Education that isn't compulsory
I have just heard that my old secondary school called Gillbrook has just failed an inspection. They didn't just fail. They did much worse. They did so bad that all the teachers have been fired and they have to reapply for their job. I can't find the article that was in the paper but here is the inspectors report.
The main thing that was wrong was the discipline. Not surprised really. Teachers weren't in charge. the pupils used to throw books, lock teachers in cupboards and sometimes assault them.
Its a pity. I heard it started to go down hill when the new head teacher started (1 year before I started the school).
I hope my old tutor keeps his job. he was a good teacher. he was the one that got locked in the cupboard.
I hope they fire some of the insane teachers like the religious education teacher who thought she had seen a faery and that there are angels with us all the time both good and bad fighting over us.
There is a simple solution to all of this. All you have to do is uncompulsorise secondary school education. At the moment school is a prison. There is no doubt about that. Uncompulsorise school and the troublemakers will leave allowing the good ones to stay and try to learn. Why should we be made to go to school? If we don't want to learn why should we be made to?
Education should be free but not compulsory. It should be up to the person who is getting the education if he or she wants it.
Think about it. Without compulsory education school would be better. The children there would actually try and learn because they have a choice to either leave or learn and behave. I don't see how this could be bad however to stop children coming to school for one lesson and leaving when there is another they should be made to sign up for the year. If they sign up then sign out of school they will not be able to sign up again until the start of the month. If they keep signing in and out they will be stopped from messing the school about and be made to sign one thing. If they choose not to sign up then they will have to wait 1 year before they can start again.
There may still be disruptive pupils but if they are too disruptive they will just lose their right to free education for the rest of the year. Children that want to learn shouldn't be disrupted from doing so.
I don't see a problem with this. Does anyone see a problem with this?
Friday, July 29, 2005
Thursday, July 28, 2005
White guilt
White christians have been given white guilt through the years because of all the atrocities that we supposedly did such as slavery, colonialism and the holocaust but I will prove that the information that we have been told is not fully true or it has been blown out of proportion by the liberals who want whites to feel guilty for what our ancestors may have done.
Slavery
What we have been lead to believe is untrue. We have been lead to believe that white Christians began slavery which was not the case. White christians didn't even want africans to be brought back as slaves. It was the Jews. No I am not an antisemite. All you have to do is look at the facts.
The fact is large numbers of free Negroes owned black slaves; in fact, in numbers disproportionate to their representation in society at large. In 1860 only a small minority of whites owned slaves. According to the U.S. census report for that last year before the Civil War, there were nearly 27 million whites in the country. Some eight million of them lived in the slaveholding states.
The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned slaves (1). Even if all slaveholders had been white, that would amount to only 1.4 percent of whites in the country (or 4.8 percent of southern whites owning one or more slaves).
According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.
To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.
The majority of slaveholders, white and black, owned only one to five slaves. More often than not, and contrary to a century and a half of bullwhips-on-tortured-backs propaganda, black and white masters worked and ate alongside their charges; be it in house, field or workshop. The few individuals who owned 50 or more slaves were confined to the top one percent, and have been defined as slave magnates.
In 1860 there were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more slaves The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards, who owned a large sugar cane plantation. Another Negro slave magnate in Louisiana, with over 100 slaves, was Antoine Dubuclet*, a sugar planter whose estate was valued at (in 1860 dollars) $264,000 . That year, the mean wealth of southern white men was $3,978.
In Charleston, South Carolina in 1860 125 free Negroes owned slaves; six of them owning 10 or more. Of the $1.5 million in taxable property owned by free Negroes in Charleston, more than $300,000 represented slave holdings . In North Carolina 69 free Negroes were slave owners.
In 1860 the Negro William Ellison was South Carolina's largest slaveowner.
Interestingly, considering today's accounts of life under slavery, authors Johnson and Roak report instances where free Negroes petitioned to be allowed to become slaves; this because they were unable to support themselves.
Further more it was these black slave magnates that were the biggest abusers of slaves.
Whilst the White man sat and ate at the same table as his slaves it was the black man that used the bullwhip.
As you can see it was not us whites that had the most slaves. Per capita blacks were more likely to own slaves. Black people should be the ones getting blamed for having slaves and not the white people.
*After the civil war Antoine Dubuclet served Louisiana as state treasurer from 1868 to 1878, the only negro in the reconstructed South to hold that office for more than one term.
Yes, that is right, after the civil war, and years before the 'civil rights movement' blacks held high office which just shows that even the south wasn't that racist. It shows that If blacks deserved it they got to where they wanted to be, well unless they were owned by another black guy.
You are probably thinking this is irrelevant as you probably think whites were the people who started the slave trade, well you couldn't be more wrong. I don't blame you. Since 1945 we have had constant antiwhite propoganda.
How do I know this? well it is basic stuff. Haven't you been told that Egypt had slaves which was thousands of years before whites owned them?
Now for slavery in modern times which is creating this white guilt. In Africa the tribes had been fighting other tribes for centuries and taking slaves.
Many people credit Bartolome De Las Casas as being the father of slavery. This would be a ridiculous statement at the best of times, as slavery has existed since the dawn of time, and still exists in Africa today, but even if we allow for a statement saying that Bartolome De Las Casas was the father of modern slavery, or slavery in the Americas, we still have a difficulty there.
Bartolome De Las Casas actually often spoke on behalf of non-whites rights. This is recorded in In 1516 when Las Casas returned to Spain to plead the Indians' case with King Ferdinand V.
Following service in New Spain (Mexico), Nicaragua, Peru and Guatemala, he obtained an audience with Charles V. The result of that meeting was promulgation of the Nuevas Leyes de 1542, which dealt a severe blow to the encomienda. Unfortunately, these laws were repeatedly flouted by greedy settlers.
Who were the these settlers though? well by the mid-sixteenth century there were more secret Jews than Catholics in Mexico City.
Bartolome De Las Casas failed in his proposals to introduce blacks as free laborers, not slaves, because of other 'spanish' settlers in the new world, the jewish ones of Mexico city and elsewhere.
As well as the settlers the scheme also failed because of problems at the other end.
When Bartolome De Las Casas first advocated free black labor in the Americas there were a number of black christian converts in Portuguese catholic missions in the country now known as Mozambique who voluntered to work in the new world, but the jewish traders refused to transport them saying they would only transport slaves.
Slavery would not have existed in the Americas without the jews, and yet you hate the White man for this trade.
By the way, while we are talking about Whites and slavery, it's also worth remembering that between 1530 and 1780 more than a million White Europeans were enslaved by North African slave traders so don't be blaming whites for slavery. Even if we did it wouldn't it be fair as whites were taken first?
Ever since Slavery was ended white people have faced blacks that have continually demanded compensation. Even if it was only whites that owned slaves it would only be the rich that actually owned them which would only be a tiny minority of people so why should blacks be given compensation for what a minority of ancestors did? They shouldn't be given a thing. The fact of the matter is the african was better off as a slave than dying in diseased africa.
It is afact that the majority of black slaves were sold into slavery by their own kind. They were captured when opposing tribes fought and were sold as slaves.
Not once is the whiteman to blame. Blacks are the first to blame because they were the ones that captured them first. Jews are the second to blame because they began the modern slave trade.
Whites did not invent slavery, they did not capture or imprison the slaves, they did not sell them, nor transport them, and proportionately they wern't even the greatest owners, but they did free them. Blacks should not be moaning at us. They should be thanking us. Without the whiteman they would never be free today.
So how can we be blamed for their 'suffering' whites took them in, housed them, fed them, clothed them, educated them and in return they expected them to work. Is that such a bad deal?
Maybe now it's time for the black race to repay the white man, not only for all these years of abuse and claims, over things we didn't do, not only to repay the unfairly claimed payments of compensation and welfare, but also to pay the debt of liberation.
If you read this spread the word. If you are blamed for slavery tell them the facts. Don't point them to this blog. Tell them to research it themselves or they will never know if you just tell them. Provide the links but that is it.
The holocaust
For years the jews and liberals have been trying to make whites feel sorry for the jews because of the holcaust. I will give you a reality check. They don't deserve our sympathy. So 6 million jews died. Far more none jews died in the second world war than that so why should we feel sorry for them? The answer is we shouldn't but liberal brainwashing has made us to it. Don't believe me? Then why do we have a holocaust memorial day? its to make us think about the minority that died. Most people don't know that they were a minority though. Most people don't realise that the jews barely just made 10% of the deaths.
It is a fact that communism killed far more people than fascism. Russian communism killed 94 million in peacetime.
We must blame political correctness for white guilt here. Another fact is political correctness was started by communism . We already know that the British government is infiltrated by communists if you see my other articles therefore they are doing this on purpose for some unknown reason. If we tried to have a day dedicated to the people killed by communism we would be ridiculed because they are communists.
There should be no holocaust memorial day. In its place we should have a genocide memorial day. A day dedicated to all genocides including the communist and holocaust genocides.
The jews don't deserve a day of their own to commemorate the dead especially if we also have to commemorate their dead and no one elses.
Colonialism
We have been lead to believe that colonialism harmed the countries that was colonised. This is false. If it did why are Canada, America and Australia such good places to live compared to everywhere else? This is because Africa was a hell hole before colonisation and we made it a little better. If it wasn't for us the native people would have never been able to take advantage of their resources. It is a myth that Africa is a poor continent. It is a fact that Africa is rich in precious rocks and other things. Without the whiteman they would have never known it existed so they would be living worse than they are today. They should be thanking us for showing them ways to take advantage of their resources.
When the Zaire (now called the Democratic Republic of the Congo) became independent in early 1960, it possessed 60,000 km of tarred roads. Today it has less than 9,000 km of tarred roads left. Good roads were one of the things that were left to them after colonialism and look what they did to that.
It is a fact that colonialism gave Africa the ability to speak english, law was also given and the colonies were built up so that the inhabitants wold have a better standard of living. Also near the end of the British empire the colonies as a whole were costing more money than they were making which would mean that Britain were helping the inhabitants a lot and what do the africans do? They go and screw it up. Africa has received half a trillion in aid despite the fact that the World Bank has reported that “Econometric analyses show that aid has no systematic relationship to growth anywhere in the world. This may not be surprising in countries where aid is small relative to the size of the economy. It is surprising and concerning in Africa—where aid flows have consistently reached 10% or more of gross national product in many countries over an extended period of time.”
The fact is we helped africa progress and now the white man isn't there they are screwing up everything we did for them. Aid is not making their situation any better. Africa is hopeless. We should just leave them alone and allow them to progress how they want to. That will probably make them regress for a few decades but that can't be avoided. Colonialism can only be blamed for progressing african nations. Perhaps the progress was too fast for them which is why we should leave them lone and let them progress their own way without any aid at all. They should finally be made to stand on their own two feet.
Conclusion
White people should not feel guilty for anything. The fact is we helped the world. Is it our fault that the africans are too stupid that they are regressing? If they don't want to be our colonies they should be made to stand on their own two feet without anymore aid as we have to be cruel to be kind in this instance.
As for the jews the next one you see that moans about the holocaust justy tell him to shut up and tell him that they weren't the only ones that suffered. Infact they were a minority.
I hope I have cleared somethings up for you and hope you will stop this political correctness and stop going to holocaust rememberance celebrations or whatever. Don't do a minutes silence for the jews. They don't deserve it. Don't donate money for live 8. The africans don't deserve it and it does little good. It might do good for the short term however if you keep donating they will expect to be fed by us constantly and won't even try to make africa a better place which will make africa a forever hell hole. Do you want them to stay that way? If you don't then don't donate to them. Its only going to make matters worse. They have to learn to progress.
White christians have been given white guilt through the years because of all the atrocities that we supposedly did such as slavery, colonialism and the holocaust but I will prove that the information that we have been told is not fully true or it has been blown out of proportion by the liberals who want whites to feel guilty for what our ancestors may have done.
Slavery
What we have been lead to believe is untrue. We have been lead to believe that white Christians began slavery which was not the case. White christians didn't even want africans to be brought back as slaves. It was the Jews. No I am not an antisemite. All you have to do is look at the facts.
The fact is large numbers of free Negroes owned black slaves; in fact, in numbers disproportionate to their representation in society at large. In 1860 only a small minority of whites owned slaves. According to the U.S. census report for that last year before the Civil War, there were nearly 27 million whites in the country. Some eight million of them lived in the slaveholding states.
The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned slaves (1). Even if all slaveholders had been white, that would amount to only 1.4 percent of whites in the country (or 4.8 percent of southern whites owning one or more slaves).
According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.
To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.
The majority of slaveholders, white and black, owned only one to five slaves. More often than not, and contrary to a century and a half of bullwhips-on-tortured-backs propaganda, black and white masters worked and ate alongside their charges; be it in house, field or workshop. The few individuals who owned 50 or more slaves were confined to the top one percent, and have been defined as slave magnates.
In 1860 there were at least six Negroes in Louisiana who owned 65 or more slaves The largest number, 152 slaves, were owned by the widow C. Richards and her son P.C. Richards, who owned a large sugar cane plantation. Another Negro slave magnate in Louisiana, with over 100 slaves, was Antoine Dubuclet*, a sugar planter whose estate was valued at (in 1860 dollars) $264,000 . That year, the mean wealth of southern white men was $3,978.
In Charleston, South Carolina in 1860 125 free Negroes owned slaves; six of them owning 10 or more. Of the $1.5 million in taxable property owned by free Negroes in Charleston, more than $300,000 represented slave holdings . In North Carolina 69 free Negroes were slave owners.
In 1860 the Negro William Ellison was South Carolina's largest slaveowner.
Interestingly, considering today's accounts of life under slavery, authors Johnson and Roak report instances where free Negroes petitioned to be allowed to become slaves; this because they were unable to support themselves.
Further more it was these black slave magnates that were the biggest abusers of slaves.
Whilst the White man sat and ate at the same table as his slaves it was the black man that used the bullwhip.
As you can see it was not us whites that had the most slaves. Per capita blacks were more likely to own slaves. Black people should be the ones getting blamed for having slaves and not the white people.
*After the civil war Antoine Dubuclet served Louisiana as state treasurer from 1868 to 1878, the only negro in the reconstructed South to hold that office for more than one term.
Yes, that is right, after the civil war, and years before the 'civil rights movement' blacks held high office which just shows that even the south wasn't that racist. It shows that If blacks deserved it they got to where they wanted to be, well unless they were owned by another black guy.
You are probably thinking this is irrelevant as you probably think whites were the people who started the slave trade, well you couldn't be more wrong. I don't blame you. Since 1945 we have had constant antiwhite propoganda.
How do I know this? well it is basic stuff. Haven't you been told that Egypt had slaves which was thousands of years before whites owned them?
Now for slavery in modern times which is creating this white guilt. In Africa the tribes had been fighting other tribes for centuries and taking slaves.
Many people credit Bartolome De Las Casas as being the father of slavery. This would be a ridiculous statement at the best of times, as slavery has existed since the dawn of time, and still exists in Africa today, but even if we allow for a statement saying that Bartolome De Las Casas was the father of modern slavery, or slavery in the Americas, we still have a difficulty there.
Bartolome De Las Casas actually often spoke on behalf of non-whites rights. This is recorded in In 1516 when Las Casas returned to Spain to plead the Indians' case with King Ferdinand V.
Following service in New Spain (Mexico), Nicaragua, Peru and Guatemala, he obtained an audience with Charles V. The result of that meeting was promulgation of the Nuevas Leyes de 1542, which dealt a severe blow to the encomienda. Unfortunately, these laws were repeatedly flouted by greedy settlers.
Who were the these settlers though? well by the mid-sixteenth century there were more secret Jews than Catholics in Mexico City.
Bartolome De Las Casas failed in his proposals to introduce blacks as free laborers, not slaves, because of other 'spanish' settlers in the new world, the jewish ones of Mexico city and elsewhere.
As well as the settlers the scheme also failed because of problems at the other end.
When Bartolome De Las Casas first advocated free black labor in the Americas there were a number of black christian converts in Portuguese catholic missions in the country now known as Mozambique who voluntered to work in the new world, but the jewish traders refused to transport them saying they would only transport slaves.
Slavery would not have existed in the Americas without the jews, and yet you hate the White man for this trade.
By the way, while we are talking about Whites and slavery, it's also worth remembering that between 1530 and 1780 more than a million White Europeans were enslaved by North African slave traders so don't be blaming whites for slavery. Even if we did it wouldn't it be fair as whites were taken first?
Ever since Slavery was ended white people have faced blacks that have continually demanded compensation. Even if it was only whites that owned slaves it would only be the rich that actually owned them which would only be a tiny minority of people so why should blacks be given compensation for what a minority of ancestors did? They shouldn't be given a thing. The fact of the matter is the african was better off as a slave than dying in diseased africa.
It is afact that the majority of black slaves were sold into slavery by their own kind. They were captured when opposing tribes fought and were sold as slaves.
Not once is the whiteman to blame. Blacks are the first to blame because they were the ones that captured them first. Jews are the second to blame because they began the modern slave trade.
Whites did not invent slavery, they did not capture or imprison the slaves, they did not sell them, nor transport them, and proportionately they wern't even the greatest owners, but they did free them. Blacks should not be moaning at us. They should be thanking us. Without the whiteman they would never be free today.
So how can we be blamed for their 'suffering' whites took them in, housed them, fed them, clothed them, educated them and in return they expected them to work. Is that such a bad deal?
Maybe now it's time for the black race to repay the white man, not only for all these years of abuse and claims, over things we didn't do, not only to repay the unfairly claimed payments of compensation and welfare, but also to pay the debt of liberation.
If you read this spread the word. If you are blamed for slavery tell them the facts. Don't point them to this blog. Tell them to research it themselves or they will never know if you just tell them. Provide the links but that is it.
The holocaust
For years the jews and liberals have been trying to make whites feel sorry for the jews because of the holcaust. I will give you a reality check. They don't deserve our sympathy. So 6 million jews died. Far more none jews died in the second world war than that so why should we feel sorry for them? The answer is we shouldn't but liberal brainwashing has made us to it. Don't believe me? Then why do we have a holocaust memorial day? its to make us think about the minority that died. Most people don't know that they were a minority though. Most people don't realise that the jews barely just made 10% of the deaths.
It is a fact that communism killed far more people than fascism. Russian communism killed 94 million in peacetime.
We must blame political correctness for white guilt here. Another fact is political correctness was started by communism . We already know that the British government is infiltrated by communists if you see my other articles therefore they are doing this on purpose for some unknown reason. If we tried to have a day dedicated to the people killed by communism we would be ridiculed because they are communists.
There should be no holocaust memorial day. In its place we should have a genocide memorial day. A day dedicated to all genocides including the communist and holocaust genocides.
The jews don't deserve a day of their own to commemorate the dead especially if we also have to commemorate their dead and no one elses.
Colonialism
We have been lead to believe that colonialism harmed the countries that was colonised. This is false. If it did why are Canada, America and Australia such good places to live compared to everywhere else? This is because Africa was a hell hole before colonisation and we made it a little better. If it wasn't for us the native people would have never been able to take advantage of their resources. It is a myth that Africa is a poor continent. It is a fact that Africa is rich in precious rocks and other things. Without the whiteman they would have never known it existed so they would be living worse than they are today. They should be thanking us for showing them ways to take advantage of their resources.
When the Zaire (now called the Democratic Republic of the Congo) became independent in early 1960, it possessed 60,000 km of tarred roads. Today it has less than 9,000 km of tarred roads left. Good roads were one of the things that were left to them after colonialism and look what they did to that.
It is a fact that colonialism gave Africa the ability to speak english, law was also given and the colonies were built up so that the inhabitants wold have a better standard of living. Also near the end of the British empire the colonies as a whole were costing more money than they were making which would mean that Britain were helping the inhabitants a lot and what do the africans do? They go and screw it up. Africa has received half a trillion in aid despite the fact that the World Bank has reported that “Econometric analyses show that aid has no systematic relationship to growth anywhere in the world. This may not be surprising in countries where aid is small relative to the size of the economy. It is surprising and concerning in Africa—where aid flows have consistently reached 10% or more of gross national product in many countries over an extended period of time.”
The fact is we helped africa progress and now the white man isn't there they are screwing up everything we did for them. Aid is not making their situation any better. Africa is hopeless. We should just leave them alone and allow them to progress how they want to. That will probably make them regress for a few decades but that can't be avoided. Colonialism can only be blamed for progressing african nations. Perhaps the progress was too fast for them which is why we should leave them lone and let them progress their own way without any aid at all. They should finally be made to stand on their own two feet.
Conclusion
White people should not feel guilty for anything. The fact is we helped the world. Is it our fault that the africans are too stupid that they are regressing? If they don't want to be our colonies they should be made to stand on their own two feet without anymore aid as we have to be cruel to be kind in this instance.
As for the jews the next one you see that moans about the holocaust justy tell him to shut up and tell him that they weren't the only ones that suffered. Infact they were a minority.
I hope I have cleared somethings up for you and hope you will stop this political correctness and stop going to holocaust rememberance celebrations or whatever. Don't do a minutes silence for the jews. They don't deserve it. Don't donate money for live 8. The africans don't deserve it and it does little good. It might do good for the short term however if you keep donating they will expect to be fed by us constantly and won't even try to make africa a better place which will make africa a forever hell hole. Do you want them to stay that way? If you don't then don't donate to them. Its only going to make matters worse. They have to learn to progress.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Terrorist should have been sent packing
The scrounging assylum seekers that ripped the British tax payer off for tens of thousands of pounds and commited the 21/7 bomb attack are still on the run. Witnesses say that they returned to their flat and they may have got more explosives and could be planning more attacks.
The fact that Muktar Said Ibrahim (one of the bombers) was allowed to stay in this country even after spending 2 years in jail is an absolute disgrace. Assylum seekers that commit even the smallest crimes should immediately be sent back however Muktar Said Ibrahim was given citizenship and tens of thousands of pounds in benefits which he no doubt sent to alqaeda.
I see no benefit in keeping assylum seekers that commit crimes here. They hate our ways so should be sent on the first plane back to where they came from.
The only way that we can defend ourselves from future attacks is by closing our boarders and not allowing anymore in. Assylum seekers should go to the first safe country if they want safety. This is never Britain so we should close our boarders to assylum seekers too. This may seem harsh but I thought they wanted safety and not a cruise half way around the world? If they actually want safety why not go to the first safe country?
Those assylum seekers already here should be sent back when their country becomes safe again. It is irrelevant how long they have been here. If they have been here 5 minutes or 25 years they should be sent back when their country is safe. No exceptions.
The scrounging assylum seekers that ripped the British tax payer off for tens of thousands of pounds and commited the 21/7 bomb attack are still on the run. Witnesses say that they returned to their flat and they may have got more explosives and could be planning more attacks.
The fact that Muktar Said Ibrahim (one of the bombers) was allowed to stay in this country even after spending 2 years in jail is an absolute disgrace. Assylum seekers that commit even the smallest crimes should immediately be sent back however Muktar Said Ibrahim was given citizenship and tens of thousands of pounds in benefits which he no doubt sent to alqaeda.
I see no benefit in keeping assylum seekers that commit crimes here. They hate our ways so should be sent on the first plane back to where they came from.
The only way that we can defend ourselves from future attacks is by closing our boarders and not allowing anymore in. Assylum seekers should go to the first safe country if they want safety. This is never Britain so we should close our boarders to assylum seekers too. This may seem harsh but I thought they wanted safety and not a cruise half way around the world? If they actually want safety why not go to the first safe country?
Those assylum seekers already here should be sent back when their country becomes safe again. It is irrelevant how long they have been here. If they have been here 5 minutes or 25 years they should be sent back when their country is safe. No exceptions.
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Canada invades Danish territory
Yes, Canada has sent their defence minister to invade Hans island which was owned by Denmark. Hans island is only slightly larger than a football field so we will have to see if Denmark tries to take it back.
I like how Canada does things, sending government officials instead of soldiers. If America had to do that with Iraq they would never have went to war so I think Canada are far more brave especially when there could have been enemy seel freedom fighters that are angry at the seel clubbing.
They planted a Canadian flag and built an Inuit stone marker on Hans Island. I understand the flag but why the Inuit stone marker? Is that supposed to frighten Danish troops if they come and reclaim the land?
I have a good idea for them to see who keeps it. They both toss a coin. Whoever gets it right gets the worthless island.
Yes, Canada has sent their defence minister to invade Hans island which was owned by Denmark. Hans island is only slightly larger than a football field so we will have to see if Denmark tries to take it back.
I like how Canada does things, sending government officials instead of soldiers. If America had to do that with Iraq they would never have went to war so I think Canada are far more brave especially when there could have been enemy seel freedom fighters that are angry at the seel clubbing.
They planted a Canadian flag and built an Inuit stone marker on Hans Island. I understand the flag but why the Inuit stone marker? Is that supposed to frighten Danish troops if they come and reclaim the land?
I have a good idea for them to see who keeps it. They both toss a coin. Whoever gets it right gets the worthless island.
Blog of the Month
I have decided to start a blog of the month to show the best blog that I have seen at that month. The blog will then be added to the links side bar. This month the blog of the month is The Sparky.
If you don't like swearing in blogs then that isn't the blog for you. His no nonsense political analysis makes him get an 8 out of 10.
I have decided to start a blog of the month to show the best blog that I have seen at that month. The blog will then be added to the links side bar. This month the blog of the month is The Sparky.
If you don't like swearing in blogs then that isn't the blog for you. His no nonsense political analysis makes him get an 8 out of 10.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
Blair Bribes teenagers
Tony Blair has once again lost the plot. He has decided to bribe teenagers to behave. How are teenagers going to even respect authority if they have to be bribed to do what they are told? What happens when they are adults and they don't receive the cash? Should they just go on a crime spree so that adults are also payed?
What is Blair thinking? He must be the most incompetant Prime minister we have ever had. Its time to get rid of him.
"Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that encouraging "respect" among young people - and tackling yobbish behaviour - would be a priority of this government."
I would love to know how this is going to encourage respect? They aren't going to respect anyone if they hare given money to behave.
This is of course the liberals fault that teenagers run rampant. They have stopped parents from being able to discipline their child by taking away their right to smack them. We all know discipline must start in the home but how are they supposed to discipline their child when they can't smack them? Shouting at them will only work for so long after that they know words can't hurt them so they have no reason not to run rampant. Its time parents were able to act on their responsibility.
If government after government hadn't sold playingfield after playing fierld maybe teenagers would have somewhere to play games but that is one of the things that have been sacrificed for money. Why don't the government put all that money that they are keeping for teenagers and buy back playingfields?
While I am not in favour of gioving them money I am in favour of setting up youth clubs for free and cadets and paying for trips for good people. That way they get the benefits but don't get money just handed to them.
Tony Blair has once again lost the plot. He has decided to bribe teenagers to behave. How are teenagers going to even respect authority if they have to be bribed to do what they are told? What happens when they are adults and they don't receive the cash? Should they just go on a crime spree so that adults are also payed?
What is Blair thinking? He must be the most incompetant Prime minister we have ever had. Its time to get rid of him.
"Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that encouraging "respect" among young people - and tackling yobbish behaviour - would be a priority of this government."
I would love to know how this is going to encourage respect? They aren't going to respect anyone if they hare given money to behave.
This is of course the liberals fault that teenagers run rampant. They have stopped parents from being able to discipline their child by taking away their right to smack them. We all know discipline must start in the home but how are they supposed to discipline their child when they can't smack them? Shouting at them will only work for so long after that they know words can't hurt them so they have no reason not to run rampant. Its time parents were able to act on their responsibility.
If government after government hadn't sold playingfield after playing fierld maybe teenagers would have somewhere to play games but that is one of the things that have been sacrificed for money. Why don't the government put all that money that they are keeping for teenagers and buy back playingfields?
While I am not in favour of gioving them money I am in favour of setting up youth clubs for free and cadets and paying for trips for good people. That way they get the benefits but don't get money just handed to them.
Boycott The Guardian newspaper
According to the Independent The Guardian newspaper is refusing to sack one of its staff reporters despite confirming that he is a member of one of Britain's most extreme Islamist groups.
Dilpazier Aslam, who has been allowed to report on the London bombings from Leeds and was also given space to write a column in last Wednesday's edition of The Guardian, is a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, a radical world organisation which seeks to form a global Islamic state regulated by sharia law.
Late on Friday The Guardian released a statement to The Independent on Sunday saying: "Dilpazier Aslam is a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an organisation which is legal in this country. We are keeping the matter under review." The paper refused to comment further.
Though Hizb ut-Tahrir is a legal organisation in this country, the group is outlawed in nearly every other country it operates in, including Germany and Holland. It is thought to have between 2,000 and 3,000 members in the UK.
How is this man still able to get a job in the Guardian when he has been exposed? The real question we should be asking is, after what happened in london shouldn't we ban groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir who are already banned in many other countries? Why hasn't this already happened? Has Blair lossed the plot?
Until this man has been sacked The Guardian should be boycotted. Its time we stood up to extremism. The Guardian should stand up against extremism by sacking Dilpazier Aslam if they don't we know which side they are on.
According to the Independent The Guardian newspaper is refusing to sack one of its staff reporters despite confirming that he is a member of one of Britain's most extreme Islamist groups.
Dilpazier Aslam, who has been allowed to report on the London bombings from Leeds and was also given space to write a column in last Wednesday's edition of The Guardian, is a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, a radical world organisation which seeks to form a global Islamic state regulated by sharia law.
Late on Friday The Guardian released a statement to The Independent on Sunday saying: "Dilpazier Aslam is a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir, an organisation which is legal in this country. We are keeping the matter under review." The paper refused to comment further.
Though Hizb ut-Tahrir is a legal organisation in this country, the group is outlawed in nearly every other country it operates in, including Germany and Holland. It is thought to have between 2,000 and 3,000 members in the UK.
How is this man still able to get a job in the Guardian when he has been exposed? The real question we should be asking is, after what happened in london shouldn't we ban groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir who are already banned in many other countries? Why hasn't this already happened? Has Blair lossed the plot?
Until this man has been sacked The Guardian should be boycotted. Its time we stood up to extremism. The Guardian should stand up against extremism by sacking Dilpazier Aslam if they don't we know which side they are on.
Can we trust muslims?
The group portrait of British Muslims painted by YouGov's survey for The Daily Telegraph is at once reassuring and disturbing, in some ways even alarming.
The vast majority of British Muslims condemn the London bombings but a substantial minority are clearly alienated from modern British society and some are prepared to justify terrorist acts.
As the figures in the chart show, 88 per cent of British Muslims clearly have no intention of trying to justify the bus and Tube murders.
However, six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.
Six per cent may seem a small proportion but in absolute numbers it amounts to about 100,000 individuals who, if not prepared to carry out terrorist acts, are ready to support those who do.
100,000 is a significant amount. Its also very scary if you think about it. We may have 100,000 muslims in this country who are ready to carry out the bombings in london. Do we really want those people in our country?
Moreover, the proportion of YouGov's respondents who, while not condoning the London attacks, have some sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who carried them out is considerably larger - 24 per cent.
That is 4 times larger than the ones prepared. so we have 100,000 prepared to carry out acts and 400,000 that are ready cheer them on. What a scary thought. Its time Blair did something about this before it gets to the point of no return where we will have daily terror attacks.
The sheer scale of Muslim alienation from British society that the survey reveals is remarkable. Although a large majority of British Muslims are more than content to make their home in this country, a significant minority are not.
For example, YouGov asked respondents how loyal they feel towards Britain. As the figures in the chart show, the great majority say they feel "very loyal" (46 per cent) or "fairly loyal" (33 per cent) but nearly one British Muslim in five, 18 per cent, feels little loyalty towards this country or none at all.
We need to get those 18% loyal as those don't care about the country and it is unlikely they ever will. If they don't care about the country they also don't care what terror attacks happen here. We must somehow change their minds.
YouGov asked respondents how they feel about Western society and how, if at all, they feel Muslims should adapt to it. A majority, 56 per cent, believe "Western society may not be perfect but Muslims should live with it and not seek to bring it to an end".
However, nearly a third of British Muslims, 32 per cent, are far more censorious, believing that "Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to bring it to an end".
I wonder if by bring it to an end they mean destroy it through terror?
The chart is scary reading. If it is true which it probably is then there are far more terror attacks to come. Can we really trust muslims anymore? I don't think so. Whether they are a policeman or the local halal butcher or a martial arts expert I don't think we can trust them anymore eventhough most are peaceful.
The group portrait of British Muslims painted by YouGov's survey for The Daily Telegraph is at once reassuring and disturbing, in some ways even alarming.
The vast majority of British Muslims condemn the London bombings but a substantial minority are clearly alienated from modern British society and some are prepared to justify terrorist acts.
As the figures in the chart show, 88 per cent of British Muslims clearly have no intention of trying to justify the bus and Tube murders.
However, six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.
Six per cent may seem a small proportion but in absolute numbers it amounts to about 100,000 individuals who, if not prepared to carry out terrorist acts, are ready to support those who do.
100,000 is a significant amount. Its also very scary if you think about it. We may have 100,000 muslims in this country who are ready to carry out the bombings in london. Do we really want those people in our country?
Moreover, the proportion of YouGov's respondents who, while not condoning the London attacks, have some sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who carried them out is considerably larger - 24 per cent.
That is 4 times larger than the ones prepared. so we have 100,000 prepared to carry out acts and 400,000 that are ready cheer them on. What a scary thought. Its time Blair did something about this before it gets to the point of no return where we will have daily terror attacks.
The sheer scale of Muslim alienation from British society that the survey reveals is remarkable. Although a large majority of British Muslims are more than content to make their home in this country, a significant minority are not.
For example, YouGov asked respondents how loyal they feel towards Britain. As the figures in the chart show, the great majority say they feel "very loyal" (46 per cent) or "fairly loyal" (33 per cent) but nearly one British Muslim in five, 18 per cent, feels little loyalty towards this country or none at all.
We need to get those 18% loyal as those don't care about the country and it is unlikely they ever will. If they don't care about the country they also don't care what terror attacks happen here. We must somehow change their minds.
YouGov asked respondents how they feel about Western society and how, if at all, they feel Muslims should adapt to it. A majority, 56 per cent, believe "Western society may not be perfect but Muslims should live with it and not seek to bring it to an end".
However, nearly a third of British Muslims, 32 per cent, are far more censorious, believing that "Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to bring it to an end".
I wonder if by bring it to an end they mean destroy it through terror?
The chart is scary reading. If it is true which it probably is then there are far more terror attacks to come. Can we really trust muslims anymore? I don't think so. Whether they are a policeman or the local halal butcher or a martial arts expert I don't think we can trust them anymore eventhough most are peaceful.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
People Before Profits
SIX million families face higher fuel bills this autumn as Powergen which is one of Britain's biggest power companies raises prices for the FOURTH time in 18 months. This is despite them making large profits every year. Infact in late 2001 they reported profits of £375 million.
It is time that companies started putting people before profits. Not all people will be able to afford to heat their homes especially the poor but these companies only care about 1 thing and that is profits. They don't care if people will die in the cold. They just want their money.
It is obvious that these companies aren't going to put people before profits as they are far too greedy so its time to hit them were it hurts, the pocket. Our energy shouldn't be in the hands of private businesses thats why our energy and water companies should be nationalised and the government will run them for a tiny profit then energy will be cheap and we can't be blackmailed by the companies to either pay or die.
SIX million families face higher fuel bills this autumn as Powergen which is one of Britain's biggest power companies raises prices for the FOURTH time in 18 months. This is despite them making large profits every year. Infact in late 2001 they reported profits of £375 million.
It is time that companies started putting people before profits. Not all people will be able to afford to heat their homes especially the poor but these companies only care about 1 thing and that is profits. They don't care if people will die in the cold. They just want their money.
It is obvious that these companies aren't going to put people before profits as they are far too greedy so its time to hit them were it hurts, the pocket. Our energy shouldn't be in the hands of private businesses thats why our energy and water companies should be nationalised and the government will run them for a tiny profit then energy will be cheap and we can't be blackmailed by the companies to either pay or die.
London terror attacks
A couple of hours ago London was hit by a terror attack. It wasn't as deadly as the one two weeks ago but it shows that Blair cannot handle what is going on.
Its time to get tough on these guys. Simply putting them in jail is not good enough. I think we will all agree to that unless you are mentally retarded. The punishments for terrorism should be extremely harsh. As a punishment they should be tortured 3 days per week for as long as their sentence is for. After their sentence they should then be killed and then cremated with a pig. That way they would not be able to get into heaven so they will no longer do it.
Suicide bombers should get a similar sentence, because they are already dead their remains should be put in a bag and cremated inside a pig. The only reason they commit terror is to get into paradise and they can't if they have touched a pig.
Its time we started doing these harsh punishments as normal punishments aren't working.
A couple of hours ago London was hit by a terror attack. It wasn't as deadly as the one two weeks ago but it shows that Blair cannot handle what is going on.
Its time to get tough on these guys. Simply putting them in jail is not good enough. I think we will all agree to that unless you are mentally retarded. The punishments for terrorism should be extremely harsh. As a punishment they should be tortured 3 days per week for as long as their sentence is for. After their sentence they should then be killed and then cremated with a pig. That way they would not be able to get into heaven so they will no longer do it.
Suicide bombers should get a similar sentence, because they are already dead their remains should be put in a bag and cremated inside a pig. The only reason they commit terror is to get into paradise and they can't if they have touched a pig.
Its time we started doing these harsh punishments as normal punishments aren't working.
Political Correctness Gone Mad
The word "fail" should be banned from use in classrooms and replaced with the phrase "deferred success" to avoid demoralising pupils, a group of teachers has proposed
Who else thinks this is ridiculous? I am sick and tired of this politically correct world that we live in. If children fail they should be told that they failed. What will these children be like when they grow up? When they fail they won't be used to failing. We are bringing up a nation of pansies which must be stopped.
The word "fail" should be banned from use in classrooms and replaced with the phrase "deferred success" to avoid demoralising pupils, a group of teachers has proposed
Who else thinks this is ridiculous? I am sick and tired of this politically correct world that we live in. If children fail they should be told that they failed. What will these children be like when they grow up? When they fail they won't be used to failing. We are bringing up a nation of pansies which must be stopped.
280,000 Filed assylum seekers still here
Once again Blair's incompetance rears its ugly head, not only are 570,000 illegal immigrants still in Britain but there is also 280,000 failed assylum seekers living here costing hundreds of millions of pounds. When is Blair going to get a brain and get out of every convention that makes us keep these people? He should be defending our country from this madness but his incompetancy has travelled too far.
It is time we elect a leader that will defend our boarders. The time has come for Blair to go. It is also time that we reject all assylum seekers whether they are bogus or not. I feel sorry for them but if they want safety they should go to the first safe country closest to their own country because thats what you do when you want to be safe. You go to the closest safe place there is.
Once again Blair's incompetance rears its ugly head, not only are 570,000 illegal immigrants still in Britain but there is also 280,000 failed assylum seekers living here costing hundreds of millions of pounds. When is Blair going to get a brain and get out of every convention that makes us keep these people? He should be defending our country from this madness but his incompetancy has travelled too far.
It is time we elect a leader that will defend our boarders. The time has come for Blair to go. It is also time that we reject all assylum seekers whether they are bogus or not. I feel sorry for them but if they want safety they should go to the first safe country closest to their own country because thats what you do when you want to be safe. You go to the closest safe place there is.
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
JOKE OF THE DAY
A man walked into an adult entertainment shop and asked the assistant for an inflatable doll.
"Would you like male of female?"
"Female, please."
"Would you like black or white?"
"White, please."
"Would you like Christian or Muslim?"
This question confused the man, who replied, "What has the religion got
to do with it? It's an inflatable doll!"
"Well," explained the assistant, "the Muslim doll blows itself up!"
A man walked into an adult entertainment shop and asked the assistant for an inflatable doll.
"Would you like male of female?"
"Female, please."
"Would you like black or white?"
"White, please."
"Would you like Christian or Muslim?"
This question confused the man, who replied, "What has the religion got
to do with it? It's an inflatable doll!"
"Well," explained the assistant, "the Muslim doll blows itself up!"
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Media Brainwashing?
News International
Sun
Times
News of the World
Sunday Times
British Sky Broadcasting
Sky multi-channels
Granada Sky Broadcasting
Fox Kids
Sky Box Office
Star
News international is owned by Rupert Murdoch
We already know about Rupert Murdoch from my previous post but here it is again:
Rupert Murdoch who owns most of the media in the uk met with Blair before 1997 general election. Before that day labour wanted tighter controls on the media infact it was one of their policies but after that day they dropped that policy and Rupert Murdoch's papers started supporting labour.
Your now asking what Rupert Murdoch gets in return. Well you only need to do a little research to find that "Although their accounts show profits of £1.387 billion since 1987, Newscorp Investments has effectively paid no tax in the UK since 1988". So now we know in return that Rupert Murdoch doesn't pay tax and he is allowed to get away with it because he is helping the Blair government and before that he was helping the tory government which is why the tories didn't do anything either.
Daily Mail and General Trust plc (DMGT)
Daily Mail
Mail on Sunday
London Evening Standard
Harmsworth TV
Westcountry TV
ITN
British Pathé
Performance Channel
New Era Television
Teletext
Reuters
Bristol United Press
Whittle Communications Ltd
Pulmans Weekly News
Euromoney
Institutional Investor
Jonathan Harmsworth, Fourth Viscount Rothermere owns this group.
Jonathan Harmsworth, Fourth Viscount Rothermere's father began as a Conservative, drifted to the cross-benches and shortly before his death not only began to sit on the Labour benches in the House of Lords, but pronounced himself a firm republican in an interview.
It is not unlikely that like his dad he wanted to keep the papers as they were. Politicians shouldn't be able to own newspapers as politicians will just go with their party regardless if it is good for the country. This is another media group that is brainwashing to fit their agenda. It is likely that Jonathan Harmsworth, Fourth Viscount Rothermere wanted to carry on what his father started before him.
Trinity Mirror
Daily Mirror
Sunday Mirror
Sunday People
Racing Post
News Letter
Sunday Business Post
Daily Record
Sunday Mail
Sly Bailey owns these
'Sly thinks terribly highly of Alastair Campbell.'
After 2001 Alastair Campbell was appointed as the "Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy". This gave him a strategic role in overseeing government communications.
Could it be that Sly only reports favourably on the Labour because she fancies Alastair Campbell? Being Director of communications he would have been able to take advantage of this.
While this is improbable it may have happened.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,860242,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alastair_Campbell#Work_for_Tony_Blair
United MAI
Daily Express
Daily Star
Sunday Express
Richard Desmond owns United MAI.
"Richard Desmond, the millionaire publisher of OK! magazine and a range of soft porn titles, gave more than £100,000 to the Labour Party just days after Trade Secretary Stephen Byers cleared the way for him to buy the Express newspaper group, The Observer can reveal.
In exchange for the donation, Labour agreed a deal with Desmond to take out a series of party political advertisements in his newspapers during the 2001 general election".
So in return for being able to buy up more of our media he donated money to the labour party. From then on he will have been injh the pockets of labour so anything highly critical of the labour party just won't happen.
Pearson
Financial Times
Westminster Press (100%)
Lord (Dennis) Stevenson is chairman of Pearson
Made a life peer in 1999, Lord Stevenson sits on the cross benches in the House of Lords. He headed the Stevenson Commission - which examined the role of information technology in schools - set up by The Rt Hon Tony Blair in 1997 and acted as the Prime Minister's Special Advisor until September 2000. The Stevenson Report, published the same year, is now regarded as one of the most influential policy documents of the Labour Government.
Lord Stevenson is Chairman of the Tate Gallery Foundation and a Non-Executive Director of Manpower Inc.
http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/alumni/graduation03/cranfield_c3a.htm
Can we trust a man who was employed by Labour to tell the truth about them?
Conclusion
The truth is out there but we aren't getting it. We can no longer stand for what is happening to this country. What can we do? The only thing we can do is get Labour out and get a party in that will put the country before their political party then nationalise all national daily newspapers.
I bet you think I am crazy, well here me out. Once we have nationalised them all the government makes their own newspaper. Sounds like we are just going back to what we have doesn't it? Well you are wrong because the public will elect the editor once per year and if he lies then he gets the sack after the year therefore the government will own the newspapers but the public controls the newss.
I bet you are saying now "but how will we know that they are lying if we don't have news to tell us?"
Well you are forgetting that we are only nationalising the daily national newspapers so you still have TV, internet, regional newspapers and weekly newspapers.
Sadly this is the only way. We are never going to get the truth unless we force them to give it to us and the only force they understand is financial force.
Warning
I didn't do much research on this so it may not have enough information for everyone however you can always research and find the information yourself and perhaps share.
I am also saying that while the media may not always support Labour openly they support Labour by not giving the whole truth to the public.
News International
Sun
Times
News of the World
Sunday Times
British Sky Broadcasting
Sky multi-channels
Granada Sky Broadcasting
Fox Kids
Sky Box Office
Star
News international is owned by Rupert Murdoch
We already know about Rupert Murdoch from my previous post but here it is again:
Rupert Murdoch who owns most of the media in the uk met with Blair before 1997 general election. Before that day labour wanted tighter controls on the media infact it was one of their policies but after that day they dropped that policy and Rupert Murdoch's papers started supporting labour.
Your now asking what Rupert Murdoch gets in return. Well you only need to do a little research to find that "Although their accounts show profits of £1.387 billion since 1987, Newscorp Investments has effectively paid no tax in the UK since 1988". So now we know in return that Rupert Murdoch doesn't pay tax and he is allowed to get away with it because he is helping the Blair government and before that he was helping the tory government which is why the tories didn't do anything either.
Daily Mail and General Trust plc (DMGT)
Daily Mail
Mail on Sunday
London Evening Standard
Harmsworth TV
Westcountry TV
ITN
British Pathé
Performance Channel
New Era Television
Teletext
Reuters
Bristol United Press
Whittle Communications Ltd
Pulmans Weekly News
Euromoney
Institutional Investor
Jonathan Harmsworth, Fourth Viscount Rothermere owns this group.
Jonathan Harmsworth, Fourth Viscount Rothermere's father began as a Conservative, drifted to the cross-benches and shortly before his death not only began to sit on the Labour benches in the House of Lords, but pronounced himself a firm republican in an interview.
It is not unlikely that like his dad he wanted to keep the papers as they were. Politicians shouldn't be able to own newspapers as politicians will just go with their party regardless if it is good for the country. This is another media group that is brainwashing to fit their agenda. It is likely that Jonathan Harmsworth, Fourth Viscount Rothermere wanted to carry on what his father started before him.
Trinity Mirror
Daily Mirror
Sunday Mirror
Sunday People
Racing Post
News Letter
Sunday Business Post
Daily Record
Sunday Mail
Sly Bailey owns these
'Sly thinks terribly highly of Alastair Campbell.'
After 2001 Alastair Campbell was appointed as the "Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy". This gave him a strategic role in overseeing government communications.
Could it be that Sly only reports favourably on the Labour because she fancies Alastair Campbell? Being Director of communications he would have been able to take advantage of this.
While this is improbable it may have happened.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,860242,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alastair_Campbell#Work_for_Tony_Blair
United MAI
Daily Express
Daily Star
Sunday Express
Richard Desmond owns United MAI.
"Richard Desmond, the millionaire publisher of OK! magazine and a range of soft porn titles, gave more than £100,000 to the Labour Party just days after Trade Secretary Stephen Byers cleared the way for him to buy the Express newspaper group, The Observer can reveal.
In exchange for the donation, Labour agreed a deal with Desmond to take out a series of party political advertisements in his newspapers during the 2001 general election".
So in return for being able to buy up more of our media he donated money to the labour party. From then on he will have been injh the pockets of labour so anything highly critical of the labour party just won't happen.
Pearson
Financial Times
Westminster Press (100%)
Lord (Dennis) Stevenson is chairman of Pearson
Made a life peer in 1999, Lord Stevenson sits on the cross benches in the House of Lords. He headed the Stevenson Commission - which examined the role of information technology in schools - set up by The Rt Hon Tony Blair in 1997 and acted as the Prime Minister's Special Advisor until September 2000. The Stevenson Report, published the same year, is now regarded as one of the most influential policy documents of the Labour Government.
Lord Stevenson is Chairman of the Tate Gallery Foundation and a Non-Executive Director of Manpower Inc.
http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/alumni/graduation03/cranfield_c3a.htm
Can we trust a man who was employed by Labour to tell the truth about them?
Conclusion
The truth is out there but we aren't getting it. We can no longer stand for what is happening to this country. What can we do? The only thing we can do is get Labour out and get a party in that will put the country before their political party then nationalise all national daily newspapers.
I bet you think I am crazy, well here me out. Once we have nationalised them all the government makes their own newspaper. Sounds like we are just going back to what we have doesn't it? Well you are wrong because the public will elect the editor once per year and if he lies then he gets the sack after the year therefore the government will own the newspapers but the public controls the newss.
I bet you are saying now "but how will we know that they are lying if we don't have news to tell us?"
Well you are forgetting that we are only nationalising the daily national newspapers so you still have TV, internet, regional newspapers and weekly newspapers.
Sadly this is the only way. We are never going to get the truth unless we force them to give it to us and the only force they understand is financial force.
Warning
I didn't do much research on this so it may not have enough information for everyone however you can always research and find the information yourself and perhaps share.
I am also saying that while the media may not always support Labour openly they support Labour by not giving the whole truth to the public.
Monday, July 18, 2005
Sir Edward Heath dies
The second greatest British traitor to ever govern Britain as prime minister died last night. Yes I am talking about Sir Edward Heath who was 89 last week. He was responsible for taking us into the EU therefore he is the prime minister where the treason began. I hope he will be remembered for his treacherous ways and I will not shed one tear for this man. If I could get to his grave I would spit on it. I hope when future generations realise what he did to this wonderful country the aniversary of his death will become a national holiday.
I and probably many others are happy at his death but angry at the legacy he left for future generations. The legacy of surrender as our leaders since his time have surrendered more and more of our sovereignty to the EU. The only bigger traitor than Sir Edward Heath is Tony Blair.
This poem seems like a good one for his death:
"Epitaph on the Politician" by Hilaire Belloc
Here richly, with
ridiculous display,
The Politician's corpse
was laid away.
While all of his acquaintance sneered and slanged
I wept: for I had longed
to see him hanged.
The second greatest British traitor to ever govern Britain as prime minister died last night. Yes I am talking about Sir Edward Heath who was 89 last week. He was responsible for taking us into the EU therefore he is the prime minister where the treason began. I hope he will be remembered for his treacherous ways and I will not shed one tear for this man. If I could get to his grave I would spit on it. I hope when future generations realise what he did to this wonderful country the aniversary of his death will become a national holiday.
I and probably many others are happy at his death but angry at the legacy he left for future generations. The legacy of surrender as our leaders since his time have surrendered more and more of our sovereignty to the EU. The only bigger traitor than Sir Edward Heath is Tony Blair.
This poem seems like a good one for his death:
"Epitaph on the Politician" by Hilaire Belloc
Here richly, with
ridiculous display,
The Politician's corpse
was laid away.
While all of his acquaintance sneered and slanged
I wept: for I had longed
to see him hanged.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
A plan to destroy america
Sorry about the caps but I found it like this on this site:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/lamm.asp
This is a speech called I have a plan to destroy america by Governor RICHARD D.LAMM:
I HAVE A SECRET PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. IF YOU BELIEVE, AS MANY DO, THAT AMERICA IS TOO SMUG, TOO WHITE BREAD, TOO SELF-SATISFIED, TOO RICH, LETS DESTROY AMERICA. IT IS NOT THAT HARD TO DO. HISTORY SHOWS THAT NATIONS ARE MORE FRAGILE THAN THEIR CITIZENS THINK. NO NATION IN HISTORY HAS SURVIVED THE RAVAGES OF TIME. ARNOLD TOYNBEE OBSERVED THAT ALL GREAT CIVILIZATIONS RISE AND THEY ALL FALL, AND THAT "AN AUTOPSY OF HISTORY WOULD SHOW THAT ALL GREAT NATIONS COMMIT SUICIDE." HERE IS MY PLAN:
I. WE MUST FIRST MAKE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY. HISTORY SHOWS, IN MY OPINION, THAT NO NATION CAN SURVIVE THE TENSION, CONFLICT, AND ANTAGONISM OF TWO COMPETING LANGUAGES AND CULTURES. IT IS A BLESSING FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO BE BILINGUAL; IT IS A CURSE FOR A SOCIETY TO BE BILINGUAL. ONE SCHOLAR, SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET, PUT IT THIS WAY:
THE HISTORIES OF BILINGUAL AND BICULTURAL SOCIETIES THAT DO NOT ASSIMILATE ARE HISTORIES OF TURMOIL, TENSION, AND TRAGEDY. CANADA, BELGIUM, MALAYSIA, LEBANON-ALL FACE CRISES OF NATIONAL EXISTENCE IN WHICH MINORITIES PRESS FOR AUTONOMY, IF NOT INDEPENDENCE. PAKISTAN AND CYPRUS HAVE DIVIDED. NIGERIA SUPPRESSED AN ETHNIC REBELLION. FRANCE FACES DIFFICULTIES WITH ITS BASQUES, BRETONS, AND CORSICANS.
II. I WOULD THEN INVENT "MULTICULTURALISM" AND ENCOURAGE IMMIGRANTS TO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN CULTURE. I WOULD MAKE IT AN ARTICLE OF BELIEF THAT ALL CULTURES ARE EQUAL: THAT THERE ARE NO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES THAT ARE IMPORTANT. I WOULD DECLARE IT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH THAT THE BLACK AND HISPANIC DROPOUT RATE IS ONLY DUE TO PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION BY THE MAJORITY. EVERY OTHER EXPLANATION IS OUT-OF-BOUNDS.
III. WE CAN MAKE THE UNITED STATES A "HISPANIC QUEBEC" WITHOUT MUCH EFFORT. THE KEY IS TO CELEBRATE DIVERSITY RATHER THAN UNITY. AS BENJAMIN SCHWARZ SAID IN THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY RECENTLY:
...THE APPARENT SUCCESS OF OUR OWN MULTIETHNIC AND MULTICULTURAL EXPERIMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED NOT BY TOLERANCE BUT BY HEGEMONY. WITHOUT THE DOMINANCE THAT ONCE DICTATED ETHNOCENTRICALLY, AND WHAT IT MEANT TO BE AN AMERICAN, WE ARE LEFT WITH ONLY TOLERANCE AND PLURALISM TO HOLD US TOGETHER.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL IMMIGRANTS TO KEEP THEIR OWN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE. I WOULD REPLACE THE MELTING POT METAPHOR WITH A SALAD BOWL METAPHOR. IT IS IMPORTANT TO INSURE THAT WE HAVE VARIOUS CULTURAL SUB-GROUPS LIVING IN AMERICA REINFORCING THEIR DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN AMERICANS, EMPHASIZING THEIR SIMILARITIES.
IV. HAVING DONE ALL THIS, I WOULD MAKE OUR FASTEST GROWING DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP THE LEAST EDUCATED - I WOULD ADD A SECOND UNDERCLASS, UNASSIMILATED, UNDEREDUCATED, AND ANTAGONISTIC TO OUR POPULATION. I WOULD HAVE THIS SECOND UNDERCLASS HAVE A 50% DROP OUT RATE FROM SCHOOL.
V. I WOULD THEN GET THE BIG FOUNDATIONS AND BIG BUSINESS TO GIVE THESE EFFORTS LOTS OF MONEY. I WOULD INVEST IN ETHNIC IDENTITY, AND I WOULD ESTABLISH THE CULT OF VICTIMOLOGY. I WOULD GET ALL MINORITIES TO THINK THEIR LACK OF SUCCESS WAS ALL THE FAULT OF THE MAJORITY - I WOULD START A GRIEVANCE INDUSTRY BLAMING ALL MINORITY FAILURE ON THE MAJORITY POPULATION.
VI. I WOULD ESTABLISH DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND PROMOTE DIVIDED LOYALTIES. I WOULD "CELEBRATE DIVERSITY." "DIVERSITY" IS A WONDERFULLY SEDUCTIVE WORD. IT STRESSES DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN COMMONALITIES. DIVERSE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE ARE MOSTLY ENGAGED IN HATING EACH OTHER-THAT IS, WHEN THEY ARE NOT KILLING EACH OTHER. A DIVERSE," PEACEFUL, OR STABLE SOCIETY IS AGAINST MOST HISTORICAL PRECEDENT. PEOPLE UNDERVALUE THE UNITY IT TAKES TO KEEP A NATION TOGETHER, AND WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS MYOPIA. LOOK AT THE ANCIENT GREEKS. DORF'S WORLD HISTORY TELLS US:
THE GREEKS BELIEVED THAT THEY BELONGED TO THE SAME RACE; THEY POSSESSED A COMMON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE; AND THEY WORSHIPED THE SAME GODS. ALL GREECE TOOK PART IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES IN HONOR OF ZEUS AND ALL GREEKS VENERATED THE SHRINE OF APOLLO AT DELPHI. A COMMON ENEMY PERSIA THREATENED THEIR LIBERTY. YET, ALL OF THESE BONDS TOGETHER WERE NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO OVERCOME TWO FACTORS . . . (LOCAL PATRIOTISM AND GEOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS THAT NURTURED POLITICAL DIVISIONS . . .)
IF WE CAN PUT THE EMPHASIS ON THE "PLURIBUS," INSTEAD OF THE "UNUM," WE CAN BALKANIZE AMERICA AS SURELY AS KOSOVO.
VII. THEN I WOULD PLACE ALL THESE SUBJECTS OFF LIMITS - MAKE IT TABOO TO TALK ABOUT. I WOULD FIND A WORD SIMILAR TO "HERETIC" IN THE 16TH CENTURY - THAT STOPPED DISCUSSION AND PARALYZED THINKING. WORDS LIKE "RACIST", "XENOPHOBE" THAT HALTS ARGUMENT AND CONVERSATION.
HAVING MADE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY, HAVING ESTABLISHED MULTICULTURALISM, HAVING THE LARGE FOUNDATIONS FUND THE DOCTRINE OF "VICTIMOLOGY", I WOULD NEXT MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ENFORCE OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS. I WOULD DEVELOP A MANTRA - "THAT BECAUSE IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN GOOD FOR AMERICA, IT MUST ALWAYS BE GOOD." I WOULD MAKE EVERY INDIVIDUAL IMMIGRANT SYMPATRIC AND IGNORE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT.
VIII. LASTLY, I WOULD CENSOR VICTOR HANSON DAVIS'S BOOK MEXIFORNIA — THIS BOOK IS DANGEROUS — IT EXPOSES MY PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. SO PLEASE, PLEASE — IF YOU FEEL THAT AMERICA DESERVES TO BE DESTROYED — PLEASE, PLEASE — DON'T BUY THIS BOOK! THIS GUY IS ON TO MY PLAN.
"THE SMART WAY TO KEEP PEOPLE PASSIVE AND OBEDIENT IS TO STRICTLY LIMIT THE SPECTRUM OF ACCEPTABLE OPINION, BUT ALLOW VERY LIVELY DEBATE WITHIN THAT SPECTRUM." — NOAM CHOMSKY, AMERICAN LINGUIST AND US MEDIA AND FOREIGN POLICY CRITIC.
------------------------------------------
Do you recognise all those points to destroy America? You should do, as this 'Plan' was put into operation decades ago in Britain and America.
Does this mean that all is lost? Far from it! The 'Plan' has only succeeded so far because it's secret purpose has been kept so well hidden by the political establishment!
We have to bring the truth to the man in the street. In other words, we all have to become activists. For the enemies of Britain have almost completed project, 'Destroy Britain'. Time is short, but we, the present generations of this country, also have a duty to generations yet to come. A duty that demands that we expose what has been done to Britain - by those charged with its protection! If you call yourself a patriot or a nationalist you cannot stand by and do nothing.
Exposure is the only thing our enemies really fear. So let's expose them and their squalid plan!
Sorry about the caps but I found it like this on this site:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/lamm.asp
This is a speech called I have a plan to destroy america by Governor RICHARD D.LAMM:
I HAVE A SECRET PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. IF YOU BELIEVE, AS MANY DO, THAT AMERICA IS TOO SMUG, TOO WHITE BREAD, TOO SELF-SATISFIED, TOO RICH, LETS DESTROY AMERICA. IT IS NOT THAT HARD TO DO. HISTORY SHOWS THAT NATIONS ARE MORE FRAGILE THAN THEIR CITIZENS THINK. NO NATION IN HISTORY HAS SURVIVED THE RAVAGES OF TIME. ARNOLD TOYNBEE OBSERVED THAT ALL GREAT CIVILIZATIONS RISE AND THEY ALL FALL, AND THAT "AN AUTOPSY OF HISTORY WOULD SHOW THAT ALL GREAT NATIONS COMMIT SUICIDE." HERE IS MY PLAN:
I. WE MUST FIRST MAKE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY. HISTORY SHOWS, IN MY OPINION, THAT NO NATION CAN SURVIVE THE TENSION, CONFLICT, AND ANTAGONISM OF TWO COMPETING LANGUAGES AND CULTURES. IT IS A BLESSING FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TO BE BILINGUAL; IT IS A CURSE FOR A SOCIETY TO BE BILINGUAL. ONE SCHOLAR, SEYMOUR MARTIN LIPSET, PUT IT THIS WAY:
THE HISTORIES OF BILINGUAL AND BICULTURAL SOCIETIES THAT DO NOT ASSIMILATE ARE HISTORIES OF TURMOIL, TENSION, AND TRAGEDY. CANADA, BELGIUM, MALAYSIA, LEBANON-ALL FACE CRISES OF NATIONAL EXISTENCE IN WHICH MINORITIES PRESS FOR AUTONOMY, IF NOT INDEPENDENCE. PAKISTAN AND CYPRUS HAVE DIVIDED. NIGERIA SUPPRESSED AN ETHNIC REBELLION. FRANCE FACES DIFFICULTIES WITH ITS BASQUES, BRETONS, AND CORSICANS.
II. I WOULD THEN INVENT "MULTICULTURALISM" AND ENCOURAGE IMMIGRANTS TO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN CULTURE. I WOULD MAKE IT AN ARTICLE OF BELIEF THAT ALL CULTURES ARE EQUAL: THAT THERE ARE NO CULTURAL DIFFERENCES THAT ARE IMPORTANT. I WOULD DECLARE IT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH THAT THE BLACK AND HISPANIC DROPOUT RATE IS ONLY DUE TO PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION BY THE MAJORITY. EVERY OTHER EXPLANATION IS OUT-OF-BOUNDS.
III. WE CAN MAKE THE UNITED STATES A "HISPANIC QUEBEC" WITHOUT MUCH EFFORT. THE KEY IS TO CELEBRATE DIVERSITY RATHER THAN UNITY. AS BENJAMIN SCHWARZ SAID IN THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY RECENTLY:
...THE APPARENT SUCCESS OF OUR OWN MULTIETHNIC AND MULTICULTURAL EXPERIMENT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED NOT BY TOLERANCE BUT BY HEGEMONY. WITHOUT THE DOMINANCE THAT ONCE DICTATED ETHNOCENTRICALLY, AND WHAT IT MEANT TO BE AN AMERICAN, WE ARE LEFT WITH ONLY TOLERANCE AND PLURALISM TO HOLD US TOGETHER.
I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL IMMIGRANTS TO KEEP THEIR OWN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE. I WOULD REPLACE THE MELTING POT METAPHOR WITH A SALAD BOWL METAPHOR. IT IS IMPORTANT TO INSURE THAT WE HAVE VARIOUS CULTURAL SUB-GROUPS LIVING IN AMERICA REINFORCING THEIR DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN AMERICANS, EMPHASIZING THEIR SIMILARITIES.
IV. HAVING DONE ALL THIS, I WOULD MAKE OUR FASTEST GROWING DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP THE LEAST EDUCATED - I WOULD ADD A SECOND UNDERCLASS, UNASSIMILATED, UNDEREDUCATED, AND ANTAGONISTIC TO OUR POPULATION. I WOULD HAVE THIS SECOND UNDERCLASS HAVE A 50% DROP OUT RATE FROM SCHOOL.
V. I WOULD THEN GET THE BIG FOUNDATIONS AND BIG BUSINESS TO GIVE THESE EFFORTS LOTS OF MONEY. I WOULD INVEST IN ETHNIC IDENTITY, AND I WOULD ESTABLISH THE CULT OF VICTIMOLOGY. I WOULD GET ALL MINORITIES TO THINK THEIR LACK OF SUCCESS WAS ALL THE FAULT OF THE MAJORITY - I WOULD START A GRIEVANCE INDUSTRY BLAMING ALL MINORITY FAILURE ON THE MAJORITY POPULATION.
VI. I WOULD ESTABLISH DUAL CITIZENSHIP AND PROMOTE DIVIDED LOYALTIES. I WOULD "CELEBRATE DIVERSITY." "DIVERSITY" IS A WONDERFULLY SEDUCTIVE WORD. IT STRESSES DIFFERENCES RATHER THAN COMMONALITIES. DIVERSE PEOPLE WORLDWIDE ARE MOSTLY ENGAGED IN HATING EACH OTHER-THAT IS, WHEN THEY ARE NOT KILLING EACH OTHER. A DIVERSE," PEACEFUL, OR STABLE SOCIETY IS AGAINST MOST HISTORICAL PRECEDENT. PEOPLE UNDERVALUE THE UNITY IT TAKES TO KEEP A NATION TOGETHER, AND WE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS MYOPIA. LOOK AT THE ANCIENT GREEKS. DORF'S WORLD HISTORY TELLS US:
THE GREEKS BELIEVED THAT THEY BELONGED TO THE SAME RACE; THEY POSSESSED A COMMON LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE; AND THEY WORSHIPED THE SAME GODS. ALL GREECE TOOK PART IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES IN HONOR OF ZEUS AND ALL GREEKS VENERATED THE SHRINE OF APOLLO AT DELPHI. A COMMON ENEMY PERSIA THREATENED THEIR LIBERTY. YET, ALL OF THESE BONDS TOGETHER WERE NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO OVERCOME TWO FACTORS . . . (LOCAL PATRIOTISM AND GEOGRAPHICAL CONDITIONS THAT NURTURED POLITICAL DIVISIONS . . .)
IF WE CAN PUT THE EMPHASIS ON THE "PLURIBUS," INSTEAD OF THE "UNUM," WE CAN BALKANIZE AMERICA AS SURELY AS KOSOVO.
VII. THEN I WOULD PLACE ALL THESE SUBJECTS OFF LIMITS - MAKE IT TABOO TO TALK ABOUT. I WOULD FIND A WORD SIMILAR TO "HERETIC" IN THE 16TH CENTURY - THAT STOPPED DISCUSSION AND PARALYZED THINKING. WORDS LIKE "RACIST", "XENOPHOBE" THAT HALTS ARGUMENT AND CONVERSATION.
HAVING MADE AMERICA A BILINGUAL-BICULTURAL COUNTRY, HAVING ESTABLISHED MULTICULTURALISM, HAVING THE LARGE FOUNDATIONS FUND THE DOCTRINE OF "VICTIMOLOGY", I WOULD NEXT MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE TO ENFORCE OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS. I WOULD DEVELOP A MANTRA - "THAT BECAUSE IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN GOOD FOR AMERICA, IT MUST ALWAYS BE GOOD." I WOULD MAKE EVERY INDIVIDUAL IMMIGRANT SYMPATRIC AND IGNORE THE CUMULATIVE IMPACT.
VIII. LASTLY, I WOULD CENSOR VICTOR HANSON DAVIS'S BOOK MEXIFORNIA — THIS BOOK IS DANGEROUS — IT EXPOSES MY PLAN TO DESTROY AMERICA. SO PLEASE, PLEASE — IF YOU FEEL THAT AMERICA DESERVES TO BE DESTROYED — PLEASE, PLEASE — DON'T BUY THIS BOOK! THIS GUY IS ON TO MY PLAN.
"THE SMART WAY TO KEEP PEOPLE PASSIVE AND OBEDIENT IS TO STRICTLY LIMIT THE SPECTRUM OF ACCEPTABLE OPINION, BUT ALLOW VERY LIVELY DEBATE WITHIN THAT SPECTRUM." — NOAM CHOMSKY, AMERICAN LINGUIST AND US MEDIA AND FOREIGN POLICY CRITIC.
------------------------------------------
Do you recognise all those points to destroy America? You should do, as this 'Plan' was put into operation decades ago in Britain and America.
Does this mean that all is lost? Far from it! The 'Plan' has only succeeded so far because it's secret purpose has been kept so well hidden by the political establishment!
We have to bring the truth to the man in the street. In other words, we all have to become activists. For the enemies of Britain have almost completed project, 'Destroy Britain'. Time is short, but we, the present generations of this country, also have a duty to generations yet to come. A duty that demands that we expose what has been done to Britain - by those charged with its protection! If you call yourself a patriot or a nationalist you cannot stand by and do nothing.
Exposure is the only thing our enemies really fear. So let's expose them and their squalid plan!
Blairs incompetance complete?
The number of people claiming unemployment benefits has risen for the fifth month in a row in June and this is the longest sustained rise in unemployment figures since the recession of 1992 according to the Office of National Statistics.
8,800 people had claimed jobseekers allowance in June leading to the total figure of 864,900 people registered as unemployed but with 8.6 million people registered as disabled and on benefits the true number of unemployed and on benefits is about ten million people in the country.
This means that 17.5% of the population in this country are unemployed. Blair has lost the plot. We have never had such an treacherous and incompetant leader such as Blair. While he has been busy planning to give more of our independence to Brussels he should have been planning ways to protect our economy. He should have been putting tariffs on foreign made good so our own can compete. He should have especially done it on China as not even african countries can compete against them (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4656987.stm).
The EU is also at the head of damaging our economy. The agricultural policy that the EU has subsidises french farmers so we are funding french farmers who are making it almost impossible for our own people to compete.
We can't wait any longer. If we don't get a new prime minister, protect our economy and leave the EU we will never recover when it gets worse unless drastic measures are taken.
The impact of the terrorist bombings on London and associated economic costs will also lead to a downturn in the economy and resultant job losses in the next few months whilst any more attacks will also cause vast economic damage to the country.
Retails sales are falling month by month and house prices are also falling and a chance exists for a further quarter point cut of interest rates next month.
The number of people claiming unemployment benefits has risen for the fifth month in a row in June and this is the longest sustained rise in unemployment figures since the recession of 1992 according to the Office of National Statistics.
8,800 people had claimed jobseekers allowance in June leading to the total figure of 864,900 people registered as unemployed but with 8.6 million people registered as disabled and on benefits the true number of unemployed and on benefits is about ten million people in the country.
This means that 17.5% of the population in this country are unemployed. Blair has lost the plot. We have never had such an treacherous and incompetant leader such as Blair. While he has been busy planning to give more of our independence to Brussels he should have been planning ways to protect our economy. He should have been putting tariffs on foreign made good so our own can compete. He should have especially done it on China as not even african countries can compete against them (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4656987.stm).
The EU is also at the head of damaging our economy. The agricultural policy that the EU has subsidises french farmers so we are funding french farmers who are making it almost impossible for our own people to compete.
We can't wait any longer. If we don't get a new prime minister, protect our economy and leave the EU we will never recover when it gets worse unless drastic measures are taken.
The impact of the terrorist bombings on London and associated economic costs will also lead to a downturn in the economy and resultant job losses in the next few months whilst any more attacks will also cause vast economic damage to the country.
Retails sales are falling month by month and house prices are also falling and a chance exists for a further quarter point cut of interest rates next month.
Friday, July 15, 2005
The minutemen
You may have heard about the Minutemen in America who are a group of citizens defending the American boarder from an invasion of illegal immigrants.
Well it is time a few good patriots in Britain to do the same. Over half a million illegal immigrants are at present in Britain and the government does nothing about it while they invade our homeland. Make no doubt about it. They are invading us. I bet I can here you saying "but wayne don't invaders need weapons?". They don't in this country as our treacherous government isn't even putting up a fight.
We need a minuteman project to defend our country seen as the treacherous government is allowing it to happen. We need people at the channel tunnel to stop them from coming though. We need thousands of good men and women.
To think we pay taxes to these people is unbelievable. Our tax money goes to things like the Ministry of DEFENCE and they aren't even defending us. Even third world countries get defended by their government but not us, we have to watch as our nation is destroyed.
You may have heard about the Minutemen in America who are a group of citizens defending the American boarder from an invasion of illegal immigrants.
Well it is time a few good patriots in Britain to do the same. Over half a million illegal immigrants are at present in Britain and the government does nothing about it while they invade our homeland. Make no doubt about it. They are invading us. I bet I can here you saying "but wayne don't invaders need weapons?". They don't in this country as our treacherous government isn't even putting up a fight.
We need a minuteman project to defend our country seen as the treacherous government is allowing it to happen. We need people at the channel tunnel to stop them from coming though. We need thousands of good men and women.
To think we pay taxes to these people is unbelievable. Our tax money goes to things like the Ministry of DEFENCE and they aren't even defending us. Even third world countries get defended by their government but not us, we have to watch as our nation is destroyed.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
Talk to me
It has come to me that people who read this may want me to cover stories and give my no nonsense analysis of the events of the day. If you want to give me a news story or ask for an article on something that you want to hear something about you can email me on wayne_blacklan@hotmail.com.
I hope to hear something soon and I will try and get atleast 1 'article' out per day.
It has come to me that people who read this may want me to cover stories and give my no nonsense analysis of the events of the day. If you want to give me a news story or ask for an article on something that you want to hear something about you can email me on wayne_blacklan@hotmail.com.
I hope to hear something soon and I will try and get atleast 1 'article' out per day.
The corrupt british government
The British government is corrupt. This is a little known fact. The British cabinet is filled with paedophiles or communists who are a bunch of hypocrites.
You may have heard of operation ore well british cabinet members were found to have downloaded child porn.
"The Sunday Herald has also had confirmed by a very senior source in British intelligence that at least one high-profile former Labour Cabinet minister is among Operation Ore suspects. The Sunday Herald has been given the politician's name but, for legal reasons, can not identify the person.
There are still unconfirmed rumours that another senior Labour politician is among the suspects. The intelligence officer said that a 'rolling' Cabinet committee had been set up to work out how to deal with the potentially ruinous fall-out for both Tony Blair and the government if arrests occur."
The fact that no other paper covered this and that it was put in a sunday paper shows that the media are in league with the labour party but we already know they are. They have been in league with Labour since before 1997. Rupert Murdoch who owns most of the media in the uk met with Blair before 1997 general election. Before that day labour wanted tighter controls on the media infact it was one of their policies but after that day they dropped that policy and Rupert Murdoch's papers started supporting labour. Are we getting the news properly? I don't think so. Blair is getting the media to support him so we will never get anything too critical of Blair unless it is in a sunday paper which not many people read. Your now asking what Rupert Murdoch gets in return. Well you only need to do a little research to find that "Although their accounts show profits of £1.387 billion since 1987, Newscorp Investments has effectively paid no tax in the UK since 1988" (http://www.red-star-research.org.uk/subframe1.html). So now we know in return that Rupert Murdoch doesn't pay tax and he is allowed to get away with it because he is helping the Blair government. This is more evidence that Blair is corrupt and people aren't going to know about this because the media are in league with the government.
Blair has had plenty of time to mention it as "He meets Tony Blair regularly, visiting Downing Street at least every 6 months" but Blair just doesn't care.
The cabinet is also filled with treacherous communists. For proof I will have to take you back to 1999. Do you remember Melita Norwood? Well she was "a British civil servant who, for a period of about 40 years following her recruitment in 1937, supplied the KGB (and its predecessor agencies) with state secrets from her job at the British Non-Ferrous Metals Research Association (a cover for nuclear research)" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melita_Norwood).
So what happened when she was exposed back in '99? Well…er….nothing. There was a day's headlines and then Jack Straw - a former commie himself - said she was "too old" to be prosecuted - unlike those old German Concentration camp guards, who pop up from time to time and are persecuted to the ends of the Earth.
It is irrelevant how old she is. Should have been prosecuted like the old nazi prison guards that were just following orders. She betrayed her country and because our government is at present filled with communists they did nothing. I wouldn't be surprised if they were secretly congratulating her.
What does that say about our government? Well it says if you are communist you can betray our countrybut if you aren't you can't.
Well it has to be said. The British government has betrayed our country by allowing a traitor to remain free.
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Introduction
This blog will be my analysis of news. Firstly, in this post I will list my views, they may seem barbaric and uncivilised but you don't know what you are talking about. The media has brainwashed many people.
I will also expose the corruption of the british government and the lying media.
Crime
I believe crimes should be separated into differenty levels. Level 1 should be minor crimes like not paying parking tickets. Level 2 should be for things like theft. Level 3 should be crimes that seriously physically harm people and level 4 should be for murder, attempted murder and treason.
Level 1 crimes you will only get a short prison sentence.
Level 2 crimes you will get a prison sentence plus hard labour. If it is your second level 2 offense then the judge may sentence you to be tortured 3 times per week however the judge doesn't have to until your third level 2 offence. On your 4th level 2 offense the judge may sentence you to death however he doesn't have to until your 5th.
Level 3 crimes start with three times per week of torture. On your second level 3 offense the judge may sentence you to death but he doesn't have to until your third level 3 offense.
Level 4 crimes will get death straightaway.
Some of you may think this is barbaric and fascist, well I say its time to start acting fascist and barbaric towards prisoners. Criminals don't deserve human rights like the rest of us civilized beings.
Criminals will also have to do hard labour if they want something to eat. If they don't work they don't get fed and can starve.
Criminals will probably feel suicidal with all this going on. Well they can go ahead and kill themselves. I don't care about the lives of criminals and I don't see why I should. They didn't care about their victims so they shouldn't be taken care of.
Prisons will have nothing fun inside. There will be no TV and no games. Prison isn't supposed to be a picnic. There will also be no newspapers and prison officers will be ordered not to discuss the news of the outside world. If prisoners want to know what is going on in the outside world they shouldn't have committed a crime.
News about family dying includes news.
Criminals will get visits from family and friends one a month for 15 minutes. If they want to see family and friends they shouldn't have committed a crime. Children under 16 will not be allowed in prisons.
There will be no early release. What sentence is handed down by the courts is the minimum that will be done. After the sentence the prisoner will go to a prison board where they decide if they can be released. If there is even a minor blot on their prison record then they stay another month. If the prison board is full up because of the amount of prisoners they will have to wait. It is their own fault for committing a crime.
Also another punishment is sterilisation for criminals who have committed a level 2 crime more than once and those levels above. Criminals don't deserve to have children and if they did they would probably become scum like their parents and we are aiming to reduce crime.
I hope you all agree that punishment should come before rehabilitation.
Immigration
Its time to say enough is enough. Britain cannot handle anymore immigration. To be a sustainable country we must decrease our population to 30 million within 100 years (http://www.optimumpopulation.org/index.html).
Recently the government estimated that there was 570,000 illegal immigrants (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4637273.stm). This is a gigantic number and the british government is responsible for the invasion. The british government is incompetant. In anyother time in history there would be an uproar in allowing an invasion of british soil by foreign peoples but the media has conditioned the british people to accept it saying that it is good for us. I have seen no evidence that it is good for us and the facts speak for themselves (http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/).
It is time to get our army out of iraq and get them to patrol our boarders and shoot all invaders that come to conquer our territory because thats what they come to do. They come to conquer our territory with their foreign cultures and beliefs. It shouldn't be allowed anymore.
European union
The European Union is another entity that wants to conquer Britain. There is no doubt about it. They have taken over britain. Britain is just a state of the United states of Europe and we must get our independence back before it is too late.
At the moment we have limited independence but that will soon dissappear.
Why do people say the EU is a good thing? I see no reason. They say it benefits us economically because we have a free trade agreement yet even if we weren't in the EU we would still be able to negotiate one just like mexico has done (http://www.mexperience.com/business/fta/bc_fta.htm).
The EU needs us far more than they need mexico so its time to leave and negotiate free trade that way.
So why do we need the EU when it is obvious that they need us more than we need them. We can trade with everyone if it wasn't for eu rules that is.
The other reason is that they will stop trading with us if we left. That is just scaremongering. Britain and the EU are members of the World trade organisation. If they stopped trading with us they would get into trouble with the world trading organisation. Even if they did you are forgetting than they need us more than we need them.
Also leaving the EU would save britain billions of pounds allowing tax cuts or spending the money on other useful projects.
Economy
Foreign goods are bringing ruin and unemployment to British industries and the communities that depend on them (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/2e294a4c-f271-11d9-8e69-00000e2511c8.html)
The government should start putting tariffs on all foreign made goods so our industries can prosper. We should put the highest tariffs on chinese made goods as they are the cheapest and they are even making it hard for african goods to compete in the world market (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4656987.stm).
Banks and newspapers should serve the people of the country and not rich businessmen so all banks and newspapers will be nationalised as well as water, electricity and gas.
Education
Education will be free and compulsory up until secondary school. After that it will be free but not compulsory.
It is time to let the ones that want to learn do just that and the ones that don't want to learn leave. They are ruining their own lives and they shouldn't be allowed to ruin other peoples lives by ruining the discipline of the classroom.
Those that want to stay will have a good working environment as there will be no one stopping them from learning. Also those that want to stay will have to sign a contract saying they will have good behaviour. Those that get more than 5 detentions per year will be expelled from school and they will have to find a new school. Schools will not have to take them. It will be there own fault.
Those that do stay in school will have to have atleast 5 hours of physical education per week. Those found overweight will have longer so we don't have a nation of couch potatoes.
Health
Everyone will have free healthcare as long as they take care of their bodies. If someone comes in with something like a smoking related illness they will be cured freely however if they continue to smoke and they get another smoking related illness they will have to pay.
The government should not be expected to fork out money for people who are harming themselves. If they are destroying their bodies they should pay for the healthcare themself as it is their own fault.
People like george best who have had more 2 livers don't deserve anymore. They should be kept at the back of the list no matter how much money they pay because he would just go back to alcohol anyway and its better to save a life that is going to be greatful for it.
That is all for now but as I write more blogs you will know what I believe
This blog will be my analysis of news. Firstly, in this post I will list my views, they may seem barbaric and uncivilised but you don't know what you are talking about. The media has brainwashed many people.
I will also expose the corruption of the british government and the lying media.
Crime
I believe crimes should be separated into differenty levels. Level 1 should be minor crimes like not paying parking tickets. Level 2 should be for things like theft. Level 3 should be crimes that seriously physically harm people and level 4 should be for murder, attempted murder and treason.
Level 1 crimes you will only get a short prison sentence.
Level 2 crimes you will get a prison sentence plus hard labour. If it is your second level 2 offense then the judge may sentence you to be tortured 3 times per week however the judge doesn't have to until your third level 2 offence. On your 4th level 2 offense the judge may sentence you to death however he doesn't have to until your 5th.
Level 3 crimes start with three times per week of torture. On your second level 3 offense the judge may sentence you to death but he doesn't have to until your third level 3 offense.
Level 4 crimes will get death straightaway.
Some of you may think this is barbaric and fascist, well I say its time to start acting fascist and barbaric towards prisoners. Criminals don't deserve human rights like the rest of us civilized beings.
Criminals will also have to do hard labour if they want something to eat. If they don't work they don't get fed and can starve.
Criminals will probably feel suicidal with all this going on. Well they can go ahead and kill themselves. I don't care about the lives of criminals and I don't see why I should. They didn't care about their victims so they shouldn't be taken care of.
Prisons will have nothing fun inside. There will be no TV and no games. Prison isn't supposed to be a picnic. There will also be no newspapers and prison officers will be ordered not to discuss the news of the outside world. If prisoners want to know what is going on in the outside world they shouldn't have committed a crime.
News about family dying includes news.
Criminals will get visits from family and friends one a month for 15 minutes. If they want to see family and friends they shouldn't have committed a crime. Children under 16 will not be allowed in prisons.
There will be no early release. What sentence is handed down by the courts is the minimum that will be done. After the sentence the prisoner will go to a prison board where they decide if they can be released. If there is even a minor blot on their prison record then they stay another month. If the prison board is full up because of the amount of prisoners they will have to wait. It is their own fault for committing a crime.
Also another punishment is sterilisation for criminals who have committed a level 2 crime more than once and those levels above. Criminals don't deserve to have children and if they did they would probably become scum like their parents and we are aiming to reduce crime.
I hope you all agree that punishment should come before rehabilitation.
Immigration
Its time to say enough is enough. Britain cannot handle anymore immigration. To be a sustainable country we must decrease our population to 30 million within 100 years (http://www.optimumpopulation.org/index.html).
Recently the government estimated that there was 570,000 illegal immigrants (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4637273.stm). This is a gigantic number and the british government is responsible for the invasion. The british government is incompetant. In anyother time in history there would be an uproar in allowing an invasion of british soil by foreign peoples but the media has conditioned the british people to accept it saying that it is good for us. I have seen no evidence that it is good for us and the facts speak for themselves (http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/).
It is time to get our army out of iraq and get them to patrol our boarders and shoot all invaders that come to conquer our territory because thats what they come to do. They come to conquer our territory with their foreign cultures and beliefs. It shouldn't be allowed anymore.
European union
The European Union is another entity that wants to conquer Britain. There is no doubt about it. They have taken over britain. Britain is just a state of the United states of Europe and we must get our independence back before it is too late.
At the moment we have limited independence but that will soon dissappear.
Why do people say the EU is a good thing? I see no reason. They say it benefits us economically because we have a free trade agreement yet even if we weren't in the EU we would still be able to negotiate one just like mexico has done (http://www.mexperience.com/business/fta/bc_fta.htm).
The EU needs us far more than they need mexico so its time to leave and negotiate free trade that way.
So why do we need the EU when it is obvious that they need us more than we need them. We can trade with everyone if it wasn't for eu rules that is.
The other reason is that they will stop trading with us if we left. That is just scaremongering. Britain and the EU are members of the World trade organisation. If they stopped trading with us they would get into trouble with the world trading organisation. Even if they did you are forgetting than they need us more than we need them.
Also leaving the EU would save britain billions of pounds allowing tax cuts or spending the money on other useful projects.
Economy
Foreign goods are bringing ruin and unemployment to British industries and the communities that depend on them (http://news.ft.com/cms/s/2e294a4c-f271-11d9-8e69-00000e2511c8.html)
The government should start putting tariffs on all foreign made goods so our industries can prosper. We should put the highest tariffs on chinese made goods as they are the cheapest and they are even making it hard for african goods to compete in the world market (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4656987.stm).
Banks and newspapers should serve the people of the country and not rich businessmen so all banks and newspapers will be nationalised as well as water, electricity and gas.
Education
Education will be free and compulsory up until secondary school. After that it will be free but not compulsory.
It is time to let the ones that want to learn do just that and the ones that don't want to learn leave. They are ruining their own lives and they shouldn't be allowed to ruin other peoples lives by ruining the discipline of the classroom.
Those that want to stay will have a good working environment as there will be no one stopping them from learning. Also those that want to stay will have to sign a contract saying they will have good behaviour. Those that get more than 5 detentions per year will be expelled from school and they will have to find a new school. Schools will not have to take them. It will be there own fault.
Those that do stay in school will have to have atleast 5 hours of physical education per week. Those found overweight will have longer so we don't have a nation of couch potatoes.
Health
Everyone will have free healthcare as long as they take care of their bodies. If someone comes in with something like a smoking related illness they will be cured freely however if they continue to smoke and they get another smoking related illness they will have to pay.
The government should not be expected to fork out money for people who are harming themselves. If they are destroying their bodies they should pay for the healthcare themself as it is their own fault.
People like george best who have had more 2 livers don't deserve anymore. They should be kept at the back of the list no matter how much money they pay because he would just go back to alcohol anyway and its better to save a life that is going to be greatful for it.
That is all for now but as I write more blogs you will know what I believe
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
