/2).  Karen Ruggiero, who had a Ph.D. from McGill University, had been prominent in an emerging field called "the psychology of legitimacy," in which scientists examine how and why the underdogs in social hierarchies adapt to, and even endorse, the systems of which they are a part. She was banned from receiving further Federal research funding and resigned her position at the University of Texas. At the same time, another left-feminist fraudster, Margaret Mead, who had claimed to discover 'sexual liberation' among girls in Samoa of 1930 had an exhibition dedicated to her in Washington. The seminal work of lusty lesbian Mead had been exposed as gravely flawed in the 1980's (http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20011215/us/margaret_mead_1.html).
     
A slow-down in mass third-world immigration to the USA was surprisingly urged in New York Review of Books by the top liberal-left sociologist, Christopher Jencks (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/14942). Worried that the USA would eventually become like Latin America (with its immense social divisions, inequalities and lack of support for the welfare state) Jencks concluded:
"America's current immigration policy is a vast social experiment of the kind that Republicans normally detest. It involves two gambles. First, we are betting that rapid population growth will have no significant adverse effect on the quality of our descendants' lives. Second, we are betting that we can admit millions of unskilled immigrants to do our dirty work without creating a second generation whose members will have the same problems as the children of the American-born workers who do such jobs. The United States may be able to double its population without lowering the quality of its citizens' lives, but the odds of its doing so would surely be better if it proceeded more slowly. The American labor force may also be able to assimilate the children of unskilled Mexicans, but again prudence suggests that we proceed slowly until we know more about how today's Mexican-American children fare as adults. Finally, while the percentage of second-generation Latinos who have real difficulty understanding, speaking, and writing English may not be high, prudence suggests that we ought to be more certain about this before we commit ourselves to rapid growth in the Spanish-speaking population, since those who don't learn English will not be able to make much progress in the larger society. The Bush administration does not appear to be worried about any of these risks…." {Another important advocate of restricting immigration had been the Jewish politician Stephen Steinlight. Explaining his change of heart (about his previous agitation for more immigration) to his fellow Jews, he wrote ('The Jewish Stake In America’s Changing Demography: Reconsidering A Misguided Immigration Policy', Center for Immigration Studies Backgrounder, Washington: DC, October 2001): "[We must] stop censoring ourselves for fear of offending the entirely imaginary arbiters of civic virtue, and bluntly and publicly pose the same questions we anxiously ponder in private.  The community should stop letting the thought police of the more extreme incarnations of multiculturalism squelch it… By liberating ourselves from these inhibitions we will unavoidably profane the altars of some of our own politically correct household gods… But we should ask the hard questions no matter what, recognizing that only straight talk will get us anywhere."}

 

 

*  A fine reply to 'Miss' Brown was sent by McDNL's London Correspondent:


                                                  13 xii 01

          Yasmin Alibhai-Brown
          c/o The Independent


          Dear Miss Alibhai-Brown,

          I have read your piece in the Independent (10/12/01) entitled
          "Mr  Blunkett has insulted us all".   It would be more  aptly
          entitled  "Yasmin  Alibhai-Brown  insults  the  British  once
          again"  or,  perhaps more accurately,  "Yasmin  Alibhai-Brown
          insults the English once again."

          You obviously do not realise it,  but your  article is deeply
          racist,  both in general tone and in its particular  content.
          From  beginning to end you carp about Britain and its  native
          people. You come up with abusive racial stereotyping  such as
          "I  feel  no obligation to bring my daughter and  son  up  to
          drink  themselves  to death in a pub for a laugh",  you  show
          your  visceral  anti-white  racist mentality   with  "I  will
          not...go  into turmoil every time a white Briton is shown  in
          some  foreign prison"  (a non-racist would simply  have  said
          Briton)  and you yearn for  people to be  cabinet  ministers,
          ambassadors  and  EU commissioners simply  because  they  are
          black or Asian. 

          What  would  you say if a white journalist wrote "I  feel  no
          obligation to bring up my daughter and son as a crack  dealer
          or pimp"?  How would you respond to a white journalist saying
          he  would not go into a turmoil every time a black Briton  is
          shown  in  some foreign prison"?  What would you think  of  a
          white  journalist  who wanted people in jobs  simply  because
          they were white?    Well,  I think we all know the answer  to
          those questions:  you would be screaming "racist" for all you
          are worth.

          But  those type of casual insults are not the end of it.  You
          speak of Britain's "destructive historical role"  without any
          justification of the statement.  Well,  exactly what was that
          destructive role, Miss A-B?   The industrial revolution?  The
          development of parliamentary government?  The development  of
          the  idea  of personal freedom?  The originator  of  all  the
          values  which  are  the  basis of  the   "human  rights"  you
          supposedly hold dear?

          Or is it that your view of Britain is simply coloured by  the
          Empire?  Well, I am not one of Nature's imperialists,   but I
          will  say  that if you had to be an unwilling  member  of  an
          Empire,  you would have been  a fool to have chosen any other
          than the British,  which, particularly in its last 100 years,
          was  driven  by  public policy  which  increasingly  put  the
          interests of the indigenous populations of the Empire  before
          those    of    the    imperial    power.     Nor    is    the
          imperial/non-imperial state a neat dichotomy. Most peoples at
          most times have been ruled by elites who have had nothing but
          contempt for the masses.  That being so,  it really does  not
          make  much  difference if a ruler is an imperial power  or  a
          local  warlord,  except that the imperial power may often  be
          more reasonable in its general behaviour.

          Your most telling passage is " If this is my country,  and it
          is,  I  will  criticise what I believe to  be  wrong,  reject
          "norms"  that I find abhorrent, take what I admire, and spend
          my  life  helping to make a more inclusive  and  dynamic  new
          nation,  instead of making do with the decayed remnants of  a
          long gone past".  That displays a childlike egotism.  You are
          saying "I will do what ever I want and the world will be made
          in my image." You wish in short to destroy the native culture
          and history  and substitute your own.  Well, it may come as a
          surprise to you,  Miss A-B,  but the English rather object to
          that.

          You  say  in  your  article that you  get  abuse  from  white
          indigenous people (hint: we are called the English) every day
          of your life.  Well,  I doubt whether many ordinary blacks or
          Asians would claim that. Does it ever vaguely cross your mind
          that   you    receive  such  frequent  abuse    because   you
          incessantly   incontinently insult and abuse the English?  If
          not, I suggest you let it do so.

          It  is not that you  do not wish to be English,  you  do  not
          even  wish to be British really,  viz:  "What's  more,  seven
          years  ago,  I finally decided that this place was my  place,
          and  that  was because I had a daughter whose father  was  of
          these  islands.  This did not make me less  black,  Asian  or
          Muslims  -  those  identities  are  in  my  blood,  thick  an
          forever." You see, you want to have your racial cake and eat.
          You want to enjoy all the benefits of living in a rich,  safe
          tolerant country such as Britain,  whilst standing aside from
          the society.

          You celebrate the fact that your identities as a black, Asian
          or  Muslim  are so  strong.  Does not occur to you  that  the
          Englishman's identity is just as set as yours?  It is,  I  do
          assure  you.  You will doubtless be scoffing in your mind  at
          the idea of Englishness because you have been brainwashed  to
          believe it either does not exist or is rapidly declining.  To
          disabuse yourself of that view,   I suggest you read "What is
          Albion" which I send by separate email.

          You  claim  that   blacks  and  Asians  are  at  disadvantage
          generally  in Britain.  Well,  in terms of public policy  the
          reverse  is true.  Blacks and Asians are frequently put in  a
          privileged  position.  For example,  there are more  than  80
          Housing Associations which will accept only non-white tenants
          (see  separate email) and  no  non-white has been  prosecuted
          under  the  1976 RRA (despite the  persistent  incitement  to
          violence  offered  by Muslims). Moreover,  where  Asians  are
          over-represented  (in  proportion  to their  numbers  in  the
          general  population)   in prestige jobs,  eg  the  legal  and
          medical  professions,  you happily accept  that  without  any
          complaint.  Why  do you never point out  instances  of  white
          disadvantage Miss A-B?

          Both  the way you behave  and the reaction you  provoke  from
          the  English  is easily explicable as biological   phenomena.
          Any  organism  will  attempt to conquer  new  territory.  Any
          organism  already in the territory will resist the  conquest.
          As someone who see herself as an alien intrusion into Britain
          (because  that whether you know it or not is what you  think)
          you  naturally wish to weaken the native culture  and  weaken
          its  people.  To do that you  both support  and  promote  the
          immigration  of as many others from your own  racial/cultural
          group  as  possible into Britain,  whilst   denigrating   the
          native  culture  with  the view to replacing it  with  a  new
          non-Native  cultural melange.  The native  population,  quite
          naturally, resists this attempt to severely disadvantage them
          at best and destroy them as a dominant group at worst.  
          
          You,  Miss  A-B,  have  been lulled into  a  false  sense  of
          security  by living too long amongst white liberals who  have
          allowed  you to behave as you want and praised  your  abusive
          behaviour  towards  their own people and  society.  You  have
          never  really had to argue your case.  You simply repeat,  in
          the  manner  of a preacher,  a set of  assertions  which  are
          rarely  if  ever challenged publicly because  white  liberals
          ensure  through their control of the media and politics  that
          those  who  would  offer the challenge  are  excluded.   (The
          quality  of your "argument"  is  exemplified by  your   boast
          that you speak good English, better than that of your English
          husband you say,  or rather claim he says.  You must be  very
          naive  if  you honestly imagine that a husband is a  reliable
          guide  to  a wife's qualities in such circumstances.  Do  you
          imagine that he would tell you that you were inarticulate  or
          clumsy in your speech if that was the case?) 

          You claim to be an eloquent and graceful speaker (hint:  such
          boasting is thought to be rather bad form here). Well, having
          heard you on a few occasions on BBC Radio,  I certainly would
          not describe  you as either. Indeed, far from being graceful,
          you  have  been  invariably shrill.  You may  think  you  are
          articulate,  but  all  I hear when you speak  is  the  fluent
          recitation of received opinion and well rehearsed statements.
          When you are asked to think on your feet, you fail miserably.
          Fluency  in such circumstances  is not true  articulacy,  any
          more than an actor saying his lines is.  Articulacy  requires
          intelligent thought before utterance, not the mere recitation
          of familiar words and thoughts. 
          
          Perhaps  the scales are beginning to fall from your  eyes  as
          far as our white liberal friends are concerned.  The  mistake
          you have made is to assume that they actually believed in the
          values they espoused.  In fact, elites only have one  settled
          principle,  Miss  A-B - the maintenance of  their  power  and
          privilege.  Have you  never wondered why all these people who
          extolled  multiculturalism  took  such  care  to  avoid   the
          consequences of mass immigration themselves by living in very
          white  areas  or  white  enclaves  within  immigrant   areas?
          Remember  how  Blair  overturned one of the  scared  cows  of
          Labour  policy,  comprehensive  education,  simply  to  avoid
          sending  his  children to Islington  schools?   These  people
          would not even inconvenience themselves, let alone go to  the
          stake for blacks and Asians.

          Some  final thoughts. In 1920 the census of the Indian Empire
          (which included latterday Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma) was
          some 400 million.  The white population was a mere   150,000,
          0.0375% of the population. An equivalent percentage of blacks
          and Asians in present day Britain would mean that their total
          population would be less than 25,000. In fact,  the black and
          Asian  population  of Britain is probably around 8%  (it  was
          officially 5.5% at the last census in 1991). If an equivalent
          percentage of whites were resident in India they would form a
          group   of  80  million.  That gives you  some  idea  of  the
          magnitude of the immigration which the British (and primarily
          the English) have had to accommodate. What do you think would
          be  the response in India if 80 million whites  attempted  to
          settle there?  Tolerance?  Acceptance? An elite dedicated  to
          their interests? I rather think not.

          Any  minority anywhere,  Miss A-B, must expect to suffer  the
          hostility of the majority. The wise thing for any minority is
          to be quiescent.

          Yours sincerely,  Robert Henderson.

 

 

The William McDougall NewsLetter wishes a MERRY CHRISTMAS to all readers who recall it fondly and await its return. Relevant entertainment this year can be had from the race-realist film 'The Lord of the Rings' in which Middle Earth is inhabited by races of creatures deeply marked off from one another by language, physical appearance, and behaviour. (Author J.R.R.Tolkien himself had, he said, "a private grudge" against Hitler for "ruining, perverting, misapplying and making forever accursed that noble northern spirit, a supreme contribution to Europe, which I have ever loved and tried to present in its true light" (Edward Rothstein, New York Times 15 xii 01).) Or, if you can't see the limited, lovable and loyal Hobbits versus the ugly, disgusting, brutal and violent Orcs, then try 'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' where Harry's magical elite (with its inherited powers) invariably trounces the hapless, fat, brutal and stupid Dursleys. For a fuller menu of race-realist entertainment, just pop down memory lane to McDNL's First Christmas.

 

A NEW YEAR PREDICTION from McDNL's London Correspondent, made 22 xii 01 in a letter to Black Labour MP Diane Abbott --
"The  taboo  on speaking  and writing honestly about race having been  broken by [UK Home Secretary] Blunkett, the movement towards race realism will continue apace, doubtless wrapped in the cloying platitudes of  the white liberal bigot elite, but continue it will. And it will be  a rapid change, because race and ethnicity go to the very heart of human existence."

 

A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR (responding to the finding that the male:female sex ratio in New York has now fallen to 87:100 –

"As liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for the West as it commits suicide, so is liberalism's feminist subset a philosophy of consolation for women as their real power (/value) in society continues to decline."

 

 

2002 continues at http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/index3b.htm

2003 continues at http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/index3c.htm

2004 continues at http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk/index3d.htm

 

 

 


To comment on material at this website, or to ask for Internet posting of particular documents, please e-mail cbrand@cycad.com or brand@crispian.demon.co.uk.

Click here for Personality Scales for yourself or friends

Click here for LATEST NEWS (McDougall NewsLetter)

For back issues of McDougall NewsLetter, email cbrand@cycad.com.

Click here for LATEST Diary entries

Click here to go to Chris Brand's homepage

 

FOR SOME TEN RECENT PUBLIC BOOK REVIEWS BY BRAND
DEALING WITH INTELLIGENCE, EDUCATION, EUGENICS AND RACE

GO TO Amazon Books (Brand) AND Heredity 2003.

FOR THREE RECENT ARTICLES, GO TO The Occidental Quarterly.
CLICK HERE FOR PROOFREADING AND TRANSLATION SERVICES

 

First published on the Web: viii 1997
Last substantial revision: vi 2003
Last modified: 6 xi 2004



[1]   NOTE ABOUT THE AUTHOR

In April, 1996, Chris Brand's book, The g Factor: General Intelligence and Its Implications was withdrawn from bookstores by its 'publisher' Wiley (New York) after Brand had agreed that he was what the left had long called a 'scientific racist.' Edinburgh University, where he had worked as an academic psychologist for a quarter of a century, promptly mounted a serious of investigations, inquiries and tribunals – all denounced by Brand on the Internet but leading in August, 1997, to Brand's dismissal. Brand subsequently waited at tables for his only reliable source of income; but he is now the Edinburgh-based Research Consultant to the Woodhill Foundation (USA). He summarizes modern work on intelligence, race and heredity at his website http://www.crispian.demon.co.uk.

 

[2]   Fortunately, Cleveland has a robust answer to Budweiser, a hoppy beer called Dortmund which would not disgrace a London pub.

 

[3]   Even while the Cleveland conference was taking place, British Prime Minister Tony Blair had embarked on arranging multi-faith jamborees where he would tell the assembled high priests that they must sink their differences, love each other, help his holy 'war on terror' and embrace PeeCee. Blair was thus playing the role that the Emperor Constantine had taken upon himself in 325A.D.: that of insisting to the disparate and disputative bishops of early Christianity that they get their act together and speedily agree what was to become the Nicene Creed.