Today’s male role models are Pathetic

Ever since feminism took its banker-funded place in the middle of society, women (and the media, pandering to them) have been busy trying to redefine men and masculinity.

That old chestnut ‘a real man would…’ tends to be used by a woman or metrosexual twit when they want to control your behaviour or thoughts. It is usually followed closely by them recommending an action that benefits them, and not you.

This article is preceded by the one about female role models, which are obviously worse. Judging by my research these ‘men’s mags’ aren’t far behind.

I was mainly prompted to write this article from a comment by Reality Seeker, and this article in the Daily Mail.

The return of real men: Ladies, get ready to meet Mr Retrosexual

Once, men were simply men. But then feminists decided they were chauvinist pigs who didn’t spend enough time doing the dishes. So along came the guilt-ridden New Man, swiftly followed by sensitive, moisturising Metrosexual Man. Of course, women soon missed the whiff of testosterone and were calling for the return of Real Men. Now a new book, The Retrosexual Manual: How To Be A Real Man, has been published. David Thomas tip-toes through the unashamedly macho details. . .

So now men need books to be told how to be men apparently. Nice way of making money I guess, and going by the extracts of this book from the article, it is obviously meant to be taken as a comedy. Obviously.

If most men are like the ‘real man’ described below, we are truly fucked.

Remember, you have a number of qualities, almost all deriving from your testosterone, which women can’t help but admire. For example:

1. Your mind is uncluttered. Consider the female brain, filled as it is with multiple anxieties about its owner’s hair, figure, health, diet, clothes, shoes, emotions, digestive transit, sex life, competitive female friendships, multi-tasking duties as a worker/lover/ wife/mother/whatever.

Instead, your mind is focused on the important things in life: sex, beer, football. Women secretly envy a mind like that.

2. You can make decisions on your own. You don’t need to talk it over for hours with all your friends, or consult a horoscope, or worry about feng shui.

3. You have strong arms which come in handy whenever bottles need opening, cases need carrying, or a girl just feels like gazing at a strong, muscular limb.

4. You do not clutter up the bathroom. No woman wants a man who owns more beauty products than she does. A man who showers, shaves, then gets out of the way is ideal.

Maybe this is marketed towards women (like almost everything else). Important things in life are sex, beer, football. Acquiring knowledge, fighting tyranny and working to make the world a better place are obviously soooo-twentieth century. Nowadays we should all just be consumers, oh and live our lives around pleasing modern women! (Point 4 and 5).

Hmm, being a man, you also have no idea how to treat women. The following points can be condensed by yours truly. Treat her as her deserves to be treated. Let’s see what a ‘real man’ is supposed to do.

1. When on a date, you pay – even if she offers. Don’t stand for any nonsense about going Dutch. And pay in cash – retrosexuals don’t use credit cards.

2. You open doors for women, and you stand for pregnant women on a bus, train or Tube. You do this because you are a man, and you’re proud of it.

3. You do not cook anything more sophisticated than Pot Noodles or baked beans. Cooking is her job. But when you have a Sunday roast – and you do, obviously – you carve with manly precision and flair.

4. Women like to talk, bless them. So don’t try to stop her getting her feelings off her chest, however daft they might be. There’s no need to actually listen, however. Nor does she expect, or even want you to express an opinion of your own. A nod of the head, roughly every 90 seconds, combined with a concerned frown, or a cheery laugh, where appropriate, is perfectly sufficient.

5. Of course, you want to have sex. Afterwards, however, it is important to avoid saying ‘I love you’ or ‘I’m sorry, that’s never happened before’.

6. She may be interested in commitment. You are not. It is vitally important that you never even acknowledge the possibility that you are in a relationship. The moment she uses a sentence that includes words such as ‘wedding’, ‘children’, or ‘meet my parents’, make your excuses and leave.

7. No woman ever comes between you and live TV football. Only a very special woman will come between you and the edited highlights on Match Of The Day.

8. There is no woman on Earth for whom you will go to see Sex And The City – The Movie.

Sorry for wasting the few minutes of your time that it took to read points 1 to 7 (I agree with 8.) But this is what we are dealing with. Feel free to visit the article to read the rest. It doesn’t get any better. Firstly, this article comes across as nothing more than a silly little marketing ploy in order to sell books that are written to appeal to women who then buy them as presents for the males in their life, just like businesses market to children in order to get parents to part with their money. Secondly, the many attempts at redefining men over the decades all have something in common:

They all involve a move towards consumerism and materialism. Making men more feminine makes it easier to control them, instil fear and make money from them (including selling debt).

The number one website for Men’s Lifestyle is FHM.com

Funnily enough, I couldn’t find anything about tyranny, the Lisbon Treaty, our Bill of Rights, the nature of Fiat Currency, Cheap Credit = Expensive Debt, Marxism, Collectivism, The Dialectic etc on its many colourful pages. I guess these things just aren’t important eh. These lads mags are consumer bibles. Like little boys, obsessed with girls bodies (which I guess is better than their brains these days).

Of course, a few generations of broken homes where the boys are raised by single mothers has helped, as young men look about for a male role model to fill the vacuum left by feminism and find corporations and big government!

We are seeing an almost textbook example of the application of various psychopolitical mechanisms on our society.

The realm of defamation and degradation, of the psychopolitician, is Man himself. By attacking the character and morals of Man himself, and by bringing about,through contamination of youth, a general degraded feeling, command of the populace is facilitated to a very marked degree – The Soviet Art of Brain Washing

Our of sight, out of mind… Make Man feel like his species is animalistic, collectivist and devoid of hope and who will stop our enemies from conquering us? Not people like this.

Of course, part of the speaking out against such psychological warface (such as with this blog) must be dealt with accordingly, from the above document;

The populace must be brought into the belief that every individual within it who rebels in any way, shape, or form against the efforts and activities to enslave the whole, must be considered to be a deranged person whose eccentricities are neurotic and insane, and who must have at once the treatment of a psychopolitician.

The lack of good, strong male and female role models is part of the plan to undermine the resistance of a people. It also makes lots of money. It perpetuates bad behaviour and reliance on media. This enhances the effectiveness of the psychopolitical campaign. Further degraded and mentally shattered, the sheep consume in the hopes of it improving their lives, the reality of which is getting worse due to the tyranny and Treason of our government. This makes even MORE money. Money that can pumped into creating better adverts and subverting more leading figures to corporate fascism. And so on and so forth…

Today’s female role models are Pathetic

When I grow up, I want to be a whore! Parading my boundless ignorance in front of the public like the town idiot in the hopes of acquiring material possessions and a rich guy who I can then trade sex for more money and attention with!

Feminism just keeps getting better and better doesn’t it?

There was a show called The Weakest Link on the other day. It was a special for charity. The ‘contestants’ were all WAGS. These are the females the media throws on the front page at every opportunity, and the females that other females choose to idolise and look up to. Here they are:

Lined up were Alex Best, ex-wife of a deceased football drunk; Charley Uchea, a Big Brother contestant, whose cousin is a footballer; Danielle Lloyd, Teddy Sheringham’s ex; Linsey Dawn McKenzie, who married footballer Mark Williams; Amii Grove, who dates footballer Jermaine Pennant; and Michelle Marsh, Lucy Pinder, Cassie Sumner and Lauren Pope  -  who are still looking for their princely footballer and kissing a lot of frogs on the way.

Let’s get the first part out of the way. These girls are thick. For me, (and countless girls it seems) these women represent the far end of the majority of post-feminist females. It is easier to tart yourself up and try and bag a rich guy than earn it yourself. Essentially exchanging their sex for money. How empowering. Sound familiar?

The nine women were as pink and transparent as a set of highly buffed acrylic false nails.

Sweet girls, but with ‘desperate to hook rich footballer’ stamped all over their decolletage and, no doubt, their St Tropez tans.

Such is the desire to be a celebrity that even girls so intellectually challenged they think ‘hello’ is spelled with an exclamation mark are prepared to put themselves forward on a national TV quiz show to be humiliated.

This society, thoroughly undermined by Marxism has now collapsed into rampant fame seeking and materialism. From a disciplinarian, moral and intellectual point of view, British culture and life is rapidly collapsing in a way never before seen. These women seem to be proud that they know nothing. Proud that they are prostitutes. Doing anything to get attention. Thinking only of themselves and the narrow world they occupy.

I am only partly disgusted by them. People like them are a logical consequence of the social engineering inflicted on this society by collectivist liberal globalists.

My issues are twofold. Firstly, the media rewards their terrible ineptitude at everything of importance with full page spreads. Women read about them in girl mags and bitch about them in their nice little air-conditioned offices (while secretly wishing it was them on the magazines with the rich boyfriend). These idiots can make a good living (probably better than you) by objectifying themselves. Turn yourself into a sex object. Get paid, just like this other idiot!

Secondly, girls look up to them. Why? Don’t they have the personal integrity to realise that their entire lives will amount to nothing? Or do these girls not care about learning about the world, protecting their nation’s sovereignty and fighting tyranny?

LOL. Sorry, I couldn’t help it.

Maybe this is partly psychopolitics. The media are helping to erode a nations identity of itself by focusing on people of particular stupidity. The way they focus on knife stabbings. In a nation of about 60 million people one would think the media could report of things a little more positive. Maybe focusing on the Lisbon Treaty and its attack on Britain’s sovereignty. Maybe the media is just reflecting the reversal of societies ‘progress’ back on itself. Maybe the increasing crime, feral kids, breakdown of families, single motherhood, rampant consumerism, narcissism, state dependence and complete apathy and lack of desire to fight and protect one another is another symptom of society moving towards a Matriarchy, where female ‘qualities’ drive society.

Makes sense. There are more women of voting age than men. Therefore you could say women may actually control the vote. Women overwhelming vote for bigger government, ‘feeling safe’ and more benefits at the small cost of the destruction of the country and a higher burden on men.

Fuck the matriarchy. People need to start lighting the fires again! We need a revolution and we need one soon, before speaking out against tyranny becomes illegal.

Life under a feminist mother, by her daughter

The full version can be found at the source site. I will post a shorter version here.

Daily Mail

I love the way his head nestles in the crook of my neck. I love the way his face falls into a mask of eager concentration when I help him learn the alphabet. But most of all, I simply love hearing his little voice calling: ‘Mummy, Mummy.’

It reminds me of just how blessed I am. The truth is that I very nearly missed out on becoming a mother  -  thanks to being brought up by a rabid feminist who thought motherhood was about the worst thing that could happen to a woman.

You see, my mum taught me that children enslave women. I grew up believing that children are millstones around your neck, and the idea that motherhood can make you blissfully happy is a complete fairytale.

In fact, having a child has been the most rewarding experience of my life. Far from ‘enslaving’ me, three-and-a-half-year-old Tenzin has opened my world. My only regret is that I discovered the joys of motherhood so late  -  I have been trying for a second child for two years, but so far with no luck.

I was raised to believe that women need men like a fish needs a bicycle. But I strongly feel children need two parents and the thought of raising Tenzin without my partner, Glen, 52, would be terrifying.

As the child of divorced parents, I know only too well the painful consequences of being brought up in those circumstances. Feminism has much to answer for denigrating men and encouraging women to seek independence whatever the cost to their families.

My mother’s feminist principles coloured every aspect of my life. As a little girl, I wasn’t even allowed to play with dolls or stuffed toys in case they brought out a maternal instinct. It was drummed into me that being a mother, raising children and running a home were a form of slavery. Having a career, travelling the world and being independent were what really mattered according to her.

I love my mother very much, but I haven’t seen her or spoken to her since I became pregnant. She has never seen my son  -  her only grandchild. My crime? Daring to question her ideology.

Well, so be it. My mother may be revered by women around the world  -  goodness knows, many even have shrines to her. But I honestly believe it’s time to puncture the myth and to reveal what life was really like to grow up as a child of the feminist revolution.

My parents met and fell in love in Mississippi during the civil rights movement. Dad [Mel Leventhal], was the brilliant lawyer son of a Jewish family who had fled the Holocaust. Mum was the impoverished eighth child of sharecroppers from Georgia. When they married in 1967, inter-racial weddings were still illegal in some states.

My early childhood was very happy although my parents were terribly busy, encouraging me to grow up fast. I was only one when I was sent off to nursery school. I’m told they even made me walk down the street to the school.

Alice Walker believed so strongly that children enslaved their mothers she disowned her own daughter

When I was eight, my parents divorced. From then on I was shuttled between two worlds  -  my father’s very conservative, traditional, wealthy, white suburban community in New York, and my mother’s avant garde multi-racial community in California. I spent two years with each parent  -  a bizarre way of doing things.

Ironically, my mother regards herself as a hugely maternal woman. Believing that women are suppressed, she has campaigned for their rights around the world and set up organisations to aid women abandoned in Africa  -  offering herself up as a mother figure.

But, while she has taken care of daughters all over the world and is hugely revered for her public work and service, my childhood tells a very different story. I came very low down in her priorities  -  after work, political integrity, self-fulfilment, friendships, spiritual life, fame and travel.

My mother would always do what she wanted  -  for example taking off to Greece for two months in the summer, leaving me with relatives when I was a teenager. Is that independent, or just plain selfish?

I was 16 when I found a now-famous poem she wrote comparing me to various calamities that struck and impeded the lives of other women writers. Virginia Woolf was mentally ill and the Brontes died prematurely. My mother had me  -  a ‘delightful distraction’, but a calamity nevertheless. I found that a huge shock and very upsetting.

According to the strident feminist ideology of the Seventies, women were sisters first, and my mother chose to see me as a sister rather than a daughter. From the age of 13, I spent days at a time alone while my mother retreated to her writing studio  -  some 100 miles away. I was left with money to buy my own meals and lived on a diet of fast food.

What about the children?

The ease with which people can get divorced these days doesn’t take into account the toll on children. That’s all part of the unfinished business of feminism.

Then there is the issue of not having children. Even now, I meet women in their 30s who are ambivalent about having a family. They say things like: ‘I’d like a child. If it happens, it happens.’ I tell them: ‘Go home and get on with it because your window of opportunity is very small.’ As I know only too well.

Then I meet women in their 40s who are devastated because they spent two decades working on a PhD or becoming a partner in a law firm, and they missed out on having a family. Thanks to the feminist movement, they discounted their biological clocks. They’ve missed the opportunity and they’re bereft.

Feminism has betrayed an entire generation of women into childlessness. It is devastating.

But far from taking responsibility for any of this, the leaders of the women’s movement close ranks against anyone who dares to question them  -  as I have learned to my cost. I don’t want to hurt my mother, but I cannot stay silent. I believe feminism is an experiment, and all experiments need to be assessed on their results. Then, when you see huge mistakes have been paid, you need to make alterations.

I hope that my mother and I will be reconciled one day. Tenzin deserves to have a grandmother. But I am just so relieved that my viewpoint is no longer so utterly coloured by my mother’s.

I am my own woman and I have discovered what really matters  -  a happy family.

The full version can be read here.

Makes you wonder. Feminists speak of ‘freeing’ women from men but according to feminists, women should only be free to do what the feminists command. Not only does that sound like a form of totalitarianism, but it tends to result in women actually having less options than they had before feminism. The results of feminism are obvious; broken homes, constantly denigrated men (thus forcing men to reject such bitter women), sky rocketing abortion rates, women seeing their own positives as negatives (maternity) and more.

These are not hard to extend into modern society with a little thought. As an example;

Feral girls come from single mother homes (so do most criminals) > lack of education > alcohol abuse > teenage sex with random boys > more pregnancies > more abortions > more depression > more problems with self-image and self-worth > consumerism > denial of instincts/ joining the rat race > find men not really interested in such females > no children > more consumerism > death.

I really can’t see any benefit of feminism at all.

Psychopolitics – Dissimulative language example

Asylum applicants should be called ‘sanctuary seekers’, says new report

The word “asylum” should be phased out in relation to foreigners seeking safe haven in Britain and replaced with “sanctuary”, a new report said today.

A poll for the Independent Asylum Commission found that only 28% of people viewed “asylum” positively, and 33% viewed it negatively.

‘Asylum’ seekers are being seen in an increasingly bad light in the UK, mainly because of mass immigration and the resulting strain on public services, the tax burden, employment opportunities, language conflicts, isolationist actions of immigrants and other issues which are well documented in studies on the effects of mass immigration on nations and their peoples.

Stopping immigration is out of the question for our collectivist masters. The goal of mass immigration is the breaking of cultural and social identity of the sovereign nation, making it easier to facilitate the legal and political takeover of the country by foreign interests.

The next best thing, to try and manipulate public perception, is simply to change its description of it to something more ‘acceptable’. This is the exact same methodology used to reinvent eugenics as transhumanism and is used consistently throughout politics. Unfortunately it keeps working.

In comparison, more than 81% thought “sanctuary” had positive connotations. Slightly more people – 31.3% – most associated the word “asylum” with a place for the mentally ill rather than with safety for the persecuted, the poll said.

Ahead of the launch of the report today, a spokesman said there was “grave misunderstanding” among the public which threatened to undermine Britain’s long tradition of offering help to those fleeing persecution.

The definition of ‘fleeing persecution’ is almost completely irrelevant in this context. By definition, fleeing persecution means you must ask for asylum in the first stable country you enter. You may claim to be ‘fleeing persecution’ from Somalia, but you can’t possibly still be fleeing it while in France, or Spain, or Italy or any other country one must pass through to arrive at Calais.

Remember Britain is an island.

Put simply, they want to reinvent the term to present a more ‘positive’ image of it. Nothing in reality changes however. Just the perception.

Ifath Nawaz, president of the Association of Muslim Lawyers and co-chair of the Independent Asylum Commission, said: “The public have to understand and support sanctuary and the system that provides it for those fleeing persecution.

“And that is why the commission is calling for a campaign to win hearts and minds and ensure we have a system that is in line with the values of the mainstream British public.”

I will be dealing with Islam on a separate site soon enough, but note the language here. The public HAVE TO understand. What they mean is the public must be forced to accept anyone claiming persecution.

Co-chair and former High Court judge Sir John Waite said: “Unless we take action to restore public support and confidence, the outlook for the UK’s tradition of providing sanctuary to those fleeing persecution is bleak.

“The public overwhelmingly supports the idea that we provide sanctuary to those who need it and they are on the whole proud of our history as a safe haven – but there is a profound disconnection in the public mind between the sanctuary they want the UK to provide and their perception of asylum seekers and the asylum system.”

The survey of 1,000 people aged over 17 was conducted by Efeedback Research.

This is more than a perception, that is a reality. The immigration/ asylum system of Britain is wide open to abuse, and is manipulated by many claiming persecution and actively encouraged by our socialist government in the hopes of destroying national identity. Still, there is no serious discussion about the effects of the vast number of immigrants arriving or at what point the government must start putting the rights and desires of the British people first, instead claiming that millions of affordable (taxpayer funded) homes that are occupied by immigrants, predominantly on (taxpayer funded) benefits has little effect on the country. Another example of using different wording to simply avoid an issue.

This article is only interested in obfuscating an issue with the hope of continuing the same old policy.

Also note that any talk of immigration by the government revolves around immigrants from outside the EU.

Technically, under the The Amsterdam Treaty 1997, all EU countries must accept an open border policy to all citizens of the EU. ‘Free movement of goods and people’. (One can become a citizen of the EU via any EU member state, so tightening the policy for out-of-EU migrants will makes almost zero difference). Another reason to vote for any party talking about leaving the EU.

I have been informed that Camden Council, of London has a Somali language session, from 9.30am to 12.30 on Wednesdays. Here is the booklet advertising this. (Page 5). Would go some way to explain the huge number of Muslim Somalis in the area.

Names of over 30,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Hypothesis

… Are due to be released by Dr. Arthur Robinson (OISM). Just thought you may like to know.

StreetInsider

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.

Canada Free Press

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.

Telegraph

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?

ICECAP

NOAA reports that April 2008 was a full degree (F) below normal making it the 29th coldest April out of 115 years for the United States, the coldest in 11 years. Much of the western 2/3rds of the lower 48 were colder than normal. In Washington State, it was the second coldest April on record. In contrast in the east, in New York State it was the 3rd warmest.

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.

Rocket MAN flies to 8,200ft

How cool is this?

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, he had 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.

Don’t forget that.

British tourists are told to put EU stickers on their passports

Daily Mail

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.

- Brussels Journal

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.

Face of EU Dictatorship

Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU 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)

EU Map deletes England, replaces it with Regions

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.

- EU Truth

Annual Cost of the EU £295bn or 25% of GDP

7 deadly Lisbon clauses

The end of freedom

Expansion of the EU

Common Purpose

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.

Thanks for reading.

Girls arguing over a boy ‘blew up houses’

Could probably do as an addendum to Another reason men are avoiding women…

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.

- FMWatkins

Another reason men are avoiding women…

Don’t get mad, get E-venge!

Daily Mail.

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.

The heaviest element known to science

Found at UKIP

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.