The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM’s Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.
It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not “skeptics.”
Nor are they ‘deniers’ or other such labels (designed purely to try and silence dissenting opinions). They simply do not agree with the very well funded propaganda campaign that revolves around blaming the entire human race for something in order to demand greater control over our freedom, energy use and independence from the State.
Now it’s not just the sunspots that predict a 23-year global cooling. The new Jason oceanographic satellite shows that 2007 was a “cool” La Nina year—but Jason also says something more important is at work: The much larger and more persistent Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has turned into its cool phase, telling us to expect moderately lower global temperatures until 2030 or so.
Attempts to silence dissent on any subject should always invoke suspicion. Coming up with a theory and attacking anyone who questions it sounds like there is an ulterior motive. In this case, that motive is not hard to find.
Researchers who analysed 30,000 academic studies dating back to 1970 said man was responsible for changes that ranged from the loss of ice sheets to the collapse in numbers of many species of wildlife.
“Humans are influencing climate through increasing greenhouse gas emissions, and the warming world is causing impacts on physical and biological systems,” said Cynthia Rosenzweig, at the Nasa Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
People that refuse to have their theories questioned, opinions probed or studies strutinised should make you wary. Why are they avoiding open discussion? What do they stand to gain from perpetuating their theory? Isn’t silencing dissent the actions of a police state, not a free society?
Don’t be afraid to question anything. That’s what you have a brain for. If you don’t ask questions now, soon you will find you won’t be allowed to.
Swooping and diving above the mountainous town of Bex in western Switzerland, the self-styled “Rocket Man” flew at 8,200ft for more than five minutes thanks to an 8ft jet-powered wing strapped to his back.
It has always been Mr Rossy’s ambition to fly freely, but it has taken four years of working on his jet design for that dream to become reality.
To achieve his bird-like status, the former Swiss fighter pilot was taken up in a light aircraft, just like a normal skydiver.
On jumping from the plane he appeared to plummet towards earth, before his fall turned to a glide and he ignited the four small jet engines attached to the carbon wing. Once under power and using a lever to control the fuel, hehad the freedom to soar where he chose.
Clearly enjoying his first public flight, at speeds of up to 186mph, Mr Rossy tipped his wings, flipped onto his back then levelled out again, performing a 360-degree roll.
Unlike Icaraus, the Greek mythological figure who flew too close to the sun and did not live to tell the tale, the 48-year-old landed safely using a parachute.
“This flight was excellent,” he said afterwards. “It’s like a second skin. If I turn to the left, I fly left. If I nudge to the right, I go right.”
Now he is planning an even greater challenge – to fly across the Channel.
I was reading this and wondering why there aren’t more women conceiving and constructing things like this, especially considering all of their women-only tax schemes and business initiatives continually being set up to pander to them.
Well consider this.
First you actually have to find something like this interesting (as opposed to the latest celeb crap gossip). You then have to study engineering and construction so you can understand the limits of what is possible compared to what you want to achieve. You then have to dedicate years of your life to trying to build it.
And there is no guarantee it is going to work. So its all very time consuming and requires much effort that may not result in a gain.
Except that, the desire to build it, and the journey trying to build it is what makes it fun.
This brings me to the point of my little rant. Women and girls love trying to denigrate men and boys, saying they’re useless, clumsy, girl power and all that bollocks.
For guys who may benefit from a bit of a boost from the constant onslaught of anti-male attitudes and propaganda… Who’s flying in the jet suit like a Centurion? Who designed the machinery that enables that light bulb to shine when you flick the switch…
It’s amazing, the level of delusional grandeur women will wallow in. Like this silly bitch.
I tried not to laugh. MMs (Macho Men) can be unintentionally hilarious. The way to deal with a modern MM, I realise, is to channel his energies into things you need him to do, like fix the car, and ignore the rest, or at least don’t let him see you smirking. It might hurt his ego, poor lamb.
The reality is that the mechanics of civilisation are invented, built and maintained by men, contrary to media-fed femmie-pandering propaganda. Remember to think about what IS, not was IS SAID.
Britons are to be asked to put a sticker proclaiming the rights of European Union “nationals” on the back cover of their passports.
From July 1 next year all new passports issued in the UK and other member countries will quote Article 20 of the EU’s founding treaty.
But in the meantime the European Commission has also told the British Government to produce stickers quoting the article and encourage as many people as possible to put them on their passports.
In case you didn’t know already, this is just another step in a long line of laws and proposals passed down from the unelected and unaccountable EU in order to mine power and influence away from sovereign nations. The goal is to eventually do away with sovereign parliaments and laws, instead governing the entire area from Brussels. The increasing power has continued to grow through the Treaties.
Foreign Office officials last night said the Government was “positive” about the proposals and diplomats were finalising details such as the look of the stickers and how they would be distributed.
Just so you know who the government truly serves.
Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague said Ministers should tell the EU to mind its own business.
“Once again the EU is desperate to muscle in on passports. Our Government should remind them that British passports are still primarily Britain’s business,” he said.
“The danger is that this is all part of a broader Brussels agenda to extend their control over how people are looked after abroad. Now it’s passports – next could be visas and embassies.”
Indeed, if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified (which cannot be allowed to pass) there will not be a need for sovereign visas and embassies. The EU technically could shut them all down and replace them with EU embassies. It even goes further than that;
Britain’s 153 embassies around the world will be closed as the ink from the Queen’s signature dries. (As Tony Blair refused to admit this has been agreed to, Jose Zapatero, the Prime Minister of Spain, confirmed it in a February 2005 radio broadcast.) - Eu Truth
The EU has almost completed its supra-national power grab. Note that the British passport already has ‘European Union’ emblazed on it, above the United Kingdom and Royal Coat of Arms. That is not random. You can imagine over time, the EU wording getting larger and the rest of it shrinking until only the EU is left.
That is what’s happening.
From July 2009, the new wording will appear alongside the official message in the name of the Queen under legislation published in Brussels last week and given the nod by British Ministers. The Article reminds “citizens” they are entitled to assistance from the embassy of any EU member state.
I don’t anything about this legislation from Brussels, I wasn’t given a vote on it. But that’s just the point though, your vote will be meaningless in the completed EU. When the text refers to ‘citizens’ it means European Citizens. The Lisbon Treaty sets up the EU as its own legal entity. This gives us dual citizenship. When the ‘rights’ or laws of the EU conflict with those of the member state, the EU’s laws will overrule.
1. It establishes a legally new European Union in the constitutional form of a supranational European State.
2. It empowers this new European Union to act as a State vis-a-vis other States and its own citizens.
3. It makes us all citizens of this new European Union.
4. To hide the enormity of the change, the same name – European Union – will be kept while the Lisbon Treaty changes fundamentally the legal and constitutional nature of the Union.
5. It creates a Union Parliament for the Union’s new citizens.
6. It creates a Cabinet Government of the new Union.
7. It creates a new Union political President.
8. It creates a civil rights code for the new Union’s citizens.
9. It makes national Parliaments subordinate to the new Union.
10. It gives the new Union self-empowerment powers.
Most people don’t know this, but then again, most people don’t know anything of any real importance. That’s the problem. While people are moaning about mass immigration (EU Amsterdam Treaty 1997) and other issues our government no longer has any authority over, these Laws, Treaties and Proposals and constantly being churned out of Brussels with every single one involved in increasing the powers of the EU over its member states.
The issue is so GRAVE that this is probably the gravest in our lifetime. In fact all civil organizations of all EU countries should start uniting their powers to prevent the ratification of the Treaty.
The content of the Treaty, as well as the circumstances within which it has been forced onto the member states are so alarming that if this Treaty will be ratified, that will be the end of freedom for the nations of Europe. - Marvin Brenik
As far as government and country is concerned, there is nothing more important than stopping the Lisbon Treaty and leaving the EU. It is a DICTATORSHIP.
After the Lisbon Treaty, there will be no others. There won’t need to be. You see, the Treaty contains a self-amendment clause.
Article 48, Article 308 and others make the treaty self-amending in that they enable the European Council to extend the areas in which the EU can legislate and make major changes to the functioning of the Union by majority vote, without the need for a new treaty and, therefore, without the need for referendums in Ireland or elsewhere. - Libertas.org
At the very worst, the Prime Minister hasn’t read the Treaty. But he’s signed it. You’re not allowed to vote on it, although it affects you. While we’re on the subject, you didn’t vote for the Prime Minister either. In fact, he refused a general election too. Seems like we are already in a dictatorship.
Let me repeat. This is not a joke. I’ve known this for ages and the more research I do, the more evidence I find in supporting our immediate exit from the Communist Claws of the EU. I’ve chosed to support the UKIP Party primarily for this reason, as voting for any of the other parties while knowing what I know would amount to me being an accessory to Treason (none of the other parties would dare touch upon the subject of leaving the EU).
Even people I talk to in town and at work have brainwashed, unsubstantiated opinons of the greatness of the EU and that being against the EU is ‘racist’. When I say I’m voting UKIP people have commented, saying ‘aren’t they like the BNP?’
No they fucking aren’t you ignorant serfs.
If we don’t leave the infernal supranational regime, nothing else is going to matter.
We’re on the express elevator to hell - going down! - Private Hudson, Aliens
The only difference between the EU Constitution and the Lisbon Treaty is that in the Lisbon Treaty the Constitution is obfuscated better.
“The substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact.” - (Angela Merkel, German Chancellor, Telegraph, 29 June 2007)
The Lisbon Treaty which was signed by Europe’s leaders on December 13th 2007 seeks to establish the European Union on an entirely new legal basis. In effect, its amendments to the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) and the Treaty Establishing the European Community (TEC) create a de facto constitution, comprising more than 90% of the substance of the EU Constitutional Treaty rejected by the people of the Netherlands and France in 2005. - Libertas.org
So it is entirely relevant to speak of the Constitution on these matters. Realise that the re-writing of the Lisbon Treaty was primarily done to get the Constitution passed in member states without giving the people a say in the matter.
You were denied a vote you were promised. If you don’t support the UK Independence Party your vote will probably never matter again. I found the party after I’d done my research, and I actually read their manifesto and realised it makes perfect sense.
If the Lisbon Treaty is ratified, the following things could happen (more are listed on the source site, please visit it to learn more);
The EU takes ownership and command of our Police, Army, Royal Navy, RAF, nuclear weapons, currency reserves, North Sea Oil. (See the EU Constitution below)
Serving officers in our police, army, navy and air force already know they will have to take an oath to the EU instead of to the Queen. If they don’t many have been told they will be dismissed. The EU will have complete military control of the UK.
The UK Independence Party will be banned under the 1999 ruling of the European court of Justice case c274/99, where it was held that it is illegal to criticise the EU.
The Conservative, Labour and Lib-dem parties will be abolished (only pan EU parties like the EPP or PES are allowed -see clause I.46.4 of the EU Constitution). It will then be blindingly obvious to even the dumbest politician there is no reason to keep Westmister open, and that the EU has the legal right to close it.
We will all be criminalised by the 107,000 regulations. Its impossible to know or understand 107,000 regulations, and the poor can’t possibly afford to comply. We will all be subject to frequent fines and arrest as a result. Here are just 4 examples:
Under EU regulations it is now illegal for you to repair your plumbing, electrics or your car (from 1st January 2006). If you buy a boat over six feet long, built after the EU Recreational Craft Directive of 1999, and don’t pay the EU £4,000 to “measure” the boat, you get 6 months imprisonment. We will live under permanent threat of arrest and fear of the knock at the door that takes us away.
There will be no redress through local democracy because there won’t be any. The nine UK regional governments, which replace our 48 counties and councillors, will be unelected (see the European Regionisation plan). Our only vote is to the powerless EU parliament. We will be ruled by the 25 unelected Commisssioners, and have have no redress at any level; we will be as poor but have less freedom than Soviet Citizens.
If we demonstrate or protest we can be be seized and relocated to another region. The EU Arrest Warrant and Civil Contingencies Act 2004, with 20 other oppressive Acts the Queen has signed between 1972 and 2005, give the government absolute power over us. They can shoot us if they wish with no legal comeback - the shootings of innocents Philip Prout and Jean de Menezes were entirely legal under EU law.
Please, just try and tell other people about this, and wake them up. Decades of TV junket and brainwashing have turned people away from politics when they need to be paying attention the most. People voted Conservative because they don’t like Labour. THAT ISN’T HOW YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO VOTE. You’re suppsed to do research, read manifestos, keep an open mind and question everything.
You no longer have any choices. Time is running out. You know what you must do.
Note it isn’t a fact, but a theory. Still, the mere fact that this could have been done (by girls) warrants a mention in my book.
A gang of teenage girls may have blown up a house with a home-made liquid bomb, which killed a man in a neighbouring property, after arguing with another girl about a love rival.
Purple liquid was poured through the letterbox of the Victorian house before the an explosion destroyed three houses.
Their intended victim, Charlotte Anderson, was caught in the blast and was rushed to intensive care suffering with severe burns.
Amazing. I guess this is what amounts to ‘girl power’ these days…
Ten hours earlier Miss Anderson had phoned police to say a gang of girls aged 16 and 17 was causing trouble outside her home, in Harrow. They were directing abuse, about a boy, at Miss Anderson’s ground floor flat.
Miss Anderson was pulled from her wrecked flat by a neighbour and she was rushed to hospital, where her condition was described as “non life-threatening”.
Scotland Yard launched a murder investigation and is hunting the girl gang.
What on Earth is wrong with these females? Now for the obligatory attack of the Internet.
A police source said the liquid could have been made using a “recipe” found on the internet
Moving on…
DCI Colin Sutton said: “Our major line of inquiry is that this liquid caused the explosion and that the explosion was an attempt to murder this young woman.”
Girls are Sugar and Spice and All Things Nice.
It would seem we should take great care when it comes to what sort of young ladies we should permit our sons to consort with.
- M Young, London
Indeed, M Young. I’ve just come up with a saying;
Women are other women’s worst enemy because they truly know what women are like.
Natalie Lue would be the first to agree that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
When she discovered that her fiancé Tom had been sleeping with other women behind her back - one of her friends caught him on a date with someone else - the rage she felt wouldn’t go away.
“I felt a terrible anger, which began eating away at me, bubbling away in my mind,” is how she describes it.
In the past, Natalie might have taken revenge by cutting up her faithless fiancé’s clothes, or perhaps even trashing his beloved car.
Yes, it is perfectly fine for a woman to destroy a man’s property if her feelings get hurt. So what if the car costs thirty grand? It will make her feel better, therefore it must be correct.
Thanks to the internet, though, a far more lethal form of vengeance is now at hand.
Natalie, like a growing number of other betrayed and deceived women, decided to take her revenge online.
Yeah, it gets better.
When 25-year-old Poppy Harris discovered her boyfriend was looking for other women on an internet dating website, her tears didn’t last for long.
A few clicks of the mouse here and a spot of typing there and the advertising executive from Walton-on-Thames had transformed the man in question from a good-looking, affluent sports coach searching for a pretty young woman to date into an unemployed layabout seeking an older woman in her 50s or 60s.
“It was the easiest thing in the world to hack into the website and change all his details,” she says, laughing at the memory.
Isn’t that illegal? I would say also immature and spiteful, but we are talking about women here so it’s hardly news…
The devastating power of the internet as a tool of revenge was revealed in January by actress Jane Slavin who took ‘e-venge’ on her lover, world-famous composer Michael Nyman, after he spurned her with no explanation.
Maybe he was fed up with her attitude? Not that it matters. Remember, it’s all about how she feels.
Posing as a beautiful woman called ‘Lucia’, she began a flirtatious online relationship with Nyman, who began bombarding ‘Lucia’ with explicit e-mails.
The crowning moment of her revenge came when ‘Lucia’ agreed to meet Nyman in a café in North London. At the appointed time, it was Jane, of course, who walked in.
Amazing. He still scored The Piano, and she is still an ugly vindictive bitch who can’t take rejection. Probably because it conflicts with her self-image as a goddess.
To compound the humiliation of the man who wrote the haunting film score for The Piano, Slavin wrote an online diary drawing attention to Nyman’s physical failings.
Do you notice how when relationships break down, women always go to the papers or wherever, and talk about how ‘crap he was in bed.’
What were you with him for then? Money? Much more noble eh.
In the U.S., there are countless websites and blogs dedicated to wronged women and the men who have hurt them - and the UK is fast following. Boiling bunnies is a thing of the past: revenge, it seems, is a dish best served up on a web page.
For the women, online vengeance serves as both catharsis and punishment. It is also possibly the most public way of dragging down an ex-lover - the modern-day equivalent of putting him in the stocks and pelting him with rotten tomatoes.
Yes, women are oppressed.
“It felt great to release the pent-up frustration,” says Natalie Lue, who was engaged to Tom for five years, but discovered his infidelity only after ending their relationship.
“It also felt great knowing so many people were being entertained by his terrible behaviour.”
“People started sending me e-mails saying they related to my frustrations.
By people she means women. Other women who have been shocked out of the little princess world they’re living in (and probably some who actually were dating arseholes, but hey, we all know women like a ‘bad boy’ right).
“This spurred me on and I started detailing everything that had happened with my ex. I felt I was settling scores, and it made me laugh that I was exposing personal details about him to thousands of people.
I wonder if any of these women ever think about how they would feel about such information of theirs being made public? But guys aren’t so selfish and narcissistic. They just get on with it.
“I told it exactly how it was. How he’d treated me like I was beneath him; how he’d been seeing another woman before we broke up; how he wasn’t even nice the night he proposed.
This goes on and on, it really isn’t worth reading the rest. It’s the same M.O.; women upset, women does her best to hurt the man as much as possible, even if it means violating privacy rights, causing criminal damage, purjury, false rape, whatever makes her feel better.
Sound like the behaviour of a lady, or a nasty, selfish spoilt bitch who thinks the world should revolve around her?
No, it isn’t a mystery why men are increasingly using women for sport sex, it seems anything else is too much of a liability (actually, so is sport sex). Then again, a woman can get a man arrested for rape when he’s never even met her, so you never know…
Take a moment to read the comments, they’re pretty good.
In early October 2007, a major research institution announced the discovery of the heaviest element yet known to science. The new element has been named “Eurotium.”
Eurotium (Eu) has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312. These 312 particles are held together by forces called “morons” which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called “peons”.
Since Eu has no electrons, it is inert. However, it can be detected, because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of Eu causes one reaction to take over four days to complete, when it would normally take less than a second.
Eu has a normal half-life of four years; it does not decay but instead undergoes a reorganisation in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places. In fact, Eurotium’s mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganisation will cause more morons to become neutrons, forming “isodopes”. This characteristic of moron promotion leads most scientists to believe that Eu is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as “Critical Morass”.
When catalysed with money, Eu becomes “Administratium” (Am) – an element that radiates just as much energy as Eu, since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.
I’m sure everyone has heard of the psy op Rich List, a publication from the Sunday Times, released each year listing the moderately wealthy of the country. I say moderately because the real wealth will never be on there. You know who I mean. The first line is…
A little-known model has entered the ranks of Britain’s super-rich…
The Arizona entrepreneur deployed her sales patter and folksy western charm as she praised the merits of the palm-sized C2 stun gun – available for $350 in a variety of fashionable colours, including the best-selling “hot pink”.
The problem isn’t people having devices for self-defence, it’s the false sense of safety that a taser creates. This encourages people (like cops) to use it on a whim because they have been told it is acceptable (and doesn’t kill, although it obviously does).
For insurance and practical reasons, Miss Shafman does not allow live target practice (nor does she permit guests to wash down the sandwiches with alcohol that might affect their judgment). Instead, the women lined up to blast away at the outline of a bad guy on aluminium foil.
Oh really. Wouldn’t want someone dying at the party would they, not a good selling point. Also, alcohol is not allowed at these parties, as opposed to at any other time these women are out. One drinks leads to another, man dies. It is also a charming way of attracting their perfect man…
Her boyfriend may not have a clue but today’s young woman knows exactly what she wants.
To be specific, she’d like to marry a man called James, who earns at least £25,000, by the time she’s 25.
Perhaps it doesn’t sound like much to ask. But according to a poll, eight out of ten women worry that they will never find their soulmate.
Sorry, but don’t expect to find sympathy from men. It because of the attitude of these women and the laws pushed by feminist politicians that has led to this situation.
While the survey showed that young women notch up as many sexual conquests as men, the survey found that they are really looking for a “romantic, hard-working man who is not afraid to commit”.
Bullshit. What they want is EVERYTHING. This article is saying something else. Women by 25 are starting to realise that their whoring about doesn’t seem to be getting them anywhere. Those men who are ignored by these young women end up going off and earning lots of dosh, partially because their energy and dedication isn’t wasted on self-entitled post-feminist tabloid loving emotional trainwrecks. These women start learning the error of their ways by 25.
Lisa Smosarski, editor of More magazine, which commissioned the survey, said: “The idea that women want an endless string of serial relationships which never end in commitment is way off the mark.
“By the age of 25, what young women really want is a soulmate with a view to marriage.
Well by then, the men they suddenly decide they want are busy shagging 20 year olds. The article then goes on to (somehow) blame this on men.
“Unfortunately, men have had it so good for so long they’ve become commitment-phobic, drifting from one long-term relationship into another.
“However, young women today have watched their mothers’ floundering relationship history and realised that getting a man to commit is important for their future happiness and family security. Young women are starting to expect far more from men.”
Men can be commitment-phobic. They fear marriage. Why? One of the comments sums it up nicely;
I’m pleased to see that women are looking for hard-working men who will commit in a relationship. Unfortunately, they will become increasingly difficult to find. If a man is stupid enough to marry, then with the law as it stands he could lose his home, half his pension and be required to financially support his children whilst being denied any significant access to them if the marriage breaks up. Even if he doesn’t marry, the law is now moving to establish the same discriminatory practices against men who are co-habiting with their partners. Faced with this, it is a mystery why any man would want a long term relationship with a woman. If his partner decides to run off with somebody else, the man is financially ruined and usually denied access to any of his children. So, I would advise my two sons against any long term relationships. The law is against you. And I speak as a man who has been very happily married to the same fantastic woman for the last 35 years.
- Ordinaryguy, Wolverhampton, UK
Although more women seem to be settling down in their thirties or later, those polled thought 25 was the “perfect age” to get married, preferably to a man who earns £25,000 or more.
LOL.
Eight out of ten said they would prefer to marry a “good, all-round, hard-working bloke” than the glitz and glamour of a “celebrity-style relationship”.
How hard will these women be willing to work I wonder? They probably have difficulty thinking about that between demanding xyz from a man, before divorcing him and taking everything off him anyway. They’re problem with celebrity relationships is the attention the man would be getting from other, younger, prettier, more fertile women.
Let’s see an article about what men want. Not that anyone seems to fucking care these days.
I feel like pissing off feminists. You know those ‘men make women into sexual objects and therefore oppress them’ crowd. I’m also tired of reading the narcissistic ramblings of those haggard, crusty, old, weak, socialist scum hiding under the banner of ‘Women’s Rights’ but are much more interested in ‘Re-shaping Society to suit out Communist Goals’.
But seriously, the right women are as great as the bitches are evil. Good women are now in the minority, so don’t hold your breath in regards to finding a decent one. Concentrate on honing your mind and your abilities, at least then you know you’re investing in something that will definitely benefit you.
Anyways, it’s the weekend and I’m tired of ranting. I want to prove something.
That men adore women.
Also, as you look through the list, try and explain how they are ‘oppressed’ by these images. Feel free to look over them again to try and clarify your thoughts LOL. Gemma Atkinson and Odette Yustman will do nicely. And Jessica Lucas. AndKate Mara… Anything but this.
A man was yesterday ordered to sell his home and give his ex-partner half the proceeds - even though they aren’t married.
Carl Barron lived with Lynne Fowler for 17 years in the home where they raised their two children. But despite the fact that he paid for the mortgage, the Court of Appeal decided she is entitled to half of the £150,000 property.
Granted, both names were on the register for the home. He paid the deposit, the mortgage and the bills. She paid for family holidays, food and looking after the children.’
Still, was there some attempt to quantify her financial contributions to his?
When the couple split in 2005 Mr Barron was declared the ‘beneficial’ owner in a county court ruling.
Yesterday, however, Lady Justice Arden, and two other Appeal Court judges, overturned that decision.
The judge said the joint name registry was a deliberate choice and it must be legally presumed that ownership was equal.
Well I guess he shouldn’t have put her name on it, although I have a feeling the ex-wife could have still fought for and won a share of the assets anyway. It isn’t like pre-nups are worth anything in the UK, I have no reason to think this would be any different.
Here comes the double-standard.
A previous ruling at The House of Lords, however, came to the exact opposite conclusion.
In April last year five Law Lords ruled that a father of four was not entitled to half of the family home he had shared with his girlfriend of 20 years because she had contributed more money to buy it.
Hmm, this reveals that this father of four actually paid into the mortgage as opposed to this more recent case where the woman paid nothing at all. It seems the theoretical ‘50/50′ only applies when women stand to gain. Sounds like standard feminist methodology to me.
If you are wondering how long you would have to be with the ‘live-in’ girlfriend before this comes into effect, you don’t have to wait twenty years.
A live-in partner would also be liable for compensation once the couple had lived together for more than two years.
The reforms are currently on hold while ministers investigate how much it will cost in legal aid.
Ah, additional (illegal) burdens on the taxpayer.
One in six couples living together are unmarried, 67 per cent more than ten years ago. This is expected to rise to one in four by 2031.
Makes it much easier for communism to flourish.
1) Turn churches into ideology-driven political clubs.
2) Replace genuine education with a dumbed down and politically correct curriculum.
3) Fashion the mass media into instruments for mass manipulation and for harassing and discrediting traditional institutions and their spokesman.
4) Ridicule morality, decency, and age old virtues without respite.
5) Present the youth, not with heroic examples, but with aggressively degenerate behavioral models.
6) Attack the very building blocks of a moral society: attack marriage and family in order to subvert the social order
England has been wiped off a map of Europe drawn up by Brussels bureaucrats as part of a scheme that the Tories claim threatens to undermine the country’s national identity.
The new European plan splits England into three zones that are joined with areas in other countries.
The “Manche” region covers part of southern England and northern France while the Atlantic region includes western parts of England, Portugal, Spain and Wales.
The North Sea region includes eastern England, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and parts of Germany.
The goal of the EU is nothing less than the eradication of national borders and sovereign identity.
German ministers claimed that the plan was about “underlying the goal of a united Europe” to “permanently overcome old borders” at a time when the “Constitution for Europe needs to regain momentum”.
As time goes on and these elites get closer to their goal of an communist super state, more of these issues will start coming to light. These issues are not new however, it is just people are thick and cannot see the forest for the trees, too busy coming up with excuses to not have to get off of their arses and do something.
People really do not understand the gravity of the situation. If the Lisbon Treaty Constitution is ratified none of these other issues (10p tax, NHS, immigration etc) will matter.
It is a Constitution. It does contain all of the elements of the previous Constitution. Pro-EU shills like to simple dismiss this as ‘anti-EU propaganda’ but what else is one to think when the man responsible for the original Constitution admits the following about the Reform Treaty;
Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, the architect of the abandoned European Constitution, has admitted that the document has been rewritten by EU leaders in a different order just to avoid the need for referendums.
“Looking at the content,” he wrote “the result is that the institutional proposals of the constitutional treaty….are found complete in the Lisbon Treaty, only in a different order and inserted in former treaties..”
He made clear that the purpose of the rewritten Treaty (now called the Lisbon Treaty) was to make people think the new version did not merit being put to the people in referendums.
Got that? More evidence for this can be found within an great article in The Spectator.
Germany
“The substance of the Constitution is preserved. That is a fact.”
(Angela Merkel, German Chancellor, Telegraph, 29 June 2007)
Spain
“We have not let a single substantial point of the Constitutional Treaty go… It is, without a doubt, much more than a treaty. This is a project of foundational character, a treaty for a new Europe.”
(Jose Zapatero, Spanish Prime Minister, speech, 27 June 2007)
Ireland
“90 per cent of it is still there… these changes haven’t made any dramatic change to the substance of what was agreed back in 2004.”
(Bertie Ahern, Irish Taoiseach, Irish Independent, 24 June 2007)
Czech Republic
“Only cosmetic changes have been made and the basic document remains the same.”
(Vaclav Klaus, Czech President, Guardian, 13 June 2007)
Finland
“There’s nothing from the original institutional package that has been changed.”
(Astrid Thors, Finnish Europe Minister, TV-Nytt, 23 June 2007)
Denmark
“The good thing is…that all the symbolic elements are gone, and that which really matters – the core – is left.”
(Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish Prime Minister, Jyllands-Posten, 25 June 2007)
Austria
“The original Treaty for a Constitution was maintained in substance.”
(Austrian government website, 25 June 2007)
Belgium
The new treaty “takes up the most important elements of the Constitutional Treaty project.”
(Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Agence Europe, 24 June 2007)
Italy
“As for our conditions… I outlined four red lines with respect to the text of the Constitution: to keep a permanent president of the EU, to keep the single overseer for foreign policy and a common diplomatic service, to keep the extension of majority voting, to keep the single legal personality of the Union. All of this has stayed.”
(Romano Prodi, Italian Prime Minister, La Repubblica, 24 June 2007)
Lithuania
Lithuania has “100 percent fulfilled the tasks set forth before the meeting, including the primary objective of preserving the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.”
(Office of the President of Lithuania, official press release)
Luxembourg
“The substance has been preserved from Luxembourg’s point of view.”
(Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg Prime Minister, Agence Europe, 24 June)
Slovenia
With the new treaty, the EU gets “content that is not essentially different from the Constitutional Treaty… All key institutional solutions remain… Some symbolic elements will be cleared up and some formulations toned down.”
(Janez Jansa, Slovenian Prime Minister, Government Communication Office, 23
June 2007)
The author of the EU Constitution
“This text is, in fact, a rerun of a great part of the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.” (Valery Giscard d’Estaing, Telegraph, 27 June 2007)
European Parliament
The European Parliament “welcomes the fact that the mandate safeguards the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.”
(European Parliament resolution, 10 July 2007)
The European Commission
“It’s essentially the same proposal as the old Constitution.”
(Margot Wallstrom, EU Commissioner, Svenska Dagbladet, 26 June 2007)
A detailed analysis of the constitional treaty can be found on OpenEurope.co.uk (downloaded here). Please visit these sites for lots of additional information.
Speaking of additional info, Lord Christoper Monckton, the former policy advisor to Margaret Thatcher has written an article titled;
I strongly suggest you read it in its entirety as it offers an insight in to the legal functioning of the EU. I shall post a quote to offer you a little example of the ‘rights’ you will have under the ‘New World Order‘ regime (my emphasis).
As of this year, under the pretext of compliance with a European anti-terrorist Directive, the right to a fair trial before a properly-constituted and impartial court was abolished in the UK for any criminal case defined as “serious”: and even offences as trivial as dropping litter in public places are now treated by the regional gauleiters as serious. Without a hearing, without the right of legal representation, the gauleiters can imprison any UK citizen for five years at a time, confiscate his house, freeze his bank accounts, close or compulsorily take over any business which he may own, or extradite him to any overseas country (including the most unspeakable dictatorships) even in the absence of any prima facie evidence whatsoever against him.
With the EU’s exponentially growing list of ‘regulations’ you can imagine it being impossible not to find yourself breaking them. Point 9 from EU Truth explains further;
9. Businesses closing under EU regulation
The EU’s 111,000 regulations, when fully enforced, will transform Britain from a free market economy into a Soviet style command economy, closing hundreds of thousands more businesses. They will also control our personal lives far more closely than were those of Soviet citizens. (In a Parliamentary answer to Lord Stoddart in January 2003, the government admitted there were 101,811 EU regulations, growing at 3,500 pa).
The cost of Britain’s 8,500 quangoes is £124 billion a year, and they raise an additional £40 billion from us in charges, according to the Cabinet Office. The Public Bodies Directory 2006 describes only 882 of them. Most exist to enforce EU regulations; nearly all should be closed.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. I cannot stress the importance enough of NOT voting for Labour/ Conservative or Liberal Democrat and not being distracted by fluff entertainment and irrevelent stories about bulemic politicians and the latest lies pouring forth from Gordon Brown’s treasonous cakehole. Use your vote while you still have one.
TROY, N.Y. - Three years ago, Cherie Clark bought a home overlooking Troy’s Washington Park. The building was a mess, she says, and the responsibility of owning alone can be daunting. But she doesn’t regret the decision. “I like the idea of owning this house and being able to do what I want.”
Many single women agree.
Uh huh…
So much so that they now account for 27 percent of the nation’s first-time home buyers, according to the National Association of Realtors, and 21 percent of home buyers overall - more than double the rate of 20 years ago.
Single men, meanwhile, account for just 9 percent of home buyers, the same percentage as 20 years ago.
Buying a house in my book means paying cash, in total, for the full value of the house. Otherwise they mean mortgages.
Rising homeownership rates among single women reflect much- discussed societal changes: Americans are more likely to marry later and often divorce when they do. And women are earning more than ever before.
The Greater Capital Association of Realtors Inc., an Albany- based trade group that keeps data on home sales and prices, doesn’t track local home-buyer patterns. But its executive director, James Ader, points out that as recently as the 1970s single women had trouble obtaining a home loan.
“As that’s become more fair and equal, women have bought more,” he said.
A home loan. Long term debt. I’m not sure on the lengths of home loans in the States, but they frequently reach into the decades in the UK. Do these women realise they have to be working for a long time to pay that mortgage off, or are they expecting to meet a guy on a whim, ’settle down’ and have him pay off the rest while she decides she wants to be a mum all of a sudden? Keep reading →
More than half of UK bosses assess the chances of a member of staff falling pregnant before employing them, a survey suggests.
And 76% of managers admitted that they would not hire a new recruit if they knew they were going to fall pregnant within six months of starting the job.
And why wouldn’t they? There are two points of view to consider here, that of the woman, and that of the business. The woman is obviously looking out for herself, so why can’t the business?
Employment Law Advisory Services (ELAS) said discrimination was prevalent, despite legislation to outlaw it.
There had been a rise in cases over pregnancy and new starters, ELAS added.
About 52% of those surveyed said that they considered the chances of a candidate getting pregnant taking into account age and whether they have just got married.
Legally, a direct question to a potential employee cannot be asked.
That’s helpful. So now women cannot even defend themselves in an interview, the business has to decide without that additional information. Naturally, they will err on the side of caution, because getting it wrong could get very expensive as well as disruptive. By the way, if women are so strong and empowered, why do they need additional legislation to ‘protect’ them? I’m sure they can handle it on their own? Keep reading →
Let’s see. Note the dashing black gloves with matching jet black NWO-thug outfit. Two guns, handcuffs (why handcuff when you can taser?) I can’t make out some of the weapons, I may pay another visit to this crap shop because there were other toys like this in it. Oh yeah, note the gold grenades on his left leg. The explosion on the label, along with the two other henchmen characters. I guess they plaster ‘Police’ on their chest so you don’t confuse them with sadistic psychopaths. Well not until it’s too late at least. Won’t matter when you’re already on the 3:10 to FEMA Camp #108
Oh well, gives the next generation of slaves something to relate to, I guess.
On a final note, I would have pointed this out to the store workers, but it is one of those shops where 95% only speak broken English (customers and staff).
The politically correct truth is that women are paid less than men because of sexual discrimination whereas the factual truth, as hard as it is to accept, is that the pay gap is an inevitable consequence of different lifestyle choices and different legal entitlements to retirement and parental leave.
Men’s legal retirement age is five years older then women’s, encouraging them to work longer careers which lifts their average earnings. Women get far more extensive parental leave than men, encouraging career breaks and limiting their lifetime work experience, thus depressing their average wages.
On average, each week, men work nearly twice as many hours of paid employment as women, building up considerably more experience in their careers, which in a meritocracy would be reflected in greater pay. In addition, women tend to opt for more socially rewarding or emotionally fulfilling jobs, while men men put a higher priority on higher wages at any cost.
As Britains’ sovereign laws are stripped by treasonous scum like Gordon Brown and the Queen, to be replaced by a Pan-European Communist Dictatorship. You may notice that I stated the Queen. Ignorant serfs would like to believe that the parasitic Royal Family only works in the interests of Great Britain. They are elitists, and therefore they work in the interests of themselves and their superiors, like the Rothschilds.
“I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply.”- Nathan Mayer Rothschild (1777-1836)
Anyway, my point is that the Royals have no alliegence to Britain as a sovereign state. Deal with it. This is a picture of Buckingham Palace.
Which flag flies above the building? Why would such a building why the flag of another state? (The Lisbon Treaty which was recently signed essentially sets up the EU as its own state, with its own laws and citizenship. It will create a dual citizenship for everyone within it tentacled grip. However, the status and laws of the EU shall have authority over the citizenship and laws of member states). Read These Boots Are Gonna Walk All Over You for a summary.
The banking/ old money elites want you ‘chipped’. This means inserting an RFID tracking chip in your arm so they can watch you, along with a cashless money supply which will then be on the chip, enabling these elites absolute control over the money supply.
It is part of their plan, as is detailed by Aaron Russo when he talks about Nick Rockefeller, of the infamous Rockefeller banking dynasty.
Russo: “I used to say to him, what’s the point of all this? You have all the money in the world, you need all the power you need, what’s the point? What’s the end goal?
And he said (Nick Rockefeller) the end goal is to get everyone chipped, to control the whole society. So the bankers, the elite people, can control the world….”
Watch the video for the rest. Don’t want to believe it, do you?
Every single Metropolitan police officer will be ‘microchipped’ so top brass can monitor their movements on a Big Brother style tracking scheme, it can be revealed today.
Some officers are concerned that the system - which will be able to pinpoint any of the 31,000 officers in the Met to within a few feet of their location - will put a complete end to community policing and leave officers purely at the beck and call of control room staff rather than reacting to members of the public on the ground
These chips are designed to centralise control of a large number of individuals (us) by a minority of individuals (government). Which is the plan all along.
One officer, working in Peckham, south London, said: “They are keeping the exact workings of the system very hush-hush at the moment - although it will be similar to the way criminals are electronically tagged. There will not be any choice about wearing one.
“We depend on our own ability and local knowledge to react to situations accordingly.
“Obviously we need the back up and information from control, but a lot of us feel that we will simply be used as machines, or robots, to do what we are told with little or no chance to put in anything ourselves.”
This has already started happening in Mexico. In 2004. Keep reading →
Ground-breaking admission by member of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change: major contributing factor to the balance of the climate not taken into account.
It would appear that, as many of us right-thinking people have known for some time, global warming caused by CO2 output is, at best, sensationalist fantasy.
It seems that everal facts have now come to light that debunk the idea that we’re killing the environment with CO2 emissions:
The predicted tropospheric hotspots that had been predicted by the IPCC failed to appear. When climatologist Dr David Evans and Christopher Monckton found an error in the way that the IPCC had interpreted the Stefan-Boltzmann equation and applied a revised (corrected) factor to the workings, they discovered that the temperature rise was as little as a third of what the World’s government think tank had predicted.
The IPCC’s computer models, used to predict the effects of global warming, it appears, failed to accurately predict the influence that water vapour has on the temperature of the earth. At the global climate change summit in Bali late last year, Dr Roy Spencer presented a paper to the IPCC, saying that rather than CO2 driving the formation of water vapour, which then drives up temperatures as a greenhouse gas, water vapour actually washes excess CO2 out of the atmosphere, dampening and balancing its affect as a greenhouse gas. This discovery was made thanks to weather satellites that showed water vapour forms a lot lower in the atmosphere than was initially suggested. Shock horror, the finely balanced system that is the global ecosystem is able to keep itself in balance… who’d have thought it?!
Apparently the lead author of the IPCC chapter on feedback (the word used to describe what effect - negative or positive - a gas has on the temperature) has written to Dr Spencer, agreeing that he is right.
CO2 output has a point of diminishing returns anyway, apparently the common analogy is painting over a window: the first layer of paint has a big impact on the amount of light let through, while each subsequent layer has a less obvious impact. Meaning that, even without the dampening effect of water vapour, a ‘tipping point’ so often spoken about by alarmists like Al Gore, is actually a scientific impossibility. Keep reading →
How cool is this?
Could probably do as an addendum to 
Also, as you look through the list, try and explain how they are ‘oppressed’ by these images. Feel free to look over them again to try and clarify your thoughts LOL. Gemma Atkinson and Odette Yustman will do nicely. And Jessica Lucas. And Kate Mara… Anything but 
… As if they were married, a court rules today.
The banking/ old money elites want you ‘chipped’. This means inserting an RFID tracking chip in your arm so they can watch you, along with a cashless money supply which will then be on the chip, enabling these elites absolute control over the money supply.
contributing factor to the balance of the climate 