British Nationalists think nothing of exposing themselves to women in their cars

Shocking, but true.  

No one in the BNP is even saying that the Sunday Star story is untrue, and the Chairman himself has not seen fit to deny the story.  

So it must be true.  

Many white British men think it is a non-story because that is how most British men really behave, BNP or not.

Why do they behave like that?

Is it cos most white women are sluts?  

Offering a white woman the opportunity to suck them your cock is as unremarkable as offering to buy her a drink, apparently.

If she says no and looks disgusted, you merely sigh, roll your eyes, put it back in your trousers, and carry on as if nothing had happened.  

If people make a fuss about it, you just ignore them, and everyone in your party will say you were led on by a slapper.

If she really was the slapper everyone is saying she is she would have sucked it, I imagine, rather than sell her story.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2012/02/chronology-of-events-leading-to-sunday.html  

Another possible version:

"As it happened, I did expose myself to her.  Since she herself asked me to do so, I thought it would be rude to refuse, even if I am in fact a very happily married man.  She eagerly and skilfully performed the sex act in question and seemed to enjoy this rare privilege.  I have no idea why she is now complaining now as it was all her idea in the first place."

Even if we gave Nick Griffin the benefit of the doubt that the ex-model led him on ....

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2012/02/nick-griffin-exposes-himself-claudia-dalgleish/

The response of BNP men was very interesting.  No one actually said,

"Get away with you!  The very idea!  Our Chairman would never do such a thing as expose his tumescent member to a female party activist who came to  his rescue in her Jeep, because we all know that he is a gentleman as well a very happily married man whom we are sure would have no problem getting his wife to do such things for him."

What the BNP men have been saying without exception is that the ex-model must have led him on, and by implication any of them would inevitably have succumbed to such a temptation by such a temptress.

If Claudia were to drive up to each of their homes in her Jeep, suggest they buy her a curry in Swanley which they will consume in her vehicle in a car park, they would without exception accede to this.  They would all get out their cocks for her after she has "led them on", even as they are armed with the knowledge of what happened to their esteemed Chairman with this ex-model in her Jeep.

It would just be like a porno version of Groundhog Day.

If the Chairman had been led on by the ex-model, his statement would look more like this:

"It was Claudia who told me to have my cock out ready for her when she came back from the litter bin after she had disposed of the remains of our curry lunch.  As it happened, when she came back, she took one look at me and suggested that I might like to get out of the car to walk my lunch off, with a rather disapproving expression on her face.  I then realised she had only been joking, took the hint, had a little walk until my excitement had subsided sufficiently, and got back into the car.  We never referred to the incident again.  Anyone who knows Claudia would know that she has a manner that could be described as provocative and flirtatious.  I think, after my near death experience that day, I might be allowed a little leeway.  The balance of my mind had been upset by my car flipping over like that on the motorway, and the curry we got from the Swanley Tandoori seemed to have aphrodisiac qualities, and it seemed to me that Claudia was being particularly flirtatious and suggestive to me that day, probably because of my brush with death.   She is very tactile and is perhaps unaware of the effect she has on most men.  Or perhaps she is, and it amuses her to tease men in this way.  I can only apologise to my wife, my family and the party for letting them down."

Perhaps such an admission might make the Chairman look slightly better, instead of his very guilty siilence.

Was the WOMAN who victimised Fireman Sam WHITE?

A pillar of the community: The popular Fireman Sam cartoon was created by David Jones who was accused of racism

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106631/Fireman-Sam-creator-Dave-Jones-detained-branded-racist-burqa-joke-airport-security.html#ixzz1nZVYD5gS

Even if the ex-model *did* lead the BNP Chairman on ....

http://thebritishresistance.co.uk/the-editor/1677-claudia-dalgeish-and-nick-griffin-bnp


Even if the ex-model had led the Chairman on, it would be good to hear his version of things. If he had not exposed himself to her one would expect an outright denial, since he was with her on 30 September 2011, and cannot deny it. But he does not even have the sense to do that.

If it was just her word against his, then it would make sense for him to do that, even if the allegation is true. It is very cynical of me to say this, of course, but I think I would have made a good Director of Communications for the BNP.

Perhaps the Chairman thinks the story will go away, which calls into question his lack of integrity, judgement and his lack of access to good advice, as well as his ability to persuade his wife to perform the sex act that he was alleged to have asked the ex-model to perform on him.

If he thinks the story will just go away, I think he is very much mistaken about the nature of the British public, whom we all know are obsessed about sex. The picture of an excited Chairman and a disgusted ex-model will remain longer in the mind of the British public than any Panorama programme about financial irregularity.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/8814380/Panorama-BNP-the-Fraud-Exposed-BBC-One-preview.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0161hqc/Panorama_BNP_The_Fraud_Exposed/

This story also gives a very bad impression of British men. Either they are so boorish as to expect their women to perform sex acts on them in car parks after a clearing up the remains of a takeaway curry consumed in the car, or British women are indeed so cheap that they regularly do this sort of thing to make British men think that such behaviour is acceptable.

I do believe the time has now come to discuss the sexual mores of the British nation, and whether the cheapness of British women (Jack Straw described white women as "easy meat"  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8247607/Pakistani-men-see-white-girls-as-easy-meat-claims-Jack-Straw.html) is in fact leading to the increasingly noticeable degeneracy of the indigenous British.

Perhaps that is why successive British governments have conspired to let in foreigners to do the work that the white working classes are no longer fit for, because of the degeneracy brought on by the cheapness of their women.

I have never got over the shock of how a party that is supposed to promote the interests of the white race does not even have the basics of racial health and hygiene to promote family values supported by marriage, and that I was expelled from the party for offending an unmarried mother with illegitimate and disabled offspring and another woman who had clearly made a bad reproductive choice, when she already knew she had Multiple Sclerosis 11 years ago, but nevertheless went on to have a severely disabled child, now 7, and was rattling her begging bowl at the British taxpayer.   http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jun/09/disability-cuts-mumsnet-david-cameron

We know who is in power by whom we cannot criticise, and it is clearly the case that the never married mother and the women who make bad reproductive choices hold the whip hand over the British political establishment.

Sexual promiscuity costing UK billions of pounds

http://www.christianconcern.com/our-concerns/social/sexual-promiscuity-costing-uk-billions-of-pounds

Statistics
Promiscuity has a direct financial cost as STIs are estimated to cost the NHS more than £1 billion per year. Diagnoses of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) in England rose 74% cent between 1998 and 2009.

Teenage pregnancies cost the NHS £63 million per year.

The abortion rate continues to rise. The total number of abortions in England and Wales rose by 8% between 2000 and 2010.96% of abortions are paid for by the NHS, at a cost of £118 million per year.

Family breakdown
Family breakdown, including divorce and separation, directly costs the taxpayer an average of £42 billion per year, most of which comes from the cost of tax credits, lone parent benefits, housing benefits and the health, crime and educational impact of relationship breakdown.  

This sum, nearly £1,400 per year for every taxpayer, is equivalent to 6% of all public spending for 2011.

Fucking Sluts!!!!!! Fucking feminists!!!!!

Why do British men just take it lying down?

Cos they are fucking sluts [pun intended] and are the running dogs of feminists, have no pride and feel no shame.

British "men" are so fucking useless that they don't mind being fucked over and then turned over to be fucked up the arse.

All they can do is think of the next free blowjob, like Nick Griffin, apparently ....

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2012/02/chronology-of-events-leading-to-sunday.html

CRB check is a tax on business imposed by feminists who are BAD FOR BRITISH BUSINESS and FAMILIES

Crime checks for a million community volunteers as vetting spirals out of control, say critics

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2101817/Crime-checks-million-community-volunteers-vetting-spirals-control-say-critics.html#ixzz1nINTatAr


Apparently, if your child is in secondary school and want to do a French exchange scheme, say, your entire family would have to have a CRB check.

I had previously thought this would apply on to those in your family over 18, but not so, according to http://forum.no2id.net/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=31320

So, you and your partner (if you are not a single mum) would have to have a CRB check.

http://www.crbexpress.co.uk/crb-check-cost.aspx

However, if that child has a father who is Muslim and has 4 wives, 5 CRB checks would be required.

If each of these wives had 4 children then they would presumably need to have CRB checks too. After all the two little bastards who tortured to death Jamie Bulger for their entertainment were only 11 and the age of criminal responsibility is 10.

Your children might abuse your French exchange guest either physically or sexually so they would need a CRB check too.

And what if you have a lodger? He or she may be a paedo too, as well as you, your partner, your partner's other partners and your partner's partners' offspring who may share the same home as you and have access to that hypothetical French exchange student ....

Also, this system favours the single mum and penalises the married person whose spouse is still living with him/her.

This is the SHIT you get when you let feminists run your government. Feminism leads to paedophilia and the Paedophile Tax.

How Feminism causes Paedophilia is explained at
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2009/04/louis-theroux-place-for-paedophiles.html

Feminism is SHIT and feminism is the shit they make British children learn at schools.

What is feminism? It is about creating SSMs, not criticising them, allowing homosexuals to "marry" each other and fining B&B owners for not wanting to do business with them.

Who represents feminism? Why, ALL the political parties, including the BNP who are too fucking thick to recognise that feminism is the antithesis of family values (which can only be supported by reintroducing fault into divorce), and that marriage is eugenic. 


They are too afraid of the sluts of their own race and prefer to whinge about Muslims and foreigners instead.


Sadly, they have no real racial pride or they would actually be ashamed of the way their women behave.

Instead of British men condemning Fiona McKeown (whom I would argue should have been charged with arranging and facilitating under-aged sex for her daughter when she arrived home), sympathy was given to her when she claimed that the death of her daughter - left in the care of her boyfriend who was an Indian tourist guide they had met while on holiday by her mother - should and could have been prevented by the Goan police.

http://www.1party4all.co.uk/Home/Account/TopicForm.aspx?topicsId=102

It is all too despicable and contemptible.   Indeed, a BNP activist even agreed with me that this should have been done, and then backtracked.

When a party that is supposed to be promoting the interests of the white race cannot practice the basics of health and hygiene nor have the moral courage to discuss ways of preventing degeneracy in their own race, you know the white race is fucked.

Feminism is SHIT and don't you forget it, but don't expect the BNP to agree with me.  Most of them are hoping to get sex from SSMs so they won't be seen to be saying anything to offend them any time soon.   

Eugenic reasons why a man should choose his woman and why women should not be sluts

"A man should choose his woman." 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_(film)

This was what Temujin's father conceded to him when Temujin decided he wanted a wife other than the one chosen for him.

All real men should always choose their female partners, but it is the case that these days most men just sit around  looking pretty, and they will eventually be picked up by a woman impatient to find a male partner.

Because feminism allows women to make the first move, men find that it is easier to just wait for the female to make the first move.

Most men are afraid of REJECTION, you see. Therefore, the cautious man will just wait for the offers of sex from impatient single and looking women to arrive. Some even target not particularly attractive women who are only good for one-off sex, because they think she is less likely to say no than someone more attractive but more likely to say no.

However, women who offer no-strings sex to timid men afraid of rejection are doing themselves no favours because timid men are by definition sub-alpha.

They may be confident that the timid sub-alpha male would not decline sex from them, but what they have got is a sub standard kind of man - a timid kind of man who does not even like her enough or have the courage to make the first move or a man with meagre financial resources who cannot afford to entice her with the quality of his hospitality and entertainment.

Women shouldn't be seen to choose their men and must go through the motions of manipulating him into making the first move.

This is because even if the man you have reluctantly decided to settle on is a sub alpha too stupid, scared and skint to make the first move, you still have to make him feel dominant or you will end up bullying him and attacking his masculinity even more, reducing him to an utter wreck which will make you despise him even more.

This may in time tempt you into adultery, leading to the break-up of your marriage, to the disadvantage of your offspring.

If enough women do this sort of thing (which they already do) it will lead to the qualitative deterioration of the next generation (which it already has).

It has been said that it only takes a stupid woman to manage a clever man, but a clever woman to manage a stupid man.

That is why men need to be more masculine, for the good of their society and their nation. To make most men seem more alpha - because, let's face it, most of them are not that up to being alpha - women have to become more feminine.  Secretly, most men are afraid of women, because they know they cannot resist an offer of apparently no-strings sex, and, if they fall in love, they can end up having their feelings very hurt.  Yes, it is risky, and, a life of biting your tongue does not sound very appealing to the modern sexually liberated female who has a career and speaks her mind, but these are the sacrifices we must make to make Britain a stronger nation whose people are mostly rational, resourceful and robust rather than illegitimate, innumerate and illiterate, disabled, mentally deficient and autistic with behavioural, mental health and substance abuse problems who are a burden on the taxpayer.

The clever woman would need the self-control to restrain herself from speaking her mind to her stupid husband so as not to attack his masculinity while manipulating him into doing the thing she wants him to do.

There is always the nuclear option. "You are not a man at all, are you, because a man would do [the thing I want you to do for me that you don't want to do that I am trying to make you do]" That is usually quite devastating.

He can always argue that not doing the thing required and desired of him is not unmanly, but rather prudent and foresightful, because etc.

Many men think feminism is cheaper because these days women are expected to pay their own way while allowing their male partners sexual access to them. But not in the long run, because your entire civilisation pays the price.

By encouraging females to choose their male partners carefully the quality of the next generation goes up.

Allowing females to make bad reproductive choices while fearing to challenge them because of the supremacy of feminism has caused the quality of masculinity and the next generation to deteriorate alarmingly in our lifetimes.

High crime, low standards of behaviour and educational standards is entirely due to the fact most British women are cheap and easy.

res ipsa loquitur.

However, the BNP - a party that you would have thought would care about the quality of the next generation of white people - actually expelled me for trying to point this out, because their membership consists mostly of the illegitimate and the parents of illegitimate children whom they are afraid of offending.

If the BNP themselves are incapable of supporting family values, just like the LibLabCon, then Britain's descent down its slippery slope to decline and extinction continues apace.

There is a strange irony that it takes a female and a foreigner to point this out to an entire country that seems to be conspiring to appear not to understand what is after all only common sense in order to avoid having to deal with its implications.

The implication is of course that feminism (which condones female promiscuity and protects women from the consequences of their actions) is bad for Britain.

I would be quite happy to be interviewed by an entire panel of Jeremy Paxmans, but no one in the BBC dares to even discuss it, precisely because they know that the moment it is discussed, all I need do is give Liberal Feminism a firm gentle push for the whole stinking rotten matriarchal edifice to come crashing down.  That is why they block me from following them on Twitter and pretend I do not exist.

But it is only a matter of time before one of them breaks ranks.

Nationalists should know that Liberalism and Feminism - ideologies that desecrate that institutions of Marriage and Family are anti-Eugenic.   Christianity has joined forces with Liberalism and Feminism now, because the Church is stuffed with Communists, Liberals and Feminists now.   Only Islam is Eugenic, because only Islam promotes family values supported by marriage in theory and in practice.

But Nationalists are afraid of discussing eugenics these days, because they are mostly stupid, scared, ignorant and think eugenics is about doing what Hitler did.   That is another sign of matriarchal degeneracy, by the way.   Eugenics as far as I am concerned, is about reconsecrating the institution of Marriage, but they are all too slut and bastard to understand this now.