Breaking Britain, and the vote-rigging that will go against UKIP (RIG FOR VICTORY)


David Davis

You all know by now that a pessimist is some one who is an optimist but who is also in full possession of the facts.

It’s probably too late to make any sensible suggestions for preserving a nominally-conservative (and not more than harmlessly-and-merely-nugatorially-socialist) United Kingdom. The GramscoFabiaNazis have realised at least one of their strategic objectives, which in their hatred of English civilisation and culture is to, out of spite, break up our country. Whether or not the ScotzNazi-Party manages to rig a majority for Scottish “independence”  later this year or not, the cracks in the structure will takes years if not decades to repair.

Not only do the GramscoFabiaNazis hate us – and for this too they could be called _racists_ under their own terms of use of their manufactured word – but they want to actaully destroy a nation, in public, in the GramscoFabiaNazi circus-games, while _FORCING ITS CITIZENS TO WATCH_ . I believe that the celebrated author Richard Blake wrote about events of this kind, in the “public games” in his novel “The Terror of Constantinople”.

Let the GramscoFabiaNazis deny this charge against them if they will. But you and I, and we and they, know that they know in their hearts, that I have spoken the truth on this one. It is their punishment delivered onto classical-liberalism: delivered for showing how they, the looters and moochers, were always and everywhere redundant, leeching and mooching and looting, upon the living bodies of ordinary working people and other humans.

The current open-season on UKIP, the general-media-assault on anybody even _thought to have been seen or slightly-heard_ saying something sort of-vaguely-not-PC_ goes on. Here’s a quote off Guido today….or maybe it was yesterday, who cares? :-

Marina Hyde on the pious left and UKIP…

“…all right-thinking people to the left of UKIP – from Tories to commies – are supposed to regard it as a triumph each time a news outlet’s exposé forces Nigel Farage to outlaw some  //_nobody_//  (my italics – ed) for a vile thing they said on social media three years ago. This, apparently, is a win, even though the evidence suggests it simply calcifies the sense of asymmetric warfare against UKIP out there in the unreachable spaces where all those rising numbers of people who are going to vote for the party are living their unknowable lives.”

Can you imagine how, if polling so far is correct, and if you analyse all MSM comment-threads except the Guardian and the Independent, UKIP will not sweep the board in the euro-elections, gain hundreds of “council” (whatever those are for) seats, and possibly get one or more MPs in 2015? Will the Tories have any MPs left at all in “The North”?

The “pollsters” all bend over backwards (sorry…) to emphasise how very, very, very accurate they all are, even if they say (very very slightly) different things, very slightly…er…differently…

It’s not what the MSM and LiblabCon can’t say: it’s the way it can’t say it…RIG FOR VICTORY.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150592194757518&set=pb.662052517.-2207520000.1399239847.&type=3&theater

 

 

About these ads

5 responses to “Breaking Britain, and the vote-rigging that will go against UKIP (RIG FOR VICTORY)

  1. Paul Marks

    And sometimes the “vile” thing is not vile at all.

    For example Mr “Lenny” Henry made a blatantly RACIST demand (more black people in the entertainment industry) and a UKIP person sarcastically replied that perhaps Mr Henry should emigrate to a majority black country where he would not have to see all these horrible white people….

    Yet it was the UKIP person (not Mr Henry) who was denounced as the “racist”.

    Or…….

    Some UKIP person (or Conservative) will point out some aspect of truth about Islam (something that Gladstone or Winston Churchill said a thousand times – indeed people in the West said quite normally up to only a few years ago, before P.C. totally took over) and screams of outrage start……

    To some extent (Paul is going to be nasty now) it is the local politicians (UKIP or Conservative) own fault – not for saying X, but for folding (like a House of Cards) when attacked

    I have been in this position myself.

    “You have said X – you had better resign”.

    NO.

    “”Well then we will take action against you”.

    Then I will fight you every step of the way – proving that the charges against me are absurd.

    “Well we had better forget about it then”.

  2. Paul Marks

    Democracy is supposed to be about the people being able to vote for candidates who reflect their opinions – the P.C. (Frankfurt School of Marxism) “police” seek to make it impossible for such people even to stand (for established political parties – the parties with the money and name to actually win).

    In Britain one way to really hit people is via candidate selection – unlike in the United States (where everyone who says they support Party X usually gets a vote on who the candidate is) in Britain candidate selection is done by a small group of people (from an approved list).

    If I am hit – this is how it will be done.

  3. In the movie “Mitt” Mitt Romney admits that he didn’t actually win the Republican nomination fairly but stole it from the one man that the Republican neo-con elite couldn’t control, Ron Paul. I expect that the elections in the UK will be no different. Above all the elite are not interested in fair play and giving up their power and any threat to it will be squashed flat.

    • How easy would it be to, say, get the Armed Forces “on-side”?

      Obviously, the Officer-Class being mostly part of the PoliticalEnemyClass won’t be any good: any respectable Nationalist counter-revolutionary would be on a hiding-to-nowt there as their oath is to The Queen, who may well be part of the main strategic problem. But what about the men?

  4. Paul Marks

    I watched the debates and I was not that impressed with Ron Paul – thin weedy voice (these things matter in politics – for example the Governor of Indiana was told he should not try for the nomination as, being short and balding, he had no chance), also he kept going on about foreign policy (as if the election was 2004 not 2012) the issue in 2012 (and 2016) was the rising cost of the entitlement programs (now Obamacare is on top – the straw that broke the camel’s broken back, accept it is more than a straw).

    However, I hope for better things from his son Senator Rand Paul (although I doubt I will be around in 2016 to see it).

    Caucus events are indeed fairly easy to rig (for example Obama’s people rigged the Iowa caucus events against Mrs Clinton) – but Primary elections are much harder to rig.

    If Rand Paul can win the New Hampshire Primary and then the South Carolina Primary (both perfectly possible) he may well build the momentum to get the nomination (even against “Jeb” Bush – who would walk the Florida Primary. as the ex Governor of the State).

    If the Iowa Caucus events are winnable (even in spite of rigging).

    As long as Rand Paul does not alienate pro national defence conservatives (as Ron Paul did) then he can win Iowa by such a large margin as to wipe out any rigging effect – and go on to New Hampshire.

    Hence the speeches opposing war – but SUPPORTING strong national defence (and supporting Christianity against Islamic attack – that plays well among key Caucus goers in Iowa).

    Some libertarians do not like Rand Paul – because of his hunger to win. But I believe there is “no substitute for victory”.

    David……

    Sadly the British army is now so small (and getting smaller) that it hardly matters what soldiers think.

    Still in a time of real crises (actual starvation) and with a basically unarmed population (which Britain now has) you might have a point.