Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Child Poverty Is An Election Issue - Child Sex Not So Much




There's nothing more dispiriting to the human soul than watching politicians descend from their ivory towers once every few years to put their faux concern for people on public display in hope of securing a vote or two at election time.

Career politicians and bureaucrats who wouldn't be seen dead with a supermarket shelf stacker or an oil splattered mechanic, suddenly start pretending they have empathy for ordinary people.

Multi-millionaire 'progressives' start talking about ending income inequality and assisting social mobility at five thousand pounds per plate fund raising dinners.

With the aid of the government-media complex the political class create images of poverty, hunger and despair to give themselves a reason to put forward solutions they know they won't implement. Where there is actual poverty, hunger and despair they will offer nothing but promises, for the simple reason that a prosperous, upwardly mobile working class robs them of their reason to interfere.

Politicians need poverty, they love talking about poverty, they wallow in it, its their element. They would have little reason to exist in their present form if the majority of the people were prosperous and financially independent of government.

The truth is that outside of election times the political class are self serving, agenda driven and couldn't care less about the lives of their constituents. They do the absolute minimum that is required, both actually and rhetorically, to keep them on board and secure their votes.

One of the most potent issues for raising the emotional temperature is child poverty, no human being with an iota of decency wants to see a child suffer hunger and despair.

Not all of the political class, nor their armies of bureaucrats are decent human beings despite the fact that they jump on the child poverty bandwagon at election times for vote gathering purposes.

When one compares the election time rhetoric with the behavior of Great Britain's political class, the whole shameful edifice of child welfare comes crashing down under the weight of their deceit and lies.

Using a flaw in the electoral system, the leader of the ridiculous Liberal Democrat party, Nick Clegg, is also Great Britain's Deputy Prime Minister. His concern for the welfare of children resulted in the formation of the Child Poverty and Social Mobility Commission, this put into law the mandatory monitoring of child poverty and set a target for the elimination of child poverty by the year 2020.
(Story here)

He further demonstrated his concern for child welfare by mandating that every child must have a free school meal regardless of means. Its all lies of course and designed to enhance his public image and his burnish child care credentials.

While Clegg was setting targets and handing out school dinners he was covering up the fact that one if the icons of the Liberal movement was a rampant paedophile who abused children on an industrial scale. When he was finally forced to admit knowledge of Cyril Smiths depraved crimes he refused to instigate an inquiry.

He also covered up the fact that he knew one of his MP's, Mike Hancock, was having an inappropriate relationship with young special needs constituent who went to him for help.
(Lib Dem paedophile stories herehere and here)

The Labour Party try to make child poverty their exclusive territory, their usurping of the moral high ground is nauseating when their unseen attitude to children is made public.

While they champion increasing the minimum wage, increasing child welfare benefits and raising children out of poverty altogether by 2020, they also promote legalising sex between adults and children under the radar.

The infamous trio of Harriet Harman, Jack Dromey and Patricia Hewitt had common cause with the Paedophile Information Exchange to legalise sex between adults and children on the back of legislation to legalise homosexuality.

While they pull on the emotional heart strings regarding the existence of child poverty and appearing to be dedicated to its eradication, Labour administrations were ignoring the grooming, rape and vile sexual abuse of under age white girls by Muslim paedophile gangs in Rotherham, Rochdale and a host of other cities in England.

In Rotherham, the head of children's services in the Labour administration removed two children from their loving foster parents because their cultural needs may not be met but ignored the rape and sexual abuse of some fourteen hundred (1,400) under age white girls at the same time.

In these blighted towns, Labour administrations ensured children were entitled to a free school dinner but not entitled to protection from rape.

David Cameron's Conservative Party also puts the welfare of children high on their agenda at election times but cover up the hideous activities of the child abusers in their midst at the same time.

Cameron held out as long as he could not to hold an inquiry into historic child sex abuse in Westminster including iconic senior members of his own party. He held out long enough for files relating to the case to go missing.
(Westminster Paedophile scandal here)

With a complete disregard for the child victims, past and present and for justice, Cameron claimed that an inquiry may lead to a witch hunt against gays in general. Finally having been dragged kicking and screaming into holding an inquiry, his choice to lead it Baroness Butler-Sloss, had to stand down because her impartiality could not be guaranteed.

During election times, politicians and their bureaucrats like nothing more than talking about their compassion for children, child poverty and their plans to deal with it, they are not so keen to talk about the innumerable paedophile scandals that have gone on for decades with their full knowledge and sometimes their facilitation.

Paedophilia is rife in Great Britain and it is beyond credulity to believe that the political class are serious about child welfare when at the same time they do little to prevent child sex abuse then cover it up when it is made public.

(UK paedophilia here)

(A previous article here)
 




Saturday, October 18, 2014

Ballot Rigging UK - Another Tangible Benefit Of Multi-Culturalism



If there was one thing that differentiated Great Britain from the third world and the communist sphere of influence it was free and fair elections. With the end of the Rotten Boroughs and the adoption of universal suffrage, multi party election campaigns were hard fought and on the whole good natured. This was an indication of the decency of the British people together with their inherent sense of fair play.

That was before the political elite unilaterally decided that the unique British way of life, together with its centuries old traditions, had to be replaced with a mythical 'multi-cultural society' along with the forced acceptance of culturally backward practices that it entailed.

Until the mass influx of third world immigrants, who lacked the cultural sophistication to understand the concept of free and fair elections, ballot rigging was confined to the Moscow financed Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) cheating to get their operatives elected to high office in the trade unions.

This resulted in the infamous High Court action involving the Electrical Trades Union (ETU) in 1961 which laid bare the malign influence of the CPGB in the British trade union and Labour movements.

The latest scandal whereby the Labour Mayor of Rochdale, Cllr Carol Wardle, indicated that she would be willing to rig the result of the recent Heywood and Middleton Parliamentary election was indicative of the acceptance of ballot rigging and the willingness of ideologically driven operatives to indulge in it.

She is frantically rowing back on her comments by claiming it was said in jest but had the microphone been switched off as she thought it was then the jest would have been shared with the winning Labour candidate only instead of the whole world.
(See the story here)

Only six hundred and seventeen votes saved the Labour Party from losing one of its rock solid seats in the middle of its rust belt heartland to the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). This was well within the margin for a ballot rigging exercise.

This kind of overt political corruption was unheard of a few decades ago and it is commensurate with open border third world immigration. As a career expatriate who has spent many years living in the third world I can confirm through first hand experience that bribery, violent intimidation, corruption and other forms of voter fraud, including ballot rigging, are routine during elections.

(I was actually living in New Delhi when an attempt by the ruling party to bribe the electorate with saris in the poverty stricken state of Uttar Pradesh caused a stampede that resulted in the deaths of twenty one unfortunate electors. But I digress)

Its was back in 2005 that Deputy High Court judge Richard Mawrey infamously compared Great Britain to a 'banana republic' after a Birmingham-wide campaign by the Labour Party to use bogus postal votes to counter the negative impact of Tony Blair's Iraq war.

Labour supporting thugs intimidated postmen into handing over sacks full of postal votes in Great Britain's second city, which is now for all intents and purposes a foreign country. Ballot papers were changed once votes had been cast using correction fluid and police discovered six men in a warehouse with two hundred and seventy four unsealed postal votes.

During another voter fraud scandal in 2012 the same Judge stated that nothing had changed since his original remarks some seven years earlier where fourteen varieties fraud were highlighted but only one had been tackled.

It is worth quoting the judge in full:

"The opportunities for fraud are now the same as they were in Birmingham".

He went on to warn that:

"In local elections a small number of votes will make a considerable difference. The opportunities for fraud are enormous, the chances of detection very small, and a very modest amount of fraud will guarantee you win the election".

A high proportion of the constituencies in Great Britain which were previously 'safe' for the legacy parties are now vulnerable due to the stellar rise of the United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP). These constituencies will be decided on a very small number of votes therefore as Judge Mawrey has indicated, "a very modest amount of fraud will guarantee you win the election".
(Read the story here)

Judging by recent events in other areas, and by the attitude of the Mayor of Rochdale, there are hundreds of constituencies the length and breadth of the country that will be susceptible to voter fraud and ballot rigging.

The Bangladeshi dominated town of Tower Hamlets in London is a hotbed of political corruption and voter fraud. Its Mayor Lutfur Rahman is under investigation yet again for a catalogue of crimes related to corruption, voter fraud and ballot rigging.

Unsurprisingly, the authorities appear reluctant to convict Rahman of any crime despite the overwhelming weight of evidence and by witnesses from his own community. As with the Muslim paedophile gangs who ran rampant through British cities with impunity, this reluctance is being put down to political correctness and 'cultural sensitivity'.
(Lutfur Rahman story here)

If any town epitomises the rampant corruption associated with mass immigration and imposed multi-culturalism it is Rotherham in the English midlands. This blighted town town is a fiefdom of the Labour Party, a virtual one party state and a depraved cesspit of cronyism and political correctness. The politcal establishment of this town deliberately ignored the grooming, rape and horrific sexual abuse of under age white girls by Muslim paedophile gangs.
(One Rotherham story here)

It would be impossible for me to even start to describe the institutionalised corruption and depravity that has infected what I am sure was once a archetypal English industrial town.
(Two stories of intimidation here and here, one complete with photographs)
(Local MEP gets death threats over Muslim paedophile scandal here)


I can only suggest that readers visit the excellent non partisan website Rothpol which monitors the local politicians and holds them to account.

The explosion of voter fraud is largely due to the extension of postal voting by the Labour Party in 2001. They could no longer rely on the automatic vote of the indigenous working class, consequently they needed an alternative route to political power. Tribalism and the power of Imams over their respective communities meant that the Labour Party only needed to bribe one person to get scores of votes. Its been working to their advantage ever since.

This tacit acceptance of voter fraud and ballot rigging, coupled with the refusal of the politicians to eradicate it, is a sad indictment of British democracy and a measure of far the country has sunk toward third world status.


Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Exporting Taxpayers Money - British Families Financing Poverty Abroad




One would think that the first priority of any government would be looking after the interests and well being of its citizens, after all that's what they promise every four years or so when trawling for votes at election time.

As the British people slowly emerge from their media induced, two decade long slumber, they are finding reality is somewhat different. What they were promised in exchange for their vote compared to what has been delivered is an indication of the contempt that they held in by their elected representatives.

The previous Labour government followed their socialist instincts by taxing the people until the pips squeaked while spending the country into bankruptcy at the same time. The incoming Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition, led by David Cameron, promised to mend the broken economy using a combination of spending cuts and increased taxation.

In other words, a severe dose of austerity for everyone except the ruling class and the so called poor in undeveloped world. Cameron not only promised to 'ring fence' spending on international aid but to increase it in real terms.

All the British people have to show for their sacrifice, and their votes, is an economy that is still broken accompanied by an unprecedented drop in living standards.

One would have thought that the package of austerity measures would have fixed the broken economy as promised, but the government are still borrowing some one hundred billion pounds per year and the national debt has passed a staggering one trillion pounds.

The outgoing Chief Secretary of the Treasury, an odious individual by the name of Liam Byrne, infamously left a note for his successor making light of the fact that his Labour government had emptied the Treasury.

"Dear Chief Secretary, I'm afraid there's no money. Kind regards - and good luck! Liam".

The flippant message conveyed the fact that the petty, small minded Byrne was not only reveling in the discomfort of the incoming Chief  Secretary, it also inferred that emptying the Treasury, borrowing to the limit and racking up record levels of debt was a deliberate scorched earth policy designed to make it difficult for the incoming government. This would make it unpopular and hence limited to one term.

(Byrne story here)

Typical of the ideologically driven, modern day political class who believe that the ends justify the means, it was a cynical political calculation taken regardless of the disastrous consequences for the British people.

Judging by their profligate behavior, the wellbeing of the British people has never been a high priority for the current political class - instead they continue use taxpayers money either to satisfy the requirements of their ideological agenda or to parade their 'progressive' credentials on the global stage.

Government spin doctors and media managers are attempting to convince the hard pressed British people that due to the continued lack of money, which apparently is nothing to do with them, austerity will be required for many years to come.

It hasn't gone unnoticed that despite the lack of money for the British people and the continuing requirement for high taxes and austerity, the government is awash with money when it comes to its own vanity projects and burnishing their own 'progressive' credentials.

Rubbing salt into the wounds of the impoverished British people, the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, Harriet Harman, thinks that exporting money abroad is a good thing, even labelling economic migrants who send their welfare benefits to their home country as heroes.

It doesn't enter her head that if migrants can send their welfare benefits home, they are either falsely claiming benefits while working, which is a criminal offence, or they are being paid in excess of what is required to live on.

Her economic ignorance and her contempt for the British people knows no bounds. While some twenty thousand pensioners in fuel poverty will die of hypothermia this year, Harman is calling on the government to make it easier for immigrants to export money abroad and to add insult to injury she wants to give them tax refunds, yes tax refunds, to encourage more immigrants to do the same.

(Pensioner poverty story here)

Harman derided "those who say that we should look after our own first" in the recession and vowed to fight any attempt to cut the overseas aid budget.
At twenty three billion pounds, remittances are more than double the foreign aid budget.

(Harriet Harman story here)

Despite abundant evidence that foreign aid is a total waste of money, and in many cases an impediment to development, it was increased by a staggering twenty eight percent last year, going from just over eight billion pounds to just over ten billion. While they impose austerity on their own people at home the political class plan to keep increasing this monumental waste of money until their 0.7% of GDP target for foreign aid is reached.

(Foreign Aid scandals here and here)

In addition to this scandalous waste of money, over fifty five million pounds per day is handed over to the unelected bureaucrats of the corrupt European Union who's accounts have failed to pass an audit for the past nineteen years.

Child benefit welfare payments worth ten million pounds is sent abroad each year for children of  economic migrants who don't live in Great Britain.

Unemployment benefit is being claimed by thousands of economic migrants who have returned to their home countries, with three million pounds being claimed by the Czech Republic alone.

The amount of money exported from Great Britain is beyond my skills to calculate but apart from the money already mentioned, there are payments or credit lines to the IMF,  the World Bank, the United Nations and its agencies, ad hoc payments to the EU to cover overspending together with other emergency aid requirements.

It is a sad fact that despite the tens of trillions spent on alleviating poverty since decolonisation, most of the developing world is no better off with deprivation, pestilence and civil war as rife as ever. In spite of this, the government will continue to ignore the calls from its own citizens to take care of poverty at home first. Obviously their posturing on the world stage appears to be their top priority.

In conclusion, many people rightly ask how it is that there is never any money for the poor at home because austerity is needed to fix the broken economy but there is always money available to bail out the destitute countries of the Eurozone and to wage war in the middle east.

There is a certain irony in the way that governments spend a fortune bombing countries back to the stone age then go on to spend another fortune in development aid to build them back up again.  




Monday, October 13, 2014

Racism, Bigotry And The 'Far Right' Are Acceptable When Chasing Votes




One of the most publicised incidents during the last British general election campaign was the labeling of Rochdale resident Gillian Duffy as "a bigoted woman" for having the temerity to mention immigration to the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
(Bigot story here)

The fact that Ms Duffy and her family were long time supporters of the Labour Party was of no consequence to the Brown or his Party, she had mentioned immigration with a negative connotation and was punished in accordance with the party's calculated tactic of demonisation and smear.

Rochdale is one of the multitude of close knit, post industrial towns in England that prides itself on close family and community ties. It is also one of the multitude of towns that has been disfigured beyond recognition by the Labour's Party's policy of cultural replacement using open border mass immigration. 

The Labour Party had long planned their covert cultural replacement agenda and knew that it would face fierce opposition once the horrific repercussions started to become apparent. Equality and hate crime laws were the main battering ram they used to bow the people into submission, along with a rigidly policed policy of political correctness.

Central to these policies, and to further back up the anti-British tactic of closing down debate, was the routine use of smear and demonisation. The Labour Party turned this into a fine art with a full time Smear Unit located at the heart of Brown's government in No 10 Downing Street. 

Anyone making a statement that was remotely critical of their immigration policy or made any reference to race, religion, ethnicity, no matter how innocuous, was seized upon by Labour's race zealots and met with insults, demonisation and smear. 

Insults such as racist, bigot, xenophobe and 'far right' were thrown around with abandon regardless of whether they were appropriate or not. The idea was to shame opponents into silence closing down any debate in the process. 

Despite promises to the contrary, it became apparent after they took office that the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition shared the same cultural replacement agenda of their predecessors. They also had no intention of dealing with open border mass immigration, political correctness or the policy of smearing anyone who questioned the agenda.

The coalition added to the armoury of insults by labelling people and groups who questioned open border mass immigration as 'far right'. The main proponent of this particular smear was none other than David Cameron's token Muslim woman cabinet member, the Baroness Warsi.

As an untalented, over promoted token appointment, the noble Baroness's attempts at linking opponents of mass immigration to more unsavoury elements was amateurish to the point of embarrassing. Prior to her resignation over her support for the terrorist group Hamas, she was in the habit of labeling any critic of mass immigration as 'far right'.

To say that the political class's mass immigration policy has been a complete and utter disaster would not only be the understatement of the century, it is also their declaration of war against the British people.

The British people didn't ask for this, they weren't consulted, they don't want it and it was never put in any election manifesto. The ruling political class, under orders from the global 'progressive' elite, were going to impose a so called  'multi-cultural society' regardless.

Consequently, villages, towns and vast areas of Great Britain's major cities are unrecognisable. Welfare financed, crime ridden, mono-cultural ghettos infest British cities with some operating under sharia law and consequently out of bounds for British citizens including the police.

With the connivance and approval of the political establishment and the local authorities, including the police, social services, care homes, schools and the media, the rape and sexual abuse of thousands of under age white girls by Muslim men was allowed continue.

(Rochdale Child abuse story here)

In addition to the increased competition for jobs, Great Britain's taxpayer funded social services including, education, health and housing have been put under intolerable strain by the unsustainable increase in the population.

Although they are yet to fully re-discover the bulldog spirit that defeated Hitler and the National Socialists, the British people are slowly awakening from their media induced slumber and fighting back against a patronising and malignant political class.

The phenomenon known as the United Kingdom Independent Party, usually referred to as UKIP or the People's Army, have been growing in influence for some years, taking support from the old legacy parties together with non-aligned and independent voters.

Their prime objective is getting Great Britain out of the European Union, regaining control over the borders, economic sanity via balanced budgets and most notably putting the interests of the British people above all others.

As a measure of their rising support they recently won the European elections, vastly increased their numbers of local councillors and won their first Member of the Westminster Parliament in a byelection. Their momentum has put the fear of God into the current political establishment who up until recently variously described them, among other things, as fascists, 'far right', xenophobes, little Englanders etc. 

The current Prime Minister David Cameron famously referred to UKIP supporters as "loonies, fruitcakes and closet racists".

The meteoric rise in support for UKIP and the corresponding fall in support for the legacy parties has heralded a change in the usual political discourse and in particular a change in language.

Not only are the policies and lexicon of UKIP no longer attracting the usual smears of racist, bigot and 'far right', they are actively being adopted by the three legacy parties.

The Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron spotted the threat earlier and has been making false promises for some time about border control, access to welfare for immigrants, deportation of foreign criminals and whole raft of measures he knows the EU bureaucrats will forbid him to action.

The rise of UKIP is heralding the end for Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and his ludicrously named Liberal Democrat Party. If ever there was a party of loonies and fruitcakes this collection of weirdos is it; to make the list of names more accurate we can add sex pests, fornicators, perverts and paedophiles. 

In a desperate attempt to ward off oblivion Clegg has softened his previously solid anti-British pro-immigrant stance and is talking in terms that would have attracted smears from him had they been spoken by a UKIP representative.

It has long been accepted that Cameron and Clegg are in total thrall to the EU bureaucrats and are prepared to lie, deceive, obfuscate and make any false promise to implement their masters agenda. It is the utter hypocrisy of the Labour Party that really beggars belief.

This is the party that has been most dedicated to the cultural replacement agenda and the most prolific in the use of insult, demonisation and smear to denigrate opponents. The Labour Party has an even uglier side it is wont to employ in order to intimidate its opponents. They call themselves Unite Against Fascism (UAF) and they violently disrupt UKIP activities hurling insults such as 'racist' and 'fascist' with abandon.

Supposedly independent of the Labour Party, UAF are in fact their unwashed, post-pubescent street activists who enjoy a bit slogan shouting, banner waving and aggravation. They enjoy pretend revolution along with bayonets and barricades rhetoric and a cup of hot chocolate from their mothers before bedtime.

(Labour and UAF here)

Labour Party leader Ed Miliband together with his second-in-command Harriet Harman and his Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper-Balls, are all stealing UKIP's clothes and talking the same UKIP language that attracted insults from them less than a week ago.

(Miliband hypocrisy here)

Harman hypocrisy here)

(Yvette Cooper hypocrisy here)

Yesterdays insults are no longer applicable when the ruling class want to use the same policies and arguments to steal the votes of the people they previously dismissed as racists and bigots. 

This kind of  cynical behavior and breathtaking hypocrisy is utterly disgraceful and serves as a clear demonstration of the abysmal standard of politician that has lied and spun their way into office. It is hoped that the rise of UKIP will consign these charlatans to the dustbin of history where they so rightly belong.   



       

Thursday, October 9, 2014

Labour Politicians And Child Sex - Its Not A Scandal Its Progressive



The media attention given to the three senior Labour party politicians involved in a child sex scandal has a whiff of opportunism about it that may detract from the genuine shock and horror that should accompany the subject of child sex abuse.
(See the story here)

The scandal involves three of the Labour Party's most rabid socialist/progressives - Patricia Hewitt, Harriet Harman and Jack Dromey who, incidentally, happens to be Harman's husband.

All three worked for the National Council for Civil Liberties (NCCL) and they all attained positions of power within the upper echelons of the Labour Party.
The NCCL at the time espoused all the trendy left wing causes of the day and, as a consequence attracted that section of British society that consisted of middle and upper class self loathers together with the post pubescent, pimpled revolutionaries that eventually grew up and joined the Liberal Democrats.

It must be borne in mind that legalizing sex between adults and children has long been a core belief of the same 'progressive' elite that are the guardians of the Labour Party soul today. According to them it was perfectly acceptable for the Paedophile Information Exchange (P.I.E) to be an affiliate of the NCCL.

Hewitt, Harman and her husband Dromey represented, and therefore endorsed the views of P.I.E, such as: "Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in with an adult, result in no identifiable damage".

They didn't divulge how they came to the conclusion of 'no identifiable damage', perhaps it was personal experience, however it remains unexplained.

They also claim that "The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage".

Again the basis for this claim is not shared, the reason being that its an ideological belief therefore no empirical evidence is necessary. If they believe it, then it must be right and everyone else is wrong.... or stuck with Victorian attitudes to sex.

Despite being senior members of the Labour Party, they campaigned for:

a) The abolition of the age of consent for sex between adults and children. ( 'Sixteen is just a start' was a campaign slogan endorsed by the Labour Party's high profile homosexual campaigner Peter Tatchell)

b) Incest to be de-criminalized.

c) Sexually explicit photographs of children to be made legal.

It is worth remembering that the Labour Party grew from the original trade union movement and consisted mainly of working men - that would be men such as coal miners, steel workers, railway men, factory workers, farm workers etc. together with their wives and other women's groups. They were also, in the main, Christians or at least lived by the Judeo-Christian moral code.

The influence and eventual takeover of the party by the aforementioned upper and middle class self loathers began with groups like the Bloomsbury Set and the Fabians.

These people referred to themselves as 'progressives' who disagreed with Victorian values and worked to abolish the Judeo- Christian moral code. They believed that this moral code was a an impediment to 'progress'. They were hedonists who not only espoused lunatic ideas such as eugenics and euthanasia but they also indulged in group sex and wanted homosexuality and paedophilia legalized, then brought into the mainstream of British life.

These so called 'progressives' have replaced the working man as the biggest influence in the Labour Party and subsequently changed it from the party of "a fair days work for a fair days pay", into a revolutionary movement of well-to-do hedonists. The hierarchy of the modern Labour Party and most of its MP's are non-working class who espouse Fabian and the Bloomsbury Set causes.

People referring to themselves as 'progressives' now dominate politics and public life and unless the people wake up it is only a matter of time before sex between adults and children, incest and child pornography are legalized. They cynically used gay marriage as a precedent and with that now socially acceptable more of the Fabian/Bloomsbury progressive agenda will follow as sure night follows day.

(Please note that their linking homosexuality and paedophilia is a tactic they have used to achieve their aims. This is a slur and an affront to homosexuals and taints the issue of same sex marriage further)

It is worth looking at these three Labour Party stalwarts in a little more detail:

Patricia Hewitt actually hails from Down Under being the daughter of a knighted professional Australian bureaucrat and an aristocrat Lady of the Realm. Originally a conservative, she adopted radical 'progressive' causes somewhere along the way. She was actually classified as a communist by the British Intelligence Service, MI5.

Hewitt was 'spotted' as a potential candidate for high political office in the Labour Party and groomed accordingly. When her time came she was selected as the Parliamentary candidate for Leicester West by virtue of her gender over a more suitable male candidate.

Referred to these days as a carpetbagger, she was parachuted into the 'safe' Labour seat of Leicester West which is about as far removed socially and politically from Australia as it is possible to be. Predictably, the undiscerning tribal voters of Leicester West elected her as their representative as they would have done had she been a horse, a donkey or a chimpanzee.

One of Hewitt's pet theories is that  "fathers may not be a useful influence in the upbringing of children".

It would be interesting to find out if the fathers of Leicester West agree with their elected representative about their families and the raising of their children.

The political duo of Harriet Harman and husband Jack Dromey epitomize everything that stinks about the Labour Party and British politics in general.

Harman is typical of the wealthy elite that lead the working mans party but wouldn't be seen dead with a dock worker or a market porter. A typical socialist/progressive hypocrite she campaigns against elite private schools but uses them for her own children. She scoffs at marriage and the traditional family but is married and has a traditional family of her own.

Harman has been the MP for Camberwell and Peckham for over three decades and despite her undivided attention it remains one Great Britain's most notorious toilet constituencies. It's a sad fact that according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation, her constituency has the highest number of poor people than any constituency in the country.

Her constituency is such a crime ridden cesspit that she has to wear  a stab proof vest to walk her own streets even when accompanied by the police.

Three decades of Harman's rule is proof enough that socialist/progressive politicians will deliberately foster poverty and welfare dependency in order to guarantee votes and political power.

Her husband Jack Dromey is a Londoner who mysteriously got himself nominated to the Birmingham Erdington constituency from an all woman shortlist after he failed to become leader of the trade union Unite.

In addition to being a member of the party's National Executive Committee he was also the party's treasurer while still employed by the party's paymaster, Unite.

During his tenure as treasurer there were the cash for peerages and illegal campaign donation scandals which also involved his wife. Despite being the treasurer of party, Dromey claimed he wasn't informed about financial anomalies amounting to millions of pounds. He also broke Parliamentary rules by failing to declare his Unite salary but got away with all this unpunished. One law for them etc. springs to mind.

Jack Dromey's own sexuality has been brought into question when he was caught favouring explicit gay porn on his Twitter account. This involved photographs of the wedding tackle of black men in all their glory. What Harriet thinks about this was not known at time of writing.
(Dromey's gay porn story here)

The history of paedophilia and child pornography by 'progressives' inside the Labour Party is well documented and can be confirmed by following the shocking revelations on the labour25 website.

If there is any remaining doubt about the left and some Labour Party member's attitude to paedophilia then a quote from the late Sir Henry Hodge should dispel it once and for all.

Sir Henry is the late husband of Margaret Hodge the Labour MP for Barking. She was the Leader of Islington Council in London when a paedophile ring gained access to children's homes under her control and sexually abused scores of children. Sir Henry began his legal career as a left wing solicitor and unsurprisingly went on to become a high court judge.

"Homosexuals are now widely regarded as ordinary, healthy people - a minority but no more 'ill' than the minority who are left handed. There is no reason  why paedophilia should not win similar acceptance". 

This is a classic example of an agenda driven paedophile supporter using the legalising of homosexuality to promote his cause.

It is worth pointing out that when constituents cast their vote for a Labour Party candidate without regard for that candidates' personal agenda, they should be aware that this is not the working man's party of their fathers and grandfathers, that party has long gone. Their party has been hijacked by a cabal of wealthy elitists, part of who's agenda is to remove the moral compass that directed the founding fathers and replace it with a moral free evil that would legalise sex between adults and children.
(Harman and Dromey show no remorse. Story here)



Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Meryl Streep Plays The Iron Lady - David Cameron Plays Himself





Anyone who has watched Meryl Streep's depiction of the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in the film The Iron Lady, can not have failed to have been impressed by how uncannily well she played the part. In addition to an Oscar nomination, she also won Golden Globe and BAFTA awards for best actress.

Written by Abi Morgan and directed by Phyllidia Lloyd, the one criticism one reads about is that by choosing Margaret Thatcher's decent into dementia as the backdrop instead of her history changing presence on the world stage, they missed a golden opportunity to make a truly classic biographical movie.

As good as the film was, when everything is taken into consideration Meryl Streep's performance was just acting and The Iron Lady, despite being loosely based on historical events, was mostly fiction.

For those of us fortunate enough to be immune to spin and the black arts of media manipulation, David Cameron's speech to the Conservative Party conference last week was similar to Ms. Streep's movie performance but without the glamour. It was all just acting and the contents of his speech, despite being loosely based on history, was mostly fiction also.

The whole choreographed charade was directed by Cameron's expensively hired political strategist, Lynton Crosby and written by his team of spin doctors. The object of the exercise is to get Cameron re-elected with his personal political agenda intact with little or no regard for the truth or the aspirations of the British people.

Although it is most likely down to professional coaching, one has to give Cameron credit for his acting abilities. His performance may not have won him an Oscar but his ability to read a prepared script, using emphasis and cadence in the right places, and making good use of choreographed body language, he came across as mildly Prime Ministerial.

(One has to admit that compared with the previous weeks performance by Labour Party leader Ed Miliband, he was positively Churchillian. No great achievement under the circumstances but I digress)

Before looking at the speech itself it is worth keeping in mind some facts about David Cameron, his core beliefs and his political loyalties. This will help the reader to understand the subtlety of the deception being perpetrated on the British people and also to admire the dubious skills of Lynton Crosby and his team of media manipulators.

On seizing control of the Conservative Party, Cameron replaced their traditional British values and policies with the trendy 'progressive' agenda that has been adopted by the remote, wealthy metropolitan elite. They live under the mistaken belief that only their view is right and all other views, including those of the British people, should be ignored.

He has had little or no contact with the British people, he cannot identify with them, he has no empathy for them, he has little understanding of them nor does he care. Whatever he says, the truth is he is totally committed to the 'progressive' transformational agenda for Great Britain. This consists primarily of remaining a member of the European Union at all costs and with all that entails.

When reading the speech it is essential to keep Cameron's previous statements and actions at the forefront of ones mind or run the risk of being seduced by his faux passion and his convincing display. Also remember it is choreographed for its impact in the media for their use in the coming election campaign.
(Get the transcript here)

There was no better way for him to kick things off than by displaying his patriotism coupled with his supposed respect for our glorious military men and women. Bearing in mind he is eviscerating the same military in readiness for its absorption into the European Defence Force.  Associating himself with a ninety one year old veteran of the Normandy landings created the right image but was particularly cynical.

He goes on to invoke the horrors of ISIS in order to justify the bombing campaign in Iraq and to deal with ISIS abroad before they bring terror and murder to the streets of Great Britain.

Obviously Cameron suffers from the same selective amnesia that afflicted Ed Miliband during his speech last week where he forgot to mention the deficit his party left behind.

As a reminder, Muslim terror and murder has already been visited on the streets of Great Britain for some years.

The 7th July bombings, the 21st July attempted bombings, the beheadings of Drummer Lee Rigby and eighty two year old widow, Palmira Silva in London, may have conveniently slipped his mind but not the minds of those people who pay attention.

Continuing with his recently acquired tough guy act, Cameron warned the home grown ISIS terrorists that he will deal with them very firmly indeed. He threatened to prosecute and imprison them or take away their passports. If they are already in Syria or Iraq he will stop them coming back. He is well aware that he can't do this under international law but no matter, there's an election coming up next year and he needs to appear tough.

In a shameless attempt to win the Yorkshire vote he invoked the spirit of another tough guy. Continually at his side during his fight to keep the British people safe from the radical Muslim jihadis that are the creation of his beloved 'multi-cultural society' stood England's greatest living Yorkshireman, William Hague.

I am not sure that the title he has bestowed upon the man known locally as Little Willy Squit has secured the Yorkshire vote, but that's the risk one takes when you hire an Australian as your election guru.

As a sop to the disenchanted and disenfranchised people of England, Cameron has bestowed upon the retiring Hague the task of securing for the English people some democratic justice after the shameless Scottish referendum bribery scandal.

"So this is my vow: English votes for English laws - the Conservatives will deliver it!" How can any English person not vote for David Cameron after that cast iron guarantee?

So on it went for an hour or so, false promise after false promise eloquently delivered in a practiced contrived style that was worthy of an academy award. He doesn't believe a word of it but he delivered it anyway in an attempt to win back the voters that have suffered the consequences of his 'progressive' agenda and who have jumped ship to the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP).

The speech was riddled with the usual soundbites and slogans that have become tedious to all but those who live their lives in the spin doctor dominated, out-of-touch Westminster village.

"Families come first, they are the way you make a nation strong" - In truth Cameron promised to give families a tax break which didn't materialize.

"I care deeply about those who struggle to get by" - In truth Cameron has deliberately increased income taxes,  consumption taxes, fuel and booze duty, energy prices and the cost of living in general.

He then proceeds to let go a series of slogans that are patently in contradiction to what he says and what he does in practice:

"I believe in something for something not something for nothing" - In his speech Cameron claims that those who do the right thing and put in the effort are the people that should be rewarded. This is so patently false because living on welfare is still a lifestyle choice enjoyed by millions and welfare tourism by economic migrants is still effectively unchallenged.

"A Britain that everyone is proud to call home is a Britain where hard work is really rewarded".

"Not a free for all, but a chance for all".

And in a complete contradiction to the reality of David Cameron's Great Britain : "There's no reward without effort; no wealth without work; no success without sacrifice...."  Except of course if you are a politician, a crony, a quangocrat, a cheating recipient of welfare entitlements or an economic migrant.

What about this for cheek: "So let other politicians stand on stages like this and promise an easy life. Not me".......

With a chapter of caveats Cameron sums up this section with:

"Its pretty simple really: a good job , a nice home, more money at the end of the month, a decent education for your children, a safe and secure retirement.

A country where if you put in, you get out

A Britain everyone is proud to call home

And real long term plan to get there"

The delivery of his Crosby inspired speech goes from strength to strength:

"What I call: full employment in Britain. Just think what that would mean:

"Those who can work, able to work......standing on their own two feet, looking at their children and thinking - I am providing for you.

We can get there - but only if we stick to our plan".

After almost five years of austerity and increasing taxes, Cameron is promising to:

"..balance the books by 2018, and start putting aside money for the future".

With echoes of his cast iron guarantee of an EU referendum, Cameron sums up this section thus:

"So here is our commitment to the British people:

No income tax if you are on minimum wage.

A twelve and a half thousand pound personal allowance for millions of hard working people

And you only pay 40p tax when you earn fifty thousand pounds.

With the Conservatives, if you work hard and do the right thing we say you should keep more of your own money to spend as you choose".

These particular policies have been unashamedly stolen from the UKIP manifesto in the mistaken belief that stealing some of their clothes will hide who they really are. It truly is desperate stuff.

I will leave it to the reader to continue with the remaining pages of this soundbite and slogan riddled nonsense. It was designed not to tell the truth but to give the impression that David Cameron actually cares about the British people or their hopes and aspirations with a view to securing his re-election.

He has devoted his political life to implementing the EU driven agenda and in that he is single minded, it is his absolute priority.

He has never listened to the British people and he has no intention of listening to them any time soon. He strongly believes that if he delivers a media orientated speech loaded with false promises, soundbites and slogans he can hoodwink the British people into electing him as their Prime Minister.

They do so at their peril. If they fall for his play acting they will lose their country to the EU bureaucrats once and for all.
    



 

Friday, October 3, 2014

Bombing Hamas And ISIS - Only Israel Must Show Restraint




The bombing of ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria must have come as a welcome relief for the much maligned Israeli government and the war weary civilian population of Israel as they emerge blinking from their bomb shelters.

As air forces from Great Britain, America and some Arab states rain down death and destruction on the latest bogey men from the Muslim world, one cannot help but be struck by the breathtaking hypocrisy of those politicians and Hamas supporters in the west who condemned Israel for taking similar action a few months ago.

Condemning Israel is putting it mildly; the first air strike in Gaza signaled the beginning of the usual tirade of abuse and mindless Jew hatred that accompanies any action by the Israeli government to protect its citizens from the medieval savages who have sworn an oath to kill every Jew on the planet.

Western governments, the anti-semitic elements that infest the 'progressive' community together with global organisations such as the United Nations and the European Union, joined forces to urge restraint from the Israelis or claim that their self defence actions have been disproportionate.

Urging restraint is all very well when one is living terror free in Washington DC, New York, London or Brussels but not so much when one is running with your children for dear life into a bomb shelter in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

What makes the hypocrisy worse is the fact that none of the countries currently bombing Iraq and Syria have been targeted, let alone hit, by a single rocket from Hamas or ISIS. Apart from the horrific murders of two American journalists and a British aid worker there have been no casualties in either Great Britain or America.

It is worth reminding ourselves that Hamas used stolen humanitarian aid money, and other resources that were intended for the Palestinian people, to stockpile rockets and other war materials in preparation for an unprovoked attack on Israeli civilians. They also built a series of tunnels for purposes of kidnapping children from Israeli kindergartens and other terrorist activities.

Hamas terrorists fired over four thousand five hundred rockets into Israel with the specific intention of committing mass murder and carnage of innocent civilians including women and children. It would be interesting to know what constitutes restraint under such circumstances.

In an unprecedented exercise to limit collateral damage to civilians, the Israeli Defence Forces dropped leaflets, sent texts and used all possible communication methods, including social media, to warn civilians to leave intended targets.

The British and American governments tempered their comments about Israel's right to defend itself with continual calls for restraint and for a ceasefire. The fact that Hamas broke every single ceasefire did not stop the pressure on Israel to be lenient and compassionate toward the people bent on its destruction.

It would be stating the obvious that in spite of the fact that there has not been a single rocket fired at Great Britain or America, let alone four and half thousand, Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu will not be putting David Cameron or Barack Obama under constant pressure to show restraint in the same way that they and their acolytes pressured him.

Their justification for wreaking death and destruction in Iraq and Syria is that ISIS have threatened bloodshed and mayhem in Great Britain and America by operatives who are citizens of these respective countries. These proposed attacks on the British and American people is weak justification compared to the actual attacks on the Israeli people.

I cannot speak for the American people but their British cousins are entitled ask who is to blame for the thousands of radicalised Muslims who are either fighting the jihad in Iraq and Syria or who are acting as a fifth column ready to activate and kill British people in the name of Islam?

Driven by their fanatical determination to impose a so called 'multi-cultural society' on behalf of the global 'progressive' elite, it was the political class and their like minded cronies that allowed radical Islam to flourish in mono-cultural ghettos the length and breadth of the country.


Great Britain's Prime Minister David Cameron, by tolerating the existence of Muslim ghettos, promoting Islam as the 'religion of peace' and caving in to every Muslim demand is responsible for the creation of radical jihadis and must accept responsibility should they harm the British people.

Its ironic that David Cameron, and similarly Barack Obama, have created thousands of radicalised Muslim citizens of their respective countries and who continually laud their contribution to cultural richness and diversity then send hi-tech weapons of war half way around the planet to blow them all to smithereens.

In conclusion I will add that next time Hamas or Hezbollah or any other terrorist group attacks Israel, it would be incumbent upon those western leaders who have authorised and support the bombing of Muslim radicals in Iraq and Syria to refrain from pressuring the Israeli Prime Minister to show restraint while defending his people.

Footnote: I will add that I fully support any action, including bombing, that rids the world of the radical Islamists and jihadis that are causing death and destruction in all corners of the planet. Fight back, hunt them down, root them out and kill them all.

Update: This article was published before I got news of the barbaric murder of aid worker Alan Henning. My prayers are with his family and may he Rest In Peace.