Wednesday, April 29, 2015
The British political class who are putting themselves up for election, or re-election in most cases, are taking the advise of their PR professionals, spin doctors, advertising executives and image consultants, by avoiding any contact with the general public.
So important has image and presentation become it has replaced reality; in tandem with this the truth has been replaced by slogans and soundbites.
This election campaign has been reduced to a series of meticulously managed media appearances and choreographed photo opportunities where only friendly bought-and-paid-for journalists are invited.
To the frustration of the electorate, where a politician has been forced to appear for a televised interview they steadfastly refuse to give direct answers to legitimate questions but repeat ad nauseum spin doctor authored soundbites while at the same time attempting to turn the interview around to the evils of the opposition parties.
(This doesn't include the anti-establishment parties such as the United Kingdom Independence Party, who are pursued mercilessly for direct answers by the MSM because they are threatening the century long grip on power of the legacy parties)
Outside of these televised set pieces and the acting studios, the leading politicians are conspicuous by their absence. Contact with the great unwashed is avoided at all costs lest the casual off-the-cuff remark become a social media sensation undoing months of expensive image creation.
Going 'off message' and putting the days carefully orchestrated spin in jeopardy is a nightmare for the media managers and it is avoided by minimising contact between the politicians and the people.
Similarly, contact between politicians and the independent press is also avoided for fear of a non-establishment journalist asking an unscripted question for which no answered has been prepared in advance for their charge to parrot.
For those of us who understand the black arts of the media managers and the PR professionals - and as a result have acquired an immunity to their spin and deceit - we can sit back and share the hilarity of watching their charges make complete idiots of themselves in places they wouldn't be seen dead in outside of election time.
Watching grown adults, Prime Ministers and supposed international statesmen sitting in infant chairs around a tiny table doing finger painting with kindergarten toddlers is a sight to behold. Watching political leaders, including Ministers of State, trying to look natural drinking a pint of ale in pub, even though the public have been excluded for duration, is laughable.
One can see at a glance that these professional machine politicians look uncomfortable doing every day things such as eating an ice cream cone or ordering fish and chips or even taking a walk on the beach.
(For the information of PR men and image creators - ordinary people don't wear a suit and tie on the beach and mushy peas in a fish and chip shop is not a guacamole dip)
The British public now have to endure the toe-curling embarrassment of watching their Prime Minister and his senior Minister don turbans, while their wives wear pashminas and hijabs for the sole purpose of securing the ethnic vote.
How this grovelling to the ethnic community and its official acceptance of their separate identity helps with the governments declared policy of integration is yet to be explained.
Everything these charlatans say and do, including their body language and phony regional accents, has been scripted in advance by the PR machines to fool the public that the images they are seeing is reality.
The age of spin and media management in politics has led inexorably to the age of the virtual politician where a flawless performance by a schooled charlatan in front of the cameras is more important than the policies they are advocating or, more importantly, the truth.
I'm sure it won't be long before the real politicians will be kept locked away somewhere safe out of the public eye to be replaced by a hologram programmed to repeat only what's been programmed into its memory chip.
In the meantime they can keep themselves busy by continuing to act as a rubber stamp for the real government operating out of the EU headquarters in Brussels and making sure they keep their expense claims away from the prying eyes of their long suffering constituents.
Monday, April 27, 2015
Long before the current election campaign in Great Britain moved into top gear, the word 'racist' was being thrown at anyone who questioned the open border mass immigration policy of the old establishment parties. It is a calculated tactic and its ad hominem nature is used not only to close down legitimate debate but also as a smear designed to intimidate and defame.
To the consternation of the establishment party zealots, its over use is having the opposite effect of that intended, resulting in increased support for the victims of this malicious smear.
Even traditional supporters of the old establishment Labour, Conservative and the ridiculously named Liberal Democrat parties, who prefer a common sense, managed system of immigration, as opposed to the current chaos of open border mass immigration, are being smeared as 'racist' and switching support to the United Kingdom Independence Party, universally referred to as Ukip, as a result.
For obvious reasons the leaders and spin machines of these parties are unable to disrupt the Ukip campaign directly therefore they hire foot soldiers operating under various titles such 'Unite Against Fascism', Hope Not Hate', Stand Up To Ukip etc. to do their dirty work.
This includes disrupting meetings, vandalising Ukip offices, defacing Ukip advertising hoardings and threatening violence against candidates and their families. With the demise of the word 'racist" as a generic smear, these foot soldiers have substituted the words "Nazi' and 'fascist' to defame their opponents.
Labelling honest, decent political campaigners as 'Nazi scum' is as high a level of debate that these demonstrators can manage and vandalising offices with the same smear is about as civilised as they can get.
These great unwashed warriors of the left obviously didn't do history at school and their understanding of political philosophy is non existant. It's lost on them that shutting down debate and intimidating opponents was a Nazi tactic used to the full by Hitler and the rest of his murderous gang.
Defacing literature and vandalising opposing political offices is more akin to nazi book burning and Chrystal Nacht than reasoned political debate. It's lost on these people that using intolerance to fight against supposed intolerance is contradictory in the extreme.
They now throw around the word 'Nazi' like they used to throw around the word 'racist'. One would think that the volunteers distributing Ukip campaign literature on the doorstep were under cover SS agents surrupticiously organising a beer hall putsch instead of promoting their candidate in a democratic election.
Nuremburg style rallies can't be far off in the future where Mr. and Mrs. Bloggs from the suburbs can finally come out of the closet and show off their goose stepping prowess in front of a huge baying crowd at a torchlight parade.
Using the words 'Nazi scum' and 'fascist' to describe ordinary decent, British citizens just because they are of a different political persuasion is ridiculous and more so since the policies they advocate are benign, sensible and increasingly popular among ordinary British citizens.
This form of extreme political campaigning is an embarrassment to the nation and it tarnishes Great Britain's image as a home of democracy and tolerance.
One can assume that the refusal of the the three legacy party leaders, David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband to condemn, let alone call a halt to these tactics, is sign that they approve; after all they have everything to lose should Ukip make the breakthrough that they promise.
It has been noted by us non-aligned commentators that the old political establishment, including the bought-and-paid-for media and the BBC, are going to extraordinary lengths to discredit and disrupt a political party that they claim is only polling from ten to fifteen percent at most. Why would they do this if they are not afraid of losing their century long grip on power?
One can almost smell the fear.
Monday, April 20, 2015
It seems strange that political activists who are passionate about their cause travel half way around the world to impose their agenda on the British people before putting their own house in order first.
My guess is that its isolated position in the southern hemisphere has kept Australia far enough away from the malign influence of western 'progressivism' that it has managed to hang on, at least in part, to its Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values.
Great Britain's Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values have been gradually eroded away after years of invasive 'progressivism' to the point where every degenerate from Pakistan to Perth feels comfortable enough to push their sexual agenda and indulge in once taboo sexual practices without shame.
'Progressivism' spreads like weeds in a flower bed; if they aren't regularly dug up by the roots and destroyed they will flourish and eventually take over, choking off any flowers that try to bloom.
Great Britain is now an old flower bed where only weeds flourish, where every native flower is strangled from seed and allowed to wither and die.
It's during this current election campaign that Green Party leader, Australian Natalie Bennett, has become a public figure and the extent of her lunacy become more widely known.
Watching her public performances and reading about the policies she wants the British people to adopt one cannot help but form the opinion that this lady is not just slightly unhinged but totally bat shit crazy.
(See her famous car crash BBC interview here)
Watching her public performances holds a morbid fascination akin to that of nineteenth century Londoners who considered watching the ravings of lunatics incarcerated in Bedlam as entertainment.
With hindsight, the recent revelations that her partner, Jim Jepps, holds depraved sexual fantasies should come as no surprise, and it is not a mystery why this lady traveled half way around the world to pursue her delusions on a tiny windswept island in the North Atlantic.
Likewise her fellow antipodean, Patricia Hewitt; she made the long voyage to Great Britain to pursue her deviant sexual agenda which included child sex. She gave her support to the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) who campaigned for incest to be decriminalised and the age of consent for sex between adults and children lowered to children as young as ten.
After having been found out she now claims her advocacy for PIE was in error and naive; this stinks of political expediency. Holding the view that "there is no proof that sex between adults and children causes no harm" suggests conviction not error or naivety, as does the claim that 'innocent adults are seduced by children'.
Hewitt took over the safe Labour held constituency of serial child abuser, Greville Janner, who remains in the House of Lords to this day. She made it to the upper echelons of the Labour Party, including Secretary of State for Health. Her career went rapidly downhill when it was revealed she was an expenses cheat and embroiled in corruption via a cash-for-access scheme. This earned her a five year ban from the House of Commons to go along with her ill gotten gains.
No comment about degenerates travelling half way around the world in order to degrade the moral values of Great Britain would be complete without a mention of Australian draft dodger and militant homosexual Peter Tatchell.
Twice selected as a Labour Party candidate for Parliament and twice rejected by the electorate, Tatchell joined his fellow Aussie in the Green Party. He also has campaigned for lowering the age of consent for sex between adults and children.
It is highly likely that these degenerates and their filth would be given short shrift in their native Australia but knew they would be welcome in 'progressive' Great Britain.
Since the 'progressive' movement succeeded in submerging Great Britain's moral compass into a cesspit of vileness and corruption it has become the country of choice for perverts, paedophiles and organised prostitution gangs.
Muslim paedophile gangs, mainly Pakistani, have been allowed to groom, gang rape and then traffic under age white girls with impunity. Paedophiles led by celebrity sub human, Jimmy Savile, abused children on an industrial scale at the BBC and in hospitals across the country with the full knowledge of the authorities.
Eastern European gangs run organised prostitution rackets in Great Britain including child prostitution and people trafficking, also with impunity.
Even the Westminster Parliament is embroiled in a paedophile scandal that is being desperately covered up by the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat establishment to protect their own.
It would be foolish to pretend that Great Britain didn't have minor problems with immorality and sexual promiscuity before the descent into degeneracy but the scale of it today would have been unimaginable just a few decades ago.
The rise of 'progressivism' resulted in the fall of morality and the degradation of standards that had evolved over centuries. Now Great Britain is a magnet for the likes of Bennett, Hewitt, Tatchell, Muslim paedophile gangs and East European prostitute rackets who are prepared to traverse the planet not only to impose their agenda on others but to live out their fantasies in real life.
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Despite its disastrous effect on every aspect of peoples lives, anyone who merely questions the British government's policy on immigration is immediately smeared with labels such as racist, bigot or xenophobe - with Fascist and Nazi sometimes thrown in for good measure.
However despicable, this is a tactic used by the government and its supporters in their effort to impose a so called 'multi-cultural society' on the British people at the behest of the UN/EU.
With the anti-immigrant rioting by black people in South Africa getting ever more bloody this tactic has become somewhat hypocritical, not that this will bother a shameless political class. More importantly their failure to condemn the rioters using the same labeling blows their self adopted moral superiority clean out of the water.
Nobody with a grasp of world events over the past half century will be surprised that the predictions of all the non-'progressive' political commentators on the planet have been proved right and the self appointed guardians of morality proved wrong.
When the Marxist orientated political activists and their army of bureaucrats at the United Nations appointed themselves the de facto world government, the well being of the global population would always take second place to their political ideology.
This was no more apparent than in Africa. The world government in New York dictated that white governments were to be replaced by black governments despite the warnings that this would spell disaster for the people.
They wouldn't countenance a program of educating, and subsequently integrating, suitable people into government over a long period of time, decolonisation had to be achieved at the earliest in order to satisfy their political bigotry.
The UN remained unmoved when the predicted disasters - which included famine, civil wars and other human catastrophes - blighted millions of people when the British and other European colonists were ordered to give up their African possessions.
Their appointment of a psychopathic Marxist dictator, Robert Mugabe, in neighbouring Zimbabwe who, as predicted, proceeded to slaughter tens of thousands of his own people then turn the bread basket of Africa into a famine zone, didn't prevent them from repeating the exercise in South Africa.
(It's worth reminding ourselves that they are unable to acknowledge their failure in Zimbabwe and as a consequence Butcher Bob Mugabe is still there today some twenty eight years after starting his bloody reign of terror, looting and murdering with little or no sanction from the UN)
The one thing the UN ideologues did learn was to accompany their diktats to hand over power with a massive propaganda campaign based on a moral basis for their demands while painting a Utopian picture of a future 'multi-cultural society'.
Despite all the gory images coming out of South Africa, they are unable to accept the utter failure of their multi-cultural project. They persist in projecting South Africa as the Rainbow Nation where racial discrimination is a thing of the past and all the people, regardless of race, religion or skin colour, live side by side in perfect harmony each respecting the other.
It's worth noting also that all the morally superior activists, including politicians, sports people and publicity hungry celebrities who were most vociferous in their condemnation of white South Africans have gone silent as their non white client group goes on a blood soaked rampage based on immigration.
These same activists who continue to smear ordinary decent people in Great Britain as racists, Fascists and Nazis for having the temerity to peacefully question mass immigration are duty bound to voice a similar opinion on their black brothers and sisters in South Africa who killing over the same issue.
What is happening in South Africa is a clear demonstration that:
a) there is no such thing as a 'multi-cultural society", it is the figment of the imagination of political ideologues.
b) imposing 'multi-culturalism' on a reluctant people without their consent will end in violence and bloodshed.
c) politicians can not legislate for people to love each other and get along.
d) the UN is no longer fit for purpose and should be replaced with a non-political organisation dedicated to achieving peace through good governance and protecting individual liberty.
Friday, April 17, 2015
News that the meeting between Hillary Clinton and ordinary Iowans for a chat over coffee was a phony set-up should come as no surprise to the politically astute. The expensively hired teams of PR men, media managers, marketing executives and image consultants that now run election campaigns have done their homework and learned from the previous mistakes of others.
As control over political candidates by these professional image creators becomes absolute, contact with real people in real situations cease.
Interaction between political candidates and the electorate is now seen as hazardous for the simple reason that the truth is want to slip out and the real person behind the manufactured image is exposed.
This can undo months, even years, of carefully constructed image creation putting an election campaign in jeopardy as a result.
What the public see in the media are the fake smiles and the well rehearsed ability to read a prepared speech, but by all accounts - including those of some close associates, former employees and the Secret Service - the real Hillary Clinton is a nasty piece of work, combining a lack of manners with a volatile temper and an all consuming sense of entitlement.
As candidate Obama found to his cost when he revealed his socialist wealth redistribution agenda to Joe the Plumber, any deviation from the prepared script will be mercilessly exploited by political opponents to the detriment of the campaign.
Fortunately for Obama, he was able to recover and go on to win the Presidency due to the damage limitation skills of his PR team combined with a bought-and-paid-for media and a gullible, star struck electorate.
In Hillary's case, allowing contact between this perfectly schooled machine politician and ordinary human beings could make for disastrous optics and consequently it is avoided at all costs.
Tony Blair was a consummate performer in front of the media and is credited with bringing the dark arts of spin into the heart of British political life. It's a sad fact that once one political party indulges in this kind of phony campaigning, all others must follow suit with slick media campaigns of their own or appear to be amateur and out of touch.
Like Barack Obama, Tony Blair and David Cameron are the creations of PR men as are the other legacy party leaders in Great Britain's forthcoming election. They were plucked from remote obscurity on account of their photogenicy and schooled over many years to perform in public.
One can see their discomfort when they are required to step into the real world and perform stunts in order to falsely identify with ordinary people. Even giving alms to a beggar is beyond some of them.
Identifying and having empathy with ordinary human beings is problematic for remote elitists who have had little or no contact outside of their own like minded community. Consequently, political candidates need to create a legend of humble beginnings - a log cabin story as they call it in the USA - in order to form a some kind of bond with the electorate.
As directed her PR team, Hillary Clinton claims she was broke when she left the White House, also that she is primarily a grandmother with her own grandparents being poor immigrants into the USA..
It's all bull of course and almost as outrageous as her fellow Democrat, Elizabeth Warren claiming native American ancestry on account her mother noting high cheekbones on a picture of Papaw; who it is assumed is her grandfather.
Any PR team worth their salt can spot the potential for a disastrous photo op and protect their charge accordingly. It must be said that Prime Minister Gordon Brown's team were right on the money when they prevented him from being photographed sitting down as he sold the British people down the river by signing the Lisbon Treaty.
They had him sneak over to Brussels then quickly sign the treacherous document standing up before rapidly departing the scene with the minimum of public ceremony.
It's a sad fact that the unreal images manufactured by these teams of PR professionals are taken in by an undiscerning public who don't have the skills to see through the bull and demand honesty. The political class are aided and abetted by a compliant media who propagate these images because they themselves are part of the machine.
This dishonesty will only end and the truth prevail when the public finally acquire the skills to spot the fake images and lies, then develop a healthy cynicism toward a corrupt political class that consider deceit as an acceptable part of the democratic process.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
It was only eight months ago that British Prime Minister, David Cameron, was being praised to the heavens for his tough response to the beheading of American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff by a British documented sub human known as Jihadi John.
Those of us who know Cameron's modus operandi warned at the time that this public performance was choreographed by his well oiled spin machine for PR purposes and that nothing would come of any action he proposed.
To remind ourselves of some of the tough measures Cameron promised:
A common sense and popular measure to strip British documented Muslims who are fighting jihad in foreign countries of their passports and citizenship to prevent their return.
Clamp down on preachers of hate.
Teach British values in schools etc.etc.
At time of writing, no jihadi has had the their passport removed or citizenship revoked as the return of Waheed Ahmed demonstrates; on the contrary they are returning from the killing fields with impunity.
Preachers of hate continue to shout their litany of hate and death unhindered, however, new rules put in place by Cameron's government will treat criticism of Muslims as a hate crime +1.
True to their Marxist principles, teachers' union leaders have instructed their members to ignore the rules on promoting British values in schools on the grounds that they may be misinterpreted by a 'future right wing government'.
The case of Waheed Ahmed raises several important issues that will be studiously ignored by Cameron and the political class as they seek to protect their Muslim clients along with their 'multi-cultural' agenda.
As is the case with every other British documented Muslim who has joined ISIS to become a jihadi bride or to commit murder and mayhem, it is being claimed that nobody, including his politician father, Shakil Ahmed, had the slightest inkling that Waheed Ahmed was an ISIS supporting radical.
The British people are being led to believe that he was always a good kid who was popular at school and enjoyed the same things that every other British kid enjoyed.
According to Ahmed's father he was a 'good Muslim' who was attending Manchester University with a bright future in front of him. Obviously not a bright enough to compare with a future of beheading, rape and gratuitous violence on behalf of Allah.
David Cameron and the parents of the Dewsbury jihadis would have us believe that they were just "ordinary Yorkshire lads" who were self radicalised or led astray. They fail to mention that the Savile Town area of Dewsbury from whence they came is 98.7% Asian and has been described as the most segregated area of Britain.
The Deobandi school of Islam, which opposes western culture, dominates this particular ghetto.
One of the Dewsbury jihadis is the grandson of so called 'Islamic scholar' Yakub Munshi who created Dewsbury's sharia court.
Incidentally, in my experience "ordinary Yorkshire lads" enjoy their cricket, their football and their beer; they are also not immune to a bacon sandwich or a traditional roast pork Sunday dinner.
The press and the politicians churn out this butter-wouldn't-melt nonsense every time a jihadi fighter goes on line to proclaim his or her love of Islam or their intention to kill for their Caliphate. They are content to blame the Internet for radicalisation as opposed to the thousands of mosques, madarassas and preachers of hate; not to mention the brainwashing from birth by parents and grandparents such as Grampa Munshi.
It must also be noted that if nobody, including close family and friends, had an inkling that these people were radical Muslims who support a medieval death cult such as ISIS, how many other members of the 2.7 million British documented Muslim community hold similar views?
A fifth column comprising hundreds of thousands of radical Muslims is not beyond the realms of possibility.
The British people are aghast that Cameron and his administration are not only preventing jihadi's from leaving but are bringing them back into the country when they are apprehended en route.
His commitment to the imposition of a so called 'multi-cultural society', as demanded by the international 'progressive' elite based at the UN/EU, prevents Cameron from taking effective action in the fight against radical Islam in Great Britain.
His master plan for young jihadis is confined to de-radicalisation. If the human rights judiciary approve, this will consist of cultural awareness training, internal exile and a requirement to report to the police periodically.
This inadequate program is akin to saying that Waheed Ahmed is not a prospective killer he's just a very naughty boy. A good finger wagging and a sit on the naughty step and he'll be free to pick up where he left off.
In reality, the thousands of segregated Muslim ghettos such as Savile Town, Dewsbury where children are radicalised from birth, will continue to flourish and grow without let or hindrance from David Cameron or the political elite. Mosque and madrassa building will continue apace and preachers of hate will continue to spout their filth unhindered.
The British people face a clear and present danger from home grown radicalised Muslims and the government is most definitely not on their side.
Monday, April 13, 2015
There's more bullsh*t dumped on the campaign trail than there was on the Chisolm Trail during the cattle herding days of yesteryear. As the public get tired of the usual diet of false promises, mudslinging and choreographed public appearances, the candidates get ever more desperate for a gimmick that will differentiate them from their opposition.
With the British general election drawing ever closer, the mandatory photo opportunities with babies, schoolkids and ethnic minorities are getting tedious in the extreme. Watching the three establishment party leaders David Cameron, Nick Clegg and David Miliband pretending to enjoy a pint of ale in a pub, visiting workers on the factory floor or visiting an old peoples home is laughable.
Their awkwardness is obvious as they attempt to switch from a remote, machine politician to an ordinary human being even for the short time it takes for a photo op.
The biggest laugh can be had watching these so called serious politicians make complete fools of themselves by donning turbans in order to win the ethnic vote.
One would have thought that in the interests of cultural sensitivity and respect, self confessed atheists such as Miliband and Clegg would not despoil the sanctity of any house of worship by entering inside, but when there's votes to be had nothing is sacred.
The fact is that the three establishment parties have hired professional spin doctors and media managers to organise and run their respective campaigns, they use the same formula with the MSM which results in a common mediocrity.
With three identical politicians from identical exclusive backgrounds who look the same, sound the same and champion the same 'progressive' policies, it's a difficult task for the spin doctors to find that one gimmick that will set their man apart from the others.
It would appear that Ed Miliband's expensively hired American spin merchant, David Axelrod, thinks he has found the answer.
Despite being a Marxist and an avowed atheist, Red Ed is being touted as Great Britain's first Jewish Prime Minister. At first glance it would appear to be a spin doctor's gift from heaven but on reflection it exposes some embarrassing realities that perhaps would have been better kept out of the public eye.
As every pre- comprehensive school history student knows, Benjamin Disraeli was Great Britain's first Jewish Prime Minister as well as one of its most renown.
It is argued that he is disqualified because he converted to Anglicanism but history confirms that this was the result of political expediency. Had he not converted he would have been illegible for Parliament because Jewish Members were forbidden at the time. Disraeli was a proud Jew and used the fact in political debate.
In one noted exchange he is quoted as saying: "Yes, I am a Jew, and when the ancestors of the right honourable gentleman were brutal savages on an unknown island, mine were priests in the Temple of Solomon"
David Axelrod is a foreigner therefore his ignorance of British history can be excused but Ed Miliband has no such excuse.....or has he?
The truth is that Red Ed is a first generation immigrant with no roots in Great Britain. His father, Adolph, was a Marxist fanatic from Belgium who held a special hatred for Great Britain along with its institutions and its people.
He despised the Monarchy, Parliament, the Church of England and most of all the patriotism of the British people. He plotted all his life to bring it down and install a Soviet style communist system in its place.
It should be obvious even to the most detached observer that Ed Miliband is a chip off the old block who's loyalty is to Marxism, not to Great Britain or Judaism. He is committed to a borderless, centrally controlled federal European Union ruled by appointed bureaucrats in Brussels as opposed to democratically elected representatives in Westminster.
It is not beyond the realms of possibility that Axelrod is using Ed's tenuous link to Judaism as an attempt to align him with the tough, uncompromising Prime Minister of Israel.
Unfortunately for Axelrod, when Ed was studying Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto, Benyamin Netanyahu was hunting down and killing the Palestinian terrorists to which Ed's Labour Party gives succour.
In reality, one cannot be a Jew and not believe in God just as one cannot be a Muslim and not believe in Allah. Much to the consternation of David Axelrod, it turns out that Ed Miliband is as Jewish as the Pope so it's back to the drawing board in search of another gimmick.
Ed Miliband is short of noteworthy accomplishments to champion so to assist Axelrod in his search he might consider touting Red Ed as the fastest Rubik Cube solving Prime Minister.
The first openly Marxist Prime Minister
The first atheist Prime Minister
The first British Prime Minister unable to handle a cup of tea
Most noteworthy is the fact that Ed Miliband, at the behest of the trade unions barons, stabbed his brother David in the back to seize the leadership of the Labour Party from under his nose, therefore Ed could be touted as the first fratricidal Prime Minister.
Due to millions of undiscerning, low information voters, the odds are good that on May 8th, as useless and incompetent as he is, Ed Miliband will indeed be Great Britain's Prime Minister and may the Lord have mercy on us all.
Friday, April 10, 2015
Listening to the outpouring of bile by the African-American celebrity community one would be forgiven for thinking that the USA is populated by a pitiless elite of white despots who's only pleasure in life is keeping their saintly black victims in a permanent state of servitude based purely on skin colour.
Listening to the leaders and icons of the African-American community one would also be forgiven for thinking that nobody with a non-white skin has ever risen above the level peasant let alone possess more than two cents to rub together.
The evil purveyors of these falsehoods are not short of a buck or two themselves and have a vested interest in prolonging the myth of victimhood that is holding back the black communities and causing such appalling misery, violence and death.
They ignore the fact that African-Americans have held the highest offices in the land including Secretary of State, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Attorney General, Supreme Court Justice, State Governors, Congressmen of both House and Senate, not to mention President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.
African-Americans comprise some of the richest people in the USA and are represented in all walks of life including Wall Street, Industry, Sport, Media, and Entertainment.
One among this number is Kanye West who is not only a highly successful, wealthy African-American he is also an icon of the black community but who continually puts down the country that facilitated his success.
For those who enjoy Kanye West's type of entertainment he is obviously a very talented individual and he must be an astute businessman to hold on to his accumulated wealth. It must be understood however that his middle class upbringing and subsequent wealthy lifestyle prohibits him from claiming the victim status that is promoted by the black vested interests that seek to prolong it.
No sensible person can deny that racism exists and that includes the black on white racism of vile organisations such as the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam who's mission is to undo the advances in civil rights and return America to the era of segregation.
If the anti-American rhetoric of the race baiters and self loathers like Kanye West were to be believed then America is rife with black oppression where opportunity is denied to black people who are confined to ghettos of poverty and violent crime.
Apparently racism is so bad in America that Kanye West has threatened to uproot his family and leave for a more accommodating environment. Where this Utopia is remains a mystery as is his wife's view on her re-location. There can't be many places on the planet where a lady with little acknowledged talent can make millions simply by being an old acquaintance of hotel heiress Paris Hilton.
If Kanye West is to be believed then no African migrant in his right mind would risk leaving their homeland to embark on a life threatening journey to the New World only to end up as a gang banger, high on drugs in a black ghetto with his pants hanging down below his a*se while being oppressed by the evil white man.
The reality is somewhat different to the false impression given by Kanye West and the race baiters who have, after all, got a living to make.
Despite the attempts to downgrade America by the Obama administration, along with every self loathing socialist, multi-millionaire celebrity and hand wringing, bleeding heart liberal - in other words those that go around calling themselves 'progressives' - it remains the land of opportunity where the American dream still lives for those who ignore the likes of Kanye West and his affluent ilk and have the determination to succeed.
Let me introduce Harold Ekeh, an immigrant from Nigeria who overcame adversity, worked hard like his parents and has been accepted by all eight Ivy League schools.
Victor Agbafi the son of Nigerian immigrants has also been accepted by Ivy League schools, as have Munira Khalif of Somalian parentage, Kwasi Enin of Ghana parentage and Stefan Stoykov of Bulgarian parentage. All are first generation immigrants who ignored the likes of Kanye West, took advantage of the opportunity afforded to them and achieved the American dream.
I would suggest that those who indulge in the ghetto gangsta culture choose new leaders and stop listening to the race hate rhetoric of the race hustlers and losers and listen instead to winners like Harold, Victor, Munira, Kwasi and Stefan.
I would also suggest that Kanye West is an ingrate and hypocrite of the very highest order who doesn't deserve the opportunity he has been afforded by the United States of America. Perhaps he should re-locate his family to Nigeria, Somalia or Ghana where he would be among his own and where racism, in theory, doesn't exist.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
With spin and obfuscation being the normal medium of communication during election time, anyone who listens to political discourse with any regularity will be hard pressed to understand what exactly the politicians have in store for we the people. Pre-election promises evaporate into thin air as soon as the votes are counted while the politicians carry on where they left off before the campaign.
For the short term, the usual diet of false promises and bribery can be taken for granted but it takes more detailed observation to understand their intentions for the longer term. In fact the political class go to extraordinary lengths to keep their true intentions away from the people for fear of an electoral backlash.
History has taught us to our cost that long term agendas can take a decade or more to fully implement and in the case of the federal European State, several generations. (In the case of the USA, fundamental transformation from free enterprise prosperity to third world socialist mediocrity is into its seventh year)
It is unlikely that Great Britain would be in the appalling state it's in today if during his election campaign candidate Tony Blair had declared his intention to alter the demographic and cultural balance of the country using open border mass immigration; nor did he declare his intention to move the economy away from individual prosperity and self reliance to one of taxpayer funded government dependency using extended welfare entitlements.
He wouldn't have stood a cat in hell's chance had he been honest with the people and declared his intention to increase taxes and impose a further one hundred new taxes to finance his dependent client groups and new voter base.
One has to look closely and analyse every word and action to get at the truth of what their long term agenda is and it's sad to say that the majority of prospective voters don't have the patience for such scrutiny. Instead they rely on the mainstream media for guidance which, as we know, is controlled by the political establishment and the party spin machines.
Governments of all colours, along with the establishment, vehemently deny that they are using Islam and its adherents as the weapon of choice to impose a so called 'multi-cultural society', however their words and actions demonstrate their absolute determination to see this transformation through to its conclusion.
Islam and its adherents are above reproach and it is clear that there is no depth to which the political class will not plummet in order to protect their cultural and religious cannon fodder and by extension, their 'multi-cultural' agenda.
In 1975, twenty two year old police officer Stephen Tibble, was fatally shot while apprehending an Irish terrorist on a London street. A memorial was unveiled at the location in honour of his sacrifice.
In 1984, twenty six year old police officer Yvonne Fletcher was fatally shot while policing a demonstration by anti-Gaddafi's dissidents outside the Libyan Embassy in London. A memorial was unveiled at the location in honour of her sacrifice.
In 1993, nineteen year old black teenager Stephen Lawrence was murdered on a London street in a racist attack. Due to the racial element this particular murder was seized upon by the political class to accuse the police, and by inference British society as whole, as institutionally racist. This was also seized upon by the self loathing community who turned the tragic death of a teenager into a celebrity cause. Stephen got two memorials and his mother was made a Peer Of The Realm entitled to sit in the House of Lords.
Memorials were unveiled for murdered politician Airey Neave and those killed in the assassination attempt on Margaret Thatcher in Brighton 1984. Both crimes were committed by Irish terrorists.
In 2013, twenty five year old British soldier Lee Rigby was brutally murdered by Muslim terrorists on a London street in broad daylight. Despite public demand no memorial will be unveiled in honour of his sacrifice. Despite attempts by the political class to bury this decision with weasel words and excuses, it turns out that the real reason is for fear of offending Muslims.
This appalling decision must be coupled with the recent announcement that actions against the Muslim population in Great Britain will be treated as a hate crime + 1, an extra bad hate crime. This can be put down to shameless trolling for the Muslim vote, but the continual grovelling appeasement of the Muslim population, which includes hate preachers, ISIS supporters and prospective jihadis, will not be found in any election campaign manifesto. Any questions about it will be greeted with the usual smears including the standard insults of racist, bigot and Islamophobe.
The political class and the establishment will not be enlightening the people during this election campaign as to what their long term agenda for the country is. Missing from any manifesto or election material will be anything relating to their true agenda of imposed multi-culturalism, cultural and religious relativity or taxpayer funded government dependency for their imported welfare colonists.
There is no craven act they will not commit nor any depth to which they will not sink in order to impose their political agenda and that includes insulting the memory of a hero murdered on the streets of the capital city of a once great country.
Friday, April 3, 2015
In 2008 when candidate Obama first informed the American people that he was "five days away from fundamentally transforming America" the British people had already suffered a decade of fundamental transformation under their own photogenic, media created leader Tony Blair.
Unlike the British people who had no idea of what was coming, the American people were warned in advance that their prospective leader had seriously malign intentions for their country. What on earth did the people think he meant by fundamental transformation?
The American people also had the bitter experience of their trans-Atlantic cousins to draw on as a living, breathing example of what fundamental transformation looks like in practice.
Had they looked at their cousins over the pond they would have seen a reasonably prosperous country, where the majority went about their lives without let or hindrance, transformed into a bankrupt, government dominated bureaucracy bloated by agenda driven political operatives and their army of useful idiots looking for kudos and a taxpayer funded free lunch.
In addition to this they would have witnessed the free enterprise economy and a culture of individual liberty replaced by expanded welfare entitlements and increased dependency. This horror was accompanied by the creeping interference of petty government bureaucrats into the minutiae of peoples lives.
Blair's government continued the policy of previous governments by transferring swathes of sovereignty from the elected representatives in the Westminster Parliament to the unelected, bureaucrats of the European Union in Brussels.
The British people are no longer self governing, they no longer have control over their borders and for all intents and purposes Great Britain no longer exists as one of the worlds independent nations. It's integration into the European Union federal state means it has been effectively dissolved in all but name.
Most sadly, Americans looking across the Atlantic would have witnessed British culture, the British way of life and its Judeo-Christian heritage that had evolved over two millenia, systematically erased with its symbols of nationhood banned. Supposedly this was for fear of offending imported alien cultures, but in reality it was an important part of the cultural replacement agenda.
The Great Britain of today no longer resembles the country of two decades ago; it is more akin to a third world developing nation with crumbling infrastructure and where public services such housing, education, transport and health care provision are unable to cope with the expansion of the imported dependent population.
Prior to their election to office, Tony Blair and his party professed their love of country, people and way of life; they claim they only want to do whats best for the people. One can only say that wrecking the country, fundamentally transforming it into a third world equivalent then organising it's dissolution is an odd way of displaying affection.
There was uproar in the media recently when former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, stated that he didn't believe President Obama loved America; looking at the state of America today, was Giuliani wrong?
The United States of America became the greatest nation earth because of its free enterprise system, its culture of individual liberty and its constitutionally limited government. American exceptionalism has created more prosperity for more people than any other country in history. It has sacrificed its sons and daughters so others may enjoy the same freedom and prosperity if they so desire.
It is the shining city on a hill that is the hope and aspiration for millions who are denied freedom and prosperity, so why in God's name would anyone want it fundamentally transformed and more importantly, into what?
Thursday, April 2, 2015
The vast majority of normal British citizens - by normal I mean real people not the self loathers who go around calling themselves 'progressives' - are aghast that the politicians are preventing these jihadis from leaving in the first place but doubly so by the insanity of repatriating them if they are caught after leaving.
The very fact that they have left Great Britain to join what is now accepted to be one of the most barbaric organisations in history in order to mutilate, behead and otherwise murder for their religion, demonstrates the unbridled hatred they have for their British 'fellow countrymen' and their way of life.
The whole issue of mass third world immigration, along with the volunteers leaving to join ISIS, raises a multitude of questions and there's no better opportunity than an election campaign for the politicians to come clean for once and furnish the answers.
(They won't of course, because the various election campaigns are being run by slick PR men with their teams of advertising executives and image consultants. They will avoid the truth along with anything else contentious in order to create the false impression that their charges have the interests of the people in mind....but I digress again)
The British people deserve to know the answers to the following legitimate questions:
Why did the politicians open the borders to incompatible cultures from the third world who harbour a visceral hatred for the host country, its people and their way of life?
What contribution to the economy and life of Great Britain, or elsewhere, do these people make?
If they want to leave Great Britain to join ISIS and engage in their fight for a Caliphate why prevent them from doing so?
Once they have left to begin their career in murder and mayhem why apprehend and subsequently repatriate them to the country and the people they hate so much?
If these returnees go on to kill, maim or otherwise cause harm to any member of the British public, will relevant members of the political class be held responsible and punished accordingly?
Knowing that these jihadis hate, and would willingly kill their hosts, why are the borders still open to them and their fellow countrymen?
The biggest question of all is why do the political class continue to demonise, smear, threaten and insult decent British people by labeling them as racists and bigots for having the temerity to ask these questions in the first place?
Students of history will recall that ISIS jihadis are not the first group of motivated British citizens to travel abroad in order to fight for their beliefs.
It is reported that anywhere between five hundred and seven hundred British Muslims have traveled to the middle east to join ISIS in their fight for a Caliphate. This is small by comparison to the twenty three hundred British and Commonwealth citizens who traveled to Spain to join the Stalin supported International Brigade in their fight for a Communist state.
Volunteers for the International Brigade included many famous names but none more so than world famous author and self confessed socialist George Orwell. (The tall chap in the photograph)
It must be pointed out that like ISIS, the International Brigade fighters were prepared to kill in pursuit of their cause, Stalinist communism, which was in reality as bloodsoaked as the Caliphate proposes to be.
An attempt was made to use the Foreign Enlistment Act to prevent volunteers leaving for Spain but it was deemed to be ineffective and hence they left virtually unhindered. There was no attempt to stop them leaving, apprehend them en route or confiscate their passports. They were treated as heroes as opposed to terrorists and some were greeted on their return at Victoria Railway station by none other than future Prime Minister Clement Attlee.
Despite Stalinist communism being a violent revolutionary threat to Great Britain and its way of life, the British International Brigade volunteers were not required to attend any cultural awareness courses on their return or be constantly monitored by the police, on the contrary there are numerous monuments erected in their honour.
The reason for pointing this out is that if British Muslim jihadis travelling abroad to fight for their beliefs are treated any differently to the International Brigade communists doing the same for theirs, then the government are admitting that there are two classes of British citizen based on religion, culture or political beliefs.
This shatters the very core of their 'multi-cultural' philosophy in that all cultures, ethnic groups, religions etc. are equal and must treated as such on pain of prosecution and possible imprisonment.
In line with his own policy of cultural and religious equality it is now incumbent upon David Cameron and the other vocal advocates of 'multi-culturalism' not to discriminate against returning jihadis and give them hero's welcome before raising monuments in their honour.
For Info - "Old Blighty" is a term of endearment for Great Britain the motherland, used mainly by troops stationed abroad.
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
Bearing in mind that both sets of leaders were fighting a global war against a determined and ruthless enemy, making a comparison is justified but excruciating to endure.
Comparing the PR executive Cameron with the battle hardened soldier and statesman is grossly unfair to Churchill and an indictment of the British political system. To think that a media created PR man can attain the same office as Sir Winston is an abomination of the mind.
I assume the same is being said about a community organiser attaining the same office as accomplished statesmen such as FDR, Truman or John.F.Kennedy.
Watching the ongoing appeasement efforts currently being undertaken by the Obama/Cameron administrations I have no confidence whatsoever that the war against radical Islam and a possible nuclear armed Iran will be won any time soon. More importantly I have less confidence that we will be handing over a better or safer world to our children than the one from just a couple of decades ago.
As opposed to the previous war leaders, Obama and Cameron are committed to their 'progressive' ideology and crippled by political correctness to the point where they can barely name the enemy that is committing unspeakable atrocities across the planet. Nor can they condemn the wider religious ideology that commands the jihadis to commit such horrors in its name.
Despite the torture, beheading, rape and murder being carried out in the name of their god, Allah, as commanded by their prophet, Mohammad, and as written in their holy book, the Koran, Obama and Cameron continue to insist that Islam is a 'global religion of peace' on the spurious grounds that the perpetrators are a minority.
Using Obama and Cameron's logic, because the majority of Germans did not support Hitler or the Nazis during World War II, National Socialism was also a 'global religion of peace'.
Neither Churchill, FDR nor Truman had any such reservations when talking about Hitler and his gang of murderous thugs nor did they fail to condemn the Nazi ideology they used to justify their murderous rampage across Europe.
Unfortunately Cameron's ability to deliver a spin doctor authored speech in perfect, well spoken English can fool an audience into believing what he says, but his record in office reveals him to be something entirely different.
He earned the moniker 'Cast Iron Dave" because he gave the British people a cast iron guarantee that he would give them a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty but, in what would become his modus operandi, he reneged on that promise when his aim had been secured.
Like President Obama, David Cameron is a self confessed 'progressive' who is also committed to imposing the global reform agenda on behalf of the UN/EU.
One only has to look at the machinations undertaken by both of these organisations to get an idea of what they are trying to achieve. The number of malicious resolutions condemning Israel compared to those against the serious human rights abusers in the middle east is a clear indication of UN/EU's intention to eliminate the Jewish homeland.
The refusal to eliminate ISIS using the same overwhelming force that defeated Saddam Hussein's massive, battle hardened military machine in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan, is a craven concession to the millions of Muslims who are effectively a fifth column in Great Britain and America.
To radical Islamists and jihadis, appeasement is perceived as weakness which only emboldens them to commit further acts of barbarity in pursuit of their caliphate. Despite the reality of the current bloodshed in the middle east, the attraction of ISIS to western educated men and women remains undiminished.
Hundreds of thousands of British and American Muslims support ISIS and hundreds, perhaps thousands, are prepared to give up their relatively comfortable lives in the west and risk death and destruction in some miserable desert cesspit on behalf of their god.
Appeasement takes many forms, from unrestricted mosque building to tolerating barbaric practises such as misogyny, child marriage, paedophilia and female genital mutilation to name but a few. At the same time as the Judeo-Christian heritage of Great Britain and America is being systematically erased at home, Christian communities as old as the Faith itself are being ethnically cleansed from the middle east.
Perceived to be nothing more than college kids, Obama and Cameron have already been given a humiliating lesson in geo-politics by Russia's President Putin and Syria's President Assad, watched closely no doubt by the Ayatollahs in Iran, ISIS and other radical Islamists around the world.
Looking at current events it's obvious that the world is an ever more dangerous place and will remain so all the while that the so called 'leaders of the free world' continue to appease Islam at home and abroad in pursuit of their cultural and religious equality agenda.
Appeasement will not replace 'shock and awe' as an antidote to radical Islam and while the Ayatollahs in Iran and ISIS rub their hands with glee, Churchill, FDR and Truman are spinning in their graves.
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity".
"The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome".