Thursday, 29 October 2009

Minimum Sentences for Edinburgh Homosexual Paedo Ring-leaders


It appears that the two Scottish paedophile ring-leaders, including the head of a "Gay Youth" group who campaigned against Section 28, have received minimum sentences which means they will serve longer than the typical 7.5 years.

Right: The eight convicted members of the paedophile network are (top, left to right) Colin Slaven, Craig Boath, James Rennie, John Milligan, (bottom, left to right) John Murphy, Neil Strachan, Ross Webber and Neil Campbell. (Two with minimum sentences in bold).

I guess that's better than nothing.

But when they were raping children as young as 3 months old, we have to ask when these absolute scum (oft over-used, but absolutely apt here) have to do something disturbing enough to face the death penalty.

Neil Strachan, 41, attempted to rape an 18-month-old boy while 38-year-old James Rennie sexually assaulted a three-month-old.

Strachan was sentenced to a minimum of 16 years in prison, while Rennie was ordered to serve at least 13 years.

I know it sounds like a cliché and it's a populist slogan etc. etc., but there surely comes a time when the crime committed is so obscene and Satanic, that the death penalty is the only response from a society which seeks to retain an iota of decency.

According to reports "Rennie was the chief executive of LGBT Youth Scotland, which offers advice to young gay and lesbian people."

'Young people' is pc code for children, some highly disturbed, confused, hormonal and looking for help... only to have an illness, deathstyle and perversion pushed on them as not just acceptable but a preferred "choice."

He also appeared on Scottish TV in the late 90s arguing against Section 28 - the law which prevented scum like him and his degenerate group going into Scottish schools and promoting homosexuality to young children.

He was also welcomed into the Scottish parliament by Labour ministers of the then Scottish government.

He also got to meet the Queen in his role as faggots' rights campaigner.

Would the perverts and Scottish (sic) politicians who agitated for the repeal of Section 28 for all their own warped politically correct and deranged sexual proclivities now have the decency to allow it to be re-introduced?

For the partial protection of schoolchildren and the (perhaps vain) effort to let children retain some sort of innocence for as long as possible.

The next Faggots Rights campaigner going into YOUR children's school could be a paedo.

Many homosexuals believe the age of consent should be lower than 16, with militant campaigners agitating, in their own sordid circles and literature, for it to be as low as 9!

THIS SHOULD BE A WARNING FOR ALL PARENTS.


Link:

BBC News Report

EU President Blair? To Fight Global Warming?

Some people say that global warming is a con.

"But why is it a con? Cui Bono?" ask the incredulous and easily pliable.

Well of course there's the usual "scientific community" looking out for their next sinecure or their next celebrated paper published to the acclaim of all.

But there's a more insidious side to this (besides getting more "Green Taxes" out of us as a side-serving to all the other forms of taxation used to pour into the bottomless pit that is the national debt).

Chris Bryant is an MP for the Rhondda in South Wales. You know the sort of area - old school Labour, solidly working class and pretty much traditional.

Chris Bryant is also a typical New Labour minister. Gay (of course!), suppliant to the Mandelsonian vision of New Labour, about as Rhondda Valley as a preening ballerina in a tutu who eschews drinking bitter for a more wine-bar style aperitif.

Right: Chris Bryant MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office was an Anglican vicar, until he posted this photo of himself in his pants on a homosexual website. Just the sort of moral compass needed for the House of Commons and a place in HM Government!

When asked to defend the idea of Tony Blair (war criminal and multi-millionaire) becoming the unelected President of the European Union he (Bryant) said that a powerful and respected man like Blair was needed to speak up for Europe so we could combat climate change.

Kerching!

So what are you telling us Mr. Bryant?

We need an unelected President of a non-existent country to... battle climate change?

Oh! I've seen the light!

Here you go Masonic bureaucrats of the EU Commission. Take all my freedoms and enroll me in your super-state! Just so long as you "fight climate change" eh?

What I find deplorable is the idea that we need a Super President of a Super State to fight pollution of any sort. I'm not a fan of pollution per se, and regardless of their pet theories and hidden taxes, I think any pollution that can be stopped should be.

But why the hell should we surrender ancient rights and sign up to spurious politically 'human rights' legislation that give some EU-approved pervert from the Bi-Lesbian Gay and Transgender (BLT) coalition the "right" to go into our schools and youth clubs, to harangue and brainwash our children?

Just as a huge paedophile racket has been smashed in Scotland wherein the boss of a similar BLT (Bi-Lesbian Fag and Transformer) 'Youf Support' network was involved in the rape of children as young as 18 months (two of the ringleaders were sentenced to Life -- and that's just seven and a half years or 90 months before parole); we are told that these perverts have the "right" to lecture our children on the rights of homosexuals and how homosexuality is perfectly normal.

That is the EU agenda, that is the Blairite agenda.

Big Brother, Big State, Big President: all to confer rights upon criminals, perverts, degenerates... whilst the ancient rights to freedom, habeus corpus, innocent until proven guilty etc. go out the Soviet-shaped EU window.

The very idea that a man who started an illegal war that killed hundreds of thousands could even be considered as President (could even be considered to be walking around free!) shows how ridiculous the whole EU set-up is!

Blair is free to profit big time, to be a "peace envoy" to the Middle East (ha ha ha), free to promote himself to EU leaders... whilst those who merely debate one aspect (and only one aspect, note!) of history are routinely locked up for their Thought Crimes!

Still, if Mr. Chris Bryant says we need an EU President to "combat climate change" and if he says Mr. Blair is the very man for the job, then who are we to gainsay a much-respected elected member of the House of Commons and Minister of Her Majesty's Government?

After all, that's democracy!

Left: "It's Global Warming stoopid!" cries the system stooge as he bashes us over the head with the controlled mass media mallet. When we get bored of that, "it's the Al Qaeda Terrorists stoopid" cries the voice of Big Brother.

And if we do raise a protest that can always hit us on the head (Timmy Mallett stylee) that we are risking the total ruination of the planet via global warming.

George Orwell had Eurasia and Eastasia to worry Winston Smith and everyone else in Oceania, we poor proles have the big invisible enemies of Global Warming and Al Qaeda - mere ghost creations of a global elite of course, but these are the big enemies used to push forward their global agenda.

Anglicans Sick of Liberalism Looking to Rome


News that a meeting of 600 Anglicans (representing many more) met to discuss moving back to the 'Church of Rome' should be welcomed.

Right: Edward the Confessor. Arguably the last Saxon King of England, a good Catholic King beloved by his people, whose piety gave him his nomenclature. The Saxons of England were an especially devout people whose Catholicism was as English as it was deeply rooted; they were nonetheless still a fiercely warrior-like people who also believed in the freedoms of the people.

Whatever we have been conditioned to think of the Catholic Church since Elizabethan and Cromwellian times, we should remember that historically the English were more Catholic than even their continental counterparts.

When the Normans invaded [1066 and all that] they found that the Saxons of England celebrated the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary*. This wasn't made a dogma of the Church for another 900 years and so the Normans suppressed it. But isn't that fascinating to know that England - often called Mary's Dowry because of the English peoples' known piety to the Mother of God - was in that sense even more Catholic than the Normans, who built so many of the breathtaking stone churches and cathedrals that still stand in so many English and Welsh cities, towns and villages.

Now don't get me wrong, I know that as an institution made up of human beings the Catholic Church is very far from being perfect. If it were perfect Jerusalem would have been Christian for the last thousand years. In more recent years it has taken up political correctness as have many others. Anti-racism in its communistic guile is there as well as many other "right on" causes.

But it is also clear to many that the Catholic Church, even in its 1960s/70s rush to "modernity" and "relevance" -- with beardy clerics wearing "call me Ted" badges -- has been a bulwark against so much that is wrong in the world.

Just imagine if the Church weren't infiltrated by Masons and the faith of the early 20th Century, with the social teaching that was embraced by movements as diverse as the Falangists, the Rexists, the Fascists etc. in a huge tidal wave that swept Europe. were still a voice for the voiceless.

One thinks of the great Cardinal Newman, himself a convert from Anglicanism, who worked with and stood up for the dock workers in East London. Or of course 'our own' G.K.Chesterton, also a convert, who embraced the social teaching of the church.

It would be almost impossible to think of nationalism today without the great influence of G.K. Chersterton. Similarly, it would be impossible to think of the rise of the myriad of anti-Communist and anti-Capitalist movements in the 30s of Europe without the great Papal encyclical of 1931, Quadragesimo Anno. Without the input of the church we would still have "nationalism" as a state-centred imperialist, reactionary, antagonistic movement with Spaniards versus the French, versus the English, versus the Germans etc. ad nauseum.

It was the Catholic Church that injected the patriotic movements of Europe with the much needed social aspect of their cause, just as it is the Catholic Church which today pushes for the belief that every soul is created in the image of God, thus to oppose a social conscience as much as to oppose a pro-life stance is simply wrong.

Nationalism owes much to the Catholic Church. To think otherwise is prejudice and to ignore the simple facts. Every single nationalist grouping (happy to acknowledge any who haven't) in England, of every type/shade, has acknowledged the huge debt owed by nationalism in the 21st Century to Chesterton and the Distributists.

So the move by many "traditionalist" Anglicans back towards Rome should, I believe, be welcomed because it acknowledges that the home of true Anglicans is in reality in the Catholic Church. The Saxons are returning to their mother Church.

Of course many will point at great wrongs in the Catholic Church, just as they did at the time of Luther, not least the terrible scandal of a tiny minority of evil paedophile priests and the cover-up organised by terrible bishops concerned more for their reputation and their station in life than their flock and their duty. One thinks immediately of America.

The same is as true today as at the time of Luther. The church does need reforming; because weak, venal, position-grabbing careerists are putting their own ideologies or betterment before Christianity.

But you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater (you don't destroy the good structure to rid a few bad practices). The corrupt parts of the Catholic Church needed a kick up the breeches in the 16th Century, and eventually the Church organised the Council of Trent which codified much, organised the education of priests etc. etc.

The same is needed today. A return to the days when homosexuality was an outright sin** (and homosexuals banned from seminaries) must be sought for the sake of the Church, for the converts, for society and for the sanity of a Europe entering a Masonic EU controlled phase of history (with the "rights" of homosexuality enshrined in their Masonic laws).

The last Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster -- the man who scandalously took the war criminal Tony Blair into the Catholic Church without a public recantation of his pro-abortion, pro-homosexual regime/views and his role in an illegal, unjust war -- springs to mind as a typical cleric of higher office who needs ostracising/educating.

So the situation (as ever throughout history) is never straightforward.

In the bigger picture we should welcome an invigorated, English, Traditional, parish-based Catholicism. It would see many local parishes, with their traditional strong Norman and Saxon altars return to the Mass (remember that the founder of the Church of England, Henry VIII, believed in the sanctity of the Mass, of transubstantiation and of the sacraments of the church) as it was in England for hundreds of years (and in Wales for a thousand plus years). It will also remind people that Christianity was, is and always will be intrinsically for the family and against all the liberalising, politically correct trends.

It will also remind everyone, from Nick Griffin to Nick Cohen, from Gordon Brown to Elton John, that to be English is to be Christian, and that isn't a 500 year old thing or born of Cromwell, but that it goes back to the Saxon "Dark Ages," to the Roman Empire and to the days we remember when we sing "did those feet in ancient times, walk upon England's mountains green".

The influx of people who question liberalism in religion may even help the Catholic Church clear out its own stables. After all a Church (as with any structure) which is seen as hypocritical in any way, and especially in matters such as the innocence of the children (better someone never have been born than to harm one of my little ones, to paraphrase Christ), cannot sincerely offer any answers to a hypocritical society and system.

The fact that the Catholic Church has retained, despite the efforts of internal and external Masons, homosexuals, humanists etc. some semblance of its age-old stance and belief-system has meant that the Anglicans who have been betrayed by a touchy-feely church with its vomit-inducing "anything goes" services, trendy vicars, homosexual-tolerant, morally ambivalent have somewhere to turn to, which will bring about a unity of Faith long sought for for 500 years.

Those who would have had the Catholic Church give up its ancient practices, structure, papacy, liturgy, dogmas etc. in totalis would have left an emaciated Anglican-like church which would have left nowhere for distraught Anglicans to turn to!

Not all is fine and dandy in the Catholic Church, but at least it is still standing firm on matters of morality in the public domain, despite its pitiful failings in a few tragic (but nonetheless devastating) cases. How much stronger would be its case for reunion with Rome if it kept its house spotlessly clean and kept a strong, determined line on defrocking degenerate priests and insisting on each one being immediately (albeit fairly) tried for their crimes?

You cannot disassociate public policy from private behaviour: by their fruits shall ye know them.

Therein lies the lesson for us all: especially for the nationalist movement.


Link:
QUADRAGESIMO ANNO




*Read William the Conqueror by Hilaire Belloc.
**Indeed, traditionally in the Catholic Church homosexuality is one of 'the four sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance.' Surely it is difficult to find a more dreadful form of sin! The full list is:

  • The voluntary murder (Genesis 4:10)
  • The sin of impurity against nature - sodomy (Genesis 18:20)
  • Taking advantage of the poor (Exodus 2:23)
  • Defrauding the workingman of his wages (James 5:4)

Wednesday, 28 October 2009

Enriching Our Culture: Part 94

David Duke on CNN from Tehran



How to attack the real enemy on the media (and not grovel to Israeli interests!)

Who Posts on Wikipedia

About 200 Israelis are active Wikipedians -- people who contribute and edit entries related to Israel several times a week. Israel has the world's highest per capita amount of Wikipedia users.

Link:
Jewish Telegraph on Wikipedia

Politicians' Expenses: Were Masons Behind the Leak?

Politicians have got themselves in a hole.

Because of the "expenses" scandal they are lower than tabloid journalists and estate agents in most peoples' eyes.

Now it looks as though many of their perks are going to be ripped away. No more cash for food. No more employing family members. No more profiting by buying second homes whilst the tax payer pays the mortgage.

MPs of course are gurning like a toothless septuagenarian at a West Country show. "It's unfair" they cry, facing the reality of the outside world where none of us get cash for food, or get to enjoy all the perks (legit and otherwise) they have been enjoying for many years!

Few tears will be shed outside of the Westminster village. These traitors have been filling their pockets whilst betraying the UK on issues as diverse as homosexuality and immigration, drugs and taxation.

It is nigh on impossible to find a situation outside Westminster where people misuse funds on their own homes, impose their relatives in profitable positions and who fiddle their expenses to such a degree!

But let's pull back a little and look at the larger picture.

The whole MPs' expenses scandal happened in the shadow of... the Credit Crunch, the Banking Scandal, the Tax-Payer Bailout. The gent who leaked the info to the Telegraph (itself a hive of MI5/Masonic contacts) was described as ex-Special Forces.

Is it too much to see the MPs' Expenses Scandal as a smokescreen, put out by the not inconsiderably powerful banker elite, to take some of the pressure -- and some of the hatred -- off their shoulders?

When viewed against the banking collapse, the MPs' situation is small fry. It's akin to a billionaire swindle (eg the charming Bernie Madoff) being pushed off the front pages for weeks on end by a nasty old lady who has been stealing sweets from a supermarket for years.

Don't get me wrong. I have no sympathy, pity or indeed time for the MPs. They were conning the public purse for years because they thought they were a "cut above" the rest of us, and should be on the same kind of overall income as their pals in the City of London.

But don't be surprised that the Bankers turned the media's hatred, bile and vengeance against these petty criminals and traitors.

For years (decades, centuries!) the banking system has kept us in bondage, always paying taxes to disappear into a bottomless pit called the National Debt. The banks were embarrassed that their Wizard of Oz charade fell apart so quickly and that the politicians had the nerve to point the finger at the bankers' greed and avarice.

Could the MPs' current situation be a case of system infighting and mud-slinging?

After all, how long have the MPs been fiddling the books? Not as long as the bankers have been robbing the country blind (ever since the man who let the Jews back into the country and allowed the Bank of England [sic] to be established: the accursed William of Orange).

The whole 'Freedom of Information' ball was rolling slowly and the MPs had been fighting a guerrilla warfare against letting all the relevant information out.

Then, after gradual nationalisation of certain banks, politicians slamming the laissez faire approach to usury-loans and unsustainable debt: BANG!

All of a sudden the info gets leaked to the Telegraph in such huge volumes that it took them weeks to fight through it all to garner all the info, weeks which saw a drip, drip, drip of deeply embarrassing info.

Do others see the hands of the Rothschilds et al in these events too?

So by all means celebrate the (limited) suffering of the politicians and the matching slide in their popularity... but remember that the real criminals are the money-lenders in the background.

When we take our eyes off that, we fail into the trap set for us by a compliant Masonic mass media.

Saturday, 24 October 2009

Will Ida the Lemur finally Kill off the Missing Link Theory?

Dem bones, dem bones, dem dry bones...

How fabulous to see the "scientific community" debunked.

It gives the rest of us a chance to glow with the same self-satisfied, all-knowing, better-than-thou smugness normally given-off by the white-coat (with pens in pocket) boffins that infest 101 sofa-based TV programmes of a current-affair bent.

Not so very long ago numberless "experts" pointed at the bones of a Lemur-like creature they called Ida.

She was like a lemur but with some features that pointed to evolution!

Oh yes -- she was the long looked-for (but sought in vain) 'missing link.'

It was the final proof the evolutionists needed to finally prove their thesis (for such it is) that we have "evolved" from monkeys.

Now the theory has suffered just one more in a long, long series of setbacks, with Ida proven not to be a "missing link" but just another... er.. Lemur.

The Lemur was of a kind that simply died-out whilst other varieties continued to this day (conspicuously not "evolving" eh?).

Needless to add, the boffins who posited these bones as the final proof will not be trawling through numerous TV studios to debunk their own myth. There's no money, no scholarships, no major book or film deals in that.

You see scientists have a habit of moving as a mass (Brownian Motion?) emboldened by their own theories and evidence, often supporting each other and so propping up their own theories that Joe Public darnst gainsay.

Whether it's evolution or global warming, they find the "evidence" to prove their theories, or simply fill in the gaps as they see fit (often making illogical leaps of faith) to keep their pet theory on the go.

Countless "missing links" have been found to be frauds, schoolboy errors or dead-ends like Ida.

Of course it won't stop the boffins from espousing their theory as undisputed fact in our schools. A superb book against evolution was originally entitled "Why Our Colleges Create Communists") you see evolution attempts to kill God and a godless society is more often than not a form of communism (soviet or EU variety, take your pick).

Fossilised modern hats, human bones next to dinosaur bones, and many other anomalies that leave evolution theories crumbling are as conveniently ignored as sun spots and the Medieval warm period are in the 'science' of global warming.

Socialists and Capitalists in their search for the ultimate godless society controlled by big government will continue to use evolution and global warming for their own ends.

Nationalists need to be a little more clued-up and dare to ask the questions that others won't.

Rattle your chains baby!


Links:
National Geographic: Ida is Missing Link

Google Promotes Evolution

Even back in May Ida was Debunked

Yesterday's Mail on Lemur Bones

Friday, 23 October 2009

Nick Griffin on Question Time: The Good & The Bad (and the Ugly - Jack Straw).

Anyone want to respond to Nick Griffin on Question Time?

Best Bit:

When he attacked the needless [Zionist] War in Iraq. he took a solidly nationalist (and anti-Zionist!) line and actually sounded sincere and full of righteous anger. He stated that Jack Straw had the blood of 800,000 Muslims on his hands...

Worst Bit:

When he stated that the BNP was the only party that stood full square behind Israel in the recent 'Gaza conflict.' He sounded like a Zionist pimp and what's more it contradicted the stance on the Iraq war which dripped with natural justice, dripping rather with insincere Zionist extremism.

No doubt others will have their favourite bits!

Thursday, 22 October 2009

Italian Minister Brambilla Gives the Fascist/Roman Salute

BBC's Question Time: The Nick Griffin Show

So the FC family have the popcorn in, the pork pies are laid-out in descending order and suitable beverages for young and old alike are busily cooling in the fridge.

Yes, it's Question Time tonight - the Nick Griffin Show. The sprogs have a special "stay up late" dispensation from the 'moany old git' (yours truly).

What awaits will be interesting if nothing else...

Today will be remembered, if for nothing else, for the lefties screeching about tolerance as they demanded a person be banned from the airwaves.

Ah! That stench of hypocrisy (tempered by B.O.) the assorted Marxists give off by the bucketload.

The youngest sprog at Codreanu Towers said "why do those white people" (the screeching hoards) "care so much about black people?"

From the mouths of bairns...

Wednesday, 21 October 2009

Nick Griffin: British Generals Like Nazi War Criminals


The BBC has reported Nick Griffin's comments that British Generals are like Nazi War criminals at Nuremberg because they "just obey orders" when it comes to illegal wars.

Was he right to do so?

The BNP supported the war against Afghanistan in the shadow of "9/11" (it backtracked/u-turned later) and has expelled councillor Simon Smith (Black Country) for saying "9/11" was a 'inside job' at a BNP meeting in more recent years.

So where does the BNP stand?

He later backtracked a little by saying that his jibe about "Nazi War Criminals" being hanged alongside the politicians was merely "black humour."

Backtracking? Or just silly to be so unstatesmanlike?

And what of the emotive "Nazi" tag? After all Japanese war criminals walked free (as do Israeli ones today) and Communist mass murderers who enslaved half of Europe were treated like liberators (by the Western powers!) in 1945. Even as they were killing Polish Nationalists (who we went to war for in 1939!).

Ahead of his Question Time appearance tomorrow, might we expect more tempered language?

Who can we expect? The pro-Israeli who blames Islam for every evil? Or the radical politician who rages against the New World Order? Or a politician who doesn't want to offend anybody?

What do you think about his "Nazi War Criminals" comment? Insightful or inciting? Radical or Populist? Measured or Knee-Jerk? Funny or ill-judged?

Perhaps if someone gets under his skin tomorrow we can expect more off-the-cuff remarks that will delight/annoy in equal measure (though to whom is anyone's guess!). And I haven't even covered his "black member" quandary and whether the BNP was 'forced' to do it or cleverly did it to side-step the accursed EHRC (Mr Griffin has claimed both in separate announcements!).

Miliband: Hamas Criminals -but Israel ALLEGED Criminals

On Panorama, Friday 16th August, David Miliband (for it was he) said that the UK government must look into the "problems of Gaza" and that they would deal with the issues of 'Hamas crimes and alleged Israeli crimes' [my italics].

He says he's not being mealy mouthed, yet someone who publicly casts doubt on Israel's war crimes yet states the Hamas actions were criminal without the blink of an eye, is spiting in the face of the independent UN enquiry.

Anyone who wonders about the impartiality of our government needs to think again.

Our soldiers are being sent into war by Zionists who take no action at all about Israeli war crimes and illegally held Israeli nuclear weapons.

If a Muslim country held illegal nukes and was involved in large scale war crimes against its occupied territories or neighbours do you think America/Britain would defend that nation at the UN?

Think again.

Tuesday, 20 October 2009

Miliband Ignores UN Report on Israeli War Crimes

The UN, in an impartial independent review, has said that Israel is guilty of war crimes.

One of the Miliband brothers (David, the Foreign Secretary) was on the box the other night and when asked what the UK intended to do about the war criminals, he had a reply that would have had Sir Humphrey blushing with shame.

Miliband said we needed to have an independent report into the allegations.

Bingo!

A "report into the report."

And when that comes out -- can we have a report into the report about the report? And so on ad nauseum?

Mr. Miliband may think it's OK to kill time as more Palestinians die (the Gaza is still cut off by Israeli troops) and no doubt his Jewish Communist mega-rich parents would admire his chutzpah.

After all we can all remember when UN reports on Iraq were ignored... erm...

Miliband (version 1 and/or 2) may think it acceptable to filibuster as men, women and children die, or whilst war criminals slip away (whatever happened to "Never Again"?) but as he is elected to his post, we should --all of us who believe in natural justice-- ensure that our government responds with justified anger to the role of war criminals in a highly disproportionate attack on a tiny strip of land filled with civilians, let alone the blockade of Gaza that has been going on for years.

Sunday, 18 October 2009

Homosexual Degenerate Stephen Gately is not a Saint


In Dublin yesterday a priest at a funeral said that the martyrs would be waiting to welcome Stephen into paradise.

Stephen was Stephen Gately of Boyzone.

Right: A degenerate homosexual whose role in pop music promoted the deathstyle to countless impressionable teenagers. He should have been denied a Church funeral.

He was a practicing homosexual whose "partner" Andrew Cowles (mislabeled "Husband" by a compliant media) was present at the funeral.

On the night of his death he had been at a homosexual night club and media reports stated that he and his homosexual "partner" had taken a man back to their home.

And the Dublin priest all but canonised this degenerate homosexual?

What a sad, pathetic bloody joke!

We wonder why people are turning away from the Church and why pews are emptying?

With this false, liberal, wishy washy "charity" which makes degenerate homosexuals, who push their lifestyle on teenagers as an acceptable "lifestyle," into instant-Saints can we wonder that a Church with no soul is abandoned?

Is this what 2000 years of Christian civilisation has descended to?

Certainly with homosexuals (inc "Frankfurt School communists) flooding the seminaries since the 50s and 60s, the Church has been delivered to the enemies of Christ.

God help us all.

Labour & Tories Ape Saint Obama in Offering No Change

The Tories would have us believe they offer "change."

Then again, New (New?) Labour would have us believe that they also offer change, after 12 years of financial mismanagement by Gordon 'sell the UK's gold reserves at rock bottom prices' Brown.

Right: David Cameron on a pilgrimage that every "Western" leader has to do before he is accepted for any form of power. No, not to his local Masonic Lodge (that's a given anyway). The Holohoax Brainwash Centre is a must-do for anyone wanting to be acceptable the media, an essential step for politicians of any shade.


So what are we to believe?

A growing number of people, especially the relatives of those needlessly sacrificed on the altar of Neo-Con/Zionist War, are very angry with New Labour and its ex-leader (and the next European President?), the war criminal Tony Blair.

The war in Afghanistan is deeply unpopular too, and the growing number of Union Flag draped coffins coming into RAF bases is a testament to another failed Zionist adventure.

Oh government ministers and their shadow ministers are busy telling us that the Taliban threaten our national security. Needless to add the Taliban have never attacked the UK, nor hurt a single British soldier until we invaded their homeland.

These are the same Taliban that we and the Americans helped arm to fight off the totalitarian Soviet invaders (who also installed a puppet president, Babrak Karmal, to follow the policies of Moscow, just as the common crook and conman, Hamid Karzai, was installed by the Americans).

At least the Soviets didn't have the chutzpah to organise an election which their candidate fiddled to appear popular and have a "democratic mandate."

According to the website infoplease, this is a brief synopsis of the Afghan-Soviet War:

The Soviet invasion, which sparked Afghan resistance, initially involved an estimated 30,000 troops, a force that ultimately grew to 100,000. The mujahidin were supported by aid from the United States, China, and Saudi Arabia, channeled through Pakistan, and from Iran. Although the USSR had superior weapons and complete air control, the rebels successfully eluded them. The conflict largely settled into a stalemate, with Soviet and government forces controlling the urban areas, and the Afghan guerrillas operating fairly freely in mountainous rural regions. As the war progressed, the rebels improved their organization and tactics and began using imported and captured weapons, including U.S. antiaircraft missiles, to neutralize the technological advantages of the USSR.


So we can see that the Soviets flooded Afghanistan to get a "stalemate" in which the Taliban/Mujaheddin were simply left in their own regions/areas, still able to mount attacks and eventually to fight back.
Left: Gordon Brown wears a yarmulke and lays a wreath (paid for by UK taxpayers - we should be told!) at Yad Vashem like all "Western" political leaders before him. Has he laid a wreath to the Armenian victims of Turkish genocide? Or the Ukrainian 33 million victims of Communism? Or the Gaza civilians murdered by Israeli War Criminals... which his government had a chance to vote against and condemn this week at the UN, but chose to abstain in a cowardly and typically fence-sitting fashion.

Now in 2009, the American "solution" to the problem of their war (for we should never forget that this is an American/Neo Con war, which they bullied NATO states into), is to flood Afghanistan with 45,000 extra US troops.

How very Soviet!

Luckily the man doing this has just won a Nobel Peace prize. Yes. 45,000 gun-totin', shoot first and ask questions later, American troops are about to invade a sovereign state under the orders of Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Prize winner after 10 months in office, having not won a single piece of peace, though still incompetently waging a Zionist War.

But then Saint Obama offered us "change" too didn't he? Change we could believe in --no less.

So what 'change we can believe in' do the "Modern Conservatives" --Mod Cons-- and New (New?) Labour --NNL-- offer us in the shadow of their Party Conferences at which the flag of change was waved like a pair of dirty underpants half way up a broomstick?

Right: Are visiting Israeli dignitaries made to kneel at the altar of St Paul's Cathedral in London or at St Patrick's Cathedral in New York to offer homage to Jesus Christ? So why do all world leaders have to don a kippur and pray at the Wailing Wall? Since rejecting Christ the Jewish religion -- Phariseeism mixed with Black Magic Kabbalah -- is an anti-Christian worship of the Jewish Race. By humbling themselves at this and other Jewish "holy sites" (Yad Vashem etc.) our political leaders are making their loyalties known.

The two parties are now gung-ho behind Obama's efforts to swamp Afghanistan with more moving targets, sorry, i mean British soldiers.

The government (NNL) announced its plan for 500 extra soldiers ahead of Obama, under the condition of extra US, NATO and Afghan troops. This was Blairite spin at its best. Gordon Brown already knew damn well that the Americans and Afghans had planned/agreed to put more troops in, and you can bet the NATO allies had received threats, bribes, and various cajoling phone calls and visits.

So in reality here we were again.

The "change" offered by Brown and Co. was more coat-trailing the Americans, more involvement in Zionist wars -- in effect no change at all!

The Tories (ModCons) followed like rats through a rotten floorboard saying they agreed with the Zionist war, agreed with Saint Obama, and agreed with plunging more young men from poor socio-economic backgrounds (sorry, I mean British soldiers) into a powder keg situation.

Left: Despite offering "change we can believe in" Obama remains resolutely tied-in with the Israeli War Criminals with their illegal nuclear weapons, protecting them at UN votes like every single American President before him.

On Wednesday, Pa Broon (Gordon Brown) spent 4 minutes reading out the names of the 37 dead soldiers that had been sacrificed on the altar of International Zionism in Afghanistan in the 3 months since Parliament had broken up.

How many were relatives of MPs? In fact how many of the over 200 troops that have died in Afghanistan were relatives of MPs? Or do they simply believe in sending others' sons and daughters off to fight on their behalf?

Pa Broon cries a good crocodile tear, just like Tony Blair before him.

The Tories are now trying to out bid Pa Broon's NNL by saying they would be happy to put even more troops into the heady cauldron of Vietnam... er sorry, I mean Afghanistan.

Change we can believe in!

With extra troops flooding Afghanistan, who can sense the Zionists chomping at the bit for a war with Iran?

Pa Broon hasn't even had the guts to challenge the banking system - dragging the UK to the brink of (some would argue actually into) bankruptcy, not even banning the quasi-nationalised banks from giving mega-bonuses to the fat cats.

He won't even use the excuse of the vast national debt to stop the meaningless and needless US-Zionist wars which cost us multi-billions every single year. Far better to hack into local schools, hospitals, libraries and other budgets eh Pa Broon ya wee gobbie bampot shite?

In the week when Israel (the holder, don't forget, of the only illegal nuclear weapons which they refuse to let international inspectors in to inspect) was found guilty of atrocious war crimes against civilians and stuck two fingers up to the UN (with the help of America!), we can be sure that they will try and ratchet up the anti-Iranian rhetoric threatening to drag us all into another needless Zionist war.

If America decides to strike against Iran, you can bet the NNL/ModCon government of the day will follow like a turd down a Victorian sewer.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, so the saying goes.

The sad thing is that despite all the speeches and promises, despite being offered change umpteen times, nothing in and of itself has changed at all!

The Zionist stranglehold on Washington DC is obvious. The subservience of Westminster to Washington DC is obvious. The ongoing nature of the Neo Con project is obvious. The political, military and financial bankruptcy of "the West" is obvious. The war criminal nature of Israel is obvious.

Change? We can believe in?

Don't make me laugh.

Friday, 16 October 2009

Multi-Culturalism Part 94: A Tale of Slavery, Forced Marriage, Incest and Rape.

Horrible incest-rape, "honour" attacks, forced-marriage background story in the news today from a court case in Cardiff.

Who are these inbred, dark ages-type, slavery-using, controlling freaks from an alien Asian religion?

Time to expose them? Seek to root out their alien religion from our midst perhaps?

Don't expect the Neo Cons and Talmudists to issue leaflets or stage demos...

The incest-rape nutters are Sikhs.

And they are supposed to be our "friends" according to the Neo-Con line.

Charming!

Am I the only one to fail to see the difference between these crazy loons and the "Muzzies' honour killings" etc. paraded in the headlines all the time?

It's about race, not space.

Let's talk about repatriation baby!


Link:
BBC Wales on Skih Rape/Incest Case

BNP: Polish Whites - YES! Black "Britons" - NO!


Bravo to Simon Darby.

Yes I'll say it again, bravo to Simon Darby.

Right: If this lady were born in China would she be Chinese?


On the Jeremy Vine Show on BBC Radio 2 today, in the shadow of the BNP's decision to cave into the equality refuseniks and let in black members, he was asked directly does he feel more in common with Polish Whites than "Black Britons" (sic) to which he replied (after a pregnant pause) yes.

FC has been saying this for years whilst many BNPers have been making silly noises about Black Britons (sic) such as Africans, Asians et al who were 'born here' or who 'pay taxes here' being good patriotic Brits (especially if they race mix -- remember the Black Zimbabwean in Cumbria in the BNP's paper?); we have more in common with our fellow White Europeans than we ever will with the 57 Variety of coloured immigrants, their descendants and dependents.

Now it seems the BNP's No. 2 is on our side!

It's RACE NOT SPACE.

Credit where it is due.

Mr. Darby says he doesn't want soft Tories taking over the BNP. Amen to that.

Neither should any decent nationalist want race-mixers and degenerates "taking over" the BNP.

Today may have been a brief blip. An aberration in an otherwise liberalising trend.

But, even if momentarily amongst the pro-Israeli drivel, what a breath of fresh air.

Sunday, 4 October 2009

Zionists, Gays and Blacks in the BNP! So is it Nationalist?

These were posted on an anti-Griffin Blog (Griffin Watch) in their comments section.

All of this is from 'the horses mouth' i.e. direct from BNP sources happy to espouse such material in the media, so they cannot claim it is spin... unless they want to accuse themselves of lying!?!?!

AnonymousWorrying times.


Anonymous said...

Just listen to this from babbling elected BNP buffoon Richard Barnbrook, it was broadcasted on Wednesday on BBC London Radio's The Late Show with Big George, drag the purple bar onto 1hour 28 minutes into the show and hear Griffin's idiot tell the world : "Happily invite Muslims to join the party.... welcomed to be members.....Blacks, Muslim & Asians can join the BNP in two months......constitution about to change......No problems with Gays...... Caribbean sister-in-law can join the BNP, she's a great cook." Big George said he was delighted that Barnbrook could join the show! You have heard it now from the horses mouth!!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p004hrdp/The_Late_Show_with_Big_George_30_09_2009/

02 October 2009 10:58

Anonymous Anonymous said...

This video was made and financed by the European Union, near the end 7 minutes into film the reporter states: "It's clear though that Griffin's aim is to clean up his party," he continues : "The new image will take time to develop..... in the mean time Griffin wants to convince Center Right colleagues in the E.U parliament that his own extremist background was adolescent folly." Griffin says at the very end : "Men tend to mellow as they grow older, so I'm a very mellow person."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZXLqGY9Fi0

02 October 2009 12:33

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Griffin on the BBC's radio Newsbeat programme on Wednesday, listen to this : "We now have nearly 14,000 members." What a lie! : "We've changed to mainstream...we've changed and evolved." The interviewer asks: "Can Blacks join your party?" Griffin answers : "Not at the moment.... Blacks and Sikhs vote for us"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00mwtbg/Newsbeat_30_09_2009/

02 October 2009 12:50

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Incidentally Griffin starts speaking 5 minutes and 30 seconds into the BBC Radio Newsbeat programme.

Death of a Culture


There has to be some sanity in this world.

Yesterday I was walking along in a town centre when I saw a sight that really annoys me. I felt like Ranting Ron on a bad day.

The sight which had raised my heckles so violently?

An overweight lady was ambling her way along a pavement (parallel with mine) wearing a 'crop top' which allowed her large wobbly tummy to hang out, betwixt her trousers and the aforementioned top.

Right: Nothing worth celebrating.

As she walked the large, dangling tummy wobbled giving the impression that somewhere in the dark depths of her belly button a toffee was being chewed!

Now this led me to cogitate over the mater. What thought process allowed this extra-large lady to come to the conclusion that a crop top would be a suitable investment for an Autumnal day (or indeed any day)?

Did she think it was suitable attire for sitting at home watching Daytime TV -- let alone trudging through a busy town centre on a Saturday?

Surely somewhere deep in her brain, behind all the numb parts deadened by years of watching Eastenders and looking at (I won't imagine she reads) tabloid newspapers, there must have been a tiny wee neutron pinging about, crying out for attention, pleading for sanity, like a voice in the wilderness... a lone, solitary voice of sanity saying: "What are you thinking? A crop top??? Your belly will hang out and you'll look like a brain-dead loon."

Now don't get me wrong. I have nothing specifically against fat people per se. How could I with my long term love affair with pork pies? One of my biggest heroes was no stranger to a good meal: G.K. Chesterton.

I have long thought that the qualities of a person are in their decisions, their morals and their manner of how they live their lives.

An "ugly" person in a council house can have a pristine character and be a veritable living saint, whereas as we all know that far too many of the "beautiful people" so beloved of the media are degenerate, greedy, drug-using, self-absorbed bampots.

The former often struggle to bring up their children with little money, doing all they can to buck the trend of those born into relative poverty, whilst too many of the latter think not having their favourite restaurant to go to is a struggle and that "bringing up" a Chihuahua is as tough as it gets.

However, when I see a vastly overweight person in a crop top it does make me wonder about the validity of universal suffrage.

After all, an army of these people can keep a War Criminal like Tony Blair in power for 10 years!

Nor are fatties in crop tops my only bugbear. Seeing grown men in clam-diggers (shortened trousers) especially the tracksuit variety and tee-shirts with graffiti-style wringing all over them, in other words dressing like they are 12-year-olds gets my back up.

So indeed does anyone of any age wearing a baseball hat to one side. This especially irks me when a Caucasian gent does it, mimicking the natives of sub-Saharan Africa (from South London) - commonly called whiggers in modern parlance. The dress-code is added to handsomely by baggy jeans hanging down so underwear can be seen, and the crotch at circa knee level so they look like they have defecated in their underwear.

Then there's the 30-somethings who insist on wearing tops with swear words emblazoned across them, sometimes feebly disguised, but sometimes bold as brass -- even the 'F-word' -- which to me reeks of someone seeking attention and trying to be 'edgy and dangerous' but really looking like a petulant, spoilt, spotty kid. It is particularly irksome when these morons turn up with their filth-emblazoned tops to collect their child(ren) from infant or junior school!

There is much wrong in this world, not least Usury-banking and the power of Freemasonry.

But can we at least get to a point in time when people dress normally without bits of them wobbling free, without mimicking Africans, without foul words plastered across their chests?

For a people and a culture to have arrived at this low point is distinctly worrying.

The EU is a Bullying Rapist - and Ireland it's Violated Victim


Ireland has been bullied and browbeaten into voting "yes" for the Lisbon Treaty.

Right: Darth Mandelson even manages to get his "I'm a Little Teapot" routine all wrong. Another failed politician, ex-Communist, pooftah and unelected Eurocrat - now ensconced in the House of Lords from where he runs numerous government departments to the detriment of all. He is just the kind of Zionist and Rothschild acolyte that will be toasting the outcome of the Irish vote (version 1.2) and is just the sort of person who will benefit from it.

Let's put aside all the politics and the fact that EU accounts haven't been signed-off by the auditors for YEARS, and the fact that MEPs don't even control the output of laws from the unelected dictatorship that is the EU commission.

Now that Ireland has voted yes, can we safely assume that it will be asked to vote again next year? To give it a chance to vote no?

If Ireland had voted yes a year ago -- would there have just been another vote to give them the opportunity to vote no?

Obviously not... and that tells us all we need to know about the EU. It is like a playground bully which refuses to let anyone stand up to it, which threatens and cajoles to get its own way.

Furthermore it also takes a hefty wedge of every child's [nation's!] dinner money to waste and fritter away as it sees fit.

Worse than that I think one of the most apt slogans of the campaign puts it even more succinctly: NO MEANS NO.

This used to be, and probably still is, an anti-rape slogan.

So the EU bully is not simply a bully, it is a bullying, threatening, bribing, brain-washing, rapist bully that simply won't take no for an answer!

so many countries have voted against the EU's machinations (we in the UK haven't been deigned worthy of such a popular plebiscite given that we live in an elected oligarchy of Masons, lawyers and party apparatchiks kept in place by a Masonic media) but the rapist bully still plies its trade, leaving the peoples and nations of Europe laying prostrate in its wake.

Still, at least we can (assuming the rapist bully has its was with the Czech Republic and anyone else who dares speak up) look forward to Tony Blair the War Criminal (who the Daily Mail claims has earned £12 Million in the two years since he left office) or some other system stooge getting yet another cosy sinecure as EU President, being put up in luxury and chauffeured around at our expense.

As we, the Irish and every nation-state (imperfect though many are) lose more and more powers to the EU behemoth, with its unelected commission, its askew accounts and its bottomless pit of corruption, nepotism and its charming SISO (sign in and sod off)system that allows MEPs like Glenys Kinnock to milk the system, we are powerless to stop a system that is rigged to help create another step on the road to World Government.

After all, what chance has anyone got against a bullying rapist who won't take no for an answer?

As with all rapists, the only answer is capital punishment, and the righteous dispatch of the EU and its quasi-communist apparatus is the only outcome that will give all of us our ancient freedoms.


MusicPlaylistView Profile
Create a playlist at MixPod.com