Monday, 31 August 2009

United Nations Report Advocates Teaching Masturbation to 5-Year-Olds

NEW YORK — The United Nations is recommending that children as young as five receive mandatory sexual education that would teach even pre-kindergarteners about masturbation and topics like gender violence.

The U.N.'s Economic, Social and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released a 98-page report in June offering a universal lesson plan for kids ranging in age from 5-18, an
"informed approach to effective sex, relationships" and HIV education that they say is essential for "all young people."

How on earth did we survive as kids without the United Nations looking after our minds?

Friday, 28 August 2009

Britain pushing for CCTV in private homes


WIRED reports;

As an ex-Brit, I’m well aware of the authorities’ love of surveillance and snooping, but even I, a pessimistic cynic, am amazed by the governments latest plan: to install Orwell’s telescreens in 20,000 homes.

£400 million ($668 million) will be spend on installing and monitoring CCTV cameras in the homes of private citizens. Why? To make sure the kids are doing their homework, going to bed early and eating their vegetables. The scheme has, astonishingly, already been running in 2,000 family homes. The government’s “children’s secretary” Ed Balls is behind the plan, which is aimed at problem, antisocial families. The idea is that, if a child has a more stable home life, he or she will be less likely to stray into crime and drugs.

The state continues to entrench itself into every aspect of peoples’ lives, to monitor and regulate everything.

Today, the Daily Mail reports (my emphasis);

Furious tenants say security cameras have turned their flats into a huge Big Brother house.

It comes after a housing trust installed up to 112 CCTV cameras in their eight three-storey blocks and pointing towards residents' front doors.

And people wonder why abolition of private property is always pursued by totalitarian regimes/ ideologies…

People living there say the move is an invasion of their privacy and fear they will be spied on 24 hours a day.

Tenant Phillip Mays, 44, was one of the first to be affected after a camera was installed outside his flat.

He said: 'They'll be able to sit watching who comes and goes into each of our flats 24 hours a day.

'If we were in prison we could expect security like that, but not in our own home.

It isn’t security, it’s surveillance. How does it make you more secure? Criminals will cover their faces. Only the law abiding will have their behaviour recorded, just like only the law abiding will be affected by draconian laws.

And again, the same old ‘fighting anti-social behaviour’ excuses are trotted out. Disruptive behaviour by feral brats, which just so happens to be the direct consequence of the welfare state and the governments’ war on families.

This is how these bastards operate. They destroy any and all institutions of independence, companionship, support that people naturally form and maintain, whether that be communities, real policing, nuclear families etc. The resulting chaos can then be then be used as part of the problem-reaction-solution for justifying more tyranny and restrictions.

Thursday, 27 August 2009

More attacks on lifestyle by the state

More propaganda

Stronger drinks - and larger measures - have become more popular in recent years, and the study warns that drinkers could be unwittingly risking their health even if they do not go out on “binges”.

Jonny Forsyth, senior drink analyst for Mintel, the leading market research analysts who produced the report, said: “The over-45s are drinking more regularly but not thinking they’re in danger.

Danger? Oh no!

“Alcohol has also got stronger so it doesn’t take as much to get your units.

Alcohol has gotten stronger eh. Don’t they mean alcoholic drinks? I guess in their rush to panic people they forgot to actually think about what the hell they were writing. Same as with cannabis. I’m surprised they haven’t linked it to terrorism. Yet.

Note the repeated statements about ‘units’. Your state-mandated allowed alcohol intake, those same units that are completely fabricated.

The Mintel report warns that although the total volume of alcohol being consumed is falling, as wine overtakes beer in popularity, people are often buying stronger drinks without realising it.

That is an assumption. It is also highly offensive, they assume people are too thick to read alcohol contents on bottles. But that is the general attitude to people these days, hence the nanny state, to protect you from yourselves.

The Office for National Statistics was forced last year to change its method for calculation safe drinking levels to reflect increasing strengths, as well as the trend for larger wine glasses.

So, alcohol use is falling, but the state forces the ONS to cook its books in order to keep up the War on Drinkers.

A large 250ml glass of wine is now classed as three units, as is a pint of continental lager.

Says who? Not me, so fuck ‘em. Now they have indoctrinated the public about these moon-units, they are slowly changing the goal posts, lowering the threshold of ‘acceptable alcohol use’ and trying to force people to feel guilty about drinking (again). Give it time and they will be classing the 250ml glass as four units, then five etc. The result is the same amount of drinking can be manipulated to convey a false image of ‘more units being consumed’.

So what really is the point of this article, apart from demonising innocent people living their lives.

Professor Ian Gilmore, President of the Royal College of Physicians, said: "This study shows very clearly that our problems with alcohol are not confined to binge-drinking youngsters – there is a striking increase in overall consumption in the last decade that mirrors the rising deaths from cirrhosis and other health consequences. Many regular drinkers who don’t consider themselves at risk are undoubtedly exceeding safe limits as drinks get stronger.

"This has to be tackled by providing better unit labelling information, but if we are to make an impact on the escalating health damage this must also be accompanied by bringing down the total amount we drink as a nation through a minimum unit price for alcohol.”

My emphasis. See, there is always an agenda with these prop pieces. I have said it before and I’ll say it again.

The biggest problems we have are not drinking, or cannabis or whatever. It’s the government itself. It needs to GO.

Wednesday, 26 August 2009

Government response to e-petition for equal rights regarding rape accusations

Rape-equal-right - epetition response

The original petition;

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to assign equal anonymous rights to both rape victim and accused until verdict is given.”

Details of Petition:

“It seems more than obvious that whilst rape is a very serious crime, being accused of rape is just as serious. With rape, the stain of being accused does not wash away with the verdict, it stains a character and prevents an equal footing guarenteed by law, especially since until the verdict is given, the accused is innocent. There is no plausible argument for releasing the name of the accused as this does nothing to further justice, but only serves to punish them outside of the judicial system. The only punishment for rape, should be passed down by a judge, not by newspapers, their peers, or their employers. Therefore revealing their identity is an unjust punishment without basis in english law. We therefore request that ALL parties to a rape case are anonymous, until a verdict is reached.”

The response is as follows, with my comments;

The Government does not agree that releasing the name of an accused is a punishment and does not agree that there should be anonymity for defendants in rape cases. The Government is satisfied that the law as it stands is operating satisfactorily and has no plans to change it.

Well it is not satisfactory for the ever increasing numbers of men now finding themselves the victim of fraudulent rape accusations, is it?

Complainants in rape cases are granted anonymity in order to encourage them to come forward. The potential harm and distress caused by publicity could discourage complainants from bringing proceedings and thus enable very serious offenders to escape justice.

And what of the very real harm and distress caused by tarnishing innocent men with the horrible brush of ‘rapist’. Men have their lives threatened, been physically attacked, their families and friends attacked, livelihoods ruined, even committed suicide, purely because they are not offered the protection of anonymity until proven guilty.

Note I said proven guilty, not proven innocent, which is what this government policy seems to assume for men in this situation. So much for equality and so much for the Rule of Law.

Defendants in rape cases are not properly comparable with complainants but with defendants in other kinds of criminal case. Defendants accused of other criminal offences do not have anonymity, regardless of the offence involved.

Correct in a way, defendants in rape cases are not properly comparable. Defendants, when their name is plastered all over the media, have their lives destroyed regardless of the outcome. The damage is already done.

This is about trying to make examples of innocent men to please feminists. This is about one rule for the accuser and another for the accused. This is about the government doing its best to encourage rape accusations, whether they be true or not and pushing for convictions, whether the man is guilty or not, for higher statistics which inevitably equals more laws and regulations over peoples’ behaviour and more money for feminist, man and family hating quangos.

This is about demonising all men as rapists, instilling fear and encouraging female mistrust of all men.

This is state-sanctioned misandry for power and political gain, nothing else.

This is the real face of feminism.

Invisible Empire Official Trailer

The official trailer for Invisible Empire, written and directed by Jason Bermas, and produced by Alex Jones.

Monday, 24 August 2009

Government to ban pint glasses


What a bunch of patronising cunts.

Plans to replace the traditional pint glass with one made of unbreakable plastic will not be accepted by drinkers, the pub industry has warned.

Damn right, who the fuck wants to pay the massively inflated costs of a pint these days, only to have it served in a piece of plastic. Let’s hear the excuse for this latest volley against freedom.

The Home Office has commissioned a new design, in an attempt to stop glasses being used as weapons.

Official figures show 5,500 people are attacked with glasses and bottles every year in England and Wales.

I'm sure I don't have to point out the absurdly low number of attacks this constitutes in the scheme of the number of pubs and revellers. More people die needlessly under the care of the NHS each year. There are over 7000 pubs in London alone. According to the same article;

126 million pints per week are served in the UK. Now that sounds high to me, but anyway.

126 million * 52 weeks = over 6 billion 500 million pints per year.

5,500 people are attacked each year with the evil pint glass. This amounts to a less than 0.00009 percent attack rate. This figure is so low I’ve convinced myself that I calculated the percentage wrong. Another way of looking at this is the average pub goer will have a 1 in 1,181,818 chance of this happening to them.

There is no logical reason for this whatsoever. What’s next, banning metal knives and forks?

Neil Williams from the association said he was concerned that drinkers would notice a drop in quality:

"For the drinker, the pint glass feels better, it has a nice weight and the drink coats the glass nicely. That's why people go out for a drink, to have a nice experience".

Something this fucking piss poor excuse for a government is doing its best to destroy using its favourite weapon; bureaucracy.

Mr Williams said the industry feared extra costs at a time when many pubs were struggling in the recession: "It would impose another cost on us. Red tape is already coming from all sides."

More costs, more regulations, more excuses for the government to watch and control private enterprise. Still, the Ministry of Freedom Home Office is adamant that us peasants accept the new programming. What to do?

Nick Verebelyi, the designer in charge of delivering the new pint, said they were looking at two approaches.

"One is to coat the glass with a substance that will make sure the glass doesn't shatter into pieces when it is broken - that could be a plastic material for example.

Whatever, I want my pint in a glass, not in some oestrogen leaking plastic container. By the way, do you know how easy it is to break a plastic pint, er cup? And what of the possibility of people using pint containers even more because ‘it’s just plastic’. I’ll lob this pint because it’s only plastic what’s the worst that can happen? Another big fucking waste of public funds.

Mr Verebelyi said he accepted that drinkers are attached to the traditional glass pint: "You make a change and there is often opposition, we've got to make it appealing to them.

"We've got to make it desirable and acceptable and cool.

"There's going to be quite a push behind this in terms of the Home Office."

Translation: We need to re-engineer people to think they way we want them to.

The Home Office Minister, Alan Campbell, said the redesign could make a significant difference to the number of revellers who are injured.

He said: "Innovative design has played an important role in driving down overall crime, including theft, fraud and burglary.

"This project will see those same skills applied to the dangerous and costly issue of alcohol-related crime and I am confident that it will lead to similar successes."

Bullshit. Note in the last sentence he says this should reduce alcohol related crime. But I thought this was about pint glasses in the face? Alcohol-related could mean any-fucking-thing, especially when the state has an agenda.

Women are deficient in intelligence

Harriet Harman, the feminist fuckface who believes that discriminating against men isn’t actually discrimination (maybe she doesn’t think men are people). Also, at Pat Condell points out on Youtube, another bloody feminist who claims women are oppressed, only to hear a deafening silence from them in regards to treatment of women under Islam.

You know, stoning to deaths, the rapes, the marriages of 10 year old girls to old men, honour killings, women being worth half a man etc. These are not merely the actions of a ‘few individual Muslims’. The view that women are inferior runs throughout Islam, throughout the Quran.

So, Harriet the fuckface stated that men cannot be trusted to run businesses on their own etc (what Industrial Revolution?).

In Iran, the opposite is true, when Iranian clerics object to women as cabinet ministers: "there are religious doubts over the abilities of women when it comes to management"

Quoth Ali, the rightful successor to Muhammad according to the Shi'ites:

"O' ye peoples! Women are deficient in Faith, deficient in shares and deficient in intelligence. As regards the deficiency in their Faith, it is their abstention from prayers and fasting during their menstrual period. As regards deficiency in their intelligence it is because the evidence of two women is equal to that of one man. As for the deficiency of their shares that is because of their share in inheritance being half of men. So beware of the evils of women. Be on your guard even from those of them who are (reportedly) good. Do not obey them even in good things so that they may not attract you to evils." - The Peak of Eloquence, sermon 80.

On the Sunni side of the street (sorry), this quotation is in accord with Bukhari 1.6.301:

The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."

So where are all the feminists now, those femmies who say unless women are automatically given 50% of the board room and cabinet positions, (but funnily enough, not 50% of building site or scaffolding positions) they are oppressed and victims of a patriarchy, but their misandric government are importing millions of Muslims who believe women are inferior, because their prophet said so, with the ensuing rise of crimes as a result.

Hello, hello? Bunch of pussies.

Sunday, 23 August 2009

Hate speech in the Quran

When Islamic terrorists massacred 186 children and 148 other non-Muslims on the morning of September 3rd, 2004 at a schoolhouse in Beslan, Russia, very few Muslims celebrated the high-profile event and some even took the time to denounce it.  But, in a community renowned for its peevishness, there was very little passion over the routine slaughter of innocents in the name of Islam.

While rumors of a Qur’an desecration or a Muhammad cartoon bring out deadly protests, riots, arson and effigy-burnings, the mass murder of non-Muslims generally evokes yawns. In the six years following 9/11 more than 10,000 acts of deadly Islamic terrorism were perpetrated, yet all of them together fail to provoke the sort of outrage on the part of most Muslims that the mere mention of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo inspires.

This critical absence of moral perspective puzzles many Westerners, particularly those trying to reconcile this reality with the politically-correct assumption that Islam is like other religion.  The Judeo-Christian tradition preaches universal love and unselfishness, so it is expected that the more devout Muslims would be the most peaceful and least dangerous... provided that Islam is based on the same principles.

But beneath the rosy assurances from Muslim apologists that Islam is about peace and tolerance lies a much darker reality that better explains the violence and deeply-rooted indifference.  Quite simply, the Qur'an teaches hate.


Friday, 21 August 2009

Councils to be able to restrain ‘stalkers’ even if found innocent

People may be given restraining orders even if they have been found not guilty of any offence, under a controversial extension of the power of the courts unveiled yesterday.

From the end of next month, courts will have greater freedom to grant the orders against those suspected of harassment or domestic violence.

Restraining orders are designed to stop stalkers harassing victims, or abusers to stop harming their partners.

In some cases, they place restrictions on going near a victim's house or workplace.

Currently courts can issue restraining orders only following conviction for two types of offences, harassment or putting someone in fear of violence.

Under the new rules, an order can be made following conviction for any offence and even when a defendant is acquitted.

And the police state grows ever larger. The councils can now impose restraining orders on innocent people if they ‘suspect’ that person. What next? Taking men falsely accused of rape and throwing them in prison anyway?

I suppose this all goes into the ‘evil men’ feminist statistics, because you know this will be directed against men. It also continues the state desire to encroach utterly on every aspect of our lives, usually by pretending to be doing it in ‘our best interests’.

One of the comments on the Mail site says this;

This is a positive step in the right direction to reduce the Islamic honor killings, and reduce the deplorably high rate or rape in the UK.

- FeFe, Wash D.C., 21/8/2009 08:40

Well, rape convictions have been consistently falling, and you want to use mass immigration of people from Islamic countries as a pretext to impose vague fuzzy draconian laws on us all?

More importantly, this decision violates the Rule of Law and that alone makes it completely unacceptable, I couldn’t give a fuck about people’s feelings.

Wednesday, 19 August 2009

Fairness – the weasel word


Planning laws are deliberately biased in favour of gipsies and travellers, a Government minister has finally admitted.

After years of official denials on the issue, Communities Secretary Shahid Malik confessed that travelling families are treated differently from 'the settled community'.

Justifying the policy, the minister said: 'Fairness does not mean treating people equally; it means addressing the different needs of different people.'

Read that carefully. Fairness does NOT mean treating people equally, it means treating people differently according to their needs.

Their needs should be irrelevant. The Law is the Law. There are two types of egalitarian, the ones who call for equality of opportunity (Rule of Law) and those who want equality of outcome. (Socialism). Guess which one this slimy little shit is speaking of.labour_islam_fmwatkins[1] Still this slimy Muslim dickhead usurper has no qualms with undermining the ancient Rule of Law. As he himself has said, what he really wants is a Muslim dominated Parliament and the establishment of a Britain ruled by a vicious, barbaric seventh-century death cult.

Anyway, equality of outcome is when you pay the same prize money to the winner of Women’s Wimbledon than you do to the mens’, ignoring the fact that the men play more sets. It would be like paying me the same salary as you only I work three days a week, you still work five.

You may as well take it further and say pay everyone the same, regardless of what they do and how much they work. Would look lovely on paper no? Imagine what society would really be like however. No tractors for you!

You should not be surprised though, Communism was designed specifically to collapse Western, individualist capital based societies as they believed their New Internationalist Order could only truly be born from the ashes of the old.

Tuesday, 18 August 2009

How The West Was Lost

From James Delingpole, in the Telegraph Blog.

The Burkini. You’d think it was a joke invention: a bit like the grotesque “Mankini” so hilariously sported by Sacha Baron Cohen on all those posters for Borat. What, after all, could be more absurd than melding the not-notably-sexy Muslim dress - the Burka - with the kind of achingly seductive kit worn by Brigitte Bardot in And God Created Woman?

But no, the Burkini is for real. It was designed by an Lebanese Australian Aheda Zanetti to enable women in thrall to extreme Saudi-style dress codes to go swimming on beaches and in public baths without incurring a beating or instant divorce from their characteristically tolerant and cosmopolitan menfolk.

If you didn’t know, it is in regards to this cultural Jihad being waged by Muslims in Britain, in this case, by imposing dress codes and Muslim only swimming sessions.

What I will add however, is the real reason for Muslim only sessions is because Muslims believe that us non Muslims are ritually unclean. Every part of us is impure and they have to keep their distance lest they be infected by our disgusting non Muslim touch.

I’m not kidding. From ‘The Legacy of Jihad by Andrew G. Bostom, MD’ we have this quote on page 33;

… According to Al-Majilisi,

And, that they should not enter the pool while a Muslim is bathing at the public baths. . . . It is also incumbent upon Muslims that they should not accept from them victuals with which they had come into contact, such as distillates, which cannot be purified. If something can be purified, such as clothes, if they are dry, they can be accepted, they are clean. But if they (the dhimmis) had come into contact with those clothes in moisture they should be rinsed with water after being obtained.

It goes on. It is only when the study Islam for yourself that you begin to discover just how much contempt Islam and its followers view us and everything about us in the West (except the benefits and council houses, which is a form of financial Jihad). Talk of ‘social cohesion’ etc is all nonsense. Islam is an imperialistic, totalitarian socio-political supremacist sect, not a religion. They do not wish to integrate, they wish to infiltrate and then dominate, while assimilating the benefits of Western society and imposing their tyrannical collectivist death cult on the rest of us. They see themselves as superior to us in every way, not because they personally came to that conclusion, but because Islam states it, and they don’t think for themselves. Actually, they’re not allowed to think. Islam says so. Such is the nature of cults.

To make it perfectly clear, Islam is not a peaceful, passive system. It is an aggressive encroaching system. Depending on their relative numbers in a host state they may play the quiet card, slowly imposing their barbaric primitive culture or in larger numbers, outright violence and threats against local non Muslims. Anyone who tells you different is either a) ignorant or b) lying. From the same book as I quoted above (and the same page);

Sir Jadunath Sarkar, for example, a preeminent historian of Mughal India, wrote the following in 1920 regarding the impact of centuries of jihad and dhimmitude on the indigenous Hindus of the India subcontinent:

Islamic theology, therefore tells the true believer that his highest duty is to make “exertion (jihad) in the path of God,” by waging war against infidel lands (dar-ul-harb) till they become part of the realm of Islam (dar-ul-Islam) and their populations are converted into true believers. After conquest the entire infidel population becomes theoretically reduced to the status of slaves of the conquering army. The men taken are to be slain or sold into slavery and their wives and children reduced to servitude.

Religion of peace indeed.

If you want a grounding in Islam relatively quickly, look at the links on the right under ‘Islam’ and read this.

John Cleese's ex-wife will leave divorce richer than him

Work that one out.

John Cleese has been forced to agree a divorce settlement of nearly £12.5million with his third wife.

The deal is likely to leave her richer than him.

He will hand over £8million to Alyce Faye Eichelberger in cash and assets, plus £612,000 a year for the next seven years, despite them having no children.

The payout will reduce 69-year-old Cleese's overall wealth to around £10million.

He has, however, managed to find a sense of humour about the settlement, saying: 'I got off lightly. Think what I'd have had to pay Alyce if she'd contributed anything to the relationship.'

Revelations about the divorce, which it is understood will be rubberstamped imminently, have come from Cleese's friend Michael Winner.

The film director and restaurant critic said: 'His ex-wife Alyce Faye Eichelberger told me on a previous spat..."John doesn't know what's going to hit him. I'll take him for every penny". She kept her word.'

Only in this bullshit feminist society could a woman even assume they would be able to take so much of a man’s hard earned wealth.

'Alyce lived in a council flat when they met. There are no dependent children. Yet she's getting some $13million in cash and assets (£8million). Plus a further $1million (£612,000 a year for seven years).

'As he put it "What I find so unfair is that if we both died today, her children would get much more than mine".

No dependent children, he made all of the money, yet she is going to take most of it, and that is on top of enjoying the fruits of his labours ALREADY since 1992.

Psychotherapist Miss Eichelberger, 64, the third Mrs Cleese, was originally claiming £900,000-a-year maintenance, two houses and half of his earnings since they married in 1992.

Wow. How women can even get off demanding such things is unbelievable. No honour or respect whatsoever. What’s love got to do with it.. indeed.

And they wonder why marriage rates are falling like a rock. Which is part of the Marxo-feminist plan of course. Destroy the nuclear family.

Still, even on the level of screwed up divorces, this is something else.

Swine Flu Vaccine Linked to Paralysis

(NaturalNews) A warning letter about the swine flu vaccine was leaked to the DailyMail over the weekend. Written by Professor Elizabeth Miller, head of the Health Protection Agency's Immunization Department, it warns neurologists that the influenza vaccine of 1976 was linked to a devastating neurological condition called Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS). "The vaccines used to combat an expected swine influenza pandemic in 1976 were shown to be associated with GBS and were withdrawn from use," says the July 29 letter.

GBS can cause paralysis and death. One woman mentioned in the DailyMail story -- Hilary Wilkinson -- was stricken with GBS and had to be fed through a drip while needing a tracheotomy just to breathe. It took her three months in the hospital to learn how to walk and talk again. On the topic of the swine flu vaccine, she says today, "It makes me feel wary that the Government is rolling out this vaccine without any clear idea of the GBS risk, if any. I wouldn't wish it on anyone... I'm frightened to have the swine flu vaccine if this might happen again -- it's a frightening illness and I think more research needs to be done on the effect of the vaccine."

No, no research! Just rush them out, make lots of money for the indemnified Big Pharma corps. Don’t look into the ingredients and their side effects, even Glaxo doesn’t know what they are, and it’s making the damn stuff. We do know about some of the ingredients though, have a look here, for the potential damage it can do.

Monday, 17 August 2009

Forget National Sovereignty

“All your Rights Are Belong to Us” – EU

In 2001, when EU leaders gathered in Laeken, Belgium, to plan their next great leap forward to European integration – the ill-fated EU constitution – they also agreed on what they saw as another bold symbol of their wish to see Europe politically and legally united: the European Arrest Warrant. Fired by the recent 9/11 outrage, they agreed that the courts of any country could call on those of another to order the automatic extradition of anyone suspected of offences under 32 headings, with such crimes as terrorism, drug-running and “xenophobia” high on their list.

Even then, fears were expressed that such a summary shortcutting of normal legal procedures might lead to serious injustices. Not all of the EU’s judicial systems (to put it mildly) rest on the same ideas of justice. But even those most worried about the dangers of this system could scarcely have imagined a case like that involving the extradition to Greece of a 20-year old British student, Andrew Symeou.

I know people don’t seem to notice at this is happening, or even care for that matter (until it happens to you of course). Instead people seem happy to continually tip toe along ever thinning lines of ‘legal behaviour’. I say the line gets thinner, because the more laws they pass, the more things become illegal that were legal a week ago.

Think about that. An illegal act is supposed to be only that which is fundamentally wrong, a violation of an individuals’ freedom or property rights would constitute such an act. But now, with thousands upon thousands of laws and statues now being enforced, nobody has a clue what they really can or cannot do.

And that is just in our Parliament. The EU’s directive book hasn’t even been audited, no one really know how many there are, but visit the EU law website on any given day and you’ll see a bunch of new directives being passed. The official journal lists approximately 9 directives a day. Some add rules, some change old rules, but you haven’t got a clue about any of them do you?

This EU extradition rule is just a small glimmer of the supranational grasp of this tyrannical invention. People only seem to want to take notice when it rears its ugly head, but usually it is busy usurping our freedoms through Parliament in stealth.

I’ll write more about this later.

Sunday, 16 August 2009


The Opinionator

British Labour councillor Zahir Ahmed, who represents the Daneshouse and Stoneyholme ward  in Burnley, has been pressured into quitting for his lack of attending required meetings and failure to represent those he was elected to serve.

Mr Ahmed, who is required to attend full council meetings, only managed four out of a possible 10 – at a cost of £675 each.

That is just the beginning of what this article highlights.


Friday, 14 August 2009

Yet another false rape accuser


Nice to see the good old female superior conscience still applies…

A woman faces jail after luring a man into having sex with her and then crying rape in a plot to claim thousands of pounds in compensation.

Sarah-Jane Hilliard, 20, applied for £7,500 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority days after falsely accusing Grant Bowers, 19, of raping her.

Yesterday, the telesales employee was told she faced a jail term, after her web of lies was exposed in court in May.

Let’s see what disgracefully lenient sentence she will get.

Officers contacted Mr Bowers and told him he would not be charged and instead arrested Hilliard for perverting the course of justice.

Ah but as is always the case with false rape accusations, the damage to the man is already done. He has no right to anonymity before a verdict you see, whereas women do, whether they are lying or not.

But this did not save him from being made a hate figure. 'The last 11 months have been horrendous,' he said.

'I've lost all my self- confidence. I don't know why she did it but her lies have ruined my life.'

Mr Bowers's father, Tony, 48, said his son had to move out of Basildon because of threats against him. He said: 'After the court case people started kicking the door of his flat in and shouting "rapist" though the letterbox.

'He moved into temporary accommodation but he heard that people were offering £100 to find out where he was. He's been threatened and chased through town with a knife too.

It is possible he could have been stabbed, maybe killed over this bitch. All so she can play the victim and get some money off of the state taxpayer, the damage to the young INNOCENT man continues;

In Hilliard's trial at Basildon Crown Court in May, Andrew Jackson, prosecuting, said: 'This incident has changed Mr Bowers.

'He speaks of his lack of confidence approaching young women, not trusting them and having trouble sleeping.

'He was physically sick through worry, constantly teary and feeling like he wanted to cry.'

I am not surprised. The damage this can do to a man is unbelievable, although our feminist society has no interest in truly accepting the harm it can cause to males, preferring to just tell them to ‘be a man about it’.

Now, just were is the ‘but she was a poor victim’ excuse… you know it is around here somewhere…

Jacqueline Carey, defending, said Hilliard had an 'extremely difficult period in her past' which she had discussed with a psychiatrist.

Hilliard was found guilty and was due to be sentenced yesterday but that was adjourned until next month to wait for further psychiatric reports.

Poor girl. She must have had such a hard past…

WHO GIVES A FUCK. She is a criminal, she lied to the police about a crime, she has perverted the course of justice, conspired to manipulate public funds (fraud) and has put an innocent young man’s life at risk for her own selfish ends.

Fuck her feelings. The lying, manipulative, narcissistic bitch.

Women in Islam


There has been a fair bit of talk lately on this issue with the Burka, or Burkini or whatever. Recently it was banned in France (well done lads);

A French mother was banned from wearing the three-piece outfit at her local swimming pool.

Carole, a 35-year- old Muslim convert, was told it was ' inappropriate' on hygiene grounds, but she insists the ban is racial discrimination.

It follows French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently attacking Muslim burkhas as a 'sign of subservience' for women and saying they should be banned.

Racial discrimination. For a religious garment. Race and religion are two different things, so we already know the mental limitation of this female, I mean she converted to Islam so don’t expect any sort of intellect here.

Women have rights that are similar to men, but men are "a degree above them." 2:228

Pat Condell weighed in on the subject with typical clarity and humour, worth a watch.

Like Pat, I too am wondering where all the rabid feminists are on this subject. Harriet the Man Hater, all too happy to portray women as victims of their sex (while equal at the same time, go figure) hasn’t uttered a peep. I suppose Muslims must come before white women in her twisted cultural Marxist worldview. Feminists are social parasites and they make me sick.

A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282

Now it is probably common knowledge now that the wearing of this Burka is not a requirement of Islam. More Muslim women seem to wear it in the West than they do in the Middle East, which just me think it is a form of Islamic cultural warfare. Doing their utmost to broadcast that they want to be different, see us as different and do not wish to communicate in the way we in the West have done for hundreds of years.

"All married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." You can't have sex with married women, unless they are slaves obtained in war (with whom you may rape or do whatever you like). 4:24

There was a female Muslim convert on LBC the other day defending wearing the Burka, saying she joined Islam because it is ‘liberating and peaceful’. Dressing up like an out of shape ninja is liberating is it? She said she liked the ‘modesty’. So she wanted to dress modestly and joined Islam to do it? She couldn’t just, you know, DRESS MODESTLY?

Women are feeble and are unable to devise a plan. 4:98

She obviously has done ZERO research into Islam, preferring to just listen to local Muslims talk shit about it, themselves probably knowing next to nothing about it. Did you know the Islamic rule for leaving the religion is death, and they imposed this rule because they were worried many Muslims would leave Islam on Mohammed’s passing, after finding out the true hatred and violence ingrained in the religion?

Believing women must lower their gaze and be modest, cover themselves with veils, and not reveal themselves except to their husbands, relatives, children, and slaves. 24:31

Of course you didn’t. Like usual, people don’t do their own research anymore, being infantile and lazy (like the humans in Pixars’ Wall-E) choosing instead to base their worldly knowledge on sanitised nonsense drip fed to them via the corporate media and the state. View this strange article in the Telegraph;

Women are allowed in mosques but there are always separate rooms in which they pray.

The Koran doesn’t specifically say married couples should be separated at weddings, but it is a long-standing custom.

It is customary that the male and female guests are served separate wedding banquets and only at the end do the married couple sit together, sometimes under a headscarf while prayers are read.

This separation of sexes is part of the religion’s emphasis on chastity and modesty, which is also reflected in the way many Muslim women cover their faces and bodies in public.

Isn’t that sweet? Islam just wants its women to be chase and modest. Nothing to do with viewing women as inferior to men then. Nothing to do with women being seen as meat by Muslim men, interpretations of which lead to women being raped, and then found guilty of sex outside marriage! An example from Pakistan.

Hudood laws are a tool in the hands of men - with these laws they can rape women and be totally unaccountable.

Under Hudood if a woman makes a rape allegation she must provide four pious male witnesses or face a charge of adultery herself.

So a woman is in the ridiculous position of having to produce four Muslim adult male eyewitnesses, men who just stood there and watched.

If sex by force is not proved, this woman can be charged with "zina" - sex outside of marriage.

Uzma Saeed believes the Hudood ordinances should be repealed

About 60% of women in our jails have been imprisoned as a result of Hudood laws.

This Islamic rule was superseded by the Women Protection Bill in 2006, but that bill has come under attack for being un-Islamic.

The Religious political parties however are against the Bill calling it un-Islamic. They argue that the bill goes against articles 2a and 227 of the constitution of Pakistan, which state respectively that "Islam will be the state religion" and "No laws will be passed which are repugnant to the Koran and sunnah."

There is no doubt about it. Men and women are not equal under their God. Girls have been stoned to death for being raped, from November ‘08;

A 13-year-old girl who said she had been raped was stoned to death in Somalia after being accused of adultery by Islamic militants, a human rights group said.

Religion of Peace? Fuck off. There are a number of things you need to take into consideration if you want to formulate a thorough understanding about the true face of Islam.

1. The teachings of the Koran, Hadiths and Sunnahs, Shariah etc

2. What Mohammed himself did and said (remember he is the example of the perfect man to all Muslims, so they must agree and defend all of his actions).

3. What actually occurs in Islamic states around the world today.

4. What has occurred in Islamic states throughout history.

5. What is happening in Western states with mass immigration of Muslims.

Just listening to a few apologists on the corporate media or some ignorant Muslim is insufficient in building an honest understanding of this so-called Religion of Peace.

If you want a summary of the treatment of women under Islam from a technical perspective, start here;

Women’s Worth in Islam

And some more info on the ideology.

The Myths of Islam

Wednesday, 12 August 2009

Tamiflu and Swine Flu vaccine research

I hope you guys are paying attention to the latest wave of news regarding the negative effects of Tamiflu, and that is an ‘established’ antiviral.

Google News Listing

Remember the Swine Flu vaccine (which they are subtly demanding the whole world takes) has had no such ‘testing’. On top of that it (Relenza) contains the adjuvant AS03. This can be confirmed by the following page on the Glaxo website, which states;

The vaccine will comprise antigen of the recently isolated A (H1N1) influenza strain and also contain GSK's proprietary adjuvant system AS03.

AS03 contains Squalene plus Vitamin-E (Why?) plus Polysorbate-80 (Tween-80) which is another additive that crosses the blood-brain barrier and is thought to create adverse effects (it's in Gardasil).

Regarding squalene;

Your immune system recognizes squalene as an oil molecule native to your body. It is found throughout your nervous system and brain. In fact, you can consume squalene in olive oil and not only will your immune system recognize it, you will also reap the benefits of its antioxidant properties.

The difference between “good” and “bad” squalene is the route by which it enters your body. Injection is an abnormal route of entry which incites your immune system to attack all the squalene in your body, not just the vaccine adjuvant.

Your immune system will attempt to destroy the molecule wherever it finds it, including in places where it occurs naturally, and where it is vital to the health of your nervous system

Polysorbate-80 is known to cause infertility.

Polysorbate 80 (also known as tween 80) is a stabilizer used in a wide variety of products including ice cream, milk products, vitamin tablets, lotions and creams and medical products like vaccines and anti-cancer medications.

It is toxic and should not be eaten, drunk, put on the skin or injected.

According to Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, Volume 95, Number 6, December 2005 , pp. 593-599(7), "it is of current relevance as a 'hidden' inductor of anaphylactoid reactions", and "Polysorbate 80 was identified as the causative agent for the anaphylactoid reaction of nonimmunologic origin in the patient. Conclusions: Polysorbate 80 is a ubiquitously used solubilizing agent that can cause severe nonimmunologic anaphylactoid reactions."

Put in plain English, polysorbate 80 can affect your immune system and cause severe anaphylactic shock which can kill.

It also goes by the name Tween 80 (Polysorbate 80) -- Polyoxyethylene Sorbitan Monooleate (polyoxyethylenesorbitan monooleat);

Gardasil contains Polysorbate 80, which is linked to infertility in mice,” noted Dee Nicholson, National Communications Director for Freedom in Canadian Health Care. [Nov 2007] Sleight of Handling: More Merck Magic Tricks With HPV Vaccine By Christopher C. Barr

A study published in December, 2005 discovered that Tween80 can cause anaphylaxis, a sometimes fatal reaction characterized by a sharp drop in blood pressure, hives, and breathing difficulties. Researchers concluded that the severe reaction was not a typical allergic response characterized by the combination of IgE antibodies and the release of histamines; it was caused by a serious disruption that had occurred within the immune system. Exploring Vaccines

According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, which is part of the United Nations, scientists from the organization are developing vaccines specifically to damage fertility as a method of contraception. A suggested ingredient for the vaccine is tween 80 (polysorbate 80): “In a preferred embodiment the vaccine comprises oil, preferably a biodegradable oil such as squalene oil. Typically, the vaccine is prepared using an adjuvant concentrate which contains lecithin in squalene oil. The aqueous solution glycoprotein is typically a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution, and additionally preferably contains Tween 80.” (Fertility Impairing Vaccine And Methods of Use’ This application claims the benefit of U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/070,375, filed January 2,1998, U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/071,406, filed January 15,1998.) Exploring Vaccines

It also contains Thiomersal;

Thiomersal (INN) (C9H9HgNaO2S), or sodium ethylmercurithiosalicylate, commonly known in the United States as thimerosal, is an organomercury compound (approximately 49% mercury by weight) used as an antiseptic and antifungal agent.

No mercury or mercury derivative should ever enter your body, there is no safe quantity. Mercury itself is extremely toxic to living organisms;

The World Health Organization declared there is no safe level of mercury for human beings - in other words, mercury is so poisonous that no amount of mercury absorption is safe. (1992)

We now know Thiomersal is an organic mercury compound;

Compounds of mercury tend to be much more toxic than the element itself, and organic compounds of mercury are often extremely toxic and have been implicated in causing brain and liver damage. The most dangerous mercury compound, dimethylmercury, is so toxic that even a few microliters spilled on the skin, or even a latex glove, can cause death.

There is also a possible mass sterilisation vector to these vaccines, considering the toxic ingredients and the deliberate stoking up of fear by governments, supranational organisations (WHO) and the MSM. There is a long list of documented sterilisation via vaccine programmes.

Vaccines: Sterilisation & Abortion

Mercury, Autism and the Global Vaccine Agenda

Obama’s current ‘science czar’ John P. Holdren co-wrote a book called Ecoscience advocating mass global sterilisation programmes using vaccines, medicated tap water and other vectors. Another one of the books’ authors, Paul H. Erlick is another rabid depopulate the planet advocate.

I strongly recommend you check all of the links on this page, read through the respective articles and do you own additional research.

Think about it, if this is the information we can uncover about these vaccines, imagine what we don’t know, and even if you don’t believe everything on here (hence you should self-check) the mere fact that so much negative data exists regarding them should make you think twice with ‘just trusting the government, they know best’.

The final responsibility for your health and that of your children does not rest with the WHO or your government, they don’t love you or your family, you are merely a statistic to them. Would you trust that complete strangers will look out for you and your family with more love and attention than you would?

Of course not.

Monday, 10 August 2009

Britain has more CCTV than China

Britain has one and a half times as many surveillance cameras as communist China, despite having a fraction of its population, shocking figures reveal.

There are 4.2million closed circuit TV cameras here, one per every 14 people.

But in police state China, which has a population of 1.3billion, there are just 2.75million cameras, the equivalent of one for every 472,000 of its citizens.

Simon Davies from pressure group Privacy International said the astonishing statistic highlighted Britain's 'worrying obsession' with surveillance.

'Britain has established itself as the model state that the Chinese authorities would love to have,' he said.

'As far as surveillance goes, Britain has created the blueprint for the 21st century  non-democratic regime.

'It was not intended but it has certainly been the consequence.'

Oh, it was intended. Everything they are doing to destroy this beautiful country is intended. You don’t accidentally fall into a police state, or sign away the worlds most illustrious, ancient democracy in the world to a Nazi wet dream. While people, commentators, MP’s and media continue to make excuses for it, it will keep getting worse.

Denial is not a river in Egypt, it is a Road to Hell.

Sunday, 9 August 2009

Muslim Europe


Britain and the rest of the European Union are ignoring a demographic time bomb: a recent rush into the EU by migrants, including millions of Muslims, will change the continent beyond recognition over the next two decades, and almost no policy-makers are talking about it.

The numbers are startling. Only 3.2 per cent of Spain's population was foreign-born in 1998. In 2007 it was 13.4 per cent. Europe's Muslim population has more than doubled in the past 30 years and will have doubled again by 2015. In Brussels, the top seven baby boys' names recently were Mohamed, Adam, Rayan, Ayoub, Mehdi, Amine and Hamza.

This was the whole point of Multiculturalism, to import many foreign cultures for the purpose of weakening the indigenous culture. Remember, the goal of the EU is one vast state, as are the goals of the African Union, Asian Union and the NAU. After that they will simply be ‘harmonised’ with each other and then merged into a global state under a global government. A world empire. Britain is particularly important because of its history with freedom and democracy. It is the epicentre for it, therefore it must be destroyed for their global agenda. Islam is particularly desired because its entire structure exists in opposition to the principles of Western freedom and democracy.

The growing Muslim population is of particular interest. This is not because Muslims are the only immigrants coming into the EU in large numbers; there are plenty of entrants from all points of the compass. But Muslims represent a particular set of issues beyond the fact that atrocities have been committed in the West in the name of Islam.

Over 13,700 acts of deadly violence in the name of Islam, according to the Religion of Peace website, and follow a religion that consider non-Muslims are the ‘vilest of animals, lower than pigs or dogs and are the enemy, never to be trusted or taken as friends. And apologists have nerve to blame the existence of Muslim ghetto’s on the host nations! As if it is the duty of a sovereign nation to kow tow to foreign cultures, rules and customs.

America's Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, part of the non-partisan Pew Research Center, said in a report: "These [EU] countries possess deep historical, cultural, religious and linguistic traditions. Injecting hundreds of thousands, and in some cases millions, of people who look, speak and act differently into these settings often makes for a difficult social fit."

It is a recipe for chaos, not merely a ‘difficult social fit’, but if the endgame is the destruction of the host cultures of democratic countries, then it makes sense. This is the primary reason for the globalist Human Rights Act. It deliberately makes no distinction between law-abiding and criminal, indigenous or foreign, contributor or not.

This unlimited immigration is a form of warfare. Same as the BOE’s money printing is economic warfare and feminism is social, ‘nuclear family’ warfare.

"To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas." - Dr. G. Brock Chisolm

Saturday, 8 August 2009

Imperial History of the Middle East

Maps of War

Obama's Eugenics Hoax Exposed


An informative video from Rob Wanek (NsaneSk8er007), who has kindly given me permission to repost it here. Rob writes:

"This is all part of either a depopulation or eugenics scam to reduce the population in the ways of minions such as rockefeller and kissinger, releasing these deadly viruses through the very vaccines themselves. This healthcare bill is steering us dead on with a global currency and global gov, as this will destroy our ailing economy even more. Destroyed be design? Or just a mistake by introducing this horrendous costly bill? You decide."

Ten things you're not supposed to know about the swine flu vaccine
(At least, not by anyone in authority...)

#1 - The vaccine production was "rushed" and the vaccine has never been tested on humans. Do you like to play guinea pig for Big Pharma? If so, line up for your swine flu vaccine this fall...

#2 - Swine flu vaccines contain dangerous adjuvants that cause an inflammatory response in the body. This is why they are suspected of causing autism and other neurological disorders.

#3 - The swine flu vaccine could actually increase your risk of death from swine flu by altering (or suppressing) your immune system response. There is zero evidence that even seasonal flu shots offer any meaningful protection for people who take the jabs. Vaccines are the snake oil of modern medicine.

#4 - Doctors still don't know why the 1976 swine flu vaccines paralyzed so many people. And that means they really have no clue whether the upcoming vaccine might cause the same devastating side effects. (And they're not testing it, either...)

#5 - Even if the swine flu vaccine kills you, the drug companies aren't responsible. The U.S. government has granted drug companies complete immunity against vaccine product liability. Thanks to that blanket immunity, drug companies have no incentive to make safe vaccines, because they only get paid based on quantity, not safety (zero liability).

#6 - No swine flu vaccine works as well as vitamin D to protect you from influenza. That's an inconvenient scientific fact that the U.S. government, the FDA and Big Pharma hope the people never realize.

#7 - Even if the swine flu vaccine actually works, mathematically speaking if everyone else around you gets the vaccine, you don't need one! (Because it can't spread through the population you hang with.) So even if you believe in the vaccine, all you need to do is encourage your friends to go get vaccinated...

#8 - Drug companies are making billions of dollars from the production of swine flu vaccines. That money comes out of your pocket -- even if you don't get the jab -- because it's all paid by the taxpayers.

#9 - When people start dying in larger numbers from the swine flu, rest assured that many of them will be the very people who got the swine flu vaccine. Doctors will explain this away with their typical Big Pharma logic: "The number saved is far greater than the number lost." Of course, the number "saved" is entirely fictional... imaginary... and exists only in their own warped heads.

#10 - The swine flu vaccine centers that will crop up all over the world in the coming months aren't completely useless: They will provide an easy way to identify large groups of really stupid people. (Too bad there isn't some sort of blue dye that we could tag 'em with for future reference...)

The lottery, they say, is a tax on people who can't do math. Similarly, flu vaccines are a tax on people who don't understand health.

Friday, 7 August 2009

Bank of England to increase counterfeiting

bbdo_brown_stalin_380[1] Going to inject more worthless paper into the economy and further devalue the cash already in circulation.

The decision by the Bank's Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) to increase the scale of the unprecedented programme of printing money, or quantitative easing, from £125bn to £175bn was consented to by Alistair Darling, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Call it what you wish, they are simply flooding the market with toilet paper. Actually, that’s a lie, toilet paper has value. It is bought by cash that is earned through labour. You know, you work for a week, get paid, that money represents a week of your working life. Same if a house is built and sold, the resulting cash created represents the collective labour, materials and profit involved in the transaction. Money is supposed to be one side of a coin (pun intended), the other side being production.

If the Wank of England just creates billions out of thin air and throws it into circulation what happens? Supply and demand happens, that’s what. If there was an infinite amount of cash then it would be utterly worthless. You would be better off using toilet paper to buy things with. Another example is diamonds, or oil. If you deliberately control (restrict) the supply and demand is static or increases it will force the value of the commodity up. That is what De Beers and OPEC do and is much easier to achieve when a monopoly/ oligopoly exists. Works the other way too. Increase the supply at a higher rate than demand and the value drops.

Now, this is just a simplified example but the principle is the same. Let’s say you earn £100,000 in a year, expenses are charged to some poor fucking idiots who let you get away with it (name this occupation). You bank the whole wedge. There is a ‘recession’ and the central bank starts flooding the economy with production-lite money. It devalues the cash in your account but it doesn’t manifest in a drop of account value, but an increase in the prices of everything else (as its buying power has decreased). Think of it like pushing weights. One month you push a certain amount with ease, but when you go back a few months later you find it much harder to push. It is the same weight, but you’ve gotten weaker due to a ‘dilution’ of your training regimen. Same thing.

Now, for the sake of simplicity let us say that your £100,000 back then can now only buy £90,000 worth of stuff today. Unlike others, you didn’t sell your Sterling for a more stable currency on the announcements of ‘quantitative easing’. This can manifest as the pound dropping against other currencies. When the pound drops, what that means is the value of your pound in your pocket falls in relation to other currencies.

Anyway you have lost £10,000 of buying power. Even if you stuck it under you mattress it would have still happened. But it gets better! Remember that the money you earn is a direct result of your labour and time you invested in it, the value of your production. £10,000 of it has now vanished. That is 10% of your working year gone. If you worked 300 days that year, it means you lost 30 of them (10%). The Bank of England literally stole them off of you. This is why inflation is a tax, and it does not take into account the burden on the taxpayer from the state spending and debt that already exists;

This year’s Tax Freedom Day, the date when we finish paying our tax burden for the year, was May 14 - the earliest since 1973. However, economists say that government deficits are really a form of deferred taxation and when government borrowing is factored in this momentous date does not fall until June 25 - the latest since 1984.

The average taxpayer is now working more than half the year on behalf of the Government and with each year that goes by this date gets later. In 2008 it fell on 15 June but in 2009 it will take 10 days longer before you start to earn any money for yourself.

So it is a fact that over half of your working life is served as a slave to the state (or that it owns a +50% stake in your production capacity). Interpret that as you will, but I see it as the government/ BOE having a controlling interest over you, and this is just for the people who are actually working!

So let’s add a few more points and summarise. The BOE is holding interest rates to the floor so people cannot earn anything on their savings, then inflating the money supply, reducing their savings, then the state is spending so much of your money that you are enslaved to it for over half the year. I do believe the BOE easing amounts to £5000 a second;

The Chancellor was lent £13billion in June - the highest ever for the month - bringing his borrowing for the financial year so far to £41.2billion, more than the defence budget.

That makes 2009/10 the fourth worst year in history for Government borrowing, even though it is only three months old. Borrowing to date has only been exceeded in an entire 12 months by last year, and the three years in 1992 to 1995.

Yes, more debt for the BOE and IMF to control us with, just what the internationalist financiers want, using the same techniques the Rothschilds used to take control of the BOE in 1825. And to top it all off, the government has had their accounts ‘qualified’.

Alistair Darling was embarrassed today when the Treasury's accounts were qualified for the first time in its 350-year history.

Moreover, after a huge rise in fraud and error in the tax credits system, auditors also qualified the accounts for HM Revenue & Customs and the Department for Work and Pensions.

When accounts are qualified it means auditors signify they have questioned information in them and disagree with the audited body's management.

This is quite simply wholesale looting of the British people, stealing real assets and replacing them with debt and worthless paper. I don’t know what else to say…

Women strike back

Good for them. Some punch-above-their-weight union (TUC) want to ban women wearing stilletos at work. Like it is any of their fucking business. It is oppressive and sexist apparently, but this writer isn’t having any of it;

… She wasn't being flippant - she was right. Old-style feminists hate heels, dismissing them as just another way to oppress women.

Designed specifically to distort the body, thrusting out our bottoms, lengthening our legs and arching our backs, they merely serve, the sisterhood argues, to turn us into sexual objects.

Feminists just can’t get their hateful little minds around the fact that women may actually like doing things that feminists don’t agree with, but they can never tell women off for their behaviour because women will just turn around and say ‘I thought you were about sexual liberation, independence, freedom of choice etc.’ So they just somehow blame men for it. Fucking pathetic.

Mandi Norwood, the former editor of Cosmopolitan magazine who once famously said 'I always wear heels to work. I can't think in flats', was speaking for the post-modern generation of career women who have rediscovered heels as both an asset and a sexual and professional weapon.

So the news that the TUC wants to ban them from the workplace on the grounds that they are sexist and even dangerous might seem to be another joke from the department of Haven't They Got Anything Proper To Worry About if it weren't so dense, so wrong, and so patronising.

But isn’t that the case with the whole of government and its quangos/ fake charities? The TUC is obviously attempting to impose another layer of control over people under the guise of protecting them. Because you know, people can’t look after themselves anymore, like little children. Or cattle. Adults need controlling. For freedom you understand.

Heels are for show, to add authority, to make you feel groomed and feminine, not for running marathons.

They don't, as the TUC seems to think, turn women into mush-brained idiots who don't know where blisters come from.

I am trying to get my head around the idea of some fucking union even dreaming of having the moral authority to tell the collective workplaces of an entire country how things should be run. That is why you start your own business, because you believe you can do all of that yourself and you’re tired of being told what to do. The only problem I know with heel’s is that they can damage expensive flooring. But that is an issue for individual businesses to deal with, not some centralised Stalinist gang with a God complex.

Remember, feminism was never about freedom. It was, is and always will be about control. The control of women and the demonisation of men. You can see this when women get criticised for making choices not in the feminist playbook. Like wanting to be a stay at home mum or entering a beauty pageant. It is just another example of social engineering, of the ‘we know what is best for you’ brigade. I get women telling me feminism is about equal right, then why is it called feminism, shouldn’t it be called equalism? There is a reason why the goals of feminism are virtually identical to those of communism… The overthrow of (spiritually) libertarian societies in favour of socialist dictatorships. It is just one arm of the NWO octopus but I’ll elaborate on that later.

Thursday, 6 August 2009

A Special Thanks From Alex Jones - Obama Deception Threatens Government Hoax

A thank you video from Alex Jones and I have also included the Obama Deception documentary from YouTube.

Freedom is down to us.

The Obama Deception ** MUST SEE **

‘Secure’ ID card – cloned and altered in 12 minutes

Laurie is holding one of 51,000 ID cards issued by the Home Office to foreign nationals currently working or studying in Britain.

It is similar to the ID card for British citizens unveiled last week by Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, as part of the Government's ongoing National Identity Scheme.

Embedded inside the card for foreigners is a microchip with the details of its bearer held in electronic form: name, date of birth, physical characteristics, fingerprints and so on, together with other information such as immigration status and whether the holder is entitled to State benefits.

This chip is the vital security measure that, so the Government believes, will make identity cards 'unforgeable'.

The same technology in the ‘new, improved’ Passports by the way.

But as I watch, Laurie picks up a mobile phone and, using just the handset and a laptop computer, electronically copies the ID card microchip and all its information in a matter of minutes.

He then creates a cloned card, and with a little help from another technology expert, he changes all the information the card contains - the physical details of the bearer, name, fingerprints and so on. And he doesn't stop there.

With a few more keystrokes on his computer, Laurie changes the cloned card so that whereas the original card holder was not entitled to benefits, the cloned chip now reads 'Entitled to benefits'.

As a chilling twist, he adds a message that would be visible to any police officer or security official who scanned the card: 'I am a terrorist - shoot on sight.'

I bet you didn’t know the ID card contains these sort of options, did you?

More disturbing still, it could be used to cover the tracks of terrorists planning atrocities on British or foreign soil. By any sensible measure, his demonstration, as part of a special Mail investigation, should be the final nail in the coffin of the Government's £5.4-billion ID scheme.

I doubt it. They are in bed with too many corporations with data mining contracts and are bound by the EU Laws concerning ID cards, which the government tries to deny. Also connected are the new Passports and EU Directive 95/46/EC.

There is also a bigger picture to this. In true Fabian fashion, nations all over the world are implementing centralised digital population registers, especially in the EU. (All nations being bound by EU Law). The issue is ownership. The government is essentially taking ownership of these (over) 50 points of data off of you, and imposing upon you the obligation to constantly update their database, else you risk a £1000 fine. For you own information. On their computers. On top of that, recently a Royal Courts of Justice ruling has set a disgustingly totalitarian precedent;

It would mean any civil/public servant and/or offices of the civil service could commit any act of wilful negligence without fear of legal action and with absolute impunity.

Imagine. A centralised collection of the most critical, important information that exists for you to interact with society. Forced together in one place (would you put your PIN with your credit card?) and that will be accessible by millions of civil servants, private businesses and even other countries.

On top of all that, is the inevitable lax in integrity-checking that is bound to occur with these new fangled super-duper ID cards. Incompetent (and unaccountable) civil servants will assume the technology is perfect, and not pay as much attention. Anyway, there is absolutely no reason why the government should assume central authority over such data. Unless it wants to position itself as the All-Seeing-Eye of all transactions.

Fuck the government. Put that in your fucking database you bunch of fascist cunts.

Free speech advocate banned, Islamic Anti-Semite allowed in

Equal treatment, anyone…

Geert Wilders, an international champion of free speech, is barred from Britain, but a Jew-hating Islamic supremacist is just fine with UK authorities.

Wednesday, 5 August 2009

Swine Flu scaremongering will net Glaxo almost £2bn


UK DRUG manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline is set to make more than £1.8 billion from its swine flu vaccine.

A further nine countries have ordered the 96 million doses in the past month, pushing orders beyond 290m as governments prepare for a possible "flu season" in the autumn.
The first supplies will be distributed next month. Glaxo has earmarked 20 per cent of the vaccine output from its Canadian manufacturing unit for poorer countries.

Fellow drug maker Novartis has started trials on its own vaccine, while Sanofi-Aventis expects to follow within days.

They better get their shitty little vaccines on the bandwagon, lots of money to be made spreading a disease,  scaring the shit out of peasants and them selling them a panacea

Problem – reaction – solution.

Obama the Joker


Diseased African Monkeys Used to Make Swine Flu Vaccines


(NaturalNews) To most people, vaccines sound medically harmless. "They're good for you!" say the doctors and drug companies, but they never really talk about what's in those vaccines. There's a good reason for that: If people knew what was really in those vaccines, they would never allow themselves to be injected with them.

Aside from the dangerous ingredients many people already know about (like squalene or thimerosal), one of the key ingredients used in flu vaccines (including the vaccines being prepared for the swine flu pandemic) is the diseased flesh of African Green Monkeys. This is revealed in U.S. patent No. 5911998 - Method of producing a virus vaccine from an African green monkey kidney cell line. (


As this patent readily explains, ingredients used in the vaccine are derived from the kidneys of African Green Monkeys who are first infected with the virus, then allowed to fester the disease, and then are killed so that their diseased organs can be used make vaccine ingredients. This is done in a cruel, inhumane "flesh factory" environment where the monkeys are subjected to a process that includes "incubating said inoculated cell line to permit proliferation of said virus." Then: "harvesting the virus resulting from step (c); and... (ii) preparing a vaccine from the harvested virus."

Aside from the outrageous cruelty taking place with all this ("incubating" the virus in the kidneys of living monkeys, for example), there's another disturbing fact that has surfaced in all this: The patent for this process is held not just by the National Institutes of Health, but by another private corporation known as DynCorp.

This, of course, brings up the obvious question: Who is Dyncorp? And why do they hold a patent on live attenuated vaccine production using African Green Monkeys?


Blog Archive