By Stanley Collymore
A white British man gets murdered on his yacht it’s alleged on the Caribbean island of St. Lucia and immediately British media hype and Foreign Office spin go into overdrive and it’s headline news even though the factual events surrounding this killing are very scarce to say the least; something which even the Sky News reporter admits to. But what the hell! The dead man is white and his alleged killers are Black, Caribbean and fit in well with the stereotypical white image of the endemically violent black man who wherever he is on Planet Earth, be it the UK or in his own backyard for example, poses a dangerous threat to white people. The fact that whites from every part of the globe regularly go off to the Caribbean on holiday, do business and even live there, and that several prominent British and other international celebrities have expensive homes there, setting aside the quite noticeable fact, if one must, that there are and have been since colonial times white citizens of these separate and diverse Caribbean territories are factual realities missed by these white morons getting hot under the collar and vaulting up on to their high horses over this death.
The reality that there are more deaths in a single day on English roads alone, let alone the entire UK, than there are murders of whites in the Caribbean in a full calendar year conveniently escapes the furtive minds of these white idiots essaying to create racial mischief for their own perverse and sick agendas. Don’t British whites, one must logically ask, get killed in white Caucasian dominated countries other than Britain itself? And while the murder of an individual irrespective of the victim’s skin colour, racial origin or nationality is quite understandably a tragedy for their loved ones regardless of where in the world that incident took place and accordingly should be reported on its merit especially by the media of the country where the murder victim came from, it’s no business normally of the British Foreign Office just because that individual happens to be British to automatically and aggressively without genuine extenuating circumstances that warrant this approach to stick its oar in. And it’s a given that if this murdered Brit had been Black neither the British Foreign Office, Sky News nor any of our media outlets, print or electronic, would have given a damn far less have reported that black individual’s demise.
Furthermore in the aftermath of the thousand of Blacks, most of them of Caribbean origin, brutally and gratuitously murdered or even executed by the British authorities: police, prison officers, agents for the UK government and specifically for the Home Office: relative to the latter: Jamaican Joy Gardner readily comes to mind, or even plain, common-o-garden racist killers with police connections and in cahoots with them, they all know that they can count on blanket immunity for protection to carry out these murders, Stephen Lawrence was an example of such; but had any Caribbean government or its Foreign Minister sought to do exactly what their British counterparts routinely do here when white Britons come to grief in non-white ruled countries and are once again at it by meddlesome involving themselves in the St. Lucia matter, such governments or their Foreign Ministers would have been given short shrift by the British government, told to mind their own business, sternly reminded that the UK was a sovereign, independent country and lectured on not interfering in British domestic affairs.
No intention however on the part of Britain to heed its own advice when the boot is on the other foot though. And if Britain is so keen on impartially protecting the interests of everyone of its citizens or legitimate residents in the UK how come then that it has done bugger all to have freed the last remaining British resident in Guantanamo Bay, illegally and arbitrarily incarcerated there on trumped up terrorism charges that have longed been debunked and leave no stone unturned to get him home to be with his British family? Or has the British mouse selectively taken to roaring at those it feels it can successfully bully; and knows, poor thing, that even with reasoned and commonsensical arguments the United States won’t pay a blind bit of notice to what it has to say, and especially so if it tried to use the same strong-arm tactics that it’s employing against the government of St. Lucia?
St Lucia which is a member of the Commonwealth whose judicial and parliamentary systems are based exclusively on those of Westminster; whose chosen and nationally approved constitutional Head of State despite St. Lucia being a sovereign and independent county although previously a British colony as well as being a fully-fledged member of CARICOM and the United Nations is Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II of England, so what legal practices that go on in that country are essentially English instituted. And in that regard it makes no sense, but people like me know why it happens all the same, why the British Foreign Office should be so unduly concerned over the death of a solitary white British male in St. Lucia when the very same people in London creating this manufactured storm in a teapot along with their white counterparts throughout other British ministerial departments, the UK government altogether and even the British parliament generally neither individually nor collectively give a damn about the tens of thousands of criminal deaths of black people, principally of Caribbean origin, in Britain.
Additionally, unlike the UK St. Lucia like several other former British Caribbean territories now fully independent as well have the death penalty on their statute books for the crime of murder, and it’s an ironic twist that the highest judiciary authority for many of them, which the general populace and some local politicians are now trying to overturn and implement instead with an indigenous and Caribbean wide Supreme Court of their own, is the judiciary arm of the British House of Lords.
Therefore all the natural bases and areas of concern that the British government might reasonably have had in completely different circumstances regarding this white Briton who lost his life in St. Lucia are fully and quite transparently covered. Consequently, the only interest I can see that the British government and others of its mindset can possibly have in this case is one based solely on ethnicity; he’s white, well-to-do, and probably has connections to some person(s) with influence or power in Britain’s social hierarchy. And those in my opinion are neither satisfactory nor sound enough reasons to unwarrantedly interfere in the internal affairs of St. Lucia, especially when the judicial system there is, as I’ve earlier pointed out, identical to that of England where this white man comes from.
Much too is was made in Sky News report that St. Lucia is a popular holiday destination which its idiots reporting this story either idiotically or conveniently didn’t mention in their discourse that St Lucia wouldn’t be so regarded, irrespective of how ideal the weather, beaches and other attractive features it has to offer, if the country was a haven of mindless criminality or a jihadist centre: never mind that St. Lucians like all other Caribbean people are solidly Christian, for the gratuitous slaughter of whites, which St. Lucia no more so than the other West Indian territories most certainly isn’t. But with white racist idiots in full flow such factors don’t matter and why the hell they figure let facts get in the way of or disrupt the narrative of a nice racist story?
Therefore, it’s perfectly obvious why the tourism element is so ludicrously being drawn into the narrative of this white Briton’s death. Candidly it’s a blackmail tactic, a sort of crude revenge to force the St. Lucian authorities into caving in to UK demands relative to the arrest, prosecution, conviction and almost certainly the execution of any black suspect(s) for this white man’s death; and manifestly has nothing at all to do with justice or the due process of law. All of which is a pernicious red herring to boot.
Advocates in Britain for the preservation of the British monarchy cite its pulling power and other factors closely associated with this as key components in our own tourism industry and the huge financial benefits that the UK and England specifically accrue from it. Be that as it may. But the number of murders that there are annually in England alone let alone the rest of the UK, even if one were to charitably set aside the many racist black ones by our respective authorities, not only significantly dwarf all those that take place in tiny St. Lucia but collectively as well those across the entire Caribbean region for the same calendar period. But I don’t see or haven’t observed in any way that those British murders have in anyway adversely impacted on British tourism; any more so than murders in other white-ruled countries globally are likely to impact negatively on their own tourism.
The US where its murder capital Chicago isn’t only a blight on the conscience of humanity but quite recently was featured as a news-series on the same Sky News channel which now wants to belittle St. Lucia because a white British man was killed there, and in St. Lucian terms is as rare an occurrence as one could get; and in equally bizarre terms would be tantamount to Sky News Eamonn Holmes masturbating himself on his early morning show Sunrise for the benefit of his co-presenter Charlotte Hawkins, or any of the other ladies who frequently feature on that show; notwithstanding that though it didn’t stop Sky News from taking the less than impartial stance it took as regards this St. Lucian killing.
No offence was intended to any of those specifically mentioned or referred to as such behaviour most certainly wouldn’t happen even if Eamonn Holmes was predisposed to doing so; just a leg pull lad, as apart from everything else you’re the consummate professional in your job. But what I’m demonstrating here by deliberately using this utterly ridiculous and rather farfetched analogy is to clearly show how skewed and subjectively bigoted these kinds of race reports are in tandem with the concerted and extraordinary lengths that elements within the British media go to distort facts and situations for their own perverse, twisted, demented and racial ends when quite often there’s no such controversy in the matter to realistically start with.
And it really is a clear-cut case of the British Foreign Office, to be quite honest, to be donning its battle helmet and other fighting gear while farcically going on the warpath and actually spoiling for a fight with St. Lucia over the as yet evidently unresolved circumstances of this white man’s death when its Foreign Secretary William Hague and the full British Con-Dem, coalition regime are adamant, in the face of intensively researched, investigated, well-documented, and irrefutable acts of multiple war crimes, crimes against humanity, murder, torture and the rest of it routinely and gratuitously committed in Iraq and elsewhere by the British military at the specific behest of the British government, MoD and the Armed Forces military top brass, that the United Kingdom shouldn’t even be investigated let alone have those personally involved in these most heinous of activities indicted, tried in a genuinely impartial court out of the reach of UK or western political influence or interference and if found guilty duly and harshly punished for what they did.
This coming in the aftermath of Mark Duggan’s public and extra-judicial execution by the British police in London on the 4th August 2011. A case in which the police have not told the truth about what actually took place; have from the outset treated Mark Duggan’s family with the utmost contempt, and as the IPCC has rather belatedly been forced to publicly admit having itself initially coseyed up with the said police and originally allowed itself to be easily taken in by their calculated lies, are now openly saying that the cops involved have from the very start of this saga and still are adamantly refusing to have face to face interviews with this legislatively constituted body the IPCC, set up to investigate controversies involving the police, to even tell it from their perspective what took place in the run up to and actually occurred during the ultimate killing by them of Mark Duggan.
Rather than do this as any other body or individual(s) either having observed or physically taken part in an incident that caused someone to lose their life would automatically be expected to and by all people the police - most people generally feel the need to explain themselves especially if they’re innocent of something, a view the police normally hold but only when it doesn’t involve themselves reinforcing this conclusion that if people they question don’t then others are perfectly entitled to draw their own conclusions – or quickly find themselves arrested and charged with at least obstructing the law or else perverting the course of justice, what we have here in the Mark Duggan case and others as well are the police, whose legal and constitutional remit is to uphold law and order and actively assist in the prosecution, conviction and jailing of wrongdoers, being a law unto themselves and wilfully revoking the same precepts they’re meant to maintain when they themselves are either involved in criminal activities or are the subject of such.
As a rejoinder their vacuously response always rolled out and especially noticeable in the Mark Duggan case being that they’ve submitted written statements to the IPCC and therefore that’s an end to the matter. Consequently, no face to face interviews allowing the opportunity for them to be questioned and importantly from the answers given have these cross-examined with what has been said in written police statements or against other germane information gathered elsewhere aren’t necessary the police concur; for to have to submit to face to face interviews or questioning would they asininely and unconvincingly claim amount to the police being treated as suspects.
What a load of fucking codswallop! What’s among the very first things that the police do when they investigate others privy to a crime or who, however vaguely so, might know someone who’s possibly connected to it? They ask those involved for precise information of where they were or what they were doing when the crime occurred; and should any of those who’re being questioned ask why the customary police response is that they’re seeking to eliminate people not involved in that particular crime from their enquiry. Conversely, if any individual whether guilty or innocent refuses to cooperate the police then invite them to either voluntarily accompany them to the local police station or else be arrested and taken there for, you guessed it, a face to face interview. One you can bet your last Pound on it will be specifically designed to ascertaining facts which will be pertinent to discovering the truth and also assist in solving that particular crime.
Of course no face to face interview is of itself an indication that the individual being questioned is guilty of any crime; in fact it’s very much to the contrary and allows those being questioned to fully or at least satisfactorily demonstrate their lack of culpability. And as the head of the IPCC posits sensible and objective members of the public would want to know why on earth would the police not want to cooperate in this way?
I’ll go much further and say it’s because they’re as guilty as hell and know they’ll be discovered to be if they opened their mouths. Feral, sadistic and sociopathic killer cops who with impunity wantonly subvert the said laws they’re meant to uphold and, what’s more, know they’re granted absolute immunity from the powers that be: the Home Office, Cabinet Ministers and de facto the government of the day, the official Parliamentary Opposition, the heads of police forces and the Metropolitan Police in particular, to do whatever they want and get away with it. Doing so under the lying and pretentious pretext advanced by this collective of influential morons that these cops put their lives on the line for us. For the powers that be clearly and those who pull their strings; but as I see it the only lives that these odious detritus of humanity put on the line are those whom they barbarically and rather sadistically murder then sickeningly, even when the facts discernibly belie their assertion, claim that they did so in self-defence.
Little wonder then that the last thing these culpable bastards want is to be confronted face to face with their criminality, where unintentional body language and all the rest of it can be a dead give away; no pun intended. For any idiot if he or she can string a couple of sentences together can set down in a statement, which they know won’t be properly vetted, whatever lies and fantasies they want to embellish. And these British cops like their US and Israeli counterparts that they not only emulate but have extremely close and operational training ties with are remarkably good at that; the classic professional liars then our British Bobbies. Not a patch one can unquestionably argue on the fictional Chief Inspector Morse or the Detective Chief Inspectors Frost, Barnaby or Banks that we encounter in our popular British television police soaps of the calibre of Inspector Morse, A Touch of Frost, Midsomer Murders and DCI Banks which evidently give an insight of how the British should be conducting themselves, instead of in real life more analogous, our boys in blue, and if truth be told to Pol Pot’s murdering thugs!
And while on the thorny subject of our police adamantly refusing face to face interviews basing their twisted reasoning and skewed arguments on the ludicrous assumption that during their clear acts of criminality, for that’s what they were, they were simply carrying out their duty, didn’t the UK at the Nuremburg Tribunals convict and put a number of World War II, German officials to death on the sole principle that simply following orders which were inherently criminal whether explicitly or implicitly known to be the case or not at the time wasn’t a legitimate defence for the perpetrator(s) defence? So what has changed since then and now for the British police to rely so pigheadedly on this categorically flawed and outlawed provision as their only defence, when it’s the same premise that was instituted by Britain for the Nuremburg Tribunals, has been globally accepted and ratified as a cornerstone of international law, and which Britain itself still ardently uses to prosecute, convict and jail those who it deems fit to go after.
So in view of all that let me put this straightforward scenario to you. You’re a parent who might even happen to be a police officer and you’re at home when there’s a knock on your door. You answer it and the upshot of that unexpected visit is you’re informed that your spouse or partner and your two young children were knocked down and killed on the high street in the community where you all lived by a motorist. That’s all the information you’re made privy to. Nothing else! You aren’t told who the driver is, the circumstances under which this tragedy took place, or why this information is being withheld from you.
What you do know is that your loved ones are dead; that the unnamed motorist who killed them and those others in the vehicle at the time with that motorist and are fully aware of what actually happened while prepared to give written statements of their colluded versions of this tragic event resolutely refuse to be personally interviewed about the matter by the police while advocating all sorts of asinine reasons for not doing so; and furthermore expect not only to be left alone but also allowed to get away with what they’re doing.
Now apart from the fact that no police service worthy of the name would tolerate such contempt for the law, nor would reason or commonsense permit a situation of that nature to prevail, you as that aggrieved parent, spouse or partner and whatever your status was wouldn’t tolerate it either and would insist on getting truthful answers to the several and legitimate queries surrounding the deaths of your loved ones. And if one were to even momentarily but quite absurdly decide to put the law aside which shouldn’t happen in the first place, what you would still be demanding in the circumstances, and especially so in these somewhat bizarre ones, is what any genuinely objective individual with a functioning brain calls natural justice. Something that each and every one of us is inalienably entitled to and where prejudices of any kind simply don’t have any jurisdiction nor should they ever be permitted to play any part in what eventually transpires.
Bearing all that in mind and drawing fully on the undoubtedly deep traumatic emotions that you would find yourselves subjected to in the scenario I described earlier, why on earth then should the police be given a blank cheque to either evade or avoid, or both, their lawful responsibilities in outlining, as they would expect or demand of others to do in similar situations, something that they’re expressly and murderously involved with themselves? But just as sickening why do you allow them to get away with it, because it’s not you, your family or friends on the receiving end of what they’re criminally doing, or even more sinister because the victims don’t look like you? Cynically and asininely deluding yourselves that the police are just doing their job and are there to protect you. Since when is gratuitously or racially murdering someone the job or remit of any civilized police force on Planet Earth?
Taking that fully into consideration why then should Mark Duggan’s family or those of the many thousands of other Blacks or whites like Ian Tomlinson who were murdered by the British police or were stitched up for crimes they didn’t commit, then convicted by bent jurors in the pay of the police and jailed for lengthy prison terms and then only through the untiring efforts of their kith and kin and their supporters had their cases reopened and their miscarriages of justice brought to light not be similarly entitled to the same respectful consideration you would want and moreover demand for yourselves, attendant with the natural justice for their loved ones that they rightfully deserve?
If you’re not familiar with these cases then I suggest that instead of being willing slaves for and addicts to the propagandistic and self-serving narratives consistently promulgated by the powers that be , the British police forces themselves and their corporate media conspirators, including the BBC that our licence fee funds and that it abuses in the most appalling manner, that you start utilizing your brains, learn to think for yourselves and research the background of just these few examples of proven and pervasive British police criminality to see specifically who and what our police forces really are; endemic racists aligned just as their Greek counterparts are to far-right, neo-Nazi groups and underworld criminals. Not the sham image of the cuddly, all-helpful British Bobby as their concerted propagandistic portrayal would have you believe.
Here then are the cases that I’d particularly like you to pore over where innocent people stitched up by the British police spent inordinately lengthy periods of time in jail for crimes they not only didn’t commit but had no knowledge whatsoever of, and where the then Master of the Rolls, one so-called Lord Denning, Britain’s most senior judge notoriously, patronizingly and quite publicly said even after their miscarriage of justice convictions were correctly quashed that it would have been infinitely better had these wrongly convicted people been kept in jai and if we still had the death penalty hanged, even though they were innocent, rather than the British judicial system of which he was a major player to have been seen to be at fault. He wasn’t sacked for his loathsome remarks by the government at the time and just as appalling no one in the legal profession saw fit to criticize him for having made them. Maybe a case of similar minds, or more fittingly identical mindsets, thinking alike. This completely obnoxious bastard is now thankfully dead and I for one hope that he rots eternally in hell; but he’s not alone among our judiciary, even in 2014, with this quite reprehensible point of view.
The cases I earlier referred to and as I said I would like for you to look up online are: The Cardiff Three; Birmingham Six; Guildford Four; and the Bridgewater Three just for starters. Chillingly had Britain kept the death penalty which it previously always had and that several nutters across the board in British society, even in 2014, would quite happily like to see reinstated, these men – one of the Birmingham Six falsely accused and convicted actually died in prison – all of whom went to prison, and this cannot be stressed often enough, for crimes they were wholly innocent of but stitched up for by the British police, would all have died on the gallows. But despite many years later having been exonerated for these crimes and released from prison these men still have to live with the stark reality that the police officers who put them there, whose criminality is now commonplace and were the death penalty still an option would similarly and callously have had them hanged, notwithstanding that have got away Scot-free with their criminal conduct.
So when next you’re inclined to start draping yourself in the British flag, ostentatiously traipse out your fake patriotic credentials and begin putting on your asinine airs of how wonderful our police forces are and should be supported come what may, I suggest you start first by subjecting yourself to a reality check and if that fails then opt for a lobotomy, for sad creature that you are you most certainly are in desperate need of one. For if despite all the facts glaringly staring you in the face of what exactly the British police are: sick, predatory thugs or imbeciles that routinely cover up for their colleagues, you still can’t or won’t face reality then you too firmly belong to that same category of human detritus fit only in my opinion to be beneficially harvested for your body parts, your brains of course naturally excluded since realistically they won’t be any bloody good either to man or beast. The German Nazis and their World War II collaborators profitably melted down their Untermenchen for all sorts of commodities including soap; but personally if that were to happen with our Undesirable equivalent I most certainly wouldn’t want to use any soap either coming from you or those murderous cops you fanatically and racially support even to wash my ass in the event of having visited the loo, done there and then subsequently vacating the lavatory bowl.
In Sky News’ report on the St. Lucia killing great emphasis was placed on this white man being killed while supposedly defending his wife. As one distinguished black US civil rights activist once famously remarked: “I know a lynching when I see one; and don’t need to be told what a lynching is.” And what, I wonder, would white media broadcasters do without their customary racial stereotypes to play on and enhance their racist credentials? The Blackman’s prevalent and voracious sexual urge being to copulate with any and every white woman there is regardless of who she is or what she looks like. Talk about the gramophone needle stuck in the same groove!
Having taken a sabbatical from my teaching job at the time I went to Barbados, that’s also in the Caribbean if you’re not cognisant of that fact and is in fact a close geographical neighbour of St. Lucia, where as a qualified journalist I worked for one of the major newspapers there. One day while relaxing on the beach I noticed the many voluntary sexual assignations going on between local black men and white Caucasian, female tourist from around the globe holidaying there but principally from the UK. Interestingly enough though while the other white women, even those from other parts of the EU, the US and Canada for example, were pretty relaxed about what they were doing and in most instances the men they were with were longstanding lovers who they saw on a regular basis when they visited the island and even resided with; although it’s fair to say that not infrequently so some of these men were proper boyfriends of these women but obviously had no wish to leave Barbados, and I personally know of several instances where the women in these relationships actually moved to the island, got married to the men in their lives there and are still residing in 2014 with their Bajan husbands in Barbados.
However in typical hypocritical fashion the majority white British women acted quite differently. They enthusiastically had and even sought out sex with the local men which as consulting adults they were perfectly at liberty to do I suppose, even if their sexual activities were being immorally carried out largely behind the backs of their husbands or partners. That said, they were also other instances where some husbands or partners and even boyfriends who’d accompanied them to the island on their joint holiday quite knowingly turned a blind eye to what their women were in fact getting up; commonly because they were also on the make themselves, got sexually turned on by it all, or in typical cuckolding fashion and with no fuss gave in to the sexual demands of women who evidently dominated them; at least psychologically so.
Tongue in cheek I had a light-hearted conversation regarding this matter with my editor who was a white American female married to a black Barbadian man who she’d chosen to leave her white American husband and their family for and suggested to her a story which had cropped up in my head. Fundamentally, to personally interview in depth as many of these white female tourists that I could manage and candidly ask them why they were behaving as they were.
My editor was rather sceptical to say the least that I would manage to get these tourists of every marital status, as I wasn’t simply after married females, to speak openly or honestly to me; much less so the British women who on the island and throughout the rest of the Caribbean have a very unflattering reputation for dropping their knickers the moment they arrive while at the same time dispensing with their fabricated diffidence just as effortlessly only to reassemble the latter just as readily the moment they arrive at the airport for their flight back home to Blighty where they can all assume again their cunningly constructed role of individuals in whose mouths butter wouldn’t melt.
Sceptical she might have been but my editor didn’t try to stop me nor would she have succeeded f she’d tried; and besides the rapport between the two of us was such that she knew it would be pointless trying to. Well I can categorically report that I successfully chatted to and interviewed at various stages and different levels a large cross-section of those that I wanted to including my fellow Brits. I was open with all of them about what I was doing, promised them anonymity and secured their trust. I even played back my tape recordings to them as and when it was necessary to do so and also offered, if they wanted to, to let them see my written notes on them. But there weren’t any takers on that offer as by then, I suppose, they all trusted me knowing full well that I would hardly have volunteered something like that if there wasn’t mutual trust all round.
When the article was finished I informed them of its publication date and those who wouldn’t be in Barbados then asked for details of how they could get copies and were given these. The article itself was a hit; sold many copies and became a very popular discussion topic on the major phone in programmes and talk-shows on the island. I was asked to participate in these but declined as I didn’t want in any discourse to give away my trade secrets as it were not even to my editor who eventually gave up when she couldn’t persuade me to tell her how I managed it; and as always I have confidentially firmly stayed mum on this matter.
So the idea that black men are voracious sexual predators where white women are concerned is a load of nonsense. A myth created during slavery and the colonial era when white men constantly essaying to lastingly emasculate the Blackman and at the same time sexually abuse black women as well had to devise ways and means to justify their barbarity and bestiality towards Blacks in general while consolidating their perverted lust in respect of black women in particular.
First they came up with their bogus science that black women couldn’t be raped as their vaginas were not only comprehensively different from those of white women but were also constructed in such a way as to make black women sexually insatiable and constantly in oestrus; interestingly enough a term that people often use in connection with and one normally associates with animals not human beings; but then Blacks at that time and even now in 2014 to a significant number of whites simply aren’t human. Therefore having sex with black women even without their consent, an activity were it embarked on with a white woman in similar circumstances would be regarded as rape couldn’t be such in the case of a black woman whites argued. And besides the bodies of black women were always aching for sex, so having sex with them in any circumstance, freely or involuntarily so on their part, was essentially a charitable act of kindness while doing them a big favour as it were, if such sexual activities were committed, of course, by white men!
The unvarnished truth however is that colonialist minded white men obsessively had the hots for black women but since they had made them slaves and deemed them to be inferiors of theirs they couldn’t very well admit this even to themselves let alone recognize them as either their social or eligible equals. No more so than then or now where one of our 21st Century royals or members of the British aristocracy more concerned about ludicrously preserving their so-called bloodline, in actuality just as counterfeit as they themselves are, could; were they to be having a similar covert sexual assignation with someone of colour and who was automatically regarded as being outside their perceived and acceptable circle of worthy companions. It wouldn’t have happened then and it sure as hell won’t happen now in Britain in 2014.
In the Caribbean white planters were notorious for their gang rape of black women. However the above state of affairs was not unique among the British since the other European colonialists did exactly the same thing. As a result 99% of Caribbean and US Blacks and a substantial number of those who either knowingly or unwittingly so pass for white Caucasians have mixed race blood; with every individual of black Caribbean extraction and the overwhelming majority of Blacks in the US, most especially those persons who are the descendants of those forced into slavery, even in 2014 involuntarily for the most part still carry the white male Y chromosome in their genetic makeup: the unquestionable result of the systemic and systematic sexual abuse and rape of black women by white males during slavery and colonialism.
And how’s this for a nerve-jangling but all the same highly germane elucidation in relation to all you obstinately bigoted and racist jerks out there utterly besotted with yourselves, your so-called white supremacy and unblemished bloodline when it’s a known fact and empirically documented that in Britain alone, among European countries, 36% of you aren’t fathered by those that you’re either deceitfully led to believe or lyingly told by cuckolding mothers are your biological fathers; biological fathers that you’ll never learn anything about let alone ever get to know. The immoral outcome and the bastard progeny derived from the immense cuckolding by white women of their husbands and partners who either unknowingly fired blanks and in many instances are still doing so or else were callously duped by their spouses or partners into believing they fathered children they clearly never sired.
Go on! Let the brilliant technology of DNA assist you out of your familial ignorance if you’ve got the bottle to, rather than asininely going around claiming to be someone you aren’t while contemptuously looking down on those who racially are different from and having the bloody nerve to regard yourselves as superior to them; when it’s very much the other way around since they at least know who their true biologically origins. For one unintended upside of slavery and colonialism was that unlike whites Blacks didn’t have either to be secretive about or dishonestly pretend who it was they were voluntarily fucking with or who’d actually fathered their children. Something they honestly knew, even when the father was the slave owner who had raped them. So what have you got to say about that Aryan and member of the Master Race, I don’t think!
Furthermore, the dominance of whites over Blacks was such and so determined were these white men and women – there were always white dykes around even then – to have these black women as their sexual playthings and do so at will that if a black woman during slavery dared to refuse a white person sexually she could be savagely beaten, branded with a red-hot iron on whatever part of her body that her abuser capriciously chose to inflict this sadistic punishment and any children that the black woman already had sold off into slavery elsewhere never to be seen again either by each other or their mother. And so pervasive and cruel was this abuse coupled with its prevalent hypocrisy that Thomas Jefferson a slave owner and one of the USA’s so-called founding fathers and who had fathered more than six children by black women he lasciviously impregnated, none the less in 1786 barefacedly passed a law which outlawed mixed marriages specifically between Blacks and whites. No change then in 2014 I see to this core element of the white racist mindset.
Therefore white men and their fellow white female sexual abusers had to do something concrete to salve their somewhat guilty consciences as far as their white wives, daughters and even white women generally were concerned; after all black females were biologically women even if they weren’t socially acknowledged as such and consequently the message had to be sent out that this sort of abuse was against women per se, not misogynistic in any way, simply something that was directly only at Blacks. So the most overtly cynical ruse was invented and implemented whereby these white women: wives, mothers, daughters, sisters, nieces etc, were publicly put on pedestals and constantly told that sex was an act of bestiality whose only proper role was the reproduction of children, and to have sexual yearnings solely for the purpose of pleasure was morally wrong in the eyes of God and all right thinking persons. It was also socially unpardonable, these white hypocrites exhorted them, for if encouraged it would put white females, who dissimilar to black women were created chaste by God, on the same bestial level as all black women are; and would they as white women and members of the humanity’s superior race want that to happen to them?
Of course these white women and even the hardcore white dyke abusers of black women didn’t want that to happen to them with all the attendant ostracism that that would entail especially if those heterosexually inclined white women were found to be consensually sexually consorting with black men. And so the white man and his white dyke equivalent’s ploy worked extremely well and still largely does in 2014; unquestionably so in many parts of Britain most notably in southern England. Meanwhile all black men knew full well that for them to have sexual notions about white women let alone consensually sleep with them and to be found out meant a brutal death for them often by lynching with several of their body parts, crucially their penises in very demonstrable acts of castration, severed from them while they were still alive and all this openly done in public amid the backdrop of crowds of cheering white folk and their families who had zealously gathered to watch this sadistic humiliation, torture and then the horrific live burning of an uppity nigger.
No white woman in her right mind living in the colonies would therefore willingly court or visit this opprobrium of knowingly consorting with a Blackman upon herself and only the very brave or foolhardy surreptitiously endeavoured to and occasionally succeeded in having ongoing and clandestine sexual relationships with black men knowing that in doing so if suspected or found out she could always claim as a survival mechanism on her part and in the eyes of her fellow whites that she was raped. In that regard too little has changed in 2014.
Sometimes these daredevil acts by white women were instigated by sheer curiosity on their part, and not uncommonly spurred on by the well known and accepted precept that if you arbitrarily ban something it usually generates a fevered interest all of its own, but equally too by the rank hypocrisy of their white men folk who while banning any romantic or sexual liaisons between white women and black men, with all the dire and attendant consequences for those black men involved if these proscriptions were deemed to have been flouted whether this was the case or not, were none the less quite delighted to keep the floodgates of their systemic and systematic sexual abuse and the ongoing and rather widespread rape of black women fully open for white Caucasian male traffic.
And it’s this kind of sick mindset with its pernicious, racial and eugenic attitudes that pervades all of the British police forces and their noticeably neo-Nazi inclined Police Federation, one of whose former chairmen publicly and unapologetically said on British TV that he thought it was perfectly alright to refer to black people as Niggers and Wogs. Doubtlessly this same federation also thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to murder or execute these same Niggers and Wogs in cold blood!
A cynical and invidious mindset that’s widespread across the UK where despite indisputable evidence to the contrary white men of all classes, educational ability or more frequently none whatsoever and backgrounds asininely continue to put their white Caucasian females up onto moralistic pedestals where they shouldn’t be and have no right to belong; deluding themselves in the process that these women are totally incapable of any wrongdoing and if it is subsequently proved otherwise then they must have done so involuntarily and categorically under pressure from some man who either pressurized the woman involved into doing what he wanted her to; had inveigled himself into her life by lyingly convincing her that he loved her when he didn’t, and having got her besotted with him callously exploited her genuine love for him; or else this apparently helpless white woman was totally under his spell, petrified of him and did whatever he demanded of her. Wheel out the puke bucket!
It’s a fucking sham that even British judges who one would normally have thought had more sense than that and therefore would see through this charade, which clearly goes to show you shouldn’t confuse book learning with commonsense, are quite willingly caught up in, and you only have to examine their sentencing policies towards white Caucasian females to see what I mean. A policy where exclusively these judges and magistrates, let’s not forget these judicial underlings, consistently hold out the olive branch of extenuating circumstances to these white women no matter what the hell they’ve done or how heinous and unmistakably instigative on these white women’s part their criminality is; and always resulting in the sickening situation where their sentences, comparable to that of a man guilty of the same offences, are habitually considerably lighter.
Consequently and fully aware of this British white women can embark on whatever crime spree they premeditatedly and callously choose to, from killing their own children and then publicly and coldheartedly advancing all sorts of ludicrous and farfetched so-called explanations about their children’s’ mysterious disappearance whether these occurred at home in the UK or abroad on holiday and get away with it. And amidst the ghoulish and unwarranted outpouring of bogus grief and sympathy for these callous and coldheartedly bitches by a British public obsessed and inured with staged-managed victim’s syndrome for people they never even met let alone know succeed as well in getting the British police inextricably though willingly caught up in the same messed up shit, running around like headless chicken after them and wasting valuable taxpayers money chasing phantom kidnappers or alleged killers when to anyone with a functioning brain in his or her head it’s quite obvious that they should be arresting these women for coldblooded and aggravated murder.
But they’re very reluctant to as logic plays no part in their deductions and so they don’t because these women and white and the myth of white Caucasian female sanctity duplicitously invented by white men and conveniently endorsed by white women during the Transatlantic Slave Trade and white European colonialism must live on; even into the 21st Century.
So going back to the white man allegedly killed in St. Lucia and the sexual inferences pertaining to him supposedly losing his life while defending his wife here’s my advice to Sky News and the rest of them that asininely want to prey on the purported predatory nature of black men sexually going after a white woman and her courageous white husband sacrificing his life to protect her from a fate allegedly worst than death; well I’ll bet you that it’s the racist fantasy of some white man in Sky’s news room whose woman, assuming he’s heterosexual that is and believe me that could be a quantum leap, is cuckolding him and he doesn’t even know about it that came up with this supposedly macho white crap. Dream on mate! I know differently from personal experiences and as my Barbadian article referred to earlier in this piece points out the facts clearly belie your assumptions; which frankly shows that you and those who think like you are manifestly talking through your white Caucasian asses!
