Corbyn: win/win

Contrary to my usual position, which was to be a member of no political party, i joined Labour. But then I also joined the tories, in order to maintain balance and harmony in the universe. Im not joining UKIP, because my views are so inflammatory sometimes they would be used against UKIP, but thats who I vote for.

However, the reason I joined Labour, is to vote for Jeremy Corbin. As I see its a win/win whether he wins or loses. I stopped voting for Labour the day Neil Kinnock fell over on Brighton Beach. That was the day Real Labour died, and the lying, duplicitous faggot friendly pro immigrant metrosexual New Labour took over, and started stabbing the English working class in the back, giving us a 20 year long dose of strap on.


When I as young I read voraciously, I could read a 100k word novel in six hours. I wolfed down everything, from E M Forster to Churchill, from Aldous Huxley to MIlton. But one of the writers who most deeply impress me was George Orwell. I read everything he wrote, all his books, letters, essays, journalism. Everything. He deeply impressed me, And the Labour Party resembled George Orwell. They were the party of the english working class, defending the working man, and standing up for this glorious nation.

It lasted until Blair came along. At that point Labour turned its back on england and the english, and decided to become copycat Tories, sucking up to immigrants, moslems, Banks, the EU and anyone else who was either rich or corruptible.

Ever since 1993, the English working class continued to vote for New Labour, under the delusion Labour still stood for the honest, white working man with two kids.. It took them 20 years to realise Labour had abandoned them, given their jobs to immigrants, and had become all millionaires, whilst telling the voters how bad capitalism was (Russel Brand is the ultimate New Labour champagne socialist fuckwit in this respect). And then the Labour voters deserted, and voted Lib Dem, UKIP, SNP. or just didnt bother voting.

So The reason Labour is shitting bricks that Corbyn will get into power is because he will get rid of New Labour. And the Champagne Socialist dream, the Europhile dream of a EU Superstate, will vanish. Instead, Corbyn will resurrect real, proper old Orwellian Labour. And the voters might come flooding back, because Corbyn may well take a UKIP like position, and start ACTUALLY representing the English working class again.

SO its worth joining Labour to vote for Corbyn. Either he wont get in, and one of the dreary metrosexual dimwit like Kendall will win, keeping Labour out of power foir another 10 years, or Corbyn will win, he will wind Labour back to Orwells Labour, in which case they might be worth voting for, especially if they develop an accord with UKIP, the only party that DOES represent the English.

SO, win/win either way.

The Mohammed Coefficient

mohammeds in waiting

Q: What do the eight men depicted above have in common?

A: They all bear the name “Mohammed”, or some variant thereof.

Top row, left to right: A classical kitsch painting depicting the prophet Mohammed, Mohamed Atta, John Allen Muhammad, Mohammed Atef.

Bottom row, left to right: Mohammed Bouyeri, Mohammad Sidique Khan, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, “Turban Bomb” Mohammed by Kurt Westergaard.

Last night, when posting about the nine men in Rochdale who were convicted on white slavery charges, I happened to coin the phrase “Mohammed Coefficient” to refer to the frequency of the name “Mohammed” among the convicted defendants. In this particular case, since four of the nine men were so named, the Mohammed Coefficient was .444, or 44.4%.

After I posted it, out of curiosity I did a web search and discovered that my usage was the only occurrence of the phrase “Mohammed Coefficient” on the internet. This unusual circumstance — most of the time, anything I invent has already been thought of by thousands of others — gives me the right of definition:

Mohammed Coefficient (abbreviated MC): The statistical measure, given as a decimal or a percentage, of the incidence of the name “Mohammed” among a group of perpetrators of evil deeds. Variant names that contribute to the MC include Mahmoud, Mahmud, Mahomet, Mamadou, Mehmed, Mehmet, Mehmood, Mehmud, Mihammad, Mohamed, Mohammad, Muhamed, Muhammad, Muhammed, and Muhammet, and all other cognates of the original Arabic name of Islam’s prophet.

So, for example, the notorious Beltway Snipers have an MC of 50%, which is fairly high. The murderer of Theo Van Gogh, Mohammed Bouyeri, gives that crime an MC of 100%. But the Shoe Bomber, the Lap Bomber, and the Killer Shrink of Fort Hood all have an MC of 0%.

The grand prize, however, goes to the violent assailants of Keighley in Yorkshire, as reported earlier this year. Every single perp in that case was named Mohammed, giving a Mohammed Coefficient of 100%, which is highly unusual — even in Britain — for a heinous crime with multiple perpetrators.

An interesting factoid in all of this is that the name “Mohammed” seems to be more common among male children born to Muslim parents in the West, as opposed to those born in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, etc. Perhaps baby boys born in the West are more likely to be christened dubbed “Mohammed” to assert publicly the family’s affiliation with Islam.

I excavated some names from the archives in order to assign Mohammed Coefficients for various murderous events of recent years. It was difficult to discover the names of all the suspects in the Bali bombing and the Beslan atrocity. 9/11, however, has an MC of 5.3%, the 7/7 Tube bombings 25%, and the 3/11 Madrid bombings 17.9%. For those who are interested, the full list of names for each of these abominations is below:
– – – – – – – – –

September 11th, 2001
New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington D.C.

1 / 19 = 5.3%

Mohamed Atta
Fayez Banihammad
Ahmed al-Ghamdi
Hamza al-Ghamdi
Saeed al-Ghamdi
Hani Hanjour
Nawaf al-Hazmi
Salem al-Hazmi
Ahmed al-Haznawi
Ziad Jarrah
Khalid al-Mihdhar
Majed Moqed
Ahmed al-Nami
Abdulaziz al-Omari
Marwan al-Shehhi
Mohand al-Shehri
Wail al-Shehri
Waleed al-Shehri
Satam al-Suqami

March 11, 2004

5 / 28 = 17.9%

Rachid Aglif
Emilio Llano Alvarez
Rabei Osman Sayed Ahmed
Hamid Ahmidan
Abdelilah el-Fadual el-Akil
Mahmoud Slimane Aoun
Youssef Belhadj
Abdelmajid Bouchar
Mohamed Bouharrat
Nasreddine Bousbaa
Antonio Toro Castro
Carmen Maria Toro Castro
Mouhannad Almallah Dabas
Basel Ghalyoun
Othman el-Gnaoui
Saed el-Harrak
Hassan el-Haski
Fouad el-Morabit
Mohamed Moussaten
Antonio Iván Reis Palacio
Rául González Peláez
Iván Granados Peña
Javier González Peña
Sergio Alvarez Sánchez
Mohamed Larbi Ben Sellam
José Emilio Suárez Trashorras
Jamal Zougam
Rafa Zouhier

July 7th, 2005

1 / 4 = 25%

Mohammad Sidique Khan
Hasib Hussain
Germaine Lindsay
Shehzad Tanweer

Readers may want to dig into some of the other murders, bombings, arsons, gang rapes, and all the various gifts of Islam, to see what additional Mohammed Coefficients they can come up with.

And what would be the overall MC for all Mohammedan violence inflicted upon the world during the past decade?

My guess is that it might be about 20% or 25%. But who knows?

Reprinted from

Moslems just dont get it.

Lets be honest, Islam is bigoted, racist, misogynist, pedophilic, Christianophobic, antisemitic, antienglish, antidemocratic, homophobic, opressive, totalitarian, warlike and a danger to world peace and women everywhere.

This country has had no problem with immigrants for 2000 years, we’ve welcomed them all, from Vikings to the Jamaicans. All have integrated and lived her peacefully as part of our society for centuries

We only started to get problems when moslems started turning up in there millions. Demanding special treatment, Demanding WE change to suit THEM. Ignoring our laws, our customs our traditions and our culture. Demanding Sharia, demanding Halal, demanding mosques, demanding moslems only schools, demanding moslems only areas, demanding, demanding and demanding, and threatening us with violence, if we dont obey.

Its not just us. Moslems are currently involved in more than FIFTY wars currently going on in the world, killing each other, and killing non-believers. In every country where they are a minority, they demand (as outlined above), threaten, and hold host countries culture and laws in contempt. Every country moslems are a majority, they brutally oppress minorities, murdering, butchering, and treating non believers with the sort of animal savagery you only get from populations stuck in the 13th century for 800 years. Moslems treat white girls like shite, molesting, raping and interfering with even under age girls.

Pakistanis in particular have a predilection for fucking 12 year old girls, especially if the girl is there cousin. At the same time, the hypocrisy of Pakistanis is apparant when Google released statistics from analysing terabytes of data on searches, and you find the commonest search terms used on Google in pakistan is “teen anal sex”, “man fucking man”, and “shemale sex”, and came in second only to Kenya for searches for “gay sex pics”.

You see the connection here dont you, everywhere you get moslems, you get conflict, strife, and discontent – and threats and violence against non-moslems. Moslems are the common factor in all this. What does that tell you about moslems and the rest of the world?


America, Today

The Steubenville rape case sparked a national conversation about victim-blaming and rape culture.

But the victim only got justice because Anonymous leaked significant social media evidence implicating the assailants — and for distributing those tweets, photos, and video, 26-year-old Deric Lostutter faces more prison time than the rapists got themselves.

Lostutter faces up to ten years behind bars if he’s convicted of hacking-relating crimes. Now he’s gearing up for a costly legal battle — and as he calls for donations, we call on you to give him the nationwide support he needs to win his trial.

The Ohio U.S. Attorney’s office and the DOJ are sending a dangerous message to men who stand up : Don’t get involved, or else. Let them know we still stand with Deric: Sign your support for his actions and oppose sending him to prison, now!

Bogus Arguments for Mass Immigration

Migration Watch UK has published a list of bogus arguments commonly used to support mass immigration. Here’s a selection of them.

‘Immigration provides great economic benefit’
For many years the government claimed that immigration added £6 billion a year to GDP. However, the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, reporting in April 2008, concluded: “We have found no evidence for the argument, made by the government, business and many others, that net immigration generates significant economic benefits for the existing UK population”.

‘Britain is only the 39th most crowded country in the world’
93% of immigrants go to England so England is what matters in this context. Together with Holland, England is the sixth most crowded country in the world if you exclude islands and city states. The 2011 census showed that the population of England and Wales had grown by 3.7 million to 56.1 million (bringing the UK population to an estimated 63.2 million). This is more than twice the rate in the previous decade and is the fastest growth in any ten-year period since the census began in 1801.

‘The public are not really as opposed to immigration as they seem’
In a major government survey conducted over a two-year period 2008-2010, 75% of respondents said that they would like to see immigration reduced, 51% by a lot. A majority of the Asian community also thought that there were too many immigrants in Britain.

‘Population projections are unreliable’
Over the last 50 years, the ONS have been accurate to +/- 2½% in their projections over a 25-year period. The latest projections indicate that the UK population will increase from 63.2 million to 70 million by 2027. Five million of this increase will be due to immigration, equivalent to the current populations of Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Bradford, Glasgow and Bristol combined.

‘The government’s immigration target is unachievable because EU migration cannot be controlled’
The major source of net migration is from outside the European Union and has averaged about 200,000 a year over the past ten years. 75% of net foreign migration of 3.2 million since 1997 has been non-EU. These flows are capable of control by the government.

‘Net migration of 150,000 per year would be satisfactory’
On the contrary, immigration on this scale would simply postpone the population reaching 70 million by 4 years to 2031, after which the population would continue to rise very rapidly.

‘Migrants do not take social housing’
Official data shows that in 2010-11, 8.4% of social housing in England was occupied by non-UK nationals. These are migrants who have not been here long enough to become British citizens or who have not bothered to do so.

‘Immigrants are needed to pay our pensions’
This is a ludicrous argument which even the Labour government dropped. The reality is that immigrants themselves grow older so that there would have to be a continuing and increasing inflow of immigrants to have any long-term effect.

‘Immigration has no effect on jobs’
The Migration Advisory Committee reported in January 2012 that every 100 additional non-EU migrants might be associated with a reduction in employment of 23 native workers over the period 1995-2010. There is considerable anecdotal evidence of job displacement in key sectors such as construction, hospitality and retail.

‘Britain is a nation of immigrants’
More people now migrate to the UK in a single year than did so in the entire period from 1066 to 1950, excluding wartime.

See the full list at the Migration Watch website.

Half of squatters brought to justice by Scotland Yard are Romanians

Romanians make up nearly half of all those caught breaking new anti-squatting laws in the capital, official police figures show.

A total of 92 people, 41 of them from Romania, have been prosecuted or cautioned for illegally occupying residential buildings in London in the past six months.

The Metropolitan Police has also brought 16 Poles, 13 Britons, six Spaniards and two Nepalese to justice for the offence since the new legislation came into force in September, the Evening Standard reported.

Previously squatting was not a criminal offence in England and Wales, meaning it was up to the property’s owners to use the civil courts to enforce their rights, which could lead to drawn-out and costly legal battles.

The law was changed in response to concerns that squatters were protected by too many powers, leaving some householders feeling powerless to remove them.

By Sam Marsden

The squatting recorded by Scotland Yard was distributed evenly around London, with the highest number of offences in Barking and Dagenham on eight, followed by Barnet and Ealing on six, and Westminster and Croydon on five.