phoenix3

A Phoenix of Liberty Rises

I’m back. It’s been a few years. I’ve been here and there, compiled even more research and have much to put on here for you. Conclusions I have reached that I have to share. I will be going to places I maybe shouldn’t be going to, but I’ll keep pushing it until you tell me to stop.

It’s going to be a little while until I hit my stride, I have lots of comments to approve, spam to clear, templates to reset, links to gather, I need to organise.

I’ll give you more personal thoughts in coming posts.

Thanks for reading.

And as far as the system is concerned? THIS IS WAR.

Attack on nuclear family leads to chaos

This contains additional information and quotes added by yours truly to give the article wider context.

Daily Mail

From almost the first moment of recorded history, one set of relationships has been at the heart of the human experience and the basis of civilisation itself: a mother and father who depend on each other; the children who rely on them both; a supportive network of grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins.

Without the loyalties and obligations of the committed family, our ancestors would certainly have struggled to survive in a dangerous and frightening world.

How else but with the help of kin could they have coped with the critical moments in life: birth, sickness, old age, the need to educate and train their young? Without such help from the very beginning, it may be asked whether humankind would ever have developed the capacity to build an advanced civilisation.

That is because it probably wouldn’t have. Matriarchal societies move males to the periphery. They are at the bottom of the social ladder and are therefore not motivated to take the risks to advance the society with technology, as is evidenced by Daniel Amneus in his book, The Garbage Generation. A must read.

This week a report from Unicef, the UN’s child welfare agency, warned that working mothers take a massive risk when they put their offspring into low quality childcare.

This is in regards to the state deciding to force women into work once their child is one years old. No doubt to not only pay for the disgusting debt these socialists have put Britain in with the bankers, but also to control the next generation.

“No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.” – Interview with Simone de Beauvoir, “Sex, Society, and the Female Dilemma,” Saturday Review, June 14, 1975, p.18

Until very recently, in fact, the importance of the family was taken for granted, not only as the basis of society, but as the foundation of our human identity.

Today? In western societies  –  and especially in the English-speaking world  –  we think we know better. Forget the wisdom of the ages. Forget our deep-rooted instincts.

Forget precepts that have governed every society in every era of history.

The importance of the ‘traditional’ family is being challenged as never before.

The idea has taken root that human families can be constructed in any way people want. The message is that biology counts for nothing.

Biological mothers don’t matter to their children. Biological fathers don’t matter either.

All that matters is what adults want  –  and children must adapt to it, whether they like it or not.

The sheer speed of what is happening is quite astonishing. In less than 50 years, the old values have been stood on their head.

Today, legislators don’t hesitate to plunge into ‘reforms’ that tear up the rights, duties and obligations that have underpinned the family for millennia.

They rush into new ‘ postmodernist’ concepts of family, partnering and parenthood. Indeed, they are even attempting to banish the word ‘marriage’ from the statute books.

Everywhere in the West, the liberal consensus is on the march. In Britain, for example, a Labour Government has discouraged the use of the ‘m’ word in official documents, while in the U.S., the American Law Institute recommends that marriage should be ‘ deprivileged’ and not be given a status above any other relationship.

Yet on any rational analysis, this reckless embrace of a brave new world is simply perverse, since there is no doubt whatever that the traditional family, underpinned by marriage, is the best way of bringing up secure, happy children and maintaining social stability.

Which is precisely why the liberal-fascists/ socialists/ feminists are so keen on destroying it. This is not news, this is historical fact.

“[The nuclear family is] a cornerstone of woman’s oppression: it enforces women’s dependence on men, it enforces heterosexuality and it imposes the prevailing masculine and feminine character structures on the next generation.” – Alison Jaggar, Feminist Politics and Human Nature

“We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage.” – Robin Morgan (ed), Sisterhood is Powerful, 1970, p.537

Feminism plays a very important role in destroying the family (softening up society for enslavement). The socialist state can not tolerate competition to its control over the population. It is an ideology of social engineering. The nuclear family represents a unit stronger than the bond between individual and state. It also gives men and women much to lose, which makes all the more difficult to enslave. This is no accident.

You don’t have to be a religious believer or a Victorian moralist to take this view. The evidence speaks for itself (despite the strenuous efforts of the liberal establishment to ignore it).

Fact: one in two unmarried couples splits up before their first child is five years old. The figure for married couples is just one in 12.

Fact: children from broken homes are 75 per cent more likely than their classmates to fail at school, 70 per cent more likely to be involved with drugs and 50 per cent more likely to have alcohol problems.

They are also more likely to run away from home, find themselves in the care system and end up in jail.

At the very least, those bleak statistics should give us pause. The truth is that some of the most intractable problems facing Britain today  –  from our tragically high rate of teenage pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases to petty crime, gang membership and welfare dependency  –  have their roots in family breakdown.

Harriet Harman MP, the socialist/ feminist fasicst is recorded as saying:

marriage was ‘irrelevant’ to public policy and described high rates of separation as a ‘positive development’, as it reflected ‘greater choice’ for couples  –  never mind the children.

Take the shabby way successive governments have treated marriage in this country, even though they know perfectly well that it is one of the great foundations of society.

It was a Tory Chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, who dismissed the married couples’ tax allowance as ‘an anomaly’. And it was former Home Secretary Jack Straw who proclaimed: ‘This Government will not preach about marriage.’

The result? In Britain today it just doesn’t pay to get married. Our tax and benefits system is so arranged that if lower-income couples who are living together get married, they will significantly increase their tax payments and lower their benefits.

Perhaps it’s no wonder that this country has a higher percentage of lone-parent families than any other country in Europe, apart from Sweden.

The system is designed to create family instability. And the costs, both social and financial, are huge.

How to explain this bizarre discouragement of an institution so important to the happiness, stability and financial health of the country?

Politicians are terrified of being thought ‘judgmental’ about the way citizens live. And they obviously take the defeatist view that nothing can be done to improve matters anyway.

Nonsense, they are only in power because they subscribe to the Marxist school of thought, whether that be socialism or its logical extension, communism. Both are collectivist totalitarian regimes that place the State as the all important construct and reduce the individual citizens to the position of slaves to its function creep and ever growing power. Reminds me of how the matriarchal society treats men. No wonder women subscribe to it.

The same aversion to moralising applies increasingly to the laws on marriage and divorce.

Not only are we witnessing ever easier divorce  –  whatever the children may need or want  –  and same-sex marriages, but there is also growing pressure to remove the words ‘father’ and ‘mother’ from birth certificates and replace them by ‘Progenitor A’ and ‘Progenitor B’ (as is already happening in Spain).

Whatever the motivation behind such trends, the ‘ traditional’ family structure is being badly eroded.

All this reminds me of the grim ideas floated in ancient Athens 2,500 years ago. In the vision sketched out in Plato’s Republic  –  a philosophical treatise on the most fundamental principles of the conduct of human society  –  mating would be random.

Children would be raised by the state. Neither mothers nor fathers could claim their biological offspring as their own. Nor could they raise their children.

And yet the family in its traditional form is crucial to us all  –  not simply because it underpins social stability or because it connects us to the past and the future, but because it’s also a bulwark of freedom itself.

Why? Because the invisible bonds it creates between its members generate loyalties and affections capable of resisting any tyranny.

Exactly. Why would these agents of the elite do this? Maybe it is because their plan for the global socialist dictatorship depends on it. They must destroy the institutions that make a strong society so it can then be taken over with ease, using lots of small changes over time, changing the structure of society to one which will be more susceptible to the type of tyranny they wish for us all. This is Fabian Socialism and it is happening to Britain NOW.

“To achieve One World Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification.” – Brock Chisholm, while director of UN World Health Organization.

“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” — Statement made before the United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950 by James Paul Warburg

“National Socialism will use its own revolution for establishing of a new world order.” — Adolph Hitler during World War II

“Mankind’s problems can no longer be solved by national government. What is needed is a world government. This can best be achieved by strengthening the United Nations system.” – Human Development Report, published by the UN Development Program, 1994

“The creation of a United Europe must be regarded as an essential step towards the creation of a United World.” – Jean Monnet, founder of the European Economic Community, 1948

“We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.” – Mikhail Gorbachev, 1987

“Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go – even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics, and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity, and precision on which the former depend.” – A quote from Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, “Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies” (New York, Basic Books, 1994), p. 116

Global one world dictatorship – Financial Times

Families in meltdown, judge says

The Labour government’s anti-family tax system

The Effect of Eugenics Propaganda: Decline of Civilization

Family Being Replaced with Feral Gangs In Socialist Britain

1,300 women have had at least FIVE abortions

Girls + Alcohol + Feminism = Record number of Abortions

Children don’t need fathers, they need lesbians

David Cameron in the feminists pocket

Man jailed for trying to protect his family

Why Feminism is a Fraud…

Half of single mothers ‘do not want to work’

The Effect of Eugenics Propaganda: Decline of Civilization

Infowars

Carolyn Harris
Infowars
December 12, 2008

According to a study led by David Schmitt, a professor of psychology at Bradley University, Illinois, Britons lead the western world in casual sex. The number of ‘one-night stands’ by both men and women are up and they are “the most promiscuous in the world.” While some praise this behavior as being “sexually free” it does have devastating consequences for human civilization. Consider the recent headline, “Drunken one-night stands over New Year will bring a record number of abortions” among teenagers.

While many “liberated” women say that they can separate sex and emotional attachment like men can and that casual sex is no big deal, testimonials do not bear this out. Besides the physical consequences of sexually-transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancies, the emotional toll is not something that is casual – it may be consciously ignored, but it is deep and long-lasting The elite know that the more sexual partners one has, the less able they are to maintain a long-term monogamous relationship like marriage. This is an insidious way to undermine the natural bonds that form marriages and create children.

And the ubiquitous sexual messages we encounter are no accident. Contained in television, movies, music, general advertisements and even now in virtual worlds, to which the public is retreating from this increasingly upsetting real-life world, these ever-present reminders of the cult of youth, beauty and sex are targeted at the young.

And the youth are absorbing those messages and putting them into practice as the results of this study show:

“Twenty-one percent of girls and 18% of boys said they have posted nude or partially nude pictures of themselves online. Forty-nine percent of teens and young adults have sent sexually suggestive text messages or e-mails of themselves. Fifteen percent of teens who sent sexually suggestive content said they have done so with someone they only know online.”

With more and more children being raised online, and coupled with the intensive mandatory sex education at public schools, they are subjected to more degrading influences and less direct family input than ever before. The deleterious effects of utilizing their unprecedented freedom online, participating in virtual worlds where anything is acceptable with no consequences, these children are literally becoming unable to form and maintain even simple friendships with actual peers they encounter in their real lives.

All of these contribute to the planned decline of civilization and the institution of . The social engineers have cleverly devised a top-down approach to tearing apart the nuclear family due to its threat to their plans for their New World Order. It is imperative to achieving their plans that the youth and young adults are inculcated with the ideas that procreating is selfish, greedy and inconvenient. They are taught from a very young age by teachers cumchange agents” to believe that human life is not as valuable as flora and fauna, that cultural morés and morals are “outdated and outmoded” and therefore should be discarded in favor of new “liberated” thinking of secular humanism, which espouses the belief that there is no concrete “right and wrong” therefore anything is justifiable with enough rationalization.

Marie Stopes, friend of fellow eugenicist Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, created the first birth control clinic in Britain and advocated “’sterilization of those totally unfit for parenthood be made an immediate possibility, indeed made compulsory.’ And in The Control of Parenthood, (1920)… wrote that were she in charge, she would ‘legislate compulsory sterilization of the insane, feebleminded… revolutionaries… half castes.’ She opposed the marriage of her own son merely because his bride-to-be wore glasses. And upon her death a large portion of her fortune was bequeathed to the Eugenics Society.” Marie Stopes International carries out one out of every three abortions in the UK, and promotes “voluntary sterilization.”

Most people instinctively recoil at the prospect of either voluntary or state-imposed sterilization, but sadly there are many who have been so brainwashed that they have aborted their pregnancies because having children is not “eco-friendly” and many others who have been voluntarily sterilized because of outright selfishness (”it would hamper my lifestyle and I wouldn’t be able to do the things I want to do”), others being “repulsed by… the idea of being pregnant and having a child” or just total lack of any maternal instinct.

This is a source of joy to the eugenicists and population control/reduction proponents because their mildly coercive population control via “education” and constant propaganda is working so well in the western world. The rampant promiscuity and resultant high divorce rate, astronomically increased infanticide, children’s lack of ability to form even the most basic relationship – friendship, legions of children being raised less by parents and more by teachers (e.g., the State) all accomplish the population reduction plan quite nicely without having to resort to bloodshed, except of course for the infants that are aborted.

But, as Bertrand Russell stated, “I do not pretend that birth control is the only way in which population can be kept from increasing. There are others, which, one must suppose, opponents of birth control would prefer. War, as I remarked a moment ago, has hitherto been disappointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full… The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people’s.”

We who value Freedom must resist the New World Order by educating ourselves and others, and refusing to participate in eugenics and voluntary population control.

British Women Arrested In Blowjob Competition

Seriously, they did. They were on holiday…

Source: Reuters

Nine British women were facing prostitution charges after being arrested at the weekend for taking part in an oral sex competition in the Greek holiday island of Zakynthos, police said on Monday.

Six British and six Greek men, including two bar owners, were also charged in the incident, which took place at Laganas beach in the south of the Ionian island, which lies off the west coast of mainland Greece, police said.

The women, who came to the popular resort on holiday, had been paid to take part in the competition, which was video recorded and was to be posted on the Internet, police said.

The men were charged with encouraging obscene behaviour.

Naturally they assumed it was the men’s idea, and What The F*ck, it was going to be put online and they still did it? Maybe they were the mothers of these girls, hoping for a bit of fame and all that. I wonder if they were all doing it, what the competition was? Which one could get a strangers’ sperm in their mouth the fastest?

The prostitution charge makes sense though. They were getting paid for sex. Now I wonder how many other women could be charged with that in this day and age…

The European Story and more

Just a quick note that on FreeBritain, I have compiled a post regarding the corruption and power of the EU, its history, current effects etc. I didn’t write it, but it’s a thorough breakdown of that socialist dictatorship. It is pretty long, but not everything can be a convenient summary.

The European Story

In regards to Islam and the constant capitulation by politically correct (read: culturally impotent) State services, comes this story of Muslims in Britain complaining that the Police Force has put a puppy on a poster. Islam deems puppies ‘dirty’ and so complain about it. Why don’t they say that about us non-Muslims? Seeing as they view us as the dirtiest and most disgusting things of all. This presents just one more in a never ending line of Muslim groups, calling for Islamic Law in Britain through degrees or just outright. Sharia Law is an oppressive regime that is incompatible with our British Laws or the Laws in the US (which are based on ours, not that our respective governments are following them.) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Islamic Law are not compatible, as this following quote states;

Predominantly Islamic countries, like Sudan, Pakistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, frequently criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for its perceived failure to take into the account the cultural and religious context of Islamic countries. In 1981, the Iranian representative to the United Nations, Said Rajaie-Khorassani, articulated the position of his country regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by saying that the UDHR was “a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition”, which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.

Islam has no place in Free Society, and what we are seeing now is nothing less than reverse colonisation, one of the forms of Islamic Holy War. The State endorses it because it helps disenfranchise British people and therefore our Culture, Heritage and National Identity.

“To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.”- G. Brock Chisholm,  Co-Founder of the World Federation for Mental Health

ANOTHER CASE OF THE TAIL WAGGING THE DOG

The real enemy of Britain is not the EU, it is our own Government, because it is our Government that is giving the EU the powers to rule over us. Everyday the Government exists in its current form is another day it is committing Traitorous Acts against the British People.

Why Ireland should vote No to the Lisbon Treaty

I am going to keep this simple.

Firstly, as I am sure people following the progress of the Lisbon Treaty will know, Ireland is the only country in the European Union who’s Constitution requires the ratification of the Treaty to be put to a public vote. Good. The re-wording of the original European Constitution to a Treaty in reality changes nothing of its content as the orignal Constitution is for all intents and purposes, intact in the Lisbon Treaty, albeit hidden. Disagree?

How about from the mouths of those whom one would expect to know, starting with the architect of the original Constitution, Valery Giscard d’Estaing, who states, in the Telegraph, 27 June 2007;

“This text is, in fact, a rerun of a great part of the substance of the Constitutional Treaty.”

He also appears in the Telegraph again where it is stated;

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.

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.

“Above all, it is to avoid having referendums thanks to the fact that the articles are spread out and constitutional vocabulary has been removed,” he added.

Here some more quotes, from an earlier article of mine;

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)

The European Commission
“It’s essentially the same proposal as the old Constitution.”
(Margot Wallstrom, EU Commissioner, Svenska Dagbladet, 26 June 2007)

And so on… So yes, it is all still there, just a different lick of paint and buried in other documents you have probably never read either.

But what is there exactly? What does the Lisbon Treaty mean for Brussels, and for its member states (who apart from Ireland, were all refused a say on the Treaty because the People were overwhelmingly against it).

In a nutshell;

An analysis by Prof. Anthony Coughlan

Today the European Union leaders signed the Lisbon Treaty. This treaty gives the EU the constitutional form of a state. These are the ten most important things the Lisbon Treaty does:

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.

The complete article (which should definitely be read) is revealingly named ‘These Boots Are Gonna Walk All Over You‘ and is located here.

So, what to do? Your government is telling you to vote Yes (although they would much rather just refused you a vote altogether), many unions and groups are campaigning against the Treaty, not sure what you are going to do? Firstly, I strongly suggest you use your vote. This Treaty will give the EU superior powers over all of your Laws (including your Constitution). This is a FACT. The European Union is just dying to expand the EU into North Africa and accelerate its expansion. Also a FACT. The French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner is currently threatening Ireland at the prospect of you guys and gals kicking the elitists in Brussels where it hurts. Apparently;

Mr Kouchner said that a “No” vote would be met by “gigantic incomprehension” in the rest of Europe.

That is a lie. It is also a blanket statement made by one politician who claims to speak for Europe which is strange considering the Lisbon Treaty was crafted specifically to stop the People having a say on it. He is just trying to use the spectre of Europe as a battering ram to frighten you into capitulating to the demands of Brussels. In truth however;

75% of people in the EU want a referendum on any new treaty which gives more powers to the EU. In the UK, 83% would want a vote to be held. A majority in all 27 countries would want a referendum.

Which brings me to my final points. The first is, what is so democratic and freedom-loving about threatening countries who may disagree with the EU? The little dictator-in-training continued;

“It would be very, very, very troubling…that we could not count on the Irish, who themselves have counted a lot on Europe’s money,”

So the EU was just pretending to be helpful, when in reality it was trying to set Ireland up to leverage power from them in the future. Sounds like the antics of a loan shark doesn’t it? This brings me to my final point.

Whether you currently think Yes or No, there is a 99.9% change that you do not really know what is in the Treaty. I don’t mean you couldn’t understand it, I just mean that you haven’t read it. This is not surprising considering the EU is refusing to allow member governments to publish readable versions of the Treaty until it is completely ratified!

So when you go to vote, just imagine you are in a bank to sign a contract on a home you already own. The suit across the table is trying to convince you to sign it. The document you have is literally unreadable. You are not sure what is in it, but you do know that at the very least it will result in massive changes in the way you can govern your own home. You don’t know how though. You don’t know how much it will cost in the future or what direction it will take either. But you do know that signing this contract means the rules you used to live by will now become secondary to the rules of that Bank. But you don’t know what the Bank’s rules are. You do know that the Banks accounts have not been signed off for at least the past 14 years because of rampant corruption and misuse of funds. You do know that a very large number of people are against the EU’s legal framework and the Lisbon Treaty. You do know that the contract contains a self amendment clause (Article 48) which will enable them to;

give the EU powers to amend its own treaties, without recourse to an intergovernmental conference or a new Treaty. It is also unclear whether this ‘simplified revision procedure’ would be subject to a referendum.

These are some other things you do know, from the National Platform EU Research and Information Centre via Wise Up Journal (each point in explained in detail in the source article);

1. Lisbon makes the EU Constitution superior to the Irish Constitution in all areas of EU law.
2. Lisbon gives the EU the constitutional form of a supranational European Federal State and turns Ireland and the other Member States into regions or provinces of this Federation.
3. Lisbon shifts influence over law-making and decision-taking in the EU towards the Big States and away from the smaller ones like Ireland.
4. Lisbon removes Ireland’s right to a permanent EU Commissioner.
5. Lisbon deprives the Irish Government of its right to decide who Ireland’s Commissioner would be when it comes to our turn to be on the Commission.
6. Lisbon gives the European Union the power to make laws in 32 new areas that are removed from the Dail and other National Parliaments.
7. Lisbon is a self-amending Treaty which would open the way to harmonising Ireland’s company taxes.
8. Lisbon gives the EU the power to decide our human and civil rights.
9. Lisbon provides that if one-third of National Parliaments object to the Commission’s proposal for an EU law, the Commission must reconsider it, but not necessarily abandon it.
10. Lisbon militarizes the EU further.

Finally, if you think you can just opt out of it afterwards, think again;

David Cameron yesterday said it would be “almost impossible” to have a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it was already law in the UK and the rest of the EU.

So, would you still sign that contract or refuse to do so until you can appreciate the number of changes it may make and what the effects of those changes could be on your life and that of your community?

Go Ireland!

* * UPDATES * *

Continue reading

Sideline Christianity and promote Islam! says Hazel Blears, Communities Secretary (Labour)

Labour in bed with Islam - endofmen.wordpress.com This is unbelievable. I was reading this very good article regarding the real and present threats to Western Civilisation from Islam and Marxist Liberal Insects called The Execution of Britain from Brussels Journal when I came upon this article in the Telegraph. And what the hell is a Communities Secretary anyway?

It is “common sense” for Christianity to be sidelined at the expense of Islam, a Government minister claimed on Sunday.

Hazel Blears, the Communities Secretary, defended Labour’s policy on religion after a report backed by the Church of England claimed that Muslims receive a disproportionate amount of attention.

She said it was right that more money and effort was spent on Islam than Christianity because of the threat from extremism and home-grown terrorism.

She really believes promoting Islam and marginalising Christianity will be good for Britain? It has to be said, that Islam and Sharia Law are incompatible with British Law and Christianity. Yes yes I know, Britain is secular now. That isn’t the point, the point is Christianity was like a godfather to Britain, helping it grow and resist subversion from foreign cultures and beliefs, something to be respected even in the eyes of a ‘non-believer’ like me) as opposed to the socialist (Labour party) and communism as described below:

Gary Allan in his multimillion best seller None Dare Call It Conspiracy, states the following about Marx’s Communist Manifesto:

“If you study Marx Communist Manifesto you will find that in essence Marx said the proletarian revolution would establish the Socialist dictatorship of the proletariat. To achieve the Socialist dictatorship of the proletariat, three things would have to be accomplished. 1. The elimination of all right to private property. 2. The dissolution of the family unit: and 3. Destruction of what Marx referred to as the ‘opiate of the people,’ ‘Religion.

Back to the socialists in power today.

She added: “We live in a secular democracy. That’s a precious thing. We don’t live in a theocracy, but we’ve always accepted that hundreds of thousands of people are motivated by faith. We live in a secular democracy but we want to recognise the role of faith.”

I see this as slightly strange. One minute stating government secularism and in the same breath advocating for the active promotion of a foreign religion, using taxpayers money that invariably will come from Christians in the country as well as many others who may not particularly want Islam promoted in their community. I guess that makes them ‘racist’ right?

The liberal Leftist Communists deem it appropriate to try and reduce the influence of Christianity, with taxpayers money, and without taxpayer’s permission. Religious communism? Two diametrically opposed religions placed at even keel with each other in the same country. No… that won’t create any problems… Our Marxist theory book says so! And if there are any problems, we can just strengthen the police state and strip you ALL of more rights in response. Religious Collectivism then;

As The Daily Telegraph reported on Saturday, the landmark report commissioned by the Church and written by academics at the Von Hugel Institute accuses ministers of paying only “lip service” to Christianity and marginalising the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches, while focusing “intently” on Islam.

Well, if the BBC was anything to go by, this should have been seen coming years ago with that memo in 2006

The admissions of bias were made at a recent “impartiality” summit the BBC held. Most executives admitted the corporation’s representation of homosexuals and ethnic minorities was unbalanced and disproportionate, YnetNews.com said. The British news agency, the report said, leaned too strongly towards political correctness, the overt promotion of multiculturalism, anti-Americanism and discrimination against the countryside.

This is not new mind you, it is just that the government is getting so confident in its power over the people that members of it will begin saying openly what they have actually done for years. But even that should come as much of a surprise to those who have studied the Barcelona Declaration, the Euro-Mediterranean Project and the conclusion of Eurabia.

The article continues;

However Malaysia’s Prime Minister warned yesterday that Muslim extremism in Britain will grow unless the Government and society learn to understand Islam.

Abdullah Badawi claimed that the legacy of Britain’s imperial past has hampered its ability to appreciate its Islamic population.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, the prime minister urged Gordon Brown to allow the country’s Muslims to live under Islamic law, but also said that they must prove their worth to society.

My emphasis. What else could allowing a foreign people to live under a foreign law system in a sovereign land mean? Somebody please tell me I’m not over-reacting here! The Muslims Against Sharia site correctly states;

Islam, in its present form, is not compatible with principles of freedom and democracy.

It would need to change to match the host country. That is how it usually works. Changing or attempting to change the host county’s culture, heritage or laws can be construed an act of aggression. The government knowingly facilitating such actions must be held to account for Treason. As it should have been done many times already.

P.S. I notice that the methodoloy utilised by the Lefties in power (Muslim = Victims, Britain = Oppressor) is exactly the same as the one used by Feminists (Women = Victim, Men = Oppressor), Socialists/ Communists (Working class – Victim, Middle Class = Oppressor),  Environmentalists (Earth = Victim, Civilisation (minus elite) = Oppressor), and generally any other special interest (usually minority) group that wants to exert power over a majority, and Labour is always there to lend a helping hand.

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

Blogosphere Round Up

Found via Antimisandry.

It seems more than obvious that whilst rape is a very serious crime, being accused of rape is just as serious. With rape, the stain of being accused does not wash away with the verdict, it stains a character and prevents an equal footing guarenteed by law, especially since until the verdict is given, the accused is innocent.

There is no plausible argument for releasing the name of the accused as this does nothing to further justice, but only serves to punish them outside of the judicial system. The only punishment for rape, should be passed down by a judge, not by newspapers, their peers, or their employers. Therefore revealing their identity is an unjust punishment without basis in english law.

We therefore request that ALL parties to a rape case are anonymous, until a verdict is reached. You have to be a British citizen or resident to sign.

Please comment in this thread: Petition To Treat The Accused And Accuser With The Same Anonymity

Also, Hawaiian Libertarian has a very good post about young women’s sexual behaviour, here. ( Also put HL on my links, I don’t know why he wasn’t there already…) Continue reading

Polls say 88% want EU referendum

Some 88% of the British public want a referendum on the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, according to private polls for the I Want a Referendum (IWAR) campaign.

“MPs voted by 362 – 224 for the Reform Treaty in its Second Reading on Monday 21st January. This sixth and final treaty, now renamed the Lisbon Treaty, formally replaces Britain with the European Union on 1st January 2009. This is a year before the deadline set by the Chancellor of Germany, Angela Merkel.

The Treaty will abolish the British Constitution, and therefore the nations of Britain and England, sweeping away our Westminster Parliament, and giving the EU the power to close it” – EU Truth

The unofficial ballot was conducted by postal vote last month in 10 Labour and Liberal Democrat marginal seats.

A total of 152,520 people voted, with 133,251 backing a referendum. IWAR claims the turnout is higher than that in local council elections. Continue reading

Gardasil vaccine deaths in UK

It was only a matter of time.

HPV Vaccine Gardasil

HPV Vaccine Gardasil 2

Cervical cancer vaccine punted to 300,000 more teenage girls

HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed

Alert over jab for girls as two die following cervical cancer vaccination.

A jab that could be given to hundreds of thousands of schoolgirls this autumn was at the centre at a safety scare last night following the deaths of two young women.

European regulators are investigating the “sudden and unexpected” deaths of the women who received Gardasil, one of two jabs to protect against cervical cancer licensed for use in the UK.

The vaccine has been hailed as a breakthrough by the Department of Health, which is backing an annual programme of vaccination for girls aged 11 to 13 years starting in September.

The jab is already available privately and a thirteen-year-old girl from London became the first in the country to receive the cervical cancer vaccine in 2006. Hollie Anderson’s mother, Lisa, paid £450 for her to have the jab after seeing her own mother battle against cancer.

I have been saying it’s dangerous for ages, and so have countless others. The government gave millions of pounds of taxpayers money to Merck, the shit-kicking Big Pharma firm to buy an untested vaccine, that had a history of deaths and bad reactions from those who received the cocktail of crap. Continue reading

CCTV Part 1

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 bet- ween 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. Continue reading