The Truth about CCTV

There is something of a continual debate here in the UK regarding CCTV. On one side are those who see the technology as a benefit, to catching criminals etc, they usually have had something happen to them, or know someone who has so it is a lot more personal. Otherwise they just use the ‘well if you have nothing to hide…’ argument.

From The Guardian:

Your private life on show to civil servants? More bureaucrats, local and national, having access to your personal information – through data-sharing and data-matching between government databases, through access to your telephone and email data, through the national database that will lie behind a “smart” identity card. Your health records on tap to researchers by ministerial order – your doctor can’t say no. Local authorities, even health trusts, able to put you under covert surveillance.

I am firmly in the ‘NO CCTV’ camp. The idea that the ever-growing parasitic corporate government and its equally corrupt subsidiaries have eyes (and now ears and mouths) watching almost every square metre of Britain does not encourage the concept of a free people. Most people who bleat on about CCTV have little or no idea about how prevalent it is, who has access to it and the potential for function creep.

I am going to address some of these issues now.

Women’s No PAYDAY Debunked

Mercian at AntiMisandry brought this latest perpetuation of the Gender Pay Gap MYTH to my attention, so now I’ll debunk this stupid Women’s Day nonsense.

Here we go again. This is a campaign originating from the evil misandric feminist Fawcett Society.

It mindlessly repeats the same old ‘pay inequality’ myths that have been doing the rounds (and subsequently being proven false) for years. They keep pushing it because it is a cornerstone of the feminists’ poor wimmin ideology.

Anyone who has actually worked in a real job and not the imaginary ones that these feminists seemed to have gotten their statistics from, knows this isn’t true.

I have never come across a woman actually getting paid less, who has the same experience, makes the same choices, and does the same job and work as a man.

It’s a ridiculous assumption. If women work for less than men, why employ men?

Anyway, back to the poor oppressed women. All of these sites spouting this ‘lets kiss women’s arse’s incase we get labelled as misogynsts’ are relying on this report, published by the Fawcett Society. (It’s a PDF so you may want to right click and download it.)

Hysterically entitled ’4000 Cheaper!’ it is a blisteringly obvious propaganda piece, full of bright colours and exclamation marks. Most people won’t bother reading it, but I have so you don’t have to waste your time. Let’s have a brief look through shall we?

Equal pay for Less Work, the Women’s Way.

A quick browse of the mangina media portal found this article entitled ‘ Wimbledon pays equal prize money.’

The announcement, due at 1100 GMT from the All England Club, brings it into line with other Grand Slams after criticism from officials and players.

Similar to the US and Australian Opens, equal rewards will be offered across the board, from the champions down to the first-round losers in all events.

Of course immediately I thought ‘good stuff, that means we’ll get to see women’s tennis matches playing up to five sets, (like the men) instead of up to three. More time on the court for them to show off their legs, show they’re willing to step up to the plate etc.’

YouTube

I’ve got a profile on YouTube now, and have begun posting videos highlighting various issues regarding feminism, corporatism etc.

Profile is here, and the first vid is now on my Featured Films page

http://www.youtube.com/FMWatkins

In other, completely off-topic news, I came across this amazing image that is now my wallpaper. It was taken using HDR imaging. It’s cool as fuck.

Dumbing down the children

Going back to Poland to Study

“I was treading water within the British education system,” said 16-year-old Aleksander.

“The boys were childish, they didn’t read papers and weren’t interested in anything.

“And the girls only talked about shopping and what they were going to do on Friday night.

“In Poland you have to know the names of all countries, even the rivers. But in England hardly anyone could place Kenya or Poland on the map. The teachers didn’t test knowledge, only effort.“

This is a perfect example of the state of schooling and of Communist Labours ongoing plans to dumb down successive generations to make them easier to indoctrinate.

Immigration drives down wages? A success then.

As I have mentioned in my post ‘Gordon Brown is a Marxist Clown‘, rampant unchecked immigration continues in earnest. With most of the mainstream media whitewashing Brown’s scheming as ‘incompetence’, people don’t actually look deeper into Brown’s Marxist methodology.

Most these days may have heard of Karl Marx, but have absolutely no idea who is actually was or what his philosophies were about. But to cut a long story short, he was obsessed with destroying the West from within. Destroying capitalism, morality and the nuclear family (hetero) in order to collapse societies to pave the way for a global communist two tier government.

Featured film and article

I have added a new section titled ‘Featured film’ where I shall be, well, featuring films lol.

It’s on the top bar. Thanks.

Alternatively, just click http://endofmen.wordpress.com/featured-film/

You’ll also notice the Featured Article page next to it. Same deal there.

I don’t think I’ll have comments on those pages because the content will change.

Where I Stand

I feel I should clarify a few things about my position within the Men’s Movement. At the moment, although I see the movement growing in leaps and bounds, it isn’t due to masterly organisation or planning. It is more due to the effects of feminism in society, and men being able to put a name to the scam.

In reality, the ‘movement of men’ in regards to the government and women is actually vast. Much much larger than official member of the ‘Men’s Movement’. Every time I go to the pub or chat with new people, I can come across men who know what women are all about, have experienced their contradictory behaviour, and seen the government kiss their ‘oppressed’ arses no matter how criminally they behave.

These men know. They’re not stupid. Even young men, teenagers and the like, are becoming aware of the terrible attitudes of the modern female. Not through choice mind, again, it is forced on them by the way the women behave.

This is an important point about the lifecycle of feminism. As feminism gives women greater license to behave badly, more privileges with less responsibility, women will continue their downward spiral. They can’t help but abuse the system for their benefit.

This of course, just serves to wake up more men to the feminism scam. If every man that has woken up to the corruption in government and the hell of feminism was officially in the Men’s Movement, we would have our own political party and be threatening the corporate-controlled left right paradigm overnight.

Womenomics?

Here is something that made me laugh.

Why womenomics is the force of the future

This article doesn’t really go anywhere or say anything most don’t already know. But of course, they need to keep rehashing the same old crap to cater to the narcissists.

It starts off with the usual girl-power spin.

Once women simply spent the housekeeping money doled out to them. These days they are more likely to hold the purse strings.

This was one of the findings of a report entitled Living Britain, which examines the trends affecting the country at the beginning of the 21st century.

It looked at the increasing purchasing and physical power of women on the economic and cultural front, which has been labelled ‘womenomics’.

A phrase initially coined by the Economist, womenomics refers to the increasing purchasing and physical power of women on the economic and cultural front.

This isn’t new though. Men usually had the last say in the family budget because;

1. He earns it.

2. He is more likely to budget intelligently and think about preparing for the future.

Women are earning more, good for them!

United Nations – Human Rights Scam

In communism power is dictated one way. From the top, down. Those in power dictate to those (literally) beneath them.

To convince the ignorant public that schemes and plans are good for them, those who seek to implement these plans use basic manipulation such as semantics.

Giving something a warm and fuzzy name like European Union doesn’t actually mean it is a good thing. The EU revolves around creating one bloc of the bankers plan for the global order, with the United Nations governing it in its entirety.

Ah the United Nations! How nice is that! Nations united yay! Let’s all dance around the campfire while the heads of corporate power create this new world order (for us apparently) to protect us from state-sponsored false flag terrorism.

“All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order” – David Rockefeller

The goal, as you should probably know by now, is a one-world super state. A corporate-communist technocracy were all power is centralised at the United Nations (an organisation drawn up by the banking cartels by the way). I mean all power. One world monetary system, religion, ‘diversity’, population control you name it.

Actually, population control will be a convenient point to explain the main thrust of this article.

You may have heard of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One of the loveliest sounding scams as you are about to learn.

The FMW Hypothesis – Part 1

It took me many years (and many beers) to come to terms with what the western female is. (I don’t really have enough experience with other females so I can’t comment).

In the same way that the global depopulation agenda hijacked the environmentalists, feminist hijacked femininity.

But when feminists did this, they did it with finances given to them by the same globalists who have their plans for the world that are hidden from most folk.

But this article is about feminism, so I’ll try and keep on the straight and narrow.

Women seem to flip flop more than politicians these days. One moment they support feminism because it is about ‘women’s rights’, but then a situation arises where a woman can’t use it to gain an advantage, at which point she says she doesn’t support feminism/ is not a feminist/ wants to be treated in a traditional way.

I have personally experienced this more times than I can count. One moment a woman says one thing, the next she can completely change her tune but still somehow believe she has integrity.

This is one of the things that woke me up to the reality of the female mind.

Divorce is hell

Paul McCartney has revealed his true feelings about his divorce from Heather Mills for the first time – and likened it to going through Hell.

When Sir Paul was asked whether he had any regrets about the fall-out from the break-down of the four-year marriage, he momentarily dropped his guard and spoke candidly quoting Winston Churchill.

The former Beatle said: ‘Going through a divorce is a very painful thing. As Winston Churchill once said, “If you’re going through Hell, keep going”.

Femcunts using taxpayers money

I’m not going to write an article today, I’m burnt out. Spent all day messing about with Ubuntu 7.10 RC, finally got it working!

This is yet another article that needs no explanation. So here it is.

LAWMAKERS PANDER TO RADICAL FEMINISTS WITH TAXPAYER MONEY

The United States Senate is preparing to vote on October 15 for a bill that will authorize the feds to turn over hundreds of millions of dollars to radical feminists. It’s believed that Democrats and Republicans will attempt to “bribe” female voters with huge handouts that has little basis in fact.

One more thing, I’ve noticed our comrade Fred X has made an appearance back at his blog (link on my sidebar). Good to see you’re ok Fred.

He makes a good point regarding getting worn down from constantly going head to head with all the misandric bullshit, the constant assaults on freedom by the corporate government etc. It does seriously wear you out and sometimes you need a break. But when you’re writing regular posts, highlighting articles, looking through legal documents and then arguing with apathetic idiots day in and day out when they refuse to believe anything you say even though you’ve got all the evidence and they don’t have anything, apart from their desire to watch soap operas and think about whatever the TV tells them to think, you begin to wonder if people deserve to be fucked over.

But then I think about the fact that if people don’t speak up and stir up the hornets nest, all of us (men and women) are going to be truly fucked in ways that have never happened before in history.

I don’t actually mind that happening to the feminists though, they fucking deserve it, the slimey self-serving family destroying child-hating parasitic cunts.

Anyway, I’m off for a few days. In the meantime if you want something to read, check these following links out.

Political Correctness Scam
What is Marxism and How Does it Work?
Domestic Violence Against Men
Environmentalism, Global depopulation
Al Gore’s ridiculous Peace Prize
Overpopulation lies

Gordon Brown is a Marxist clown

I keep coming across articles about this Labour government speaking of it’s incompetence, ‘it’s missing the point, ineptitude, not listening to the people‘ etc.

You see speeches of Gordon Brown, speaking of the ‘new invigorated Labour’, making it the party for the people, accountable to the people on the one hand, and trying to secretly sell Britain’s sovereignty to Brussels on the other. That is of course, continuing on from Tony Blair’s legacy of signing over chunks of this country to the EU too.

The articles lament on how ‘Brown isn’t listening, poor us!’ and other defeatist nonsense, some even going to far as to criticise the New World Order puppet. But they are all missing the point.

People don’t want to admit it, and even those that do seem to have their views restricted by the mind control of political correctness, but the truth is Gordon Brown couldn’t give a fuck about Britain or the people in it. He answers to the Bilderberg Group, just like that other minion, Blair did.

Britain’s most expensive hooker award…

… Goes to Heather McCartney as she celebrates winning £50 million in a divorce settlement from Sir Paul McCartney after a measly 4 years of marriage (spent posing in photo shoots, getting famous off of Sir Paul’s name and spending lots of his money of course).

4 years, £50 mil. That’s £12.5 million a year. For what?

What the hell makes her think she’s worth that? What makes the Judge think she’s worth that?

Before I get a flood of emails or whatever moaning about ‘not all women are like that’ I say this:

Yes they fucking are. I can’t be bothered to constantly say ‘there are an exception’ because it’s so small I might as well not even bother.

Just remember this.

This female told Paul McCartney the whole ‘I love you I’ll do anything for you’ speech. As women do.

He believed it. He really wanted her to be one of those rare women who really care about their man.

That was his downfall.

You think your woman can’t switch completely once she knows she’s got you by the short and curlies?

She can, and if she so chooses, you’re completely fucked. No matter what you say about love and sacrifice and all that stuff, that all goes out of the window when it comes to divorce.

Women change completely when they want to. Or should I say, women show their true colours when they want to. Especially after they get married, mainly because they know the law is on their side in ways you don’t want to believe until it’s happening to you.

Why would you get married if you have anything to lose?

Man, don’t do it, don’t be stupid. Women initiate the majority of divorces, the entire divorce industry revolves around the selfish lying back stabbing bitches.

Fuck em.

Sir Paul, you should have listened to your daughter mate.

Heather McCartney is a money grabbing bitch, as are most women.

Edit: There are additional developments to this story. Apparently the settlement fell through. You see, the predatory female couldn’t just have the money, because the conditions were that she couldn’t talk about the breakup of the marriage. Which I would assume you wouldn’t do anything, seeing as it’s supposed to be a private matter. But all bets are off when a modern skank wants something…

Sources close to the case said a date has now been set for a five-day trial, adding: “It is finished. There are no more talks planned. The whole thing broke down without agreement. A trial date has been set for February next year and that is where we are heading.”

A major sticking point is said to be Sir Paul’s demand that Ms Mills, 39, promised not to speak about their four-year marriage.

It is understood McCartney, 65, offered her £50million, including a lump sum of as much as £30million, plus an annual income for their daughter Beatrice.

But Ms Mills, it is thought, was willing to accept as much as £15million less – provided she was free to discuss their relationship.

Sources confirmed the confidentiality clause was a major problem during yesterday’s eight hours of legal talks at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Yeah she wants to tell any newspaper and television show about the relationship. Sanctity of marriage? Respecting the privacy of a relationship? Hell no, that’s oppressing the poor wimmin! The fucking bitch.

Ms Mills, 39, a former topless model who lost a leg in a road crash, has been depicted as a golddigger, only out for the former Beatles’ money.

Really? Whatever would give someone that idea? The word golddigger doesn’t quite cut it anymore. You can also add the term ‘parasite’. Thanks.

But it has also been suggested that what she really craves is publicity and her apparent willingness to forgo many millions, allowing her – if she wants – to write a book and enter the US chat show circuit, appears to be evidence of that.

She has already hosted Larry King Live in the presenter’s absence – removing her artificial limb on air – and recently entered the US equivalent of Strictly Come Dancing.

I could swear constantly but there’s no point. Quite simply, the stupid parasite has absolutely no respect for the rules of relationships. It’s all about her. This leads me to my next point.

Modern women think about themselves. And generally, that’s it. When they say they want a husband, there isn’t some particular breed of man they want. What they want is a particular lifestyle associated with being married and having the man pay for everything. Even when she is telling you she loves you, she probably doesn’t mean it. She says it because she is going through the motions.

These days women want everything and don’t want to have to work for any of it. They just expect it to happen when they want it, how they want it. Here are some quick and easy translations for you men to keep in mind. I actually thinking of starting a separate page for this new dictionary…

‘I want to have a baby’ – I want children. So I’ll find some guy who will give me the sort of babies I want, (the right look, height, etc) then we’ll break up. He’ll want to see the kids but I’ll be annoyed that he stopped doing whatever I want. So I’ll stop him seeing them, how the children feel about it is irrelevant. It’s all about ME!.

‘I want to get married’ – I want to live the princess in the castle fantasy. Which means it should happen in exactly the way I want it too. He has to have (preferably) lots of money and be willing to give me the credit cards to show how much he loves me. Then he’ll give me children. Once I get bored of him, I’ll divorce him, get lots of his money (I deserve it because I deserve everything) then find some other guy who is more exciting/ violent (whatever fantasy I want to live at the time). It’s all about MEEEEEEEE!.

Creating a female market

Girls are bombarded by pictures of ‘impossibly perfect’ women each day

Young girls are “bombarded” every day with images of digitally enhanced female beauty, a survey has found.

This can prompt feelings of low self-esteem, with 77 per cent of 11 to 14-year-olds feeling “fat, ugly and depressed” when they see images of celebrities and models, according to toiletries brand Dove.

HPV Vaccine Gardasil

Part two of these articles, imaginatively titled ‘HPV VAccine Gardasil 2‘ is here‘.

Gardasil is a cervical cancer vaccine made by a firm called Merck. They are pushing the vaccine to be injected into all the girls between 12 and 13.

And now they want to inject boys with it. Why?

Why boys as well as girls should get the cervical cancer jab

Boys should be vaccinated against the sexually-transmitted disease which causes cervical cancer, a leading specialist said yesterday.

While it is only a minor complaint in boys, the human papilloma virus can be passed on to unvaccinated partners.

Ministers have already announced that girls aged 12 will be given the jab against it in the hope of saving around 700 lives a year.

Now Dr Anne Szarewski of Cancer Research UK says 12 and 13-year-old boys should also receive the jab on the Health Service.

Apart from passing on the disease in future years, she says maximising the number of recipients would increase immunity across the population. The vaccination has to be given to pre-teens because it is more effective before puberty.

Dr Szarewski told GP magazine that just vaccinating girls sends out ‘a bad public health message.

So they want to apply the risks of this ‘vaccine’ to the entire young male population because of a public health message? Are you fucking kidding? Maybe this ‘doctor’ is on the Merck payroll.

Poisoning of women

Something I am constantly having a go at women about but do they want to listen to the Field Marshall? Noooooooo.

Now it’s in on a mainstream site (one they don’t mind being dictated to through) maybe they’ll pay attention now. By the way, text in bold is by me.

Is your make-up killing you?

Women absorb 5lb of chemicals from cosmetics every year – from cancer-causing compounds in face cream to arsenic in eyeshadow. We tested two beauty junkies to reveal the shocking toll on their bodies…

Charlotte Kohl and her sister Emma are attractive young women. Their looks, they admit, are very important to them, which is why, between them, they use more than 70 different beauty and cosmetic products every day.

Take Charlotte, 27, an estate agent from East London. Each evening, after slathering her face with a concoction of night creams, she sleeps with a dental bleaching kit on her teeth and fake tan all over her body.

Every morning, she uses an array of products in the shower, ranging from shower gels and exfoliating scrubs to ‘body building’ lotions to give life to her fine hair.

Her make-up regime includes blusher, bronzer, eyeliner, eye shadow and mascara, and she never leaves the house without covering her head in a thick cloud of hairspray.

Fucking yuk. I don’t see this as a particularly rare example either. Most females splatter themselves with poisons to varying degrees, for reasons I’ll get to at the end of the article.

Her 24-year-old sister Emma, a personal trainer, follows a similar routine, but she also has an obsession with lipgloss: she owns 60 different ones and touches up her lips every few minutes.

In a bid to ensure she always has fresh breath, Emma also cleans her teeth seven times a day and carries a tube of toothpaste in her handbag, which she rubs into her teeth and gums at almost hourly intervals.

Insecure are we? These firms must be making some serious cash!

Between them, the two girls get through four cans of deodorant a week, and spend £1,000 a month on cosmetics.

Yes, women really do spend that much on this shit. This doesn’t include shoes, then handbags to match the shoes, and a dress to match the handbag, oh oh oh, and those earrings that singer was wearing, and sweets, partying, buying cocktails, restaurants and the like.

No wonder the majority of Britain’s debt is owned by women.

“We have been into cosmetics since we reached our teens,” says Emma.

They sound like crack heads.

“We’re the sort of people who rush out to buy a new mascara just because it claimed to do more for our eyelashes than any other mascara previously.

“I’m a complete sucker for anything that

Women’s Aid – The definition of DV. Part 1

I visited this website recently for some research into an article I was writing. I was interested to know how these ‘charities’ market themselves to people.

These days I tend to view these organisations more like corporations. Nothing particularly noble about them. They exist, they get money, they need more victims so they can ask for more money, because dwindling victims means less money. Simple really.

Now we should all know by now that domestic violence affects both men and women. That is to say, they can both be perpetrators in equal amounts. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Now you would think Women’s Aid would cater to women, fair enough, every bloody organisation in the country caters to the poor victimised little helpless things. It goes one better though, it’s tag line is ‘until women and children are safe’. You see, women and children are seen as one, inseparable unit, men are superfluous. Man is a evil brute lurking in the shadows outside of the house with the poor woman inside trying to protect HER child from HIM.

We all know the standard politically correct myth.

That tag line also, by exclusion, presents a subtle statement regarding men. Men don’t need to be made safe because obviously ‘they’re not in danger as they’re the ones committing all the ‘violence’.

Remember men and women are victims in equal amounts. Keep that in mind always. Because this site chooses to represent one half (or less) of the victims. Not only that, but it markets itself in a way which presumes men are very rarely victims.

Lets quickly look at the page titled ‘About Domestic Violence‘.

They call female victims of domestic violence ‘survivors’. They don’t call male victims anything because, well, they’re irrelevant. I could be wrong but

Half of single mothers ‘do not want to work’.

Oh really.

By STEVE DOUGHTY

UP to half of all single mothers do not want to work and simply will not take jobs, a report has found.

The analysis said Labour will never achieve its goal of persuading large numbers of lone parents to abandon a life on benefits because a huge proportion of them simply refuse to do so.

And why should they bother to? They are already employed by the government via the taxpayer (the majority of which are men). Plus they can be with their children.

The study, produced by the Department for Work and Pensions, suggests much of the £3.4billion spent on attempts to encourage lone mothers to find jobs over the past ten years has been wasted.

Four out of ten lone mothers, the report added, say they do want to take jobs ‘but only at some point in the future’.

New Labour’s efforts to reduce poverty have centred on single parents since Tony Blair won the 1997 election.

What that means is, Communist Labour has encouraged benefits for single parents, which frequently outweigh benefits for couples, essentially bribing parents (mainly women) to become single for the additional tax credits.

As Chancellor, Gordon Brown devised the tax credits benefit system which currently pumps £16billion a year into the pockets of lower-paid working people and which is heavily biased towards helping single mothers.

Of course it is. The majority of single parents are single mothers, mainly because the law favours passing the children to the mother, regardless of whether the father is more suitable or not. Which studies suggest he probably would be.

But remember the corporate government is interested in breaking up the family, not promoting it. Families represent social power centers, and communism abhors any form of people power.

Some £3.4billion has gone on the New Deal for Lone Parents, a welfare-to-work scheme meant to help single mothers into jobs.

However, recent figures showed that only around a fifth of those joining the New Deal find work that lasts more than a few weeks.

The new analysis, carried out for the DWP by Andrew Thomas of Insite Research and Consulting, examined ‘work focused interviews’ which are a key part of the New Deal package.

Mothers must attend an interview if they wish to continue claiming the main benefit for the workless, income support.

Freedom eh? You are a slave to the State if you are wholly dependent on benefits. And yes, this is the way the government wants it. Remember what I keep on saying. Feminism helps to destroy the family by turning women against men, men are ostracised from their children, the corporate government steps in with benefits, and with female friendly laws (Equal Opportunies/ Affirmative Action anyone?) and the females ally themselves with the government, as they are now the provider.

Men no longer have their families to protect and care for. Their work ethic drops, crime and drug taking go up, single mother children grow up never knowing a strong family and the problems are compounded. You get social chaos, a weak society is one that is easy to control and manipulate.

The report said that although some mothers who are looking or willing to look for work derive some benefit from the interviews, most see going to one as a routine part of claiming benefits.

In spite of ‘additional support premiums, incentives, transitional benefits, information on childcare and other elements that have been added piecemeal to the programme over the past five years,’ the report found little progress had been made.

Interviews ‘still appear to be unable to make significant headway against the firm decision of many to choose not to work’.

They’re just jumping through the hoops necessary to claim benefits.

Ministers are understood to have discussed over the summer a system which would withdraw benefits from lone mothers who refuse to work.

But Mr Brown told the TUC conference earlier this month that the main change in Government policy would be to offer single parents even more incentives and extra benefits.

These will include £40 a week in taxpayer-subsidised pay – £60 a week in London – for the first year in work, £400 in training allowances, and a rule to allow single mothers to continue receiving state out-of-work benefits for their first six weeks in a job.

Yay, more benefits for single mothers!

Robert Whelan of the Civitas think tank said: “If people know they have the option of not working