Thursday, 27 August 2009

BNP blamed for Climate Change

Apparently the BNP are to blame for the West Ham v Millwall punch up according to the idiot Donal McIntyre and also for kidnapping Muslims.

The latter is a bullshit artist whilst the former has a new book to flog and wants some publicity.

I love the way donal blames the BNP for the violence between west ham and milwall fans because we have been elected into MEP seats and then he says "He added: "Millwall and West Ham have been involved in football hooligan firms for the last 30 years, so it surprises me that the violence wasn't predicted" and therefore directly contradicts himself by saying footie fans have been kicking seven bells out of each other for decades - the total twat.

Lets hope the cops nick the bullshitting Muslim idiot who accused the 'BNP' of kidnapping him and no-one buys Macintyres shite book.

There should be plenty of CCTV footage to prove the twat in Essex is lying as his attackers drove him to Epping Forest - and then lets see if the police prosecute him for wasting police time when the CCTV shows the 'kidnapping' did not happen.

Next week - the BNP are to be blamed for climate change and the death of the dinosaurs.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/audio/2009/aug/27/bnp-ukcrime

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23737371-details/article.do?ito=newsnow&


































Add to Technorati Favorites

Wednesday, 26 August 2009

Media Quango Fascists ASA




Image - This image must not be seen, as some prick in the ASA has decided that the truth is now too subversive to be shown in our own country.






Yet another definition of racism crawls out of the woodwork, this one in relation to imagery used in advertising.

The ASA, a bunch of ASS's who are nothing more than up a jumped up pitifully pathetically correct New Labour Quango, have unilaterally decided to tell us what we can see and read in our own country and have also issued a new definition of that hydra with a thousand heads of 'Racism' which now includes ' reinforcing negative sterotypes' - even though those images may be true.

Yes, the truth, if its reinforces a negative stereotype, is racist.

Therefore the truth must be hidden and the ASA ban it.

This is how sick our society is.

A campaign which showed images of a WHITE victim of crime being attacked by Blacks cannot be shown as, even if the image reflects the reality in our society, if that image reinforces a social perception that Blacks are involved in crimes where Whites are victims, then that image must be banned as being racist.

This is insanity - in effect the truth must be hidden if it reinforces negative ideas about the Black community, even if the intent was to help the Black Community.

Note that no-one asked ' will this advert help white kids who are the victims of black crime going to the police as they feel their pain and suffering is being shown for the first time in our society as political correctness has prohibited debate on white vitims of black or ethnic crime ' - they just said that as the image reinforced the idea that blacks are muggers, then this advert must be banned.

WHO THE HELL ARE THESE SCUM !

The ONLY restrictions on our right of free speech are defined in the European Convention of Human Rights, and that states that ideas and images which distrubm shock and offend society are protected under free speech rights.

The only other people who have a right to say we cannot see an image are the police -under legisltation prohibiting that imagery eg child pornography.

The ASA is a jumped up politically correct joke of a QUANGO, and the charity involved in this pathetic case wont appeal the findings of the overpaid idiots in the ASA.

Therefore this little bit of media mindbending will go unchallenged - and another assault on our democratic rights and free speech will have been allowed to slip under the radar.






http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/26/asa-kids-company#



A poster ad for a children's charity that showed two black teenagers harassing a white man reinforced negative stereotypes and was therefore "racist", the advertising watchdog has ruled.

The Advertising Standards Authority also found that another billboard ad for the Kids Company charity that stated "You are right – kids who can kill really are wrong in the head" beneath a picture of four black teenagers was likely to cause offence.

In addition, this ad made misleading claims about a supposed link between emotional development, brain size and violent behaviour, the ASA said.

Both ads were judged to be in breach of the ASA's code on decency, with the one featuring the claims about brain size also falling foul of clauses on truthfulness and substantiation.

The ASA conceded that Kids Company meant to raise awareness about the children it sought to help, but nevertheless ordered the charity not to re-use the ads, two out of five used in a poster campaign.

In its defence, the charity said the campaign as a whole had used a cross-section of local children from different backgrounds in and around Kilburn, north London.

According to Kids Company, the racial mix was representative of the children from the youth clubs in that area, with 80% of the children that came to it for help from Afro-Caribbean backgrounds, a proportion that was again reflected by the ads.

The Outdoor Advertising Association said it had cleared the ads as they contained both black and white children and were spread as evenly as possible across nine different stations.

Kids Company's ads were designed to "confront superficial judgments and prejudices" and challenged the viewer to reject stereotypes, the charity added.

The charity said the ad showing the black teenagers harassing the white man opposed the viewer's presumption – spelled out in the headline "How do you get inside the head of a 16-year-old knife-wielding thug?" – with the charity's point of view, written in italics: "First get inside the head of a 16-year-old bed-wetting boy."

However, the ASA found that this ad "focused on a negative image of black teenagers that was likely to reinforce negative stereotypes and was therefore racist".

The watchdog also said the ad linking violent teenagers to emotional underdevelopment "was likely to cause serious offence because it featured only black teenagers".

Kids Company said two images of the brain it used in this ad – one, larger brain was labelled "normal", while a smaller one was marked "extreme neglect" – had been taken from a US study on child trauma and brain development that demonstrated the effect of sensory deprivation on brain size.

However, the ASA said its interpretation of the study suggested it was referring to factors such as nutrition and children being raised in cages in dark rooms, not just to emotional development.

Moreover, the regulator rejected the idea that there was evidence that brain size had an impact on violent behaviour, as it found the ad had implied.

On both points, the ad had been "misleading", the ASA said.

Tuesday, 25 August 2009

Larry Flynt - Telling It As It Is

Larry doesnt define 'the ruling elite' so I will ;

The US Shadow Government of the Military Industrial Bloc

The Corporate Media

The Federal Reserve

The International Bankers and the international banking cartels

AIPAC and the Zionists

Liberals and Leftist Globalists

The Big Oil Corporations

The Global Corporations

The Globalist Institutions - UN, WTO, EU, NATO, Bilderbergers, Round Table Groups, Tri-Lateral Commission etc etc



Larry says it isnt about left and right, and he is correct, but it isnt also between average people and the ruling elite - the struggle is between NATIONALISTS and Globalists.



By Larry Flynt, Publisher of Hustler magazine and free speech advocate

August 20, 2009

Simulposted with The Huffington Post

The American government — which we once called our government — has been taken over by Wall Street, the mega-corporations and the super-rich. They are the ones who decide our fate. It is this group of powerful elites, the people President Franklin D. Roosevelt called “economic royalists,” who choose our elected officials — indeed, our very form of government. Both Democrats and Republicans dance to the tune of their corporate masters. In America, corporations do not control the government. In America, corporations are the government.

This was never more obvious than with the Wall Street bailout, whereby the very corporations that caused the collapse of our economy were rewarded with taxpayer dollars. So arrogant, so smug were they that, without a moment’s hesitation, they took our money — yours and mine — to pay their executives multimillion-dollar bonuses, something they continue doing to this very day. They have no shame. They don’t care what you and I think about them. Henry Kissinger refers to us as “useless eaters.”

But, you say, we have elected a candidate of change. To which I respond: Do these words of President Obama sound like change?


“A culture of irresponsibility took root, from Wall Street to Washington to Main Street.”

There it is. Right there. We are Main Street. We must, according to our president, share the blame. He went on to say: “And a regulatory regime basically crafted in the wake of a 20th-century economic crisis — the Great Depression — was overwhelmed by the speed, scope and sophistication of a 21st-century global economy.”

This is nonsense.

The reason Wall Street was able to game the system the way it did — knowing that they would become rich at the expense of the American people (oh, yes, they most certainly knew that) — was because the financial elite had bribed our legislators to roll back the protections enacted after the Stock Market Crash of 1929.

Congress gutted the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial lending banks from investment banks, and passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which allowed for self-regulation with no oversight. The Securities and Exchange Commission subsequently revised its rules to allow for even less oversight — and we’ve all seen how well that worked out. To date, no serious legislation has been offered by the Obama administration to correct these problems.

Instead, Obama wants to increase the oversight power of the Federal Reserve. Never mind that it already had significant oversight power before our most recent economic meltdown, yet failed to take action. Never mind that the Fed is not a government agency but a cartel of private bankers that cannot be held accountable by Washington. Whatever the Fed does with these supposed new oversight powers will be behind closed doors.

Obama’s failure to act sends one message loud and clear: He cannot stand up to the powerful Wall Street interests that supplied the bulk of his campaign money for the 2008 election. Nor, for that matter, can Congress, for much the same reason.

Consider what multibillionaire banker David Rockefeller wrote in his 2002 memoirs:

“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Read Rockefeller’s words again. He actually admits to working against the “best interests of the United States.”

Need more? Here’s what Rockefeller said in 1994 at a U.N. dinner: “We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis, and the nations will accept the New World Order.” They’re gaming us. Our country has been stolen from us.

Journalist Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, notes that esteemed economist John Kenneth Galbraith laid the 1929 crash at the feet of banking giant Goldman Sachs. Taibbi goes on to say that Goldman Sachs has been behind every other economic downturn as well, including the most recent one. As if that wasn’t enough, Goldman Sachs even had a hand in pushing gas prices up to $4 a gallon.

The problem with bankers is longstanding. Here’s what one of our Founding Fathers, Thomas Jefferson, had to say about them:

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father’s conquered.”

We all know that the first American Revolution officially began in 1776, with the Declaration of Independence. Less well known is that the single strongest motivating factor for revolution was the colonists’ attempt to free themselves from the Bank of England. But how many of you know about the second revolution, referred to by historians as Shays’ Rebellion? It took place in 1786-87, and once again the banks were the cause. This time they were putting the screws to America’s farmers.

Daniel Shays was a farmer in western Massachusetts. Like many other farmers of the day, he was being driven into bankruptcy by the banks’ predatory lending practices. (Sound familiar?) Rallying other farmers to his side, Shays led his rebels in an attack on the courts and the local armory. The rebellion itself failed, but a message had been sent: The bankers (and the politicians who supported them) ultimately backed off. As Thomas Jefferson famously quipped in regard to the insurrection: “A little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Perhaps it’s time to consider that option once again.

I’m calling for a national strike, one designed to close the country down for a day. The intent? Real campaign-finance reform and strong restrictions on lobbying. Because nothing will change until we take corporate money out of politics. Nothing will improve until our politicians are once again answerable to their constituents, not the rich and powerful.

Let’s set a date. No one goes to work. No one buys anything. And if that isn’t effective — if the politicians ignore us — we do it again. And again. And again.

The real war is not between the left and the right. It is between the average American and the ruling class. If we come together on this single issue, everything else will resolve itself. It’s time we took back our government from those who would make us their slaves.









































Add to Technorati Favorites

Britains Biggest Twat Award 2009 - Peter Jones





Yes folks is that time of year again, when the awards are dished out to the rich, the famous and the pathetic.

This years award for Britains Biggest Twat is Peter Jones of The Guardian for the article about Meerkats and Racism.

Take a look at the boat race of this geezer.

What a totally smug looking twat.

You can just imagine him in the arms of his nubile Eastern European wench, their bodies locked in post-coital bliss when she leans over and says in a slinky Eastern European accent, " Vell zen Peter, ifs you is vanting any more of mine fine Eastern European poomtang zen you best be dealing viz zose fucking meerkats. I am so vucked off viz ze racism of ze British advertizing on ze telly. YOU WRITE TO ZE ASA YOU ASS OR NO MOREZ OF ZIS FINE ASS ! "

Poor old peter rolls from the bed, ripe metrosexual tears falling from his eyes, his feelings mortally wounded, he raises his arms to the godless sky and screams forth into the darkness, " DAMN YOU MEERKATS FROM HELL, YOU RACIST CUTE, SMALL MAMMALS FROM THE AFRICAN CONTINENT HAVE PUT ME ON A PUSSY DROUGHT, YOU MUST PAY, DAMN YOU MEERKATS, DAMN YOU TO HELL ! "

Oh woe to thee oh meerkats, poor old peter with his unused pecker is now on the warpath.

A well deserving winner of the award wouldnt you agree.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/aug/22/advertising-racism-meerkats





A few weeks ago, my girlfriend and I were watching TV at home when the advert for comparethemarket.com appeared on our screen. I had seen the ad before and not thought anything of it. However on this occasion, my girlfriend, who is Ukrainian, turned to me and said: "I don't like this advert, it is very offensive to me." I mentioned it to a friend who said his Latvian lodger also found it offensive.

The advertisement centres on the word "market" – a word that eastern Europeans/Russians pronounce "meerkat" – using talking CGI-animated meerkats. The sole point of this African animal's appearance is, it seems, to highlight the idea that east Europeans cannot pronounce the word market properly when they speak English. It struck me how racist it was to parody what is now a significant part of the British population in this way. It also occurred to me that were the ad to use stereotypical Indian or Caribbean accents in the same way it would never be allowed on TV.

Over the following week the ad seemed to be perpetually in our faces, the meerkat characters shouting "meerkats", "meerkats" in their stereotypical tones into our living room. I decided to complain first to ITV. When I looked on the ITV website, to my shock, I found that their business development manager Richard Chilvers was boasting that this was his favourite ad and that it helped to bring his "passion alive". I emailed my complaint. ITV responded that "the subject matter, content and treatment of all commercials are always given serious consideration to determine their suitability for transmission". They also stated that "particular care is needed to ensure that advertisements are not misleading or offensive". They then stated that I should contact the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) which I duly did.

The ASA informed me that it did not assess advertisements before they went out but responded to complaints. The initial assessment and clearing was done by a company called Clearcast which, I was told, conveniently did not deal with the public. I then emailed my complaint to the ASA, whose response stated: "Whatever impact the mild stereotyping of the eastern European accent has is undercut by the fact that it is a cartoon rather than a live actor. As such we do not feel that the content of the commercial is likely to provoke widespread offence." It said it had not had any other complaints.

I asked my girlfriend why that might be. She told me that people from eastern Europe were brought up in a society where it was not normal to complain, especially to such sectors as the government and the media. She told me that they would not expect to be able to do anything about it, they would not know of the existence of the ASA and the power to demand that an advert was taken off television. It is also the case that as so many people from eastern Europe were so new to the country that they would not want to be seen to be causing trouble. It then dawned on me that this ad was targeting a sector of the population who would be unlikely to fight back.

The irony of the situation is that those in charge at the ASA and ITV probably consider themselves the most politically correct in society. However, the evidence shows that they have only learned who not to offend, not how not to offend. It looks as though those from eastern Europe are going to have the same fight on their hands as people from India and the Caribbean did all those years ago.

















Add to Technorati Favorites

Monday, 24 August 2009

Daniel Shays - A Real American Patriot



Image - Daniel Shays.

Thomas Jefferson, who was serving as an ambassador to France at the time, refused to be alarmed by Shays' Rebellion. In a letter to a friend, he wrote that "a little rebellion now and then is a good thing. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."






I have only recently become aware of Daniel Shays and the Shays Rebellion.

Now this is what I call a Nationalist and a Patriot.

When America is once again ruled by patriots and nationalists, instead of globalists and traitors, then statues of Daniel Shay should be erected all across the country.

The Daniel Shays Medal should be awarded to all American Nationalists and Patriots who each year have distinguished themselves in the struggle for American liberty and democracy.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays'_Rebellion


Shays' Rebellion was an armed uprising in Central and Western Massachusetts, (mainly Springfield) from 1786 to 1787. The rebellion is named after Daniel Shays, a veteran of the American Revolution who led the rebels, known as "Shaysites" or "Regulators". Most of Shays' compatriots were poor farmers angered by what they felt to be crushing debt and taxes. Failure to repay such debts often resulted in imprisonment in debtor's prisons or the claiming of property by the County.

Seeking debt relief through the issuance of paper currency and lower taxes, they attempted to prevent the courts from seizing property from indebted farmers by forcing the closure of courts in western Massachusetts. The participants in Shays' Rebellion believed they were acting in the spirit of the Revolution and modeled their tactics after the crowd activities of the 1760s and 1770s, using "liberty poles" and "liberty trees" to symbolize their cause.[1]

The rebellion started on August 29, 1786 and by January 1787, over 1000 Shaysites were arrested. A militia that had been raised as a private army defeated an attack on the federal Springfield Armory by the main Shaysite force on February 3, 1787. There was a lack of an institutional response to the uprising, which energized calls to reevaluate the Articles of Confederation and gave strong impetus to the Philadelphia Convention which began in May 17, 1787. Shay’s Rebellion produced fears that the Revolution’s democratic impulse had "gotten out of hand."[


















Add to Technorati Favorites

Russian ship Hijkacked = Mossad

WASHINGTON: According to sources, the Nezavisimaya Gazeta newspaper that the persons who are suspected pirates who boarded the cargo ship "Arctic Sea" In fact, members of the Israeli intelligence (Mossad) were trying to prevent the ship from the transfer of weapons to Iran.

The ship had disappeared more than three weeks of monitoring off the west coast of Africa and the Russian forces to free the crew of 15 sailors Russia on Monday, near the Cape Verde.

The media reported that Russia may have been the ship "Arctic Sea" cruise missile X-55 illegally hidden among a load of sawdust.

The newspaper "Novaya Gazeta" that the men acting on behalf of the Israeli Mossad seized the ship, adding that the sudden visit to Israeli President Shimon Peres traveled to Moscow in 18 of the month following the day to locate the "Arctic" He's been to contain the situation.

He said Assad, according to the newspaper, during the visit Moscow for not supplying arms to Iran or missile defense systems.


Russian authorities deny that the ship was smuggling weapons

The Russian authorities had earlier denied speculation that the cargo ship Arctic Sea, which lost about three weeks ago was smuggling weapons.

He said the Russian ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Dmitry Rogozin said the allegations by some military experts that there were cruise missiles bound for Iran hidden under a cargo ship from sawdust are allegations of "fake" and "ridiculous."

Rogozin added that the deployment of Russia's fleet in the Black Sea at great cost to free the hijacked ship was for the Russian sailors, not the arms shipment assumed.


In the developments, and on Friday, Russian authorities have been formally charged eight people on charges of kidnapping the cargo ship "Arctic Sea".

According to the Russian Interfax news agency reported that Russian investigators charged eight men kidnapped the Russian sailors who were on board the ship in addition to piracy.



The report said that the list of defendants includes Lithuanians, Russians and three people without identity, and contrary to previous reports from each list included Spain, is currently being investigated on the nationality of two other suspicions revolve around nationality.















Add to Technorati Favorites

The Wrath of Christos





Image - note the inverted cross after the tornado hit the Church.




The wrath of Christos is not often displayed in such an obvious manner.

The inversion of the Cross and the timing of this event all suggest what Jung would have called 'synchronicty', or a conjunction of random events that suggest a deeper meaning.

Homosexuals who are having sexual relations cannot be preists.

Homosexuality is a sterile relationship, predicated on lust not the sacred principle of creating new life.

Therefore those who are homosexual cannot speak in Gods name when they defile their bodies and other peoples bodies with perverse sexual acts.

Perverse sexual acts are irrelevant as regards ordinary homosexuals in our society, but not for preists.

Thats why we regards preists as special, as they are supposedly not indulging in lustful acts of perversion.

Just as being born blind disqualifies you from being a pilot, just as being born with one leg disqualifies you from being a high jump champion, just as being a heterosexual male should disqualify you from being a shower attendant in a womens gymn and just as having a penis disqualifies a male from giving birth - then being a homosexual disbarrs you from being a preist.

What you lawfully do with your sex organs when you are a private person is your own private business, but a preist is not a private person - their very role makes them a public and spiritual figurehead, therefore they cannot claim a privacy opt out.

Article here ;


http://fratres.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/minneapolis-tornado-rips-lutheran-conference-on-gays-in-the-church-pics/





























Add to Technorati Favorites